Share your "bad history" questions from events or reenactments

Not sure if this comes under mansplaining or rotten living history--but the maddest I've ever been was looking at a nice uniform jacket (hand-made, good fabric, etc.) hanging on a tent at Fort Concho when this yahoo comes up and starts telling me all about uniforms. Ahem. Not only have I been trained by the best--@Tin cup, James C. and others--but I have a degree in Home Economics, which means I took Textiles classes and tailoring and....:cautious: I kept trying to nicely tell him I knew what I was looking for, but no. So, I wandered off and didn't buy it. Next, he shows up at another event (Texas is really a small place in many ways), and starts telling me why something....I tuned him off and walked away (my poor husband is too dang nice!). Third time I ran into him was a local event....and he started in on the whole Lost Cause whys and wherefores--the war was all over economics and not slavery, etc. :stomp: After THAT encounter, my husband even got irritated with him, and he's the nicest guy ever. My uncharitable comment as we walked away is that I could have used Forrest's saber and that I'd find one if I got cornered by the guy again.
 
(1) I've had kids and even adults ask me if we shoot real bullets at each other. "Yeah hon, now give me a dollar and I'll show ya' a bullet hole!"
(2) At a "dog and pony show" for school event a teacher informed the class that Bull Run was the "shot heard 'round the world". We informed her that was Lexington but she insisted that she was right and we were wrong.

(3) Another teacher pointed to pictures of Lincoln and Davis and informed the class that they were related; Reason ? THEY BOTH HAD BEARDS!

(4) A Middle School "genius" said that if he had been in the war he'd "got me a Uzi..."

(5) At meal time we were feeding our faces and an ADULT came up and asked us "Is that real food you're eating ?" I had to bite my tongue to keep from responding with "Yeah it is, so come back in about four hours and it'll be real ****"
 
I am not a reenactor or even a "History teacher." I have just read this thread and would like to make a few comments from the perspective of a retired science teacher who is a bit of a "late bloomer" when it comes to the ACW. (Though I did make sure my students were made aware of the history or stories behind the topic we discussed. Any topic needs to be put into its historical perspective.)

The thread is highly interesting and I can imagine reenactors sitting around a campfire discussing some of the "dumb" questions they have been asked. And to us they may seem "dumb" like the answers to seemingly easy questions asked to folks "on the street" on some late night shows. And honestly, some are dumb; and maybe some of those questions are made to, maybe, poke a little fun on the reenactors. I really don't know. Any teacher ocassionally has to put up wit a "smart a.." comment.

But some of the questions in the tread may come out of ignorance or an honest question that could really allow the "teachable moment."

The "real bullet" topic could have been addressed by showing that person a real bullet and providing some conversation and further info on the topic. Would you like to see a real CW bullet? Hold the gun, is it heavy? . . The smell after firing, . . .

The "real food" could lead to a discussion of the diet and provision provided to the men during the battle and how they may not even eat for a few days or on limited rations until supplies caught up with them, maybe how they "cooked" food, or how rotten some of it really was.

The question about "real water" could lead to water sources, sanitation, pollution, latrines and that more deaths resulted from disease than battle wounds. ...maybe even to the mention that "germ theory' was not even fully developed at the time.

Perhaps a thread about "teachable moments" during reenacting or other teaching situations would be interesting.
It's not so much about bad previous teachers or curriculum, just ignorance on the individual's part and our opportunity to correct any ignorance we might come across. And maybe some of you did take advantage of the question after all. Isn't that why you reenact?
 
...And to us they may seem "dumb" like the answers to seemingly easy questions asked to folks "on the street" on some late night shows. And honestly, some are dumb; and maybe some of those questions are made to, maybe, poke a little fun on the reenactors. I really don't know. Any teacher ocassionally has to put up wit a "smart a.." comment...

You're on to something there, 19th Ohio. What we sometimes get from teens in a group is the result of peer pressure: not to show too much knowledge or interest in the Civil War, or even feign ignorance, is to stay "in the posse," and maybe even gain the notice and a glance from that cute boy or girl in the group.* Last thing you want to be is the nerd - proclaiming what you know but clueless that impressing the teacher and getting a star sticker is such a grade-school thing.

I agree with you on what to do with that dynamic. I refuse to make hay out of a dumb statement or question just to edify the sense of my grand and extensive knowledge of the Civil War and impress the crowd with it. Just quash it and follow-up with "well you probably know that's silly" or whatever and address the poser as a competent person. In fact know that some of these kids undoubtedly have more raw intelligence than you do, urp.

As for those jaded, lazy and over-opinionated adult spectators -- have at it.



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
* in particular, in my experience, for too long it's been just too cute for girls to play dumb, and you'd think that's changed with recent social awareness but apparently that hasn't reached younger teens yet.
 
