Thanksgiving 1865 in Washington City

Each year during the Sesquicentennial I wrote a post focused on Thanksgiving at the corresponding time 150 years ago. I looked at holiday celebrations in camp or in the streets, hospitals, and churches of Washington and Alexandria. Now that the four-year commemoration is over, I wasn't sure what to do for this Thanksgiving. Many people are turning their attention to the aftermath of war and the start of Reconstruction so I decided to check out the Washington papers for the end of 1865, as the reunited nation prepared to observe the first Thanksgiving holiday since the end of the war.

President Andrew Johnson declared a day of national Thanksgiving for Thursday, December 7, 1865. In his Proclamation, the President reminded the American people that "it has pleased Almighty God during the year which is now coming to an end to relieve our beloved country from the fearful scourge of civil war and to permit us to secure the blessings of peace, unity, and harmony, with a great enlargement of civil liberty. . . ." He recommended that "the whole people make confession of our national sins against His infinite goodness, and with one heart and one mind implore the divine guidance in the ways of national virtue and holiness."

On December 6, the day before Thanksgiving, the Washington Daily National Republican published the following editorial:

The editorial surely reflected the thoughts of many loyal Americans about the ground the nation had traversed since the previous year and just how much the country had reason to give thanks as the end of 1865 approached. Some, however, may have disputed the characterization of President Johnson, who had just given his State of the Union address on December 4. (The speech is referenced in the article.)

Two Winslow Homer views of Thanksgiving Day, 1865 from Frank Leslie’s Illustrated:  Hanging up the Musket and The Church Porch (courtesy of streetsofsalem).

Thanksgiving in Washington City was a relatively subdued affair. As was typical in previous years, businesses were closed. The Washington Evening Star reported that "the churches were opened for divine worship, and were well attended, while the services at each were appropriate to the occasion." (Dec. 8, 1865.) The paper was also pleased to observe that "throughout the day there were fewer displays of improper conduct than usual on such festive occasions." (Dec. 8, 1865.) According to the Daily National Republican, Bostonians were nowhere near as well behaved as the "staid and proper" Washingtonians. (Dec.8, 1865.) The paper reported that during the evening in Boston, "many persons were slewed, with great carnage." (Dec. 8, 1865.) Perhaps high rates of celebratory drinking had something to do with ruining the holiday up north. In any event, whether in Washington City or elsewhere, Thanksgiving gave Americans a day of rest and relaxation as they prepared to deal with the difficult issue of reconstruction and the future of the reunited country.

On a personal note, I'd like to wish all of my readers a Happy Thanksgiving! Enjoy the good times with family and friends, eat plenty of turkey and fixings, and see you next month!

A Talk with Eugene Schmiel, Author of "Citizen-General: Jacob Dolson Cox and the Civil War Era"

A couple of years ago I had the pleasure of meeting Gene Schmiel during a Savas Beatie Author Enclave at South Mountain and Antietam. At the time, Gene was putting the finishing touches on his biography of Union Gen. Jacob Cox. The book, Citizen-General: Jacob Dolson Cox and the Civil War Era was published by Ohio University in 2014. Gene's biography received many favorable reviews and has been featured as a History Book Club Reading Selection. Gene was nice enough to take the time to answer some questions about his book and Cox. I think you'll find his responses interesting, to say the least. And if you'd like to meet Gene and hear him speak about "Jacob Cox and the West Point-'Political General' Divide in the Union Army," be sure to head to the Loudoun County Civil War Rountable next Tuesday, June 9, at 7:30 p.m.

Q. First off, tell readers a little about yourself.

A. I am a retired U.S. Department of State Foreign Service Officer who served overseas in Sweden, South Africa, Djibouti, Kenya, and Iceland. I was Charge’ d’Affaires at three embassies and Consul General in Mombasa, Kenya. I now work part-time at the State Department on international political-military and terrorism-related issues.

Before joining State, I was an Assistant Professor of History at St. Francis University (Pennsylvania). I earned my Ph.D. from The Ohio State University, where I met my wife, Bonnie Kathryn. We have two children, David and Jennifer, and five grandsons. My wife and I wrote a book in 1998 about our life in the Foreign Service entitled, Welcome Home: Who are You?  Tales of a Foreign Service Family. We live in Gainesville, Virginia

Q. Why did you choose Jacob Cox as the subject for a biography? 

A. My focus in grad school was 19th century U.S. history, and Jacob Cox’s life (1828-1900) was in many ways a microcosm of the most important developments during that era. His military career, his role in Ohio and national politics, his tenure as both a railroad and a university president, and his authorship of highly-respected histories of the Civil War all made him one of the most important figures from the era about whom no one had written a biography. He even became one of the world’s most renowned amateur microscope scientists and wrote thirty-two articles about that topic for scholarly journals. In sum, he was a “Renaissance Man in the Gilded Age.” My dissertation was the “first draft” of that biography, and my book Citizen General: Jacob Dolson Cox and the Civil War Era was the conclusion of that process.

Q. What sources helped you the most? 

A. The Cox papers at the Oberlin College archives were by far the most important. Cox was not only an avid correspondent, but also someone with a sense of history, who saved his letters and most of those he received from other prominent individuals. Thankfully, he also had good handwriting! Among other important sources were the Official Records, the papers of Cox’s contemporaries and friends such as James A. Garfield and Rutherford B. Hayes, and Cox’s writings, especially his histories and extensive number of reviews of Civil War books.

Q. How would you describe the thesis of your book?

A. In my preface I noted that in his book, The Civil War Dictionary, Mark Boatner wrote that it “might well be titled, ‘What ever happened to J.D. Cox?’” His thesis was that Cox, like many others in the war, had served well, but had been forgotten. So, in effect, my goal was to answer Boatner’s question, as follows: Jacob Cox was one of the best Northern “citizen generals” in the Civil War, an influential postwar political leader, and the ablest participant-historian of the war, one whose writings have been both recognized as authoritative and objective and quoted by serious Civil War historians ever since.

Q. How do you rate Cox among Civil War Union generals?

A. I think it would be fair to say that a consensus of Civil War historians would place Cox in the top five of the “political” generals, along with men such as “Black Jack” Logan, Joshua Chamberlain, and Alpheus Williams. [William T.] Sherman clearly agreed – he thought so much of Cox’s ability that not only offered him a chance to command the 23rd Corps on the March to the Sea, but he also offered Cox a brigadier generalship in the Regular Army at the end of the war. The fact that Sherman and Grant both suggested to President Andrew Johnson that he choose Cox as Secretary of War to resolve the dispute with Congress over the “Tenure of Office” Act is additional evidence of Cox’s abilities and reputation.

Q. What sets Cox apart from other political generals in the Civil War? 

A. One key difference was that Cox was not politically prominent before the war, having served just one term as a back bencher in the Ohio Senate. Most historians, when using the term “political generals,” point to men like Logan, Butler, and Banks, all of whom were prominent already in national or state politics, and who could “demand” senior positions and commands. By contrast, Cox worked his way up and was given increasingly important positions by the senior generals whom he impressed with his ability, e.g. Rosecrans, McClellan, Burnside, Sherman, and Schofield.

Secondly, Cox was not a self-promoter – often to his detriment.  In his letters to his wife he often expressed dismay that incompetents (both political and West Pointers) were getting good press and that others were more successful in lobbying Congress for promotions.

