Researching Civilians and the War in Northern Virginia: Local Resources

The amount of Civil War source material available on the Web can seem downright overwhelming.  As a blogger and amateur historian, I have access to information that would have required countless trips to libraries and archives only a handful of years ago.  Google Books and the Internet Archive have reproduced a multitude of regimental histories and period writings, while universities and historical societies have digitized newspaper articles and soldiers' letters.  In a time of such virtual riches, it is perhaps easy to forget that an entire world of primary and secondary sources still awaits the researcher on library shelves and in archival boxes.

I recently began some in-depth research on the impact of the Civil War on civilians in Fairfax County.  Given the relatively obscure nature of the subject matter, the limits of the digital age quickly became apparent to me.  As much as I enjoy the freedom of researching from my living room couch at any hour of the day or night, I realized that a trip to a couple local libraries was in order.  Lucky for me, Northern Virginia is blessed with abundant resources for Civil War researchers.

Mary Riley Styles Public Library in Falls Church, which houses the Local History Room (courtesy of the Falls Church Times).

I started my search at the Local History Room of the Mary Riley Styles Public Library in Falls Church.  This cramped but cozy space in the basement of the library contains a small reference collection on the history of Falls Church.  The Local History Room is only open by appointment, and times slots are limited, so I had to run out one Saturday during my twins' nap time.  I mainly went to get a copy of an article on the Langley Ordinary from an old issue of Echoes of the Past, a publication of the Pioneer Society of America.  The Local History Room is one of the few places around here to have 1970s-era editions of Echoes of the Past.  I also spent some time just browsing through one of the vertical files on the Civil War.  Needless to say, I came across a few interesting items, including an invitation and pass received by John Hay to attend a dance at a Union Army camp in Virginia.  These materials will surely form the basis for further research and related blog posts.

Last week I paid a visit to the impressive Virginia Room at the City of Fairfax Regional Library.  This part of the library, which occupies an entire floor, holds an extensive collection of items related to regional history and genealogy, including books, manuscripts, old photographs, and maps.  According to the Virginia Room's website, "a particular strength is Confederate military history."  Unfortunately, I didn't have a chance this time around to view these materials because my research was directed more to the civilian side of things.

City of Fairfax Regional Library, home of the Virginia Room (courtesy of Costello Construction).

The Virginia Room offers access to the monumental, seven-volume set entitled, Fairfax County in 1860: A Collective Biography by Edith Moore Sprouse.  This work contains profiles of nearly every inhabitant of Fairfax County in 1860 based on Census records, Southern Claims Commission (SCC) files, and other sources.  An accompanying map, which was compiled by Beth Mitchell, shows property ownership in Fairfax during the same time period.  (The map is also available here.)  I wonder how many other counties in the United States have put this much effort into taking a snapshot of their communities right before the war, but I am grateful that Sprouse and Mitchell did so for Fairfax.   The two historians also assembled three volumes of abstracts of SCC claims for Fairfax County.  These summaries are a useful guide to the sometimes cumbersome original files. 

The Virginia Room has a vast collection of local newspapers available on microfilm.  These papers are indispensable for local Civil War research, and I believe that many of them are not yet digitized.  I viewed and copied articles from 1863 editions of the Alexandria Gazette.  The library offers an on-line "Historical Newspaper Index" that I searched before going to the Virginia Room.  This step saved me time, and I was able to retrieve the reel and just copy what I needed.

I also spent an hour or so looking through vertical files on a couple of local historical landmarks.  The files, which are available from a reference librarian, contain journal articles, newspaper clippings, research notes, and other documents.  If there is a historic property in Fairfax, I am sure that the library has compiled a file on it. 

My visit was made all the more pleasant and productive thanks to the helpful, friendly, and knowledgeable staff.  I wrote to the Virginia Room a few days before going there and received a multitude of useful hints and insights.  Once on the ground, a couple of reference librarians helped to point me in the right direction and provided some additional information.

Fairfax County and Falls Church have done a commendable job of preserving the historical record for current and future generations.  I would recommend the Local History and Virginia Rooms for anyone with a research interest in Northern Virginia's Civil War past.  After my recent visits, I know that I won't be able to stay away; the existence of so many resources at my doorstep is just too tempting.

Note

For more information about visiting the Falls Church Local History Room and Fairfax County's Virginia Room, follow the links provided in the text above.

Improving Historical Interpretation at Ft. Ethan Allen

A couple years ago I took a tour of the Civil War forts of Arlington.  During the excursion, I learned that the county would be making much-needed improvements to the site of Ft. Ethan Allen, but timing seemed uncertain.  Built in the fall of 1861, the fort guarded the approaches to the strategic crossing of the Potomac River at Chain Bridge.  Today several earthworks survive and are preserved as part of Ft. Ethan Allen Park.  Unfortunately, visitors will find little in the way of interpretation aside from a couple historical markers.  (See here and here.)  All of this is about to change.

