DOCSLIB.ORG

Interpretive Plan for the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District Project No

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Interpretive Plan for the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District Project No Interpretive Plan for the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District Project No. GA-2255-03-016 Prepared for the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation Prepared by John Milner Associates, Inc. and Riggs/Ward Design, PC November 2008 Interpretive Plan for the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District Project No. GA-2255-03-016 Prepared for the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation New Market, Virginia Prepared by John Milner Associates, Inc. Architects, Landscape Architects, Archeologists, Planners West Chester, Pennsylvania with Riggs Ward Design Exhibit Designers Richmond, Virginia November 2008 The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the U.S. Government. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute their endorsement by the U.S. Government. Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District Interpretive Plan Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ix PART I: CONTEXT FOR INTERPRETATION Chapter 1 Vision, Purpose and Background 1-1 1.1 Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District 1-1 1.2 Management and Implementation Plans 1-3 1.3 Interpretive Plan Guidelines, 2001 1-3 1.4 Goals for Providing a Meaningful Interpretive Experience 1-4 1.5 Interpretive Vision and Approach 1-5 Chapter 2 Existing Interpretation in the Valley 2-1 2.1 An Overview of Existing Interpretation 2-1 2.2 Regional Attractions 2-1 2.3 Interpretive Attractions 2-2 2.4 Battlefields 2-4 2.5 Battlefield Sites 2-5 2.6 Marketing Plan Survey and Audiences 2-8 Chapter 3 Interpretive Themes 3-1 3.1 The Use of Themes in Interpretation 3-1 3.2 Primary Theme: The Shenandoah Valley – Stories of its Places and People 3-3 3.2.1 Context for War 3.2.2 The Strategic Valley 3.2.3 Civilian Experience 3.2.4 The War’s Resonance 3.3 Primary Theme: The Campaigns – Strategies and Personalities 3-5 3.3.1 Stonewall Jackson’s Valley Campaign – 1862 3.3.2 Lee’s Invasion of the North – 1863 November 2008 iii Interpretive Plan Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District 3.3.3 Sigel and Hunter Move Up the Valley – Spring 1864 3.3.4 Early’s Raid on Washington – Summer 1864 3.3.5 Sheridan’s Valley Campaign – Fall 1864 3.3.6 Nature of the Fighting 3.4 Primary Theme: The Battlefields - Parts of the Whole 3-6 3.4.1 First Kernstown – March 23, 1862 3.4.2 McDowell – May 8, 1862 3.4.3 Front Royal – May 23, 1862 3.4.4 First Winchester – May 25, 1862 3.4.5 Cross Keys – June 8, 1862 3.4.6 Port Republic – June 9, 1862 3.4.7 Second Winchester – June 13-15, 1863 3.4.8 New Market – May 15, 1864 3.4.9 Cool Spring – July 17-18, 1864 3.5.10 Second Kernstown – July 24, 1864 3.5.11 Third Winchester – September 19, 1864 3.5.12 Fisher’s Hill – September 21-22, 1864 3.4.13 Overall – September 22, 1864 3.4.14 Tom’s Brook – October 9, 1864 3.4.15 Cedar Creek – October 19, 1864 3.5 Interpretive Connections 3-9 Chapter 4 Interpretive Media 4-1 4.1 Websites 4-1 4.2 Podcasts 4-3 4.3 Published Materials 4-5 4.4 Audio Tours 4-7 4.5 Static Exhibits 4-9 4.6 Interactive Exhibits 4-12 4.7 Guide-Assisted Interpretation 4-14 PART II: PLAN FOR INTERPRETATION Chapter 5 District-Wide Interpretive Program 5-1 5.1 Valley-Wide Interpretation 5-1 5.2 Historic Roadways and Valley Towns 5-2 5.2.1 A System of Historic Byway Exhibits 5.2.2 Historic Valley Towns 5.3 Civil War Clusters and Orientation Centers 5-6 5.3.1 The Five Clusters 5.3.2 The Winchester Cluster iv November 2008 Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District Interpretive Plan 5.3.3 The Signal Knob Cluster 5.3.4 The New Market Cluster 5.3.5 The Rockingham Cluster 5.3.6 The McDowell Cluster 5.3.7 Civil War Orientation Centers 5.4 Battlefields 5-14 5.4.1 Battlefield Visitor Experience 5.4.2 Pre-Trip and Post-Trip Battlefield Information 5.4.3 Battlefield Interpretive Publications 5.4.4 Battlefield Driving Tours 5.4.5 Battlefield Walking Tours 5.4.6 Battlefield Landscapes 5.4.7 Battlefield Exhibits 5.5 Civil War Related Interpretive Sites 5-33 5.5.1 Regional Attractions 5.5.2 Local Interpretive Attractions Chapter 6 Implementation 6-1 6.1 Priorities and Phasing 6-2 6.1.1 Website and Publications 6.1.2 Historic Roadways 6.1.3 Clusters 6.1.4 Battlefield Plans 6.1.5 Civil War Related Attractions 6.2 Role of Partners 6-3 6.3 Role of the Battlefields Foundation 