It’s probably time to continue with our look at John Brown. We’ve looked at the way two different North Carolina newspapers covered the Raid. Let’s look at the way that others within the state reacted.
One common echo was that men and women from the North needed to be “watched” closely. The Washington Dispatch (NC) believed that Yankee schoolmasters, booksellers, and vendors should be watched, questioned, and examined. They believed that every Northerner should be assumed to be an abolitionist agent, and the burden of proof of innocence was placed on the visitor. The Raleigh Register believed that every stranger coming into a Southern state should be considered “as prima facie an incendiary” and must supply evidence to the contrary. Only the editor of the Carolina Watchman believed spoke against this suspicion “not only on account of its tendency to aggravate that state of unrest which nearly precedes violence, “but because it was “apt to lead to indiscrimination and wrong.”
The words that flowed off the North Carolina press were more than rhetoric. In November 1859, two book peddlers from Connecticut were arrested and charged with “tampering” with slaves. They were taken before the superior court, but were later released and returned to the North. Others were likewise forced to leave the state, as reported in local newspapers. Since some of the prominent abolitionists were ministers, local preachers who were from the North came under special scrutiny. (This topic probably deserves a post on its own.)
There were additional measures taken. One was a proposed bill to remove “free negroes” from the state. The bill did not pass. While some newspaper editors advocated the removal of “free negroes,” others, like Holden, came to their defense, at least partially. Holden did advocate that “no addition to their number” be permitted. “We would advise nothing in relation to this unfortunate race of a harsh or unjust character.”
One further result of John Brown’s Raid was the reorganization of the state’s militia. I also think that this deserves a separate post, but we will hit the basics. North Carolina has had a militia system since the 1600s. At times, the system worked, and at other times, it did not. In the 1850s, each county had a militia regiment, and the state had brigades and divisions. The militia was required to drill once a year, but the system was largely defunct (even that is a generous statement). There was a large public outcry regarding the reorganization of the militia following John Brown’s Raid. While the state did act, it was slow. In some places, such as Mecklenburg County, and in Wilmington, volunteer militia companies were organized. Some of these volunteer companies became the first companies to enlist in state service following Governor Ellis’s call for troops.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Thursday, September 10, 2009
John Brown, pt. 3, cont.
Let’s look at another newspaper, the Fayetteville Observer.
On October 20, the Observer ran a piece on the Raid on page 3, their first page being made up of advertisements, and their second page a piece on Kings Mountain and Blackbeard… The Observer’s coverage lasted almost two columns. Their headline is “Startling News from Virginia,” and interestingly enough, at first the author believes that the Raid was a riot of workers at the Arsenal. They are not (at least yet) attacking anyone like the Weekly Standard did.
The next issue was published on October 24, and much of the paper is devoted to the Raid. On page two, E. J. Hale, the editor, sums of the Raid from accounts from other newspapers. Interestingly enough, Hale looks at reports in Northern newspapers for how they reacted to Brown’s Raid. Hale found several neutral – the Journal of Commerce, Democratic, the Express, Whig, and the Day Book, all published in New York. The “incendiary” Evening Post apparently justified the actions of Brown.
Coverage was scaled back on October 27. On page two was an article concerning a trunk that reputably belonged to Brown. The trunk contained maps of the other Southern cities. On page three, Hale again looks at Northern newspaper reaction to Brown’s raid, and finds the papers in Boston, Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Philadelphia “sound and patriotic.” The editor did find problems with the Ohio State Journal and Boston Daily Advertiser. Hale believed that much good would come out of the Raid. He wrote that
Beside the natural effect of deterring others from following an example where only disgrace and death are the rewards of the conspirator, where the State and Nation instantly unite their powers to punish them, and where there is an almost universal expression of abhorrence and detestation of their crime—another good result is manifest, in the clear line of separation which it has been made between the handful of Abolitionists and the great host of Republicans. That line had been almost obliterated—we in the South have been accustomed to consider it entirely obliterated. To see that it is not so, but only to read the conspiracy. With the exception of such fanatics as Greely of the Tribune and Bryant of the Evening Post, there is one united and overwhelming burst of condemnation.
And while this ought to lead, and doubtless will lead, to a more kindly spirit between the sections, since it shows that after all we are not so widely separated as had been feared, it will be a death blow to the Presidential aspirations of such ultraists as Seward, and Chase, whose speeches have encouraged outrages like this at Harper’s Ferry. The outbreak has come in good time to prevent the Republicans from nominating any man of their stamp.
The next issue, published on October 31, took excerpts from other newspapers to further inform their readers of the events that had transpired. These excerpts take about two columns of page two and are the only mentions of the Raid in that issue, although the Observer does make some mention of letters passed between abolitionists.
On October 20, the Observer ran a piece on the Raid on page 3, their first page being made up of advertisements, and their second page a piece on Kings Mountain and Blackbeard… The Observer’s coverage lasted almost two columns. Their headline is “Startling News from Virginia,” and interestingly enough, at first the author believes that the Raid was a riot of workers at the Arsenal. They are not (at least yet) attacking anyone like the Weekly Standard did.
The next issue was published on October 24, and much of the paper is devoted to the Raid. On page two, E. J. Hale, the editor, sums of the Raid from accounts from other newspapers. Interestingly enough, Hale looks at reports in Northern newspapers for how they reacted to Brown’s Raid. Hale found several neutral – the Journal of Commerce, Democratic, the Express, Whig, and the Day Book, all published in New York. The “incendiary” Evening Post apparently justified the actions of Brown.
Coverage was scaled back on October 27. On page two was an article concerning a trunk that reputably belonged to Brown. The trunk contained maps of the other Southern cities. On page three, Hale again looks at Northern newspaper reaction to Brown’s raid, and finds the papers in Boston, Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Philadelphia “sound and patriotic.” The editor did find problems with the Ohio State Journal and Boston Daily Advertiser. Hale believed that much good would come out of the Raid. He wrote that
Beside the natural effect of deterring others from following an example where only disgrace and death are the rewards of the conspirator, where the State and Nation instantly unite their powers to punish them, and where there is an almost universal expression of abhorrence and detestation of their crime—another good result is manifest, in the clear line of separation which it has been made between the handful of Abolitionists and the great host of Republicans. That line had been almost obliterated—we in the South have been accustomed to consider it entirely obliterated. To see that it is not so, but only to read the conspiracy. With the exception of such fanatics as Greely of the Tribune and Bryant of the Evening Post, there is one united and overwhelming burst of condemnation.
And while this ought to lead, and doubtless will lead, to a more kindly spirit between the sections, since it shows that after all we are not so widely separated as had been feared, it will be a death blow to the Presidential aspirations of such ultraists as Seward, and Chase, whose speeches have encouraged outrages like this at Harper’s Ferry. The outbreak has come in good time to prevent the Republicans from nominating any man of their stamp.