One of the existing historical markers at the entrance to Ft. Ethan Allen Park.  The remains of the fort's southern face can be seen in the background.

In 2011 Arlington provided $473,000 in funds to develop interpretive features at Ft. Ethan Allen Park.  The Arlington County Department of Community Planning, Housing, and Development has responsibility for the project, and the plans for the site were recently posted on-line.  According to a presentation by Arlington County, construction and installation of the new interpretative elements should be complete by late November 2013.  Arlington will recreate one of the fort's gun emplacements, complete with a 20-pounder Parrott.   Several markers will be placed across the site to explain different aspects of the fort, including the existing remains of the guard house, bombproof, and powder magazines.  The county will also install a 3-D model of Ft. Ethan Allen along with a memorial to the soldiers who garrisoned the fort.  If what Arlington did at Ft. C.F. Smith is any guide, we should be very excited to see the final results.

Remains of the bombproof at Ft. Ethan Allen

Arlington commissioned the project management firm Versar to conduct an archaeological survey of the impact of the planned improvements on the historic site.  The archaeologists investigated three locations where the county intends to place the interpretive features.  According to Versar's final report, the team "found little new evidence of Fort Ethan Allen’s past. . . ."  Unfortunately, "much of the ground surface has been significantly altered during the course of the 20th century."  The archaeologists discovered a few Civil War artifacts, including lead bullets, but "all of these appeared to have been moved around in the years since they were initially dropped or lost."  They also located the probable location of the fort's well, which was filled with rubble sometime last century.  Versar considered that "[t]he most significant surviving elements of the original fort appear to be the massive remains of the earthworks themselves clearly visible on the surface."  The report concluded that the interpretive elements "were unlikely to disturb any intact cultural deposits or features" and recommended that the 3-D model and memorial "be placed and constructed to avoid the well. . . ."* 

The improvements to Ft. Ethan Allen are a welcome addition to the park, which currently suffers from a lack of sufficient interpretation when compared to other local sites like Ft. C.F. Smith in Arlington and Ft. Ward in Alexandria.  Starting this fall, Ft. Ethan Allen will become an even more compelling destination in Northern Virginia for those interested in the defenses of Washington.  I will be sure to keep readers informed as the project at Ft. Ethan Allen progresses throughout the year.

Note

*One of the best parts of the report is the digital recreation of Ft. Ethan Allen and environs.  (See p. 14.)  I only wish I had such computer graphics skills!

Langley Gets Its Marker Back (And Some Parking Spots Too)

Langley, Virginia saw its fair share of activity during the first fall and winter of the Civil War.  I've written extensively about Camp Pierpont, which played home to the Pennsylvania Reserves from October 1861 to March 1862.  This encampment covered the rolling farmland along the Leesburg-Georgetown Turnpike (today's Georgetown Pike, or VA-193) near Langley.  Gen. George A. McCall, commander of the Reserves, used the Langley Ordinary as his divisional headquarters.  Today, the area around Georgetown Pike and Chain Bridge Road in Langley is designated as the Langley Fork Historic District and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and the Virginia Landmarks Register.

A couple years ago, I wrote a walking tour for those interested in seeing the Civil War-related sites in Langley, which is part of present-day McLean.  The on-line Historical Marker Database indicated that a Langley Fork state marker was located along Georgetown Pike next to the village. I searched for that marker in vain when I was doing on-the-ground research for the tour and concluded that it must have been removed.  I am glad to report that the marker is now re-installed along the pike.  The state also built a pull-off area next to the marker, complete with twenty-two parking spots. The money came from a $300,000 federal transportation grant, which was administered by the Virginia Department of Transportation.  Fairfax County and the Fairfax County Park Authority each chipped in $75,000 for the project.  The full story can be found here, in the McLean Connection.

The newly re-installed Langley Fork historical marker, which was originally placed along Georgetown Pike in 1998.

A view of the marker and pull-off, looking west.  The Georgetown Pike runs to the left of the photograph.  Langley Fork is located at the top of the distant hill.  The pull-off will be landscaped once the weather turns warmer.

The pull-off will make viewing the marker a little easier, but be warned that competition for those new spots will be fierce.  Clemyjontri, the ever-popular children's park, is right across the street, and parents frequently experience a shortage of parking spaces there on weekends.  Families with eager youngsters are likely to take the spots at the pull-off, so it is probably best to come early on weekends, or during a weekday.  (In fact, the parking lot has a lot more to do with Clemyjontri than heritage tourism.)  The pull-off is also a good place to leave your car if you want to walk around the historic district.  And, of course, I view the location as the perfect spot to install a new marker on Camp Pierpont and the Pennsylvania Reserves!

Postscript

This Monday I submitted an update to the Historical Marker Database indicating the new pull-off.  Click here to see the entry, including some photographs of the various buildings in Langley.