6-4 6.3.1 Battlefields Foundation Board of Trustees 6.3.2 Interpretation and Education Committee 6.3.3 Historical Advisors 6.3.4 Foundation Staff 6.3.5 Protection of Battlefield Resources for Interpretation Appendix A Civil War Sites in the National Historic District A-1 Appendix B Historic Roadway Routes B-1 Map of the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District Interior of the Back Cover November 2008 v Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District Interpretive Plan Acknowledgements FUNDING Preparation of this Plan was made possible by: National Park Service - American Battlefields Protection Program Commonwealth of Virginia - Department of Historic Resources National Trust for Historic Preservation – Dr. Henry A. Jordan Fund Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation SHENANDOAH VALLEY BATTLEFIELDS FOUNDATION District-wide Interpretive Plan Committee Richard R.G. Hobson, Chairman Irvin E. Hess Nicolas P. Picerno James L. White Patricia L. Zontine Foundation Staff Howard J. Kittell, Executive Director Elizabeth Paradis Stern, Assistant Director for Policy and Communications Terence M. Heder, Program Manager for Field Services Nancy R. Long, Office Manager PROJECT CONSULTANTS John Milner Associates, Inc. Peter C. Benton, AIA, Project Planner BJ Titus, Graphic Design Sarah Jane Ruch, Mapping Riggs Ward Design Brent Ward, Principal Katie Painter, Exhibit Planner STAKEHOLDERS and PARTNERS The following individuals representing partnering organizations participated in the stakehold- er meetings or where otherwise consulted during various phases of the project. James Barnett, Kernstown Battlefield Association W. C. Bedall, Shenandoah Valley Civil War Round Table Carolyn Brackett, Heritage Tourism Program, National Trust for Historic Preservation Suzanne Chilson, Cedar Creek Battlefield Foundation Patrick Farris, Warren Heritage Society Robert Frye, Shenandoah County Historical Society Zenaida Hall, Harrisonburg Tourism & Visitor Services Scott Harris, New Market Battlefield State Historical Park Deborah Hilty, Museum of the Shenandoah Valley Dr. Warren Hofstra, Shenandoah University Bill Holt, Elkton Historical Society November 2008 vii Interpretive Plan Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District Diann Jacox, Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park Thomas Lockhart, Scenic 340 Project Troy Marshall, New Market Battlefield State Historical Park Betty Martin, Turner Ashby Chapter, United Daughters of the Confederacy Richard Martin, Harrisonburg-Rockingham County Historical Society Elizabeth McClung, Belle Grove Plantation, Inc. Earl Meese, Plumb House Robert Moore, Page County Civil War Commission David Myers, Civil War Preservation Trust Jonathan A. Noyalas, Lord Fairfax Community College Trish Ridgeway, Old Court House Civil War Museum Steven Shenk, Valley Brethren-Mennonite Heritage Center Cissy Shull, Winchester-Frederick County Historical Society Byron Smith, Stone House Foundation Nancy Sorrells, Augusta County Historical Society Crysta Stanton, Highland Historical Society John Stevens, Fort Collier Civil War Center, Inc. Christopher J. Stubbs, Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park Natalie Wills, Winchester-Frederick Convention & Visitors Bureau viii November 2008 Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District Interpretive Plan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Interpretive Plan Goal This Interpretive Plan is designed to provide guidance and direction to the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation and its partners on creative and effective means to interpret and coordinate the array of Civil War sites and stories in the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District. The Plan The Plan is divided into two parts. Part I, “Context for Interpretation,” discusses the background for the development of the Plan, reviews the existing interpretive sites and partnering organizations in the Valley, lays out the proposed themes of the Plan, and looks at the different media that could be used for interpretation. Part II, “Plan for Interpretation,” details the Plan and its implementation. The Plan also includes two appendices that review the Civil War sites and proposed designated Historic Roadways in the Valley. PART I: CONTEXT FOR INTER P RETAT I ON Chapter 1 – Vision, Purpose and Background At the time of the Civil War, the Shenandoah Valley was a major transportation route, and a region so agriculturally prosperous that it was known as the “Breadbasket of the Confederacy”. Its