DOCSLIB.ORG

Untitled [Randall Jimerson on a Southern Boy in Blue: the Memoir

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Untitled [Randall Jimerson on a Southern Boy in Blue: the Memoir Kenneth W. Noe, ed.. A Southern Boy in Blue: The Memoir of Marcus Woodcock, 9th Kentucky Infantry (U.S.A.). Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1996. xxvi + 348 pp. $32.95, cloth, ISBN 978-0-87049-921-0. Reviewed by Randall C. Jimerson Published on H-CivWar (September, 1996) One reason that the Civil War remains fasci‐ fantry (U.S.A.), rising from the rank of private to nating to many Americans is that it presents an al‐ first lieutenant. most infnite variety of new perspectives on a crit‐ Woodcock's service was confined to the west‐ ical period in the nation's history. No other period ern theater. Two distinctive features set it apart is so richly textured by personal narratives, di‐ from other memoirs: the rare perspective of a aries, letters, and memoirs of ordinary men and southern Unionist from a region other than the women engaged in both extraordinary exploits Appalachians, and its immediacy of tone and per‐ and mundane routines. This memoir of Marcus spective. Written largely during the spring of Woodcock, a native of north-central Tennessee 1865, the memoir at times discusses the war as an who fought for the Union, adds yet another valu‐ ongoing event and comments on Lincoln's assassi‐ able perspective to our understanding of this nation as recent news. This perspective means complex era. that Woodcock's account does not partake of the William Marcus Woodcock was born in 1842 consensus view of the war that developed by the in Macon County, Tennessee, located in the central 1880s, and that it does not sugarcoat the horrors highlands adjacent to the Kentucky border. His fa‐ of battlefield and hospital or devote excessive at‐ ther was a yeoman farmer and self-educated doc‐ tention to defending or impugning the reputa‐ tor, who "seems to have moved in and out of the tions of military and political leaders. Although slaveholding class" (p. xiv), according to editor many passages are clogged with purple prose and Kenneth W. Noe. The eldest of eleven children, self-conscious literary affectations, the story has Marcus Woodcock was both a Democrat and a the vigor and forthrightness found more often in Unionist, and when Tennessee seceded, he joined wartime letters and diaries than in memoirs. a number of his neighbors in crossing the nearby A Southern Boy in Blue thus presents the best state line to enlist in Kentucky's Home Guards. For of both genres. It has the candor and immediacy three years he served in the 9th Kentucky In‐ of contemporaneous letters and diaries, coupled H-Net Reviews with the sense of perspective and reflection federate charge at Stones River is rendered with shown in the best memoirs. Most of Woodcock's dashes for punctuation, as though composed in memoir is based directly on his wartime diaries, the heat of battle. Yet this contrasts with his ac‐ although his commentary and elaboration clearly count of the beginning of that day and his eager‐ extend beyond what the diaries recorded. In Au‐ ness just before hisfrst battle, clearly written gust 1862 he lost his diaries, and the account of with a veteran's hindsight: his early months in service are therefore based "I had never yet realized the horror and entirely on memory. The difference is clear. His bloodshed that are met with in battle--felt not the diary-based accounts are less self-conscious, more usual dreads and eventual sufferings that are pe‐ direct, more detailed, and less stilted than the ear‐ culiar to the veteran soldier, for my imagination lier passages. had not pictured the battle with half its horrors-- The benefits of this are seen most clearly in the crash of the skirmishers' musket, or the boom his vivid, detailed, frst-hand account of the confu‐ of the heavy cannon did not cause that feeling of sion and roller-coaster emotions he experienced uneasiness and fear to creep over my limbs as it during the battle of Chickamauga. After a self-con‐ always did in subsequent actions" (p. 121). scious literary effort to recreate his thoughts on Woodcock's memoir, however, is more than a the eve of battle, his lengthy description of the running account of battles and engagements. His contest presents almost a minute-by- minute ac‐ description of joining the Kentucky Home Guards count of a single soldier's perspective on the in September 1861 illustrates the confused and progress of the battle. It is both excellent litera‐ fluid situation that existed in the border states. In ture and superb personal narrative--one of the traveling the few miles from his Tennessee home best frst-hand battle accounts one could