The next issue, published on October 31, took excerpts from other newspapers to further inform their readers of the events that had transpired. These excerpts take about two columns of page two and are the only mentions of the Raid in that issue, although the Observer does make some mention of letters passed between abolitionists.
Wednesday, September 09, 2009
John Brown, pt. 3
I was hoping to get to ASU to look up some additional sources on North Carolina’s reaction to John Brown’s raid. But with time constraints, and with the flu running rampant on college campuses, I’ve decided to just use the resources that I have at hand.
I will start by saying that using newspapers to gauge the public’s reaction to an event is not necessarily good history. Newspaper editors (then and now) are biased, and use their column space to present a certain view (theirs) to the public. With that warning in mind, let’s dive in.
John Brown’s raid took places on October 16-17, 1859. Word had not arrived in sufficient time to warrant a column in the October 19 issue of the Weekly Standard (Raleigh). The Raid did get coverage in the October 22 issue, the editor (W. W. Holden), devoting almost three whole columns on the front of his paper to the Raid. Holden’s personal comments seem to be these:
The Outbreak at Harper’s Ferry
The whole country has been startled by the insurrectionary movement at Harper’s Ferry, Virginia, full accounts of which will be found in our paper today.
The movement was promptly suppressed by the authorities, but it will be long remembered as a [practical] illustration of abolition doctrines.
The President of the United States deserves the thanks of every true man North and South, for the energy and promptitude which he displayed on the occasion. What would have been done, if Seward had been President?
Everything else on the first page is a reprint from a newspaper in Washington, D. C., detailing the raid, and the search for fugitives.
Holden devotes most of page three (the newspaper was only four pages) to coverage of the Raid. He continues his own thoughts, praising the actions of Virginia Gov. Henry A. Wise. Holden then looks to identify the financial backers of the Raid, naming “Gerritt Smith, Joshua R. Giddings, and other prominent abolitionist.” Holden wanted the federal authorities to “take hold of these men…” He also wrote that “If about one thousand of the prominent abolitionists could be hanged by the neck until they were dead, the country would be benefitted, and all good men every where would be more assured of a continence of concord between the States.” Holden’s next paragraph is aimed at Seward and the abolition movement. “At the North this Harper’s Ferry movement” Holden writes “should produce more sound reflection on the subject of slavery than heretofore, and should dispose every just and fair-minded citizen to set his face against a party whose doctrines lead inevitably to insurrection and a dissolution of the Union.” Holden then goes on to reprint articles from Richmond and Baltimore.
In the next issue of the Weekly Standard, published on November 2, 1859, Holden once again turns his pen against Seward. On page 1, under the title of “The ‘Irrepressible Conflict’”, Holden writes that the “doctrines announced by Mr. Seward, in his Rochester speech, have displayed their first fruits in the recent outbreak at Harper’s Ferry." The editor then looks at the doctrines of the “black Republicans,” and latter takes issue with Republican journalists, saying that while they “seek to palliate the wickedness of old Brown and his confederates, by declaring that he is a madman, and that they are not responsible for his conduct…” Brown’s actions “are the legitimate fruits of their doctrines, which teach that slavery is a monstrous evil, to be ‘extirpated’ by every means under the ‘higher law’ which its enemies can command."
I will start by saying that using newspapers to gauge the public’s reaction to an event is not necessarily good history. Newspaper editors (then and now) are biased, and use their column space to present a certain view (theirs) to the public. With that warning in mind, let’s dive in.
John Brown’s raid took places on October 16-17, 1859. Word had not arrived in sufficient time to warrant a column in the October 19 issue of the Weekly Standard (Raleigh). The Raid did get coverage in the October 22 issue, the editor (W. W. Holden), devoting almost three whole columns on the front of his paper to the Raid. Holden’s personal comments seem to be these:
The Outbreak at Harper’s Ferry
The whole country has been startled by the insurrectionary movement at Harper’s Ferry, Virginia, full accounts of which will be found in our paper today.
The movement was promptly suppressed by the authorities, but it will be long remembered as a [practical] illustration of abolition doctrines.
The President of the United States deserves the thanks of every true man North and South, for the energy and promptitude which he displayed on the occasion. What would have been done, if Seward had been President?
Everything else on the first page is a reprint from a newspaper in Washington, D. C., detailing the raid, and the search for fugitives.
Holden devotes most of page three (the newspaper was only four pages) to coverage of the Raid. He continues his own thoughts, praising the actions of Virginia Gov. Henry A. Wise. Holden then looks to identify the financial backers of the Raid, naming “Gerritt Smith, Joshua R. Giddings, and other prominent abolitionist.” Holden wanted the federal authorities to “take hold of these men…” He also wrote that “If about one thousand of the prominent abolitionists could be hanged by the neck until they were dead, the country would be benefitted, and all good men every where would be more assured of a continence of concord between the States.” Holden’s next paragraph is aimed at Seward and the abolition movement. “At the North this Harper’s Ferry movement” Holden writes “should produce more sound reflection on the subject of slavery than heretofore, and should dispose every just and fair-minded citizen to set his face against a party whose doctrines lead inevitably to insurrection and a dissolution of the Union.” Holden then goes on to reprint articles from Richmond and Baltimore.
In the next issue of the Weekly Standard, published on November 2, 1859, Holden once again turns his pen against Seward. On page 1, under the title of “The ‘Irrepressible Conflict’”, Holden writes that the “doctrines announced by Mr. Seward, in his Rochester speech, have displayed their first fruits in the recent outbreak at Harper’s Ferry." The editor then looks at the doctrines of the “black Republicans,” and latter takes issue with Republican journalists, saying that while they “seek to palliate the wickedness of old Brown and his confederates, by declaring that he is a madman, and that they are not responsible for his conduct…” Brown’s actions “are the legitimate fruits of their doctrines, which teach that slavery is a monstrous evil, to be ‘extirpated’ by every means under the ‘higher law’ which its enemies can command."
Thursday, September 03, 2009
N.C. Museum of History Returns Civil War Flag to Rhode Island
Greetings folks! I was away at a Avery County Heritage Museum meeting this afternoon, and found this in my email on my return.
The North Carolina Museum of History has returned a Civil War flag of Company L, First Rhode Island Cavalry to its home state. The V-shaped flag, called a guidon, was captured by the 63rd North Carolina Troops (Fifth North Carolina Cavalry) on June 17, 1863, during the Battle of Middleburg, Virginia. The battle was part of the Gettysburg campaign, a series of battles in June to July during Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee's movement through Virginia toward Pennsylvania.
The silk, striped guidon of Company L, with stars and letters on a field of blue, was donated to the Museum of History in the early 1900s. The gold-fringed banner has been fully restored by the museum and has appeared in previous exhibits.
In a gesture of goodwill, the Museum of History initiated the offer to return the flag to the State of Rhode Island. In 2008 the Rhode Island National Guard accepted the gift from North Carolina.
