The following poem about the June 9, 1863 Battle of Brandy Station appeared in the Journal of the Military Service Institution of the United States, Vol. 49, July-August 1911, page 142. It was originally published in the St. Louis Globe-Democrat,, date unknown.
The Cavalry Veteran
This sabre-cut on my forehead scored?
I picked it up at Beverly Ford
The day we turned “Jeb” Stuart’s flank
And hurled him from the river bank.
It was parry and thrust with a hearty will
As we fought for the guns on Fleetwood Hill,
While over the fields and through the pines
Backward and forward surged the lines;
Twelve thousand men in a frenzied fray;
Charge and rally and mad melee —
Oh, the crash and roar as the squadrons met,
The cheers and yells — I can hear them yet!
But we’d forced the fords, so our work was done,
And we galloped away ere set of sun.
With thanks to Clark B. “Bud” Hall for sharing this with me. Good stuff.Scridb filter
There’s only one word to describe the scope of this reenacting fail…epic….
To see a larger version of the photo, double click on it.
Readers of this blog will remember that I had very little good to say about History’s Gettysburg film when it aired back in May. I wasn’t alone in this assessment. I was concerned that old friend Garry Adelman, who was one of the talking heads in the program, might have his reputation sullied by being involved in such a God-awful project.
Garry has been silent about it to date. However, Garry has penned a guest post on Kevin Levin’s excellent Civil War Memory blog today that addresses his role in the project. Garry points out that the film, even with its almost countless inaccuracies, has spurred new interest in the battle, and for that reason it was worthwhile. I can’t really disagree with that, although I still hate the almost innumerable inaccuracies in it.
Here’s what Garry says about those inaccuracies:
Just before the scripts got under way, the Gettysburg National Military Park’s Supervisory Historian, Scott Hartwig, came on board. Scott and I served as the primary historical consultants thereafter. We reviewed three versions of the script and watched rough cuts of the production as it emerged. Together, we made no fewer than 400 specific comments and requests for changes, and, to History’s great credit, almost every single one of these comments was addressed in the final show. Scott and I have both worked with other production companies before and we agree that none were so dedicated to trying to get it right as was History and Herzog & Co. In the first scripts, there were scores of significant errors and I mean significant.
He points out that there was nothing that could have been done about many of the wrong sets, uniforms, etc., as all of those were filmed before he and Scott Hartwig got involved, so they focused on what they could fix. That makes good sense to me, and I certainly can appreciate it.
The film will air again on Wednesday night. I will do all in my power to avoid it, as I still think it’s just atrocious. However, I do appreciate Garry’s insight, and I also understand completely where he’s coming from on this. And if it does manage to spur new interest in the Civil War, then I suppose I can live with it. Thanks for setting the record straight, Garry.Scridb filter
Some guy I’ve never heard of previously named James R. Leighton left a review on Amazon of my 2001 book, Glory Enough for All: Sheridan’s Second Raid and the Battle of Trevilian Station. I read it and was floored. I actually was left speechless by it and had to share my exchange here.
The title of the review is “Another biased Civil War book.” This is what the review says:
Like so many books and articles as well as art I found this book heavily in favor of the South. The North is often made to seem lacking in good Generals or often even in good horses. It is always something!! I really only liked this book because it was about a train station and I am a train collector. Actually I have read many books about the civil war since I was 16 years old and have visited many of the important battle sites. I even collect toy soldiers and here I am 68 years old!
What are the good points about this book? One is that it is easily readable and the story flows evenly with good maps which is rare in civil war books. It also does a good job of describing the content of the battle, going into the purpose of the raid, as well as the many difficulties of being in a troop of some 9000 men trying to engage an elusive enemy. I also found that Sheridan’s tactics in trying to lead the Southern cavalry away from Grant’s movements to Petersberg were justified. Also remember it was under Grant’s approval that this raid was conducted. Since that goal was accomplished I would say that the raid was successful and disagree with the authors opinion that it was a failure.
What is not so good about this book? I would say that it could have used a few more maps in some strategic places, that the battle of Samaria seemed more like an after thought and was not very well described. Most of all, the books inherent Southern bias made me wonder how accurately the battle is described in spite of the rather large amount of documentation included at the end of each chapter. But since the documentation included many references to the First Maine Cavalry in which some of my relatives served at least now I have to find another book to read which is often the outcome of reading one book on the very Lost Cause.
