Journal of Southern History Review

In case you missed it, I had the huge honor of having my book reviewed in the prestigious Journal of Southern History by Dr. Paul E. Coker of the University of Tennessee.  Dr. Coker has written extensively on the experiences of US Colored Troops from Tennessee during and after the Civil War and I couldn't be more pleased with the review.

Here is the full review:

The Battle of New Market Heights: Freedom Will Be Theirs by the Sword. By James S. Price. (Charleston, S.C., and London: The History Press, 2011. Pp. 125. Paper, $19.99, ISBN 978-1-60949-038-6.) The focus of James S. Price's study is a sometimes overlooked episode of the Civil War's Richmond-Petersburg campaign: the courageous but near-suicidal charge of black Union soldiers against entrenched Confederates at New Market Heights, Virginia, on September 29, 1864. The black units involved suffered heavy casualties, but Union forces ultimately won the position, and fourteen black soldiers were awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor--a number that "equaled the total number of Medals of Honor issued to black soldiers in the Spanish-American War, World War I and World War II combined" (p. 87).

This slim volume offers considerable insight regarding the black military experience. Some of Price's bolder claims, such as his suggestion that this was "arguably one of the most important days in American history," may not convince all readers (p. 9). Instead, perhaps the book's greatest strength is its exploration of the ambiguity and pliability of the battle's legacy. While the courage of the U.S. Colored Troops awed many observers, at least one Confederate soldier who surveyed the battlefield dead saw only a waste of "about a million dollars worth of niggers, at current prices" (p. 79). Elsewhere, Price counters arguments, perpetuated in recent studies, that Confederate defenders voluntarily withdrew and thus were not driven from their positions or that the Medals of Honor were merely a product of General Benjamin F. Butler's cynical self-promotion. Finally, an epilogue analyzing recent battlefield preservation efforts reveals the resistance of local landowners, one of whom angrily characterized plans for park expansion as yet another example of Yankee aggression. While some readers may dread wading into a detailed battle history, this book's clear writing style, inclusion of dozens of photographs and maps, and relevance to broader historical themes make it accessible for a general audience and worth consideration for undergraduate courses. [PAUL E. COKER, University of Tennessee]

Upcoming Appearances

Well, even though there hasn't been much cooking on this blog in the past few weeks, things have been percolating behind the scenes and I have gotten enough public speaking requests to warrant a post! As always, if you’d like me to come speak at your event, just shoot me an e-mail and I will see if I can swing it. In the meantime, I’ll count on running into some of you at the following events:

November  12 – McLean Historical Society. Topic: Freedman’s Village at Arlington

November  16 – Loudon Civil War Book Signing

2014

May 24 – Clara Barton National Historic Site. Topic: USCTs during the Siege of Petersburg

June 20 – “Campaign Before Richmond” Sesquicentennial Symposium (featuring Bob Krick, Dick Sommers, and Louis Manarin) at Deep Bottom Park. Topic: The First Battle of Deep Bottom

September 9 – Richmond Civil War Round Table. Topic: New Market Heights

September  26-28 – New Market Heights Re-enactment Weekend, Henrico County

November  9 – “Real to Reel” Movie and Lecture at Henrico Theater. Movie: Glory

Recapping Bristoe 150th

 Well, a big “thank you” goes out to all of you who took the time out of your busy schedules to attend the commemorative events surrounding the 150^th Anniversary of the Battle of Bristoe Station. All told, over 1,000 students and visitors participated in this event, which began on the morning of Thursday October 10^th and ended at 6 PM on October 14^th with the playing of “Taps.”

Fellow bloggers Ron Baumgarten and Craig Swain came out to see some of the events and the park was fortunate to have Dr. James I. “Bud” Robertson, Jr. give the keynote address. For those who may have missed it, here is the full address. Enjoy!

Turning a Page

Well, you may have noticed a precipitous drop in the number of posts over the past few days, but I assure you I have a good reason.

At the beginning of the month I accepted a position with Prince William County’s Historic Preservation Division. I am the Historic Site Manager for both Ben Lomond Historic Site (an 1830’s house that served as a field hospital after First Manassas) and Bristoe Station Battlefield HeritagePark.

