• Home
  • About
  • How to Contribute
  • Our Correspondents

11

Jun

18

Beyond Gettysburg: Primary Sources for the Gettysburg Campaign

Posted by Cooper Wingert  Published in Civil War (1861-1865), Lesson Plans, Letters & Diaries, Lists

The Shelling of Carlisle occurred on July 1, 1863, even as the Battle of Gettysburg raged to the south.

Alabama soldier Elihu Wesley Watson arrived in Carlisle, Pennsylvania in the summer of 1863 as part of the Army of Northern Virginia’s shocking invasion of Pennsylvania –the one that culminated with the Battle of Gettysburg (July 1-3, 1863).  While he was on brief occupation duty in Carlisle at the end of June, Private Watson spent some time talking to the president of Dickinson College (Herman Johnson), a man he then described in a subsequent letter as “an unmitigated abolitionist and a bitter enemy to the south,” with “principles… as bad as Wm. H Seward’s.” Watson’s fascinating account from the occupation of Carlisle was not an isolated bit of first-hand testimony.  While often overlooked in classroom studies of the great battle, the primary sources describing the days leading up to confrontation at Gettysburg offer rare and very teachable glimpses into the nature of the war and especially into a deeper understanding of the interactions between Confederate soldiers and Northern civilians.

For this post, I have assembled available digitized primary sources from the House Divided Project, the Dickinson College Archives, the Cumberland County Historical Society and from my book, The Confederate Approach on Harrisburg (2012). Featured below are accounts that describe a series of little-known skirmishes and events from the 1863 invasion, including the Confederate occupation of Carlisle. Of special interest are the stories of Samuel Hillman, a Dickinson professor who debated Confederate officers about slavery, and recollections from Dickinson alumni and Confederate officers Richard Beale and Richard Shreve who were among the Confederate troops responsible for shelling Carlisle on the evening of July 1-2.  I created this post originally in the summer of 2018, but we will keep adding materials to it as they become available.  Feel free to make your own suggestions or contributions using the comment box (“Leave A Reply”) below.

 

Primary Sources – Skirmishes 

Construction of the defenses near Harrisburg (Frank Leslie’s Illustrated Newspaper, July 4, 1863, House Divided Project)

Confederate Occupation of Carlisle – June 27-28, 1863

  • Campbell Brown account (Confederate Staff Officer)
  • Samuel Dickinson Hillman account (Dickinson professor) – account for The Methodist, July 18, 1863
  • Charles Himes Letter and Diary (Civilian)
  • Jedediah Hotchkiss Letter (Confederate map-maker)
  • Henry London recollection (32nd North Carolina)
  • Robert Park recollection (12th Alabama)
  • Leonidas Polk Letter (43rd North Carolina)
  • Confederate Supply Requisition, June 27, 1863
  • “General Orders No. 72” posted in Carlisle, June 27-30, 1863
  • William J. Underwood Letter (4th Georgia) – camps on the Dickinson College campus (Atlanta History Center)
  • Elihu Wesley Watson Letter (6th Alabama) – mentions “a long conversation” with Dickinson College President Herman Johnson
  • Young Girl’s Pocket Diary, June – July, 1863, CCHS (transcribed by Frank Kline) –The unknown young girl wrote on Monday, June 29 that, “The Rebels are going in every house and stealing all they can”

Confederates in York and Wrightsville – June 27-30, 1863

  • Maj. Gen. Jubal Early’s memoir (Confederate)
  • Newspaper account of the occupation of York (Civilian)

Battle of Sporting Hill – June 30, 1863

  • George Wingate (Union)
  • Report of Landis’s Philadelphia Battery (Union)

Shelling of Carlisle – July 1-2, 1863

  • Richard L.T. Beale profile and account (Confederate, Dickinson Class of 1838)
  • George W. Beale (son of RLT Beale) letter (Confederate)
  • Theodore S. Garnett account (Confederate)
  • Report of Landis’s Philadelphia Battery (Union)
  • Fitzhugh Lee (Confederate)
  • Anna Fosdick recollection (Civilian)
  • Charles Godfrey Leland memoir (Union)
  • Isaac Harris diary (U.S. Sanitary Commission) – took shelter “under the lee of the jail wall” during the shelling
  • C. Stuart Patterson account (Union) – wounded during the shelling
  • Charles Schaeffer Diary (Union)
  • Richard Southeron Shreve account (Confederate, Dickinson Class of 1860)
  • John Keagy Stayman letters (Civilian) – Dickinson College as a hospital
  • George Wingate (Union)

A Confederate artilleryman, Richard Southeron Shreve (Class of 1860), “pointed out the various localities” in his old college town for Confederate cannons to aim at. (House Divided Project)

Primary Sources – Union

  • “A Word to Pennsylvania”: New York Times column criticizing Pennsylvanians’ response to the invasion.
  • Isaac Harris diary (U.S. Sanitary Commission)
  • John Lockwood memoir (23rd New York State National Guard)
  • George Wingate history (22nd New York State National Guard)

    Union militia camped near Fort Washington, the defenses of Harrisburg. (Cumberland County Historical Society)

Primary Sources – Confederate

  • “Gen. Jenkins’ Brigade” Newspaper account (Chronicling America)
  • Herman Schuricht Diary (14th Virginia Cavalry)
  • William Sillers Letter (30th North Carolina Infantry)

Primary Sources – Civilian

  • Anonymous Letter from Cumberland County resident
  • “Behavior of Our Citizens Under Rebel Fire” – Carlisle Herald account
  • “Boyhood Memories of the Civil War” – James Sullivan account
  • “Citizens of the Cumberland Valley” – recruitment poster, July 3, 1863
  • Culver Family Correspondence – Hanna Culver’s July 9, 1863 letter detailing the occupation and shelling, and her brother Joseph Culver’s letter of concern for their father.
  • Mary Johnson Dillon – (daughter of Dickinson College President Herman Johnson)
  • George Chenoweth Letter – Carlisle civilian’s account
  • Conway Hillman letter – son of Prof. Samuel D. Hillman, recalls the summer of 1863
  • Jacob Hoke – Chambersburg civilian
  • “Rebel Occupation of Carlisle” – Carlisle newspaper account
  • Thomas Griffith Letter – Carlisle civilian
  • Theodore M. Johnson account – (son of Dickinson College President Herman Johnson)
no comment

