I follow quite a few historians, Battlefield Guides and Reenactors on Twitter, Youtube and a few other platforms. Why? well I like history, I like researching battles and then walking (and Riding) the ground, often giving a talk on the battle to those that I’m with, and I also do Living History/ Reenacting. So whats the issue?
Well…….
There are times when everyone hates each other or condemns each other but particularly at this time of year, the events season, I see quite a lot of focus on the the dislike and condemnation of the Reenactors and Living Historians.
“Its that time of year when fat old blokes appear dressed up as aged paras….“
“there is nothing I hate more that seeing fat middle aged men pretending to be Richard Sharpe….“
and so on and so on.
As a living Historian I’ve been on the end of this flak and I’ve also been part of the reason for the flak. But I’ve also seen the hypocrisy and double standards of the Historians and battlefield guides. So this is going to be a tale of how we all have a problem, how we can look to prevent the problem and how we all fit together and can work together.
Before I go any further – There are people out there that that already do this and are bloody good at it and it makes for really good events, talks and lectures. We just need to be:
- Honest with ourselves.
- Open minded to learning
- Open minded to learning from others from the other groupings.
- Prepared to work together
- Understanding that just because you are in one of the groupings (Historian, Battlefield Guide or Reenactor), don’t think that there aren’t people from your grouping in some of the other Groups.
So what do I mean by some of these observations? Well lets have a chat.
I got into the Living History by accident but once in I really enjoyed it and for me the ability to learn history, demonstrate it and then engage with the public is the bit that pushed/ pulled me further into it.
So lets get things straight to start with I am the middle aged chubby bloke that likes to dress up (Steady now…….!) in historical uniforms. I’m 52 and stocky in build, I am not going to cut the mustard as a 1918 Royal Engineer Sapper aged about 21. However I have worked out that I can pass as a Warrant Officer or as a Major, and that works for portraying Sappers and Infantry. I have also kitted myself out as a Sergeant of the 5th Seaforths but not of an Infantry Company but of the Transport Section – why? because from images of the time there is a good spread of older blokes in that type of unit.
Its an early lesson that I learned from some reenacting groups – Do you look like you belong dressed the way you are? The other bit of my rationale is that I have been a Warrant Officer and an Officer, now I agree that doesn’t mean that I can carry it off as a period Officer or Warrant Officer/ SNCO but it gives me a basis for the role but I’ve had to dig in and learn the specifics of the role in the period portrayed.
Mistakes that I have made as a Living Historian that could be or are spotted a mile away by others in the Reenacting world:
- wearing modern glasses. I’m a speccie git and I need my specticals all of the time (I’m not blind….) but for some of my early events I just wore my modern glasses, while they were plain metal frames I was very aware that they were not period appropriate. I now have period appropriate glasses for the Victorian & Great War period and also for the 1940s period. You get them from companies such as Dead Man’s Spex (https://www.deadmensspex.com/)- A very good company and great to deal with!
- Using Modern Drill – this is a common issue with British Soldiers that start doing reenacting. The lifting your knee to parallel to the ground and stamping your feet is a post ww2 thing. And I’ve been caught out by it – yes the non-drillie sapper was caught out doing modern drill. WW1 drill is more akin to Royal Navy drill – sliding the foot in, less formality to it. The good reenacting groups do a lot of training to get their group and individuals to look the part and to break the habit for the serving soldiers in their ranks so that the foot drill is appropriate of the period.
- Missing the small details – I have an officers SD Cap that dates from the 1940/ early 50s. Fairly well battered and was a good starter cap to use with WW1, when I picked it up it had modern stay bright ER2 side buttons on it. It was only after a couple of events that I clocked it and changed them for brass period buttons (I’ve also replaced it now with 2 period specific caps). Which was lucky as at the next event that I attended I was checked over and the individual was looking particularly for this type of thing.
- Riding Boots – Riding boots are not cheap and most people have black riding boots. Luckily when I decided to invest in a set of long riding boots I went for brown ones which was not a bad idea for when I was doing competitive riding but for reenacting they just weren’t right. It wasn’t until I did the Warhorse 14 Event where we were asked to bring our own long riding boots that I realised how much they they were not appropriate. The style and cut of them was just not right. so over time I have managed to invest in a couple of pairs of boots. These haven’t been cheap, but they are really good to ride in and between them I can cover all of the Great war period.
- There are other faux pas but as I’ve realised them or they have been pointed out they have been corrected or removed.