Mosby at Lewinsville: August-September 1861

A few notable figures passed through the tiny village of Lewinsville, Virginia during the first year of the Civil War. At the Battle of Lewinsville on September 11, 1861, Col. Jeb Stuart led a small Confederate force against a much larger contingent of Union soldiers under Col. Isaac Stevens. Stuart, who won a brigadier's commission in part because of his actions at Lewinsville, rode on to become one of the most celebrated Confederate cavalry commanders of the war. Stevens, who later commanded a division in the Army of the Potomac, lost his life at the Battle of Chantilly the following September while leading his men against Stonewall Jackson's troops. Other well-known generals also have a connection to the village of Lewinsville and environs, including Winfield S. Hancock, George McClellan, and "Baldy" Smith.

All of this got me thinking. I had heard somewhere that partisan ranger John S. Mosby also fought at Battle of Lewinsville in the days before he became the famed "Gray Ghost of the Confederacy." This story always seemed the stuff of local legend to me, so I recently set out to discover whether Mosby actually participated in the engagement.

John S. Mosby rose to command the 43rd Battalion, Virginia Cavalry, better known as "Mosby's Rangers" (courtesy of Wikipedia)

Before the Civil War, Mosby practiced law in Bristol, Virginia. During the winter of 1861, he volunteered for a militia company known as the Washington Mounted Guard. At the outset of hostilities, Mosby, then a private, and his fellow troopers joined other Virginians preparing for the fight in the Shenandoah Valley. The Washington Mounted Guard was assigned to the 1st Virginia Cavalry as Company D under Capt. William E. "Grumble" Jones. Stuart was given overall command of the regiment.

A Brush with Death Near Lewinsville

The 1st Virginia Cavalry saw action at First Manassas in July 1861 and spent the remainder of the year on outpost duty along the Confederate lines in Northern Virginia. Mosby later recalled his time as a mounted sentinel:

We had to go on picket duty three times a week and remain twenty-four hours. The work was pretty hard; but still, soldiers liked it better than the irksome life of the camp. I have often sat alone on my horse from midnight to daybreak, keeping watch over the sleeping army.  (Mosby, Reminiscences, 14.)

At the end of August 1861, Mosby was assigned picket duty on the road running from Falls Church to Lewinsville with one or two other troopers.* The men were under orders from Capt. Jones to fire on anyone making an approach from outside the Confederate lines. Unbeknownst to the pickets, a second Confederate detachment had galloped down a different road towards Lewinsville on a mission to arrest an alleged spy. The group made the mistake of returning by the same road where Mosby was stationed without alerting the pickets in advance.

Awakened from his slumber by the sound of approaching hoof beats, Mosby mounted his horse and opened fire into the rainy night. Alarmed by the flash of the carbine, Mosby's horse bolted away, tripped over a sleeping cow, and fell on top of him. As Mosby remembered his injuries, "I was bruised from head to foot, and felt like every bone in my body had been broken." (Mosby, Reminiscences, 15.) The Confederate cavalrymen carried Mosby to Falls Church and eventually sent him in an ambulance to Fairfax Court House. As Mosby lay unconscious, Capt. Jones apparently looked at him and "swore harder than the army in Flanders." (Mosby, Reminiscences, 15.) The following week, Mosby recounted the episode in a letter to his wife Pauline, telling her that the accident "came near killing me." (in Mosby, Memoirs, 88.)

Mosby at the Battle of Lewinsville

Not long after his unfortunate spill, Mosby joined Stuart in the attack on Stevens at Lewinsville. On September 11, cavalry pickets alerted Stuart to the presence of enemy soldiers in and around the village. Stuart advanced towards Lewinsville with 305 soldiers of the 13th Virginia, a detachment of the 1st Virginia Cavalry, and two guns of Thomas Rosser's Washington Artillery. (OR, 1:5, 183.) Stuart pounced on Stevens and harassed his retiring column with artillery fire. The Union troops eventually reached the safety of their own camp near Chain Bridge.

Mosby described his experience at Lewinsville in a letter to Pauline dated September 1861.**  He wrote:

The Enemy had come up with three thousand men, artillery, etc. to Lewisville [sic], one of our picket stations; when we got there they were still there.*** Three men of our Company (including myself) were detached to go forward to reconnoitre. Col. Stewart [sic] was with us. While standing near the opening of a wood a whole regiment of Yankees came up in full view, within a hundred yards of me. Their Colonel was mounted on a splendid horse and was very gaily dressed.**** I was in the act of shooting him, which I could have done with ease with my carbine, when Col. Stewart told me not to shoot, — fearing they were our men. . . .  I never regretted anything so much in my life as the glorious opportunity I missed of winging their Colonel. We went back and brought up our artillery, which scattered them at the first shot. I never enjoyed anything so much in my life as standing by the cannon and watching our shells when they burst over them.  (in Mosby, Memoirs, 90.)