5

Jun

18

The Slave Hunt: Amos Barnes and Confederate Policy

Posted by Cooper Wingert  Published in Civil War (1861-1865), Letters & Diaries

The Confederate invasion of Pennsylvania in June 1863 had a profound effect on south central Pennsylvania’s African-American population. Numbering at least 5,000, local blacks fled the region in large numbers as the Confederate army drew near, and many of those who remained behind were quickly captured by Southern soldiers. [1]

Illustration of Confederate soldiers driving captured African-Americans during an earlier “slave hunt” in Maryland from 1862  (Harper’s Weekly, November 8, 1862)

This post explores the fate of several local blacks as they faced either captivity in Confederate prisons, or enslavement elsewhere in the South.  But at least one captured black resident, a man named Amos Barnes, was returned to freedom by Confederate officials because of the intervention of a network of Dickinsonians.

On June 16, shortly after Confederate cavalry had occupied Chambersburg, the Southern horsemen were seen “scouring” the surrounding fields and countryside for not only horses, but African-Americans. “O! How it grated on our hearts to have to sit quietly & look at such brutal deeds,” wrote resident Rachel Cormany in her wartime diary. In Chambersburg alone, between 25-50 blacks were captured and shackled, many of them women and children. “I sat on the front step as they were driven by just like we would drive cattle,” recorded Cormany. [2] In nearby Mercersburg, Dr. Philip Schaff watched as a group of Confederate guerrillas, known as McNeill’s Rangers, “came to town on a regular slave-hunt, which presented the worst spectacle I ever saw in this war.” The Southerners threatened to “burn down every house which harbored a fugitive slave, and did not deliver him up within twenty minutes.” A subsequent search of the town turned up “several contrabands, among them a woman with two little children.” To Schaff, it was a “most pitiful sight, sufficient to settle the slavery question for every humane mind.” [3]

Locals were quick to note that many of the captured African-Americans were free-born Pennsylvanians and long-time members of the community. Jemima Cree, another Chambersburg woman, attempted to intercede on behalf of her free-born domestic servant, but was rebuffed by a Confederate officer, who claimed “he could do nothing, he was acting according to orders.” [4] Other residents took their complaints directly to Confederate generals, occasionally securing the release of a specific captive. [5] Chambersburg resident Jacob Hoke later wrote about how a connection to a Confederate officer helped secure the freedom of one African-American captive.

The story of one prisoner, Amos Barnes of Mercersburg, illustrates the confused and often protracted fate that awaited many African-Americans. Barnes claimed that he and another free African-American helped McNeill’s horsemen ferret out the location of runaway slaves. During the retreat, Barnes accompanied the Confederate army southward, under the “assurance” that he would be released and permitted to return home. However, at Martinsburg, Virginia (modern-day West Virginia), “in the confusion of such business,” he was sent along with other African-American captives to Castle Thunder Prison in Richmond. At first “confined closely in Castle Thunder,” Barnes was eventually put to work at nearby Camp Winder Hospital, and later “employed to labor on a boat carrying wood to Richmond.” He was allowed to keep “some refuse wood for himself and sell it in Richmond,” earning $25 in Confederate script. With those funds in hand, Barnes cajoled a Confederate guard to mail a letter on his behalf to acquaintances back in Mercersburg. [6]

Rev. Thomas Creigh (Class of 1828) helped to secure the release of Amos Barnes. (House Divided Project, Dickinson College)

Barnes’s plea for help ultimately found its way into the hands of two Dickinsonians, who collaborated to secure his freedom. His letter first reached Rev. Thomas Creigh (Class of 1828) of Mercersburg, who wrote to another Dickinsonian, Rev. T.V. Moore (Class of 1838) of Richmond, asking Moore “to do something in their behalf to release them….” Moore paid a visit to Castle Thunder, and left convinced of Barnes’s freedom. He appealed to Confederate Assistant Secretary of War, John A. Campbell, who on December 14, 1863, ordered the release of “Amos Bar[n]es, a free negro from Pennsylvania… upon grounds which appear to the Department sufficient to justify an exceptional policy with regard to him.” [7]

 

Barnes and Lewis were held at Castle Thunder Prison in Richmond. (Library of Congress).

Still, the strange story of Amos Barnes raises new questions. What were Confederates hoping to gain by imprisoning free African-Americans like Barnes? Southerners had long-held grievances about the flow of fugitive slaves into border states such as Pennsylvania, leading some historians to speculate that the “slave hunt,” was a reprisal. It appears some captured blacks were indeed enslaved. In a letter dated June 28, William S. Christian, an officer in the 55th Virginia, claimed to have been “offered my choice” of the captives, but declined “as I could not get them back home.” [8] Similarly, Lucy Buck, a Winchester, Virginia woman, recorded in her diary that her family’s fugitive slaves were captured near Greencastle and later recognized by a local Confederate cavalryman. Buck expected her family’s fugitives–a mother and her young children–to be returned to her family, while noting that male captives taken by the Confederate army “had all been sent to Richmond to work on fortifications.” [9]

Among those sent to Richmond were Barnes and another local black, Alexander Lewis of Chambersburg. Lewis was ultimately placed in charge of the culinary department at Castle Thunder, and his story survives in a collection of wartime stories of Chambersburg residents. An African-American child seized from York was also held at Castle Thunder, and tasked with carrying messages and performing errands. [10] Historian Mark Neely counts at least 16 free blacks from Pennsylvania who were held at Castle Thunder. In prison records, Confederate officials consistently distinguished these captives as “free negroes,” indicating an awareness of their legal status even as they were being detained. Neely argues that Confederates held these free African-Americans as “civilian political prisoners,” with the aim of exchanging them for Confederate civilians or fugitive slaves. More recent research by David Smith suggests that while Barnes was freed in December 1863, many African-Americans remained in Confederate prisons well into 1864, and perhaps beyond. Smith, drawing on Lucy Buck’s diary account and notes left by Confederate bureaucrats, concludes that captured African-Americans “had value to the Confederate hierarchy” as manual laborers.  [11]