strategic importance made it the scene of bitter conflict – resulting in more than 300 military actions – with devastating impact upon the lives of its inhabitants. The Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District was created by Congress in 1996 to help preserve ten of the Valley’s battlefields and to create programs that would encourage the telling of the region’s Civil War stories, both military and civilian. The National Historic District encompasses an eight-county area extending from Frederick and Clarke Counties in the north to Augusta and Highland Counties in the south. The purposes of the District are to: preserve, conserve, and interpret the legacy of the Civil War in the Shenandoah Valley; to recognize and interpret important events and locations representing key battles in the Valley; to recognize and interpret the effects of the war on the civilian population of the Valley; and to create partnerships to preserve and interpret the battlefields and related sites associated with the war in the Valley.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Timeline 1864
    CIVIL WAR TIMELINE 1864 January Radical Republicans are hostile to Lincoln’s policies, fearing that they do not provide sufficient protection for ex-slaves, that the 10% amnesty plan is not strict enough, and that Southern states should demonstrate more significant efforts to eradicate the slave system before being allowed back into the Union. Consequently, Congress refuses to recognize the governments of Southern states, or to seat their elected representatives. Instead, legislators begin to work on their own Reconstruction plan, which will emerge in July as the Wade-Davis Bill. [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/reconstruction/states/sf_timeline.html] [http://www.blackhistory.harpweek.com/4Reconstruction/ReconTimeline.htm] Congress now understands the Confederacy to be the face of a deeply rooted cultural system antagonistic to the principles of a “free labor” society. Many fear that returning home rule to such a system amounts to accepting secession state by state and opening the door for such malicious local legislation as the Black Codes that eventually emerge. [Hunt] Jan. 1 TN Skirmish at Dandridge. Jan. 2 TN Skirmish at LaGrange. Nashville is in the grip of a smallpox epidemic, which will carry off a large number of soldiers, contraband workers, and city residents. It will be late March before it runs its course. Jan 5 TN Skirmish at Lawrence’s Mill. Jan. 10 TN Forrest’s troops in west Tennessee are said to have collected 2,000 recruits, 400 loaded Wagons, 800 beef cattle, and 1,000 horses and mules. Most observers consider these numbers to be exaggerated. “ The Mississippi Squadron publishes a list of the steamboats destroyed on the Mississippi and its tributaries during the war: 104 ships were burned, 71 sunk.
    [Show full text]
  • Touring the Battle of Cool Spring
    Touring the Battle of Cool Spring Welcome to Shenandoah University’s Shenandoah River Campus at Cool Spring Battlefield. On July 18, 1864, the 195 acres that now comprise the Campus at Cool Spring Battlefield played an important role in the Battle of Cool Spring—the largest and bloodiest Civil War battle fought in Clarke County. Shenandoah University invites you to use this guide to explore important elements of the Battle of Cool Spring. Please feel free to either take this guide home with you or return it to the kiosk after the tour, but whatever you decide please help spread the word about this valuable historic resource. The tour begins at the kiosk located near the end of the parking lot located closest to the Shenandoah River. The walking tour is approximately 2 miles round-trip and takes you over some uneven terrain so please watch your step. Please see the trail map on the last page of this guide to assist you in navigating the property. Tour markers are also located along the trail to assist in navigation. Follow the Stops Below to Tour the Battlefield Self-Guided Tour Stop Map Stop 1: Prelude to Battle (Kiosk) Gen. Jubal A. Early (From Battles & Leaders) “We haven’t taken Washington, but we’ve scared Abe Lincoln like hell.” Confederate general Jubal A. Early After marching to within sight of the Capitol dome in Washington, D.C. on July 11, 1864, the capital of the United States seemed within Confederate general Jubal Early’s grasp. However, with the imposing Fort Stevens in his front and news that additional Union reinforcements were on the way to protect the capital, Early decided to withdraw on the night of July 12 and return to Virginia.
