What is all this tomfoolery

[5MadFarmers]

Ok, I'm curious. About a number of things really. Is there something specific you want to see? The topic title is:


Military collectibles: field gear (like ammo cans, mess kits), uniforms, unit patches, insignia, weapon sights, medals, helmets, etc. Some folks like certain eras like WW1, WW2, Civil War etc.

Ok, that I can do I think. Some of it anyway. I don't collect patches, insignia, medals, and don't have much for Civil War stuff. Outside of that though I think I'm doing ok.

So what is it people want to see if anything?

Second question. What do you collect?

Third question. Why?

There are different types of collectors I'd think. I guess I'm more of an accumulator. I'm in the process of trying to get one of pretty much everything a normal infantryman would have. Up to the end of WW2 anyway but some goes beyond that. I have very little family stuff. I guess I have kind of "adopted" other people though.

Does that make sense? First real "meat can" is the 1872. They go right into the modern era. So I've tried to get one of each model and one of each maker. I skipped the makers after WW2 though and just went for one of each model. Ditto the utensils.

Intrenching tools the same thing. One of each since inception. Not really maker based. Gun tools pretty much the same thing. Canteens - again the same thing. Shelter halves, sleeping bags, etc. One per model. Haversacks ditto.

So what are people interested in? Do you prefer to show your stuff or do you want to see stuff?

[Sunray]

"...everything a normal infantryman would have..." Would have or have been issued? Not the same thing.
PBI troopies were and are incredibly smart and creative. If a piece of kit either didn't work, was useless or was heavy, they'd lose it. Air mattresses, in VN, for example.
"...Intrenching tools..." Entrenching tools? A shovel by another name.
Most new collectors want to know where thay can get vintage stuff. Pictures of stuff they can't get doesn't help.

[JBinIll]

I like to see pictures of the variations and the harder to find items.Like what were the variations in color of the early web gear or the differences in the eagle snaps to determine who was the maker.I like to see as a friend of mine once said about a collector magazine I take,"articles about things you'll most likely never see let alone own".

Myself I'm a hodge podge collector.I like/collect many things not just militaria or firearms.The closest thing i can say I specialize in is collecting books on the artifacts of history I collect.LOL I buy a piece for the collection then purchase 6 books about it's history and use.

Why do I collect.My relatives often ask me that.I guess there is an inate desire among human beings to possess "things" to reinforce a sense of permanence or give purpose to their existence beyond the mundane hum drum of the daily grind.I like history and possessing an artifact,no matter how common or mundane,is to be able to touch something from the past.On many things I collect I like used items in preference to the mint.The mint item has no history other than it's age versus the used item has the handprint of it's user on it.

[Johnny P]

.On many things I collect I like used items in preference to the mint.The mint item has no history other than it's age versus the used item has the handprint of it's user on it.

Most military items have been in civilian hands much longer than they served in the military. To some they were a part of history to be preserved, but to others they were only valuable as a tool.

I would have to disagree that only used items have any history. Civilian neglect, misuse, or poor storage adds no history to a military item. Somewhere around here I have one of the military Pal 5" sheath knives that my dad bought for me shortly after WWII. It was a brand new unissued knife for the princely sum of $3.50. Today it's beat up condition looks like the veteran of a thousand battles, as it was carried for many years, used as a throwing knife or stuck up in the ground countless times until someone missed getting their knife to stick up. I put all it's history on it, and it's only value today is that it is a part of my childhood.
I have posted this pistol before, but as confirmed by SRS it was issued to a ship's captain in WWII. It had already been in service for more than a year when issued to the ship's captain, but it survived the war in remarkable condition, and has a documented history.

http://i49.tinypic.com/svnzit.jpg

[JBinIll]

LOL I said many things,not all things.In looking at military items I like unit marked pieces versus the mint unissued pieces.Like the knife you describe,beyond being purchased by the government and sitting in a box in a warehouse and then sold as surplus it has no history beyond yours.To me that is the interesting part of it's history.As a collector I like to dwell more on the people than the item.