The so-what of this is that my journey to become better and more accurate has taken time, effort, research and some bits of embarrassment and some wrong turns, added to which it also costs. Next to no one can afford to come into this hobby and buy a full set of kit in one hit that is perfect. You tend to start with the basics and build from there or get loaned some kit to get you through your first season of events. Once you know that you enjoy it then you should start the real investment of time, effort, research and money.
So this is why you tend to have the middle aged individual with a bit more cash dominating the field.
A lot of people from the historian side of things are keen to point out the Fat SS bloke or a group of “Living History” bods at an event that just look shite while wearing all sorts of uniform, kit and equipment. Here is my take on things –
The WW2 German and SS reenactors get a shit load of flak from the historian community and others, they are an easy target to critise and often used as a focal point to have a go at the wider reenacting community. They are seen as right wing sympathisers, or Nazis in plan sight etc. Well while a very small number may be, the vast majority are not. Theres a whole wider discussion to be had rather than roll out a blanket – THEY SHOULD BE BANNED! – I don’t agree with that. There are some very good living history groups that do WW2 German Forces, they do it in an educational way and they do excellent displays. if you ban them then you lose an important part of history, you only see one side of the story and that means that parts of the story go missing or are glossed over or simply disappear. My view is that incomplete or unbalanced history is not good history and wrong lessons can be taken from that – this is a far bigger discussion for a later blog post perhaps.
I’ve seen arguments where these uniforms should only been seen in Museums. Well guess what?Museums occasionally get their uniform and equipment displays wrong and they often don’t like being corrected by the reenacting community! (I’m aware of 2 museums at least that have incorrect 1902 UP saddle and Tack set ups on display which are wrong and the equipment they display is not period appropriate for the display! In both cases the displays were done by the museum staff and historians).
As with all living history events and groups, if you get the right people, with the right reputation for doing the displays and talks right, and you will have the ability to understand the soldier’s perspective, from both sides of the conflict.
Another important thing where reenactors get criticised is where they just look like a bag of shite and don’t look appropriate. Reenacting groups will often look for funding or costs to attend an event, and often that really expensive event that you paid a fortune to attend will look to cut costs and in doing so they will book groups that are cheaper or to cut the costs further by using in-house volunteers.
Now some groups are are cheap because they are starting out and need the money to cover travel costs or to fund then next part of their development. Established groups need to cover their travel costs, public liabilities insurances, repair and maintenance of their equipment etc, that means they are not cheap but you do get a very good display and experience, these are groups such as The Warwicks 1914-1918 Group or the 16th Lancers Group.
Some events decide that they just don’t want to pay out for these groups so they either get some of their volunteers to dress up in uniforms or in a couple of cases they have hire some actors and provided some kit for them to wear. From a Reenactor point of view this is the worst of the all possible worlds, as people will look at these individuals and think “feck me they look fecking rubbish!” and they are right but trying to make people realise they are not reenactors is bloody impossible, They have been trotted out by an event that is too cheapskate to allocate some funds to get a half decent group booked, and regularly we see photos from these type of events being trotted out by Historians and Battlefield guides as the evidence of why reenactors are shite!
To the event organisers, do yourself a favour, if you can’t afford or won’t pay for a decent Living History or Reenacting Group then either don’t add a dressed up element or speak to a Reenacting group and ask if they can provide a small contingent to do a talk or smaller display. All that happens is the reenactors get a bad reputation and the event gets black listed by reenacting groups for the future.
To the Historians out there I have listened to a number of you publicly complain that you are invited to speak at events with an expectation is that you will not be paid – well it is the same thing for the Reenactors.
I’ve worked with historians and on Battlefield Studies/ Staff Rides. Some of these have been really good and some have been shockingly bad. Here is my take on things (this is my opinion and my experience. so you can take it or leave it).
On an Army Staff ride event in France and we are stood on a battlefield. The Historian steps up and gave a really good brief on the Context to the battle, the formations involved and the Generals and the factors that affect the battle to this point. At this point he handed over to the Battlefield Guide who then talks everyone through the battlefield that we were stood on and pointed out all of the relevant features of the battlefield that could be seen and what happened as the battle proceed. At this point he handed over to us the Living History team for us to talk though the kit and equipment that the British, French and German infantrymen would have worn and carried for this particular battle, we then handed back to the historian who then talked through the results and consequences of this particular battle! Job done, good partnership!
On the same staff ride I then had the problem of a different Historian talking through a Battle, in really Big Hand terms and skimming over the particular details of the actual events and location that we are stood on. And then used me as the equivalent of a tailors dummy to talk about my kit and equipment which he proceeded to get completely wrong. Which is really bloody annoying! This well respected individual and published author, while comfortable with the Strategic and operational aspects of the events, was bloody clueless on the tactics and fighting on the site and the particular loads carried by a British Infantryman on the day!
