Here's a brief but interesting anecdote of "role reversal" from the Covington Journal of June 29, 1861
One of the slaves, at Newport News, on being questioned as to whether he had run away from his master, replied, "No, golly, Massa run away from me! When he see de soldiers comin' he run like de debil. 'spec he's gone to Richmond!"
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Monday, June 27, 2011
Book Review: The Class of 1846 by John C. Waugh
The Class of 1846: From West Point to Appomattox: Stonewall Jackson, George McClellan and Their Brothers
John C.Waugh
copyright 1994
Warner Books
I finished this fine book a couple of weeks ago and though I regret I cannot do a full review of it, I do want to offer at least a small review of it.
It is a good book, but long. At over 500 pages, it did take me quite a while to read it (outside distractions kept me from reading it as quickly as I wished), but that is not a bad thing. It is well-written and easy to read, so the length is not a major issue.
This book serves almost as a mini-biography of several of the future soldiers, but especially McClellan and Jackson, for whom it describes their youth and their lives in between their time at West Point and the Civil War. They - the two most prominent members of the class - are certainly the two dominant figures in this book.
I enjoyed sketches of others as well though. I wish they had talked a bit more about A.P. Hill (though he was moved back to the class of 1847, he did start in the 1846 class), especially in the final days of his life. The same can be said about George Pickett.
At one point, the book had a nice discussion about Ambrose Burnside replacing McClellan late in 1862 and when the chapter ended, I was disappointed that the discussion about Burnside stopped too. Then I realized he was not part of this class, not even temporarily like Hill.
Waugh discusses their time at West Point, with the spartan lifestyle and he describe many of the teachers under whom the cadets studied. He mentions Benny Havens, of course, and the trouble associated with that tavern and related activities. He also describes the Mexican War, and the role many of these young men played in it.
Overall, I found this to be an enjoyable book, a pleasant read and an informative description of several future well-known Civil War generals.
I enjoyed sketches of others as well though. I wish they had talked a bit more about A.P. Hill (though he was moved back to the class of 1847, he did start in the 1846 class), especially in the final days of his life. The same can be said about George Pickett.
At one point, the book had a nice discussion about Ambrose Burnside replacing McClellan late in 1862 and when the chapter ended, I was disappointed that the discussion about Burnside stopped too. Then I realized he was not part of this class, not even temporarily like Hill.
Waugh discusses their time at West Point, with the spartan lifestyle and he describe many of the teachers under whom the cadets studied. He mentions Benny Havens, of course, and the trouble associated with that tavern and related activities. He also describes the Mexican War, and the role many of these young men played in it.
Overall, I found this to be an enjoyable book, a pleasant read and an informative description of several future well-known Civil War generals.
Saturday, June 25, 2011
The Terrors of Civil War
The Covington Journal of June 22, 1861 re-printed this piece.
The Lutheran Observer, a strong Union paper, says:
"Of all the awful judgments of a justly incensed God, WAR, and especially INTESTINE WAR, is the most terrific and destructive. When God determined to inflict condign punishment on His ancient people on account of their offenses, He submitted to David, their King, his choice of three fearful scourges, to wit: Famine, War, or Pestilence. David would rather fall into the hand of the Lord, "because His mercies are great," than of man, and chose pestilence as the least appalling.
The Lutheran Observer, a strong Union paper, says:
"Of all the awful judgments of a justly incensed God, WAR, and especially INTESTINE WAR, is the most terrific and destructive. When God determined to inflict condign punishment on His ancient people on account of their offenses, He submitted to David, their King, his choice of three fearful scourges, to wit: Famine, War, or Pestilence. David would rather fall into the hand of the Lord, "because His mercies are great," than of man, and chose pestilence as the least appalling.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
One brief view of the North's war goal
From the Covington Journal of June 22, 1861, comes this brief story which makes an interesting and thought-provoking point in the concluding paragraph (its response to the reprinted report above it.)
