Why, from a Historical Perspective, this isn't Good Art

Dear Reader,

I'm glad the clickbait title has drawn you in. Today, we are going to examine two pieces of historical art. Ambush!, by Dan Nance, shows a Native American warrior about to attack a senior British officer during the American War of Independence. The other, below, shows a specific incident from the Battle of Savannah during the American War of Independence. At the outset, I should say that both images are artistically appealing. Mr. Nance is a fine painter, who has painted many other historical pieces which I like.

So, why isn't the painting of the Native American warrior attacking a British officer, below, a helpful image from a historical perspective? First, this image trades on common stereotypes regarding both Native Americans and the British Army during the War of Independence. The Native Warrior is shown jumping (presumably from a tree?) with club raised and screaming. The British officer, presumably from the 7th (Royal Fuziliers) or 8th (King's) Regiment of Foot, given his uniform. His sword is drawn, and is he looking rather obliviously in the opposite direction. Even his horse has noticed the oncoming warrior.





















































Both of these ideas (that the Native Americans were masters of the ambush, and that the British were remarkably ill-suited for wilderness warfare) are stock images from American mythology, and give little information regarding the actual reality of the past. Native American warriors were impressive soldiers in certain conditions, but certainly fell prey to ambush by Euro-American warriors. A famous example of this is during the Siege of Fort Sackville by George Rogers Clark, when Clark's forces took a Native war party by surprise.[1] Likewise, British forces had learned much regarding wilderness warfare since the early days of the French and Indian War, and were capable of fighting in wilderness conditions.


Second, the above image deliberately obscures historical reality. Much more often than not, the specific regiment which is depicted above fought alongside native warriors. The King's Regiment fought alongside native Americans at engagements such as the Cedars, Fort Stanwix, Fort Laurens, Hannastown, Bird's Invasion of Kentucky, and perhaps most famously, at the Battle of Newtown in 1779.[2] By and large, for good or ill, the King's Regiment fought alongside Native Americans throughout the War of Independence, not against them. If the 7th Regiment was depicted, the image is also somewhat less egregious, but the 7th Regiment of Foot spent much of the war fighting in larger coastal armies, and to my knowledge, was never ambushed by the Catawba or any other Native group.

Third, there are liberties taken with the material culture of the image. The enlisted men and drummer wear gaitered trousers, which is possible for the 8th Regiment, but not confirmed by documentary evidence. Finally, it is perhaps unlikely that a drummer would have accompanied raids deep into the upper country, and certainly would not have been beating a march step during this type of movement. The British officer appears to be wearing a hat purchased from GG Godwin, Sutler. His uniform is immaculate, if a bit large for him. Speaking frankly, I am not qualified to evaluate the accuracy of the dress of the Native Warrior (it is possible that it is of a very high standard).

Fourth, and finally, the image does not depict a specific historical event. No senior officers of the Royal Fuziliers or King's Regiment were killed in ambush by Native American warriors during the years of the American War of Independence. Many of them died, often from illness or being drowned while on transport ships on the Great Lakes. A shipwreck on the Lakes, would be an incredibly interesting artistic project for the various excellent artists currently exploring the revolution.

So, in short, whatever the artistic value of the above image, it possesses a questionable historical value.

Artist Graham Turner's image of the Battle of Savannah, painted for Osprey

The above image, depicting Archibald Campbell at the capture of Savannah by artist Graham Turner, may not be equal artistic appeal, but possesses much more historical value than the ambush of the Native Warrior above. 

First of all, the image depicts a specific historical event, described by a primary source.[3] When preparing to attack the rebel held city of Savannah, Lt. Colonel Archibald Campbell climbed a tree in order to better observe the rebel defensive positions. He also spoke with an enslaved man regarding a flanking route for his army's march, which is perhaps a missed opportunity in the painting.

Second, in choosing a specific historical event, the image destroys mythology regarding the British Army in the War of Independence. The popular view of British officers in the United States is that they were hide-bound traditionalist fops with little real experience in the arena of war. By showing a British officer who was willing to think outside the box and get is hands dirty a bit, Graham Turner displays a class of generally competent senior officers such as Howe, Cornwallis, and Campbell who were not afraid to innovate in order to gain victory in America.