In the aftermath of Gettysburg, it was also apparent that some enslaved men from the Army of Northern Virginia had been left behind in Pennsylvania.  A reporter for the New York Herald asserted that “among the rebel prisoners… were observed seven negroes in uniform and fully accoutered as soldiers.” In recent decades, these words have sometimes been seized upon as purported proof of the existence of Black Confederates. However, contrary to popular misconception, these seven men were among the estimated thousands of camp slaves who accompanied the Confederate army into Pennsylvania. While the Confederate force numbered around 75,000 fighting soldiers on the eve of Gettysburg, historians estimate that as many as 10,000 slaves marched north with the army. Non-combatants, these camp slaves filled important roles as officers’ servants, cooks and teamsters. According to Arthur Freemantle, a British observer traveling with Robert E. Lee’s army, “in rear of each regiment were from twenty to thirty negro slaves.” After the battle, many camp slaves were forced to tend to the wounded and dead. Elijah, the slave of Col. Issac E. Avery, recovered and buried his master’s body after Avery was mortally wounded on the slopes of Cemetery Hill.[12]

Primary Sources

Rachel Cormany’s June 16, 1863 diary entry.

Thomas Creigh’s June 26, 1863 diary entry. 

Amos Stouffer’s June 19, 1863 diary entry.

William Heyser’s June 14, 18 and 22 diary entries.

Vermont Soldier Chester Leach’s July 15, 1863 letter from “Dear Wife”: The Civil War Letters of Chester K. Leach.

 

Amos Barnes was held at Castle Thunder Prison until December 1863. This notation by a Confederate clerk indicates that Barnes is to be exchanged under the next flag of truce. (Department of Henrico Papers, Section 11, Confederate Military Manuscripts Database).

 

 

Notes

[1] Joseph C.G. Kennedy, Population of the United States in 1860; Compiled from the Original Returns of the Eighth Census, (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1864), 412, [WEB].

[2] Rachel Cormany, “Rachel Cormany Diary, 1863,” Valley of the Shadow Project, [WEB]; Franklin Repository, Chambersburg, PA, July 8, 1863, Valley of the Shadow Project, [WEB]; Jacob Hoke, The Great Invasion of 1863: Or, General Lee in Pennsylvania, (Dayton, OH: W. J. Shuey, 1887), 107-108, [WEB];

[3] Philip Schaff Diary, June 16-19, June 25-27, 1863, in The Woman’s Club of Mercersburg, Old Mercersburg, (New York  The Frank Allaben Genealogical Company, 1912), 163-165, [WEB]; Ted Alexander, “‘A Regular Slave Hunt’: The Army of Northern Virginia and Black Civilians in the Gettysburg Campaign,” North & South 4, no. 7 (September 2001): 82–88, [WEB]; Steve French, Imboden’s Brigade in the Gettysburg Campaign, (Hedgesville, WV: Steve French, 2008), 63-64, [WEB]; Captain John H. McNeill’s group of partisan rangers was temporarily attached to Brig. Gen. John D. Imboden’s command during the Gettysburg Campaign. See U.S. War Department. War of the Rebellion: Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1899), Series I, vol. 27, pt 2:291, [WEB].

[4] Jemima K. Cree, “Jenkins Raid,” in The Kittochtinny Historical Society: Papers Read before the Society from March, 1905 to February, 1908, (Chambersburg, PA: Repository Printing Press, 1908), 94, [WEB].

[5] Hoke, The Great Invasion, 107-108, [WEB]; Charles Hartman Diary, June 22, 1863, Philip Schaff Library, Lancaster Theological Seminary.

[6] “Discharged from Richmond,” Franklin Repository, December 23, 1863, Pennsylvania Civil War Newspapers Database; T.V. Moore to Isaac H. Carrington, November 1863, File 1025 C 1863, Letters Received by the Secretary of War, RG 109, War Department Collection of Confederate Records, National Archives and Records Administration.

[7] Thomas Creigh to T.V. Moore, November 10, 1863, Section 11, Confederate Military Manuscripts, Series A: C.S.A. Army, Department of Henrico Papers, 1861-1864, ProQuest History Vault Database; The Woman’s Club of Mercersburg, Old Mercersburg, 86, [WEB]; Official Records, Series II, 6:704-705, [WEB]; Peter C. Vermilyea, “The Effect of the Confederate Invasion of Pennsylvania on Gettysburg’s African-American Community,” Gettysburg Magazine, [WEB]; Mark E. Neely Jr. Southern Rights: Political Prisoners and the Myth of Confederate Constitutionalism, (University of Virginia Press, 1999), 201; James F. Epperson, “Lee’s Slave-Makers,” Civil War Times Illustrated 41, no. 4 (August 2002): 44; David G. Smith, On the Edge of Freedom: The Fugitive Slave Issue in South Central Pennsylvania, 1820-1870, (New York: Fordham University Press, 2013), 188-194; Edward L. Ayers, The Thin Light of Freedom: The Civil War and Emancipation in the Heart of America, (New York: W.W. Norton, 2017), 45-49.

[8] “A Rebel Letter,” in Frank Moore (ed.), Rebellion Record: A Diary of American Events, 7:[WEB].

[9] Lucy Buck Diary, July 3, 1863, in Elizabeth R. Baer (ed.), Shadows on my Heart: The Civil War Diary of Lucy Rebecca Buck of Virginia, (Athens & London: The University of Georgia Press, 1997), 228.

[10] Jacob Hoke, Historical Reminiscences of the War; or Incidents which transpired in and about Chambersburg, during the War of the Rebellion, (Chambersburg, PA: M.A. Foltz, 1884), 144, [WEB].