Several years ago a well known collector and dealer in arms and militaria,primarily early U.S and I'm not talking about WW1 but 1700s and 1800s,named William Guthman passed away and his collection was auctioned off.I bought the auction catalog for reference purposes.The most interesting thing about his collection was that many of the items had "make do" repairs,had been personalized many rather crudely,and showed use and adatation by later owners to serve their purposes long after it's use ceased being military.Some folks like to collect by the numbers,some don't.I'm one of don'ts.

I don't disagree with your assessment of used versus the mint,but neither am I going to use someone elses ideas of what they look at as being applicable to my collecting interest.Your assessment of suitability for purchase for your collection is not the same as mine.We have different collecting goals.People collect many things for many reasons.I've found over most of the last 60 years I was better served in my collecting interests by following my opinions on what I wanted to achieve in my collecting than what someone else thought I should.My main goal is to enjoy the adventure in finding and collecting the things I like not the "looky what I got that you don't" type of collecting.

[Johnny P]

I would never try to influence anyone on what they want to collect. The point being made was that something worn is just something worn. We will never know for sure where the wear came from except as in the case of the knife I mentioned. Someday after I am gone it may become a prize in someone's collection because of all the wonderful wear and history it shows.

[5MadFarmers]

"...everything a normal infantryman would have..." Would have or have been issued? Not the same thing.

Completely true. An easy example are the German rifle cleaning kits (the "tobacco can" ones) with USGI issue stuff inside. A hodge podge kit.


"...Intrenching tools..." Entrenching tools? A shovel by another name.

Either spelling is acceptable. The "I" one is more prevalent in the eras I collect.

No, not necessarily a shovel. For a bit it was a trowel bayonet and later it was a knife. Between those two it was closer to a garden trowel.


Most new collectors want to know where thay can get vintage stuff. Pictures of stuff they can't get doesn't help.

"eBay" doesn't make for much of a forum.

[5MadFarmers]

In looking at military items I like unit marked pieces versus the mint unissued pieces.

Same here. I like unit and personal markings - it adds to the item for me.



The closest thing i can say I specialize in is collecting books on the artifacts of history I collect.LOL I buy a piece for the collection then purchase 6 books about it's history and use.

I collect the original manuals, regulations, etc. Some of the after-market books but not many.

[JBinIll]

No, not necessarily a shovel. For a bit it was a trowel bayonet and later it was a knife. Between those two it was closer to a garden trowel.

What exactly was the thinking behind the trowel bayonet as an entrenching tool?That has to be one of the most worthless designs of a dual purpose tool ever.You could probably have dug quicker with the lid off the meat can.Were there any period field reports on using these?

[5MadFarmers]

Actually it was the second most useless dual purpose item they developed. The rod bayonet in the '03 was useless as a bayonet and, due to it being made of steel, there were specific instructions to not use it as a cleaning rod. Kind of an expensive tent stake.

The norm in the ordnance department was for people to push their pet projects. The trowel bayonets were simply a follow-on to some CW ones. In fact he started down the road by buying them surplus. The "field report" was pretty much limited to "don't dig with them attached to the rifle as it'll bend the barrel." The General Commanding didn't want them adopted but the O.D. was under the Secretary of War and was able to get their way more often than not.

I don't think they were used for much other than digging latrine holes. Small temporary ones.

[pelago]

me. I have ancestors that fought in the civil war, direct and not so direct and some from marriage,

I am always looking for items that the average civil war GI carried, I have some memorabilia from my Great Grandfather Martin Barger, Corporal B Co, 25 Ill, from Danville Ill.

He survived Stones River, Chickamagua, Missionary Ridge, and Lookout Mountain. He fathered my Grandmother in 1888. I have two pistols and a Leech and Rigdon Confederate Bowie Knife, both his.

In his later years he was appointed Colonel and commanded the Old Soldiers Home in Danville Ill, which later became and is the VA Hosp

[John Sukey]

Actualy the trapdoor Springfield rod bayonet preceeded the one on the 03, and, unlike the 03 Rod bayonet it did get issued,.