Third, the uniforms are generally accurate. Turner's artwork shows the 71st Regiment of Foot in short coats and linen gaiter trousers with highland bonnets, all fairly responsible choices for this era of war. Woolen donation-cloth trousers might have been a better choice for this time of year (although I am not familiar with the primary source documentation for this particular regiment, so I cannot say) but this is a relatively minor quibble. Likewise, the tree may not have been defoliated at this time of year in Savannah. It is difficult to tell whether Campbell is wearing his own hair or a wig, which pleased me greatly.

So, in closing, both images are very enjoyable and artistically sound. With that said, images which depict specific events from primary sources, coupled with a theme which explores the reality, rather than the mythology of historical eras, are an asset to historians, and to the public. Accurate, well-presented uniforms are icing on the cake.

If you enjoyed this post, or any of our other posts, please consider liking us on facebook, or following us on twitter. Consider checking out our exclusive content on Patreon. Finally, we are dedicated to keeping Kabinettskriege ad-free. In order to assist with this, please consider supporting us via the donate button in the upper right-hand corner of the page. As always:

Thanks for Reading, 

Alex Burns

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Journal of Joseph Bowman, February 24th, 1779 https://www.in.gov/history/2964.htm
[2] Journal of Thomas Blake, 1st NH Regiment, August 29th, 1779, http://www.usgwarchives.net/pa/1pa/1picts/sullivan/nhjournals.html#norris
[3] See Matthew H. Spring, With Zeal and With Bayonets Only, 66 and Archibald Campbell, Journal of an Expedition, 25-26.

Young Historian Spotlight: Casey Hill

Casey Hill working at the Castillo de San Marcos National Monument

Today, we are continuing with the second of a series of interviews with a number of young historians. By the time this series concludes in early November, we will have heard from Jack Weaver, Andrew Warren, Ben Olex, Casey Hill, Samantha Sproviero, and Davis Tierney. All of these individuals are broadly interested in the Kabinettskriege era, and have been selected as a result of recent promotion, impending graduate school applications, or work recently begun in graduate school or at a historic site. Today's young historian Casey, a historian interested in a vital era of colonial conflict. Casey has worked as an historic interpreter at the Castillo de San Marcos and Fort Matanzas National Monuments, and is currently in the process of applying to graduate programs in historical archaeology. Casey possesses a broad range of knowledge on the War of Jenkins Era, and plans to study this topic in graduate school.

Alexander Burns : What drew you to study the history in this era? In 2018, much of popular memory of military history in the United States is focused on World War 1, World War 2, and the Vietnam War. What about the history of the 1688-1815 era do you find so compelling?

Casey Hill[1]: What drew me to to the military history of this particular era was actually getting involved in it. From a young age, I have always had an interest in history and naturally, this interest has expanded over the years. In 2013, I made the first step by establishing myself as a volunteer with the National Park Service at the Castillo de San Marcos National Monument in St. Augustine, Florida. I was doing this while working on my undergraduate so unfortunately, I didn’t have ample time to dedicate to it but I managed a couple weekends each month. This was my first involvement with reenacting and living history. I eventually was fortunate enough to  be able to get a student job with the NPS at the Castillo, which really changed things up for me quite a bit. I was able to learn so much about the Castillo and its involvement in history. The main interpretive theme is the time portrayed during the British siege that St. Augustine experienced in 1740. Naturally, I wanted to find out as much as I could, not only for my job, but because I was personally very interested. I learned all about the War of Jenkins’ Ear which I personally find the most compelling about this era.

AB: Is there a particular person, conflict, event, or geographical setting which draws you to this era?