Wow. I’ve been called a lot of things in my day, but a Lost Causer? Inherent Southern bias? Say what? Those of you who read this blog regularly know that nobody has EVER accused me of having inherent Southern bias or of being a Lost Causer before. I was blown away and had to respond. Here’s my response:
Wow. I’m blown away by this. I’ve been accused of a lot of things, but one thing I have NEVER been called is a Southern partisan. If anything, I’m known for my work on the UNION cavalry. The Union cavalry has always been the primary focus on my work. I am most assuredly NOT a Lost Causer. NOBODY has ever accused me of that before. Wow.
So, he responded. Get a load of this:
Whether or not you write about the Union cavalry is is not the issue. The issue is the fact that you are and other writers are critical of the Union side of the war until the last year of the war. You depict Sheridan as basically incompetent just like other writers about Sherman and Grant. Why is this? The Battle of Travilian Station was another victory of the Union not a loss as you depict it. Sherman gave the South exactly what it deserved with a constitution that approved of slavery and so did Sheridan. Even Mort Kuntsler depicts the South in a positive light. I cant find one artist or writer including you that depicts the South as basically a criminal society. Such is revisionist history!!
Let me see if I’ve got this right: anyone who doesn’t portray the South as a criminal society is a revisionist Lost Causer with an inherent Southern bias. Anyone who criticizes the Union high command–even when it’s appropriate and deserved–is a Lost Causer. Hmmmmm….that’s a new one on me, and I thought I’d heard pretty much everything in my years of working with the Civil War.
That’s a very strange definition you use, Mr. Leighton.
You seem to think that I should have preconceived notions rather than go where the evidence leads me. If it takes being what you criticize to satisfy you as to my work, I’ll take a pass, thanks.
By every definition–tactical and strategic–Sheridan failed miserably. You and he are the only ones who call it a victory. How is being driven from the battlefield after failing to achieve your objective a victory? That’s one strange definition you have, sir.
Good luck to you.
Normally, I would be terribly amused by this sort of thing, but I’m actually troubled by it. The only thing that will satisfy this bozo is something that condemns the South as a criminal society and compares Jefferson Davis to Adolf Hitler. It really concerns me that this guy takes such a viewpoint seriously. He can say what he wants about me–I don’t care what he thinks about me. I am, however, worried now about how many others are out there who share this absurd viewpoint.
It seems that I have found the mirror image of the Lost Causers and neo-Confederates that I so despise. I guess I now have a new category of moron to contend with, and that concerns me. What do we even call this viewpoint?Scridb filter
Here is the official press release issued by the Washington County Convention and Visitors Bureau (with the blurb from article on Dahlgren in the Gettysburg Campaign excised):
Contact: Hagerstown-Washington County CVB, 301-791-3246
Hagerstown Suns, 301-791-6266
For Immediate Release:
Hagerstown-Washington County CVB and Hagerstown Suns Unveil “Captain Ulric Dahlgren” Bobblehead; Hero of Battle of Hagerstown to be Given Away at July 9th Home Game
HAGERSTOWN, MD — The Hagerstown-Washington County Convention and Visitors Bureau will present Captain Ulric Dahlgren bobbleheads to the first 1,000 fans arriving at the Hagerstown Suns’ 7:05 p.m. game against the West Virginia Power on Saturday, July 9.
Gates will open at Municipal Stadium at 6:05 p.m., and the Suns advise fans to arrive early, as the supply of bobbleheads is not expected to last long.
The bobblehead commemorates the famous Civil War officer known as “The Hero of Hagerstown.” Captain Ulric Dahlgren was the son of the well-known Union Rear-Admiral John Adolf Dahlgren. On July 6th, 1863, then-Captain Dahlgren led a charge of Union Cavalry against numerically superior Confederate forces in the streets of Hagerstown. The hand-to-hand and fierce fighting exemplified the bravery and gallantry of Ulric Dahlgren.
The new bobblehead was unveiled at a press conference at the Hagerstown-Washington County Convention and Visitors Bureau’s Visitor Welcome Center.
