History 352: The Civil War and Reconstruction Professor Dubrulle The 5th New Hampshire ... · 2018. 1. 10. · Hampshire’s Civil War history; the 5th Regiment of New Hampshire Volunteer

History 352: The Civil War and Reconstruction

Professor Dubrulle

1

The 5th New Hampshire Project

Officers of the 5th

Regiment of New Hampshire Volunteer Infantry at the Federal prison camp at Point Lookout, MD.

The regiment guarded Confederate prisoners of war at this location from November 1863 to May 1864.

(http://ourwarmikepride.blogspot.com/2013/07/stand-your-ground-circa-1864.html)

Welcome

Welcome to the 5th New Hampshire Project! As part of this assignment, you will be attached to a group of

students that will engage in primary and secondary source research on topics associated with the 5th

Regiment of New Hampshire Volunteer Infantry. Eventually, your group will produce a research paper,

and if that essay meets the course’s standards, it will be posted on a web site about this regiment. You will

receive full and public credit on the web site for your work, so give it your best shot. Keep in mind that

this project will be a work of time; History 352: The Civil War and Reconstruction will have to be offered

several times before students can generate the text necessary to populate all the topics that will be covered

on the web site.

Purpose

As you work on this project, please keep the two following purposes uppermost in your mind.

http://ourwarmikepride.blogspot.com/2013/07/stand-your-ground-circa-1864.html


Professor Dubrulle

2

First, this assignment will require you and your group to work together as you read both primary and

secondary sources carefully, think critically, synthesize information, produce a sophisticated argument, and

write a well-crafted essay. In other words, this project is an opportunity for you to hone important skills of

analysis and exposition that will serve you personally as well as professionally throughout your life.

Second, this assignment will give you the chance to educate the public about an important part of New

Hampshire’s Civil War history; the 5th Regiment of New Hampshire Volunteer Infantry holds the

distinction of having suffered more combat fatalities than any other regiment in the Union army during the

Civil War. You will learn much as you work on this project, but at the end of the day, you are performing

a service for visitors to the site. This responsibility is an important one. Make sure you carry it out to the

very best of your ability.

Topics

The web site will be divided into a series of sections, each one surveying a topic or related family of topics.

The topics are listed below. The rest of this document will describe what each topic involves, what sources

you should use in dealing with essays that address these topics, and how your essay should be structured.

Recruitment and Organization

Discipline and Desertion

Politics

People

Battles

Prisoners of War

Medicine

Mapping and Statistics

Sources

Requirements

So far as formatting is concerned, your research paper should satisfy the following requirements.

The essay should be double-spaced in 12-point Times New Roman font.

Margins should be conventional; one inch on the left and right, top and bottom.

Page numbers should be inserted in the center of the bottom of each page.

Other requirements include the following:

Your paper should include a cover page with a title that describes its subject/argument. The cover

page should also include the names of the students who produced the paper.

The paper should use endnote citations.

Figures—including maps, portraits, photos, and other images—should be submitted on the due

date via email as attachments. Please include a url and caption for each image in your email.

The essay should be a minimum of 3000 words (roughly 12 pages with the formatting described

above).


Professor Dubrulle

3

Essay Topics for this Semester

Topic #1: Colonel Edward E. Cross

Cross was the first colonel of the 5th

NHVI (that is, its first commander), leading it from the date that it was

mustered in (October 1861) until he was mortally wounded on the second day of Gettysburg (July 1863).

Cross was the single most important person in the unit’s history; his forceful character made an enormous

impression on the regiment and does much to account for its unique spirit.

Issues You Should Address

Your essay should present a chronological narrative about Cross’ life, but it should not read like a long

encyclopedia entry. It should start, like a normal paper, with an introduction that presents a thesis or

argument that assesses Cross and the job he did as colonel of the regiment. As you write your essay, you

should address the following:

What were the formative experiences in Cross’ life?

How would you judge his character? What were his attributes and weaknesses?

To what degree did he make his mark on the regiment? What exactly was that mark? In other

words, how and to what extent did the regiment reflect his character?

What were Cross’ attitudes toward the regiment, the war, and politics?

In answering these questions, you will want to think about Cross’ ideas and his relationships with

others.

Discussion of Sources

The place to start is with Pride and Travis’ My Brave Boys. Relying on an extensive collection of sources,

this book tells the story of the 5th NHVI with Cross as the central figure. Grandchamp’s work is a more

conventional biography and somewhat shorter, but it is still very good and well researched. Grandchamp

goes into somewhat more detail on Cross’ pre-war activities than Pride and Travis do. Child’s A History of

the Fifth Regiment is also incredibly important because it straddles the area between primary and

secondary source. Child was a surgeon in the 5th NHVI and knew Cross personally. After the war, Child

became the self-appointed chronicler of the regiment and had access to official records as well as his

companions’ diaries. Finally, Lancaster, NH is where Cross was born and raised, so you will want to take a

look at Somers’ History of Lancaster.

The most important collection of primary sources on Cross during the Civil War appears in Stand Firm and

Fire Low. In this book, you will find Cross’ Civil War journal, his letters, and his various after-action

reports. The after-action reports are also contained in the Official Records, and you will want to consult

these. All of these are important for forming a picture of the man. You will also want to turn to sources

produced by men in the regiment who knew Cross to see what kind of estimate they formed of their

colonel. Child’s wartime letters have been published, and these are especially valuable because they express

what he thought at the time and not what he remembered years later. Livermore’s book was published in

1920 shortly after he died, but it was based on a manuscript he wrote right when the war ended. His

recollections are important because, unlike Child, he was with the regiment from its mustering in to the

end of the war. Livermore was also commissioned officer, so he had many chances to interact with Cross.


Professor Dubrulle

4

Finally, you ought to take a look at the Barton, Butler, Gove, and Larkin transcriptions for references to

Cross. Barton appears to have been more or less hounded out of the regiment by Cross, so it should be

interesting to see what he thought of Cross. Butler was an especial favorite of Cross’, and they spent much

time together. Gove is entertaining for his outspoken letters. Finally, Larkin had his violent disagreements

with Cross, but eventually made his peace with the colonel and came to respect him.

Archival Sources

Ira Barton Papers (DC)

Frank W. Butler Papers (NHHS)

George Gove Papers (UNH)

James Larkin Papers (NHHS)

Primary Sources for Edward E. Cross

William Child, Letters from a Civil War Surgeon: The Letters of Dr. William Child of the Fifth New

Hampshire Volunteers (Solon, ME: Polar Bear & Co., 2001).