[11]  Neely, Southern Rights, 139-140; Smith, On the Edge of Freedom, 192-193; Creigh to Moore, November 10, 1863, Confederate Military Manuscripts, Series A: C.S.A. Army, Department of Henrico Papers, 1861-1864, ProQuest History Vault Database.

[12]  “Incidents of the Battle,” New York Herald, July 11, 1863, [WEB]; Arthur Freemantle, Three Months in the Southern States, (New York: John Bradburn, 1864), 234, [WEB]. James M. Paradis, African Americans and the Gettysburg Campaign, (Toronto: The Scarecrow Press, 2013), 23-26, 72 [WEB].

 

2 comments

26

Jul

17

Making Something to Write Home About

Posted by weismans  Published in 19th Century (1840-1880), Civil War (1861-1865), Letters & Diaries

This post is part of a new summer 2017 “DIY” (do-it-yourself) series by House Divided Project interns Rachel Morgan and Sam Weisman on how to make various types of primary source facsimiles; see posts on CDVs, stereocards, colorized photos, and letters.

Imagine holding the tear-stained letter from a loving wife to her husband, a Union soldier. Then, follow the soldier through news clippings to the bloody Battle of Antietam. Hold the wife’s letter in one hand and the soldier’s death notice in the other.

House Divided Project facsimile collection

When students leaf through facsimile documents, they connect with these emotional stories. The authentic feel of a replica letter adds an interactive, physical layer to the study of primary sources.

Within my first week as an intern at the House Divided project, I picked up some tricks to quickly reproduce primary source documents. A few key details can make a facsimile ready for classroom use with little time and effort.

Getting the Paper Right

Paper was not made from wood pulp until after the Civil War. This is good for historians because newspapers and letters from this time are often better preserved than documents from the early 20th century. Most documents were off-white though, no matter how hard printers tried to clean them with bleach or lime.

“Fine writing” in books was printed on laid paper, a thin, woven, lightly coated sheet similar to Resume paper. Illustrations were printed on coated paper. The facsimile equivalent of this is photo glossy paper. People would have seen major events in the Harper’s Weekly or Frank Leslie’s Illustrated Weekly. The Harper’s Weekly archives are subscription-based but the Library of Congress carries many of the same photographs for free.

Realistic marbled binding on a facsimile diary or damage to a replica letter really feels like a piece of the past. Think about what practical details are missing from an image. For example, I bound a pamplet from the Southern Historical Society with colorful marbled paper.

To get the feel right, it can be useful to stop by your local historical society or archives to handle some original documents.

 

Patriotic Letters

A red, white, and blue sailor raises the flag of Union, surrounded by words of wartime optimism. Decorated stationary and envelopes like this were one of the main trends of the Civil War. Facsimiles of patriotic letters help bring to life the experience of the era. One of the House Divided documentary projects features this patriotic letter.

House Divided Project

How to make a patriotic letter: 

  • Format the page size to 5″ by 8″.
  • Add faint blue lines on the front and back, spaced about 3/8″ apart.
  • Download a patriotic cartoon image, printed in red, white, and blue.
  • Position an image in the upper left corner of the page.
  • If reproducing a handwritten letter, transcribe the text and paste the transcript on the back. Feel free to correct misspelling or illegible sections.

Writing Home Courtesy of the Delaware Historical Society

How to make a formal letter:

  • Format page size to 8″ by 10″.
  • Switch to landscape mode.
  • Divide into three sections, each about 3.5″ by 8″.
  • Add message using period appropriate font or handwriting.
  • Print and fold in thirds.

I printed letters on manila paper which was popular in the Civil War era. The same effect can be reached by recoloring the paper background in Microsoft Word. Go to the Design tab and select Page Color on the right of the tool bar. It may be difficult for students to read the handwriting so transcribing a letter in advance is very useful.

Learn more:

Cycleback, David (February 10, 2013) “Identifying and Dating Paper” Looking at Art, Artifacts and Ideas

 Kautz, August V (1864) The company clerk: showing how and when to make out all the returns 1826-1896 (J.B. Lippencott&Co, Philadelphia)

Sullivan, Bob (February 26, 2009) “19th Century Stationery Items” Civil War Wiki 

Valente, AJ (2010) “Changes in Print Paper During the 19th Century” Proceedings of the Charleston Library Conference: 209-214

 

2 comments

11

Feb

15

Lincoln’s Fremont Problem

Posted by Matthew Pinsker  Published in Civil War (1861-1865), Letters & Diaries

According to historian Louis Masur, Abraham Lincoln was “upset” by Union General John Fremont’s decision on August 30, 1861 to announce from his headquarters in St. Louis the general emancipation of rebel-owned slaves in Missouri (p. 28).  Yet, in his first letter to Fremont requesting changes in this proclamation, which he sent by special messenger from Washington just a few days later, Lincoln doesn’t sound so upset.  He claimed only that two points in the fiery August 30 directive (which had also declared martial law) had given him “some anxiety.”  The president dealt with the first matter regarding the shooting of people under the terms of Fremont’s martial law in blunt fashion, saying effectively, don’t do it without my approval, but then addressed the second matter concerning emancipation in a more subtle fashion.  He asked Fremont to modify this part of the order “as of your own motion,” so that it would “conform” to the recent Confiscation Act (August 6, 1861) and claimed explicitly that he was making these confidential requests “in a spirit of caution, and not of censure.”

Now this is a  good example of how historians have to interpret evidence and how these interpretations actually matter.  Masur believes Lincoln was upset because he thinks the Great Emancipator was still adamant in the summer of 1861 that the war was being fought over union and not slavery.  That is why Masur claims that Lincoln found the Fremont proclamation so upsetting and “objectionable,” mainly because, as he puts it in The Civil War: A Concise History (2011), the order “violated the terms of the Crittenden-Johnson resolution, adopted by Congress on July 25, which reaffirmed the position that the war was not being fought to overthrow or interfere with established institutions” (28).  Yet, Lincoln never mentioned that important (and very conservative-sounding) resolution in either of his two letters to Fremont.  Nor did he use the word “objectionable” in his initial communication with Fremont, which Masur does not quote from in his short book.

