DOCSLIB.ORG

Archaeological Investigations at the Carter House State Historic Site, Franklin, Tennessee

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Archaeological Investigations at the Carter House State Historic Site, Franklin, Tennessee ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS AT THE CARTER HOUSE STATE HISTORIC SITE, FRANKLIN, TENNESSEE 2010 ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS AT THE CARTER HOUSE STATE HISTORIC SITE, FRANKLIN, TENNESSEE by Samuel D. Smith and Benjamin C. Nance with contributions by Emanuel Breitburg Fred M. Prouty Robert Daniel Royse Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation Division of Archaeology Report of Investigations No. 14 2010 ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS AT THE CARTER HOUSE STATE HISTORIC SITE, FRANKLIN, TENNESSEE Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Archaeology Report of Investigations No. 14 Published 2010 The cover image is from a painting by Don Troiani entitled "Opdycke's Tigers," showing the intense fighting around the Carter House on November 30, 1864. It was provided courtesy of Don Troiani, www.historicalimagebank.com. Pursuant to the State of Tennessee’s policy of non-discrimination, the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation does not discriminate on the basis of race, sex, religion, color, national or ethnic origin, age, disability, or military service in its policies, or in the admission or access to, or treatment or employment in its programs, services or activities. Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action inquiries or complaints should be directed to the EEO/AA Coordinator, Office of General Counsel, 401 Church Street, 20th Floor L & C Tower, Nashville, TN 37243, 1- 888-867-7455. ADA inquiries or complaints should be directed to the ADA Coordinator, Human Resources Division, 401 Church Street, 12th Floor L & C Tower, Nashville, TN 37243, 1-866-253-5827. Hearing impaired callers may use the Tennessee Relay Service (1-800-848-0298). Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Authorization No. 327248, 500 copies. This public document was promulgated at a cost of $6.31 per copy. March 2010. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Figures vi List of Tables x Introduction 1 Acknowledgments 3 Historical Background 5 The Carter House During the Civil War 13 Carter House Site Buildings and Features 25 Main House and Yard Features 25 Wing Addition to the Main House 35 The “Office” 36 The Smokehouse 39 Brick Kitchen 41 Moved Log Building 43 “Log Outhouse” 43 Building at End of Wing 44 Building Northwest of End of Wing 44 Building West of Smokehouse 44 Addition at Southwest Corner of Main House 45 Slave Houses 46 The Cotton Gin 46 Miscellaneous Outbuildings 48 The West Tract 51 The North Tract 53 Excavation Projects 55 The 1988 Project 55 Results of the Main House Excavation 59 Results of the Smokehouse Excavation 66 Results of the Well Excavation 67 The 1991 Project 67 The 1998 Project 69 Results of the 1998 Project 71 West Tract Post-Excavation Information 75 West Tract Conclusions 75 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page Carter House Artifact Analysis 77 Introduction 77 Civil War Military Artifact Group 77 General Information for Civil War Arms in Use at the Battle of Franklin 80 Civil War Military Artifacts Recovered at the Carter House in 1988 85 Arms and Ammunition 85 Military Equipage 107 Uniform Items 112 Additional Items 115 Civil War Military Artifacts Recovered at the Carter House in 1991 116 Kitchen Group 117 Ceramics 117 Bottles and Glassware 122 Tableware 123 Kitchenware 124 Tinware 124 Stove Parts 124 Architectural Group 124 Flat Glass 124 Nails and Spikes 127 Door Parts 129 Construction Hardware 129 Furniture Group 130 Furniture Hardware 130 Arms Group 130 Clothing Group 131 Buckles 131 Thimbles 132 Buttons 132 Scissors 132 Straight Pins, Awls 132 Hook and Eye Fasteners 134 Glass Beads 134 Other Clothing Items 134 Personal Group 135 Coins 135 Keys 135 Writing Materials 136 Other Personal Items 136 Tobacco Pipe Group 136 