Foreign Observers

[lincolnsguard]

Looking at photos of Civil War military observers and was curious if anyone has thought of portraying a foreign military observer or has seen this done at large events.

No personal interest in doing this myself but it opens up some interesting possibilities.

Thoughts?

Yes, too much; at places they never were; and very poorly.

[RJSamp]

We've got a local guy who does Coldstream Guards for literally any CG time period. His mounted officer's impression is superb (great horse as well). Saw him at the local July event and he looked sharp in his late 1850's Crimean War veteran kit.....probably one of the rare exceptions for the FO impression. And a heckuva nice guy to boot.

[indguard]

We've got a local guy who does Coldstream Guards for literally any CG time period. His mounted officer's impression is superb (great horse as well). Saw him at the local July event and he looked sharp in his late 1850's Crimean War veteran kit.....probably one of the rare exceptions for the FO impression. And a heckuva nice guy to boot.

Shhh, RJ. You don't want to destroy the holier-than-thou set that is sure all Foreign Observer impressions are garbage.

WTH
The BoredWithIt mess

[Micah Trent]

"That was ages ago, we hardly even dream of it. Cavaliers and Roundheads! Off with his head! Off with his head"

LOL..had to say that. But the foreign observer thingy is over done and the ones I have seen don't even come close to pulling off the impresion right. You can dress like one, but when it comes to attitude, mannerisms, etc., they don't cut it.
But if that is what one wants to do, so it is what it is....

[Ross L. Lamoreaux]

Shhh, RJ. You don't want to destroy the holier-than-thou set that is sure all Foreign Observer impressions are garbage.

WTH
The BoredWithIt mess

You bring up a valid point. Many of us are critical about that particular impression, but I think it has more to do with the physical impression and not the knowledge of those who portray that. For instance, most of the foreign countries that sent observers were neutrals, therefore they would not be wearing uniforms. They would be wearing typical citizen's travel attire of the class they were of. The exception to that would be several who originally came as observer's and ended up as volunteer aides for Federal general officer's. McClellan had several on his staff from France and Great Britain. I've met several folks in the last few years who have incredible knowledge of the period, of their chosen individual, and of the army they portray, and readily share it in an enjoyable and educational manner (Sir Harry is one of those, as is the gentleman who portrays Lt Col Freemantle in Florida), but because they tend to dress as European officers on parade, they are harder to take at times. There are several good period accounts such as Freemantle's own book that go into the details of what they traveled with an wore , and this should be a guide to this type of specialty impression

[lincolnsguard]

I didn't say there aren't folks out there who "do it right." There are just too many other "horrible messes" out there that get the good apples thrown in the bucket of bad apples too. Rememberance Day in Goofysburg is filled with Bad Lincolns and really bad foreign observers. And, nothing compares to "what a mess" shows up in Gettysburg for the Memorial Day festivities. Been there, done that, have the photos.

[Rob Weaver]

Fremantle repeatedly mentions that most of the time he was traveling, he was wearing a brownish colored hunting suit, having sold his baggage early in the trip. He specifically notes that he was wearing that at Gettysburg. He also notes that it was too shabby, in his opinion, for him to accept a number of dinner invitations he received.
I don't want to pile on the observer impression, but want to note a couple things about it. It would be a terribly hard impression to start without a great deal of background research. As a relative neophite, you can slap on a blue or grey uniform and experience civil war reenacting. Observers, however, require a vast amount of arcane knowlege about 19th century culture, most of it from other places than the United States. They were few in number and we know many of them by name, so you're now researching a specific individual. A certain amount of acting skill and desire are needed because you're going to be interacting with not only the public, but other reenactors as someone else. Finally, I'd include at least a passing knowlege of the language of the country you're supposed to hail from, at least enough to get through standard greeting and pleasantries. That's a pretty tall order.

[mravery]

Hello all,
Some of you know me and for those who do not I do a specialty impression full time (and successfully I would add) I’ve yet to understand the disdain and animosity that the general reenactor has towards this small group of reenactors.
It seems that that general attitude is that unless you slog a rifle and fall in line as a grunt you are not ‘part’ of the community. In my eyes, a LARGE part of the role of a reenactor is educating the public about the period, places and ways of the times and the specialty impressions were a part of it and are usually forgotten by the wayside. Whether it is the role of Paymaster, Topographic Engineer, Pinkerton Agent or even Foreign Observer they were all part of the times and should be part of the community.
If you want to discuss the topic of ‘not being researched’ or ‘done poorly’ etc, I can guarantee that I can show you with a minimum of odds of 100 to 1 a poorly researched or done poorly infantry reenactor to every specialty impression out there. I would also wager a bet that the specialty impression reenactor has done ten times the research about what he is doing compared to the average infantry reenactor.
Ok, I’m off my soap-box now…..
BTW-R.J. very much looking forward to seeing you again at Shiloh!
Cheers
Mark

[johnduffer]

'can guarantee that I can show you with a minimum of odds of 100 to 1 a poorly researched or done poorly infantry reenactor to every specialty impression"

Not weighing in either way on specialty impressions (to each his own) but it would seem your ratio is a tad flawed - by it's very nature the specialty impression is heavily outnumbered and you're implying that all such are well researched and well done. "Specialty" is also a bit subjective - sutlers, teamsters, doctors, et al are specialty impressions in a way but would have been much more common than the foreign observer.

[Rob Weaver]

My biggest critique of specialty impressions is that they easily become lopsided in terms of the numbers we post at the average reenacting weekend. We tend to look like a skirmish wargame board: a handful of infantry, some dismounted cavalry, 5 or 6 artillery pieces and a number of civilians of indeterminite origin added for color. We would be better served with larger numbers of very common impressions.