    [Show full text]
  • Boy Soldier of the Confederacy: the Memoir of Johnnie Wickersham
    Civil War Book Review Summer 2007 Article 6 Boy Soldier of the Confederacy: The Memoir of Johnnie Wickersham Arthur W. Bergeron Jr. Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/cwbr Recommended Citation Bergeron, Arthur W. Jr. (2007) "Boy Soldier of the Confederacy: The Memoir of Johnnie Wickersham," Civil War Book Review: Vol. 9 : Iss. 3 . Available at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/cwbr/vol9/iss3/6 Bergeron: Boy Soldier of the Confederacy: The Memoir of Johnnie Wickersham Review Bergeron, Arthur W., Jr. Summer 2007 Gorman, Kathleen, ed. Boy Soldier of the Confederacy: The Memoir of Johnnie Wickersham. Southern Illinois University Press, $27.95 hardcover ISBN 9780809327225 Fact and Fiction? Two Accounts of the Civil War Experience Boy Soldier of the Confederacy: The Memoir of Johnnie WickershamEdited by Kathleen Gorman A Civil War Soldier of Christ and Country: The Selected Correspondence of John Rodgers Meigs, 1859-1864 Edited by Mary A. Giunta Originally published in 1915 as The Gray and the Blue, John T. Wickersham's stories about his experiences in the Confederate army during the Civil War have been edited in this new edition by Professor Kathleen Gorman. Johnnie Wickersham claimed to have joined the Confederate army in Missouri at age 14 and to have served with it until May 1865. He also stated that he received a captain's commission from General Sterling Price. Gorman acknowledges that there is no record of Wickersham as a soldier. It appears that he simply attached himself to a volunteer company in which one of his brothers served, probably a company in the 4th Missouri Infantry Regiment (later the 1st and 4th Missouri Consolidated Infantry).
    [Show full text]
  • General Phillip H. Sheridan
    SHERIDAN, Philip Henry, soldier, b. in Albany, N. Y., 6 March, 1831; d. in Nonquitt, Mass., 5 Aug., 1888. After attending the public school he was entered as a cadet in the United St'ttes military academy, 1 July, 1848. On account of a quarrel with a cadet file-closer in 1850, whose conduct toward him he deemed insulting, he wu.s suspended from the academy for a year, but re­ turned, and was graduated, 1 July, 1853, standing thitty-fourth in a class of fifty-two, of whieh James B. McPherson was at the head. Gen. John M. Schofield and the Coniederate Gen. John B. Hood were also his classmates. On the day of his gradu­ ation he wa" appointed a brevet 2d lieutenant in the 3d infantry. After service iu Kentucky, Texas, and Oregon. he was made 2d lieutenant in the 4th inf,mtry, 22 Nov., 1854, 1st lieutenant, 1 March, 18G1. 'lnd captain in the 13th infantry, 14 May, 1861. In December of that year he was chief quartermaster and commissary of the a.rmy in southwestern Missouri. In the Mississippi cam­ paign from April to September, 1862, he was quar­ termaster at. Gen. Halleck's headqnarters during the ad"anre upon Corinth. It then became mani­ fest that his tl'l1e place was in the field. On 20 May, 1862, he was appointed colonel of the 2d Michigan cavalry, and on 1 July was sent to make a mid on Booneville, Miss. He did excellent ser­ vice in the pursuit of the enemy from Corinth to Baldwin.