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page Activities Group 136 Construction Tools 137 Toys 137 Fishing Gear 137 Storage Items 137 Ethnobotanical 137 Stable and Barn 137 Miscellaneous Hardware 138 Wire 138 Other Activities 138 Unidentified Metal Objects 138 Amorphous Metal 138 Miscellaneous Modern 139 Other Materials 139 Summary and Conclusions 141 Appendix A – Faunal Remains from the Carter House, Franklin, Tennessee 143 Appendix B – Carter House Cartridge Examinations 157 Appendix C – Prehistoric Artifacts Found at the Carter House 163 Appendix D – Civil War Period Military Artifacts Recovered from the Executive Residence in Nashville, Tennessee 165 Bibliography 177 Authors Cited 177 Other Sources 189 A List of Publications and Reports Concerning Civil War Archaeology, Focusing on Battlefield Archaeology 191 v LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Plan of entrenchments and troop positions during the Battle of Franklin 18 2 Enlargement of Carter House area from the map in Figure 1 19 3 Plan of the Federal defenses in the Carter House area 20 4 Map showing known and probable locations of buildings on the Carter House site 26 5 Whole view and close-up of a cake plate with an image of the Carter House as it is supposed to have looked before its stepped parapet gable ends were removed 27 6 Ca. 1884 photograph of the Carter House, facing south 28 7 View of the Carter House facing southeast (1909) 29 8 View of the Carter House facing southwest (1909) 29 9 View of the Carter House facing slightly west of north (1909) 30 10 View of the Carter House from the south showing its relationship to Columbia Pike 30 11 Undated view of the front of the Carter House 31 12 View of the Carter House and grounds from the south (1923) 32 13 Front view of the Carter House, ca. 1936 32 14 Back yard area of the Carter House, ca. 1930s 33 15 Photograph labeled “The Carter House circa 1940” 34 16 Recent photograph of the Carter House well 35 17 Recent photograph of the north face of the main house and wing 36 18 Photograph of the “office” at the end of the Carter House ell 37 19 Ca. 1909 photograph of the “office” at the end of the west wing showing bullet holes in what during the Civil War was its south side 38 vi LIST OF FIGURES (continued) Figure Page 20 Recent photograph of the “office” showing its bullet scarred south side 38 21 The Carter House smokehouse with attached property line fence 39 22 View of the bullet-scarred south side of the Carter House smokehouse 40 23 Members of a 1910 Civil War veterans reunion posing in front of the south side of the Carter House smokehouse 40 24 Recent photograph of the brick kitchen, facing northwest 41 25 Portion of a 1928 Sanborn map showing the Carter House and its smokehouse and kitchen buildings 42 26 Recent photograph of back yard area with the brick kitchen, the “office,” the smokehouse, and the moved in log building 43 27 View of the south end of the Carter House showing a semi- detached addition adjoining the southwest corner, ca. 1940s 45 28 Portion of an 1863 map showing what is assumed to be the Carter cotton gin to the east of the road that is Columbia Pike 47 29 A sketch of the Carter gin and cotton press as they appeared after the Battle of Franklin, drawn by former Union soldier Frank Baltischwiler 47 30 Undated photograph of the Carter cotton gin 49 31 Photograph of the Carter cotton gin viewed from Columbia Pike, facing northeast (late 1870s or early 1880s) 49 32 Franklin High School football field on what is referred to in this report as the West Tract 52 33 A 1964 picture of the Franklin Rodeo being held on the West Tract 52 34 Photograph of Franklin High School before 1956 54 35 Base map showing 1988 excavation units 56 36 View of the Carter House (facing southwest) after completion of first series of 1988 excavation units 57 vii LIST OF FIGURES (continued) Figure Page 37 View of the Carter House (facing northwest) after completion of the first series of 1988 excavation units 57 38 Front side of the Carter House after removal of intervening units south of the front steps, showing the lean-to shelter