“The Convention and Visitors Bureau is very proud to be the financial sponsor of this bobblehead giveaway,” Bureau President and CEO Tom Riford said. “With the 150th Anniversary of the Civil War upon us, we felt that this particular bobblehead would be unique, and a reminder of the struggles endured in Hagerstown during July 1863.”
Riford announced that a direct descendent of Ulric Dahlgren will be throwing out the first ceremonial pitch at the July 9th baseball game at Municipal Stadium, “Ulric Dahlgren, IV and Ulric Dahlgren, V have agreed to represent their famous ancestor’s legacy, and throw out the first pitch at the opening ceremony.”
Captain Ulric Dahlgren is the sixth figure to be honored by the Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB) with a bobblehead giveaway at Municipal Stadium, joining General George Washington, author Nora Roberts, MSO music director Elizabeth Schulze, General Abner Doubleday, and Hagerstown’s symbol Little Heiskell.
“It is appropriate that our sixth annual CVB-sponsored bobblehead be of such an important and historic figure from our city’s past,” Riford said. “Just as Hagerstown fielded the first minor league baseball team in Maryland, the CVB is proud to make the Hagerstown Suns the first professional baseball team ever to give away a Captain Ulric Dahlgren bobblehead.” The figure is historically accurate, and is dressed in the uniform of a Union Captain from 1863, complete with sword.
“This project has been more than eight months in the making,” according to Hagerstown Suns General Manager Bill Farley. “We’ve been working very hard with the CVB to make this bobblehead ready for the July 9th home game.”
“The Suns are proud to partner with the Convention and Visitors Bureau on the 2011 Ulric Dahlgren Bobblehead giveaway. We hope our fans enjoy adding another historical piece of Suns memorabilia to their collections.”
The game is expected to be a sell out. The Hagerstown Suns management urges people to purchase tickets as soon as possible.
The Hagerstown Suns play at Municipal Stadium in Hagerstown, MD and are a Class “A” affiliate of the Washington Nationals. Visit the Suns on the web at www.hagerstownsuns.com.
The Hagerstown Suns baseball team is a member of the Hagerstown-Washington County Convention and Visitors Bureau. For more information, see; www.marylandmemories.com. Washington County is part of the Heart of the Civil War Heritage Area, and the Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area. For more information see: www.heartofthecivilwar.org and also www.hallowedground.org.
Don’t forget: July 6th Premiere of “Valor in the Streets: The Battle of Hagerstown.” See: http://tinyurl.com/6b46kuk.
Don’t forget: Bobblehead Give-Away Night: July 9th at Municipal Stadium.
About Ulric Dahlgren (compiled by historian Steve Bockmiller, from multiple sources):
US Army Colonel Ulric Dahlgren was the second son of Rear-Admiral John Adolf and Mary Dahlgren, and was born April 3, 1842, in Bucks County, Pennsylvania.
Completing his school-days in 1858, it was decided that his vocation was civil engineering, and, as he had received much practical instruction from his father, he was in 1859 employed to survey some tracts of wild land in Mississippi. In September, 1860, in obedience to his father’s wishes, he entered a Philadelphia law-office, but amid the rush of events which followed the inauguration of President Lincoln he desired to serve his country, and July 24, 1861, he was attached to a naval expedition from the Washington Yard to assist in the defense of Alexandria, Virginia. Ulric then reluctantly resumed his law studies, with the promise that he would be recalled when the hour of action should come.
During the winter of 1861-62 he was one of an association of young men who formed a light artillery company in Philadelphia, at the same time pursuing his studies.”
On the 26th of May, 1862, young Dahlgren, who was then just twenty years old, was sent to Harper’s Ferry, in charge of a battery of navy howitzers, and on the 29th was sent back to Washington to obtain needed supplies of ammunition. Appointed a captain in the army, he returned to Harper’s Ferry the next morning in time to take part in the final repulse of the rebels.
Captain Dahlgren was attached to the staff of General Sigel, and later the staff of Army of the Potomac commander Major General Joseph Hooker.
General Sigel desired to make Captain Dahlgren chief of artillery of his corps, and in a note addressed to the governor of Pennsylvania, endorsed by President Lincoln and Admirals Smith and Foote, spoke of his aide as a “young officer of merit and usefulness, who has already distinguished himself and reflected much credit on the service.”
