Should You Reenact the European Seven Years War in North America?

The author reenacting the European Seven Years War in the United States

Dear Reader,

This post has been bouncing around in my head for some time, brought to the fore by planning a European Seven Years War event at a historic site in Virginia next year. Since I began reenacting the European Seven Years War in the United States during 2015, I have seen and heard a number of criticisms of this practice. I want to take a moment today to respond to these criticisms: first by answering five common criticisms, and then by giving five reasons I believe that it is useful, and even important, to reenact the European portion of this conflict in North America. As a Ph.D candidate in who studies this era, and a reenactor who has developed a number of impressions between 1740-1789, I have a great deal of interest in this topic.

Five Common Criticisms:

1. Reenacting the European Seven Years War is wrong in North America, because the fighting in that part of the conflict took place in Europe. This same criticism could be leveled against reenacting World War One, or World War Two in North America. No shots were fired in anger during those conflicts by large formations of troops in North America. By this logic, the only appropriate reenactments should be training exercises and prisoner of war camps.  Although I am not personally involved in the reenacting of either of those conflicts, I believe that events like Newville are immensely useful and enjoyable for those who take part. Beyond this, Europeans frequently reenact wars which occurred in North America: such as the American Civil War, or American War of Independence.

2. Reenacting the European part of this conflict is disrespectful to the men who served in the North American theater of war.  Reenacting is respectful or disrespectful to the men being reenacted based upon the quality of the impression, not purely the location it is being reenacted. There are instances where reenacting a certain impression is disrespectful to a site, to my knowledge, that has not occurred (to date) in the reenacting of the European Seven Years War in North America.  Demanding that every unit in the North American theater of war be reenacted before any other theaters of war are reenacted would be akin to demanding that every unit of National Guard troops must be represented in World War Two before any forces from Imperial Japan or the United Kingdom are reenacted. After all, they were present in the United States, and not the other forces.

A recreated Prussian drummer from Prussian IR 13

3. Reenactors who reenact the European Seven Years War in North America aren't Progressives/Harcores

As a historian of the Seven Years War era who identifies as a progressive reenactor, (a term which means a serious reenactor, for all you non-reenactors reading this) I find this criticism inane. Among those who reenact the European Seven Years in the United States, there are individuals who have horrible commitments to material culture, and those who take their responsibilities to the past as seriously as the most serious progressives in reenacting the French and Indian War or the American War of Independence. There are a range of commitments, just like in every other era and genre of reenacting. (I mean, have you seen the state of F&I reenacting?)

Secondly, most of the reenactors who are interested in European reenacting before 1789 have their work cut out for them. In order to reenact these impressions well, these reenactors take on the challenge of having to research in one or more languages other than English in order to properly understand their impression. I know a reenactor who has acquired a complete set of Hans Bleckwenn's 30+ volume study of the material culture of eighteenth-century Prussia. A commitment to research is something that occurs on a individual/unit wide level, it is rarely enforced by an umbrella organization, and that is true in all eighteenth-century reenacting I have taken part in.

A Gemeine of Prussian IR 13 (Itzenplitz)

4. Reenactors of the European Seven Years War in North America aren't committed to portraying history responsibly, or is just plain silly.

As a reenactor of the Seven Years War, I have spent dozens of hours hand-sewing reproduction clothing, and hundreds (and hundreds, and hundreds) of dollars acquiring accurate accoutrements and weapons. From drafting gaiter patterns to dealing with The Rifle Shoppe, I pursue my hobby as seriously as anyone in eighteenth-century reenacting. Also, I "do history" for a living, so I do have a genuine interest in portraying the past in a responsible manner. If you want to reenact the European Seven Years War in North America, you need to take extra care to select sites and events which are appropriate for your impression. 

On the point of sillyness, far be it from me to criticize any group of people who want to spend their weekends camping in handsewn wool clothing firing blank ammunition at other groups of campers, but when it is done well (see below), it is no more or less "silly" than any other form of reenacting.

5. The European Seven Years War isn't really related to the History of the United States. 
Nothing could be further from the truth. While FM Leopold von Daun or Frederick II of Prussia might not be household names in the United States, the Seven Years War had a wide impact on the modern world, and the United States. The debt created by the war helped cause the American and French Revolutions, gave the British control of Canada and India, and created the possibility of a North German center of gravity in the Holy Roman Empire. Figures like Frederick William de Steuben and Frederick de Wotdke who traveled to fight for the United States had previously served on these European battlefields. Beyond this, knowing a bit of history outside the history of the United States might not be a bad thing.