    [Show full text]
  • HFR00306 Harpers Ferry Repels an Attack, Base of Operations For
    HARPERS FERRY REPELS AN ATTACK AND BECOMES THE MAJOR BASE OF OPERATIONS FOR SHERIDAN’S ARMY, JULY 4, 1864 TO JULY 27, 1865 (A Report on the Federal Fortifications at Harpers Ferry, W. Va., January 1, 1864, to July, 1865, to accompany “Map IV-Harper’s Ferry, W. Va., July 4, 1864-April 9, 1865,” date January 15, 1950.) 18 Illustrations Harpers Ferry National Monument Prepared By: Charles W. Snell Historian (Park Supervisory Dated January 21, 1960 105 pages Research Project No. HF-96D Table of Contents Introduction ......................................................... 1 A. Primary Maps Used in the Preparation of Map IV .................. 1 CHAPTER I: STATE OF THE HARPERS FERRY FORTIFICATION, OCTOBER 7, 1863 – JULY 2, 1864. ........................................................ 5 1. Maryland Heights ................................................ 5 2. Loudoun Heights ................................................. 6 3. Camp Hill ....................................................... 6 4. Bolivar Heights ................................................. 7 5. Function of Harpers Ferry, October, 1863-July, 1864 ............. 9 6. Federal Plans for Defending Harpers Ferry ...................... 11 CHAPTER II: GENERAL EARLY ATTACKS HARPERS FERRY, JULY 3-8, 1864 ..... 13 1. Sunday, July 3, 1864 ........................................... 13 2. Monday, July 4, 1864 ........................................... 16 3. Tuesday, July 5, 1864 .......................................... 20 4. Wednesday, July 6, 1864 .......................................
    [Show full text]
  • The 1864 Shenandoah Valley Campaign
    The 1864 Shenandoah Valley Campaign September to October 1864 A Module for Stonewall in the Valley [Revised May 12, 1998] NOTE: Sheridan in the Valley is not a complete game. You MUST own Stonewall in the Valley in order to use this module. Designer's Note: This is my first "module" for the GCACW series. It looks fine to me (but I'm biased) - however, I realize it will require a lot of work if it is ever to be published (which is my ultimate goal.) Most of you probably have much more experience with the game system that I do. I would appreciate any feedback you can give me to help improve this module. Please feel free to (constructively) criticize any and all parts of this module - be merciless! Thank you. John Menichelli HEADQUARTERS, In the Field, Monocacy Bridge, Md.. August 5, 1864—8 p.m. Major-General HUNTER, Commanding Department of West Virginia: GENERAL: In pushing up the Shenandoah Valley, where it is expected you will have to go first or last, it is desirable that nothing should be left to invite the enemy to return. Take all provisions, forage, and stock wanted for the use of your command; such as cannot be consumed destroy. It is not desirable that the buildings should be destroyed; they should rather be protected, but the people should be informed that so long as an army can subsist among them recurrences of these raids must be expected, and we are determined to stop them at all hazards. Bear in mind the object is to drive the enemy south, and to do this you want to keep him always in sight.
    [Show full text]
  • Papers from the 2014 Fields of Conflict Conference and Preservation Workshop Steven D
    University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Faculty Publications Anthropology, Department of 2016 Preserving Fields of Conflict: Papers from the 2014 Fields of Conflict Conference and Preservation Workshop Steven D. Smith University of South Carolina - Columbia, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarcommons.sc.edu/anth_facpub Part of the Anthropology Commons Publication Info Published in 2016. Smith, Steven D., ed. Preserving Fields of Conflict: Papers from the 2014 Fields of Conflict Conference and Preservation Workshop. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina--South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, 2016. http://artsandsciences.sc.edu/sciaa/ © 2016 by University of South Carolina--South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Anthropology, Department of at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PRESERVING FIELDS OF CONFLICT: PAPERS FROM THE 2014 FIELDS OF CONFLICT CONFERENCE AND PRESERVATION WORKSHOP STEVEN D. SMITH, EDITOR South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology College of Arts and Sciences University of South Carolina Columbia, South Carolina 1321 Pendleton St. Columbia, SC 29208 PRESERVING FIELDS OF CONFLICT: PAPERS FROM THE 2014 FIELDS OF CONFLICT CONFERENCE AND PRESERVATION WORKSHOP STEVEN D. SMITH, EDITOR South Carolina Institute of Archaeology
    [Show full text]
  • General Frederick Steele Papers, 1845-1965 (Inclusive), 1862-1868 (Bulk)