Edward Ephraim Cross, Stand Firm and Fire Low: The Civil War Writings of Colonel Edward E. Cross

(Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 2003).

Thomas Livermore, Days and Events, 1860-1866. (Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1920).

(https://archive.org/details/daysevents18601800live)

United States War Department, Official Records of the War of the Rebellion, Series I, 1-53; Series II, 1-8;

Series III, 1-5; Series IV, 1-4 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1880-1901).

(http://ehistory.osu.edu/books/official-records)

Also available on the shelves at Geisel Library (see OR index)

Secondary Sources for Edward E. Cross

William Child, A History of the Fifth Regiment, New Hampshire Volunteers, in the American Civil War,

1861-1865 (Bristol, NH: R. W. Musgrove, Printer, 1893).

https://archive.org/details/historyoffifthre00chil

Robert Grandchamp. Colonel Edward E. Cross, New Hampshire Fighting Fifth: A Civil War Biography

(Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, 2012).

Mike Pride and Mark Travis, My Brave Boys: To War with Colonel Cross & the Fighting Fifth (Hanover,

NH: University Press of New England, 2001).

Donald R. Richards, “The Fifth New Hampshire Volunteers (Light Infantry)” Historical New Hampshire,

(Winter 1973).

Amos N. Somers, History of Lancaster, New Hampshire (Concord, NH: Rumford Press, 1899).

https://books.google.com/books?id=nnQUAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&

cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

https://archive.org/details/daysevents18601800livehttp://ehistory.osu.edu/books/official-recordshttps://archive.org/details/historyoffifthre00chilhttps://books.google.com/books?id=nnQUAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=falsehttps://books.google.com/books?id=nnQUAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false


Professor Dubrulle

5

Topic #2: Battle of Fair Oaks

The Battle of Fair Oaks (May 31-June 1, 1862) took place during the Peninsula campaign in which General

George B. McClellan, the commander of the Union Army of the Potomac, sought to capture Richmond,

the Confederate capital. It was the largest battle ever fought up to that point in the Eastern theater; the

Federals lost suffered 5,000 casualties, while the Army of Northern Virginia, under General Joseph E.

Johnston lost about 6,000 dead, wounded, and missing. Fair Oaks was the first major battle in which the

5th NHVI fought. The regiment gave a good account of itself and drove the Confederate forces back but

lost over 150 men in the action.


As always, you should not merely “give the facts.” Your essay should present an argument about the battle

and the regiment’s performance in it—and this argument should appear in the introduction. In other

words, this paper should weigh the evidence and make critical judgments as it addresses the following

issues:

Place the battle in context. What was the Peninsula campaign of which this battle formed a part?

Why had McClellan decided to land at Fort Monroe and take Richmond from the east? What was

his plan? What had happened after he had landed? In other words, what battles had he fought,

and to what places had he laid siege? What progress had he made toward his goal of seizing

Richmond?

Generally, what happened at Fair Oaks? Why did a battle occur there? Why did Johnston decide

to attack McClellan in this area? What was McClellan hoping to accomplish? How did the battle

unfold?

Zoom in on the 5th NHVI. What was its role in the battle? What did the regiment do and what

was its experience during the fighting? As you read the secondary sources, it would help to follow

what Caldwell’s brigade and Richardson’s division were up to (these were the brigade and

division, respectively, to which the 5th NHVI belonged). Somewhat more than half of your paper

should focus on these questions.

What were the consequences of this battle for the big picture?

In what ways was the battle significant for the 5th NHVI?


Before you do anything else, get a grip on the big picture. The best place to start, probably, is Sears’ To the

Gates of Richmond. This book will provide you with a good survey of the campaign up to Fair Oaks. Then

move on to Dougherty and Cullen. After you have looked at these overviews, focusing primarily on the

beginning of the campaign and the Battle of Fair Oaks, it’s time to look at the books on the battle itself.

Fair Oaks has not attracted a huge amount of scholarly attention. Broadwater’s The Battle of Fair Oaks is

one of the only recent works on the subject. Finally, you should read the relevant section of Child’s

History of the Fifth Regiment for his version of what the regiment did at Fair Oaks. Keep in mind that

although Child served with the regiment for much of the war, he did not join the 5th NHVI until the fall of

1862.


Professor Dubrulle

6

So far as primary sources are concerned, you should pay close attention to the relevant parts of Stand Firm

and Fire Low, especially Cross’ after-action report (this report also appears in the Official Records). Check

his diary and any letters he may have written from around the period of the battle. As the colonel of the

regiment, Cross is one of the best sources of what the unit did during the battle. Check Until Antietam to

see if Richardson wrote any letters about the battle. Consult Livermore’s book for a first-hand account of

the fighting.

Take a look at the various relevant documents that appear in the Official Records. These would include the

reports of the generals who commanded the corps, division, and brigade of which the 5th NHVI formed a

part (Sumner, Richardson, and Howard/Parker, respectively). And you will want to read the report of

Colonel Cross, the commander of the 5th NHVI. It might also prove profitable to look at the reports of the

other units that were in the same brigade as the 5th NHVI (the 64

th New York, the 61

st New York, and the

81st Pennsylvania) as well as the report of the Irish Brigade which was close by during the battle.

Read the transcripts of the archival sources to see what the various soldiers involved in this battle

experienced and thought. Look at letters written right after June 1, 1862. These accounts can give you some

good anecdotes (e.g. James Larkin’s assertion that “it is a merricle I was not shot for the balls whized

around my head like a swarm of bees”) and really give you a good idea of what being at the battle was

like. Quotes from these sources can really make your narrative come alive. Same goes for the

correspondence from the various letters sent to the newspapers.

Finally, the Excel spreadsheet will permit you to do some statistically analysis. For example, you can

determine which companies in the regiment suffered more heavily than others at the battle—and from

reading narratives of the battle, you may understand why that was the case.

Archival Sources

Ira Barton Papers (Dartmouth)

George Bucknam Papers (UNH)

Frank W. Butler Papers (NNHS)


James E. Larkin Papers (NNHS)

John Bucknam Papers (NHHS)

Miles Peabody Papers (NHHS)

Charles Phelps Papers (NHHS)

Newspaper Sources

In the days after Fair Oaks, a number of anonymous correspondents wrote to New Hampshire

newspapers. Make sure you consult the Concord Independent Democrat, the Coos Republican, and the

Farmer’s Cabinet.