Captain Dahlgren’s led sixty men on a raid into Fredericksburg, Virginia to disrupt Confederate operations there and held the town for three hours against a force of Confederates that outnumbered his 5 or 10 to 1, and then withdrew with thirty-one prisoners and their horses and accoutrements.
During the Gettysburg campaign he entered Greencastle and captured several very important dispatches, and then rode at break-neck speed through thirty miles of enemy-held territory to Gettysburg. Some historians have argued one of the letters revealed that General Robert E. Lee did not have the large force at Gettysburg that Union intelligence officers had estimated, and that General Meade then decided to stay and fight a third day. The third day of the Battle of Gettysburg resulted in a Union victory.
He was given one hundred men to operate with, and July 4, 1863, he attacked a brigade of Confederate cavalry and captured Greencastle. On his way back dashed into a rebel train, destroyed one hundred and seventy-six wagons, captured two hundred prisoners, three hundred horses, and one piece of artillery.
Confederates held Hagerstown, and were ransacking the town, and terrorizing the residents. In the July 6, 1863 Battle of Hagerstown, Captain Dahlgren, on horseback and in plain site to every enemy soldier, led a charge of 20 dismounted cavalrymen up Potomac Street toward Confederates emplaced at the present-day Zion Reformed Church. When he reached Franklin Street (at City Hall) his right foot and ankle was blasted by a shot from hiding Confederate soldiers. He was wounded in the foot by gunfire from the area of today’s Pioneer Hook and Ladder Company on West Franklin Street. It was said that his charge up Potomac Street was of such a heroic nature that Confederates ran from his fury, and he fought on even after being horrifically wounded. He avenged a dear friend’s life, and afterwards “no man could withstand him.”
Sent to his father’s home in Washington, gangrene set in and his foot had to be amputated. On July 24th he received his commission as colonel, directly from President Abraham Lincoln.
Returning to the field on February 18, 1864, he was given a command of five hundred picked men to join an expedition to release the Union prisoners at Richmond, Virginia. Colonel Dahlgren drove the enemy’s pickets into their works around Richmond, but the country being aroused he could not make the junction with Kilpatrick, and in endeavoring to return to the Union lines he was ambushed, and killed. Orders were allegedly found on his body to burn Richmond and capture and kill President Davis and his cabinet. This became an international incident. It may have inspired John Wilkes Booth to begin his plot against Abraham Lincoln, and Admiral Dahlgren spent the rest of his life trying to clear his son’s name.
Colonel Dahlgren’s remains were secured at the close of the war, and, after lying in state in the City Hall of Washington and Independence Hall of Philadelphia, were buried with distinguished honors at Laurel Hill Cemetery in Philadelphia. After the war, his step-mother, Madeline Vinton Dahlgren purchased the stone house on the National Road at the top of South Mountain and maintained it as a summer home for many years. That stone home is now the Historic Old South Mountain Inn restaurant. Mrs. Dahlgren constructed the Dahlgren Chapel across the street from the restaurant, which stands to this day. It honors both the Admiral, and the heroic son, Colonel Ulric Dahlgren.
Sadly, I will miss the game–we should be somewhere in southern Virginia about the time the first pitch is thrown by either Ric Dahlgren or his son Ulric V, but I’ve got a line on one of these little beauties, which will have a place of honor in my library at home.Scridb filter
Every now and again, I wander off the reservation and post about something that has nothing to do with my historical work. Today is going to be one of those occasional wanderings off topic, as I would be remiss if I didn’t at least touch on the death of Clarence Clemons, The Big Man, yesterday. I hope you will forgive me for doing so.
Music has long played a very important role in my life. I have no musical talent whatsoever, but I have always loved music, and it has long been the soundtrack of my life. A big part of the soundtrack of my life has been the music of Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band. For reasons that I’ve never quite understood, Bruce’s blue-collar paeans to life have always deeply resonated with me. I first discovered the Boss at 14 in 1975, when his epic Born to Run was released. Playing a major role in the stories that fill “Born to Run” was the honking saxophone of the great Clarence Clemons.
As an example of how large a role the Boss and his music have played in my life, I spent the night before my first day of law school–in August 1984–attending a Springsteen concert in Washington, DC with my good friend Stuart Jones, and then drove all night to get back to Pittsburgh in time to get a couple of hours of fitful sleep before getting up to go to my first day of law school. I never got caught up on my rest again until after I took the bar exam three years later. I’ve had the good fortune of seeing the E Street Band perform live eight times in my life, and I now worry that there with Clarence’s passing, there will be no more such opportunities.