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/tf8j49p007 No online items Guide to the General Frederick Steele Papers, 1845-1965 (inclusive), 1862-1868 (bulk) Department of Special Collections Green Library Stanford University Libraries Stanford, CA 94305-6004 Phone: (650) 725-1022 Email: [email protected] URL: http://library.stanford.edu/spc © 1999 The Board of Trustees of Stanford University. All rights reserved. Guide to the General Frederick Special Collections M0191 1 Steele Papers, 1845-1965 (inclusive), 1862-1868 (bulk) Guide to the General Frederick Steele Papers, 1845-1965 (inclusive), 1862-1868 (bulk) Collection number: M0191 Department of Special Collections and University Archives Stanford University Libraries Stanford, California Contact Information Department of Special Collections Green Library Stanford University Libraries Stanford, CA 94305-6004 Phone: (650) 725-1022 Email: [email protected] URL: http://library.stanford.edu/spc Processed by: Special Collections staff Date Completed: 1971 Apr. © 1999 The Board of Trustees of Stanford University. All rights reserved. Descriptive Summary Title: General Frederick Steele Papers, Date (inclusive): 1845-1965 (inclusive), 1862-1868 (bulk) Collection number: Special Collections M0191 Creator: Steele, Frederick, 1819-1868. Extent: 10.5 linear ft. Repository: Stanford University. Libraries. Dept. of Special Collections and University Archives. Language: English. Access Restrictions None. Publication Rights Property rights reside with the repository. Literary rights reside with the creators of the documents or their heirs. To obtain permission to publish or reproduce, please contact the Public Services Librarian of the Dept. of Special Collections. Provenance Gift of Mrs. Catherine B. Steele, 1968-1972. Preferred Citation: [Identification of item] General Frederick Steele Papers, M0191, Dept.
    [Show full text]
  • Destruction of Private Property in the 1864 Shenandoah Valley Campaign Jeannie Cummings Harding James Madison University
    James Madison University JMU Scholarly Commons Masters Theses The Graduate School Spring 2013 Retaliation with restraint: Destruction of private property in the 1864 Shenandoah Valley Campaign Jeannie Cummings Harding James Madison University Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/master201019 Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Harding, Jeannie Cummings, "Retaliation with restraint: Destruction of private property in the 1864 Shenandoah Valley Campaign" (2013). Masters Theses. 228. https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/master201019/228 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the The Graduate School at JMU Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of JMU Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Retaliation with Restraint: Destruction of Private Property in the 1864 Shenandoah Valley Campaign Jeannie Cummings Harding A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of JAMES MADISON UNIVERSITY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Department of History May 2013 To Mark and the three amazing Harding boys God has blessed us with: Seth, Jonathan, and Andrew. Each of you encouraged me to follow my passion, and I pray you have the opportunity to do the same. Also to my Mama, who has never once failed to be there for me. We love because He first loved us. 1 John 4:19 ii Acknowledgements The completion of a master’s degree is not a solitary endeavor. The past two years I have spent in the graduate history program at James Madison University have been more enjoyable than I ever could have imagined.
    [Show full text]
  • Class of 1851-1852
    CLASS OF 1851. 1.494 .. (Born MIlS.) ....GEORGE L. ANDREWS . .......(Ap'd Mas.) .. 1. Military HistOlY. Cadet a·t the U. S. Military Acadcmy from July 1, 1847, to July 1, 1851, whcn he was graduated und promotcd in the A.rmy to BVT. SECOND LrEUT., CORPS OF ENGINEERS, JULY 1, 1851. Served as Asst. Engineer in the construction of Ft.. Warren, Boston Harbor, Mas., 1851- 54; and at t.he Military Academy, as Asst. Professor of Enginccl'ing, (SECOND LIEUT., CORPS OF ENGINEERS, FED. 2, H154) Aug. 30, 1854, to Sep. 1, I8;)G. RESIG~'EIl, SEP. 1, 18;35. Civil History.-Engineel· of Amoskcag lVlllllufactnring Comp'U1Y, at Man chester, N. H., 1855-57. Asst. Engineer in the service of the United States, in t.he constrnction of the Fortifications of Boston H"rbor, Mas., 1857-G9,­ and at Sandy Hook, N. J., 1850- 60. Military History.- Scrveu dm'ing tho Rebollion of tile Seceding States, (LIEUT.-COLONf:L, 2D lVI.~s. VOLUNTJ::ERS, MAY 24, 1861) 1861- 65: in guarding lhe Uppel' Potolllac, July- Nov., 1861; ill ganison at Frederick, Md., and as Member of Board for examiDing Vohmtcor Officers. Dec., 1861 to Apr., 1862; ill Opemtiolls uncleI' Major-General Banks, in Ow i:lhenandoah V~lley, lVIal'. - Jlme, 1862, being ongaged in several Skil1uishcs,­ (COLONEL, 2D MAS. VOLUN1'EEllS, JmlE 13, 1862) and Combat of Willehester, lVI,1Y 25, 1862; in the Nort.hern Virginia Campaign, Jllne - Au~. , 1862, being engaged in the Battle of Cedar Mountidn, Aug. n, 1802; in the ~1I\ryhlllc1 Campaign (Army of the Potomac), Sep.- Oct., ]862, being engaged in the Battle of AntietflUl, Scp.