Primary Sources

Excel spreadsheet with data from Augustus D. Ayling, Revised Register of the Soldiers and Sailors of New

Hampshire in the War of the Rebellion 1861-1866 (Concord: Ira C. Evans, Public Printer, 1895).




Professor Dubrulle

7



Jack C. Mason, Until Antietam: The Life and Letters of Major General Israel B. Richardson, US Army

(Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2017).


Series III, 1-5; Series IV, 1-4 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1880-1901). (E464.U61 in the

library catalog)

Documents you ought to consult from the Official Records come from Series I, Volume 11, part 1, and

include reports written by the 5th NHVI’s corps, division, brigade, and regimental commanders:

#2 Return of Casualties for the Army of the Potomac, p. 757

#3 Sumner’s Report (Corps commander), pp. 763-764

#4 Richardson’s Report (Division commander), pp 764-766

#6 Howard’s Reports (Brigade Commander), pp. 768-770

#8 Cross’ Report (Regimental commander), pp. 771-772

See also:

#7 Parker’s Report (commander of the 64th New York which was in the same brigade as the 5th

New Hampshire; Parker wrote this report in his capacity as the officer who took over the brigade

at Fair Oaks after Howard was wounded in the arm)

#9 Barlow’s Report (commander of the 61st New York which was in the same brigade as the 5th

New Hampshire)

#10 Parker’s Report (in his capacity as commander of the 64th New York)

#11 Johnson’s Report (Colonel of the 81st Pennsylvania which was in the same brigade as the 5th

New Hampshire)

#12 Meagher (commander of the Irish Brigade which was close to the 5th New Hampshire)

Secondary Sources

Robert P. Broadwater, The Battle of Fair Oaks: Turning Point of McClellan’s Peninsula Campaign

(Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2011).




Joseph Cullen, The Peninsula Campaign, 1862: McClellan and Lee Struggle for Richmond (Harrisburg, PA:

Stackpole Books, 1973).

Kevin Dougherty, The Peninsula Campaign of 1862: A Military Analysis (Jackson, MS: University Press of

Mississippi, 2005).

Gallagher, Gary (ed.). The Richmond Campaign of 1862: The Peninsular and the Seven Days (Chapel Hill:

University of North Carolina Press, 2000).





https://archive.org/details/daysevents18601800livehttps://archive.org/details/historyoffifthre00chil


Professor Dubrulle

8

Stephen Sears, To the Gates of Richmond: The Peninsula Campaign (New York: Ticknor & Fields, 1992).


Professor Dubrulle

9

Topic #3: Battle of Antietam

The Battle of Antietam (September 17, 1862) was the bloodiest day of the entire Civil War. It was also

significant in a number of other ways. Under General George B. McClellan, the Army of the Potomac

managed to turn back the Army of Northern Virginia (commanded by General Robert E. Lee) before its

raid into Maryland had even really started. Although the battle was tactically indecisive, it was a strategic

victory for the North that provided President Abraham Lincoln with the opportunity to issue the

Emancipation Proclamation. The 5th NHVI played a very important role in the fight, helping to crack the

center of the Confederate line which was stationed in the infamous “Sunken Road”—otherwise referred to

as the “Bloody Lane.” In so doing, the regiment came away with a rare trophy—the regimental standard of

the 4th North Carolina Volunteer Infantry. The standard was seized by Sergeant George Nettleton, an

English immigrant from Company G, who was promoted to 2nd

Lieutenant for his actions (he was mortally

wounded at Fredericksburg later in the year). The regiment went into battle with about 325 men and lost

around 125 casualties (fortunately, only about 18 were killed).


You should follow much the template as for the Battle of Fair Oaks. As always, you should not merely

“give the facts.” Your essay should present an argument about the battle and the regiment’s performance in

it—and this argument should appear in the introduction. In other words, this paper should weigh the

evidence and make critical judgments as it addresses the following issues:

Place the battle in context. What was the Maryland campaign of which this battle formed a part?

Why had Robert E. Lee decided to move north into Maryland? What was his plan? What

tremendous stroke of luck gave McClellan an advantage? What was his plan for dealing with the

Army of Northern Virginia?

Generally, what happened at Antietam? Why did a battle occur there? How did McClellan plan to

destroy Lee’s army there? How did the battle unfold? What were the stages of the battle?

Zoom in on the 5th NHVI. What was its role in the battle? What did the regiment do and what

was its experience during the fighting? As you read the secondary sources, it would help to follow

what Caldwell’s brigade and Richardson’s division were up to (these were the brigade and

division, respectively, to which the 5th NHVI belonged). Somewhat more than half of your paper

should focus on these questions.

What were the consequences of this battle for the big picture?

In what ways was the battle significant for the 5th NHVI?


The situation here is somewhat different from that pertaining to the Battle of Fair Oaks. There are many

more scholarly secondary sources, but somewhat fewer archival sources.

Sears’ Landscape Turned Red is probably the best book about the battle itself, but the first part of it

presents a detailed narrative about the prelude to the battle—maybe more than you might want or need.

McPherson gives a concise overview of the months leading up to the battle and how Antietam fit in the big

picture. Carman will be of interest for those interested in details of the campaign and the battle. You will

want to pay close attention to Armstrong’s book because it deals specifically with Sumner’s Second Corps


Professor Dubrulle

10

which is the one to which the 5th NHVI belonged. Gallagher’s book has an essay specifically about the

Bloody Lane where the 5th NHVI was engaged, so you will definitely want to check that out. As always,

you will want to consult Grandchamp’s book along with My Brave Boys.

So far as printed primary sources are concerned, you should pay close attention to the relevant parts of

Stand Firm and Fire Low, especially Cross’ after-action report (this report also appears in the Official

Records). Check his diary and any letters he may have written from around the period of the battle. As the

colonel of the regiment, Cross is one of the best sources of what the unit did during the battle. Israel

Richardson (the division commander) was mortally wounded at the battle, but you will want to check

Until Antietam to look at letters he wrote during the campaign.

You will also need to look at the Official Records. These would include the reports of the generals who

commanded the corps, division, and brigade of which the 5th NHVI formed a part (Sumner, Hancock, and

Caldwell, respectively—Hancock took over the division after Richardson was wounded during the battle).