As you know, we only have around 50 days until the 150^th anniversary of the Battle of Bristoe Station, so I will be doing everything from helping to install an exhibit at the Manassas Museum that opens next weekend to installing interpretive signs at the battlefield park and getting the site ready for the large crowds we are expecting.

One piece of “insider information” I can offer you now is that Brad Gottfried’s new The Maps of the Bristoe Station and Mine Run Campaigns will be available at the commemorative weekend and Brad will be there to sign copies!

Listed below are all of the events, tours, and activities that the great staff at Prince William has put together.

And for those of you who might be on the fence, I have two words for you: Bud Robertson.

150th Anniversary of the Battle of Bristoe Station

“There Was a Want of Vigilance” – Battle of Bristoe Station Exhibit at the Manassas Museum August-October, Manassas Museum ($5 admission)

Exhibit will feature rare artifacts from the Battle of Bristoe Station.  Featured items will include personal effects of A.P. Hill and other leading participants of the battle.  Exhibit cosponsored by the Prince William County Historic Preservation Division and the Manassas Museum. Contact Manassas Museum for more information at 703-368-1873

Bristoe Station Campaign Bus Tour Saturday, October 5, 2013

$85 per person, includes lunch.  Reservations required, space is limited

Enjoy a full day with an in-depth tour of the sites and battlefields that made up the Bristoe Campaign.  Stops will include:  Bristoe Station Battlefield Heritage Park, Auburn, Remington and Buckland.  Historians will explain how this important campaign impacted soldiers, civilians and its overall impact on the outcome of the Civil War.  Participants will have a chance to see little known or visited sites.  Contact Bristoe Station Battlefield Heritage Park at 703-366-3049 for more information and reservations.

Battle of Bristoe Station 150th Commemorative Weekend

Saturday – Sunday, October 12-13, 2013

Free, donations encouraged

To commemorate the 150th Anniversary of the Battle of Bristoe Station, tours, musical performances, lectures, tours and living history demonstrations and encampments to represent the soldiers and units present at the battle in 1863. Weekend kicks off on Saturday at 10am with a dedication ceremony featuring keynote speaker Dr. James I. Robertson Jr. The Virginia History Mobile will be available on Saturday and a Youth Activity Tent will also be available all weekend. 

Schedule:

Saturday, October 12, 2013

10 a.m. – Opening Program and Trail Dedication

Introductions, The Honorable W.S. Wally Covington III Brentsville District Supervisor, Prince William County

Keynote Speech, Dr. James “Bud” Robertson

11 a.m. – Music, Gillmore’s Light Ensemble

noon – Talk, “Road to Bristoe Station”, Brad Gottfried

12:45 p.m.– Music, Carolina Fife and Drum

1:30 p.m. – Battle of Bristoe Station Demonstration

3 p.m. – Talk, “Preservation of Bristoe Station Battlefield, a history”y, Jim Burgess

4 p.m. – Music, Gillmore’s Light Ensemble

5 p.m. – Program Closes

7 p.m. – Special Evening Civil War Musical Performance by Evergreen Shade at Historic Brentsville Union Church, 12229 Bristow Rd., Bristow, VA 20136

Battlefield Tours ongoing on the hour from the program tent (11am-4pm).  Living history demonstrations on going in camp areas (see map).  Virginia History Mobile 11am-4pm.

Sunday, October 13, 2013

11a.m. – Music, Carolina Fife and Drum

noon – Talk, “Colonel Mallon & the Tammany Regiment of New York,” Fred Wexler

1 p.m. – Battle of Bristoe Station Demonstration

2 p.m. – Music, Evergreen Shade

3 p.m. – Program Ends

Battlefield Tours ongoing on the hour from the program tent (11am-3pm).  Living history demonstrations on going in camp areas.