"The great mass of those who are supporting the war in the North, and fighting its battles, have not the most remote idea of giving it an emancipation character" - Cincinnati Enquirer
Have they not? Then the spectacle is presented to the world of a mass of men aiding in the accomplishment of an object they do not approve of.
This newspaper, a Southern-supporting periodical in a state that remained in the Union, clearly saw the Union war effort as having an abolitionist goal, even more than a year before the Emancipation Proclamation.
"The great mass of those who are supporting the war in the North, and fighting its battles, have not the most remote idea of giving it an emancipation character" - Cincinnati Enquirer
Have they not? Then the spectacle is presented to the world of a mass of men aiding in the accomplishment of an object they do not approve of.
This newspaper, a Southern-supporting periodical in a state that remained in the Union, clearly saw the Union war effort as having an abolitionist goal, even more than a year before the Emancipation Proclamation.
Friday, June 17, 2011
Youth's Companion: Camp Life of the Soldier
From the Youth's Companion of January 23, 1862
A correspondent of the Sunday School Gazette gives the following description of the camp life of our soldiers now stationed on the Potomac. Such a life is no boy's play:
The first thing done, when a regiment reaches camp ground, is to pitch the tents. These are arranged in lines as regular as the streets of a city, and sometimes camp streets receive names like the streets of a city. The tents are made of stout canvas, and are of different sizes, some being round, others square, and others oblong.
The largest tents are used to accommodate the soldiers, and will hold ten, fifteen, or twenty, who use this one place for parlor, bedroom, sitting and dining-room. The smaller tents belong to officers, three of whom sometimes chum together, sometimes two only, and again but one using the tent. Old-bachelor-like, I have a tent all to myself, with nothing to disturb my slumbers or interfere with my comfort, but noise outside.
The tents, inside, are furnished in various ways, according to the taste, means or rank of the occupant. Some have boarded floors with a carpet, table, comfortable chairs, pictures, books, and a soft, easy bed, while others have only the ground covered with straw or the branches of trees, and little or no furniture. In going to war, soldiers are allowed to have only what they can carry in knapsacks on their backs, but officers can take trunks, and supply themselves with quite a number of home comforts.
After the tents are pitched, and things all arranged, cooks, wagoners, commissaries, and other company-helpers are chosen from each company, the company consisting of one hundred men, and fireplaces or ovens are built in the ground, or of stone or brick, above ground; rude eating-booths, sheltered by boughs of trees, are put up, and the regiment is prepared to begin military life in earnest. The food supplied by government is wholesome and abundant, and the clothing amply sufficient for all reasonable wants; but, sometimes, owing to the rascality of contractors, or the carelessness of the men themselves, the food gets injured, the clothing does very poor service, and suffering follows.
A correspondent of the Sunday School Gazette gives the following description of the camp life of our soldiers now stationed on the Potomac. Such a life is no boy's play:
The first thing done, when a regiment reaches camp ground, is to pitch the tents. These are arranged in lines as regular as the streets of a city, and sometimes camp streets receive names like the streets of a city. The tents are made of stout canvas, and are of different sizes, some being round, others square, and others oblong.
The largest tents are used to accommodate the soldiers, and will hold ten, fifteen, or twenty, who use this one place for parlor, bedroom, sitting and dining-room. The smaller tents belong to officers, three of whom sometimes chum together, sometimes two only, and again but one using the tent. Old-bachelor-like, I have a tent all to myself, with nothing to disturb my slumbers or interfere with my comfort, but noise outside.
The tents, inside, are furnished in various ways, according to the taste, means or rank of the occupant. Some have boarded floors with a carpet, table, comfortable chairs, pictures, books, and a soft, easy bed, while others have only the ground covered with straw or the branches of trees, and little or no furniture. In going to war, soldiers are allowed to have only what they can carry in knapsacks on their backs, but officers can take trunks, and supply themselves with quite a number of home comforts.