I also attended Battlefield study provided by a commercial company, 5 days around the Ypres battlefields with a focus on 3rd Ypres. By Day 3 it was clear that our guide was really good at the tactical battles of each of the sites we visited, he could walk us through each site and give us great detail about the events, the bravery of the soldiers and wins and losses at each point of the battle. What was lacking was the piece that linked each of these battles together what made these battles part of the Third Ypres Offensive? The operational and strategic aspects were lost or missing, why is that important? Well the audience was Warrant Officers, Majors and a couple of Lt Colonels, and getting to know the bigger picture was probably a bit more important. The follow up letter to the Company Head office expressed the disappointment of missing the key component of what had been asked for when the battlefield study was booked! To resolve this we ended up asking for a War Studies academic from Sandhurst to come and spend a day with us, who quite successfully managed to stitch everything together for us.
Another observation that I have is the hypocrisy of some historians. The number of times that I have seen some historians criticise reenactors and living historians and later appear either in badly fitted and incorrectly worn kit themselves as part of a talk that they are giving or where they give a lecture or presentation and use reenactors as part of that event.
Guys, if you don’t like us then stay the hell away from us and don’t try and jazz up your presentation by slinging some kit on. If you are going to wear kit and equipment then get a hair cut, make sure you are wearing the right kit for the period you are presenting on and make sure you know your stuff about what you have on. If you want to do this then come and talk to us, embrace it and make the effort. The reenacting community wants to help and wants to engage, thats what we do this dressing up milarky for. A really good example of this was on the Ride to High Wood in 2016 we were joined by a professional artist who had been commissioned to produce a piece of art of the battle. He could ride and as such was kitted out as a 7th Dragoon and had spent time prior to the event learning to ride in a WW1 Saddle and equipment and then joined us for the 2 days to ride the ground of the 14th July 1916. He wanted to get an understanding of how the uniform, equipment and saddlery was worn and used prior to starting his artwork.
I’ll leave you with a last anecdote. I was part of a group of living history members doing a set of static WW1 displays at Sandhurst showing the support and logistics involved in the later parts of the Great War. These displays were part of the pre-deployment presentations for the Army Staff Ride in 1918. Those attending the staff ride were broken down into smaller groups and moved around each of the stand and got briefs and the chance to ask questions and handle the kit and equipment. Each of the groups had a mix of nationalities and also civilians Historians and Academics. with one of the groups I noticed most of the academics were not particularly engaged with the displays but with one group one of the academics was really interested, lots of questions, keen to get his hands on the kit and really engaged with what we had on display.
This acedemic later came back to have a chat with my mate and myself. He was really fascinated by the differences in our uniform but by the fact that we were both Royal Engineers. We explained that I was kitted out for a soldier with the Field Squadrons and my younger counterpart was kitted out for a Field Company Sapper and we ran through the differences and similarities for him. He explained that as a Historian he knew about the activities of the Royal Engineers and the wide functions of the different units but to actually see and understand the difference in kit and equipment was something that just wasn’t part of what he dealt with. We had a good discussion and by then end of it had agreed that to get the full picture there is a need and a place to have historians, Battlefield guides and Reenactors working together. I regularly see this Historian on TV and I’m always impressed by him, the fact that he was open to ask questions and engage has probably helped in my opinion of him.
In summary – there are good, bad and middling Reenactors, Battlefield Guides and Historians. The vast majority of reenactors and Living History people are passionate about their area of history and strive to get things right or as near as damn it. Quite a few of the living history and reenacting community are also Battlefield Guides and or Historians so give them credit.
Yes we are a older bunch but we do aim to get younger people engaged and to support them into the community and into groups.
Not everyone that you see in photos are reenactors or living historians, some events are just too tight to pay or invite good quality groups to their events. So sometimes we are tarred with the “Bad” brush due to the poor efforts of event volunteers and actors.
It can be hard to build a reputation as a reenacting group and often that takes attending smaller events and just not quite getting it right to allow them to refine, adjust and correct things, but don’t be too critical because some of these groups have to go through the pain of “not being 100% right” so that they can correct themselves.
And to the Historians who like having a go at criticising some of the reenacting groups, be prepared to eat a bit of humble pie if you suddenly find yourself needing some reenactors for your next book launch or your next history talk, and especially if you find yourself looking like a bag of shite tied in the middle with a 37 pattern web belt!
Lets all play nice and work hard together to give the public and audiences some good quality history events. And most of all lets learn from each other!