150th Anniversary of the Battle of Bristoe Station

Monday, October 14, 2013

Walking Tours Free, Car Caravan and Bus Tours have separate fee

Join Bristoe Station Battlefield Heritage Park staff on the 150th Anniversary of the Battle of Bristoe Station for exclusive tours of the battlefield.  Tours will take place “in time” of the events in 1863, including Prelude to Battle Walking Tour, In the Footsteps of North Carolina walk tour and a Musical Tribute to the fallen at Bristoe Station.  Events are as scheduled:

 9 - 11 a.m. – Car Caravan Tour of Bristoe Station Campaign Sites ($25 fee per vehicle)

11:30 a.m. - 1:30 p.m. – Bus Tour of exclusive Bristoe Station Battlefield sites off of the Park ($35 per person, reservations recommended, light refreshments provided)

3:30 p.m. – “Their Moment, Our Time” Tours – Tours of the Battle of Bristoe Station at the time of the        battle, 150 years later. Tour Will Begin at Program Tent, moderate walking, water available

6 – 6:15 p.m. – Tours End, Musical Tribute and Taps

The Self Fulfilling Prophecy of Black Participation in the Sesquicentennial

Today I came across an essay that deals with a question that has plagued Civil War battlefields and museums for decades – how do you attract African Americans to your sites and events?

Having been in the field of public history since 1998, I have heard frustration over a lack of African American participation and enthusiasm voiced over and over again…and no matter how hard sites try to bend over backwards to attract and accommodate a black audience, results never seem to match expectation.

Well, today on a blog operated by the Atlanta Journal Constitution,Natasha McPherson of Spelman College chimed in on this dilemma.

Here’s how she framed her explanation:

“First, this wasn’t our war. Many African-Americans fought and died on both sides of the conflict, but they were excluded from the decision-making process.”

She went on to pose an astonishing question with an even more problematic answer: “But the Civil War led to the abolition of slavery, right? Maybe.”

I would posit that these two quotes from her larger explanation of why African Americans are unconcerned with the Civil War actually raise more questions than they answer.

For instance:

- Is she giving credence to the Black Confederate myth when she declares that blacks “fought and died on both sides of the conflict”?

- What body of evidence is there that would imply that the Civil War didn't really abolish slavery?

McPherson begins her essay by stating “most African-Americans regard the Civil War with relative indifference.”

This leads to the issue I allude to in the title of this post – is there any wonder that blacks would be indifferent when the war is framed within this negative and pessimistic context?  

The implication is that there is nothing that blacks can take away from the Civil War experience that they can be proud of – it was all too horrible, so why go back and retread such awful and painful ground?

McPherson obviously brings an entirely different set of experiences to her observations and that is fine – I just can’t help but feel different based on my experiences speaking to African American groups and attending living history events with the 23rd United States Colored Troops.

In my experience, the question I hear repeated over and over again within these communities is – why didn’t anybody tell me about this?

At a recent event with the 23^rd, I had the pleasure of talking to an African American couple who had driven many miles just to see and talk to the members of the 23^rd because they had no idea what USCTs were or how large their participation in the war actually was. They were completely intrigued.

When I was done talking to them, they were literally giddy with what they had just learned and couldn’t wait to go home, buy some books, and learn even more. And this was not an isolated incident. Many African Americans I have spoken to feel a sense of loss that they have gone their whole lives without hearing about black participation in the Civil War.

Sadly, McPherson’s perspective would seem to leave little room for such edification.

Forgotten Cavalryman & Medal of Honor Recipient Timothy O’Connor

In my last post on the First Battle of Deep Bottom, I mentioned the lone Medal of Honor recipient to emerge from the battle – Pvt. Timothy O’Connor, Co. E, 1^st U.S. Cavalry.

For more on the story of Pvt. O’Connor, I highly recommend reading fellow blogger and historian Don Caughey’s blog post devoted to the topic. 

During my ongoing research for my forthcoming book on the battle, I sent out a request for help to several colleagues trying to find out more information about Pvt. O’Connor.

O’Connor won the Medal of Honor “for extraordinary heroism on 28 July 1864, while serving with Company E, 1st U.S. Cavalry, in action at Malvern, Virginia, for capture of flag of the 18th North Carolina Infantry (Confederate States of America).”

Below is a picture of the actual flag captured by O’Connor which was returned to the state of North Carolina in 1905.

 NC Dept. of Cultural Resources 

The task of finding out basic information on this individual was quite an ordeal.