And you will want to read the report of Colonel Cross, the commander of the 5th NHVI. It might also

prove profitable to look at the reports of the other units that were in the same brigade as the 5th NHVI

(the 7th New York, 64

th New York, the 61

st New York, and the 81st Pennsylvania) as well as the report of

Meagher who commanded the Irish Brigade which was on the same part of the battlefield

Interestingly enough, the various letters we have make scant mention of Antietam. The only

correspondence covering the battle comes from George Gove. It’s not entirely clear why such is the case.

For sure, George Bucknam was in the hospital recovering from a gunshot wound sustained at Fair Oaks,

and James Larkin may have been under a doctor’s care for scurvy of all things, but there is no obvious

reason why the correspondence of others has no letters referring to the battle. Too bad! At least you can

look at some of the newspaper correspondence which does have several letters.

Finally, the Excel spreadsheet will permit you to do some statistically analysis. For example, you can

determine which companies in the regiment suffered more heavily than others at the battle—and from

reading narratives of the battle, you may understand why that was the case.

Archival Sources


Newspaper Sources

In the days after Antietam, several anonymous correspondents wrote to New Hampshire newspapers.

Make sure you consult the Concord Independent Democrat, the Coos Republican, and the Farmer’s

Cabinet.

Primary Sources






Professor Dubrulle

11



Jack C. Mason, Until Antietam: The Life and Letters of Major General Israel B. Richardson, US Army

(Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2017).



library catalog)

Documents you ought to consult from the Official Records come from Series I, Volume 19, part 2, and

include reports written by the 5th NHVI’s corps, division, brigade, and regimental commanders:

#5 Return of Casualties for the Army of the Potomac, p. 191

#38 Sumner’s Report (Corps commander), pp. 275-276

#39 Hancock’s Report (Division commander), pp 277-283

#42 Caldwell’s Reports (Brigade Commander), pp. 284-287

#43 Cross’ Report (Regimental commander), pp. 287-288

See also:

#44 Brestel’s Report (commander of the 7th New York which was in the same brigade as the 5th

New Hampshire)

#45 Barlow’s Report (commander of the 61st New York and 64th New York which were in the

same brigade as the 5th New Hampshire)

#46 Miles’ Report (commander of the 64th New York which was in the same brigade as the 5th

New Hampshire)

#47 McKeen’s Report (commander of the 81st Pennsylvania which was in the same brigade as the

5th New Hampshire)

#48 Meagher (commander of the Irish Brigade which was right next to the 5th New Hampshire)

Secondary Sources

Marion V. Armstrong, Unfurl Those Colors! McClellan, Sumner, and the Second Army Corps in the

Antietam Campaign (Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 2008).

Ezra Ayers Carman, The Maryland Campaign of September 1862: Ezra A. Carman’s Definitive Study of the

Union and Confederate Armies at Antietam (New York: Routledge, 2008).




Gary W. Gallagher (ed.), The Antietam Campaign (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1999).



Robert J. Kalasky, Shadows of Antietam (Kent, Ohio: The Kent State University Press, 2012).

James McPherson, Crossroads of Freedom: Antietam (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002).



Stephen Sears, Landscape Turned Red (New Haven: Ticknor & Fields, 1983).

https://archive.org/details/daysevents18601800livehttps://archive.org/details/historyoffifthre00chil


Professor Dubrulle

12

Topic #4: Desertion

On October 12, 1861, eighteen-year-old Samuel Nichols of Worcester, MA, along with the rest of Company

A, was mustered into the 5th NHVI near Concord. The next day, he deserted. He was the first of the

regiment’s deserters, but he certainly was not the last. Desertion during the war was extremely common,

with some historians estimating that around 9% of the men serving in the Union army deserted at some

point during the war. The 5th NHVI was no exception—the regiment lost more men to desertion than it

did to combat fatalities.


For years, desertion was an understudied topic. Ella Lonn’s book, which was originally published in 1928, is

still the only monograph that covers the issue. In the last 15 years, though, interest in desertion has

reawakened, and historians as well as economists have attempted to look at the question through a variety

of fresh perspectives. This paper, then, should do the following:

What are the various explanations given by scholars as to why men deserted during the Civil War?

What were the general patterns of desertion in the 5th NHVI and to what degree do they accord

with the explanations of historians?

To answer the latter question, you will have to immerse yourself in the Excel spreadsheet which provides

the abbreviated service records for the soldiers in the 5th NHVI.


As mentioned earlier, Lonn’s work is the only book-length treatment of the topic, so it makes sense to start

with that. But you will then want to move to Costa’s more recent work, particularly “Cowards and

Heroes” as well as Heroes and Cowards. (Hess’ essay explains the way in which different historians have

used the dataset that Costa employed.) The rest of Costa’s research is interesting, but not necessarily quite

as relevant. Her quantitative approach to the question (she’s an economist) is different from that of

historians. You will want to compare her ideas to other recent studies, including those by Bearman,

Cimbala and Miller (whose book contains several pertinent essays about the relationship between the

home front and soldiers’ willingness to stick it out), Kemp, and Weitz. If you can get hold of the various

MA theses, these might be very helpful, especially Frawley’s.

Having looked at the various arguments presented in the secondary literature, you will need to dive into

the Excel spreadsheet with the abbreviated service records of all soldiers who served in the 5th NHVI. Look

for patterns. What kind of people were deserting? When did they desert? What was the composition of

deserters’ companies? Who were their officers? Your research may leave you with questions that require

further research. How did their towns vote in 1860 and 1864? What were the primary occupations in these

areas? If your research leads you in these directions, contact me, and I can point you in the right direction.

You will also want to pay close attention to the assorted primary and archival sources to see what they

reveal about desertion. Keep in mind that Cross, Livermore, Child, Gove, and Larkin were officers, and

that perspective influenced their view of this phenomenon. Peabody and Holt were corporals and

Bucknam a private, so they saw matters in a very different light.


Professor Dubrulle

13

Archival Sources

George Bucknam (NHHS)


Stephen Henry Holt Papers (DC)


Miles Peabody (NHHS)

Primary Sources









Secondary Sources

Peter S. Bearman, “Desertion as Localism: Army Unit Solidarity and Group Norms in the U.S. Civil War”

Social Forces 70 (1991): 321-342.