fnd. across the state line, he had to avoid Confederate During the second day of fghting, Woodcock ob‐ troops and partisans; yet his father was able to served the desperation of Union soldiers trying to visit him in camp, and he stopped at home before avoid defeat: leaving for the front. Later, when his regiment "Oh the terrible feelings that must have pos‐ reached the Unionist enclaves in eastern Tennes‐ sessed the heart of any witness of this scene-- see in November 1863, Woodcock rejoiced in the there were less than three hundred men, regard‐ hearty welcome he received: lessly throwing themselves into the scale against "To day we began to fnd some of the people thousands of the enemy, who were rendered that were so long the prominent subjects of rebel more furious by their recent success on our front tyranny--loyal East Tennesseans. All along the lines -- every man seemed willing to sacrifice his road they seemed to welcome us as deliverers and life if it would in any way retrieve the fortunes of received us with all possible demonstrations of the day which we now saw was surely lost with‐ joy" (pp. 243-44). out some almost superhuman effort.--I saw tears Woodcock also documents and comments on streaming from many an eye as the poor boys many of the common views and experiences of would cast their eyes to the right, left and rear, Union soldiers: Southern political demagogues; and see unmistakable evidence that the day was camp life and routines; the importance of writing lost" (p. 206). and receiving letters; sickness and disease (Wood‐ Woodcock also offers a detailed depiction of cock missed Shiloh because of an almost fatal at‐ the battle of Stones River (Murfreesboro) and an tack of measles); execution of a deserter; pillaging excellent account of the storming of Missionary of Rebel property; emancipation and the use of Ridge. His seemingly breathless account of a Con‐ black soldiers; and the 1864 election. 2 H-Net Reviews One of the most significant and interesting as‐ the untenability of my position" (p. 273) and tore pects of his memoir is its depiction of his chang‐ up his address. After this complete change in his ing views on slavery, blacks, and national politics. principles, he cast his ballot for Lincoln. It is the unprovoked attack on a black man by his Marcus Woodcock was wounded in May 1864 fellow soldiers that prompts Woodcock to recon‐ at Pickett's Mill, during Sherman's Atlanta cam‐ sider some of his racial prejudices. "Many a time paign. His memoir ends abruptly on June 4 with has my blood fairly boiled with rage when I have an account of his trip home to recover from his seen some of these poor fellow[s], whose only wounds. The remainder of his military service is fault is a black skin, and the fact that they have al‐ described in a brief epilogue, written by the edi‐ ways been slaves, stunned by a stone thrown by tor. No clear explanation is given for the narrative some specimen of the noble and magnanimous break, although Woodcock himself clearly did not Anglo Saxon race" (p. 147). intend this to be the end of his memoir, for it has Although his family had from time to time no fnal summation or conclusion. It ends, uncere‐ owned one or more slaves, Woodcock strongly de‐ moniously, with a comment about maggots under nounced slaveowners. In February, 1863, he the blankets of the railway car in which he trav‐ wrote: eled home from the front, with no indication that "Yes, they are waging a most terrible and this was the end of his war service. bloody war which is costing our country the lives Woodcock returned to his regiment near At‐ of thousands of patriots and millions of treasure lanta in July 1864. When his three-year enlistment that they may enslave an unfortunate race which expired in 1864, Marcus Woodcock decided not to is decreed by heaven shall be free. But we will re-enlist. He was mustered out on December 15, come victorious out of this struggle, and if our 1864, and arrived at his home on Christmas Day. country's history is stained with the black spot of In March 1865 he won election to the Tennessee one civil war, it will be the brighter by the re‐ House of Representatives. The former southern moval of the blacker one of slavery" (p. 149). Democrat had become a Radical Republican who Despite growing sympathy for blacks and ha‐ supported "Parson" William G. Brownlow, the tred of slavery, Woodcock opposed the initial new governor of Tennessee. Soon after arriving in plans to recruit black soldiers for the Union. How‐ Nashville, Woodcock began transcribing his di‐ ever, he reports this as an opposition that he no aries, expanding the account into a full wartime longer maintains: "I had not yet got rid of all the memoir.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • “Sisson's Kingdom” Loyalty Divisions in Floyd County, Virginia, 1861-1865