CH: Yes. As I had mentioned before, for me it is the War of Jenkins’ Ear but I would also have to say King George’s War and the War of the Austrian Succession in general. Again, being surrounded by and involved with St. Augustine’s history when I was working there, really sparked my interest not only in that conflict, but the specific siege that St. Augustine experienced in 1740 led by General James Oglethorpe. The British invasions of Florida and the Spanish Invasions of Georgia and the Carolinas have always fascinated me. They are very obscure parts of American history, but are also quite important which is one of the many reasons I love talking to people about it. Political cartoons, ballads, broadsides, maps, pamphlets, commemorative medals, just about any type of 18th century material culture you can think of was produced during this war especially regarding Admiral Edward Vernon and the capture of Porto Bello in 1739, the successful capture of Porto Bello made Vernon an instant hero in Britain and really helped to establish the national pride of Britain, the image of the British Tar and Britannia ruling the waves as we see this famous song come out of this period. That victory also created so much interesting material culture!. My interest has evolved so much that I even find myself acquiring said original items from this period.

Casey working at the  Castillo de San Marcos and Fort Matanzas National Monuments

AB: Casey, that is really interesting. Do you view the War of Jenkins Ear as part of a global conflict between 1740-1748? I know that is a common interpretation of the Seven Years War, and wonder if you have seen it with this conflict as well?

CH: I most definitely do. As far as the War of Jenkins’ Ear goes, Britain officially declared war on Spain in October 1739 and a little over a year later, the War of the Austrian Succession (WAS) broke out in Europe. It was very much a global conflict and encompassed several theaters of war. In addition to the War of Jenkins’ Ear (WJE), these include King George’s War (KGW), which was a conflict between the British and French primarily over Louisbourg and Nova Scotia which erupted in 1744.  WAS also included the First Carnatic War (1746-48) between the French and British over control of Madras and Pondicherry (which were two major battles in their own right) in India, two very important trading ports that the French and British East India Companies fought over for control. There were roughly nineteen battles/engagements that made up KGW (1744-48) which covered the areas of New York, Massachusetts Bay, New Hampshire, and Nova Scotia as well as roughly nineteen engagements that made up the WJE (1739-48) that covered the south British colonies of North and South Carolina and Georgia and Spanish Florida, the Caribbean, South America and various naval engagements in European waters and the Pacific. It was also very much a global conflict for Colonial Americans as it was the first foreign war they directly fought in. Sir William Gooch’s 42nd Regiment of Foot, or the “American Regiment” was the first all Colonial American regiment raised and put on the British Establishment and consisted of roughly 3,000 men from 10 different colonies from New York to North Carolina. It was established with the sole purpose of fighting the Spanish in the West Indies, primarily the ill-fated Cartagena expedition of 1741. Lawrence Washington, George Washington’s older half brother, was a commissioned officer in this regiment. 

AB: How do you plan to continue your research into this era? You have been employed in public history setting, and are currently applying to graduate programs. Why have you chosen your particular path?

CH: I am also in the process of applying for graduate school; planning on pursuing historical archaeology, collections management, and historic preservation. I also do substantial independent research on my area of interest which includes collaborating and/or visiting historic sites that are relevant to my research but also acquiring primary sources that pertain to my area/conflict of interest. I would also love to do some proper funded research, perhaps in my masters program with a visit to Spain to visit some of the archives, museums, and libraries. I hope to eventually start giving talks/presentations on the War of Jenkins’ Ear using my collection as a visual and tangible aid, which I managed to do at my previous job and hope to continue in the future.

AB: What have you been reading, recently? Could you recommend one book on your topic of interest, or any recent work on the era?

CH: Since I have many books on many different topics of the period, I will stick with the main topic of the era being discussed. Apart from the primary source material from my collection, I have a handful of good books I could recommend for the War of Jenkins’ Ear period. The one I have acquired recently, which actually just came out in 2016 and I highly recommend, is titled The Temptations of Trade: Britain, Spain, and the Struggle for Empire by Adrian Finucane [University of Pennsylvania Press]. The others I would recommend (and have read) are: America’s First Marines: Gooch’s American Regiment, 1740-1742 by Lee G. Offen, On the Rim of the Caribbean: Colonial Georgia and the British Atlantic World by Paul M. Pressly, Trade and Privateering in Spanish Florida, 1732-1763 by Joyce Elizabeth Harman (a great little book!), A Relation, or Journal, Of a late Expedition, &c.: A Facsimile Reproduction of the 1744 Edition with an Introduction and Index by John Jay Tepaske [Bicentennial Floridiana Facsimile Series/University of Florida Press] (this is also available digitally), and last but not least, Informed Power: Communication in the Early American South by Alejandra Dubcovsky.