Paul C. Cimbala and Randall M. Miller (ed.), Union Soldiers and the Northern Home Front: Wartime

Experiences, Postwar Adjustments (New York: Fordham University Press, 2002).

Albert Connor, Seizing Destiny: The Army of the Potomac’s “Valley Forge” and the Civil War Winter that

Saved the Union (El Dorado Hills: Savas Beatie, 2016).

Dora L. Costa, Health and Labor Force Participation over the Life Cycle: Evidence form the Past (Chicago:

Chicago University Press, 2003).

Dora L. Costa, Heroes and Cowards: The Social Face of War (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008).

Dora L. Costa, “Cowards and Heroes: Group Loyalty in the American Civil War” The Quarterly Journal of

Economics 118 (2003): 519-548.

Dora L. Costa and Matthew E. Kahn, “Deserters, Social Norms, and Migration” The Journal of Law and

Economics 50 (2007): 323-353.

Dora L. Costa and Matthew E. Kahn, “Shame and Ostracism: Union Army Deserters Leave Home” NEBR

Working Paper (April 2004).

Dora L. Costa, “Leaders: Privilege, Sacrifice, Opportunity, and Personnel Economics in the American Civil

War” The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 30 (2014): 437-462.

Jason Mann Frawley, “Voting with Their Feet: Union Desertion in the Army of the Potomac” MA Thesis,

Georgia Southern University, 2003.

https://archive.org/details/daysevents18601800live


Professor Dubrulle

14

Katherine Giuffre, “First in Flight: Desertion as Politics in the North Carolina Confederate Army” MA Thesis

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1991.

Earl J. Hess, “The Early Indicators Project: Using Massive Data and Statistical Analysis to Understand the

Life Cycle of Civil War Soldiers” Civil War History 63 (2017): 377-399.

T. R. Kemp, “Community and War: The Civil War Experience of Two New Hampshire Towns” in Toward

a Social History of the American Civil War, ed. M. A. Vinovskis (New York: Cambridge University Press,

1990): 31-77.

Robert L. Klatte, “Civil War Desertions: Abandoning the Cause” MA Thesis, Baylor University, 1992.

Peter Levine, “Draft Evasion in the North during the Civil War, 1863-1865” Journal of American History 67

(1981): 816-834.

Ella Lonn, Desertion during the Civil War (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1998).

Kris Clarke Mitchell, “Deserting the Cause” MA Thesis, Arizona State University, 1995.

Mark Weitz, A Higher Duty: Desertion among Georgia Troops during the Civil War (Lincoln: University of

Nebraska Press, 2000).


Professor Dubrulle

15

Topic #5 Prisoner of War Camps

The number of soldiers from the 5th NHVI who were captured did not amount to more than 100 (out of

about 2400 who passed through the unit’s ranks). The great majority of these men were captured in two

actions—at Cold Harbor (June 3, 1864) and Farmville (April 7, 1865). And the men seized at the latter

battle remained in Confederate hands for only a couple of days (those who didn’t escape as Lee’s Army of

Northern Virginia disintegrated were freed when that force surrendered at Appomattox on April 9, 1865).

Members of the 5th NHVI, then, had much more experience as captors than as captives. From November

1863 to May 1864, the regiment stood guard at Camp Hoffman, better known as Point Lookout, a large

camp in Maryland (where the Potomac River and Chesapeake Bay meet) holding thousands of

Confederate prisoners of war. This portion of the regiment’s service give us an opportunity to investigate a

particularly contentious topic—Civil War prisoner of war camps. The most acrimonious debates revolving

around Federal camps for Confederate POWs are the following. First, how bad were Federal camps

compared to Confederate ones? Second, what accounted for the conditions at Federal camps? We will

look at these questions as we survey the 5th NHVI’s experience at Point Lookout.


You should survey the literature concerning Civil War prisoner of war camps and be able to summarize the

different arguments or themes in that literature. What do different scholars say about these camps? You

should also try to reach some conclusions about these camps. In other words, what were the conditions at

these Northern camps in general and at Point Lookout in particular? What accounted for these conditions

(e.g. incompetence, neglect, callousness, shortages, retaliation, etc.)? Having established answers to these

questions, take a look at the 5th NHVI’s experiences at Point Lookout. What did the soldiers from the unit

think and write about the camps? Do they bear out what you have learned about Northern camps? If there

are important differences between what the soldiers write and what you have learned, can you reconcile

these differences somehow?


Start with the main books about Civil War prisons: Gillispie, Pickenpaugh, Sanders, Speer, and Springer.

Each of these historians has a different take about the conditions and Federal camps and what accounted

for those conditions. You will also want to see how much information you can garner from these works

about Point Lookout. After you’ve surveyed these works, take a look at Betizell’s book. For such a large

camp (in fact, it was the North’s largest), Point Lookout is understudied—Beitzell is the only one who has

focused specifically on this topic. And then it’s time for Child’s history of the regiment.

At that point, it’s time to move on to primary and archival sources. You should make sure to survey the

relevant parts of the Official Record. Most of the useful information about Point Lookout is located in

Series II, volumes 6-8. Here you can you information about conditions in the camp. For example, there is a

record of a very interesting conversation between General Benjamin Butler and several Confederate

sergeants who were responsible for the mess halls at Point Lookout. There is also information about a

board of inquiry presided over by Colonel Charles Hapgood (then commander of the 5th NHVI) that

investigated the shooting of a Confederate POW by a sergeant in the 2nd

NHVI.


Professor Dubrulle

16

You should also take a look at the illustrations of John Omenhausser, a Confederate prisoner at Point

Lookout who produced a series of sketches detailing camp life. These are an interesting visual record of

conditions in the camp—from a Confederate point of view.

Finally, you should find out what the Child, Gove, Holt, Larkin, and Peabody letters indicate about their

experiences at Point Lookout.

Archival Sources


Stephen Henry Holt Papers (DC)


Miles Peabody (NHHS)

Primary Sources





New York Historical Society (Omenhausser’s illustrations of Point Lookout):

http://blog.nyhistory.org/inside-a-civil-war-prison-camp-sketches-from-point-lookout/



library catalog)

Documents you ought to consult from the Official Records come from the following:

Series I, volumes 33 and 37

Series II, volumes 6, 7, and 8

Series III, volume 5

The great bulk of information about Point Lookout comes from Series II, volumes 6, 7, and 8. Volume 6

has a very interesting set of documents issuing forth from a board of inquiry (presided over by Colonel

Charles Hapgood, then commander of the 5th NHVI) that investigated the shooting of a Confederate POW

by a sergeant in the 2nd

New Hampshire Volunteer Infantry (see pp. 1097-1101).