Bruce knew how much Clarence meant to the band and to the fans. He always introduced the Big Man last, and he acknowledged his importance in the song “Tenth Avenue Freezeout”, from Born to Run:
When the change was made uptown
And the big man joined the band
From the coastline to the city
All the little pretties raise their hands
I’m gonna sit back right easy and laugh
When scooter and the big man bust this city in half
In the fall of 1982, my senior year in college, I got to see Clarence’s own band, Clarence Clemons and the Red Bank Rockers, in a concert at Gettysburg College. The band featured Clarence, obviously, Max Weinberg, and most of the horn section of the Asbury Jukes, and it was a fun, rollicking night. After the show, I got to chat with Max and Clarence for a while, which was a great thrill. They were willing to talk to a couple of college kids, and we had a few laughs together. I will never forget their kindness to a couple of middle-class college students.
Clarence was not the greatest technical sax player, but he was larger than life, a huge star in his own right–as Bruce so often put it, he was the king of the universe. He was a gentle bear of a man at 6’4″, 270 pounds, with a large personality and an even larger stage presence. The eye naturally gravitated toward him, as he loved the limelight. Before long, it was obvious that, other than Bruce himself, Clarence was the one member of the E Street Band who was irreplaceable. Indeed, I cannot even begin to imagine hearing something like “Jungleland”–Clarence’s most famous and most epic solo, one that still gives me chills when I hear it today–without Clarence’s horn.
I can’t help but wonder whether Clarence’s untimely passing yesterday at the too-young age of 69 won’t mean the end of the E Street Band–I hope not, but as I said, I cannot imagine it without the Big Man’s outsized persona and his even bigger horn. For now, rest in peace, Clarence. Thank you for the memories, and thank you for filling such a large place in the soundtrack of my life. You will be missed.
It’s a sad day on E Street today…..Scridb filter
I suffered through 45 minutes of Gettysburg on the History Channel last night. With brothers Ridley and Tony Scott as directors and producers, I had high hopes for this production. The Scotts are two of my very favorite directors, and they are known for the quality of their productions.
What a staggering disappointment this thing was. I turned it off after 45 minutes because I couldn’t take another moment of it. This thing was shockingly bad. Events were presented horribly out of context, with absolutely no stage setting. The movie begins with the Iron Brigade’s advance to the unfinished railroad cut and without any context for the viewer to understand how they got there or why they were there. It would have confused anyone without a decent working knowledge of the battle.
I counted ten major factual inaccuracies in the first ten minutes of the thing. And it got worse from there. Just a few of the things wrong with this production–and this is FAR from a comprehensive list:
1. The terrain was completely wrong. Since when were segments of the Gettysburg battlefield covered with thick forests of pine trees?
2. The sets were awful–fence lines were wrong, the buildings were wrong, and the depiction of the town itself was completely wrong. The unfinished railroad cut on McPherson’s Ridge was portrayed as being only three or four feet deep when it’s really as deep as thirty feet at its deepest.
3. They had the Iron Brigade digging deep trenches atop Culp’s Hill on the night of July 1–not crude breastworks like those actually built on the night of July 2, but rather the sort of deep, semi-permanent trenches with head logs that one expects to see on the Petersburg battlefield. And they were using brand-new, shiny shovels and pick axes that looked like they still had the Lowe’s or Home Depot price stickers on them, not period tools. They never did mention Greene’s brigade either….
4. The uniforms and many of the weapons were wrong, and few, if any, of the actors looked like the people they were portraying. I just loved the yellow cavalry stripes on the infantrymen. That was my favorite.
5. The history was largely wrong. As just one example, none of John Buford, John Reynolds, Henry Heth, or A. P. Hill were even mentioned at all during the discussion of the first day. Instead, the first day focused on Rufus Dawes–you would think that the 6th Wisconsin alone captured the Confederates in the railroad cut and that no other units were involved.
6. I turned it off just as the second day’s portrayal began. I’m told that the focus was on William Barksdale and that there was no mention of Little Round Top or of Joshua Chamberlain or the 20th Maine’s defense.