Third, he always sublimated his political views to military necessity.  For example, when he served under John Schofield, a Democrat, during the Atlanta, Franklin-Nashville, and North Carolina Campaigns, Cox wrote to his wife that Schofield’s views were irrelevant on the battlefield and that he would carry out his orders without question.

Fourth, whereas McClellan and Sherman, among others, looked down on volunteer officers, they seemed to make an exception for Cox, whose abilities they respected as they offered him substantive responsibilities. They knew that Cox was, as I put it in the book, the “quintessential subordinate” officer, and that they could rely on him totally.

Q. Tell us about Cox’s relationship with Gen. George McClellan. 

A. In the beginning the two were very close, but after the war, Cox adjudged both that McClellan had critical weaknesses as a commander and that he was two-faced when dealing with his subordinates and superiors.

McClellan began the war as commander of Ohio’s troops and Cox was the military chief of staff of Ohio Governor William Dennison. They clearly got along well, and McClellan was impressed by Cox’s study of military tactics and history, as well as his intellectual command of military matters. McClellan, despite his prejudice against “volunteers,” chose Cox to command troop training at Camp Dennison and gave him an autonomous command in the West Virginia Campaign.

During the Maryland Campaign, Cox’s “Kanawha Division” was the advance element of the Army of the Potomac in taking Frederick and helping win the Battle of South Mountain. At the Battle of Antietam, Cox was tactical commander of the Union left wing, and he came within minutes of sweeping Lee’s forces from the field. McClellan praised him for his efforts and supported his promotion to Major General, even as he regretted Cox’s orders that October to go back to West Virginia to push back a Confederate offensive.

Cox noted in his letters and writings that he always respected McClellan during the war and believed he was the general best qualified to command Union troops. However, when he began doing research for his book reviews and his books, he came to a very different set of conclusions. He was especially taken aback when reading McClellan’s Own Story, from which he discovered that McClellan was two-faced and inclined to blame others for his failings. While preparing his review of that book, Cox made multiple notes in the margins of his copy of the text. Among his outraged comments were, “I don’t believe a word of it”; “Quintessence of nonsense!”; “What Stuff;” and “Always a lion in the way!” In his review, his wrote that that the book was “full of blinding self-esteem,” in which “everyone is a rogue and incapable except McClellan.”

In many ways Cox’s review and his articles about McClellan in West Virginia and the Battle of Antietam in the Battle and Leaders of the Civil War, and his section on the latter battle in his Military Reminiscences set the historiographical foundation for the judgment about McClellan’s shortcomings as a commander. As he wrote in the Antietam article, noting acerbically McClellan’s claim in his memoirs that because he led the Maryland Campaign without written orders, the administration could have charged him with usurpation of command, “The suggestion of McClellan twenty years afterward that it had all been a pitfall prepared for him, would be revolting if…the absurdity of it did not prove that its origin was in a morbid imagination.” Finally, underscoring that throughout his campaigns McClellan’s army greatly outnumbered the enemy and his equipment and supplies were far better, Cox commented that “McClellan’s persistent outcry that he was sacrificed by his government destroys even that character for dignity and that reputation for military intelligence which we fondly attributed to him.”

Q. Why do you think Cox hasn’t attracted the attention of other Union generals like Winfield Scott Hancock? 

A. Not being a West Pointer, he had no major command positions, and partly as a result he suffered from what he called the problem of being a second in command and being forgotten in the writing of history. In fact, that was a key impetus to his career as an historian.

Also, Cox was what might be called “colorless.” That is, he was a staid, stoic, and unemotional intellectual who lacked the common touch.  He had been a divinity student at Oberlin, and for some time a career as a minister and professor of theology seemed likely in his future. While his men respected him, they never “loved” him in the way McClellan’s did. These characteristics made him an effective commander since he never lost control of himself and was always a voice of calm reason, even during the most tempestuous moments of the conflict – except once (see the next item).

Finally, as noted above, he was not a self-promoter, so while others sought and got the limelight, the reticent Cox always said he would rely on history to recognize his contributions.

Q. In your view, what was Cox’s most important military accomplishment during the Civil War?

A. If I had to pick one, it would be his command of the defensive line at the Battle of Franklin, November 30, 1864. His commander, John Schofield, made Cox acting commander of the 23rd Corps and most of the 4th Corps and ordered him to set up a defensive line to protect the withdrawal of troops and the wagon train on its way to Nashville. Schofield did not even visit Cox during the day, so confident was he that Cox would, as always, perform his responsibilities effectively.

When John Bell Hood decided to attack frontally at Franklin, most generals on both sides were surprised. Cox too thought Hood would try to outflank the Union forces, but having seen Hood attack frequently on the Atlanta Campaign, he decided to set up a strong bulwark against a frontal attack. The only problem was that he had to leave a gap in the line for the wagon train and withdrawing troops.  He set up a second line behind the first in case Hood did in fact attack. When that happened and fleeing Union troops, with rebels just behind them, poured through the opening, Cox faced a major challenge. At that moment, everything he had fought for and all of the contributions he had made to the Union war effort were at risk.

In the book I wrote that it was at that moment that, for one of the few times in his life, Cox dropped his stoic veneer and became an emotional “warrior” – though even then in a controlled manner. He rode to the front, waving his sword and screaming at his men to meet the challenge. But he still was calm enough to, at one point, calm his nervous horse, which was bucking wildly because of the noise. The Union forces met the challenge, and Cox’s leadership was the critical element of their success.   He was the “unsung hero” of the Battle of Franklin.

Q. What were Cox’s most enduring contributions outside of the war? 

A. Cox was the ablest participant-historian of the Civil War, and his books and articles about the war are his enduring legacy. His two-volume Military Reminiscences, in particular, is frequently cited by modern Civil War historians not only because it is a primary source, but also because Cox has been shown to be a superb historian. His books on the Atlanta Campaign, on the Battle of Franklin, and on Sherman’s March to the Sea, the Franklin-Nashville Campaign, and the North Carolina Campaign all have stood the test of time. His five articles in the Battles and Leaders of the Civil War volumes, as well as his 161 reviews of books for the Nation magazine from 1874-1900, are further evidence of the quality of his research and historical writing.

Q. Why didn’t Cox ultimately succeed in politics like some other well-known Ohioans?

A. When the war ended, most political observers would have said that Cox was someone whose rise to national political prominence was inevitable. He had a sterling war record, was one of the founders of the Ohio Republican Party, and had close friends in the national political and military leadership. Also, his home base of Ohio was important because that state was the home of five of the next six presidents, all of whom had war records (Grant, Hayes, Garfield, Harrison, and McKinley). When Cox was elected Governor of Ohio in 1865, he could have used that position as a springboard to be as Grant’s ultimate successor. (In fact Grant’s successor was Cox’s successor as governor, Rutherford B. Hayes).

Instead Cox’s established reputation as an uncompromising intellectual intent on speaking his own mind at all times proved to be his political downfall. He also lacked charisma and tended to give political speeches which were academic-oriented.  His first political problems came when he suggested in the Ohio campaign (in his famous “Oberlin Letter”) that a possible solution to the racial problems of the postwar South was the creation of a special area where blacks would be given special privileges and protected from white reaction. The practical politicians all told him to say nothing about the issue, but he insisted that he wanted to contribute to the national debate. The plan was considered too radical – even if the blacks would not be forced to go there – and political leaders now knew that Cox had a strong independent streak.