    “Sisson’s Kingdom” Loyalty Divisions in Floyd County, Virginia, 1861-1865 Paul Randolph Dotson, Jr. Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters in History Dr. Crandall A. Shifflett, Chair Dr. James I. Robertson, Jr. Dr. Peter Wallenstein May 1, 1997 Blacksburg, Virginia Keywords: Floyd County, Civil War, Unionism, Desertion, Appalachia “Sisson’s Kingdom” Loyalty Divisions in Floyd County, Virginia, 1861-1865 Paul Randolph Dotson, Jr. (ABSTRACT) “Sisson’s Kingdom” uses a community study paradigm to offer an interpretation of the Confederate homefront collapse of Floyd County, Virginia. The study focuses primarily on residents’ conflicting loyalty choices during the war, and attempts to explain the myriad of ways that their discord operated to remove Floyd County as a positive portion of the Confederate homefront. The study separates the “active Confederate disloyalty” of Floyd County’s Unionist inhabitants from the “passive Confederate disloyalty” of relatives or friends of local Confederate deserters. It then explores the conflicting loyalties of the county’s pro-Confederates, Unionists, and passive disloyalists, seeking to understand better the wide variety of loyalty choices available to residents as well as the consequences of their choices. To determine some of the significant factors contributing to the Floyd County community’s response to the Confederacy and Civil War, this thesis documents the various ways residents’ reactions took shape. Chapter One examines the roots of these decisions, exploring briefly Floyd County’s entrance into Virginia’s market economy during the 1850s and its residents’ conflicting choices during Virginia’s secession crisis.
    [Show full text]
  • The 13Th Amendment Signed by Abraham Lincoln
    Abolishing Slavery: The 13th Amendment Signed by Abraham Lincoln “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude…shall exist within the United States” Abraham Lincoln. Manuscript Document Signed (“Abraham Lincoln”) as President, with his Autograph Endorsement (“Approved. February 1, 1865.”) Washington, D.C., ca. February 1, 1865. Co-signed by Hannibal Hamlin as Vice President of the United States and President of the Senate, Schuyler Colfax as Speaker of the House, and John W. Forney as Secretary of the Senate. 1 p., 15 1/16 x 20 in., on lined vellum with ruled borders. #22159 This amendment, outlawing slavery and involuntary servitude, was the first substantive change to America’s conception of its liberties since the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791. After signing the original resolution on February 1, Lincoln responded to a serenade, and to questions about the legality of the Emancipation Proclamation and prior efforts to eradicate slavery, by saying that the amendment “is a king’s cure for all the evils. It winds the whole thing up.” Transcript: A Duplicate. Thirty-Eighth Congress of the United States of America, at the second session, begun and held at the City of Washington, on Monday the fifth day of December, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-four. A Resolution submitting to the legislatures of the several States a proposition to amend the Constitution of the United States. Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, (two-thirds of both Houses concurring,) That the following article be proposed to the legislatures of the several States as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which, when ratified by three-fourths of said legislatures, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as a part of the said Constitution, namely: Article XIII.
    [Show full text]
  • Rebel Salvation: the Story of Confederate Pardons
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 12-1998 Rebel Salvation: The Story of Confederate Pardons Kathleen Rosa Zebley University of Tennessee, Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Zebley, Kathleen Rosa, "Rebel Salvation: The Story of Confederate Pardons. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 1998. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/3629 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Kathleen Rosa Zebley entitled "Rebel Salvation: The Story of Confederate Pardons." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in History. Paul H. Bergeron, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: Stephen V. Ash, William Bruce Wheeler, John Muldowny Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Kathleen Rosa Zebley entitled "Rebel Salvation: The Story of Confederate Pardons." I have examined the final copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degreeof Doctor of Philosophy, witha major in History.
