Deconstructing the History of the Battle of The

Deconstructing the History of the Battle of McPherson’s Ridge Myths and Legends of the Twenty- Sixth North Carolina on the First Day’s Fight at Gettysburg Judkin Browning In the early aft ernoon of July 1, 1863, the Twenty- aim and shot Lane in the back of thePress head from just Sixth North Carolina Regiment, under the lead- a few yards away. Lane was the last of thirteen col- ership of twenty- one- year- old Col. Henry King or bearers to be shot that day. Of the 800 men who Burgwyn Jr., launched itself into Civil War im- attacked, only 216 emerged unscathed; Company F mortality with its charge into Herbst’s Woods on suff ered 100 percent casualties in the charge. Sever- McPherson’s Ridge against the Iron Brigade, specif- al decades2015 aft er the battle, Lane met the man who ically the Twenty- Fourth Michigan Regiment. With shot him and embraced McConnell in a stirring few variations, historians tell the celebrated story of moment© at the 1903 Gettysburg battlefi eld reunion. this charge thusly: Th e Twenty- Sixth North Car- Described this way, the battle between the olina began their attack with 800 men sometime Twenty- SixthNebraska North Carolina and the Twenty- around 3:00 p.m. Th ey crossed three hundred yards Fourth Michigan makes for a very dramatic and of wheat fi elds, pushed into the thick brambles at poignantof story. Th e Twenty- Sixth North Carolina— the edge of Willoughby’s Run, splashed through which went on to suff er more losses during the that shallow creek, and entered the thin woods Pickett- Pettigrew charge on July 3 at Gettysburg on the slope of McPherson’s Ridge. Th ey closed to and in the retreat across the Potomac on July within just a few paces of the Twenty-Copyright Fourth Mich- 14— became very proud and protective of its dis- igan, suff ering and infl icting enormous casualties tinction as the regiment that suff ered the greatest along the way. At the height of the charge, Capt. W. loss in any battle during the war. Regimental mem- W. McCreery of brigade commander J. Johnston bers claimed upward of 88.5 percent casualties— Pettigrew’s staff raced up to BurgwynUniversity and relayed a enduring evidence of extraordinary bravery and message from Pettigrew: “Tell him his regiment has sacrifi ce. However, some of the iconic elements of covered itself with glory today.” Soon aft er uttering the battle have become so enshrined in legend— these words, McCreery theimpulsively picked up the largely through continual retelling— that it is diffi - fallen regimental battle fl ag and held it aloft for a cult to know what is actually true about the fi ght. moment before being killed by a shot to the chest. A Several key sources used to tell the story have seri- few moments laterby Burgwyn picked up the banner ous problems of authenticity or accuracy yet have and was mortally wounded as he handed it to an- largely been accepted as gospel, testament to the other soldier. Lt. Col. John R. Lane then hoisted the fact that historians can show faith in a source if we fl ag and led the regiment in a final, ultimately suc- want to believe the story it tells. cessful charge to push the Yankees off McPherson’s Historians have struggled to reconcile some of Ridge. Just before retreating, Cpl. Charles McCon- the disparate accounts of the battle, but the basic nell of the Twenty- Fourth Michigan took careful story and specifi c details recounted above emerge 14 Gettysburg Magazine, no. 53 Press 2015 Lt. Col. John R. Lane. Courtesy of the State Archives of ©North Carolina. Col. Henry King Burgwyn Jr. Courtesy of the State Archives of North Carolina. writtenNebraska from memory (or secondhand memories) decades aft er the fact. Th ough trained to be skep- ticalof of their sources and to weigh all the evidence, intact in nearly every history of the battle.1 Th is even historians can be seduced by the drama and could be because the authors of those histories have magnifi cence of a story. A careful examination of rarely examined the most obvious problem— nearly the sources allows us to deconstruct the Twenty- all the descriptive accounts of the charge were Copyright Sixth North Carolina’s mythic role in this battle and 1 Most of the details mentioned above originated with the fi rst regimental reveals that much of the beloved story is not as cer- history: George C. Underwood, “Twenty- Sixth Regiment,” in Histories of the Several Regiments and Battalions from North Carolina in the Great War 1861– tain as it seems. ’65, ed. Walter Clark (Goldsboro, nc: Nash Brothers, 1901), 2:303– 423. Th ough Historians have perhaps been most charmed by most comprehensively told in Rod Gragg’s Covered in Glory: Th e 26th North Carolina Infantry at the Battle of Gettysburg (NewUniversity York: Harper Collins, 2000), the fi rst offi cial history of the Twenty- Sixth North the history of the regiment’s experience at Gettysburg is also well covered in other works, such as (in chronological order by date of publication) Glenn Carolina, supposedly written by a member of the Tucker, High Tide at Gettysburg: Th e Campaign in Pennsylvania (Indianapolis: regiment, George C. Underwood, in 1901.2 Un- Bobbs- Merrill, 1958), 145– 50; Warren W. Hassler, Crisis at the Crossroads: Th e First Day at Gettysburg (Tuscaloosa:the University of Alabama Press, 1970), 112– 14; derwood’s account of the fi rst day’s battle of Get- Archie K. Davis, Boy Colonel of the Confederacy: Th e Life and Times of Henry tysburg is very detailed— so detailed in fact that it King Burgwyn, Jr. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1985), 308– 39; Champ Clark, Gettysburg: Th e Confederate High Tide (Alexandria, va: ought to make one suspicious. Underwood gran- Time- Life Books, by1986), 61– 62; R. Lee Hadden, “Th e Deadly Embrace: Th e diosely claimed to be an assistant surgeon with the Meeting of the Twenty- Fourth Regiment, Michigan Infantry and the Twenty- Sixth Regiment of North Carolina Troops at McPherson’s Grove, Gettysburg, regiment, but an assistant surgeon would not have Pennsylvania, July 1, 1863,” Gettysburg Magazine 5 (July 1991): 19– 33; Harry W. participated in the charge. So Underwood’s fi rst- Pfanz, Gettysburg: Th e First Day (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2001), 280– 84; Earl J. Hess, Lee’s Tar Heels: Th e Pettigrew- Kirkland- 2 Th e history fi rst appeared in volume 2 of Walter Clark’s fi ve- volume history of MacRae Brigade (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2002), North Carolina regiments and then was published later that same year as an 122– 37; Stephen W. Sears, Gettysburg (Boston: Houghton Miffl in, 2003), 210– 11; individual book. For ease of reference, this article refers to the original essay Steven E. Woodworth, Beneath a Northern Sky: A Short History of the Gettys- version in Clark’s series. Th e standalone book version is George C. Under- burg Campaign (Wilmington, de: sr Books, 2003), 77, 83– 84; Allen Guelzo, wood, History of the Twenty- Sixth Regiment of the North Carolina Troops in the Gettysburg: Th e Last Invasion (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2013), 195– 96. Great War 1861– ’65 (Goldsboro, nc: Nash Brothers, 1901). Myths of the Twenty-Sixth North Carolina 15 person narrative, in which battle.4 In an eff ort to me- he recounted specifi c de- morialize his brother and tails and conversations as the regiment at Gettys- if he witnessed and heard burg, William Burgwyn them, seems doubtful. It collected much material becomes even more dubi- about the Twenty- Sixth ous when one learns that North Carolina and be- not only was Underwood came its unoffi cial histo- certainly not an assistant rian. Burgwyn had also surgeon at Gettysburg but authored a history of his that he was not present in own regiment, the Th irty- any capacity at that battle. Fift h North Carolina, and According to the regi- was an adjutant general ment’s military records, and chief of staff of the George C. Underwood North Carolina Division was a second lieutenant of of the United Confeder- Company G who resigned ate VeteransPress organization on July 22, 1862, because at the turn of the century, of health reasons, and playing a key role in tell- never rejoined the regi- ing the story of the Con- ment. Underwood— who federate heroism in the in 1860 had been a student 2015 war. Several clues in the living in the household of work give away Burgwyn W. S. McLean, a medi- © as the author. Th e clear- cal doctor and the origi- William H. S. Burgwyn, as member of the Thirty-Nebraska Fifth est is when the author nal captain of Company North Carolina Regiment. Courtesy of the State Archives discussed the number of G— had likely lent a hand of North Carolina. of casualties aft er the fi rst in the hospital during his day’s battle, referencing only year of service, but he was never given the title William H. Fox’s book, Regimental Losses in the or paid as an assistant surgeon.3 Civil War (1889). In one passage the author writes, Since Underwood’s credibility is compromised “In a letter to the writer dated 30 September 1889, and he was not a witness to the eventsCopyright he de- Colonel Fox says.” Th at September 30 letter was scribed, it begs the question: did Underwood even addressed to Burgwyn and the original (identical write the account of Gettysburg? And if Under- to the one quoted in the book) is in the Burgwyn wood did not write the story, who did? Th e prob- Papers at the State Archives of North Carolina.5 able author of the account of the Universityfi rst day’s battle 4 Th ere are various names by which William Hyslop Sumner Burgwyn is of Gettysburg (and perhaps the entire book) was referred.

Load more