Then, as the division between Andrew Johnson and the Radical Republicans widened, Cox supported Johnson for some months, and then tried to play a peacemaking role between the two. He was soon seen as insufficiently “loyal” by both sides, and decided not to run for re-election. Finally, in 1870 Cox resigned from Grant’s Cabinet on another matter of principle, civil service reform, and became a leader of the Liberal Republican party. Its loss meant that whereas in 1865 his political future seemed wide open, by 1873, he was in permanent national political exile. He did serve one term in the House of Representatives, where he hoped to help implement the policies of his wartime subordinate, Rutherford B. Hayes, but again his stubborn commitment to principle and refusal to become a “practical politician” convinced him to leave politics.

In an introspective letter written to a friend in 1885, Cox said that he well knew that he had a golden political future in 1865, but that:

My experience of public life had probably been about as great as may come unsought to one who has stubbornness of opinion.  Enough, at best, to warrant me in thinking that I too could have cut a more prominent figure had I thought the game worth the candle…and so without disappointment or envy, regret or longing, I have been able to go my way thinking my own thoughts, advocating my own opinions, calling no mob master.

Q. How did Cox’s early Whig views influence his stance on issues like racial equality?

A. Cox’s first political affiliation was with the Whigs, which he joined just as it was undergoing its death throes in the early 1850s.  He joined the Whigs rather than the Free-Soilers, in great part because the former’s membership was representative of Anglo-Saxon elites with moderate views on slavery and its expansion. Despite Cox’s education at Oberlin College, he was not a radical on racial issues, though he was, of course, intensely anti-slavery.

Like other Whigs who joined the Republicans, he believed that blacks should be free, but that they would inevitably be second-class citizens. Unlike many Whigs, he didn’t support overseas colonization, but during the war he suggested in a letter that black soldiers who performed well might be given land in Texas which would be off-limits to whites. That idea was the germ of his proposal in the “Oberlin Letter.” Cox, who as a former divinity student and potential professor always wanted to stimulate intellectual thought, saw this as an attempt to stimulate a dialogue about possible solutions. His political friends, including Garfield, warned him not to do it, but his instinct was always to be “tutelary.” It was exactly the wrong approach at that point in his political career – he paid the price, but as noted above, he was always his own man.

Q. Are there any other Civil War books on the horizon?

A. Not for a while, if at all. I do have an article coming out in October in an Ohio history magazine, Timelines, about Cox’s near-miss at Antietam, when his forces, on the verge of taking Sharpsburg and breaking the Confederate right wing, were hit in the flank by A.P. Hill’s men and forced to halt their advance.

I also might do some articles about related topics from Cox’s life. One would be about his close friendship with Jack Casement, who was his subordinate during the war. Casement, who was the main builder of the Union Pacific Railroad, was Cox’s complete opposite in personality: brusque, abrasive, coarse, etc., but also, like Cox, a quintessential subordinate.   It was a friendship of complete opposites.
---------------------------
Thanks so much to Gene for taking the time to answer my questions. Cox is truly a fascinating subject for a biography, all the more so given his relative obscurity among Civil War generals!

Commemorating the 150th of Cold Harbor

The Overland Campaign poses a challenge to even the most ardent Sesquicentennialist. After all, the Union and Confederate armies engaged in almost continuous combat over the course of several weeks. I knew that I would never have the time to attend all of the commemorative events being planned. I went to the 150th of the Bloody Angle at the Spotsylvania Court House Battlefield on May 12, but given the craziness of this thing we call life, I wasn't sure if I would make it to any others. This past Saturday, however, I found myself with the opportunity to attend the kick off of the Sesquicentennial of Cold Harbor. So I got up early (for a weekend), jumped in the car, and drove down I-95 to the Cold Harbor Battlefield near Richmond.

The National Park Service (NPS) had arranged for shuttle bus transportation from a nearby church to the battlefield. The crowd was waiting for the bus when a police officer arrived and informed us that we could park at the site itself. Before long, I joined the caravan of cars, trucks, and SUVs driving down Cold Harbor Road.

Entrance to the battlefield, a unit of Richmond National Battlefield Park. The parking on the field next to the park began filling up early. 

I decided to do the two morning tours of the battlefield. The first looked at the soldiers' perspective of Cold Harbor, with a focus on the attack of the 2nd Connecticut Heavy Artillery on June 1, 1864. This unit had recently joined the Army of the Potomac from the defenses of Washington. As we hiked over the very ground where the fight occurred, the Park Ranger brought to life the regiment's baptism by fire at Cold Harbor.

Soldiers from the 2nd Connecticut Heavy Artillery halted in this depression before resuming their attack on the Confederate works on June 1. Enemy troops under Gen. Robert Hoke initially beat back the assault, but the 2nd Connecticut regrouped and took the Confederate line.

The tour group stops at the 2nd Connecticut Volunteer Heavy Artillery monument. The regiment lost over 330 killed and wounded during the fighting on June 1. Among those killed was the unit's commander, Col. Elisha Kellogg.

These three reenactors portraying members of the 2nd Connecticut Heavy Artillery traveled all the way from Connecticut to commemorate the regiment's sacrifices at Cold Harbor. I talked to them and discovered that they were camping near the regiment's monument for a few nights with the permission of the NPS. The men thanked the tour group for our interest in honoring the 2nd Connecticut on the occasion of the 150th anniversary of the regiment's first major engagement.

The tours were scheduled so close together so I had to depart a few minutes early and rush to join the second hike. This tour examined the historical memory, myths, and realities behind the June 3, 1864 fight at Cold Harbor. The Ranger led us to the area of the attack made by Gen. William F. "Baldy" Smith's XVIII Corps, which was one of the bloodiest and most intense parts of the battle on June 3. He helped us to understand the sheer horror of that day and explained the role that poor coordination and fatigue played in the Army of Potomac's loss. The Ranger also dispelled the notion of "Grant the Butcher."

The tour group walks over terrain that featured in the attack of the XVIII Corps on June 3. At the time of the battle an unnamed stream ran where the pond sits today.  Units from the XVIII Corps advanced generally from left to right along the ravine formed by the stream.

Looking just over the park boundary in the direction of Confederate entrenchments that greeted the XVIII Corps on June 3. The earthworks are long gone.

The tour group stops at the edge of hastily dug Union trenches. During the fighting on June 3, soldiers used canteens, tin cups and plates, and frying pans to build temporary protection.

The NPS also featured plenty of living history. The sight of Union and Confederate field encampments under the tall pines transported visitors back to 1864. Reenactors portraying Lee and Grant were even on hand. Every once in a while the sound of cannon fire would echo through the park, a chilling reminder of what was happening here on a grand scale 150 years ago.

Union encampment on the battlefield.

I spotted General Grant himself over in the Union encampment!

Reenactors portraying soldiers from Lee's army march past the remains of  Confederate earthworks on the battlefield. (I assume they were not in any way tramping on the historic entrenchments!)

Stacked arms in the Confederate encampment.