under construction 58 39 Map showing features recorded during the 1988 excavation 64 40 Completed Square 80N825E at south edge of the Carter House smokehouse 66 41 Square 206N828E, adjacent to the Carter House well 68 42 Cluster of dropped Williams Cleaner bullets found in the Carter House well unit (Square 206N828E) 68 43 Carter House backyard area showing sections of sidewalk between the back of the Carter House and the Kitchen 69 44 Map showing excavation units in the West Tract in relation to the main Carter House tract and the North Tract 70 45 Distribution of Civil War Military Artifact Group artifacts, excluding artifacts from features 89 46 Conical bullet types 90 47 Round ball type bullets 90 48 Examples of impacted bullets 91 49 Examples of mutilated bullets 91 50 Distribution of dropped bullets, excluding those from features 92 51 Distribution of impacted bullets, excluding those from features 93 52 Cartridge and cartridge casing types 99 53 Distribution of cartridge casings and one intact cartridge, excluding those from features 100 viii LIST OF FIGURES (continued) Figure Page 54 Percussion caps 103 55 Distribution of percussion caps, excluding those from features 105 56 Probable canister or case shot from an artillery shell 106 57 Gun Parts 107 58 Possible percussion cap tins 108 59 Cartridge box tins 109 60 Military Equipage items 111 61 Military buttons 113 62 Token stamped Holmes, Booth and Haydens – Waterbury, Ct. 115 ix LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Buildings Associated with the Carter House 25 2 1988 Excavation Project Features 60 3 Artifacts from West Tract Test Excavations 72 4 Distribution of Carter House Artifacts by Provenience 78 5 Distribution of 1988 Civil War Military Artifact Group Artifacts by Provenience 87 6 Distribution of Civil War Military Artifacts from Sidewalk Areas 116 7 Distribution of Ceramics by Provenience 118 8 Distribution of Flat Glass by Provenience 126 9 Dating Formulas Applied to Flat Glass Samples 126 10 Distribution of Nails by Provenience 128 11 Distribution of Buttons by Provenience 133 x INTRODUCTION The Carter House, on the south edge of Franklin, Tennessee, is best known for its role in the Civil War Battle of Franklin, which began on the afternoon of November 30, 1864.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 'The Lightning Mule Brigade: Abel Streight's 1863 Raid Into Alabama'
    H-Indiana McMullen on Willett, 'The Lightning Mule Brigade: Abel Streight's 1863 Raid into Alabama' Review published on Monday, May 1, 2000 Robert L. Willett, Jr. The Lightning Mule Brigade: Abel Streight's 1863 Raid into Alabama. Carmel: Guild Press of Indiana, 1999. 232 pp. $18.95 (paper), ISBN 978-1-57860-025-0. Reviewed by Glenn L. McMullen (Curator of Manuscripts and Archives, Indiana Historical Society) Published on H-Indiana (May, 2000) A Union Cavalry Raid Steeped in Misfortune Robert L. Willett's The Lightning Mule Brigade is the first book-length treatment of Indiana Colonel Abel D. Streight's Independent Provisional Brigade and its three-week raid in spring 1863 through Northern Alabama to Rome, Georgia. The raid, the goal of which was to cut Confederate railroad lines between Atlanta and Chattanooga, was, in Willett's words, a "tragi-comic war episode" (8). The comic aspects stemmed from the fact that the raiding force was largely infantry, mounted not on horses but on fractious mules, anything but lightning-like, justified by military authorities as necessary to take it through the Alabama mountains. Willett's well-written and often moving narrative shifts between the forces of the two Union commanders (Streight and Brig. Gen. Grenville Dodge) and two Confederate commanders (Col. Phillip Roddey and Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest) who were central to the story, staying in one camp for a while, then moving to another. The result is a highly textured and complex, but enjoyable, narrative. Abel Streight, who had no formal military training, was proprietor of the Railroad City Publishing Company and the New Lumber Yard in Indianapolis when the war began.