"The Rhode Island National Guard is thankful to the North Carolina Museum of History staff for graciously returning a Rhode Island Civil War guidon," says Maj. Gen. Robert T. Bray, Adjutant General and Commanding General of the Rhode Island National Guard. "We are delighted to display the banner, especially given its pristine condition as a result of the careful preservation provided by the museum, among the many historical artifacts at the Varnum Armory in East Greenwich."
The Museum of History hopes the State of Rhode Island will return a North Carolina flag captured by Rhode Island soldiers at New Bern on March 14, 1862. "We would like this Confederate flag, along with ones held by other states, to eventually be returned to North Carolina," says Tom Belton, curator of military history.
In addition to the Rhode Island guidon, the Museum of History has given back a Civil War flag to Louisiana. The banner was mistakenly identified as being associated with North Carolina. Within the last few years, the Museum of History has received North Carolina flags from Arkansas and Massachusetts to add to its collection.
The Museum of History boasts the third-largest Confederate flag collection in the world. All banners in the collection were carried by Tar Heel troops. The museum is currently engaged in an extensive flag conservation program in anticipation of the 150th anniversary of the Civil War; commemorative events will take place from 2011 to 2015.Company L, First Rhode Island Cavalry at the Battle of Middleburg
Company L, First Rhode Island Cavalry suffered devastating losses during the Battle of Middleburg. On June 17 Union Col. Alfred N. Duffié led more than 230 men into Middleburg around 4 p.m. After hearing of their arrival, Confederate Maj. Gen. J.E.B. Stuart ordered Brig. Gen. Beverly Robertson to move the Fifth North Carolina Cavalry in, and at 7 p.m. the regiment surrounded and attacked the Rhode Island unit. Several of Duffié's men were killed or wounded, and the rest were driven out of town and fought their way through the night.
Most of Company L's soldiers were captured the next morning. Only four of Duffié's officers and 27 soldiers made it back to Centreville on June 18. A few more men from Company L returned during the next two days, but the regiment's losses were about 200.
For more information, call 919-807-7900 or access ncmuseumofhistory.org. The Museum of History is located at 5 E. Edenton St., across from the State Capitol.
The North Carolina Museum of History has returned a Civil War flag of Company L, First Rhode Island Cavalry to its home state. The V-shaped flag, called a guidon, was captured by the 63rd North Carolina Troops (Fifth North Carolina Cavalry) on June 17, 1863, during the Battle of Middleburg, Virginia. The battle was part of the Gettysburg campaign, a series of battles in June to July during Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee's movement through Virginia toward Pennsylvania.
The silk, striped guidon of Company L, with stars and letters on a field of blue, was donated to the Museum of History in the early 1900s. The gold-fringed banner has been fully restored by the museum and has appeared in previous exhibits.
In a gesture of goodwill, the Museum of History initiated the offer to return the flag to the State of Rhode Island. In 2008 the Rhode Island National Guard accepted the gift from North Carolina.
"The Rhode Island National Guard is thankful to the North Carolina Museum of History staff for graciously returning a Rhode Island Civil War guidon," says Maj. Gen. Robert T. Bray, Adjutant General and Commanding General of the Rhode Island National Guard. "We are delighted to display the banner, especially given its pristine condition as a result of the careful preservation provided by the museum, among the many historical artifacts at the Varnum Armory in East Greenwich."
The Museum of History hopes the State of Rhode Island will return a North Carolina flag captured by Rhode Island soldiers at New Bern on March 14, 1862. "We would like this Confederate flag, along with ones held by other states, to eventually be returned to North Carolina," says Tom Belton, curator of military history.
In addition to the Rhode Island guidon, the Museum of History has given back a Civil War flag to Louisiana. The banner was mistakenly identified as being associated with North Carolina. Within the last few years, the Museum of History has received North Carolina flags from Arkansas and Massachusetts to add to its collection.
The Museum of History boasts the third-largest Confederate flag collection in the world. All banners in the collection were carried by Tar Heel troops. The museum is currently engaged in an extensive flag conservation program in anticipation of the 150th anniversary of the Civil War; commemorative events will take place from 2011 to 2015.Company L, First Rhode Island Cavalry at the Battle of Middleburg
Company L, First Rhode Island Cavalry suffered devastating losses during the Battle of Middleburg. On June 17 Union Col. Alfred N. Duffié led more than 230 men into Middleburg around 4 p.m. After hearing of their arrival, Confederate Maj. Gen. J.E.B. Stuart ordered Brig. Gen. Beverly Robertson to move the Fifth North Carolina Cavalry in, and at 7 p.m. the regiment surrounded and attacked the Rhode Island unit. Several of Duffié's men were killed or wounded, and the rest were driven out of town and fought their way through the night.
Most of Company L's soldiers were captured the next morning. Only four of Duffié's officers and 27 soldiers made it back to Centreville on June 18. A few more men from Company L returned during the next two days, but the regiment's losses were about 200.
For more information, call 919-807-7900 or access ncmuseumofhistory.org. The Museum of History is located at 5 E. Edenton St., across from the State Capitol.
News and notes....
Time for our little look around….
The blog North Carolina Miscellany has yet posted another post about Abe Lincoln’s North Carolina roots. Check it out here.
The Chapel Hill News has an article that you can read here that is comparing our War in northeastern North Carolina in the 1860s with the war in Afghanistan. Hmm, I’m not so sure that I agree with their assessment.
In the Examiner.com, there is an article looking at Gov. W. W. Holden, the only North Carolina governor to have been impeached. Check out the article here.
The Sun News, out of Myrtle Beach, complains that the displays at the North Carolina Capital is not racially diverse. Hmm, I felt tthat there was plenty of diversity last time that I was there. Maybe they have changed things around. Check out the article here.
Interesting article in the Washington Post (you can read it here) about the town of Beaufort.
The Examiner.com (mentioned above) has a good article on the Bennett Place. Read it here.
The blog North Carolina Miscellany has yet posted another post about Abe Lincoln’s North Carolina roots. Check it out here.
The Chapel Hill News has an article that you can read here that is comparing our War in northeastern North Carolina in the 1860s with the war in Afghanistan. Hmm, I’m not so sure that I agree with their assessment.
In the Examiner.com, there is an article looking at Gov. W. W. Holden, the only North Carolina governor to have been impeached. Check out the article here.
The Sun News, out of Myrtle Beach, complains that the displays at the North Carolina Capital is not racially diverse. Hmm, I felt tthat there was plenty of diversity last time that I was there. Maybe they have changed things around. Check out the article here.
Interesting article in the Washington Post (you can read it here) about the town of Beaufort.
The Examiner.com (mentioned above) has a good article on the Bennett Place. Read it here.
Wednesday, September 02, 2009
John Brown, pt. 2
I’ve been working on the North Carolina reaction to John Brown’s raid part of this current series and I’ve made a couple of discoveries. This is probably not going to be a two parter, but will probably have five parts. I think the new part two is: what do you think John Brown was? Here are your choices:
guerrilla fighting in the revolutionary cause of antislavery
terrorist
not sure
I’m going to put up a poll on the sidebar and keep it up for a week, and then we will talk about the results. Thanks for voting.