After the tours I went back to the Visitor Center to check out the various activities that were underway. I bought a requisite commemorative cover as I have for other Sesquicentennial events. Although I am far from being a stamp collector, I like having some type of keepsake from these 150th commemorations, and I just can't bring myself to buy those T-shirts they sell! I also had a chance to get my copy of Hurricane from the Heavens: The Battle of Cold Harbor, May 26-June 5, 1864 autographed by co-author Daniel T. Davis.

One of my goals while at Cold Harbor was to locate the general area where my ancestor, Pvt. William Baumgarten, fought on June 3. William was with Co. K of the 102nd Pennsylvania, which belonged to Gen. Frank Wheaton's brigade, Gen. Thomas Neill's division of Gen. Horatio Wright's VI Corps. Generally speaking, the VI Corps saw little fighting on June 3, but Neill's men made a run at the Confederate line. The 102nd Pennsylvania held the far right of the VI Corps line, and moved along with rest of Wheaton's brigade towards Confederate works held by Gen. G. T. Anderson's brigade. As Wheaton described in his after-action report:

The troops advanced with spirit, carrying the first and imperfect line of rifle-pits of the rebels running diagonally with our front; in the attempt to take the second line, however, they were repulsed with heavy loss. The One hundred and second and One hundred and thirty-ninth Pennsylvania Volunteers found cover under the rifle-pit taken, which extended over their front. (OR, 1:36:1, 689.)

The 102nd Pennsylvania and other regiments remained at the converted entrenchment until relieved by soldiers from the Vermont Brigade. Overall, the 102nd Pennsylvania lost six killed, 39 wounded, and two missing. Lt. Col. William McIlwaine, the regiment's commander, was mortally wounded, and Maj.Thomas McLaughlin suffered severe wounds. (OR, 1:36:1, 693.)

The NPS staff assisted me in trying to figure out the site where the 102nd Pennsylvania fought. After digging around and looking at a few maps, they finally determined that the 102nd Pennsylvania more than likely entered the fray a little to the south of the unnamed stream along which the XVIII Corps advanced, not far from the battlefield's Tour Stop 3. (This stream is the same one marked by the pond seen in the picture above.)

I walked out to the approximate position of the 102nd  Pennsylvania's attack and looked around. I tried to image what William was feeling at that time. Enlisting only in March 1864, he had arrived just in time for the hellacious fighting at the Wilderness and Spotsylvania. And now here  he was, once again facing the enemy. I took a moment to pause and remember my ancestor and the sacrifices he made for his country. (Note that since my visit, additional research has shed some light on a more accurate and precise position of the 102nd Pennsylvania. I will need to go back and walk around some more!)

The surviving entrenchments are one of the most striking and memorable aspects of the Cold Harbor Battlefield. I had never before seen such an extensive network of well-preserved earthworks. I took several pictures, but nothing can capture the sense of being there and seeing them for yourself. The earthen remains of the desperate struggles of June 1 and June 3 are a true national treasure.

Example of the preserved Confederate trenches at Cold Harbor.

Following my tour at Cold Harbor, I drove up the road to the Garthright House, which was used as a Union hospital during the battle. The NPS owns the house, but the surrounding land forms part of Hanover County's Cold Harbor Battlefield Park. The marker at the home tells the horrific story of how Mrs. Garthright took shelter in her basement as blood dripped through the floorboards. Around 97 soldiers were buried in the front yard and later interred at the Cold Harbor National Cemetery in 1866.

As my last stop, I crossed the road and visited the national cemetery. This small, sobering place is a reminder of the sacrifices made by the men in blue at Cold Harbor and other area battles. I checked out the Pennsylvania Monument, which is dedicated to the regiments who participated in the June 1864 battle at Cold Harbor, including the 102nd Pennsylvania. The cemetery also contains a monument to the 8th New York Heavy Artillery, as well as the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, which is dedicated to 889 unidentified Union war dead buried nearby.

The only downside of the day had nothing to do with program or sites at all. My iPhone lost power pretty fast as I downloaded photos to Twitter. I tried to recharge in my car while eating lunch, but I never got enough juice. Unlucky for me, the phone died completely just as I began to take pictures of the area where William Baumgarten and 102nd advanced and fought. If I learned one lesson, it is to take my digital camera the next time!

Overall I had a very meaningful day at Cold Harbor. Along with fellow Civil War enthusiasts, I had a chance to study and ponder the fighting that took place on this hallowed ground 150 years ago. I also explored my own personal connection to the battle and honored my ancestor who fought there. As birds sang and the scent of pine filled the air, I could hardly imagine the bloodshed that had occurred in such a tranquil and beautiful setting. But then I would look down at one of those entrenchments from so long ago and remember all too well that "it was not war, but murder."

Sources

Aside from the OR, the following sources were useful in compiling this post:

Daniel T. Davis & Philip S. Greenwalt, Hurricane from the Heavens: The Battle of Cold Harbor, May 26-June 5, 1864 (2014); Gordon C. Rhea, Cold Harbor, Grant and Lee, May 26-June 3, 1864 (2002).

Washington City's Newspapers Report on the Opening of the Overland Campaign

The 150th anniversary of the Overland Campaign has officially begun. On this day in 1864 the Union and Confederate armies fought each other in the dense woods and thick underbrush of the Wilderness. I recently looked at some articles in the Washington papers from the corresponding time period, curious as to news residents of the nation's capital were receiving about the battle. What I found was an unusually long time lag, as well as inaccuracy, confusion, and contradiction. Perhaps this is not entirely surprising. The Union Army started removing telegraph lines once the spring campaign got underway, and even the Lincoln Administration was straining to learn news of the Army of the Potomac.

As the first day of the battle raged less than 100 miles to the south, readers of the Washington Daily National Republican were greeted with a headline that the Union Army was "[a]cross the Rapidan." (DNR, May 5, 1864.) Already Gen. Robert E. Lee "has been compelled to fall back from the strong position where he has held us at bay all winter," and "[e]very hour may now bring us news of a battle. . . ." (May 5, 1864.) Likewise, the Washington Evening Star informed readers:

The belief is expressed by parties from the front that Lee has suddenly evacuated his position; and there is a report coming through Rebel sources that he is marching rapidly to meet a Federal force believed in Richmond to be moving up the peninsula under General [William F.] Smith. 

Good military judges about us however, believe that Lee means to confront [Ulysses S.] Grant directly. . . .

We may be certain from Grant's past history that his movements will be rapid and telling. (ES, May 5. 1864.)

"Major-General [James] Wadsworth Fighting in the Wilderness," Harper's Weekly, June 4. 1864, after a sketch by A.R. Waud (courtesy of sonofthesouth.net). This illustration depicts fighting on May 6. Wadsworth was mortally wounded during the battle.

The next day, the hard fighting continued in the Wilderness, but the citizens of Washington were left guessing as to events at the front. According to one report in the Evening Star, "Lee's intention is to retreat to Richmond or to make a stand near Hanover C.H." (ES, May 6, 1864.) The Daily National Republican had little additional information, but offered some commentary:

We shall be very much disappointed if the first official dispatch from Gen. Grant is not dated from the victorious plains of Spotsylvania or before the defences of Richmond. 

The killed in the battle already fought, or to be fought, in Virginia we cannot serve, but the wounded we all can help, and it behooves the citizens to prepare themselves to render all the aid in their power.  

The number must be great in such a terrible conflict as will take place whenever the armies of Grant and Lee meet. (DNR, May 6, 1864.)