I am not a reenactor or even a "History teacher." I have just read this thread and would like to make a few comments from the perspective of a retired science teacher who is a bit of a "late bloomer" when it comes to the ACW. (Though I did make sure my students were made aware of the history or stories behind the topic we discussed. Any topic needs to be put into its historical perspective.)

The thread is highly interesting and I can imagine reenactors sitting around a campfire discussing some of the "dumb" questions they have been asked. And to us they may seem "dumb" like the answers to seemingly easy questions asked to folks "on the street" on some late night shows. And honestly, some are dumb; and maybe some of those questions are made to, maybe, poke a little fun on the reenactors. I really don't know. Any teacher ocassionally has to put up wit a "smart a.." comment.

But some of the questions in the tread may come out of ignorance or an honest question that could really allow the "teachable moment."

The "real bullet" topic could have been addressed by showing that person a real bullet and providing some conversation and further info on the topic. Would you like to see a real CW bullet? Hold the gun, is it heavy? . . The smell after firing, . . .

The "real food" could lead to a discussion of the diet and provision provided to the men during the battle and how they may not even eat for a few days or on limited rations until supplies caught up with them, maybe how they "cooked" food, or how rotten some of it really was.

The question about "real water" could lead to water sources, sanitation, pollution, latrines and that more deaths resulted from disease than battle wounds. ...maybe even to the mention that "germ theory' was not even fully developed at the time.

Perhaps a thread about "teachable moments" during reenacting or other teaching situations would be interesting.
It's not so much about bad previous teachers or curriculum, just ignorance on the individual's part and our opportunity to correct any ignorance we might come across. And maybe some of you did take advantage of the question after all. Isn't that why you reenact?
Ok, lets start that thread about teachable moments!
 
I am not a reenactor or even a "History teacher." I have just read this thread and would like to make a few comments from the perspective of a retired science teacher who is a bit of a "late bloomer" when it comes to the ACW. (Though I did make sure my students were made aware of the history or stories behind the topic we discussed. Any topic needs to be put into its historical perspective.)

The thread is highly interesting and I can imagine reenactors sitting around a campfire discussing some of the "dumb" questions they have been asked. And to us they may seem "dumb" like the answers to seemingly easy questions asked to folks "on the street" on some late night shows. And honestly, some are dumb; and maybe some of those questions are made to, maybe, poke a little fun on the reenactors. I really don't know. Any teacher ocassionally has to put up wit a "smart a.." comment.

But some of the questions in the tread may come out of ignorance or an honest question that could really allow the "teachable moment."

The "real bullet" topic could have been addressed by showing that person a real bullet and providing some conversation and further info on the topic. Would you like to see a real CW bullet? Hold the gun, is it heavy? . . The smell after firing, . . .

The "real food" could lead to a discussion of the diet and provision provided to the men during the battle and how they may not even eat for a few days or on limited rations until supplies caught up with them, maybe how they "cooked" food, or how rotten some of it really was.

The question about "real water" could lead to water sources, sanitation, pollution, latrines and that more deaths resulted from disease than battle wounds. ...maybe even to the mention that "germ theory' was not even fully developed at the time.

Perhaps a thread about "teachable moments" during reenacting or other teaching situations would be interesting.
It's not so much about bad previous teachers or curriculum, just ignorance on the individual's part and our opportunity to correct any ignorance we might come across. And maybe some of you did take advantage of the question after all. Isn't that why you reenact?

That's an excellent point, 19thOhio! In hindsight, it might have been appropriate to also ask in the original post what the responses were to these "bad history" questions and how they were handled. I agree completely with your observation that they should all be treated as teachable moments, and in fact that's been my approach all along.

The "bad history" questions are asked out of ignorance of the subject matter and not stupidity (two entirely different things). That's why at the outset in the original post I didn't want examples of questions like, "Is that a real fire? " or "Is that real baby?" etc. because those are just stupid questions. You don't need an understanding of 19-Century material culture to know that four pieces of burning firewood is a real fire. I was looking for questions that show a lack of education about history in general and the Civil War era in particular.

On the other hand, if a teenager asks me if the Civil War came before or after WWII, that shows an ignorance of history, and I'd use that opportunity to politely educate them on the historical timeline, which is in fact what I did. That's how I handle the response to any question I get, whether it's stupid or just the result of ignorance of the subject matter. When I'm dealing with the public, my approach is, "there are no stupid questions." Every inquiry needs to be handled as a "teachable moment," and any interaction with the public needs to produce a positive result.
 
Last edited:
I am not a reenactor or even a "History teacher." I have just read this thread and would like to make a few comments from the perspective of a retired science teacher who is a bit of a "late bloomer" when it comes to the ACW. (Though I did make sure my students were made aware of the history or stories behind the topic we discussed. Any topic needs to be put into its historical perspective.)

The thread is highly interesting and I can imagine reenactors sitting around a campfire discussing some of the "dumb" questions they have been asked. And to us they may seem "dumb" like the answers to seemingly easy questions asked to folks "on the street" on some late night shows. And honestly, some are dumb; and maybe some of those questions are made to, maybe, poke a little fun on the reenactors. I really don't know. Any teacher ocassionally has to put up wit a "smart a.." comment.