University of Maryland Libraries, Digital Collection, John Jacob Omenhausser Sketchbook, Point Lookout,

Maryland, 1864-1865: https://digital.lib.umd.edu/image?pid=umd:50498#fullMetadata

Secondary Sources

Edwin Warfield Beitzell, Point Lookout Prison Camp for Confederates (Abell, MD, 1972).




James M. Gillispie, Andersonvilles of the North: The Myths and Realities of Northern Treatment of Civil

War Confederate Prisoners (Denton, TX: University of North Texas Press, 2008).

Ross J. Kelbaugh, Maryland’s Civil War Photographs: The Sesquicentennial Collection (Baltimore:

Maryland Historical Society, 2012). (Photographs of Point Lookout).

https://archive.org/details/daysevents18601800livehttp://blog.nyhistory.org/inside-a-civil-war-prison-camp-sketches-from-point-lookout/https://digital.lib.umd.edu/image?pid=umd:50498#fullMetadatahttps://archive.org/details/historyoffifthre00chil


Professor Dubrulle

17

Ross Kimmel, “I Am Busy Drawing Pictures” Civil War Times Illustrated 41 (2002).

Roger Pickenpaugh, Captives in Gray: Civil War Prisons of the Union (Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama

Press, 2009).

Charles W. Sanders, While in the Hands of the Enemy: Military Prisons of the Civil War (Baton Rouge:

Louisiana State University Press, 2005).

Lonnie R. Speer, Portals to Hell: Military Prisons of the Civil War (Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books,

1997).

Lonnie R. Speer, War of Vengeance: Acts of Retaliation against Civil War POWs (Mechanicsburg, PA:

Stackpole Books, 2002).

Paul J. Springer, Transforming Civil War Prisons: Lincoln, Lieber, and the Politics of Captivity (New York:

Routledge, 2015).

“A View of Point Lookout Prison Camp for Confederates” Organization of American Historians Magazine

of History 8 (October 1, 1993): 30-36.


Professor Dubrulle

18

Advice for Approaching Research

Every essay will be different, but the following general advice will probably apply to everyone.

Get Your Books as Soon as Possible: As soon as you establish your group and topic, get the books you

need. Geisel Library will have some of these book (either on the shelf or in databases), and other sources

may be located online. However, many works will have to be ordered through Interlibrary Loan (ILL). You

ought to put in your ILL requests in as soon as possible, because some of your books might take a little

while to get to you.

Start with the Most General Secondary Sources: Consult the most general secondary works first. As you

read, keep track of the author’s argument (e.g. the conditions in Northern prison camps were a result of

malicious and retaliatory Federal policies) and take note of important or useful facts (e.g. construction of

the Point Lookout camp began in June 1863).

Move from General Secondary Sources to More Specific Ones: For example, once you’ve finished books

that are generally about Federal prison camps, then start reading books about the camp at Point Lookout.

Again, you will want to remain mindful of the author’s argument, but you will also want to note facts that

will help you make sense of the primary sources (e.g. the location of the soldiers’ barracks).

Then Look at Primary Sources: Once you’ve looked at all the secondary sources, then it’s time to move to

the primary ones. Why read the secondary works before the primary sources? First, reading various

authors’ arguments will make it easier for you to develop your own thesis. Second, the secondary works

will provide the context that will make it possible for you to understand fully the primary sources.

Take Good Notes: Throughout the process, take good, well-organized notes that you can access easily.

Since you will be consulting a wide variety of sources, you will want to keep notes in such a way that you

can draw on them quickly and compare information from very different sources.

Group Work and Communication: Everybody will be working as part of a team, and the key to successful

teamwork is communication.

Plan to meet frequently so all of you can stay abreast of what each of everyone in the group is

doing, share information, and assign tasks.

Set aside specific dates and times to meet.

Assign tasks and deadlines.

Build some cushion into your deadlines.

Divide the work equitably. Not everybody ought to do the same thing; different people have

different strengths. But everybody must do something.

Communicate frequently by email or text so that everybody is on the same page and little

problems don’t become big ones.


Professor Dubrulle

19

What Every Essay Should Do and How It Should Be Done

Just because we are generating material for the web does not mean that we should neglect the traditional

principles that allow one to write good essays. I have produced a short explanation of what I expect every

essay to do.

The Point of the Exercise: Always keep in mind that the main functions of your essay are a) explain what

historians think about a particular aspect of the Civil War and b) how the experience of the 5th NHVI either

fits or does not fit with what historians think. If your topic is desertion, then, you ought to discuss the

broad trends in desertion that historians have discussed and the degree to which the 5th NHVI’s experience

fits these trends.

Think!: First, turn off the TV, your iPhone, or anything else that might distract you. You need to have some

peace and quiet so you can be alone with your thoughts. Walking around outside just letting my mind

wander often helps me write. Second, as they come to you, write down bits of ideas on pieces of paper.

These could be ideas you find in the source material, and they can also be ideas that you come up with

yourself. They don’t have to be organized. Just write them down so you have them recorded somewhere.

The ideas don’t always have to be important—they can also just be interesting. Keep your source material

handy during this process so you can look at it. Keep in mind that there should be some feedback between

your writing and your thoughts. After thinking, read a little bit, and after reading, ponder over what you

have read for a spell. At a certain point, you will have to sit down with your scraps of paper, your sources,

and your thoughts and use these to write an outline.

Planning, Outlining, and Writing: Your outline should be flexible. It should not act as a straitjacket. The

whole process of writing is nothing more than thinking. If, as you begin to write, your thinking compels

you to leave the outline, by all means, leave it. Once you leave the old outline, you will have to formulate

a new one. In Lawrence Freedman’s Strategy: A History, he argues that strategy is not the same thing as a

plan. “A plan,” Freedman claims, “supposes a sequence of events that allows one to move with confidence

from one state of affairs to another.” However, “strategy is required when others might frustrate one’s

plans because they have different and possibly opposing interests and concerns.” In other words:

Strategy is often expected to start with a description of a desired end state, but in practice

there is rarely an ordered movement to goals set in advance. Instead, the process evolves

through a series of states, each one not quite what was anticipated or hoped for, requiring

a reappraisal and modification of the original strategy, including ultimate objectives. The

picture of strategy that should emerge . . . is one that is fluid and flexible.