After the tents are pitched, and things all arranged, cooks, wagoners, commissaries, and other company-helpers are chosen from each company, the company consisting of one hundred men, and fireplaces or ovens are built in the ground, or of stone or brick, above ground; rude eating-booths, sheltered by boughs of trees, are put up, and the regiment is prepared to begin military life in earnest. The food supplied by government is wholesome and abundant, and the clothing amply sufficient for all reasonable wants; but, sometimes, owing to the rascality of contractors, or the carelessness of the men themselves, the food gets injured, the clothing does very poor service, and suffering follows.
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Military Oath
From the June 15th Covington Journal
By the provision of the last military bill adopted by the Legislature, all members of the State Guard are required to take the oath which the officers of the organization have heretofore taken, and if they refuse to take it within thirty days, the State arms held by them are to be returned to the proper authorities. Home Guards organized under that bill, receiving arms from the State, are required to take the same obligation. It is as follows;
"I do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of this State, and be faithful and true to the Commonwealth of Kentucky so long as I continue a citizen thereof; and I further swear that I will well and truly execute and obey the legal orders of all officers legally placed over me, when on duty. So help me God.
By the provision of the last military bill adopted by the Legislature, all members of the State Guard are required to take the oath which the officers of the organization have heretofore taken, and if they refuse to take it within thirty days, the State arms held by them are to be returned to the proper authorities. Home Guards organized under that bill, receiving arms from the State, are required to take the same obligation. It is as follows;
"I do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of this State, and be faithful and true to the Commonwealth of Kentucky so long as I continue a citizen thereof; and I further swear that I will well and truly execute and obey the legal orders of all officers legally placed over me, when on duty. So help me God.
Monday, June 13, 2011
National Geographic Civil War Centennial Coverage: Part 4
A few weeks ago, I received an email about National Geographic's online coverage of the Civil War Sesquicentennial
This reminded me that I owned some bound volumes of this magazine from the early 1960s and I decided to compare and contrast how this publication covered the current observance and the 100th anniversary of the war. Below are links to the three previous entries I made on this subject.
part 1
part 2
Part 3
For today's entry, presumable the final one on this topic, I turn to the National Geographic from April 1965, volume 127, number 4.
The coverage in this edition is very similar to its initial coverage, in "part 1" linked above. Once again, it features an article written by Ulysses S Grant 3rd, the grandson of the famous Union General and President.
The article discusses the last few days of the Civil War, as Union troops tried to trap the forces commanded by Robert E Lee and force them to surrender. The article includes photographs, from the war period and from the magazine's own era, as well as maps and illustrations of people, places and events during those chaotic few days.
Deciding to focus the coverage on that part of the war was a natural choice and one I can support, but what bothered me about this article was how frequently the author used it to praise his grandfather, either from his own thoughts and memories (though the general died when this grandson was only 4 years old) or from quotes by others. I do not dislike praise for the original U.S. Grant, and much, if not all, of it, was well-deserved, but I did find it difficult to take it as seriously, coming from his own descendant. It struck me almost as being hagiography at times, and certainly not as an objective discussion of the general and his performance. The author's using various terms like "my grandfather," "General Grant" and "the general" throughout the article did not help either.
The author's telling of a story told by his grandmother of a discussion with President Lincoln was quite interesting and something I had not seen before, but, again, I'm not sure an article commemorating the end of the war was the right place for a piece of family history.
I understand why Grant III wrote as he did, and think it's great he felt so proud of his ancestor, but it was not a good idea to have him write this article due to the obvious lack of objectivity.
Besides the frequent praise for General Grant, this article did at times fall back on the 1961's reliance on a theme of "reunification" and how the war brought "a Nation united for all time." This theme was not as constant as in the 1961 article, but did appear at times throughout it.