Jesse Benton Fremont

Jesse Benton Fremont

Yet even in Lincoln’s second letter to Fremont, the one which Masur quotes from, the tone is not necessarily “upset.” Written in response to the general’s September 8th reply to his “private and confidential” September 2d telegram, the president still remained at least outwardly calm despite the fact that the general was stubbornly refusing to do what he had suggested.  Fremont had actually sent his wife, Jesse Benton Fremont, an experienced politico herself, to deliver his response to the White House.  She did so apparently around midnight on September 10, 1861. There was some kind of dramatic confrontation between Mrs. Fremont and President Lincoln that evening at the White House although its nature has been disputed.  Two years later, the president recalled, according to the wartime diary of a close aide, that she “taxed me violently” during their conversation, although much of their argument by his recollection concerned rumors of Fremont’s administrative incompetence and factional politics in Missouri and not either martial law or emancipation (John Hay diary, December 9, 1863).  This claim of the president’s is supported by a private memo from another White House aide (John Nicolay) produced just a week after the confrontation which asserted that the “matter of the Proclamation … did not enter into the trouble with the Gen” (September 17, 1861).  Years later, Jesse Fremont remembered it much differently, claiming in 1891 that Lincoln was focused almost solely on the dangers of emancipation and had told her: “the General should never have dragged the Negro into the war.”  This is not a very credible recollection, but it has appeared in various forms in many secondary sources and presumably helped inform Masur’s outlook.  Regardless, what resulted from this unusual collision was a second presidential note, this time for public consumption, in which Lincoln claimed that while there was “no general objection” to Fremont’s August 30th order, on the particular matter of the “liberation of slaves,” there was something “objectionable” about its “non-conformity” with the Confiscation Act.  So, Lincoln decreed, since the general wanted an “an open order for the modification” from the Commander-in-Chief himself, that he was “very cheerfully” willing to do so.  Hence, the president publicly ordered on September 11, 1861, that Fremont’s proclamation was to be “modified” so as not to “transcend” the government’s official confiscation policy regarding the seizure of Rebel-employed slaves.

And there’s the rub.  Some historians, like Masur, consider the official Union policy regarding slavery in the summer of 1861 to have remained what Lincoln had stated (or technically re-stated) in his March inaugural address.  In his brief passage on Fremont’s controversial order, Masur writes, “The proclamation itself violated Lincoln’s assurance that he had no intentions of interfering with slavery where it existed” (28-29).  Yet for other historians, such as James Oakes, that policy on non-interference had already  changed –and had been changing since spring 1861.  The August 6th Confiscation Act merely culminated a new wartime policy by Union authorities allowing them to interfere with slavery whenever it was necessary for military reasons.  In particular, runaways or “contrabands” were generally supposed to be “discharged” from enslavement, because as the fourth section of the new statute delicately put it, any slaveholder who required or allowed “any person claimed to be held to labor or service” (i.e. his slaves) to either “take up arms” against the United States or to be employed by the Rebel military was to “forfeit his claim to such labor.”  It’s not clear from the plain language of the statute that these ex-slaves were to be freed, but that was the practical effect in many cases.  This new precarious freedom also applied indirectly to runaways who had nothing to do with the war effort.  The War Department had begun issuing orders to field commanders as early as May 30, 1861 allowing them to protect so-called “contrabands” or fugitives from the demands of slaveholders, and on August 8, 1861, the Secretary of War (Simon Cameron) provided a clear directive based on the new law authorizing commanders to protect and discharge not only Rebel-employed slaves, but also runaways whose masters were loyal.  Cameron’s letter informed field commanders (in this case, specifically General Benjamin Butler) that they should simply keep records of everyone freed so that later (“Upon the return of peace”), Congress could provide for “just compensation” to any loyal masters whose slaves had been “discharged” incorrectly.  Not every Union commander followed this directive in the subsequent months, but more than a few did.  The result was real freedom for many ex-slaves.  At the end of the year, President Lincoln, in his first annual message, described the policy shift as one that had “thus liberated” an unspecified “numbers” of black people in 1861.

Lincoln and Browning, courtesy of Ana Kean

Lincoln and Browning, courtesy of Ana Kean

The interpretative stakes are quite high here.  Masur (and many others) explicitly describe the Civil War as one that “began as a limited war to restore the country” (xi) before becoming in late 1862 and early 1863 a more revolutionary struggle for freedom.  Yet if Lincoln was not so “upset” by Fremont’s 1861 emancipation decree, but rather more concerned over exactly how to emancipate slaves, then this emphasis on limited war seems misplaced.  There was certainly plenty of limited, cautious rhetoric on the Union side, especially from President Lincoln, but the policies on the ground seem far more radical, almost right from the beginning.  Yet it is complicated.  On September 22, 1861, Lincoln defended his actions in regard to General Fremont in a remarkably candid private letter to his old friend, Orville Browning, now a U.S. senator from Illinois (he had recently taken the seat following the death of Stephen A. Douglas).  Lincoln labeled Fremont’s emancipation edict “purely political” and

Copy of Lincoln's 1861 letter to Browning

Copy of Lincoln’s 1861 letter to Browning

denied forcefully that either “a General, or a President, may make permanent rules of property by proclamation.” That sounds quite limited as a policy statement, and yet a smart Civil War student might well ask, isn’t that also exactly what the Great Emancipator himself did just one year later, when he revealed his own emancipation policy on September 22, 1862?  With presidential emancipation, he made “permanent rules of property by proclamation.” In his letter to Browning –a must-read for any serious student– Lincoln denied that he had been or would be “inconsistent” and carefully explained to his longtime friend and political colleague the difference between “principle” and “policy” and why some things had to be done in private while others had to be managed in public.  It’s a masterful document and one that holds perhaps the key to understanding Lincoln as a wartime political leader.