Washington Daily National Republican, May 7, 1864

Finally, the May 7 papers carried news of the recent battle in the Wilderness based on a dispatch from a New York Tribune correspondent who had made his way behind the lines. The Daily National Republican, which also cited government sources, loudly proclaimed, "Grant Victorious. . . THE REBELS DEFEATED." (DNR, May 7, 1864.) The Evening Star was more cautious and spoke of "RUMOR RUN WILD":

A contemporary publishes this afternoon as information received by Government, statements that a great victory was achieved by General Grant. . . . 

We should be very glad to be able to confirm this news, but have to say that after diligent inquiry we are satisfied that Government has received no such information, or any information of more decisive results than that furnished by the Tribune dispatch elsewhere.

The fact that [Gen. George] Meade was able to stand the brunt of the Confederate onset with a portion of his command is considered a hopeful indication, and we hope soon to be able to announce a decisive victory, but we shall not trifle with our readers by manufacturing bogus victories for an hour's sensation. (ES, May 7, 1864.)

The next day, the Evening Star had reason for optimism:

The Chief Quartermaster has made a requisition for grain for the animals. This imports an advance by General Grant. . . . 

There seems to be no doubt that, although nothing decisive has yet occurred, the enemy has been foiled in his confident expectation of driving General Grant back before his operations could be fully developed, and that Lee has been compelled to give way. (ES, May 8, 1864.)

Finally, on May 9, three days after the battle had ended, the Evening Star declared Grant "VICTORIOUS" and informed readers that "Lee retreats 12 miles, leaving his dead and wounded in our hands." (ES, May 9, 1864.) By this time, however, news of another battle was starting to trickle in:

Parties in Alexandria County, yesterday, heard firing as from heavy siege guns, in the direction of Spotsylvania Court House, from 11 to 1 o'clock a.m. The distance is over 60 miles, but the day was quiet and the wind from the southwest, making it not improbable that the firing was from a battle going on yesterday between Grant and Lee. (ES, May 9, 1864.)

The Daily National Republican again rushed to declare another win:

There is reason to believe, from dispatches already received since our first extra to-day, that Lee was forced to fight at Spotsylvania on Sunday [May 8], and was again repulsed and compelled to retreat. (DNR, May 9, 1864.)

Of course, the engagement at Spotsylvania would drag on for days and prove just as inconclusive as the fight in the Wilderness had been. Grant, however, pushed onward in pursuit of Lee. Throughout the remainder of May and into June, Washingtonians continued to read about mounting casualties while praying for that ever elusive final victory over the Army of Northern Virginia. The papers would have no shortage of war news for the days and months to come.

Sources:

Noah Andre Trudeau, Bloody Roads South: The Wilderness to Cold Harbor, May-June 1864 (1989); Washington Daily National Republican, May 5, 6, 7 & 9, 1864; Washington Evening Star, May 5, 6, 7, 8 & 9, 1864.

A New Year's Day Retrospect of 1863

Watch television at the end of December or start of January and you are bound to come across a special program or two on the "year in review." Many of us like to look back at the previous twelve months and remember the people, places, and events that made the year unique. Perhaps we are motivated by nostalgia or even a deep-seated sense of history. But whatever the reason, twenty-first century Americans are not alone in reflecting on the past year as they ring in a new one.

"New Year's Day," Harper's Weekly, Jan. 2, 1864 (courtesy of sonofthesouth.net)

On January 1, 1864, the Washington Daily National Republican published "A Retrospect." The paper offered readers a review of Union military gains during 1863:

In taking a retrospect of the past year we find a record of the most brilliant successes yet achieved during the war. If we include Mufreesboro, which commenced by skirmishing on December 29, 1862, and lasted until January 4, 1863, we have among our principal victories Mufreesboro, Vicksburg, Morris Island, Gettysburg, Port Hudson, Chattanooga, Knoxville. History does not furnish a year's victories by the armies of any country in any war that will excel these.

[Braxton] Bragg was completely whipped at Mufreesboro after a week's hard fighting.

At Vicksburg General [Ulysses S.] Grant, by military manoeuvres that have no parallel, captured the rebel stronghold of the Mississippi Valley.

At Port Hudson, the last remaining post on the Mississippi, the navigation of the "Father of Waters" was opened entirely by General [Nathaniel P.] Banks.

At Morris Island General [Quincy] Gillmore astonished the world by his gunnery, captured forts the rebels deemed impregnable, put Charleston under fire, and converted the original city of the rebellion into a purgatory for traitors, where they must live in mortal fear until the town is finally wrapped in ashes.

At Gettysburg the rebels were brought to a stop in their contemplated raid, which was to destroy at one fell swoop Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Washington. The question of a Northern invasion was settled by this battle, and the future safety of the North secured.

At Chattanooga the invincibility of our armies when rightly handled was established, and the rebels cut off from their most fruitful source of supplies, East Tennessee, the fighting at Knoxville putting a clincher upon this part of the business, and deciding the fate of this most valuable region.

And then may look with satisfaction to the splendid advantages gained by General Banks in Texas; to the demonstrations made by our cavalry, showing that in this arm of the service the rebels no longer excel us.

If we turn to the operations of the navy we behold an equally pleasing record. The blockade has finally been made so nearly perfect that the rebels can no longer depend upon receiving supplies from foreign speculators, and our captures of rebel craft have been very heavy.

Our victories during the year have cost us dearly in the blood of our patriotic countrymen, but this has sanctified our cause and rendered more determined our people in the work of putting down the insurrection. Never will we yield our birthright to traitors, when so many of our kindred have died so nobly in defending it.

The paper closed the retrospect with an excerpt from "To-Day and To-Morrow" by English poet Gerald Massey:

High hopes that burned like stars sublime
 Go down the heaven of Freedom
And true hearts perish in the time
 We bitterliest need them
For never sit we down and say
 There's nothing left but sorrow
We walk the wilderness to-day
 The Promised Land to-morrow

Build up heroic lives, and all
 Be like a sheathen sabre
Ready to flash out at God's call, 
 O chivalry of labor 
Triumph and toil are twins: and aye,
 Joy s[uns] the cloud of sorrow
And 'tis the martyrdom of to-day
 Brings victory to-morrow (emphasis in original editorial).

The Daily National Republican's focus on the military successes of 1863 is not surprising. After all, when compared to a year ago and the disaster at Fredericksburg, the war was going much better for the Union, and people across the country had every reason to look back with pride. Echoing President Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, the newspaper called for a total defeat of the rebellion so that those who died preserving the Union had not died in vain. Within a few months, the pages of the Daily National Republican would carry news of Union advances and high casualties. The war would lead to even more death and destruction during 1864, but "victory to-morrow" would be within reach as the year drew to a close.

**

I'd like to wish everyone a Happy New Year, and thanks for reading in 2013! This past year has been a busy one for the blog and my other Civil War-related pursuits, and 2014 promises to be even busier. The pipeline of posts keeps growing. I also have a couple of speaking engagements later this winter and plan to work with Fairfax County on developing a new Civil War Trails marker. And then there are the multitude of Sesquicentennial activities that will be attracting everyone's attention this year. As always, see you here, and hopefully see you on the battlefield!