A Prussian Musket from the era of Frederick William I on display at Fort Ligonier

Five Reasons why you should reenact the European Seven Years War in North America

1. The Seven Years War was a global war. There are museums relevant to the history of the European Seven Years War in North America. Museums such as the Frontier Culture Museum in Staunton, VA, Fort Ticonderoga, and Fort Ligonier have objects or collections relevant to the history of the European Seven Years War. When these sites want to emphasize those collections or objects, having volunteers with a high standard of material culture benefits both the museum and the visitors. Not all of these museums accept the European Seven Years War reenacting, but importantly, some do.  European Seven Years War reenactors have been invited such as Fort Ligonier, where they have developed a positive working relationship with the site staff. Reenacting this part of the war assists these museums by lighting specific portions of their collections, and by driving up attendance numbers with events.

An Early Modern Germanic Farm House at the Frontier Culture Museum

2. Portraying different theaters of a global war provides a transnational perspective, which is helpful for addressing myths which develop around specific national experiences. 
Understanding the Seven Years War and American War of Independence through the lens of a particular national experience can lead to the public missing the wider story of a war, or believing various local myths which develop about the nature of a conflict. Understanding the broader context of a war allows for the public to see the way in which the eighteenth-century world was globalized. The story of the Seven Years War is not an exclusive European, North America, or even Asian story, but was born out of all of these places. By reenacting the European (and Asian) portions of the Seven Years War in North America, the wider war is presented to the public.

Check the index of the Bouquet Papers for Prussia

or Frederick II, sometime. 

3. Soldiers who fought in North America were often deeply interested in European Warfare. Setting aside the experiences of individuals like Freiherr de Steuben, Casimir Pulaski, and Kurt von Stedingk, figures who we traditionally associate with fighting in North America had an interest in Europe. If you examine George Washington or Henry Bouquet's papers during the Seven Years War, they are very interested in reports of the fighting in Europe. George Washington had busts of two European military figures in his study at Mount Vernon: Charles XII of Sweden and Frederick II of Prussia.

4. Developing an understanding of the European Theater of War assists in understanding the specific context of war in North America. 
As a reenactor with a foot in multiple theaters of the Seven Years War, and American War of Independence, I believe that my understanding of the material culture of the European Seven Years War brings aspects of the American War of Independence and French and Indian War into clearer focus. Reading descriptions of material culture in Central Europe is helpful in understanding the context that many French and Indian War soldiers came from. Most of the soldiers of the 60th Regiment of Foot during the French and Indian War, for example, were born in the 1730s in Central Europe. Understanding the European context of their experience (say, by reading memoirs of European soldiers drawn from similar regions) allows you to better understand their origins and motivations.

The author and Dr. Thomasz Karpinski at a 

reenactment in Germany

5. Reenacting the European Seven Years War in North America makes you a part of an international community of reenactors. 
Joining the community of European Seven Years War reenactors puts you in contact with people from across the Atlantic World who are interested in the same topic. In the process of working on my Seven Years War impression, I have met and worked with reenactors from Germany, Poland, the Czech Republic, Russia, and the Netherlands. These individuals add immensely to your understanding of the period, as well as just being enjoyable friends. I have had the wonderful experience of communicating with serious reenactors from all over Europe, as a result of my decision to reenact the European Seven Years War. In the process, I often get questions regarding warfare in North America. Who knows, perhaps your reenacting in North America will someday translate to attending European events.

A recreated Austrian officer from IR 4 (Teutschmeister)

Final Thoughts

If you are going to reenact the European Seven Years War in North America you should take the time to do it well.
I would argue that like any type of reenacting, you should attempt to tailor your impression to fulfill a specific goal. Be intentional with how you design your kit, seek out help to make your impression the highest quality possible, and most importantly, choose when and where you choose to reenact the Seven Years War with care. It would be best to reenact this conflict at museums and historic which invite you to do so, at events specifically designed to explain the nature of the global conflict to the public, or at immersion events where the public is not present.  It is important to keep in mind that some people in reenacting will react negatively to what you are doing. Don't mind them, and be confident in your decision to do the impression well.

Finally, for those of you reading this post who disagree with this practice, I hope I have at least explained some of our rationale for pursuing this part of the hobby. At the end of the day, you may not agree with my points, and that is alright. European Seven Years War reenacting in North America is here to stay, and I hope we can coexist is this crazy hobby.

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

Martin Luther, the Protestant Reformation, and the Seven Years' War

A Contemporary depiction of the 1760 siege

Dear Reader,


Today is popularly remembered as the 500th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation. If you are a rather austere historian like me, you might point out that November 11th, not October 31st, is really 500 years on from October 31st, 1517. On that day in October, Augustinian Friar Martin Luther circulated his 95 Theses, beginning a large and eventually successful movement to change theological understandings of Christianity. Luther, a professor of Theology at Wittenberg University, supposedly nailed this document to the doors of the local church, a common practice for sharing ideas. The doors of the schlosskirche, or Castle-Church (often referred to as All Saints Church in English) were much like a bulletin board, and Luther likely did not intend to start anything more than a local conversation. Despite that, he touched off a movement that would irrevocably change the world.