This post originally appeared at Matthew Pinsker’s Civil War & Reconstruction class (History 288), Dickinson College, Spring 2015.

no comment

7

Mar

14

The mysterious new Lincoln letter

Posted by Leah Miller  Published in Antebellum (1840-1861), Letters & Diaries, Recent News, Recent Scholarship

This photo of a newly discovered Lincoln letter (provided by the Papers of Abraham Lincoln project) provoked scholars to wonder why there is a section mysteriously clipped out

Last Friday, the Associated Press reported on the discovery of a previously unknown Abraham Lincoln document, and with it, a puzzling mystery.  Addressed only to “My dear Sir,” a portion of the letter had been carefully removed, eliminating the key to understanding its meaning.  Lincoln appears to have been writing “in haste” to someone asking if he or she could “keep up a correspondence” with an unknown person.  “I like to know his views occasionally,” Lincoln wrote.  Researchers at the Papers of Abraham Lincoln project focused on the peculiar phrase, “keep up a correspondence,” and ran it through their database, matching it to a letter written to Lincoln by fellow Republican Leonard Swett in June 1860.  In his note, Swett mentioned that he would “try to keep up a correspondence during the Campaign” with “our friend T W of Albany.”  Researchers believe these initials refers to Thurlow Weed, the powerful editor of the Albany Evening Journal, a leading Republican newspaper from New York.  During that period, Weed was essentially serving as a campaign manager for New York senator William Henry Seward, whom Lincoln had just defeated for the Republican presidential nomination in May 1860.  Candidate Lincoln needed full backing from Seward, Weed and their various supporters in the upcoming election but worried that he might not receive it because they were so disappointed over Seward’s unexpected defeat.  This would explain why Lincoln and Swett wanted to keep close tabs on Weed and his views and why Lincoln may have sent the mysterious letter featured above.

New letters and documents relating to Abraham Lincoln turn up more frequently than you might realize.  Just a few weeks ago for Time magazine, House Divided Project director Matthew Pinsker highlighted some recent discoveries that give us powerful new insights into Lincoln.  In 2008, scholars revealed that Lincoln had once fired off an angry letter to the editor of the Chicago Tribune which belittled another Republican politician as “Sister Burlingame” and which Pinsker calls “the angriest, nastiest written statement Lincoln ever produced.”   Another newly discovered letter from 1859 reveals that Lincoln privately called slavery  the only “living issue of the day” and wrote that it would be “idiotic” to think otherwise.  Pinsker also points out that even something as monumental as the transcript for Lincoln’s very first national speech (1847) has only just recently been made available to scholars.

For teachers and students using our Lincoln’s Writings: The Multi-Media Edition site, we’ve added a new tool to help you examine some of the best of these recent documents for yourself.  Under the “Special Topics” heading, which can be found in the right-hand sidebar of every page, there is a link to  “recently discovered documents.” As you browse each of these documents, you can also use the tags at the bottom of each page to find other related materials.

In your quest for new Lincoln materials, however, always keep in mind that there are sometimes Lincoln forgeries in circulation, especially over the Internet.  This problem has even fooled us before.  Just remember that the most reputable sources for Lincoln documents remain the Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln  and the Papers of Abraham Lincoln.  And, of course, we’ll do our best to help navigate the truth as well.

no comment

12

Feb

14

Our Top Ten Lincoln Resources

Posted by Matthew Pinsker  Published in 19th Century (1840-1880), Editor's Choice, History Online, Lesson Plans, Letters & Diaries, Recent News, Recent Scholarship, Video

Lincoln 1863To honor Lincoln’s 205th birthday, we are tweeting out the top ten Lincoln resources from House Divided.  But here is the full list:

 

#1    Lincoln’s Writings: The Multi-Media Edition

Created by participants in the “Understanding Lincoln” open online graduate course (offered in partnership with the Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History), this site (still in development) features 150 of Lincoln’s “most teachable” documents and offers a full array of multi-media resources designed to help teach them in the K-12 and undergraduate classroom.  This site is especially useful for Common Core alignments.

#2   Building the Digital Lincoln (Journal of American History)

Created as part of the Lincoln Bicentennial anniversary, this site offers a snapshot of where the “Digital Lincoln” stood as of 2009, and includes a host of examples of research and presentation tools, especially designed for serious student and academic scholars.

#3   Emancipation Digital Classroom

Created in part to help transform insights from James Oakes’s prize-winning study, Freedom National (2013) into use for the modern-day classroom, this site presents an array of primary and secondary source tools for studying the complicated but fascinating subject of emancipation and abolition.

#4  Unofficial Teacher’s Guide to Spielberg’s Lincoln

This “unofficial” guide includes access to Tony Kushner’s script, a full cast of characters (with photo comparisons to actual historical figures), and extensive analysis of the artistic license in the film and the historical reaction to Steven Spielberg’s important movie project.

#5  Lincoln-Douglas Debates Digital Classroom

This site offers a clickable word cloud of the Lincoln-Douglas Debates and host of other rare primary sources for use in studying these critical texts.

#6  Abraham Lincoln in the House Divided Research Engine

The House Divided Research Engine is a Drupal-based content management system that contains over 12,000 public domain images and tens of thousands of documents and other historical records.  The link above takes users directly to Abraham Lincoln’s main record page and offers a well-curated gateway for Lincoln research.

#7  Lincoln’s Gettysburg Addresses (Google Cultural Institute)

This short but compelling exhibit came together as part of the 150th anniversary of the Gettysburg Address and helps visitors understand the evolution of the document, including a sharp analysis of all five manuscript versions of the address in Lincoln’s handwriting.

#8  Lincoln’s Autobiographical Sketch (YouTube & RapGenius)

Dickinson College students Leah Miller and Will Nelligan helped create short but engaging tools for studying Lincoln’s most important autobiographical writing –a sketch he produced in late 1859 to help launch his presidential bid.  There is a six minute YouTube video of the sketch and an annotated edition of it through the new platform at RapGenius.