A large portion of this theme of reconciliation is in the ending pages of the article, where the author makes frequent mention of and reference to his ancestor's generosity in the terms offered to Lee, even including quotes from an essay by Robert Louis Stevenson and from a 1912 speech by Lee staff member Colonel Charles Marshall, showing how "magnanimous" and "gentlemanly" Grant the elder was
It is a good article and worth reading, but while I understand the magazine's decision to have the grandson of what many consider to be an American hero write for it, I wish they had let him do an article to serve as a brief biography of the general and had another author discuss the race to Appomattox.
This reminded me that I owned some bound volumes of this magazine from the early 1960s and I decided to compare and contrast how this publication covered the current observance and the 100th anniversary of the war. Below are links to the three previous entries I made on this subject.
part 1
part 2
Part 3
For today's entry, presumable the final one on this topic, I turn to the National Geographic from April 1965, volume 127, number 4.
The coverage in this edition is very similar to its initial coverage, in "part 1" linked above. Once again, it features an article written by Ulysses S Grant 3rd, the grandson of the famous Union General and President.
The article discusses the last few days of the Civil War, as Union troops tried to trap the forces commanded by Robert E Lee and force them to surrender. The article includes photographs, from the war period and from the magazine's own era, as well as maps and illustrations of people, places and events during those chaotic few days.
Deciding to focus the coverage on that part of the war was a natural choice and one I can support, but what bothered me about this article was how frequently the author used it to praise his grandfather, either from his own thoughts and memories (though the general died when this grandson was only 4 years old) or from quotes by others. I do not dislike praise for the original U.S. Grant, and much, if not all, of it, was well-deserved, but I did find it difficult to take it as seriously, coming from his own descendant. It struck me almost as being hagiography at times, and certainly not as an objective discussion of the general and his performance. The author's using various terms like "my grandfather," "General Grant" and "the general" throughout the article did not help either.
The author's telling of a story told by his grandmother of a discussion with President Lincoln was quite interesting and something I had not seen before, but, again, I'm not sure an article commemorating the end of the war was the right place for a piece of family history.
I understand why Grant III wrote as he did, and think it's great he felt so proud of his ancestor, but it was not a good idea to have him write this article due to the obvious lack of objectivity.
Besides the frequent praise for General Grant, this article did at times fall back on the 1961's reliance on a theme of "reunification" and how the war brought "a Nation united for all time." This theme was not as constant as in the 1961 article, but did appear at times throughout it.
A large portion of this theme of reconciliation is in the ending pages of the article, where the author makes frequent mention of and reference to his ancestor's generosity in the terms offered to Lee, even including quotes from an essay by Robert Louis Stevenson and from a 1912 speech by Lee staff member Colonel Charles Marshall, showing how "magnanimous" and "gentlemanly" Grant the elder was
It is a good article and worth reading, but while I understand the magazine's decision to have the grandson of what many consider to be an American hero write for it, I wish they had let him do an article to serve as a brief biography of the general and had another author discuss the race to Appomattox.
 | |
| Currier and Ives' image of the surrender, courtesy of Library of Congress |
Saturday, June 11, 2011
Camp Dennison Civil War Event June 25-26
Camp Dennison Reenactment
This is courtesy of the Ohio Civil War 150 blog, a very informative blog that I do recommend for people interested in the Civil War in and around the Buckeye State.
Here are a couple of links with some more information about Camp Dennison including Camp Dennison Civil War page
The Christian Waldschmidt homestead will host the event and I recommend visiting it, including the house which was built in the very early 1800s. It's a neat place and the Daughters of the American Revolution do a terrific job with it
This is courtesy of the Ohio Civil War 150 blog, a very informative blog that I do recommend for people interested in the Civil War in and around the Buckeye State.
Here are a couple of links with some more information about Camp Dennison including Camp Dennison Civil War page
The Christian Waldschmidt homestead will host the event and I recommend visiting it, including the house which was built in the very early 1800s. It's a neat place and the Daughters of the American Revolution do a terrific job with it
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)