    [Show full text]
  • Lang, Theodore F. Loyal West Virginia from 1861 to 1865. Baltimore, Md.: Deutsch Publishing Co., 1895
    Lang, Theodore F. Loyal West Virginia from 1861 to 1865. Baltimore, Md.: Deutsch Publishing Co., 1895. CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTORY :— WESTERN VIRGINIA AND ITS RELATIONS TO THE MOTHER STATE FOR MANY YEARS PRIOR TO THE WAR. Virginia, One of the Thirteen Original United States : — Its Boundary, Principal Cities and Towns, Rivers, Mountains, Minerals, Natural Curiosities, Climate, Products, Canals, Railways, Public Buildings, Newspapers, etc. — Early Settlement. — Mother of Presidents. — First to Prepare the Federal Constitution. — Hostility Between the People of the Eastern and Western Part of the State. — The Causes Therefor. — Constitution of 1850. — Talk of Separation of the State. — Hons. W. T. Willey and John S. Carlisle Stand for Separation. — A Proclamation by Governor Letcher. — Western Virginians Incredulous, 1-5 CHAPTER II LOYALTY OF WESTERN VIRGINIANS WHEN THE CONFLICT CALLED THEM TO ARMS. Habits, Customs, Manners and Character of the People of the State. — The City and Townspeople. — The Farmer and the Country People. — The Improvident Mountaineer. — Bushwhackers and their Methods. — Western Virginians Allied to Northern Sentiments and Institutions. — Governor Letcher Assembles Legislalature in Extra Session. — Proceedings of Same. — Virginia Convention Passes Ordinance of Secession, ............ 6-14 CHAPTER III LOYALTY OF WESTERN VIRGINIANS WHEN THE CONFLICT CALLED THEM TO ARMS— (CONTINUED). Virginia Annexed to the Southern Confederacy. — Treason and Secession an Incentive to Western Virginia Loyalty. — Moral Courage Required to be for the Union. — Speakers Mobbed and Meetings Broken Up. — Escape of Union Members of the Convention. — Public Meeting of Unionists at Clarksburg. — The Beginning of the War of the Rebellion. — Secession of the Southern States. — Convention at Montgomery, Alabama. — Constitution Adopted and Jefferson Davis made President.
    [Show full text]
  • Crawford NF T 2021.Pdf (663.6Kb)
    “A Matter of Increasing Perplexity”: Public Perception, Treatment, and Military Influence of Refugees in the Shenandoah Valley During the American Civil War Noah Frazier Crawford Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts In History Paul Quigley (Chair) Melanie Kiechle Brett Shadle May 7, 2021 Blacksburg, Virginia Keywords: Refugee, Fugitive, Deserter, Unionist, Virginia, Civil War Era “A Matter of Increasing Perplexity”: Public Perception, Treatment, and Military Influence of Refugees in the Shenandoah Valley During the American Civil War Noah Frazier Crawford Abstract: This thesis examines the ways in which definitions and perceptions of refugees in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia evolved over the course of the American Civil War. It investigates perspectives from individuals in both the United States and Confederate States to illustrate how misconceptions about refugees—who they were, what they wanted, and how they could benefit each side—dominated how displaced people were discussed. I argue that despite significant attention to refugees in newspapers, military reports, and among the public, both sides failed to adequately assist refugees who were displaced as a result of the war. Utilizing a broadly chronological approach allows greater insight into how the situation in the Shenandoah Valley escalated over time with the addition of various refugee demographic groups, including white Unionists, Black self-emancipated people, deserters, and pro-Confederate civilians. This thesis discusses how each of these groups challenged Americans’ culturally-constructed definition of the word “refugee.” It also demonstrates how military commanders made use of refugees as sources of military intelligence who directly influenced the events of several military campaigns.
    [Show full text]