I’m not suggesting that writing involves collision with others who might “frustrate one’s plans.” What I am

suggesting is that our ideas don’t always unfold in an orderly manner. As you write, you need to remain

flexible and incorporate new thoughts that might be better than your old ones.

Know What You Want to Write before You Start Writing: Do not start writing until you have something to

say. In other words, you should only begin tapping on the keyboard once you know what your argument

is going to be. If you start prematurely, your paper will sound like it’s “thinking aloud,” your sentences will

be plodding, your statements will be vague, and your prose will be contorted. Many problems with


Professor Dubrulle

20

writing—in fact, more than you might believe—have to do with not really having a point or argument in

mind when you sit down to write. So don’t start writing too soon.

The Introduction is Important: Every essay should have an introduction. That introduction should

preferably have some kind of hook to grab the reader’s interest. That hook should be short and sharp. The

introduction should also establish very clearly what the essay is about. Most important of all, the

introduction should produce a definite and precise thesis statement which will alert the reader to the

argument of your essay. Every essay, whether it deals with a biography (Darius Couch), a battle

(Antietam), or a general topic (medicine) should present a coherent and unambiguous proposition that is

briefly explained in the introduction (e.g. Edwin Sumner was a brave officer and popular among the 5th

New Hampshire, but he was a merely competent corps commander who was really too old to lead troops

in the field).

Throughout the essay, make sure you do not lose track of your argument. Always keep it in mind.

Use the Recommended Sources: Use all of the primary and secondary sources that have been

recommended to you in this document. If you are writing about the 5th New Hampshire’s role in the Battle

of Fair Oaks, there is no avoiding the various secondary, primary, newspaper, and archival sources

mentioned recommended for that topic in this document.

Reconciling the Sources: In the course of your research, you might find that your primary and secondary

sources contradict one another. That’s ok. In your essay, you should point out where these sources

disagree. You should also try to resolve the disagreements. After some consideration, you can claim that

one source is right and the other is mistaken. Or you can argue that the truth lies somewhere between the

two. That’s what historians do. You will also find that your secondary sources will clash over various

points. That’s the lifeblood of history—scholars produce different interpretations and try to produce

convincing arguments to support these interpretations. Again, in your essay, when relevant, you should

recognize these different interpretations and finally plump for one, if that’s possible. Returning to the

example of Edwin Sumner, we could lead off with our thesis statement (Edwin Sumner was a brave officer

and popular among the 5th NHVI, but he was a merely competent corps commander who was really too

old to lead troops in the field). That is your final judgment. But in the body of the paper, you could

recognize that various scholars have reached different conclusions about Sumner’s attributes. Eventually,

though, you will have to explain why some scholars are wrong, which ones you agree with, and why you

reached your final determination.

Endnotes: Every essay should have endnotes and a works cited page. Since we are producing something for

public consumption, it is very important that we are on the up and up when it comes to giving credit

where credit is due.


Professor Dubrulle

21

Appendix 1

5th Regiment of New Hampshire Volunteer Infantry

and the Army of the Potomac’s Order of Battle

An order of battle shows the organization and command structure of an army. This particular document

shows where exactly the 5th NVHI fit in the Army of the Potomac’s order of battle. That way, those of you

who want to know to whom the regiment answered can find out easily. This information will come in

particularly handy for those of you writing papers on battles.

So how should one read the information below? Take the Battle of Fair Oaks as an example. The 5th NVHI

belonged to Howard’s 1st Brigade which in turn formed part of Richardson’s 1

st Division which constituted a

portion of Sumner’s II Corps. Keep in mind that much of the time, especially at the division or brigade

level, officers referred to a unit by its commanding officer (e.g. Richardson’s division).

NOTATIONS: Officers who filed reports for their units that appear in the Official Records have their names

bolded. The following indicate what happened to them in battle:

W: Wounded

MW: Mortally wounded

K: Killed

Battle of Fair Oaks

Army of the Potomac: Maj. Gen. George B. McClellan

o II Corps: Brig. Gen. Edwin V. Sumner

1st Division: Brig. Gen. Israel Richardson

1st Brigade: Brig. Gen. Oliver O. Howard [W]/Col. Thomas J. Parker

o 5th Regiment of New Hampshire Volunteer Infantry (Col. Edward

Cross [W])

o 61st Regiment of New York Volunteer Infantry (Col. Francis

Barlow)

o 64th Regiment of New York Volunteer Infantry (Col. Thomas J.

Parker)

o 81st Regiment of Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry (Col. James

Miller [K]/Lt. Col. Charles F. Johnson)

NOTE: Howard was badly wounded in the arm which was amputated. He still submitted a report. The

senior regimental commander, Parker, took over the brigade after Howard was wounded and filed two

reports: one detailing what he did after he took over the brigade from Howard and one explaining the

doings of the 64th NYVI. Cross was wounded but still submitted a report. Miller was killed; a report for his

regiment was submitted by Johnson. Barlow was untouched and submitted a report.


Professor Dubrulle

22

Battle of Savage’s Station


o II Corps: Brig. Gen. Edwin V. Sumner

1st Division: Brig. Gen. Israel Richardson

1st Brigade: Brig. Gen. John C. Caldwell

o 5th Regiment of New Hampshire Volunteer Infantry (Lt. Col.

Samuel G. Langley/Cpt. Edward Sturtevant)

o 7th Regiment of New York Volunteer Infantry (Col. George von

Schack)


Barlow)

o 81st Regiment of Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry (Col. Charles F.

Johnson[W]/Lt. Col. Eli Connor[K]/Maj. H. Boyd McKeen)

NOTE: Cross was in the hospital, and in his absence, Langley took over the regiment. Langley fell ill at the

end of the battle, and Sturtevant, the senior company commander, led the regiment. Both Langley and

Sturtevant filed reports. Johnson was wounded and Connor killed, so McKeen took over the 81st PVI and

wrote the report. Schack and Barlow came through unscathed and wrote the reports for their regiments.

Battle of Antietam


o II Corps: Maj. Gen. Edwin V. Sumner

1st Division: Maj. Gen. Israel Richardson [MW]/Brig. Gen. John C. Caldwell/Brig.