#9  Burlingame’s Lincoln Biography (Teaching Edition)

Michael Burlingame’s prize-winning Abraham Lincoln: A Life (2008) is the most important new multi-volume study of Lincoln, but it is difficult to teach because it is so lengthy.  With permission, however, from both the author and the publisher (Johns Hopkins University Press), we have created short visually enhanced excerpts from the work that focus on the election of 1860 and include clickable footnotes, allowing teachers and students to “see” Burlingame’s sources directly.

#10  Mash Up of Collected Works, Lincoln Day-By-Day, and Lincoln Papers

Created by technologist Rafael Alvarado, this mash up includes an integrated interface allowing users to see the online edition of Lincoln’s Collected Works (his known writings), Lincoln Day-By-Day (his daily schedule), and The Abraham Lincoln Papers At the Library of Congress (the bulk of his extant correspondence) for the essential “one-stop” shopping experience.  There is nothing else quite like this “timemap” available on the Internet –a must-see for serious and aspiring scholars.

no comment

1

Mar

13

Teaching Lincoln’s Autobiography in the Common Core

Posted by Matthew Pinsker  Published in Antebellum (1840-1861), Lesson Plans, Letters & Diaries

1859 Lincoln to FellIn the excitement over the new “Lincoln” movie and Daniel Day-Lewis’s Oscar-winning and truly mesmerizing performance as Abraham Lincoln, it is easy to overlook one of the very best sources of information on Lincoln’s life –Lincoln himself.  Abraham Lincoln never kept a diary or wrote a memoir, but he did craft a few, brief autobiographical sketches.  The most important of these efforts came in December 1859 at the request of a Pennsylvania newspaper (Chester County Times) that was preparing a series on potential Republican nominees for president in 1860.  Joseph J. Lewis, publisher of the Chester Times asked a mutual friend, Bloomington, Illinois attorney (and Pennsylvania native) Jesse W. Fell, to approach Lincoln for information that could be used to craft a profile.

What Lincoln produced was a 600-word document that reveals a striking amount about his background and style.  You can access a written transcript of the sketch (along with the equally revealing cover letter to Fell, where Honest Abe states confidentially, “Of course it must not appear to have been written by myself.”) along with a special audio version of the documents created for the House Divided Project by noted actor and Dickinson College theatre professor Todd Wronski. [NOTE: Just right-click on this audio link and select “Save Link As…” in order to download the audio file to your computer / network).

ahtv_1860For a Common Core-aligned assignment, students should read and listen to Lincoln’s autobiographical sketch and prepare a short informational essay that summarizes Lincoln’s life story using Lincoln’s own words.  After they have completed their essays and discussed them in class, teachers should show clips from Matthew Pinsker’s college-level discussion of Lincoln’s autobiographical sketch, which was filmed by C-SPAN’s American History TV
continue reading "Teaching Lincoln’s Autobiography in the Common Core"

no comment

30

Jan

12

We Got Punked, Lincoln Forgery-Style

Posted by Matthew Pinsker  Published in Antebellum (1840-1861), Letters & Diaries, Recent News

Alexander Stephens

It was bound to happen sooner or later.  Last week, sadly, we discovered that there was a forged document in the House Divided research engine.  David Gerleman from the Papers of Abraham Lincoln contacted us to point out that a letter supposedly written by Abraham Lincoln to Georgia politician (and future Confederate Vice President) Alexander Stephens, dated January 19, 1860, was a known Lincoln forgery.  The letter (since removed) was full of memorable and sometimes unLincolnian statements about the sectional crisis and ended with the line:  “This is the longest letter I ever dictated or wrote.”  Since Lincoln was not in the habit of dictating anything at all (especially in those pre-presidential days), this was a document that should have set off warning bells.  But it was published as part of a pamphlet that had been produced during the centennial of Lincoln’s birth in 1909 and even now remains in wide circulation on the Internet and elsewhere.  A recent scholarly article in the Tulane Law Review by John Inazu (“The Forgotten Freedom of Assembly” 2010) even began by quoting from it.  Yet there was no such exchange with Stephens. For a full discussion of the problems with the alleged January 19, 1860 document, see the article, “Four Spurious Lincoln Letters” in the Bulletin of the Abraham Lincoln Association 21 (Dec. 1930): 5-9, available online here). You can view the text of the forged document at the Internet Archive (where we apparently found it) inside a pamphlet edited by noted Lincoln collector Judd Stewart and entitled,  Some Lincoln Correspondence with Southern Leaders Before the Outbreak of the Civil War (1909).   Stewart was one of the so-called “Big Five” of early Lincoln collectors and was careless enough to fall victim to these types of scams (his collection, stripped of several other faked items, is now housed at the Huntington Library in California).  During the decades after Lincoln’s assassination, there was practically a land office business in Lincoln forgeries, and their ripple effects are still being felt today.  I exposed one of these problems in 1999 when actor Warren Beatty and journalist Jonathan Alter used a phony Lincoln quotation about the evils of big corporations that had originally been ginned up during the Populist era and continues to be quoted and re-quoted today despite numerous debunkings.  History News Network reprinted the piece in 2005 when author Kevin Phillips and historian Paul Kennedy both made the same mistake of admiring a Lincoln who sounded suspiciously like William Jennings Bryan.  What’s the lesson in all this for teachers and students?  Check your sources.  We never should have used a 1909 pamphlet for a Lincoln document when the Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln (8 vols., 1953; 1974, 1990) is the current gold standard in Lincoln’s writings (though the online Papers of Abraham Lincoln, where Gerleman works, will soon become the new AAA-rated repository for all things Lincolniana).  And always remember, when a story or document seems too “good” to be true … it just very well might be.

4 comments

11

May

11

New York Zouaves in Washington, DC

Posted by sailerd  Published in Civil War (1861-1865), Historic Periodicals, Letters & Diaries Themes: Battles & Soldiers

One hundred fifty years ago today the Cleveland (OH) Herald published a report from the Philadelphia (PA) Press on how the New York Zouaves in Washington, DC were called in to put out a fire at the famous Willard’s Hotel. As the soldiers were unable to find any ladders, the Press‘ correspondent described how:

The New York boys…sprang to the windows of the telegraph office, between the burning store and the main entrance to the hotel; from the window they raised members of the company on their shoulders to the next window, and thence they continued from window to window until the top of the building was gained – an adventure worthy of great commendation, as it was accomplished only through heroic daring and effort. Hose pipes were immediately handed up, and water applied to the flames, which had then broken out on the roof of the wing…. The New Jersey and New York men worked heroically, and a prospect of saving the main building began to be realized.