AB: Thanks! Is there a reason you enjoy Finucane’s book? Can you tell us a bit about it?

CH: I am always excited to see new books/research/material come out about this period. I found that it read very well and I feel it greatly explained the reasons behind the lead up to the outbreak of the War of Jenkins’ Ear, beginning right around the time of the end of the War of the Spanish Succession when Britain wins the right to begin trading with the closed Spanish market by way of the Assiento all the way through to when war was declared, and even the years of conflict. April Hatfield of Texas A&M University summed up this book pretty well and I would like to use an excerpt from what she said: “Adrian Finucane puts a human face on the Caribbean’s imperial and commercial struggles by bringing to life the stories of the South Sea Company’s agents in Spanish America. In the process, she answers a number of important questions about the nature of eighteenth-century trade and illustrates how British and Spanish empires, despite their unrelenting rivalry, depend on one another.” It is always important in this field to try to “put a human face” to any type of struggle or conflict that is going on to help try to understand the bigger picture, and I believe this book does that very well by not only telling stories of the South Sea Company agents experiencing the rising tensions first hand, but explaining the fact that Britain and Spain heavily relied on each other in trade in the West Indies, but at the same time, fought for dominant control of the seas and for free and warranted trade rights. It’s interesting also because Spanish Florida relied heavily on trade from the northern British colonies of Georgia, the Carolinas, and even New York (though it was illicit) because St. Augustine could no longer rely on the nearly nonexistent yet promised supplies from the Spanish via Mexico City. In my opinion, this is one of the most interesting aspects of this conflict, and this book really helps to delve deeper into that. I would like to end my answer with the last line of this book: “The increase in imperial control enacted by the British and Spanish in the second half of the eighteenth century shifted the opportunities of empire away from those who succumbed to the temptations of trade during earlier iterations of empire.” I think that is one of the most important lessons that can be taken from this conflict. 

AB: Thanks Casey! We look forward to following your career as it continues!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Casey Hill graduated from the University of Central Florida in 2015 with his BA in Anthropology, focus specifically in historical archaeology. He hopes to one day work with a university, museum and/or a historical site/city as a historical archaeologist. He plans to begin his MA next year in Historical Archaeology (maritime and terrestrial). His is particularly interested in the late 17th century to the mid-18th century. His main area of interest for research is Western Europe, North America, and the Caribbean (particularly during the colonial period) the War of Jenkins' Ear/King George's War/War of the Austrian Succession. He has worked for two years (2015-2017) as a historic interpreter at the Castillo de San Marcos and Fort Matanzas National Monuments in St. Augustine Florida.

Young Historian Spotlight: Andrew Warren

Andrew (left) in his interpretive role at Fort Ticoderoga
(Photo Credit: Fort Ticonderoga)

Today, we are continuing with the second of a series of interviews with a number of young historians. By the time this series concludes in early November, we will have heard from Jack Weaver, Andrew Warren, Ben Olex, Casey Hill, Samantha Sproviero, and Davis Tierney. All of these individuals are broadly interested in the Kabinettskriege era, and have been selected as a result of recent promotion, impending graduate school applications, or work recently begun in graduate school or at a historic site. Today's young historian is Andrew Warren, a rising star in the world of public history. Andrew has worked at a number of historic sites, including Colonial Williamsburg and Fort Ticonderoga.  

Alexander Burns : What drew you to study the history in this era? In 2018, much of popular memory of military history in the United States is focused on World War 1, World War 2, and the Vietnam War. What about the history of the 1688-1815 era do you find so compelling?