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter 3
    x Frederick H. Hackeman CAMP 85 June 2018 A Message From the Commander Brothers, As we break for the Michigan summer months, we will have some activities that I hope many of our Brothers can attend and support. Coming up this month (June) will be the Three Oaks Flag Day parade. Brother Truhn has offered his trailer to tote those of us that might have an issue in walking the prade route - like me. We’ll have two banners and two magnetic sigs to place on the trailer and vehicle to ‘announce’ our presence. We’ll also place our camp lag/ banner and have a period correct Amrican Flag. This looks to be a fun day with the day begin- ning at 3 p.m. Our mustering will be much earlier to ensure that we get into the correct slot. Then in July, Three Oaks is the location for the Civil War Days event on July 28 and 29. War There will events all day long each day. Brother Chamberlain and wife, Faye, will be two of the presenters on Saturday. Battle re-eactments are also scheduled each day for those partici- pating - and those spectators. I will have a tent set up (and camping there overnght) with a table set up for information pamphlets. I would ike to see some of you to stop by while you are taking in the various activities and sit with me to talk to the interested public. Remember, we’re always looking to recruit new members ! Commander to Page 5 In this Issue Page 1 - Commander’s Message Page 2 - Berrien County in the War Page 3 - May Meeting Minutes Page 3 - Alonzo Goodenough Veterans of the Civil Page 4 - Civil War Time Line Page 6 - Upcoming Events Page 11 - Battle of Fort Pillow Sons of the Union Camp Communicator Next Camp Meetings September 20, 2018 - 6 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil War in the Delta: Environment, Race, and the 1863 Helena Campaign George David Schieffler University of Arkansas, Fayetteville
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 8-2017 Civil War in the Delta: Environment, Race, and the 1863 Helena Campaign George David Schieffler University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Schieffler, George David, "Civil War in the Delta: Environment, Race, and the 1863 Helena Campaign" (2017). Theses and Dissertations. 2426. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/2426 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Civil War in the Delta: Environment, Race, and the 1863 Helena Campaign A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History by George David Schieffler The University of the South Bachelor of Arts in History, 2003 University of Arkansas Master of Arts in History, 2005 August 2017 University of Arkansas This dissertation is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. ____________________________________ Dr. Daniel E. Sutherland Dissertation Director ____________________________________ ____________________________________ Dr. Elliott West Dr. Patrick G. Williams Committee Member Committee Member Abstract “Civil War in the Delta” describes how the American Civil War came to Helena, Arkansas, and its Phillips County environs, and how its people—black and white, male and female, rich and poor, free and enslaved, soldier and civilian—lived that conflict from the spring of 1861 to the summer of 1863, when Union soldiers repelled a Confederate assault on the town.
    [Show full text]
  • Major General George H. Thomas at Nashville
    From Harpers Weekly FORT DONELSON CAMP No. 62 SUVCW Volume 17 Issue No. 2 Spring 2011 Major General George H. Thomas at Nashville While Grant grappled with Lee in On December 15, Thomas, unaware Virginia and Sherman gutted the eastern that Grant intended to fire him, roared out of Confederacy, Gen. George Thomas was sent his works against Hood. In two days his troops back to Tennessee to reorganize the stripped- crushed the Rebel army. His infantry, including down Army of the Cumberland and deal with two brigades of U.S. Colored Troops, smashed CS Gen. John Bell Hood. The Confederate into Hood's troops while the Union cavalry, general had gotten away from Atlanta with dismounted with its fast-firing Spencers, curled some 40,000 troops and evaded Sherman's around and behind the Rebel left. Later, effort to catch him. Now he was marching north historian Bruce Catton summed up the battle in through Tennessee. Thomas' Federals under two words: "Everything worked." John Schofield slowed and badly damaged the Thomas "comes down Rebels in the fierce battle of Franklin, but by in in History ... as the great December Hood was dug in on the high Defensive fighter, the ground facing Nashville. Thomas fortified the man who could never be city while he gathered strength for a decisive driven away but who blow, but to carry it out he needed more men, was not much on the horses and supplies. offensive. That may be a Grant, 500 miles away, grew impatient. correct appraisal," wrote He sent telegrams urging Thomas to move, Catton, an admirer and then ordered him to "attack at once." Thomas biographer of Grant."Yet said after the war that he was tempted— Gen.