Sources

Gerald Massey, The Poetical Works of Gerald Massey (1861); Washington Daily National Republican, Jan. 1, 1864;

Thanksgiving 1863 in Washington and Alexandria

President Lincoln issued a proclamation in October 1863 declaring the last Thursday of November as a national day of Thanksgiving. During the countdown to the holiday, Gen. Ulysses S. Grant defeated the Confederate Army of Tennessee in a series of engagements before Chattanooga. News of the Union victories began to appear in newspapers prior to Thanksgiving Day, providing the country with even more reason to give thanks.

Last week, I discussed how the residents of Washington City and Alexandria prepared to mark the Thanksgiving holiday in November 1863. Now, on the eve of our own family celebrations, I'd like to take a look at Thanksgiving Day observances in the two cities.

People in Washington and Alexandria awoke to stunning autumn weather on Thanksgiving morning, November 26. As the Washington National Republican observed: "The day dawned bright and beautiful. The atmosphere was cool and bracing. Every heart, therefore, leaped high with joyous thrillings." (Nov. 27, 1863.) Similarly, the Alexandria Gazette reported on November 27 that "[y]esterday was one of the most delightful days -- as to weather-- we have had this fall."

The Washington Evening Star provided an overview of the holiday in the nation's capital:

Yesterday being Thanksgiving day, it was celebrated by a general suspension of business throughout the city, and in accordance with the recommendation of the authorities was very generally observed. Services of an appropriate character were held at all the churches, and all were well attended. Others celebrated the day by attendance upon one or the other of the place of amusement, all of which were open. The street cars were filled on every trip, mostly by those who took the occasion for a ride from the Navy Yard to Georgetown and intervening points. The day was indeed recognized as one justly set apart for thanksgiving and joy on account of the many victories which have recently crowned the Union arms; and when about 12 o'clock, the extra Star appeared, announcing further victories and new causes of gratulations, the public felt indeed that the day was one for the exchange of gratulations and the pouring out of devout thanksgiving. (Nov. 27, 1863.)

The Gazette was a little less verbose, but also took note of the observance of Thanksgiving in Alexandria:

Business in this place was suspended yesterday. In the Methodist Episcopal, Methodist Protestant, and Christ Church, religious services were held and addresses delivered, and collections taken up for the Federal prisoners confined in Richmond. (Nov. 27, 1863.)

The National Republican devoted considerable space to summarizing the Thanksgiving Day sermons around town. Most notably, at the Calvary Baptist Church, the Rev. T.R. Howlett "preached an eloquent and truly patriotic sermon." (Wash. Natl. Rep., Nov. 27, 1863.) He thanked God "for the glorious results of our many victories." (Wash. Natl. Rep., Nov. 27, 1863.)  The paper observed that "[o]n this point, the speaker dwelt at some length, referring to several of the most important battles, closing with the last, the glad intelligence of which so appropriately reached the ears of a grateful people this very day." (Wash. Natl. Rep., Nov. 27, 1863.) Howlett also reminded his congregation about the meaning of the war :

We should today thank God for the brightening prospects of freedom. The conflict in which we are now engaged is to settle forever the principles of the Declaration of Independence. From the womb of the storm, universal liberty is to be  born. (Wash. Natl. Rep., Nov. 27, 1863.)

"Thanksgiving-Day," Harper's Weekly, Dec. 5, 1863, by Thomas Nast (courtesy of Gilder Lehrman Institute)

The patients in military hospitals throughout the capital also had an opportunity to partake in the Thanksgiving Day festivities. As the National Republican reported:

. . . suffice it to say that a merry time was enjoyed by all -- both patients and invited guests. There was a superfluity of turkeys, roast beef, plum pudding, and all the little etceteras which go to constitute a good sumptuous Thanksgiving dinner. In the afternoon the religious exercises were held by the chaplains, and in two or three a dance was held in the evening. We venture the assertion that the inmates of the hospitals of our city yesterday spent as happy a time as was possible for the surgeons-in-charge and the noble women of our city who act as nurses could possibly make them. (Nov. 27, 1863.)

At Emory Hospital east of the Capitol, "'Do they miss me at home' was on the lips of all." (Wash. Natl. Rep., Nov. 27, 1863.) The paper described some of the day's entertainment for the convalescing soldiers:

The band of the 15th New York discoursed the most exquisite music. "Yankee Doodle" and the "Star Spangled Banner" were rendered with a spirit we have seldom seen equalled. (Wash. Natl. Rep., Nov. 27, 1863.) 

The patients even presented assistant surgeon W.H. Ensign with "a splendid silver service, a pitcher, two goblets, and salver, exquisitely and appropriately engraved." (Wash. Natl. Rep., Nov. 27, 1863.)

Across the Potomac in Alexandria, the hospitals were also filled with holiday cheer. According to the Gazette, "several of the U.S. Hospitals were decorated, and in all of them, the inmates were provided with repasts." (Nov. 27, 1863.)

As in the previous two years, Thanksgiving provided welcome relief from the everyday routine of civilian and military life in and around the nation's capital. Grant's victories made the holiday that much more meaningful and offered hope for the future. Alas, another Thanksgiving would come and go before the bloodletting would end and the U.S. flag would waive once again over the capital of a reunited country.

On a personal note, I'd like to wish readers Happy Thanksgiving! See you in December! Be forewarned, however, that due to the end of the year rush to make trade deals, things may slow a bit around here next month. Regardless, I have a few good posts in the works that I hope to share.

Sources
Alexandria Gazette, Nov. 27, 1863; Washington Evening Star, Nov. 27, 1863; Washington National Republican, Nov. 27, 1863

Preparing for Thanksgiving in Washington City and Alexandria, November 1863

Thanksgiving is one of my favorite holidays. Each year since starting the blog, I've taken a look at how the day was celebrated in and around the nation's capital at the time of the Civil War. As I wrote a few years ago, Thanksgiving was not yet a national holiday when the war began. Instead, individual states set aside a day in November to give thanks. Soldiers and civilians alike took the opportunity to observe the holiday with food, religious services, and numerous diversions.

This year marks the 150th anniversary of a key event in the history of Thanksgiving. On October 3, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln issued a proclamation designating the last Thursday in November "as a day of Thanksgiving and Praise to our beneficient Father who dwelleth in the Heavens." (Alex. Gazette, Oct. 5, 1863.) This proclamation laid the groundwork for the national holiday that we know today. (The full text of proclamation is available here.)

The country enthusiastically embraced Lincoln's call. By mid-November, the Alexandria Gazette reported:

Large preparations are making at the North for "Thanksgiving Day," 26th of November. Raisons [sic], lemons and grapes, &c., are arriving, opportunely, in vessels from Malaga, &c. (Alex. Gazette, Nov. 13, 1863.)

Residents in Washington found the stores well-stocked for the upcoming holiday. The Perpetual Market on H Street advertised the "finest lot in Washington" of turkeys and other birds for "THANKSGIVING DINNERS." (Wash. Evening Star, Nov. 24, 1863.) Meanwhile, the Philadelphia Provision Store on Pennsylvania Avenue offered for sale a "large lot of TURKIES, CHICKENS, DUCKS, and GAME of all kinds." (Wash. Evening Star, Nov. 24 1863.) A.M. Bininger & Co., also on Pennsylvania Avenue, announced "FOR THE HOLIDAYS. . . THE MOST COMPLETE ASSORTMENT OF WINE AND LIQUORS TO BE FOUND IN THE METROPOLIS." (Wash. Evening Star, Nov. 25, 1863.)