If Mosby is to be believed, Stevens came close to losing his life almost a year before he was fatally shot at Chantilly! In any event, Mosby's contemporaneous account demonstrates that he was present at Lewinsville during the fight. Now when I drive by the site of the skirmish, I can't help but think that before he rode to fame and glory with his Rangers, Mosby was engaged in more conventional warfare just around the corner from my house.

Notes

*This road was likely current-day Great Falls Street, which runs from VA-29 (Lee Highway) in Falls Church to the intersection with VA-123 (Dolley Madison Blvd.) in McLean. In a September 2, 1861 letter to his wife, Mosby stated that "there were only three of us at our post."  (in Mosby, Memoirs, 88.)  However, in his Reminiscences, Mosby noted that he was on picket duty "with one other."  (Mosby, Reminiscences, 15.)

**The exact date is missing from the transcription.

***Mosby exaggerated the Federal strength.  Stevens' force consisted of around 1,800 men.  (OR, 1:5, 169.)

****Mosby presumably means Col. Stevens.

Sources

John S. Mosby, The Memoirs of Colonel John S. Mosby (1917); John S. Mosby, Mosby's War Reminiscences and Stuart's Cavalry Campaigns (1887); James Ramage, Gray Ghost: The Life of Colonel John Singleton Mosby (1999); Jeffy D. Wert, Mosby's Rangers (1991); James Joseph Williamson, Mosby's Rangers: A Record of the Operations of the Forty-Third Battalion of Virginia Cavalry from Its Organization to the Surrender (1909 ed.)

The Year Ahead, Plus Some Odds and Ends

As the new year gets underway, I find myself thinking about the direction of the blog in 2013.  Things have been off to a pretty slow start due to a hectic personal and professional schedule over the last few weeks as well as a cold and stomach bug.  I also was busy preparing for a recent Civil War lecture to the McLean Historical Society.  That being said, I am planning on an active year for the blog.  Here are just a few of the topics I'd like to cover:

*As I did last year, I plan to look at the lives of civilians impacted by the war in Northern Virginia.  I have a literal backlog of items to cover on this topic.

*I also want to continue discussing the units that manned the defenses of Washington, particularly in Northern Virginia, so look for more posts in what I call the "Defenders of Washington" series.  I've started research on some of the regiments, but many more remain.

*It probably goes without saying that I will examine events that happened around Northern Virginia in 1863, the corresponding year of the Sesquicentennial.  Of particular interest is my recent discovery of contraband camps that sprung up in Langley in late spring 1863.  John S. Mosby really got going around here in 1863, so I may look at his activities from time to time.

*I have a lot of additional topics to cover concerning the early war in my neck of the woods, so bear with me as I periodically go back to 1861 and 1862.  In fact, next week's post will talk about a famous participant in the Battle of Lewinsville.

*As usual, I plan to visit and report on Civil War sites both near and far.  Here in Fairfax, for example, I just learned of a new property near Alexandria that is worth checking out.  I also hope to make trips to Chancellorsville and Gettysburg.  I'd like to visit before the big Sesqui crowds hit the scene.  (I'm embarrassed to admit it, but I haven't been to Gettysburg in many years, so I am looking forward to that pilgrimage!)  I will be sure to offer my readers thoughts on touring the famed battlefields.

*I will continue writing about my antique newspaper and book acquisitions. I have my eye on a few first editions and am saving up the cash.  I hope that this year will bring a lot of welcome additions to my library.

*I've also been toying with the idea of writing a law review article on slavery and emancipation.  If I do so, then I will report on the direction of my research.

This list is by no means exhaustive.  And I also realize that some of these topics will take a bit of intensive research.  In those instances, I may need to sacrifice the quantity of posts for the quality, so forgive me if I am not as prolific as I could be! 

Some Odds and Ends

*My lecture to the McLean Historical Society on the Civil War encampments in McLean was video recorded and can be viewed here.

Captiol, 1863, showing work on the statue of Freedom atop the dome (courtesy of USA Today)

*The recent Inauguration of President Obama was replete with Civil War references and symbolism.  John Rudy and Kevin Levin have both done an excellent job of pointing out some of the connections to our Civil War past.  (See here and here.)  Like John, I was particularly struck by Senator Charles Schumer's opening remarks, which touched on the significance behind the completion of the Capitol dome in 1863.  I'd urge you to read the full speech here.  As I watched the Inauguration, I couldn't help but think of the armed struggle for freedom that helped pave the way for where we are today.  A little over 150 years after the Emancipation Proclamation, Americans saw an African-American sworn in as President for a second term.  Very few moments in contemporary life can bring the meaning of the Civil War alive as much as the Inauguration did for me on Monday. 

