I was wondering if some kind soul with access to the Hetrina or Mr. Burgoyne's list of Waldeck soldiers in the Rev War would be willing to look for a soldier with the initials "C.V.?" Here is my reason: I recently acquired in North Carolina a small, fancy, 18th century wooden tobacco box. The top has an unusual panel of beadwork spelling "Taback." It is a professionally made piece. On the the front in ink are the initials "C.V." Inside the lid, again written in ink, is the following: Von deinen Schwestern Zum Andenken Waldeck am b5/12 76 Translation: >From your Sisters In remembrance of Waldeck on/at the b5/12 76 It seems "Zum Andenken" is one of those phrases that has more than one meaning in English: a souvenir, in memory of, presented by, to remember, etc. What caught my eye was the Waldeck and 76 as I know the 3rd regiment was formed in 1776. The 76 is set somewhat off to the side but I believe it is for 1776 (the box is certainly 18th c.). The b5/12 has me puzzled. I'm not sure how to interpret the "b" in front of the numbers. I considered "battalion 5/12th company" but maybe not. Obviously reading the date as May 5 is tempting as that would put it in the perfect timeframe for the 3rd but I believe in Europe it would be read 5 December, making it after the 3rd had sailed. Which, of course, means it could be nothing more than a souvenir of a day trip to Waldeck or something like that. Still, the box got here somehow. It is in very rough condition and has obviously been in a barn or such for a long, long time. On your website I did find one "C.V." -- Christoph Voepel, POW at Amite, died in New Orleans 22 Oct 1779. Obviously, at this point I have absolutely no proof of connection to the 3rd regiment let alone to an individual but it is simply an avenue I'm exploring. I don't see this box as something a common soldier would have been given (it would have been impossibly bulky for a knapsack) but possibly an officer, maybe a junior officer. I am not a Hessian descendant or even researcher but I do have a minimal knowledge of the subject -- enough to have, thankfully, picked up on the Waldeck :-) Any input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks so much! Kathy in Virginia

One correction to what I wrote: "Obviously reading the date as May 5 is tempting" should read "May 12." Sorry! kathy