Andrew Warren[1]: While I had some interest in military history, my predominant focus had always been on other subjects, namely domestic service and male fashion. The latter in particular is part of what drew me to historic interpretation and living history, wishing to dress in period clothing. Through a circuitous series of events, I ended up at my first interpreter job, a seasonal position at Fort Mackinac on Mackinac Island, Michigan. Working there for four summers drastically expanded my interest and knowledge in military history. While the focus of that fort was 19th century, the sister fort on the mainland portrayed the 18th century, and over the years I became increasingly interested in that period. This culminated in me eventually getting a position at Colonial Williamsburg, long a dream of mine. As I became ever more devoted to this period, my research skills also drastically improved, and it so happened that I became close friends with a number of the military interpreters there, including Mr. Davis Tierney. Partly through him I began doing reenactments as a hobby, and I found my niche combining my primary historic passion, domestic servants, with military history by focusing my research on officers’ servants and portraying that oft-neglected aspect of the armies of this period.

AB: Is there a particular person, conflict, event, or geographical setting which draws you to this era?

AW: As it pertains to military history, I am most focused on the American War for Independence. In particular, I have a keen interest in presenting more nuanced perspectives to modern Americans, for whom the war has often been taught in a completely black and white fashion. One of my favourite ways of achieving this is portraying, or discussing, the loyalist perspective, whether in a civilian or military context. I think there is great poignancy in what was truly a civil war, and the many stories of broken families, friendships, towns, etc. In a broader sense, my interest has always been on England, for I am rather a devout Anglophile. But I’m fascinated by the effects, good and horrifically ill, of Britain’s colonization of North America, and the overlap in cultures that existed here, particularly in contrast to the differences between our nations today.

AB: How do you plan to continue your research into this era? You’ve worked a number of great historic sites, including Fort Ticonderoga. Why have you chosen your particular path?

AW: I am digging ever deeper into the role of officers’ servants, bringing my knowledge of servants in general and keen interest in the subject to spot references that others have missed. I have spoken with my bosses about possibility publishing an article on the fort’s website on the subject, or even possibly doing lectures at some point in the future. Over this winter, I will be delving far more into the French army of the Seven Years’ War than I have previously in preparation for next year’s season at the fort. At the risk of being redundant, I intend to particularly try to understand the role of servants in that context. On a more everyday basis, I hope to, in the words of Freeman Tilden, provoke guests - particularly children - into developing a passion for history, just as I was inspired many years ago. Sharing my passion, and seeing enthusiasm reflected in our guests is truly why I do this, far above anything else. Meeting so many wonderful people, from all over the world, and knowing that I am part of the reason they have traveled so far is humbling and a true honour, and I hope not only to teach them, but to learn from them, and their perspectives.

Andrew Warren in his interpretive role at Colonial Williamsburg

AB: Andrew, have you ever thought about publishing your research on domestic service, or writing about  it in a formal way? You clearly have a lot to offer on the topic!

AW: I’ve thought about it. A number of people have suggested it over the years, especially recently. I’ve tried to find small outlets for some of my knowledge, whether it be in public history or talking with other professionals and reenactors, but the idea of making it more formalized is on my mind. I’m not sure what that will look like in the end (if anything!), and I hesitate a bit due to my lack of formal academic credentials. That said, part of me feels it to be something of a duty to share my knowledge, especially as it’s a subject that’s relatively under-examined, particularly in our period.

AB: How does your particular line of research or interpretation style share your topic, not just with fellow historians and researchers, but with the public in the United States?

AW: I will add that with my role in particular, not only doing school programs at the fort but also often traveling to schools, I have a unique ability to reach children who may not have even considered attending a museum. Again, to cite Tilden, understanding how to connect each individual or group with something that they will understand is key to fostering their interest, and helping them to comprehend sometimes abstract, broad concepts. As far as sharing my research with others in the field of history, I have been humbled by the number of people who have approached me to either portray a servant or give them information pertaining to them, and what began as my own personal passion and interest has become something of a duty, ever since realizing how little focus is put on this subject.