A Review of Lincoln (Finally!)

A few weeks ago, I finally had the chance to see Steven Spielberg's acclaimed film about our sixteenth President. Bloggers and academics, along with film critics, have already reviewed and analyzed Lincoln many times over, but like any good blogger, I thought I would offer my two cents. (See below for links to some of the reviews and commentary.) Before I saw the movie, a friend had asked me whether I would post a review on my blog. I wasn't sure. After leaving the theatre, however, I couldn't help but feel compelled to write down a few observations and impressions.

I once read that you are either a Civil War buff, or a Lincoln buff, but not both. I've never been a big Lincoln aficionado. That being said, I admire and respect Lincoln and count him among one of my favorite Presidents. I eagerly anticipated this film and was not disappointed. The movie offers what is probably the most realistic portrayal ever done of President Lincoln.  Daniel Day-Lewis, who just won a Golden Globe for his remarkable performance, shows the man as I imagined him to be from all the period descriptions and biographical accounts that I have read. His lankiness, high pitched voice, keen intellect, good-natured sense of humor, and political savvy were all there. We may never come this close to meeting a President who lived so long ago. The movie also delivers on other characters, like the radical and sharp-tongued Thaddeus Stevens (Tommy Lee Jones) and the cranky Edwin Stanton (Bruce McGill).

But Lincoln also does something more; Spielberg's movie magic proves that time travel is possible. The film transported me back to early 1865. I felt surrounded by the sights and sounds of the time. The scene of Lincoln traveling through the streets of Washington depicted the nation's capital as I've always pictured the city to be during the Civil War -- more rough and tumble, dirty, and unsophisticated than anything, and a far cry from today's mix of federal grandeur and urban hipness. The lighting of interiors, whether at the Executive Mansion, on the House floor, or in private homes or taverns, reminded me that life was a lot darker in the days before electricity. Spielberg also captured the complexity of the times. You feel the weight of the momentous issues facing Lincoln, Congress, and by extension, our country, as you watch the movie. Emerging from the multiplex into a suburban mall filled with teenyboppers sending text messages and the smells of fast food, I felt strangely disoriented, like I didn't belong. The film had altered my sense of time and place for two and a half hours. If I watch the movie again and again, it is in part because I want to go back and visit.

Some historians have taken Lincoln to task for failing to depict the entire story of emancipation. Kate Masur, for instance, wrote in the New York Times that "Mr. Spielberg’s 'Lincoln' helps perpetuate the notion that African Americans have offered little of substance to their own liberation." She also worried that the film "reinforces, even if inadvertently, the outdated assumption that white men are the primary movers of history and the main sources of social progress." Masur and other critics miss the point. Lincoln is not a movie or documentary about the entire history of emancipation in America, nor was it intended to be. Rather, it focuses on just one facet of that story--the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment by the U.S. House of Representatives and the role that Lincoln played in that momentous decision. 

Critics like Masur fail to understand the movie for another reason too. Recall that before the Civil War, the Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. Constitution protected slavery. Lincoln, a lawyer by profession, recognized the shaky legal foundations of the Emancipation Proclamation as a war measure. The document also had limited reach. The President knew that in a nation of laws built upon the Constitution, an amendment to our most sacred of secular texts was required to seal the fate of slavery once and for all. Abolitionists, contraband seeking refuge behind Union lines, emancipationist generals, prior congressional acts, and the liberating advance of the Federal armies all contributed significantly to the demise of slavery. But without a change to our most fundamental of laws, the future of emancipation was not yet secure. The Thirteenth Amendment, passed by a Congress that was anything but diverse, placed the legal nails in the coffin of slavery, and set in motion a constitutional revolution to guarantee equal rights under the law. The action was a necessary step in destroying the peculiar institution, and Lincoln makes this abundantly clear. (See Andy Hall's post on a masterful scene where Lincoln explains the legal necessity of the Thirteenth Amendment.)

Lincoln is a captivating and powerful film. Spielberg brings our sixteenth President to life on the big screen and tells a key part of the story on emancipation. Lincoln enables the audience to visit the past like no other film I have seen. We feel as though we are there as events are unfolding. I am sure that the film has inspired more than a few people to study the Civil War and Lincoln more closely. Lincoln will surely become a defining part of our sesquicentennial remembrance.  If you haven't yet seen the movie, you can't miss it.  And if you have already gone, I wouldn't be surprised to see you sitting there again, next to me.