But some of the questions in the tread may come out of ignorance or an honest question that could really allow the "teachable moment."

The "real bullet" topic could have been addressed by showing that person a real bullet and providing some conversation and further info on the topic. Would you like to see a real CW bullet? Hold the gun, is it heavy? . . The smell after firing, . . .

The "real food" could lead to a discussion of the diet and provision provided to the men during the battle and how they may not even eat for a few days or on limited rations until supplies caught up with them, maybe how they "cooked" food, or how rotten some of it really was.

The question about "real water" could lead to water sources, sanitation, pollution, latrines and that more deaths resulted from disease than battle wounds. ...maybe even to the mention that "germ theory' was not even fully developed at the time.

Perhaps a thread about "teachable moments" during reenacting or other teaching situations would be interesting.
It's not so much about bad previous teachers or curriculum, just ignorance on the individual's part and our opportunity to correct any ignorance we might come across. And maybe some of you did take advantage of the question after all. Isn't that why you reenact?
Yes we DID respond with a "teachable moment" but I think you took this thread totally out of context. How brain dead does one have to be to ask "DO YOU ACTUALLY SHOOT REAL BULLETS AT EACH OTHER" ??? AND FAKE FOOD ??? Some of us reenact and others are interpreters at historic parks and sights (living history villages, etc) WE ALL GET SONE REAL HUM-DINGERS FOR QUESTIONS. If the tourists would just STOP AND THINK before they ASK, it could avoid a lot of embarrassment. You need to attend some events and see what it's really all about. :dance:
 
My best are just from conversations. Once, my boss at another job, a very intelligent woman, asked me which side wore the blue uniforms.
And once I was asked to supply a childhood hero for a website. I told the young lady it was Robert E. Lee. "Hmmm...I'll have to google him," she responded, obviously never having heard of him.
 
Second hand, but someone shouted "The Redcoats are coming!" at our corporal

...

I also do Rev War reenacting as a musician in the Continental Army. Most people (including many reenactors) don’t know that musicians in the Continental Army wore red coats with blue trim, the reverse color of the infantry (standing behind us in the picture) who wore blue coats with red trim--this was so the officers could identify us quickly to relay messages. As a result, we’re continually mistaken for British soldiers and get all kinds of comments from the public: “You guys prisoners or something?” “Hey, you lost? Your army’s over there!” “Boo! The Redcoats are coming!” etc., all of which is understandable and we have great fun with it, as well as use it as a teachable moment.

1-m.jpg
 
I also do Rev War reenacting as a musician in the Continental Army. Most people (including many reenactors) don’t know that musicians in the Continental Army wore red coats with blue trim, the reverse color of the infantry (standing behind us in the picture) who wore blue coats with red trim--this was so the officers could identify us quickly to relay messages. As a result, we’re continually mistaken for British soldiers and get all kinds of comments from the public: “You guys prisoners or something?” “Hey, you lost? Your army’s over there!” “Boo! The Redcoats are coming!” etc., all of which is understandable and we have great fun with it, as well as use it as a teachable moment.

View attachment 340823

It does lead one to wonder why the Continentals would have their musicians in red at all. Were they THAT unpopular with the troops? I jest, but it does seem odd, when you could pick any color you wanted seeing as the American army was brand new in so many ways.
 
It does lead one to wonder why the Continentals would have their musicians in red at all. Were they THAT unpopular with the troops? I jest, but it does seem odd, when you could pick any color you wanted seeing as the American army was brand new in so many ways.
Actually a few Continental units did wear red uniform coats . Webb's Additional Continental Regiment wore red as did Henley's .
 
It does lead one to wonder why the Continentals would have their musicians in red at all. Were they THAT unpopular with the troops? I jest, but it does seem odd, when you could pick any color you wanted seeing as the American army was brand new in so many ways.

According to the weird battlefield chivalry of the day, musicians were considered non-combatants, so you weren't supposed to kill them deliberately, regardless of what they were wearing. Military uniforms of that era were varied and colorful--some British musicians even wore green or yellow coats!
 
I also do Rev War reenacting as a musician in the Continental Army. Most people (including many reenactors) don’t know that musicians in the Continental Army wore red coats with blue trim, the reverse color of the infantry (standing behind us in the picture) who wore blue coats with red trim--this was so the officers could identify us quickly to relay messages. As a result, we’re continually mistaken for British soldiers and get all kinds of comments from the public: “You guys prisoners or something?” “Hey, you lost? Your army’s over there!” “Boo! The Redcoats are coming!” etc., all of which is understandable and we have great fun with it, as well as use it as a teachable moment.

View attachment 340823
Great photo. Toured Colonial Williamsburg years ago and a Brit gal became quite incensed that the Redcoats were viewed as the “bad guys”.
 
Back
Top