A play on President Lincoln's Thanksgiving Day Proclamation from a merchant in Washington City, Washington Evening Star, Nov. 25, 1863

Businesses adopted holiday operating hours in both Washington and Alexandria. The Gazette carried a notice informing readers that due to the "day of Thanksgiving and Prayer," the market in Alexandria would be closed on Thursday, November 26. Instead, the market would remain "open all day on the Wednesday preceding." (Alex. Gazette, Nov. 21, 1863.)  Similarly, the Center Market in Washington was scheduled to be open Wednesday afternoon, the 25th, rather than the next morning. (Wash. Evening Star, Nov. 25, 1863.) Gen. John Slough, the military governor of Alexandria, even issued a notice concerning proper commercial practices on Thanksgiving Day:

Thursday, the 26th inst., having been set apart by the proclamations of the President of the United States and the Governor of the State of Virginia as a day of thanksgiving and praise to Almighty God for his many blessings conferred on us as a people, so that the occasion may be properly observed, all citizens and soldiers in this command are notified that they will be expected, upon that day, to abstain from ordinary business pursuits except those unavoidably necessary. (Alex. Gazette, Nov. 24, 1863.)

No word on whether the provost marshal attempted to enforce Slough's notice, but whatever the case, today's big box retailers could learn a thing or two from our ancestors in 1863 about respecting the Thanksgiving holiday!

Family shopping for Thanksgiving Day turkey, c. 1860s (courtesy of PostersGuide)

The papers contained reminders of the religious nature of the holiday. Among the houses of worship in Washington, the E Street Baptist Church, the Unitarian Church, and the Wesley Chapel placed special notices about Thanksgiving Day services. (Wash. Evening Star, Nov. 25, 1863; Wash. Natl. Rep., Nov. 25, 1863.) The U.S. Christian Commission "made an appeal to the several pastors and congregations of the District to present the claims of the Commission on Thanksgiving Day, and take up a collection to aid them in their work." (Wash. Natl. Rep., Nov. 25, 1863.)

Thanksgiving Day also provided ample opportunity for fun and entertainment. The Evening Star noted that the Smithsonian Museum would be open to the public on Thanksgiving from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. (Wash. Evening Star, Nov. 25, 1863.) Those who were more theatrically inclined had the option of attending one of the many performances around town. Ford's New Theatre on 10th Street was staging "TWO GRAND PERFORMANCES" of Po-Ca-Hon-Tas, or, Ye Gentle Savage on Thanksgiving Day. (Wash. Natl. Rep., Nov. 25, 1863.) Meanwhile, "THE ENTIRE ITALIAN OPERA COMPANY OF IMPRESARIO GRAU" was performing at Grover's Theatre near Willard's Hotel (today's National Theater). (Wash. Natl. Rep., Nov. 25, 1863.) For the more adventurous and sports-minded, the Meridian Hill House uptown was hosting a "GRAND SHOOTING MATCH" with the prize of a 200-pound "live bear." (Wash. Evening Star, Nov. 25, 1863.) Readers were reminded that "street cars stop near the house."(Wash. Evening Star, Nov. 25, 1863.)

Thousands of sick and wounded soldiers filled hospitals in Alexandria and Washington. They too would have a chance to celebrate the holiday. As the Gazette observed on November 25:

Preparations are in the making at all the U.S. hospitals in this place, for the observance of to-morrow as a day of thanksgiving. Dinners and refreshments are to be furnished at all of them, and supplies have been received therefor. (Alex. Gazette, Nov. 25, 1863.)

The pages of the local newspapers in November 1863 tell the story of two cities preoccupied with preparations for Thanksgiving Day. Far away in Tennessee, Gen. U.S. Grant stood ready to break the Confederate hold on Chattanooga. By Thanksgiving, the nation would be receiving the blessings of yet another victory in a year that had already witnessed Gettysburg and Vicksburg.

Sources

Alexandria Gazette, Oct. 5, Nov. 13, 21, 24, & 25; "Thanksgiving History," Plimouth Plantation (website); Washington Evening Star, Nov. 24 & 25, 1863; Washington National Republican, Nov. 25, 1863.

A Civil War Enthusiast Visits Lexington & Concord

This summer my wife and I decided to spend our family vacation at her parents' house in Westford, Massachusetts.  On previous trips to the Bay State, wedding planning or holiday obligations had gotten in the way of visiting local sites like Lexington and Concord.  This time I had ten days on my hands and was determined to take in some history.  On the Monday before the Fourth of July, my father-in-law (whom readers may know as "the Colonel") and I jumped into his SUV and started our tour.  Most of the sightseeing naturally focused on the Revolutionary War era, but I crafted an itinerary that also promised some local stops related to antebellum America and the Civil War.

We first visited the town of Lexington, where colonial militia and British Regulars clashed on April 19, 1775.  The Colonel and I strolled around the Lexington Green and viewed several Revolutionary War monuments and markers.  I felt incredibly moved to be standing on the very ground where the fight for independence began.  As we walked behind the Buckman Tavern, I spotted a memorial "dedicated to the memory of those who served aboard a ship named Lexington."  Erected in 1988 by the Lexington Lions Club and the USS Lexington CV-16 Association, the monument contains five markers, each one dedicated to a vessel that carried the name "Lexington."  As to be expected, the marker for the Civil War-era Lexington caught my eye.  This timberclad gunboat participated in major battles and campaigns in the Western Theatre, including Ft. Henry, Ft. Donelson, Shiloh, and Vicksburg.

Marker dedicated to the timberclad gunboat Lexington.

We next drove from Lexington to the Minute Man National Historical Park.  Here we viewed a film about the famous Revolutionary War engagements and visited a few landmarks along the Battle Road, including Paul Revere's capture site.  I was reminded of the Henry Wadsworth Longfellow's 1860 poem, "Paul Revere's Ride," which served as a rallying cry for the Union in the days leading up to the Civil War.

The remainder of our tour was spent in and around Concord.  This town is best known as the site of the "shot heard 'round the world."  However, during the mid-19th century, Concord was home to several famous writers and intellectuals.  Many of these individuals held strong anti-slavery views, and the town became known as a center of the abolitionist movement.  Amos Bronson Alcott, father of Louisa May Alcott, was a reformer, teacher, and writer.  A friend of abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison, he protested against the implementation of the Fugitive Slave Act and even opened his home to runaway slaves.  Poet and essayist Ralph Waldo Emerson spoke publicly against the evils of slavery.  Philosopher Henry David Thoreau wrote his famous essay Civil Disobedience (1849) after being arrested for failing to pay taxes in opposition to the Mexican War and slavery. 

Many of Concord's leading thinkers supported abolitionist John Brown and provided money for his cause.  Brown visited Concord in 1857 and again in 1859.  When Brown was captured in the raid on Harpers Ferry, Thoreau came to his defense in a speech that was later published as A Plea for Captain John Brown.

The Colonel and I stopped to visit a few homes that figured in the literary and abolitionist history of Concord (see photos below).  We had limited time, so I could not take docent-led tours, but I am sure that I will be back in future years!  Another must-do on the return trip is the walking tour of African-American and abolitionist history sites put together by the non-profit Drinking Gourd Project.  The Project is also creating an African-American and Abolitionist History Center in a restored cabin that once belonged to Caesar Robbins, a freedman and Revolutionary War veteran.