Other Reviews and Commentary

Andy Hall
Keith Harris
Bernard Kempinski
Kevin Levin (Atlantic article synthesizing some posts from Kevin's blog)
Michael Lynch (here, here, here,and here)
John Rudy
Donald Shaffer
Harry Smeltzer

McLean Historical Society: Follow-Up on Speaking Engagement

As readers are aware, this past Tuesday I spoke before the McLean Historical Society (MHS) about the Union Army encampments in the McLean area during the first fall and winter of the Civil War.  I am extremely grateful that the MHS invited me to talk about this topic, which has been one of the main focuses of this blog.  All told, around 50 people turned out for the event.  It warmed my heart to see that so many people were interested in learning about the Civil War camps in my part of Northern Virginia.  The audience was not strictly "local" either.  At least one Facebook fan from DC showed up, along with a member of the neighboring Bull Run Civil War Roundtable.

A few people in the crowd were also descendants of families who lived in this area during the mid-19th century.  Dan Smoot's ancestor, Jacob Smoot, owned Salona at the time of the Civil War.  Jacob, a Southern sympathizer, fled Salona with his family and moved to Georgetown.   He was also arrested by Union authorities early in the war.  Gen. "Baldy" Smith used Salona as his divisional headquarters, and the Vermont Brigade encamped on and around the Smoot property.  (The present-day owner of historic Salona was also present).  Doug Mackall is the descendant of William W. Mackall, a Confederate general who lived in the McLean area after the war.  The home of Doug's distant relative, Dr. Richard Mackall, became brigade headquarters for Gen. Winfield Scott Hancock.  The DC area is often viewed as transient, but people like Dan and Doug remind us that some families have deep roots dating back more than 150 years.  Who could have imagined that in 2013 a transplant from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania would be speaking about local citizens who were so deeply affected by the Civil War in front of their very descendants? 

Detail from 1862 Union Army map showing the area where the divisions of "Baldy" Smith and George McCall established Camps Griffin and Pierpont, respectively.  The Mackall and Smoot properties are plainly visible in the center of the map.

The audience engaged in a lively Q&A session, and I also had time to speak one-on-one with some of the attendees following the main event.  A woman from McLean informed me that just the other day she found three Civil War bullets in her yard!  Others told me about some recent relic discoveries on a large plot of land near my house which apparently confirm the existence of a Union Army campsite.  Another attendee alerted me to a book about the experiences of the Comte de Paris, who served on George B. McClellan's staff.  Entitled Voyage en Amérique 1861-1862 : Un prince français dans la guerre de Sécession (2011), the book devotes considerable attention to the Comte's time in Northern Virginia.  I plan to order a copy soon and see what gems I can uncover.  I'll let readers know in future posts. 

This was my second time speaking before the MHS, and I enjoyed every minute of it.  I also walked away with some interesting stories and insights from those who attended.  Thanks to all who came to hear about the camps!

Upcoming Speaking Engagement: Civil War Camps of McLean

I wanted to let readers know that I will be speaking to the McLean Historical Society (MHS) on Tuesday, January 8.  Paul Kohlenberger, the president of that organization, graciously invited me to give a talk on the Civil War encampments in the McLean, Virginia area.  This will be my second speaking engagement before the MHS, and I look forward to sharing what I have learned while researching and writing about Camps Advance, Griffin, and Pierpont.  Camp Advance served as the Union Army's initial foothold in Virginia near Chain Bridge.  Camps Griffin and Pierpont played home to over 20,000 boys in blue from October 1861 to March 1862.  I plan to discuss the origins and locations of these camps.  I will also take a look at life in the camps, including such topics as daily army routine, military reviews, foraging expeditions, distractions and amusements, food and shelter, sickness and hospitals, and the impact on civilians. 

I hope to see you next week in McLean!

Event Details

Where:
McLean Community Center
1234 Ingleside Avenue
McLean, Virginia 22101

Date and Time:
Tuesday, January 8 @ 7:30 pm

The event is free of charge, and no reservations are required. For more information, see here.

Christmas in Washington 1862: A Dinner for the Sick and Wounded

As Christmas of 1862 approached, Elizabeth Smith, the wife of Interior Secretary Caleb B. Smith, was busy organizing a holiday dinner for patients of the military hospitals in and around Washington.  Following the carnage at Fredericksburg, many wounded soldiers were transported to the nation's capital for treatment.  Their presence added to the numbers of the Union Army's sick and wounded who were already recuperating in Washington.   Theses men faced the sad reality of Christmas away from loved ones back home, and Smith and others like her were determined to bring some holiday cheer to the hospital wards.

Smith and her fellow volunteers raised donations from across the Union to help defray the cost of the Christmas meal.  The New York Times noted that "a large outlay will of course be required," and informed readers that "[a]ny sums left with United States Marshal MURRAY, at his office in Chambers-street, will be duly acknowledged and forwarded to Washington."  (N.Y. Times, Dec. 10, 1862.)  The City of Philadelphia alone raised three thousands dollars, while the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad "volunteered to transport supplies over their road free of charge."  (Daily Morning Chronicle (Wash., D.C.), Dec. 25, 1862, in Hay & Hill at 294-95.) 