    [Show full text]
  • The Border South and the Secession Crisis, 1859-1861 Michael Dudley Robinson Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 2013 Fulcrum of the Union: The Border South and the Secession Crisis, 1859-1861 Michael Dudley Robinson Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Robinson, Michael Dudley, "Fulcrum of the Union: The Border South and the Secession Crisis, 1859-1861" (2013). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 894. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/894 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected]. FULCRUM OF THE UNION: THE BORDER SOUTH AND THE SECESSION CRISIS, 1859- 1861 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College In partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of History by Michael Dudley Robinson B.S. North Carolina State University, 2001 M.A. University of North Carolina – Wilmington, 2007 May 2013 For Katherine ii Acknowledgements Throughout the long process of turning a few preliminary thoughts about the secession crisis and the Border South into a finished product, many people have provided assistance, encouragement, and inspiration. The staffs at several libraries and archives helped me to locate items and offered suggestions about collections that otherwise would have gone unnoticed. I would especially like to thank Lucas R.
    [Show full text]
  • John H. Reagan: Unionist Or Secessionist? Philip J
    East Texas Historical Journal Volume 13 | Issue 1 Article 7 3-1975 John H. Reagan: Unionist or Secessionist? Philip J. Avillo Jr Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ethj Part of the United States History Commons Tell us how this article helped you. Recommended Citation Avillo, Philip J. Jr (1975) "John H. Reagan: Unionist or Secessionist?," East Texas Historical Journal: Vol. 13: Iss. 1, Article 7. Available at: http://scholarworks.sfasu.edu/ethj/vol13/iss1/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by SFA ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in East Texas Historical Journal by an authorized administrator of SFA ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EAST TEXAS HISTORICAL SOCIETY 23 JOHN H. REAGAN: UNIONIST OR SECESSIONIST? by Philip J. Avilla, Jr. Studies of Texas ... ecession have concluded that Texans voted overwhelmingly in favor ofwithdrawal from the Union in 1861. 1 Yet, students ofTexas during the Civil War era have also contended that strong signs of Unianis! sentiment existed in the state until the very eve of secession. For example, onc histmian has interpreted Sam Houston's strong victory in the Texas gubernatorial election in 1859 as clear testimony of this Union sentiment and the election of Andrew J. Hamilton to the United States House of Representatives from the western Texas district in that same year has been similarly interpreted. John H. Reagan, elected along with Hamilton to the House of Representatives, has also received recognition as a true Unionist in ante-bellum Texas.2 When Texas finally seceded, however, Houston's opposition proved less than forceful, Hamilton served in the newly elected Texas legislature, and Reagan withdrew from Congress before his state seceded.
    [Show full text]
  • Southern Unionists in a Fractured Confederacy: a Historiography
    The AlexAndriAn I, no. 1 (2012) Southern Unionists in a Fractured Confederacy: A Historiography David Davenport With the exception of recent scholarship, there is little monographic or article literature devoted exclusively to Southern Unionists in the Civil War. When Unionists are acknowledged, they are usually relegated to only a paragraph or footnote in most general studies. Therefore, it is entirely appropriate that during the 150th anniversary of the Civil War, we re-examine the existing literature regarding Southern Unionists. Southern Unionist literature can be grouped into three eras. First, the era from 1865 to the 1890s was one that acknowledged Southern Unionists and their contributions to the Union war effort and Confederate defeat. Second, the era immediately following the war and stretching into the early twentieth century called the “Lost Cause” era. The final period runs from the Great Depression to the present, in which gradually, more and more literature is written regarding Southern Unionists and their contributions during the war. These works have evolved into more detailed studies that focus on the cultural, social, and other aspects that distinguish the Southern Unionists from their pro-Confederate counterparts in the South. Studying the historiography of Southern Unionists allows students, teachers and those with interest in the Civil War to see the biases that have existed in the literature over the years. In addition, it identifies other areas that need further research on the topic. With the exception of recent scholarship, there is little monographic or article literature devoted exclusively to Southern Unionists in the Civil War. Therefore, it is entirely appropriate that during the 150th anniversary of the Civil War, we re-examine the existing literature regarding Southern Unionists.