    [Show full text]
  • The Other Side of the Monument: Memory, Preservation, and the Battles of Franklin and Nashville
    THE OTHER SIDE OF THE MONUMENT: MEMORY, PRESERVATION, AND THE BATTLES OF FRANKLIN AND NASHVILLE by JOE R. BAILEY B.S., Austin Peay State University, 2006 M.A., Austin Peay State University, 2008 AN ABSTRACT OF A DISSERTATION submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of History College of Arts and Sciences KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY Manhattan, Kansas 2015 Abstract The thriving areas of development around the cities of Franklin and Nashville in Tennessee bear little evidence of the large battles that took place there during November and December, 1864. Pointing to modern development to explain the failed preservation of those battlefields, however, radically oversimplifies how those battlefields became relatively obscure. Instead, the major factor contributing to the lack of preservation of the Franklin and Nashville battlefields was a fractured collective memory of the two events; there was no unified narrative of the battles. For an extended period after the war, there was little effort to remember the Tennessee Campaign. Local citizens and veterans of the battles simply wanted to forget the horrific battles that haunted their memories. Furthermore, the United States government was not interested in saving the battlefields at Franklin and Nashville. Federal authorities, including the War Department and Congress, had grown tired of funding battlefields as national parks and could not be convinced that the two battlefields were worthy of preservation. Moreover, Southerners and Northerners remembered Franklin and Nashville in different ways, and historians mainly stressed Eastern Theater battles, failing to assign much significance to Franklin and Nashville. Throughout the 20th century, infrastructure development encroached on the battlefields and they continued to fade from public memory.
    [Show full text]
  • Read Book Stonewall of the West : Patrick Cleburne and the Civil War
    STONEWALL OF THE WEST : PATRICK CLEBURNE AND THE CIVIL WAR PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Craig L. Symonds | 328 pages | 01 Oct 1998 | University Press of Kansas | 9780700609345 | English | Kansas, United States Stonewall of the West : Patrick Cleburne and the Civil War PDF Book The main focus of Symonds' work is on Cleburne the general, but he gives enough background of his youth in Ireland and his migration to and adoption of America as his new home to sketch what shaped his character and what motivated him to fight in the Southern cause. However, in the spring he was made aware of a job opening to manage the clinic of two doctors in Helena Arkansas. Read all about it! Stephen Thumma rated it it was amazing Oct 18, Be the first to ask a question about Stonewall of the West. Patrick Cleburne forced to quit school, he then became an apprentice for a colleague of his fathers. In , he was disinterred and returned to his adopted hometown of Helena, Arkansas, with much fanfare, and buried in Maple Hill Cemetery, overlooking the Mississippi River. Cleburne believed Confederate independence was the most important goal of the war, and he therefore believed Southerners would be willing to arm and free slaves if it furthered the goal of Southern independence. Paperback , pages. Product Details Table of Contents. William J. Fictional Appearances:. Hugh Schieffler rated it it was amazing Mar 09, When Cleburne and Hindman were drawn into a gunfight with political rivals on the streets of Helena, Cleburne suffered a gunshot wound that nearly proved to be fatal, at the same time shooting and killing one of his assailants.
    [Show full text]
  • All's Fair in War, Streight's Raid & Forrest's Bluff
    A 2020 BGES Weekend Warrior Program: All’s Fair in War, Streight’s Raid & Forrest’s Bluff With Brian Steel Wills and Norm Dasinger October 2-4, 2020, from Gadsden, AL No Civil War figure has been more polarizing than Nathan Bedford Forrest. Yet, he was a feared and respected military commander who produced some of the great stories and legendary military operations of the war. If you have not read a great biography on the man, Brian Steel Wills’ The Confederacy’s Greatest Cavalryman should be on your list. This program examines one of the unique operations of Forrest’s command and opens a discussion on the military impact of the operation on the war. Streight’s Raid is tarred by history for its misstatements and criticism of the Union commander. Mounted on mules, the operation is ridiculed for the logistical difficulties it presented and the open opportunities it created for Forrest. In some circles analogous to falling out of a boat—Forrest had to hit water! Still, what was the impact of two simultaneous raids launched from nearly the same locations, the first being Ben Grierson’s move south to distract Confederates attention from U.S. Grant’s move along the west bank of Louisiana to cross the Mississippi; the second being Abel Streight’s move toward the Confederate Army of Tennessee’s line of supply, the Western and Atlantic Railroad, which was supplying Braxton Bragg near Tullahoma? Had Rosecrans and Grant coordinated? What might have happened had Forrest pursued Grierson instead of Streight? Clearly both raids launched near the same dates and ending within days of each other—one successful and the other a failure—are robust themes for examination and discussion.