The editors of the Daily National Republican (Wash., D.C.) could barely contain their enthusiasm on Christmas morning:

To-day, this city is to witness a scene never witnessed  here before--the Christmas dinner to the sick and wounded soldiers in the hospitals, got up under the auspices of Mrs. Secretary Smith and the noble ladies associated with her in this grand Christian effort.  (Daily National Republican, Dec. 25, 1862.)

The Cleveland Morning Leader described the grand Christmas event for readers:

Accounts say that nowhere else in the world than in America could have been seen the sight which made this holiday remarkable and memorable--the banqueting of 35,000 wounded and sick soldiers upon a Christmas dinner, spread by the hands of individual benevolence.

Tables were set and abundantly and elegantly covered in the largest wards of the different hospitals.  The room were ornamented by volunteer hands with evergreens and flowers.  Volunteer waiters, gentlemen and ladies of the first families in the land, tenderly and devotedly served the wounded warriors in every hospital, waiting first on those too injured to be moved to the tables.  (Cleveland Morning Leader, Dec. 29, 1862.)

The dinner also provided the soldiers with entertainment and a chance to rub elbows with some of Washington's bigwigs:

To make the festive occasion more complete in most of the hospitals, hired or volunteer singers sang songs of home and country; in others, members of Congress and Cabinet officers made speeches happily fit to the occasion, and moved socially among the tables.  (Cleveland Morning Leader, Dec. 29, 1862.)

President Lincoln and the First Lady even visited the sick and wounded soldiers at several of the hospitals.  The couple "rejoiced the hearts of the brave volunteers . . . with their presence and soothing and consoling words."  (Daily National Republican, Dec. 27, 1862.)  The pro-Administration Daily National Republican noted:

Many were the exclamations heard of "Honest man, God bless you;" "Here is one volunteer who prays for your long life and happiness;" "May Heaven protect you;" "Providence must have selected you to rule us in such an hour" . . . . (Daily National Republican, Dec. 27, 1862.)

"Washington, D.C. Mess hall at Harewood Hospital heated by elaborate stoves" (courtesy of Library of Congress).

The Cleveland Morning Leader reported that "[o]ver seven thousand turkeys and chickens were consumed at this novel Christmas dinner."  (Cleveland Morning Leader, Dec. 29, 1862).  The paper explained that "this immense amount of poultry came mostly from Maryland and Pennsylvania, but four car loads of it came all the way from Chicago."  (Cleveland Morning Leader, Dec. 29, 1862.)  In addition, "[t]hree hundred turkeys, sent from ever-generous Albany, came cooked and ready for the table."  (Cleveland Morning Leader, Dec. 29, 1862.) 

Given the magnitude of the event and the number of actors, there were a few glitches.  The Daily National Republican stated that "[i]n some of the hospitals. . . through the non-arrival of a portion of the supplies. . . there was delay and annoyance."  (Daily National Republican, Dec. 27, 1862.)  Moreover, "in one or two cases the unaccommodating spirit and incompetency of the officers in charge, had a very unpleasant effect."  (Daily National Republican, Dec. 27, 1862.)  Overall, however, Mrs. Smith and her volunteers pulled off quite the organizational feat.  As the Daily National Republican exclaimed, "the ladies have every cause for gratulation and praise."  (Daily National Republican, Dec. 27, 1862.)

The Christmas dinner in Washington's military hospitals offered a grateful nation the opportunity to do something for the men who were fighting to put down the rebellion.  The year had proven a very difficult one, and there were two more wartime Christmases yet to come.  Violent and savage battles, as well as sickness and disease, had already extracted a heavy toll in suffering and death.  At least on this one day, the sick and wounded soldiers in and around Washington could try to enjoy a little holiday cheer and hope for the time when they would be reunited with loved ones.

"Santa Claus in Camp," Harper's Weekly, Jan. 3, 1863 (courtesy of sonofthesouth.net)

Finally, I'd like to wish all of my readers Happy Holidays!  As always, thanks for taking the time to visit and read the blog.  See you in 2013!

Sources

"Bridging the River," National Review, Dec. 24, 2007; Cleveland Morning Leader, Dec. 29, 1862; Daily National Republican, Dec. 25, 1862; Daily National Republican, Dec. 27, 1862; N.Y. Times, Dec. 10, 1862; John Hay & Douglas Hill, An Idler: John Hay's Social and Aesthetic Commentaries for the Press During the Civil War, 1861-1865 (2006);

"Baldy" Smith's Division and Dranesville

Today marks the 151st anniversary of the Battle of Dranesville.  I've written a few times about this engagement that pitted Gen. E.O.C. Ord's brigade of Pennsylvania Reserves against a smaller force under Gen. Jeb Stuart.  I even authored the lead piece on the battle for the Civil War Trust's website.  Not too long ago historian John Hennessy sent me a period newspaper article that has shed some additional light on the events surrounding the fight at Dranesville.