    [Show full text]
  • President Lincoln and His Vice-Presidents. Lincoln Era Essay
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 360 206 SO 022 835 AUTHOR Cagle, William, Ed. TITLE President Lincoln a-id His Vice-Presidents. Lincoln Era Essay Contest Eleventh Annual Winners-1992. INSTITUTION Indiana Univ., Bloomington. Lilly Library. PUB DATE 92 NOTE 181p. PUB TYPE Information Analyses (070) Collected Works General (020) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC08 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS High Schools; High School Students; Intermediate Grades; Junior High Schools; *Presidents of the United States; *Student Projects; Student Research; *United States History IDENTIFIERS Hamlin (Hannibal); Johnson (Andrew); *Lincoln (Abraham); Student Writing; *Vice Presidents; Writing Contests ABSTRACT Sponsored by an endowment to Indiana University, the Lincoln Era Essay Contest has been held since 1982.Students in grades 6 to 12 may submit essays that addresssome topic dealing with Abraham Lincoln's presidency. A new topic is choseneach year. Written by middle school/junior high and high schoolstudents, this year's 19 essays concern President Abraham Lincolnand his two vice-presidents: Hannibal Hamlin and Andrew Johnson.Some of the titles are: "Lincoln and His Vice-Presidents in Caricature"(E. Broxmeyer); "Lincoln, Hamlin, and Johnson" (S. Silver);and "President Lincoln's Two Great Mistakes" (J. Veverka).(DB) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best thatcan be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCA' Office of Educatoonal Research and Imi EDUCATIONAL RESOJRCES INFO CENTER (ERIC) lifis,Thm document has been reprc ceeved from the person or on ouginaung 0 Namur changes have been made reproduchon quality Points of view of opnons staled ,r ment do not necessarily reprew OERI posobon or mac,/ "PERMISSION TO REPRODUC MATERIAL HA, BEEN GRAN' K} V-.
    [Show full text]
  • The First Alabama Union Cavalry in the Civil War at The
    “Homemade Yankees”: The First Alabama Union Cavalry in the Civil War At the Battle of Monroe’s Crossroads on March 10, 1865, as the Civil War drew to a close, Alabamians fighting for the Union helped finish off the southern rebellion. In his official report, Major Sanford Tramel, of the First Alabama Union Cavalry, described the action that day. “At the sounding of reveille,” he wrote, “we were aroused from sleep by the whistling of bullets and the friendship yelling of the enemy, who were charging into our camp.” Then followed “a most bloody hand-to-hand conflict, our men forming behind trees and stumps and the enemy endeavoring to charge us (mounted) with the saber. The fighting was most desperate for an hour, when we succeeded in driving the enemy away.” During the fight, Tramel reported, “I was captured by the enemy and held as prisoner until the 14th instant, when I succeeded in making my escape, and after three days lying the swamps and traveling nights, I succeeded in rejoining my command.” A month later, having fought for three full years against their rebel neighbors, Tramel and the First Alabama Cavalry watched as Confederate general Joseph E. Johnston surrendered the Army of Tennessee at Bennett Place.1 Southerners fighting for the Union represent a well-documented phenomenon to historians of the Civil War. As many as 100,000 white citizens of Confederate states, spread over eighty-five units, enlisted in the Union Army over the course of the war. The vast majority of these men came from the Upper South, particularly Virginia and Tennessee, states which had vacillated in their allegiance right up to the outbreak of hostilities.
    [Show full text]
  • The Irony of Emancipation in the Civil War South Clark Scott Nesbit
    The Irony of Emancipation in the Civil War South Clark Scott Nesbit, Jr. Richmond, Virginia B.A., Swarthmore College, 2001 M.A., University of Virginia, 2005 A Dissertation presented to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Virginia in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Corcoran Department of History University of Virginia December, 2013 2 © Clark Scott Nesbit, Jr., 2013 3 ABSTRACT Nearly everyone in the Civil War South had opportunity to feel the irony of emancipation. This irony arose from the wartime difference between ending slavery as a regime and freeing slaves, as individuals. This dissertation explores the ways in which white southerners sacrificed, or refused to sacrifice, their interest in the enslavement of particular southern blacks for the sake of a regime that would safeguard slavery. It argues that African Americans at times sought their own freedom even if it meant aiding the Confederate regime, and at other times sought to avoid warzones even if it meant remaining legally enslaved. It argues that the Union’s war to defeat the Confederacy was also a war waged against the Confederates’ main source of labor. Such a war meant, for most who became free in the Civil War, emancipation through displacement and integration into a new system for managing former slaves, the refugee camp/plantation/recruitment complex. For those who remained in the wake of Sherman’s marches and other U.S. raids, it meant living in a land with little food. 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my dissertation committee, Ed Ayers, Gary Gallagher, Peter Onuf, and Maurie McInnis for their patience and thoughtful critiques.