    [Show full text]
  • Reproduction Arms Only
    REPRODUCTION ARMS ONLY North-South Skirmish Association, Inc. Small Arms Committee 2020 Edition Updated: 01/01/2020 N-SSA PRODUCTION APPROVED REPRODUCTION ARMS, BARRELS, AND PROCESSES For HAND AND SHOULDER ARMS Topic Section Rifles 1 Rifle Muskets 2 Smoothbore Muskets 3 Rifled Muskets 4 Carbines 5 Breechloading Rifles/Carbine II 6 Revolvers 7 Approved Processes 8 Rimfire to Centerfire Conversions 8a Approved Barrel Processes 8b Miscellaneous Approved Barrels 9 IMPORTANT NOTICES. READ CAREFULLY! (1) All firearms, barrels, and processes listed in this document are approved by the Board of Directors for use in shooting activities of the North-South Skirmish Association, Inc. They have received “Production Approval”, which means that as manufactured they are pre-approved for skirmish use. An arm or barrel which has been altered or modified must be submitted to the Small Arms Committee for individual approval and must be issued a Small Arms Committee approval card before it can be used in a skirmish. It is the responsibility of the skirmisher to find out if planned or executed changes might void the existing approval of an arm or a barrel, and to submit altered production arms and/or barrels to the Small Arms Committee for consideration. If you are considering making any changes to an approved arm or barrel it is good practice to discuss it first with a member of the Small Arms Committee. 2. The Small Arms Committee must individually approve custom-made arms for which the maker does not have production approval, and a Small Arms Committee individual approval card must be carried for that arm as evidence of that approval.
    [Show full text]
  • Winchester Down Home Series Berryville Again in the Year 2010, We’Re Making Our Way Woodstock 66
    WINCHESTER DOWN HOME SERIES BERRYVILLE AGAIN IN THE YEAR 2010, WE’RE MAKING OUR WAY WOODSTOCK 66 AROUND THE REGION, EACH ISSUE VISITING A 81 DALE CITY SMALL TOWN AND MEETING SOME OF THE 95 FOLKS WHO MAKE UP THE HEART OF Charlottesville KING GEORGE PUNGOTEAGUE ELECTRIC CO-OP COUNTRY. ON 64 64 THIS YEAR’S SIXTH STOP, Richmond BUCKINGHAM COURT HOUSE AMELIA COURT HOUSE WE’LL BE ... Roanoke 460 85 81 MEHERRIN 95 77 VALENTINES DOWN HOME IN WINCHESTER Story and photos by Robin Couch Cardillo, Contributing Writer n a sunny Friday morning in May, magnet for history buffs, and the recreation- “I started talking to old-timers in town, to the Visitor Center on Winchester’s filled future, which caters to the nouveau hear stories about Winchester from the early OPleasant Valley Road is unusually tourist. That’s why alongside the Civil War to mid-20th century,” he says. “I learn even busy. A middle-aged couple from Lynchburg museums and battlefield markers now reside the most innocuous details, like where peo - stops in to ask about biking paths in the city. intricately mapped bicycle and walking paths, ple used to go out to dinner and how that The phone rings and the caller inquires about a nationally recognized golf course, a state-of- changes over time.” Patsy Cline attractions. Joggers trot along the the-art fitness center, even a dog park. At the five-year-old Museum of the center’s walkways, and visitors walk their Making the transition isn’t easy, but the Shenandoah Valley, the administrators un - dogs under the shade trees of an adjacent his - colorful vision of the townspeople drives derstand their audience is diverse, too.