Think of it:

- The most basic details of his life were sketchy and sometimes contradictory (some sources have him listed as being buried in Arlington, others say he's buried in Kansas)

- He was an Irish immigrant

- He had no middle name and a last name that is extremely common

- Some sources refer to him as “Timothy Connors” or “Timothy Conners”

- He fought in a unit that is difficult to get detailed information on

After weeks of fruitless searching, Craig Swain kindly put me in touch with Don, who is the leading expert on all things pertaining to the regular U.S. cavalry during the Civil War.

As you can see, Don applied his expertise to the problem and came up with a much clearer picture of who Timothy O’Connor was. 

In so doing, he has rescued a courageous young recipient of our nation’s highest honor from obscurity, for which we owe him a debt of gratitude.

O'Connor's Memorial Headstone in Arlington National Cemetery with incorrect death date.

First Deep Bottom: July 27-29, 1864

Today marks the 149^th anniversary of the conclusion of the inglorious sortie that has come down to history as the campaign and battle of First Deep Bottom.

The First Battle of Deep Bottom – also on occasion referred to as the Battle of Darbytown, Strawberry Plains, Tilghman’s Gate, New Market Road ,Gravel Hill, and even Malvern  Hill (the latter causing a great deal of confusion) – has been relegated to the status of a historical footnote. One would think that an expedition to threaten the Confederate capital led by such Union luminaries as Winfield Scott Hancock and Philip H. Sheridan would have garnered a substantial amount of attention by Civil War scholars, but this has not been the case.

First Deep Bottom was part of Grant’s Third Offensive of the Richmond-Petersburg Campaign, which culminated in the horrific Battle of the Crater. In addition to the more famous mine assault, Grant also planned to send an expedition to the north side of the James River. Hancock’s II Corps, along with two divisions of Sheridan’s cavalry and one division of Kautz’s Army of the James cavalry would cross the James River at Deep Bottom and threaten Richmond.

Union Pontoon Bridge at Deep Bottom

The cavalry was to ride hard and fast to destroy the Virginia Central Railroad as far as the North Anna River. The blue cavaliers were then to ride down to Richmond and attempt to carry the city in a joint effort with the II Corps. If the raid was successful in destroying the railroad and taking Richmond, Grant intended to call off the mine attack.

Over the night of July 26-27, the II Corps crossed the James on a pontoon bridge at Deep Bottom and advanced east of the bridgehead there into an area called Strawberry Plains. The expedition started well on the 27th, with Union forces capturing four 20 pounder Parrott rifles of Graham’s Virginia Battery and forcing the Confederates to pull back to the New Market Line. 

The Capture of Graham's Battery

Unfortunately, this brief success is what caused the rest of the campaign to unravel. The new line occupied by the Confederates was too strong to attack head on and, in Hancock’s mind at least, there were not enough men to flank the position. Hancock decided to pull the plug on Sheridan’s raid and kept his horsemen with the main infantry column. In a revealing note to Grant, Hancock said he wanted to be as “cautious as possible to avoid any bad luck” – a clear indication that the devastating casualties inflicted upon the II Corps since the start of the Overland Campaign were preeminent in Hancock’s decision-making.

While Hancock gave up the initiative (and thus any real chance of obtaining any of Grant’s offensive goals) his mere presence was enough to worry Lee into sending Richard H. Anderson with four divisions (2 infantry, 2 cavalry) north of the James.

The next day, these Confederate reinforcements plowed into Sheridan’s horsemen at 10:00 a.m. After a fierce clash near the Enroughty Farm (recently preserved by the Richmond Battlefields Association and the Civil War Trust), the rebels were driven back. In this fight, Pvt. Timothy O’Connor of Co. E, 1^st U.S. Cavalry was awarded the Medal of Honor for capturing the regimental colors of the 18^th North Carolina Infantry. Although the Yankee soldiers had prevailed, Hancock was undeterred from maintaining his defensive posture. 

By the morning of July 29^th Hancock had already sent one division back to Petersburg and decided to hunker down and use the rest of his force as bait in the hopes that Lee would shuffle even more troops north of the James. In this, he was successful. Edward Porter Alexander noted that “nearly six Confederate divisions” had been shifted to the north side of the James by the time the mine exploded, affording the IX Corps a real chance to achieve a decisive breakthrough. Hancock’s men had abandoned their positions near Deep Bottom and were already in front of Petersburg by the morning of July 30^th, when the explosion was triggered.