    [Show full text]
  • Enduring Bonds Between Black and White Unionists in the Civil War and Beyond James Schruefer James Madison University
    James Madison University JMU Scholarly Commons Masters Theses The Graduate School Spring 2016 Good Union people: Enduring bonds between black and white Unionists in the Civil War and beyond James Schruefer James Madison University Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/master201019 Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Schruefer, James, "Good Union people: Enduring bonds between black and white Unionists in the Civil War and beyond" (2016). Masters Theses. 96. https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/master201019/96 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]. Good Union People: Enduring Bonds Between Black and White Unionists in the Civil War and Beyond James M. Schruefer 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 2016 FACULTY COMMITTEE: Committee Chair: Philip D. Dillard Committee Members/ Readers: Gabrielle M. Lanier Andrew Witmer Acknowledgments The completion of this thesis was made possible by the care and professional dedication of a number of people. The entire faculty of the JMU Department of History, whether directly involved in this thesis or not, have enriched my life by sharing their knowledge throughout time here. When I embarked on furthering my education as an adult I had no idea what to expect, and feared that my efforts would either be unworthy or go unrecognized.
    [Show full text]
  • Unconventional Warfare in East Tennessee, 1861-1865
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 3-1963 Unconventional Warfare in East Tennessee, 1861-1865 Paul A. Whelan University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Whelan, Paul A., "Unconventional Warfare in East Tennessee, 1861-1865. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 1963. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/1479 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Paul A. Whelan entitled "Unconventional Warfare in East Tennessee, 1861-1865." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Arts, with a major in History. LeRoy P. Graf, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: S. J. Folmsbee, Ralph W. Haskins Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) March 6 � 1963 To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Paul Ao Whe lan entitled "Unconventional Warfare in East Tennesseei l861=1865o00 I recom= mend that it be accepted for nine quarter hours of credit in partial fu lfillment of the requirements for the de gree of Master of Arts� with a maj or in Historyo We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Accepted for the Council: \ De'/f{d.l�an of the Graduate School dc��7/ UNCONVENTIONAL WARFARE IN EA ST TENNESSEE.
    [Show full text]
  • Lincoln: Peacemaker Or Warrior? Phillip C
    Lincoln: Peacemaker Or Warrior? Phillip C. Stone March 15, 2010 Phillip C. Stone is President emeritus of Bridgewater College and founder of the Lincoln Society of Virginia. he almost universal perception of Abraham Lincoln is of a kind, big-hearted and almost pacifist T personality who, in spite of being caught in the maelstrom of war, never really endorsed its cruelty or harshness. He himself confessed that he had felt shame and remorse as a youth after shooting and killing a wild turkey, a rather common occurrence on the frontier, where people killed game in order to eat. Except for some immature political attacks made as a young man, his manner even with his political enemies was unfailingly gracious and kind. He did not hold grudges and saw no value in revenge or retaliation. Both as a lawyer and politician, he developed a reputation as one who could reconcile and conciliate. Doris Kerns Goodwin, in Team of Rivals describes in a masterful way how Lincoln brought together in his cabinet men who had competed with him for the presidential nomination.1 She correctly identified that achievement as a tribute to his lack of ego and his ability to work with disparate personalities. When he discharged the disreputable and ineffectual Simon Cameron as Secretary of War, he turned to a Democrat, Edwin Stanton, a surprising choice both because he was a Democrat and because Stanton had humiliated Lincoln years earlier in a court case. Stanton not only snubbed him in the trial, even though they were on the same side, but referred to him as “that d____d long armed ape.”2 Lincoln patiently tolerated personal attacks, never answering in kind.
    [Show full text]