I feel badly for Garry Adelman and Prof. Peter Carmichael, who were interspersed as talking heads. They presented the history accurately and correctly, and lent some credibility to this thing, but yikes–now they will be associated with this piece of crap. Pete and Garry are both good guys and very capable and accomplished historians, and I sincerely hope that their association with this terrible program doesn’t sully their reputations.
There’s plenty more, but that will give you a taste. I’m so disappointed in this that it’s shocking. What’s even more concerning to me is that novices will think that this piece of dreck is an accurate depiction of the battle and that they will find out just how terribly wrong it was and lose interest because of it. On the other hand, if it spurs interest, then I guess it’s a good thing, but it nevertheless shows how far the History Channel has fallen.
Awful. Just appallingly, horrifyingly awful. Do yourselves a favor–don’t waste a minute of your time or a brain cell on this piece of crap. It’s not worth either.Scridb filter
With thanks to Bud Hall–a Marine Corps veteran of the Vietnam War himself–for passing this along to me, I give you the words of the great American poet, Archibald MacLeish, who offered this elegy:
Who in the still houses has not heard them? The soldiers say: “Our deaths are not ours; they are yours. They will mean what you make them mean.”
They say: “Whether our lives and our deaths were for peace and a new hope or for nothing, we cannot say. It is you who must say this.”
They say: “We leave you our deaths. Give them their meaning. We were young, we had died, remember us.”
Thank you to all of the veterans who gave the last full measure of their devotion to help give us the freedoms that we take for granted. And to all of my friends who have served, thank you for your service and for the sacrifices that you have made so that the rest of us can enjoy our freedom. As you celebrate this Memorial Day, please remember to thank a veteran for his or her service.Scridb filter
This photo, taken last Sunday on the steps of the Ohio State House at the Ohio Civil War 150 kick-off event, which featured a speech by Wes Cowan of The Antiques Roadshow, pretty much leaves me speechless. Apparently, there was another event going on downtown at the same time….
UPDATE, APRIL 18, 2011: I’ve gotten a piece of hate mail from a fellow member of the Sesquicentennial Commission, slamming me big time for posting this photo. He says it makes the re-enactors look bad and that it also makes the Commission look bad. While I am not a re-enactor and personally don’t get it, I have plenty of friends who are re-enactors who take it very seriously by trying to get it right, and it was never my intention to offend any of them. My intention was to take a photo that HAD ALREADY SPREAD ACROSS THE INTERNET by the time I saw it, and have a little bit of fun with it. As I told him, if he takes himself so seriously as a re-enactor that he can’t have a laugh at a silly, funny picture, then that’s a real shame
As for the Commission: My membership on the Governor’s Advisory Commission on the Civil War is a matter of great pride for me. It’s important to me to have been asked to serve on the Commission, as I think that I have something to offer. I take that responsibility VERY seriously, although I try never to take myself too seriously (although I admittedly don’t always succeed).
Unfortunately, I could not attend the event, as I had already committed to do the event in Greencastle, PA months before the idea for this event was even cooked up. I felt it would be disingenuous to brag about an event I could not and did not attend, and at the same time, I wanted to let it be known that we can all have a little fun with this stuff, that there’s no reason to be as serious as a heart attack about it all the time. It certainly was not intended to belittle the effort that went into planning and executing the event–which was substantial–or to disrespect anyone who participated in it. If any other of my fellow Commission members–other than the member who sent me the hate mail–were offended by my having a little fun with this, then I apologize for offending you. However, I do not, and will not, apologize for thinking that it’s okay not to take ourselves–and the commemoration of the Sesquicentennial–too seriously.Scridb filter
I’ve been fairly cutting edge with the Civil War on the Internet. I was one of the earliest participants in on-line discussions, I had a website as early as 1997, I started blogging in 2005, and I’ve been using Facebook to promote and sell my stuff. There is, however, one thing that I absolutely and categorically refuse to do: join Twitter. While some argue that no social media strategy is complete without tweeting, I can’t get beyond the thought that Twitter is the ultimate exercise in narcissism. It never ceases to amaze me that with all of his loony, demented ravings, nobody has ever gotten a larger following on Twitter faster than Charlie Sheen, who admittedly doesn’t even write his own posts.