AB: What have you been reading, recently? Could you recommend one book on your topic of interest, or any recent work on the era?

AW: Lately, I’ve been reading more primary documents in the course of my research. In that vein, one of my favourite works is British Soldiers, American War by Don Hagist. It’s a rare glimpse into enlisted soldiers of the British Army fighting here in America, backed up with a good deal of additional research to contextualize it, a nice middle ground between primary and secondary sources. Needless to say, the chapter based around a letter written by an officer’s soldier-servant to his master’s wife is particularly fascinating to me. But given my penchant for portraying the British perspective on the war, it’s far more than that. But if I can step away from modern texts and military history for a moment, two of my favourite period accounts are the journal of John Harrower, a Scotsman who became an indentured servant in Virginia in the 1770s, and wrote many fascinating everyday details often missing in journals, as well as a book published in 1790 entitled “Travels in Various Parts of Europe, Asia, and Africa” &c., republished in the 20th century as “Memoirs of an 18th Century Footman”, by another Scotsman, John MacDonald. MacDonald was a servant for about 25 years, to 28 different masters (including some military men), and was narcissistic enough that what he published as a travelogue became a memoir of his life. It’s the only memoir of a servant from this period I know of, and the number of masters he served shows the wide spectrum of experiences for those in roles of service. Finally, on a slightly different note, I want to highlight Freeman Tilden’s Interpreting Our Heritage. I still believe that his work, which outlines the basic principles of good interpretation, holds up despite its age, and is a good starting point for anyone in public history to understand how to connect your topic with the wide variety of backgrounds, prior knowledge, and interest that each guest brings.

AB: I love your response! Is there a particular anecdote or moment in the account of John Harrower which appeals to you?

AW: Harrower is kind of a unique case, because he was indentured as a schoolmaster, so a different role than most bond labourers. But one detail that really stuck out to me - I wouldn’t say appeals exactly - is that at one point, he writes about how his mistress got angry at him for whipping their youngest son, and a few days later the master hears that same child crying and wonders why Harrower wasn’t whipping him for it. When Harrower told his master that his wife had remonstrated him for it, the master got upset at his wife. I was surprised at the idea of an indentured servant being allowed, and indeed expected, to whip his master’s children, though again it’s a bit unique to his position as schoolmaster for the family. He also shares some fascinating details of the ship’s journey to Virginia, for example a very windy night where amongst those on board “there was some sleeping, some spewing… some daming, some Blasting their leggs and thighs, some their liver, lungs, lights and eyes, And for to make the shene [scene] odder, some curs’d Father, Mother, Sister, and Brother.” And his descriptions of what he calls the “soul drivers” is harrowing (no pun intended): “they are men who make it their business to go onbd. all ships who have in either Servants or Convicts [indentured or convict servants, respectively] and buy sometimes the whole and sometimes a parcell of them as they can agree, and then they drive them through the Country like a parcell of Sheep untill they can sell them to advantage”.

AB: Thanks Andrew! It has been great talking with you, I look forward to seeing where your work takes you!

If you enjoyed this post, or any of our other posts, please consider liking us on facebook,  or following us on twitter. Finally, we are dedicated to keeping Kabinettskriege ad-free. In order to assist with this, please consider supporting us via the donate button in the upper right-hand corner of the page. As always:

Thanks for Reading,

Alex Burns

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Andrew Warren has been the School & Youth Programs Interpreter at Fort Ticonderoga since October 2017, and his duties involve leading programs for school and scout groups at the fort. His career as an historic interpreter began at Fort Mackinac in 2012, working there seasonally for four years, before taking a full-time job at Colonial Williamsburg doing primarily school group tours and youth education, but a variety of other tasks besides. Andrew has never attended college, making him an extreme outlier in this field, but in addition to his extensive and varied experience in historic interpretation, he has devoted much time to his own research. He particularly enjoys the "experiential learning" that comes with living history, and has acquired various historic skills along the way, such as shoemaking, cooking, &c. Andrew's true passion, however, is in sharing his love of history with others, hopefully inspiring them to develop their own.