The ensuing Battle of the Crater ensured that First Deep Bottom would languish in relative obscurity for many years. However, in recent decades, renowned historian and researcher Bryce A. Suderow has been compiling a massive amount of data on the battle, some of which was published in his 1997 article “Glory Denied: The First Battle of Deep Bottom July 27^th - 29^th 1864” which remains the standard account of the battle after 16 years.

In addition to the great work already done by Suderow, I am in the process of writing The First Battle of Deep Bottom: Grant vs. Lee North of the James, 1864 which will be released by The History Press just in time for the 150^th anniversary of the battle.  

Skewering the Copperhead

Well, it’s a day ending in “y” and that must mean that someone somewhere is lambasting Ron Maxwell’s new film “Copperhead.”

If you’ve been following the reviews at all, you will know that they have been almost universally negative.

Megan Kate Nelson decried the film for not entertaining her. 

Some person named Justin Chang, who apparently suffers from an over fondness for prepositions, called it, “A stodgy, drearily long-winded attempt to to shed light on a little-known chapter of the Civil War.” 

The New York Times said, “Though the tale, based on a novel by Harold Frederic, remains relevant to our time, the film is too self-conscious and tedious for the message it delivers.” 

While the Times lauds the message of "Copperhead",  the last few days have seen an argument over just what that message truly is.

On July 22^nd, journalist and Clinton confidante Sidney Blumenthal wrote a piece for The Atlantic called “Romanticizing the Villains of the Civil War.” Blumenthal claims that “The newly released film… is in the same tradition as Gone with the Wind and Gods and Generals. Its history is highly revisionist.” He sees the film as a Neo-Confederate extravaganza, meant to pay homage to the lost cause.

The piece concludes:

In the year of the 150th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation, Copperhead presents us with a false depiction of the Copperheads as principled men of peace instead of what they were -- often violent and always racist defenders of slavery, secession, and the Confederacy. Copperhead is propaganda for an old variation of the neo-Confederate Lost Cause myth, that the root of the Civil War was not slavery and the slave power, but an aggressive, power-mad North seeking to tyrannize, by unconstitutional means, a benign and chivalrous South. The Lost Cause myth was at its heart not a matter of a differing interpretation, but of the falsification and suppression of history in order to vindicate the Confederacy and later to justify Jim Crow. Frankly, my dear, we should give a damn.

 Two days later Bill Kauffman, who wrote the screenplay, responded in The American Conservative, claiming “Sidney Blumenthal misunderstands a film about peace, community, and the limits of dissent—not the Union or Confederate causes.”

Far from being a paean to the Southern cause, Kauffman claims “The movie is about the effect of war on a community. It is about the way that wars tear families apart. It is about the challenge of loving one’s neighbor. And it is about dissent, which is never exactly in robust condition in the land of the free.”

Kauffman denies allegiance to the ideology of either the North or the South, asserting that “’Copperhead’ does not end with an affirmation of the Union, as convention would dictate. Nor does it end with an affirmation of disunion, as would a pro-Confederate film.”

While I have not seen the film and therefore cannot comment on the validity of any of the abovementioned viewpoints, I do find it interesting that the latest tussle over the film has a political bent to it. With the recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan still looming over the American psyche, who would have predicted that an “anti-war” film would be criticized on the left and applauded on the right?

For those who have seen the film, feel free to weigh in.

State Marker to be Placed at Site of 23rd USCTs First Combat

As many of you know, something that has filled me with immense pride over the last two years has been my small role in the formation of and participation with the recreated 23^rd Regiment United States Colored Troops.

While family tragedy and health issues have kept me from attending as many events as I would have liked over the last 14 months, I was very glad to hear from the units president, Steward Henderson, that a state highway marker has been approved to mark the site of the actual 23^rd’s baptism of fire at the Alrich Farm in Spotsylvania County.

Map courtesy of FSNMP

As you can see from the map, this was the very first time during the Civil War that black troops had fired on Robert E. Lee’s vaunted Army of Northern Virginia north of the James River.