The bottom line is that I already spend too much time on this stuff as it is, and the last thing I’m about to do is to add another layer to my daily Internet usage, and I just won’t do so. That doesn’t mean that others shouldn’t make good use of Twitter as a means of marketing and selling books, I just won’t be one of them.
However, I have to tip my cap to a historian at the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources who is using Twitter to spread the word of the Civil War sesquicentennial. Here’s the article about it, from Yahoo News:
Historian tweets about Civil War to bring back era
By TOM BREEN, Associated Press – Tue Mar 22, 5:02 pm ET
RALEIGH, N.C. – Two months before the start of the Civil War, a North Carolina belle named Catherine Ann Devereux Edmondston tapped out a frustrated message about her secession-opposing sibling in a tweet to her followers: “Sister Frances is a terrible Unionist!”
She might have tweeted, that is, if Twitter had existed in 1861. Instead, Edmondston and other long-dead North Carolinians from a bygone era are having their social networking done for them posthumously. A Raleigh-based historian is using the popular service to bring the home front of a war to modern day audiences nearly a century and a half later.
“We’re not imposing any of our words. This is purely from men, women, and even teenagers who stayed at home and fought the war in their own ways,” said LeRae Umfleet, the historian who manages the collections at the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources.
Since last week, Umfleet has been tweeting from the account (at)CivilianWartime with the words of an escaped slave, a woman whose husband owned a plantation and others. The tweets are moving roughly in chronological order along with the war, meaning that so far the messages mostly express the foreboding and uncertainty of people in North Carolina as they watched war clouds build.
“I have just seen the President’s message,” Umfleet tweeted in the March 11, 1861 words of Mary Bethell. “Mr. Lincoln, I think he intends to coerce those seceding States.”
The Twitter account is part of the ongoing effort of the cultural resources department’s ongoing effort to mark the 150th anniversary of the bloodiest conflict in American history. It seeks to highlight the experiences of those who remained at home while others went off to war — a conflict ever more dire as the battles drag on.
“By the end of the war, we will have seen conflict on North Carolina soil, and we’ll have heard from people with firsthand knowledge of that,” Umfleet said.
The tweets aren’t just short excerpts from a time when letter writing was far more common than today, though. Each tweet links to a blog that contains the full passage being cited as well as information on where to find the original documents.
And all of the tweets are taken verbatim from letters, diaries, autobiographies and other records of what people thought of the conflict as it unfolded.
These tweets of war are an attempt to reach those now accustomed to getting their information from tiny portable screens rather than thick and musty volumes. Siince Monday, the Twitter page has gone from fewer than two dozen followers to more than 240.
“How cool is this!” one Twitter user tweeted Tuesday, linking to the site.
Umstead has been tweeting several times a day so far. She plans to follow the war’s progress by recording thoughts of North Carolinians roughly in step with the chronology of the war, from the first stirrings of secession to the final surrender in 1865.
One of those following the tweets is Wilson Hines, a history major at Wayne Community College in Goldsboro. Hines, 37, says that some history buffs may turn up their noses at services like Twitter, but it’s increasingly important to use tools familiar to younger people to teach them about such a big part of American history.
“All these kids do is spend time on the Internet,” he said. “It’s on their phones, it’s on their laptops … Twitter is a fantastic way to get the word spread about historical events.”
Hines has even seen specific interest in the Civil War growing on Twitter, where the (hash)CivilWar hashtag — a way to search for tweets referring to a particular topic — has grown significantly in the last few months.
“Almost every minute someone’s saying something new about the Civil War, where not long ago there might be one post a day,” he said.
The conflict that millions of Americans followed at the time through newspapers, letters and the telegraph has become something of an Internet-era sensation, with efforts that also include blogs and web sites featuring accounts and images from the war. There are also numerous Facebook pages, and even Twitter accounts set up on behalf of long-dead figures from the war era, including Abraham Lincoln and Ulysses S. Grant.
Umfleet, who is new to Twitter herself, said she’s taken to tweeting with enthusiasm, although there are hurdles to negotiate when bringing 19th century ways of speaking into the digital age.
“Sometimes their prose is a little difficult to follow, and unfortunately they don’t end their sentences with LOL,” she said.
I’m still not going to run out and sign up for Twitter, but I have to tip my cap to Ms. Umfleet for coming up with a really novel idea, and if it helps get one person in the Civil War, then it’s a good thing.Scridb filter