Ord's men, accompanied by the famed Bucktails and a force of artillery and cavalry, set off from Camp Pierpont in Langley, Virginia during the early morning hours of December 20, 1861.  Gen. George A. McCall, commander of the Pennsylvania Reserves, ordered Gen. John F. Reynold's brigade to follow in support.  Ord ran into Stuart's men at the tiny hamlet of Dranesville, and a brisk fight ensued.  Reynold's troops, who were stopped at Difficult Run along the Leesburg-Georgetown Turnpike (VA-193), marched towards the battlefield.  Gen. George G. Meade's brigade of Reserves also left Langley and headed down the pike to Dranesville.  Both brigades arrived too late to participate in the fight, which resulted in a Union tactical victory.

The role that Reynolds and Meade played (or did not play) is well known.  Thanks to the article that John Hennessy sent my way, I recently learned that the Gen. William F. "Baldy" Smith's division also got involved in the day's events.  Smith's men were quartered for the winter at Camp Griffin, in the same general vicinity as Camp Pierpont (today's McLean, Virginia).  His command included the Vermont Brigade and another brigade under Gen. Winfield S. Hancock.  According to a December 24, 1861 account from a soldier-correspondent of the 6th Vermont:

On Thursday last, Gen. McCall had a fight with some 8000 of the enemy.*  About one o'clock, on that day, our brigade was drawn up, together with Gen. Hancock's brigade, the batteries of [Capt. Thaddeus] Mott and [Capt. Romeyn] Ay[res], also some Maine regiments, for the purpose of proceeding to the scene of action and if possible to flank the enemy on their retreat. ** We marched at a rapid pace some ten or twelve miles in the vicinity of Hunter's Mills and Drainsville [sic], but come to a sudden halt on account of a bridge being burnt.  All we had to do was to "about face" and march back, reaching camp a little before eight, tired enough to rest.  The next morning at four we were tramped out on picket. ("A March," Vermont Journal (Windsor), Jan. 4, 1862, courtesy of John Hennessy.)

This article intrigued me, as I didn't recall coming across any references to Smith's men playing a role, however remote, in the engagement at Dranesville.  I at once searched for additional references and found a letter that Corporal Dan Mason, Co. D, 6th Vermont sent to his fiancee, Harriet B. Clark.  The facts in this correspondence closely track the details from the Vermont Journal article.  On December 27, 1861, Mason wrote:

I dare say you have heard of the battle at Drainsville a few days since We heard the firing from our camp. Gen McCalls division of Penn soldiers went out in the morning on a foraging & scouting expedition (this Div is encamped about a mile north of our camp) Our division started about 2 oclock P M. to assist them if nessessary We marched 12 miles we came to a branch of the Potomac the rebels had burned the bridge so that we were compelled to face about & march homeward the boys were in the best of spirits until the order to about face came. that made them look disappointed quite a number fell out by the way & were picked up the ambulances which follow an army to pick up those that are wounded or sick & are not able to march. . . . (spelling and grammar as in original; courtesy of Vermont Historical Society, On-Line Collection of Dan Mason Letters.)

Co. D, 6th Vermont Volunteer Infantry at Camp Griffin (courtesy of Library of Congress)

Both of these accounts explain that the march to Dranesville was interrupted when Smith's men stumbled upon a destroyed bridge.  Given that the Pennsylvania Reserves moved freely back and forth along the Leesburg-Georgetown Turnpike, including the portion that crosses the Potomac tributary of Difficult Run, it appears that Smith's men took a different route towards Dranesville.  Their line of march towards Dranesville may have continued due west from Camp Griffin (today's McLean) in the direction of Hunter's Mills, or could have turned northwest onto the Leesburg-Alexandria Turnpike (current VA-7).  Both routes passed over creeks, and Confederate soldiers may very well have burned the bridge at any of the crossings.  (For a detailed map, see here.)

The mobilization of Smith's men on the afternoon of December 20 makes sense.  A fight had erupted at Dranesville between a Union brigade and a Confederate force of unknown size.  As word reached the camps around Langley, Smith took action to render assistance to the Pennsylvania Reserves.  Of course, Ord beat Stuart without needing help from other brigades.  In any event, Smith's men were blocked at the site of a burned down bridge, and it is unclear how much they could have contributed that day.

Notes

*The Battle of Dranesville occurred on a Friday, not a Thursday.  The correspondent greatly exaggerated the size of Stuart's force, which consisted of 1,600 infantry, 150 cavalry, and a four-gun battery of artillery.  (OR, 1:5, 490.)
**"Our brigade" means the Vermont Brigade.  Two Maine regiments --the 6th and 7th Maine-- belonged to Smith's division. The 6th Maine was part of Hancock's brigade.  (See George B. McClellan, Report on the Organization and Campaigns of the Army of the Potomac (1864).)