Regards,
Michael
guerrilla fighting in the revolutionary cause of antislavery
terrorist
not sure
I’m going to put up a poll on the sidebar and keep it up for a week, and then we will talk about the results. Thanks for voting.
Regards,
Michael
Saturday, August 29, 2009
John Brown, pt. 1
I’m behind on my postings for this week – had some computer problems that are hopefully resolved. What I hope to write in the next couple of days is a two-part post dealing with John Brown and his raid. The first post, the one you are getting today, deals with some thoughts by Robert E. McGlone in a recent article in Civil War Times. The second part of the article will deal with the reaction of North Carolinians to Brown’s raid at Harper’s Ferry.
It would seem that some people are trying to reform John Brown, shifting him from being labeled a terrorist to a “guerrilla fighting in the revolutionary cause of antislavery.” (per an article entitled “John Brown, terrorist?” in American Nineteenth Century History – March 2009. Since most folks don’t subscribe to that Journal, we will focus on McGlone’s piece.)
McGlone lays out his defense of John Brown in two paragraphs.
At no point did Brown endorse random killings, and he conceived his crusade against slavery as being governed by the rules of honorable warfare. Unlike typical modern terrorists, Brown also personally led guerrilla forces in the field. He treated his hostages at Harper’s Ferry with courtesy and deference rather than using them to shield his retreat from the town.
During the Marines’ assault on his engine house refuge on the grounds of the Federal armory, he shielded them from fire. He conceived the liberation of the slaves as a patriot act, not the destruction of the state. With control of the Harper’s Ferry arsenal… Brown could have wrought havoc upon the town. But he loved the biblical story of Gideon panicking the Midianites, and like Gideon, he hoped to strike fear in the hearts of his adversaries.
First: “At no point did Brown endorse random killings, and he conceived his crusade against slavery as being governed by the rules of honorable warfare.” So, when Brown attacked those living in cabins along Pottawatomie Creek, in retribution for a raid on Lawrence, Kansas, did he act as those “being governed by the rules of honorable warfare”? “At the first cabin, Brown's men brutally killed three Doyle men, splitting open their heads and cutting off their arms. Brown himself reportedly watched as if in a trance. When his men were done, he put a bullet through the head of James Doyle. Then the party went to two more cabins, dragging out and killing two more proslavery men. They killed five in all.” (1) Bear in mind that the while the men whom Brown and his party killed believed in the right of slave ownership, they actually did not own any slaves. We could further add that there were several individuals in Harper’s Ferry that Brown, or his men, killed, and not by the rules of honorable warfare.
Second: “Unlike typical modern terrorists, Brown also personally led guerrilla forces in the field.” There would be hundreds of examples to refute this. I’ll cite just one. Osama bin Laden reportedly carries a Soviet AK-47, which he obtained by killing a Russian soldier with his bare hands. This just might be urban legend, but there are plenty of examples of terrorist leaders taking up arms themselves. Once a terrorist organization grows, these terrorists gain lieutenants to manage their fights.
Three. “He treated his hostages at Harper’s Ferry with courtesy and deference rather than using them to shield his retreat from the town. During the Marines’ assault on his engine house refuge on the grounds of the Federal armory, he shielded them from fire.” Brown told his prisoners “I have only to say now that you will have precisely the same fate that your friends extend to my men.” (4) Which I take to mean that if Brown’s men were killed by the militia, then so would his prisoners be killed.
Four. He conceived the liberation of the slaves as a patriot act…” One of Brown’s sons recalled, in relationship to the murders on Pottawatomie Creek, that John Brown said “It was now and here that they, their aiders and abettors who sought to kill our suffering people should themselves be killed, and in such a manner as should likely to cause a restraining fear.” (2) So, Brown sought to strike fear into his adversaries. McGlone admits as much: “But he loved the biblical story of Gideon panicking the Midianites, and like Gideon, he hoped to strike fear in the hearts of his adversaries.”
Five. “With control of the Harper’s Ferry arsenal… Brown could have wrought havoc upon the town” Well, Hayward Shepherd, a baggage man for the R&O (and a free person of color) was shot and killed by Brown’s men at 1:30 in morning. Another citizen of the town, an Irishman named Boerley “happened to get within range of a picket, -a black fellow who called himself Dangerfield Newby, --whereupon the negro raised his rifle and without a word of warning shot him dead…” Another man, George Turner, moved toward the arsenal, with a shotgun. “When he had approached within some fifty yards… the same negro… saw him coming, and, taking deliberate aim, shot him dead.” (3) A skirmish between Brown’s men in the firehouse and the citizens of the town soon broke out. Fountain Beckham, the mayor of the town, was shot and killed. By all accounts, Beckman was unarmed. There are numerous accounts of terror experienced by the citizens of the town when Brown struck. Then with hundreds of militiamen pouring into the small town, and with a detachment of US Marines, well, the town was in havoc.
Brown wanted to establish a new nation in the Appalachian mountains, a nation composed of freed slaves. So, in a sense, Brown wanted to overthrow the US government and establish his own. And, we might add, slavery, no matter had repugnant, was constitutionally protected at this time. He expected these slaves, once they had heard of Brown’s successful rebellion, to quickly flee from their masters (possibly murdering them in the process) and join other abolitionists. Brown was prepared to use violence to complete his objectives, and had he been able to hold the armory, would have had weapons to achieve his means. Brown gathered a force, secretly made plans, captured a portion of a United States military base, took hostages, terrified local civilians, killed and wounded innocent civilians, killed and wounded United State Marines, and damaged United States property, all under the guise of “this is God’s will.”
According to a online dictionary from Princeton University, a terrorist is “a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities.” (5)
So, I stand by what I wrote above. John Brown was not a patriot, he was not a “guerrilla fighting in the revolutionary cause.” He was a terrorist.
It would seem that some people are trying to reform John Brown, shifting him from being labeled a terrorist to a “guerrilla fighting in the revolutionary cause of antislavery.” (per an article entitled “John Brown, terrorist?” in American Nineteenth Century History – March 2009. Since most folks don’t subscribe to that Journal, we will focus on McGlone’s piece.)
McGlone lays out his defense of John Brown in two paragraphs.
At no point did Brown endorse random killings, and he conceived his crusade against slavery as being governed by the rules of honorable warfare. Unlike typical modern terrorists, Brown also personally led guerrilla forces in the field. He treated his hostages at Harper’s Ferry with courtesy and deference rather than using them to shield his retreat from the town.
During the Marines’ assault on his engine house refuge on the grounds of the Federal armory, he shielded them from fire. He conceived the liberation of the slaves as a patriot act, not the destruction of the state. With control of the Harper’s Ferry arsenal… Brown could have wrought havoc upon the town. But he loved the biblical story of Gideon panicking the Midianites, and like Gideon, he hoped to strike fear in the hearts of his adversaries.