John Hay, who worked as President Abraham Lincoln’s secretary, noted in his diary that “Ellsworths Zouaves covered themselves with glory… in saving Willard’s Hotel and quenching a most ugly looking fire.” “They are utterly unapproachable in anything they attempt,” as Hay concluded. Yet almost two weeks later the New York Zouaves’ commander, Elmer E. Ellsworth, was killed after he removed a Confederate flag from a building in Alexandria, Virginia. “So much of promised usefulness to one’s country, and of bright hopes for one’s self and friends, have rarely been so suddenly dashed as in his fall,” as President Lincoln told Ellsworth’s parents. You can learn more about Ellsworth in John Hay’s “Ellsworth,” Atlantic Monthly (1861) and Ruth Painter Randall’s Colonel Elmer Ellsworth: A Biography of Lincoln’s Friend and First Hero of the Civil War (1960).

no comment

29

Apr

11

“Nothing to Fear” – William Willey at Dickinson College

Posted by sailerd  Published in Civil War (1861-1865), Letters & Diaries Themes: Carlisle & Dickinson

One hundred fifty years ago today William P. Willey wrote his father to update him on the conditions in Carlisle and at Dickinson College. Willey, who was from western Virgina, was one of the few southern students at Dickinson College who did not return home after the attack on Fort Sumter and President Abraham Lincoln’s call for 75,000 troops. While at one point “Southern students…could not walk the streets [in Carlisle] without being harassed with threats and nicknames,” Willey reassured his father there was “nothing to fear.” Willey reported that “several of the best citizens” had told him that “[he] would not be molested.”  “I feel just as safe as if I were at home,” as Willey concluded. Willey also believed it was in his best interest to stay since classes at Dickinson would continue. While “only about twenty [students were] left,” Willey explained that Dickinson College President Herman Johnson “[had] sent printed circulars to the parents” in an attempt to convince others to return. Even though “it [was] very lonesome” on campus, Willey noted that “the advantages for those remaining will only be better.” In addition, Willey described how some Carlisle residents reacted to the start of the war.  “The prominent desire seems to be… getting a hold on Jeff Davis” and, as Willey noted, “each man declares his intention of preserving an extra shot for him.” Willey also described the reaction on April 22 when reports  about an advancing “southern army” reached Carlisle:

On Monday night about 2 o’clock the report came that a southern army was marching in this direction, that they had burned Hanover, [Mount Holly Springs], and other small places beyond here, and were coming to Carlisle to take possession of the barracks, and burn the town. In about an hour the streets were alive with people. Women half dressed running through the streets with their children, men with their arms, asking the direction of the army, and before long the country people began to come with butcher knives and rusty shot guns, and I believe some of the Dutch women were clinging to the immortal broomstick. All the bells in town were ringing their loudest peal. Two persons have not yet recovered from the effects of the excitement. It was altogether the most exciting and ludicrous scene I ever saw. A few sensible citizens finally succeeded in showing the absurdity of the report and quiet was restored.

Willey was careful to remind his father that “the excitement here [in Carlisle had] abated to a considerable degree” since that event.You can listen to this letter by clicking on the play button below:

Listen to William Willey’s letter:

http://housedivided.dickinson.edu/sites/blogdivided/files/2011/04/1861_04_29_william_to_waitman.mp3

no comment
Page 1 of 1212345...10...»Last »

Search

Categories

  • Dickinson & Slavery
  • History Online
  • Period
    • 19th Century (1840-1880)
    • Antebellum (1840-1861)
    • Civil War (1861-1865)
    • Reconstruction (1865-1880)
  • Type
    • Editor's Choice
    • General Opinion
    • Historic Periodicals
    • Images
    • Lesson Plans
    • Letters & Diaries
    • Lists
    • Maps
    • Places to Visit
    • Rare Books
    • Recent News
    • Recent Scholarship
    • Recollections
    • Video
  • What Would Lincoln Do?

Project Links

  • Digital Lincoln
  • HDiv Research Engine
  • House Divided Index
  • L-D Debates Classroom
  • Lincoln in PA
  • PA Grand Review
  • UGRR Classroom
  • Virtual Field Trips
  • William Stoker Exhibit

Administration

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
Donate

Recent Post

  • Black Employees and Exclusive Spaces: The Dickinson Campus in the Late 19th Century
  • Friend or Foe: Nineteenth Century Dickinson College Students’ Perception of Their Janitors
  • Teaching Gettysburg: New Classroom Resources
  • Coverage of the Gettysburg Address
  • Welcome to Chicago: Choosing the Right Citation Generator
  • Augmented Reality in the Classroom
  • Beyond Gettysburg: Primary Sources for the Gettysburg Campaign
  • African Americans Buried at Gettysburg
  • The Slave Hunt: Amos Barnes and Confederate Policy
  • Entering Oz – Bringing Color to History

Recent Comments

  • George Georgiev in Making Something to Write Home About
  • Matthew Pinsker in The Slave Hunt: Amos Barnes and Confederate Policy…
  • linard johnson in Making Something to Write Home About
  • Bedava in The Slave Hunt: Amos Barnes and Confederate Policy…
  • Adeyinka in Discovering the Story of a Slave Catcher
  • Stefan Papp Jr. in Where was William Lloyd Garrison?
  • Stefan Papp Jr. in Where was William Lloyd Garrison?
  • Jon White in Albert Hazlett - Trial in Carlisle, October 1859
  • Pedro in Discovering the Story of a Slave Catcher
  • Matthew Pinsker in Register Today for "Understanding Lincoln," a New …

by Wired Studios, Corvette Garage, Jeff Mummert
© Content 2007-2010 by Dickinson College