"Popular" History: The reenactor, the wargamer, and the professional historian

A picture of the Regiment von Reidesel, taken shamelessly from their Facebook page

Dear Reader,


I have been thinking a lot about the role of the historian lately. It is my heart's desire to be a traditional professional historian/college professor. Specifically, my field of interest, (as you might have guessed, reading this blog) is military history of the Kabinettskriege period. (Unsure of what Kabiettskriege means? click here for an explanation.)

In the first post of this blog, I claimed that the warfare of the Kabinettskriege era should not be the exclusive domain of hobbyists and enthusiasts. This is my opinion, not because there is anything wrong with the hobbies associated with warfare, but because the past is a different country, and it requires research from professional historians to understand the past, and make that understanding available to the public.

The more I read, and the more I travel to historical events, the more apparent it is that there is a rift between professional historians, and historical impressionists, such as reenactors and wargamers. (For an interesting post about this, see the blog of historian Paul Lockhart.)

I mean, come on, who doesn't want to play with these guys?

Historians' complaints about Reenactors/Wargamers:

There are three common complaints I hear from historians about those in the historical hobby community.

The first complaint is that they are doing more harm then good by repeating historical myths to the public. This complaint is a legitimate concern. Despite an excellent monograph stating to the contrary, people still claim that "Baron" von Steuben was not a member of the nobility. While he wasn't a "baron" in the tradition sense (the German word is Freiherr), he was a member of the Prussian aristocracy, a sort of noble middle manager. History is incredibly complex, and the subtleties are often lost in wargaming and reenacting.

The second complaint is that reenactors (and wargamers) often claim to be historians, when they don't have the training or the intelligence to actually be historians. One definition of an historian, from the Princeton online dictionary is: "A person who is an authority about history, and studies and writes about it." In my experience, reenactors and wargamers usually meet two of the requirements: they study the past and are regarded by the general population as authorities on history.

Finally, and most worryingly in my opinion, reenactors and wargamers seemingly glorify war and violence. This is especially concerning when examining more modern reenactors, such as World War 2 reenactors. However, with that being said, the reenactors and wargamers I know realize that the past was awful. Dying on an eighteenth century battlefield would have been one of the most horrific things imaginable. With this in mind, what is the right response? Ban reenactments? wargames? non-accurate historical films?

Dr. Christopher Duffy lecturing at a wargame convention

A change in tactics is the answer:

I view myself as a professional historian: someone who makes the acquiring and distribution of historical knowledge into a career. Most reenactors or wargamers might say that they are historians, but they would never claim to be making a career out of being an historian. (Unless of course, they were also professional historians.)

I think that professional historians are looking at reenactors and wargamers entirely the wrong way. As opposed to viewing them as an annoyance, or as the perverters of the past, we should attempt to come alongside reenactors and other historical hobbyists. They are an incredible opportunity-they are fun, interesting, and their activities are exciting-everything we lack as historians.

The reenactment and wargaming community has a wide base: much wider than the readership of historical monographs. Reenactors and wargamers give professional historians a chance to reach the general public. If they are telling the public about non-factual events, it is our responsibility to get the right information into the hands of these historical enthusiasts.

Historical hobbyists are NOT our enemies-and they have the potential to become our allies. Dr. Christopher Duffy has been taking this approach for a long time, by coming to the Seven Years' War convention in South Bend, Indiana. If more historians followed his example, perhaps there would not be such a disconnect between professional historians and historical hobbyists.

The fact of the matter is, history is not interesting to most people. Declining numbers in history departments around the country tell us this. We can only appeal to the mind through writing. Reenactors are historians of the senses, the give us the sight, smell sound and touch of history. When combined with historical writing, this can help the general public to better understand the past. It also allows us to sell more books- never a bad thing.

Sorry, this one got a bit long. More on the actual Kabinettskriege period to come.

Thanks for reading,

Alex Burns

If you liked this post, let me know in the comments below! Feel free to follow the blog. Its free, and lets me know that you enjoy what I'm doing-basically the only reason I write this thing.