First: “At no point did Brown endorse random killings, and he conceived his crusade against slavery as being governed by the rules of honorable warfare.” So, when Brown attacked those living in cabins along Pottawatomie Creek, in retribution for a raid on Lawrence, Kansas, did he act as those “being governed by the rules of honorable warfare”? “At the first cabin, Brown's men brutally killed three Doyle men, splitting open their heads and cutting off their arms. Brown himself reportedly watched as if in a trance. When his men were done, he put a bullet through the head of James Doyle. Then the party went to two more cabins, dragging out and killing two more proslavery men. They killed five in all.” (1) Bear in mind that the while the men whom Brown and his party killed believed in the right of slave ownership, they actually did not own any slaves. We could further add that there were several individuals in Harper’s Ferry that Brown, or his men, killed, and not by the rules of honorable warfare.
Second: “Unlike typical modern terrorists, Brown also personally led guerrilla forces in the field.” There would be hundreds of examples to refute this. I’ll cite just one. Osama bin Laden reportedly carries a Soviet AK-47, which he obtained by killing a Russian soldier with his bare hands. This just might be urban legend, but there are plenty of examples of terrorist leaders taking up arms themselves. Once a terrorist organization grows, these terrorists gain lieutenants to manage their fights.
Three. “He treated his hostages at Harper’s Ferry with courtesy and deference rather than using them to shield his retreat from the town. During the Marines’ assault on his engine house refuge on the grounds of the Federal armory, he shielded them from fire.” Brown told his prisoners “I have only to say now that you will have precisely the same fate that your friends extend to my men.” (4) Which I take to mean that if Brown’s men were killed by the militia, then so would his prisoners be killed.
Four. He conceived the liberation of the slaves as a patriot act…” One of Brown’s sons recalled, in relationship to the murders on Pottawatomie Creek, that John Brown said “It was now and here that they, their aiders and abettors who sought to kill our suffering people should themselves be killed, and in such a manner as should likely to cause a restraining fear.” (2) So, Brown sought to strike fear into his adversaries. McGlone admits as much: “But he loved the biblical story of Gideon panicking the Midianites, and like Gideon, he hoped to strike fear in the hearts of his adversaries.”
Five. “With control of the Harper’s Ferry arsenal… Brown could have wrought havoc upon the town” Well, Hayward Shepherd, a baggage man for the R&O (and a free person of color) was shot and killed by Brown’s men at 1:30 in morning. Another citizen of the town, an Irishman named Boerley “happened to get within range of a picket, -a black fellow who called himself Dangerfield Newby, --whereupon the negro raised his rifle and without a word of warning shot him dead…” Another man, George Turner, moved toward the arsenal, with a shotgun. “When he had approached within some fifty yards… the same negro… saw him coming, and, taking deliberate aim, shot him dead.” (3) A skirmish between Brown’s men in the firehouse and the citizens of the town soon broke out. Fountain Beckham, the mayor of the town, was shot and killed. By all accounts, Beckman was unarmed. There are numerous accounts of terror experienced by the citizens of the town when Brown struck. Then with hundreds of militiamen pouring into the small town, and with a detachment of US Marines, well, the town was in havoc.
Brown wanted to establish a new nation in the Appalachian mountains, a nation composed of freed slaves. So, in a sense, Brown wanted to overthrow the US government and establish his own. And, we might add, slavery, no matter had repugnant, was constitutionally protected at this time. He expected these slaves, once they had heard of Brown’s successful rebellion, to quickly flee from their masters (possibly murdering them in the process) and join other abolitionists. Brown was prepared to use violence to complete his objectives, and had he been able to hold the armory, would have had weapons to achieve his means. Brown gathered a force, secretly made plans, captured a portion of a United States military base, took hostages, terrified local civilians, killed and wounded innocent civilians, killed and wounded United State Marines, and damaged United States property, all under the guise of “this is God’s will.”
According to a online dictionary from Princeton University, a terrorist is “a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities.” (5)
So, I stand by what I wrote above. John Brown was not a patriot, he was not a “guerrilla fighting in the revolutionary cause.” He was a terrorist.
1. “The Story of John Brown.” Current Events 11 March 2005. Vol. 104, Is. 21.
2. Goodrich, War to the knife: Bleeding Kansas (1998) 123.
3. Ibid., 233
4. Ibid., 236
5. http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=terrorist
Monday, August 24, 2009
News and notes….
Sorry to hear that Bill Scaife has passed away. I used his book The Campaign for Atlanta extensively in the 58th NCT book. You can read an article about him here.
The Raleigh City Museum is hosting a special event concerning reconstruction. Check out an article here.
Rob Neufeld continues his exploration of the War in western North Carolina with a look at the skirmish at Hanging Dog Creek. Check out the article here.
The Greensboro News-Record has an article on the statues in Statuary Hall in Washington, D. C. Read all about it here.
BlueRidgeNow.com has a look at the historic Cavalry Episcopal Church in Fletcher. The church served as a barracks and hospital during the War. Read about it here.
And,
In the Fayetteville Observer, you can find an article on primary sources and Sherman’s march through North Carolina. Check it out here.
The Raleigh City Museum is hosting a special event concerning reconstruction. Check out an article here.
Rob Neufeld continues his exploration of the War in western North Carolina with a look at the skirmish at Hanging Dog Creek. Check out the article here.
The Greensboro News-Record has an article on the statues in Statuary Hall in Washington, D. C. Read all about it here.
BlueRidgeNow.com has a look at the historic Cavalry Episcopal Church in Fletcher. The church served as a barracks and hospital during the War. Read about it here.
And,
In the Fayetteville Observer, you can find an article on primary sources and Sherman’s march through North Carolina. Check it out here.
Friday, August 21, 2009
Moore County
Two counties in one week….
Moore County was formed in 1784 and named for Alfred Moore, a Revolutionary War officer and later justice on the United States Supreme Court. The county seat is Carthage.
According to the 1860 census, Moore County had a population of 11,427, which included 2,513 slaves and 184 free persons of color. During the 1860 presidential election, Moore County men cast 588 votes for Bell, 299 for Breckinridge, and 179 for Douglas. When the vote for the call for a convention came in early 1861, Moore County men cast 1,257 against with 135 for calling the convention. Representing Moore County in May 1861 was Dr. Hector Turner. He was a native of Scotland and came to America in 1820. He studied medicine at the University of New York. During the war, he became a surgeon in the 20th North Carolina Troops, surrendering at Appomattox. He later served in the state legislature. Turner was born in 1816 and died in 1896.
Men from Moore County served in Company H, 26th NCT; Company H, 30th NCT; Company C, 35th NCT; Company H, 46th NCT; Company D, 48th NCT; Company D, 49th NCT; Company F, 50th NCT; and, Company E, 56th NCT. You can find a list here.