This marker is important not only for the event that it memorializes, but also the momentous symbolism of that event.

As I told Fredericksburg’s Free Lance-Star in a recent interview:

The 23rd U.S. Colored Troops had many men in the ranks who had been held as chattel in Spotsylvania, Stafford, and the surrounding counties – their entrance into combat here saw them return to the site of their former degradation not as property, but as free men willingly taking up arms to liberate their enslaved brethren.

 Photo by John C. Cummings III

Those who worked hard to have this marker placed – people like John Hennessy of the National Park Service and John Cummings and Steward Henderson of the 23^rd USCT – have done an incalculable service to future generations who will come to Spotsylvania seeking to better understand America’s Civil War.

The marker will be unveiled during the 150^th anniversary commemoration that will take place at the actual site of the fighting on May 17, 2014. The 23^rd USCT, along with other living history units, will recreate the march of the 23^rd from the Chancellorsville ruins to the intersection of Catharpin and Orange Plank Road. This is shaping up to be a very special event, and I will post updates as the event planning continues. 

Commemorating the Sesquicentennial of the Mine Run Campaign…Or Not

“For the Army of the Potomac and its commander George G. Meade, the canceled assault at Mine Run was probably the most important nonevent in the army’s history as well as something of a turning point.” – John Hennessy, 1997

This past Monday, Craig Swain listed some of the exciting events that will be taking place this fall in anticipation of the 150^th anniversary of the Bristoe Campaign (see here).

While it is great to see such attention being paid to an often overlooked episode in the eastern theater, I was surprised to see that there are no events in the offing for the anniversary of the Mine Run Campaign, which lasted from November 26 – December 2, 1863.

I find this surprising, because Mine Run has much to offer in terms not only of counterfactuals and tactical interest, but also its hyper-political context (both for the US and the Confederacy).

In mid-November of 1863, Gen. Meade, under pressure from Washington, crossed the Rapidan in an attempt to outflank the Army of Northern Virginia. The opportunities were great – several crucial fords across the Rapidan were unguarded and Longstreet’s Corps was off in Tennessee. Speed was crucial to Meade’s plan, and when the army got off to a slow start, problems began to compound for the Army of the Potomac. French’s III Corps took far too long crossing the river, and Lee soon caught wind of the offensive and started shuffling troops from Orange Court House to stymie Meade.

It worked.

Following the Battle of Payne’s Farm (680 acres of which has been preserved by the Civil War Trust), which included what one Confederate described as “as warm a musketry fire as I have experienced for a good while – certainly worse than I have been in since Sharpsburg,” Lee pulled his men back to a carefully selected position on the west side of Mine Run where they immediately began digging in.

Meade followed Lee to Mine Run but would advance no further. After issuing orders for an attack that some Confederates were eagerly hoping would develop into a “Second Chancellorsville,” Meade examined the strong Confederate position and called off the attack. As he told his wife, “I would rather be ignominiously dismissed, and suffer anything, than knowingly and willfully have thousands of brave men slaughtered for nothing.” He pulled his men back across the Rapidan on December 2^nd and reaped a whirlwind of political discontent in Washington. To his men, however, he won admiration and respect for not wantonly throwing away their lives.

Lt. Michael S. Austin of the 5th New Jersey wrote:

Much censure is cast upon Gen Mead [sic] for the apparent failure of the late campaign. Those who were more closely connected & interested in that affair, are satisfied that it terminated as it should have done, after they saw what they had first to overcome…Today there are 15,000 men living, & of service, if properly used. In the case contemplated, that number of men would have been lost to the enemy & country, with a great chance of defeat.

For Robert E. Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia, the Army of the Potomac had been allowed to slip away with no further damage yet again. Lee grumpily said after the campaign, “I am too old to command this army.  We should never have permitted those people to get away.”

Thus, the 150^th anniversary of the Mine Run Campaign offers a chance to take a fresh look at this forgotten affair…it just looks as if no one has taken an interest in conducting that look.

While it may not grab the attention of the masses since we know that a large scale battle did not develop, the men who lived through the campaign did not enjoy this hindsight.

If anyone is aware of any upcoming events that deal with this fascinating period, please post them in the comments section.