The Wayside in Concord, which today is part of Minute Man National Historical Park.  The Alcotts resided here from April 1845 to November 1848.  The home, called "Hilldside" by the Alcotts, served as a stop on the Underground Railroad.  Two fugitive slaves stayed here on their way to Canada during the winter of 1846-47.  Author Nathaniel Hawthorne also lived at the Wayside from 1852 until his death in 1864.  Hawthorne, unlike many of his neighbors, was not entirely sold on the idea of abolition.  After a trip to Washington in March 1862 to meet with military and civilian leaders,  Hawthorne penned an essay entitled, "Chiefly About War Matters."  The piece, published in the July 1862 issue of The Atlantic, was critical of the war and earned Hawthorne the scorn of many readers. 

The Orchard House, where the Alcotts resided from 1858 to 1877.   The house is next door to the Wayside.  While living here, Louisa May Alcott decided to volunteer as a nurse for the Union Army.  She headed to Washington in December 1862, where she served until falling ill with typhoid pneumonia in January 1863.  Returning to Concord, Alcott recovered and wrote Hospital Sketches, a book about her experiences as an army nurse.  Originally published as a four-part series in a Boston weekly, the story was released as a book in August 1863.  Alcott also wrote Little Women (1868) while residing at Orchard House.

The Ralph Waldo Emerson House, located not far from the Wayside and Orchard House in Concord.  Emerson resided here with his second wife from 1835 until his death in 1882.

The Colonel and I next made our way into the center of Concord to check out the main attraction on Monument Square.  Like many New England towns, Concord erected a monument to its native sons who died in the Civil War.  At the dedication ceremony on April 19, 1867, Ralph Waldo Emerson delivered an address in which he recalled the central role of emancipation in the war:

Every man was an abolitionist by conviction, but did not believe that his neighbor was. The opinions of masses of men, which the tactics of primary caucuses and the proverbial timidity of trade had concealed, the war discovered; and it was found, contrary to all popular belief, that the country was at heart abolitionist, and for the Union was ready to die.

The Soldiers' Monument in Concord, proclaiming "Faithful Unto Death."

Detail of one of the sides of the Soliders' Monument listing the names of those with Concord connections who died in the Civil War.

After lunch and a beer at the historic Colonial Inn, my father-in-law and I drove to the North Bridge.  The site, part of Minute Man National Historical Park, marks the spot where British and colonial forces clashed on April 19, 1775.  The famous statue of the Minute Man by Daniel Chester French sits at one end of the bridge.  President Ulysses S. Grant attended the dedication ceremony for the statue during the Centennial celebration of the Battles of Lexington and Concord in 1875.

Minute Man at the North Bridge.  The sculptor, Daniel Chester French, is also famous for his statue of President Abraham Lincoln at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington. 

The North Bridge sits close to the Old Manse.  Emerson's grandfather built the home in 1770 and witnessed the battle from his window.  While living here from 1834-35, Emerson wrote Nature, an essay which gave birth to Transcendentalism.   Hawthorne and his wife also called the Old Manse home from 1842-45.

The Old Manse near the North Bridge.  Emerson's grandfather died in 1775.  His grandmother remarried the Rev. Ezra Ripley, and the family continued to reside in the house.  Bronson Alcott and Thoreau often visited the Hawthorne and Ripley families at the Old Manse.

We made our last stop at Sleepy Hollow Cemetery, not far from Monument Square in Concord.  Established in 1855, this burial ground contains the graves of many of the town's most prominent citizens.  As I walked through the cemetery and looked over the sloping hillsides, I noticed the large number of graves belonging to Civil War veterans.  Each resting place was marked with an American flag.  I reflected on just how dramatic an impact the war had on a place like Concord.  Far removed from the battlefields in the South, this New England town experienced much sacrifice and loss during four years of war.

Perhaps the most fitting symbol of Concord's ultimate contribution to the Union cause is the Melvin Memorial, known also as Mourning Victory.  James C. Melvin commissioned the memorial in honor of his three brothers who had died in the Civil War.  All three belonged to Company K of the 1st Massachusetts Heavy Artillery, which manned the defenses of Washington before being sent to the front in the spring of 1864.  John Heald Melvin died at a military hospital at Ft. Albany (in Arlington, Va.) on October 13, 1863, while Asa Heald Melvin was killed at Petersburg on June 16, 1864.  Samuel Melvin, who was captured at Harris's Farm, Virginia on May 19, 1864, later died at Andersonville in September 1864.  (Incidentally, all three names are also on the Concord Soldiers' Monument, as seen in the picture above.)

The Melvin Memorial at Sleepy Hollow Cemetery.  Daniel Chester French, a longtime friend of James Melvin, created the memorial.  Three tablets on the base of the memorial commemorate each of James Melvin's brothers who died in the Civil War.  The dedication ceremony in 1909 was held on the anniversary of Asa Melvin's death at Petersburg.  Eighty-eight members of the 1st Massachusetts Heavy Artillery attended the ceremony, along with twenty members of the Old Concord Post of the Grand Army of the Republic.

 

A closer view of the relief sculpture of Victory in mourning, draped in the American flag.

After visiting the Melvin Memorial, I walked to Authors Ridge to see the graves of Concord's famed intellectual and literary community.  The hill is the final resting place for Bronson and Louisa May Alcott, Emerson, Hawthorne, and Thoreau.  The latter two died and were buried during the Civil War.  I was fascinated to see that many modern-day visitors have left behind mementos in honor of their favorite authors.

The Alcott family grave site at Sleepy Hollow Cemetery.  Louisa May Alcott's grave is marked by a flag to honor her wartime service as a nurse.

The graves of James C. Melvin and John H. Melvin at Sleepy Hollow Cemetery.  James Melvin served with the 6th Massachusetts Infantry.  Asa Melvin, killed at Petersburg, is buried in an unknown grave in Virginia, while Samuel Melvin is interred at Andersonville National Cemetery.

Following Sleepy Hollow, the Colonel and I headed back to home base.  The all-day tour not only taught me a thing or two about the Revolution, but also satisfied my craving to explore Massachusetts history during the Civil War era.  If you stop and look around, the war surrounds you everywhere in Concord.   In some ways, the town that helped to ignite the Revolution was at the forefront of a new one.  And the headstones and monuments speak to the high price that the community paid to preserve the Union and end slavery.

Sources

Aside from the links provided above, the following sources were useful in compiling this post:

Concord (Mass.), Ceremonies at the Dedication of the Soldiers' Monument in Concord, Mass. (1867); Concord Free Public Library, "Address at the Centennial of the Concord Fight, 1875" (2003); "Famous (and Infamous) Authors: Nathaniel Hawthorne: Clashes with Editors," The Atlantic; National Park Service, Soldiers and Sailors Database; Alfred S. Roe (ed.), The Melvin Memorial, Sleepy Hollow Cemetery, Concord, Massachusetts: A Brother's Tribute: Exercises at  Dedication, June 16, 1909 (1910); Robert Sattelmeyer, "Miss Alcott Goes to War," Civil War Times, April 2012; Richard Smith, "Concord and Captain John Brown," The Concord Magazine, March-April 2001.