Just like with Person County, I could not find a lot of information in books or on the web about Moore County and the War.
There is a Confederate Monument in Moore County, but information about the monument is scarce.
http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~ncmoore/mcconfedsld.htm
Moore County was formed in 1784 and named for Alfred Moore, a Revolutionary War officer and later justice on the United States Supreme Court. The county seat is Carthage.
According to the 1860 census, Moore County had a population of 11,427, which included 2,513 slaves and 184 free persons of color. During the 1860 presidential election, Moore County men cast 588 votes for Bell, 299 for Breckinridge, and 179 for Douglas. When the vote for the call for a convention came in early 1861, Moore County men cast 1,257 against with 135 for calling the convention. Representing Moore County in May 1861 was Dr. Hector Turner. He was a native of Scotland and came to America in 1820. He studied medicine at the University of New York. During the war, he became a surgeon in the 20th North Carolina Troops, surrendering at Appomattox. He later served in the state legislature. Turner was born in 1816 and died in 1896.
Men from Moore County served in Company H, 26th NCT; Company H, 30th NCT; Company C, 35th NCT; Company H, 46th NCT; Company D, 48th NCT; Company D, 49th NCT; Company F, 50th NCT; and, Company E, 56th NCT. You can find a list here.
Just like with Person County, I could not find a lot of information in books or on the web about Moore County and the War.
There is a Confederate Monument in Moore County, but information about the monument is scarce.
http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~ncmoore/mcconfedsld.htm
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Person County
Time for a look at another one of North Carolina’s great counties. Person County was formed in 1791, and named for Gen. Robert Person of Revolutionary War fame. The county seat of Roxboro was chartered in 1855 and named after Roxborough, Scotland.
In 1860, Person County had a population of 11,221, people, including 5,195 slaves and 313 free persons of color. In the 1860 presidential election, Person County cast 420 votes for Breckinridge and 483 for Bell, with only 9 for Douglas. In early 1862, Person County cast 593 votes in favor of calling a convention to consider the question of secession, while 167 people voted against the measure. John W. Cunningham, a local planter, merchant, state senator and member of the Council of State, was the county’s representative.
A local historian writes that Person County supplied between 800 and 1000 men to the Confederate army. Some of these men served in Company F, 17th NCST; Companies A and H, 24th NCT; Company E, 35th NCT; and Company A, 50th NCT.
Not much can be found about the role of the county during the war. One recent local historian writes that “Person County was a well-established plantation center before the Civil War. Crops included tobacco, cotton, corn, wheat, oats, fruits, vegetables, cattle, hogs and sheep…” A search of my standard sources – Johnson, Bennett, Trotter, Cromie, and others, did not turn up much.
Person County is the birthplace of Edwin G. Reade, a lawyer in Roxboro, a representative in the House of Representatives from 1855 until 1857, and a North Carolina Senator in the Confederate Congress (appointed by Vance). Reade was one of the Confederate senators who in 1863 advocated state commissioners from North Carolina meeting with representatives to reestablish North Carolina in the Union. Reade had the “unenviable job “ of opening that fall 1865 meeting of the Constitutional Convention in Raleigh. He is reported to have opened the meeting with “Fellow-citizens, we are going home…” Reade would go on to become a North Carolina Supreme Court justice. Reade was born in 1812 and died in 1894. He is interred in Oakwood Cemetery in Raleigh.
In 1860, Person County had a population of 11,221, people, including 5,195 slaves and 313 free persons of color. In the 1860 presidential election, Person County cast 420 votes for Breckinridge and 483 for Bell, with only 9 for Douglas. In early 1862, Person County cast 593 votes in favor of calling a convention to consider the question of secession, while 167 people voted against the measure. John W. Cunningham, a local planter, merchant, state senator and member of the Council of State, was the county’s representative.
A local historian writes that Person County supplied between 800 and 1000 men to the Confederate army. Some of these men served in Company F, 17th NCST; Companies A and H, 24th NCT; Company E, 35th NCT; and Company A, 50th NCT.
Not much can be found about the role of the county during the war. One recent local historian writes that “Person County was a well-established plantation center before the Civil War. Crops included tobacco, cotton, corn, wheat, oats, fruits, vegetables, cattle, hogs and sheep…” A search of my standard sources – Johnson, Bennett, Trotter, Cromie, and others, did not turn up much.
Person County is the birthplace of Edwin G. Reade, a lawyer in Roxboro, a representative in the House of Representatives from 1855 until 1857, and a North Carolina Senator in the Confederate Congress (appointed by Vance). Reade was one of the Confederate senators who in 1863 advocated state commissioners from North Carolina meeting with representatives to reestablish North Carolina in the Union. Reade had the “unenviable job “ of opening that fall 1865 meeting of the Constitutional Convention in Raleigh. He is reported to have opened the meeting with “Fellow-citizens, we are going home…” Reade would go on to become a North Carolina Supreme Court justice. Reade was born in 1812 and died in 1894. He is interred in Oakwood Cemetery in Raleigh.
Person County has a Confederate monument, located on the grounds of the court house in Roxboro. The monument was erected by the United Daughters of the Confederacy in 1922. On top of the monument is a statue of Capt. E. Fletcher Satterfield, who was killed on July 3, 1863, while bearing the flag of his regiment, the 55th NCT, at Gettysburg. Not sure why he is holding a rifle, and not a sword.
Thursday, August 13, 2009
58th NCT at Appomattox?
Recently, I got Glatthaar’s book General Lee’s Army, in the mail (thanks, Matt). As usual, I flipped through the index first. To my surprise, there was an entry for the 58th NCT. I flipped to page 463 and found this:
“John Wesley Richards, a twenty-five-year old private in the 58th North Carolina, the son of a poor laborer, was not so lucky. According to official sources, he had survived Saylor’s Creek, only to suffer a mortal wound at Appomattox.”
So – if you have been following my blog for any length of time, you immediately see what is wrong. The 58th NCT was neither at Saylor’s Creek nor Appomattox. Neither was there a John Wesley Richards within the ranks of the 58th NCT. There was a John Wesley Richards. He served in the 56th North Carolina, not the 58th NCT. According to his service record, Richards hailed from Cleveland County and enlisted in Company F of the 56th NCT in Wake County on July 8, 1862. He was twenty-three years old at the time. Richards was “[r]eported sick in hospital at Goldsboro July and AUgust 1862. Returned to duty in September – October 1862. Reported present through December 1864. [May have been mortally wounded at or near the Appomattox River near the end of the war.]”
Had it been another regiment, say the 46th NCT vs. the 56th NCT, I would not have caught this mistake. But I did, so if you read Glatthaar’s General Lee’s Army, just remember that the 58th NCT was not at Saylor’s Creek or Appomattox.
“John Wesley Richards, a twenty-five-year old private in the 58th North Carolina, the son of a poor laborer, was not so lucky. According to official sources, he had survived Saylor’s Creek, only to suffer a mortal wound at Appomattox.”