Luther's (rebuilt) church in Wittenberg, as it looks today

To this day, Luther's significance is widely debated. Many Catholics and some historians argue that Luther horribly divided European Christianity, and created the pluralistic society we live in today. Many Protestants, both Lutheran and otherwise, view Luther as a hero, who created the theological framework for their religious beliefs. Finally, there is the category I and others fall into: the belief that Luther was a deeply flawed individual, who greatly assisted created the modern Western World, with all of its flaws, foibles, triumphs, and achievements. It is possible to view Luther creator of much of the human freedom which has developed in the west since 1500: freedom of speech and religion being two of the largest consequences of his movement. It is important to note: as a late Medieval man, Luther would have been horrified at many of these developments, but he helped create them nonetheless.

Luther in 1520, by Lukas Cranach the Elder

After Luther's death in 1546, religious conflict devastated Europe for the next century. From 1546 to 1648, the wars of religion, culminating in the Thirty Years' War, caused an intense amount of suffering, particularly in German Central Europe. After the Peace of Westphalia ended the Thirty Years' War in 1648, European statesmen began to realize that wars fought to enforce religious belief were often less than successful. The desire creation of a universal Protestant or Catholic Europe faded, and religious toleration began to grow, in fits and starts. Wars were fought between princes and states, not between fanatic adherents of rival religious groups.  Soldiers could still be incredibly religious: indeed, Swedish troops in the Great Northern War were some of the most devout religious believers in European history. Religious differences as a cause of war, however, became less common.

Hans Karl von Winterfeldt:
A Protestant-Warrior in the Eighteenth Century

By the mid-eighteenth century, warfare began to stoke the tensions of the religious conflict, not the other way around. The British developed an anti-French and anti-Catholic identity, while in German Central Europe, the birthplace of Luther and the Reformation, religious tensions remained. Indeed, the Seven Years' War in Europe may have been caused by Protestant ambitions on the part of one man: Prussian General Hans Karl von Winderfeldt. Winterfeldt, one of Frederick II of Prussia's closest confidantes, dreamed of "the creation of a new Protestant German Empire."[1] Frederick's record of religious toleration was mixed; he certainly sponsored it at times in his life and built Catholic places of worship, even in Berlin. However, he also persecuted disloyal Catholics in the County of Glatz during the Seven Years' War, and executed a Catholic priest. The Prussian and British governments used religion as a weapon of propaganda in the Seven Years' War, in an attempt to represent the conflict as religious in nature. Frederick enjoyed a high reputation among Protestant and Catholic minor princes in the Holy Roman Empire, and Austrian Minister Kaunitz wrote that "favoured by fanaticism, the tempting prospect of the secularisations, and the strong solidarity which exists among Protestants ... the kings of England and Prussia could become effectively the masters of the whole of Europe."[2]

The remains of the fortifications of Wittenberg

For their part, the Austrians took steps to solidify their religious position. Fear of defections among Protestant troops within their own armed forces prevented them from using religious propaganda to full effect, and Maria Theresa was warned, "Your Majesty would run the risk of losing a considerable number of generals and officers from Your army, or at least be unable to rely on their loyalty."[3] The greatest event with a legacy to the reformation occurred on the 10th-13th of October 1760. Wittenberg, the sleepy town where Luther had ignited the Protestant Reformation, had been occupied by Prussian forces and was surrounded and besieged by an Austrian Army.  The Austrian bombardment ignited wooden buildings within the town, and fire quickly spread to the schlosskirche, the church where Luther had circulated the 95 Theses. In the course of the fire, the church, and Luther's tomb were burned. According to rumor, the Austrian commander, Grumbach, had wanted to destroy Luther's tomb. This moral victory, and the enterprising work of Austrian light troops who destroyed the locks with kept the wet ditch secure, quickly allowed the Austrian forces to capture the town.[4]

The rebuilt schlosskirche doors in Wittenberg

In the aftermath of the Seven Years' War, the church was rebuilt, and in the nineteenth century, Frederick II's great-great-great nephew, Frederick William IV, had commemorative doors cast in bronze, to replace the original wooden doors lost to the bombardment. Eventually, a Protestant-led German nation-state was created, but by that time, the fire of Christian religious conflict had faded from Europe. Now, Luther's legacy is debated with words rather than musket shot. Even 500 years on, Luther remains a divisive figure.


Thanks for Reading,




Alex Burns

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Christopher Duffy, Frederick the Great: A Military Life, 86.
[2] Quoted in Christopher Duffy, Instrument of War, 349.
[3]Ibid.
[4] Christopher Duffy, By Force of Arms, 280.