Gen. Winfield Scott Hancock

1st Brigade: Brig. Gen. John C. Caldwell


Cross [W])

o 7th Regiment of New York Volunteer Infantry (Capt. Charles

Brestel)


Barlow [W]/Lt. Col. Nelson Miles)

o 64th Regiment of New York Volunteer Infantry (Col. Francis

Barlow [W]/Lt. Col. Nelson Miles)

o 81st Regiment of Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry (Maj. H. Boyd

McKeen)

NOTE: Richardson was mortally wounded. Caldwell filled in temporarily as division commander, but

Hancock eventually took command and filed the division report. Cross was wounded again but still filed a

regimental report. Barlow, who commanded both the 61st and 64

th NYVI, was wounded and replaced by

Miles. Barlow, however, wrote the report for these two units. McKeen and Brestel wrote the reports for

their respective units.


Professor Dubrulle

23

Battle of Fredericksburg

Army of the Potomac: Maj. Gen. Ambrose Burnside

o Right Grand Division: Maj. Gen. Edwin V. Sumner

II Corps: Maj. Gen. Darius Couch

1st Division: Brig. Gen. Winfield Scott Hancock

o 1st Brigade: Brig. Gen. John C. Caldwell [W]/Lt. Col. George von

Schack

5th Regiment of New Hampshire Volunteer Infantry (Col.

Edward Cross [W]/Maj. Edward Sturtevant [K]/Capt.

James Larkin)

7th Regiment of New York Volunteer Infantry (Colonel

John Bendix [W]/Lt. Col. George von Schack/Capt. G. A.

von Bransen

61st Regiment of New York Volunteer Infantry (Col.

Nelson Miles [W])

64th Regiment of New York Volunteer Infantry (Col.

Nelson Miles [W])

81st Regiment of Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry (Maj.

H. Boyd McKeen [W]/Cpt. William Wilson)

145th Regiment of Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry (Col.

Hiram Brown [W]/Capt. David McCreary)

NOTE: Caldwell was wounded but wrote the brigade report. Every regimental commander in the brigade

was wounded, but some, such as Cross and Miles filed their reports. Schack, Wilson, and McCreary wrote

the reports for their regiments in lieu of their wounded superiors.

Battle of Chancellorsville

Army of the Potomac: Maj. Gen. Joseph Hooker

o II Corps: Maj. Gen. Darius Couch

1st Division: Maj. Gen. Winfield Scott Hancock

1st Brigade: Brig. Gen. John Caldwell


Cross)

o 61st Regiment of New York Volunteer Infantry (Col. Nelson Miles

[W]/Lt. Col. K. Oscar Broady

o 81st Regiment of Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry (Col. Henry

Boyd McKeen [W])

o 148th Regiment of Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry (Col. James

Beaver [W]/Maj. George Fairlamb]

NOTE: The Official Records only contain reports from the following regimental commanders: Cross, Miles,

and Broady.


Professor Dubrulle

24

Battle of Gettysburg

Army of Potomac; Maj. Gen. George Meade

o II Corps: Maj. Gen. Winfield Scott Hancock/Brig. Gen. John Gibbon

1st Division: Brig. Gen. John Caldwell

1st Brigade: Col. Edward Cross [MW]/Col. Boyd McKeen

o 5th Regiment of New Hampshire Volunteer Infantry (Lt. Col.

Charles Hapgood/Maj. Richard Cross)

o 61st Regiment of New York Volunteer Infantry (Lt. Col. K. Oscar

Broady)

o 81st Regiment of Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry (Col. Henry

Boyd McKeen)

o 148th Regiment of Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry (Col. Henry

Boyd McKeen/Lt. Col. Robert McFarlane)

NOTE: Before the battle, Cross placed McKeen, commander of the 81st PVI, at the head of the 148

th PVI as

well; Cross believed that McFarlane was too inexperienced to lead his regiment into battle. When Cross

was mortally wounded on July 2, McKeen, the senior regimental commander, was also placed in charge of

the brigade. McKeen gave the report for the brigade and the two regiments he commanded. Richard Cross,

Edward Cross’ younger brother, filed the report for the 5th NHVI. Broady reported for the 61

st NYVI.


Professor Dubrulle

25

Appendix 2

All Mentions of the 5th Regiment of New Hampshire Volunteer Infantry

in the Official Records

References appear in:

Series I: Volumes 5, 11, 12, 19, 21, 25, 27, 29, 33, 36, 40, 42, 46, and 51

Series II: Volumes 6 and 7

Series III: Volumes 1 and 3

Series I

Volume 5: 19, 385, 386, and 720

Volume 11:

Part 1: 149, 280, 284, 285, 332, 632, 757, 764, 765, 768-772, 777, and 782 (Fair Oaks)

Part 2: 24, 60, 61, 63, 64, 66, 67, and 91 (Savage’s Station)

Volume 12: 413 and 414

Volume 19:

Part 159, 172, 191, 278, 281, 282, 285-288, 292, 298, and 304 (Antietam)

Part 2: 93

Volume 21: 49, 129, 229, 233-235, 238, and 926 (Fredericksburg)

Volume 25:

Part 1: 159, 176, 311, 312, 318, 319, 321, 331, and 333 (Chancellorsville)

Part 2: 17 and 576

Volume 27:

Part 1: 98, 157, 175, 381-384, 402, and 408 (Gettysburg)

Volume 29:

Part 2: 160 and 620

Volume 33: 484 and 1057

Volume 36:

Part 1: 166, 372, 375, 376 and 385 (Cold Harbor)

Part 3: 201, 233, 261, 377, 443, 472, and 666

Volume 40:

Part 1: 219, 241, 251, 324, 333, 336, 338-340, 342, 345 and 346 (Petersburg)

Part 2: 48 and 543

Part 3: 696 and 729

Volume 42:

Part 1: 116, 129, 261-263, 265, 266, 402, and 900-902 (Petersburg)

Part 2: 612

Part 3: 160, 202, 458, 561, 780, 1036, 1065 and 1115

Volume 46:

Part 1: 198, 233, 566, 582, 692, 705, 710, 713-720, 737 and 741 (Appomattox)

Part 2: 273, 325, 739 and 866

Part 3: 1027

Volume 51:

Part 1: 56, 297, 298, 507, 508, 1081, 1227 and 1228

Series II

Volume 6: 141

Volume 7: 153

Series III

Volume 1: 509