So – if you have been following my blog for any length of time, you immediately see what is wrong. The 58th NCT was neither at Saylor’s Creek nor Appomattox. Neither was there a John Wesley Richards within the ranks of the 58th NCT. There was a John Wesley Richards. He served in the 56th North Carolina, not the 58th NCT. According to his service record, Richards hailed from Cleveland County and enlisted in Company F of the 56th NCT in Wake County on July 8, 1862. He was twenty-three years old at the time. Richards was “[r]eported sick in hospital at Goldsboro July and AUgust 1862. Returned to duty in September – October 1862. Reported present through December 1864. [May have been mortally wounded at or near the Appomattox River near the end of the war.]”
Had it been another regiment, say the 46th NCT vs. the 56th NCT, I would not have caught this mistake. But I did, so if you read Glatthaar’s General Lee’s Army, just remember that the 58th NCT was not at Saylor’s Creek or Appomattox.
Monday, August 10, 2009
58th NCT update (and a few other things)
I’ve been working today on writing captions for the book on the 58th NCT. The book will have approximately 100 photographs, many of them are of members of the regiment, a few are of the places where they fought. The text of the book has not really changed, about 126,000 words. I might get it turned in about two weeks from now. (Don’t hold your breath!)
I was digging about today on facebook and I found several North Carolina and the War-related links. They include a page on the preservation of the flag of the 58th NCT, a page produced by the state Sesquicentennial Committee, and a page devoted to Zeb Vance. There are probably others, I’ve just not found them yet.
If you are on facebook, look me up sometime.
By the way, if you have 58th NCT cemeteries, photographs, etc., you had better send them to me soon.
I was digging about today on facebook and I found several North Carolina and the War-related links. They include a page on the preservation of the flag of the 58th NCT, a page produced by the state Sesquicentennial Committee, and a page devoted to Zeb Vance. There are probably others, I’ve just not found them yet.
If you are on facebook, look me up sometime.
By the way, if you have 58th NCT cemeteries, photographs, etc., you had better send them to me soon.
Thursday, August 06, 2009
North Carolina and the War in the news...
Well, time for our look around.
Rob Neufield started a series on western North Carolina Civil War sites. Check it out here.
The Star News Online has a article on the namesake of Pender County. Read more here.
Also in the Star News Online is an article on the Frying Pan Shoals, off the Cape Fear River. Check it out here.
Pat Falci will be speaking to the Western North Carolina Civil War Round Table on August 10. Check it out here.
There is an article on North Carolina and Nat Turner’s Rebellion in “This Month in North Carolina History.” Check it out here.
and,
I'll be at the Mt. Mitchell Arts and Crafts Fair tomorrow (Friday). The organizers have an area set up for history and invited us to come. Stop by and say hi.
Rob Neufield started a series on western North Carolina Civil War sites. Check it out here.
The Star News Online has a article on the namesake of Pender County. Read more here.
Also in the Star News Online is an article on the Frying Pan Shoals, off the Cape Fear River. Check it out here.
Pat Falci will be speaking to the Western North Carolina Civil War Round Table on August 10. Check it out here.
There is an article on North Carolina and Nat Turner’s Rebellion in “This Month in North Carolina History.” Check it out here.
and,
I'll be at the Mt. Mitchell Arts and Crafts Fair tomorrow (Friday). The organizers have an area set up for history and invited us to come. Stop by and say hi.
Wednesday, August 05, 2009
the 58th NCT and Chickamauga
There have been several times in my life when I have had the opportunity to work with the National Park Service and do living history programs on battlefields. This past weekend, I had the great privilege to portray a member of the 58th North Carolina Troops at Chickamauga-Chattanooga National Park. We were camped out at the Snodgrass cabin, not too far from where the regiment would have camped on the night of September 20, 1863. Saturday’s slate of interpretive programs went great. We had good crowds each time, and many of the spectators asked good questions and few even hung around for quite awhile. Saturday evening it started to rain, and many of us bunked in the Snodgrass cabin. The original cabin was used as a field hospital during and after the battle. The cabin itself is not original, but it is re-constructed on its original foundation. Some talked about hearing that “bump in the night” but, to be honest, between the fellow snoring on one side of me and another fellow on the other side cussin’ at the fellow snoring, well, I did not hear much. We ran through one part of one of our programs on Sunday morning for a couple of people, but it continued to rain, so we were cut loose. I spent the next hour and a half just riding around the park and talking pictures out the window.
Speaking of pictures, here is our mess for the weekend. All of these fine fellows were from the Old North State.
Saturday, August 01, 2009
At Chickamauga today
Come see me this weekend at Chickamauga. It's great to be portraying the actual 58th on the actual ground!
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
ensign v. color guard
Ok- I learned something new today. That’s not to say that I don’t learn something new every day, I just thought I would share it with you today. I’ve been involved in a great email discussion with a fellow Tar Heel regarding the flags used at Chickamauga, particularly the flags of Kelly’s brigade and the 58th North Carolina. No, we have not really reached a consensus. To me, it would almost seem that the 58th NCT was not issued a flag until they received a Second National sometime in between the battles of Chickamauga and Missionary Ridge. The color sergeant was appointed at this time, and the color guard of the 58th NCT was awarded four captured Colt’s Revolving Rifles for their (the regiment’s) performance at Chickamauga.
Anyway, I was reading in Howard Madaus’s book on flags of the Army of Tennessee, when I came across this:
“From 1812 through the Civil War, the responsibility for carrying the colors rested with the sergeants selected from the line companies. On 5 March 1864, however, the Confederate War Department published the act of Confederate Congress which reinstituted the rank of ensign, ‘whose duty it shall be to bear the colors of the regiment, but without the right to command in the field.” Three months later this privilege was extended to battalions as well as regiments. The problems posed by this position caused Congress to reconsider its earlier enactment, and on 25 March 1865, the rank of ensign was abolished…”
Ok – I knew all of that except the part about Congress rescinding its act in March 1865 (and how long have I owned this book?). Of course, the war was about over, and, maybe the Confederate Congress should have been worrying about more important matters. So I wonder, what problems arose?
So, I went hunting for the problem. I found several instances of the bearers of the flag being called ensigns prior to the fifth of March 1864, i.e., the 2nd Arkansas Mounted Rifles had an ensign in January 1863, as did the 19th Louisiana Infantry at Chickamauga. And interestingly enough, the term “ensign” appears more in the Official Records of Confederates within the Army of Tennessee than within the Army of Northern Virginia. Ensigns were to receive the pay and allowances of first lieutenants, which amounted to $90 per month. When the office of ensign was abolished two interesting things transpired: one, ensigns were approved, based upon recommendation, by the president, but when the office was abolished, the commanding officer of the regiment got to pick the color bearer from men under his command; and, two, though no longer an officer, the color-bearer still received the pay of a first lieutenant. (ORs, Ser. 4, Vol. 3, p.1167)
Interesting stuff, but I still cannot find the “problems” that Madaus alluded to in his book. Thoughts of where to look next? Maybe Jefferson Davis’s papers, or???