    [Show full text]
  • VMI Men Who Wore Yankee Blue, 1861-1865 by Edward A
    VMI Men Who Wore Yankee Blue, 1861-1865 by Edward A. Miller, ]r. '50A The contributions of Virginia Military Institute alumni in Confed­ dent. His class standing after a year-and-a-half at the Institute was erate service during the Civil War are well known. Over 92 percent a respectable eighteenth of twenty-five. Sharp, however, resigned of the almost two thousand who wore the cadet uniform also wore from the corps in June 1841, but the Institute's records do not Confederate gray. What is not commonly remembered is that show the reason. He married in early November 1842, and he and thirteen alumni served in the Union army and navy-and two his wife, Sarah Elizabeth (Rebeck), left Jonesville for Missouri in others, loyal to the Union, died in Confederate hands. Why these the following year. They settled at Danville, Montgomery County, men did not follow the overwhelming majority of their cadet where Sharp read for the law and set up his practice. He was comrades and classmates who chose to support the Common­ possibly postmaster in Danville, where he was considered an wealth and the South is not difficult to explain. Several of them important citizen. An active mason, he was the Danville delegate lived in the remote counties west of the Alleghenies where to the grand lodge in St. Louis. In 1859-1860 he represented his citizens had long felt estranged from the rest of the state. Citizens area of the state in the Missouri Senate. Sharp's political, frater­ of the west sought to dismember Virginia and establish their own nal, and professional prominence as well as his VMI military mountain state.
    [Show full text]
  • Remembering Perryville: History and Memory at a Civil War Battlefield”
    1 “Remembering Perryville: History and Memory at a Civil War Battlefield” Kenneth W. Noe, Dept. of History, Auburn University, Auburn AL 36830 Popular Culture Association and American Culture Association Conference, Apr. 14, 2001 While members of the general public regularly travel to Civil War battlefield parks in large numbers, they usually do not give much thought to the history of those pastoral facilities. With the notable exception of Gettysburg, the same can be said of most scholars. Yet the slow evolution of battlefields as state-owned parks can tell us much about the nation’s post-Civil War history and search for meaning. Battlefields became the focus of new battles over how the Civil War was to be remembered, who was to be included or excluded in establishing an orthodox memory, and who was to profit from their establishment. In the process, those who saw the land as something other than a historical tableau struggled to establish a different identity. That process continues today. The battlefield at Perryville, Kentucky, offers a lesser known example of the process. On October 8, 1862, Union and Confederate forces clashed just west of Perryville, a small market town located southwest of Lexington in the commonwealth’s central bluegrass. The climax of a hard, six- week campaign that shifted the focus of the western war from northern Mississippi hundreds of miles toward the Ohio River, the battle ended inconclusively. Although a tactical Confederate victory, Gen. Braxton Bragg abandoned the hard-won field overnight to his numerically stronger foe and commenced a retreat that eventually led back to Middle Tennessee’s Stones River at the end of the year.
    [Show full text]
  • An Historical Archaeological Examination of a Battlefield Landscape: an Example from the American Civil War Battle of Wilson's Wharf, Charles City County, Virginia
    W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 2003 An historical archaeological examination of a battlefield landscape: An Example from the American Civil War Battle of Wilson's Wharf, Charles City County, Virginia Jameson Michael Harwood College of William & Mary - Arts & Sciences Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons, Military History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Harwood, Jameson Michael, "An historical archaeological examination of a battlefield landscape: An Example from the American Civil War Battle of Wilson's Wharf, Charles City County, Virginia" (2003). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539626393. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21220/s2-bkaa-yg82 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. AN HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXAMINATION OF A BATTLEFIELD LANDSCAPE: An Example From The American Civil War Battle Of Wilson’s Wharf, Charles City County, Virginia A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Department of Anthropology The College of William and Mary in Virginia In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts by Jameson Michael Harwood 2003 APPROVAL SHEET This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Jameson MichaefHarwood Approved, May 2003 t Norman Barka Dennis Blanton MarleyBrown, III DEDICATION To the soldiers who fought and died the Wilson’s Wharf battlefield landscape TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Acknowledgements v List of Tables vi List of Figures vii Abstract ix Introduction 2 Chapter I.
    [Show full text]