Anyway, I was reading in Howard Madaus’s book on flags of the Army of Tennessee, when I came across this:
“From 1812 through the Civil War, the responsibility for carrying the colors rested with the sergeants selected from the line companies. On 5 March 1864, however, the Confederate War Department published the act of Confederate Congress which reinstituted the rank of ensign, ‘whose duty it shall be to bear the colors of the regiment, but without the right to command in the field.” Three months later this privilege was extended to battalions as well as regiments. The problems posed by this position caused Congress to reconsider its earlier enactment, and on 25 March 1865, the rank of ensign was abolished…”
Ok – I knew all of that except the part about Congress rescinding its act in March 1865 (and how long have I owned this book?). Of course, the war was about over, and, maybe the Confederate Congress should have been worrying about more important matters. So I wonder, what problems arose?
So, I went hunting for the problem. I found several instances of the bearers of the flag being called ensigns prior to the fifth of March 1864, i.e., the 2nd Arkansas Mounted Rifles had an ensign in January 1863, as did the 19th Louisiana Infantry at Chickamauga. And interestingly enough, the term “ensign” appears more in the Official Records of Confederates within the Army of Tennessee than within the Army of Northern Virginia. Ensigns were to receive the pay and allowances of first lieutenants, which amounted to $90 per month. When the office of ensign was abolished two interesting things transpired: one, ensigns were approved, based upon recommendation, by the president, but when the office was abolished, the commanding officer of the regiment got to pick the color bearer from men under his command; and, two, though no longer an officer, the color-bearer still received the pay of a first lieutenant. (ORs, Ser. 4, Vol. 3, p.1167)
Interesting stuff, but I still cannot find the “problems” that Madaus alluded to in his book. Thoughts of where to look next? Maybe Jefferson Davis’s papers, or???
Monday, July 27, 2009
58th NCT at Chickamauga
Greetings folks! There is an article in The Daily Citizen about an upcoming living history at Chickamauga National Battlefield Park. A group of interpreters (me included) will be portraying the 58th North Carolina on Snodgrass Hill on August 1st and 2nd. If you live in the area, stop by and see us. You can check out the article here.
Sunday, July 26, 2009
color guard
I think I was able to put two and two together this morning and come out with the original color company of the 58th NCT. The color guard of a Confederate regiment was composed of six men: the color sergeant and his guard, usually five corporals. Usually, only the color sergeant, or, after June 1864, the ensign, is listed in the records. I went through several of the Troop books put out by the state looking for comparisons. William E. Weaver of the 29th NCT was formally 1st Sergeant of Company H. He was promoted to color sergeant on July 2, 1863. However, the next entry states that John R. Rich enlisted in August 1861, and was mustered in as color sergeant. He was promoted to ensign in September 1864, and took the oath in 1865. Hmmm, maybe the 29th NCT had two color sergeants. In comparison, the 30th NCT, has no one listed as a color sergeant or ensign. The 22nd NCT has two men listed: Jesse H. Pinkerton and Sion H. Oxford. Even the 26th NCT, whose role during the battle of Gettysburg is highly documented, only lists Jefferson B. Mansfield as a color sergeant. His record simply states that Mansfield “Was apparently detailed to serve as Color Sergeant on various occasions during the war.”
For the 58th NCT, we know that Green B. Woody served as color sergeant, and later ensign, from October 1, 1863, through February 1865. Woody was a 2nd Sergeant in Company C. In a post war letter written by Lt. Col. Samuel Silver, he states that during the battle of Missionary Ridge, all of the companies had been sent from the bottom of the mountain to the top of the mountain save the center company, which was Captain Suel Brigg’s Company C. The color guard would have been attached to the center company of the regiment, with that company being designated as the color company. The entire regiment would have dressed on the color guard, and the color company.
So, I know where two of the twelve companies were in line – Company A was on the right, and Company C was in the center.
For the 58th NCT, we know that Green B. Woody served as color sergeant, and later ensign, from October 1, 1863, through February 1865. Woody was a 2nd Sergeant in Company C. In a post war letter written by Lt. Col. Samuel Silver, he states that during the battle of Missionary Ridge, all of the companies had been sent from the bottom of the mountain to the top of the mountain save the center company, which was Captain Suel Brigg’s Company C. The color guard would have been attached to the center company of the regiment, with that company being designated as the color company. The entire regiment would have dressed on the color guard, and the color company.
So, I know where two of the twelve companies were in line – Company A was on the right, and Company C was in the center.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
News and notes...
Time for our look around the old North State.
There is an article on the passing of CSS Neuse II’s founder Ted Sampley on encToday. Check it out here.
Also in encToday is an article about work on the museum to house the original CSS Neuse. Read about it here.
Several newspapers have reported on the work of three North Carolina Central Students and their work with the papers of Jefferson Davis at the Museum of the Confederacy. Check out one of those articles here.
There is a small piece on New Bern and “What-if” which you can find here.
In the Stokes News you can find an article about the restoration of their courthouse and the planned addition of the North Carolina Civil War Trails marker. You can read about it here.
A very interesting article on the preservation of Fort Fisher through the past 100 years: read about it here.
There is an article on the passing of CSS Neuse II’s founder Ted Sampley on encToday. Check it out here.
Also in encToday is an article about work on the museum to house the original CSS Neuse. Read about it here.
Several newspapers have reported on the work of three North Carolina Central Students and their work with the papers of Jefferson Davis at the Museum of the Confederacy. Check out one of those articles here.
There is a small piece on New Bern and “What-if” which you can find here.
In the Stokes News you can find an article about the restoration of their courthouse and the planned addition of the North Carolina Civil War Trails marker. You can read about it here.
A very interesting article on the preservation of Fort Fisher through the past 100 years: read about it here.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
58th NCT update
I thought I would pass along a 58th NCT update. This morning, I wrote the last paragraph in the book. There will undoubtedly be some things added between now and when I turn the book in, but I am getting close. The manuscript stands at 125,074 words. That includes text, notes, bibliography, roster, and a couple of other appendixes. For those who have my book on the 37th NCT, that manuscript was 150,000 words. I still do not have a number of illustrations – I am still working on getting some things scanned and indexed.
Tonight, I will be speaking at the Col. John B. Palmer Camp of the Sons of Confederate Veterans. They meet at 6:30 pm at the town center in Burnsville. I’ll be talking about some odds and ends regarding my work into the 58th NCT. If you get a chance, come and join us.
Tonight, I will be speaking at the Col. John B. Palmer Camp of the Sons of Confederate Veterans. They meet at 6:30 pm at the town center in Burnsville. I’ll be talking about some odds and ends regarding my work into the 58th NCT. If you get a chance, come and join us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)