Civil War Blog

Posted By Norman Gasbarro on March 21, 2013

Today’s blog post begins a multi-part series on the Petersburg National Battlefield – that portion of the battlefield which made up the Eastern Front, where the opening assaults and the Battles of the Crater and Fort Stedman occurred.  Recent photographs taken at the battlefield are interspersed with the official, interpretative statements made at the various tour stops as well as statements from the National Park Service brochures and web site.  Many men from the Lykens Valley area participated in this battle and the Battle of the Crater itself was noteworthy for the participation of coal miners from Schuylkill County.

The Siege of Petersburg was the longest military event of the Civil War.

Nine and a half months, 70,000 casualties, the suffering of civilians, thousands of U. S. Colored Troops fighting for the freedom of their race, and the decline of Gen. Robert E. Lee‘s Army of Northern Virginia all describe the Siege of Petersburg. It was here Gen. Ulysses S. Grant cut off all of Petersburg’s supply lines ensuring the fall of Richmond on 3 April 1865. Six days later, Lee surrendered.

The Visitor Center is located off I-95 south at Exit 52.  At the exit, bear left and follow the signs for Wythe Street (Rt. 36).  Continue on Rt. 36 and the entrance (pictured above) is located 2.8 miles on the right.

The Visitor Center

Begin your tour here where a map program explains the complex operations of the 9 1/2 month siege.  Exhibits and a walking trail to Battery 5 , on the original Confederate defense line (the Dimmock Line), will take you to the site where the “Dictator,” a huge Union mortar was located.

A signboard at near the Visitor Center gives an overview of the battle and gives some broad meaning to the siege and the 9 1/2 month campaign.  A time line of the battle is at the bottom of the signboard and the map gives some understanding of the scope of the fighting.

The Prize:  Petersburg

If Petersburg fell, the Confederate capital at Richmond would fall too.  Grant knew it; Lee knew it.  And for nine months in 1864 and 1865 Union and Confederate armies waged a brutal campaign here that left the Confederacy on the verge of total defeat.  At Petersburg, the war in Virginia transformed from a whirlwind succession of marches and battles into a methodical struggle of endurance and hardship.

Click on picture to enlarge.

The green area on the eastern part of the map is the tour covered by these posts.  Stops along the way are numbered and keyed to other signboards at the battlefield and to information in a map/brochure distributed at the Visitor Center.

On the ground before you the first major attacks against Petersburg occurred. This bloodletting marked the beginning of nine months of siege.

The gentle depression in front of you is the only vestige of the Joshua Jordan House.  The house was dismantled by Union troops during  the Siege of Petersburg.

War came to the Jordan Farm in late 1862, when Confederate engineer Charles Dimmock laid out ten miles of defenses to protect Petersburg.  Battery 5 of the “Dimmock Line” stood only yards from the Jordan House.

When Union and Confederate armies swarmed over this area in 1864, dozens of farmers like Jordan were uprooted, their homes damaged or destroyed, their woodlots cut, and their fields ravaged.  The landscape still bears the scars.

The un-mowed strip of tall grass has been left to indicate the outline of connecting earthworks between Confederate Battery 5, to your left, and Battery 6, 250 yards to your right.

Continued tomorrow…

Category: Memorials, Museums, Resources | Comments Off on Touring the Petersburg National Battlefield – The Visitor Center
Tags: African American

Posted By Norman Gasbarro on March 20, 2013

Joseph Witman (1833-1898), a tinsmith of Gratz and Halifax, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, had an interesting Civil War service record which covered the entire period of the Civil War.  He served first in the 10th Pennsylvania Infantry, Company F, as a Private, from 26 April 1861 until his discharge on 31 July 1861, and then joined the 11th Pennsylvania Cavalry, Company D, as a Private, on 27 August 1861, and served through to 13 August 1865, including a re-enlistment.

Not much is known about Joseph’s early life.  There is a Joseph Witman who appears in the 1850 census for Jonestown, Lebanon County, with no occupation stated; he is living in an inn operated by E. G. Lantz.  It is possible that this is the same Joseph Witman, and that he was either from Lebanon County or was in the area of Lebanon County learning to be a tinsmith.  As of this writing, Joseph’s parents have not been identified.  In 1860, Joseph is living in the household of Jonas Laudenslager in Gratz where he is working as a tinsmith.

The two index cards (above) from the Pennsylvania Archives confirm Joseph’s Civil War service.  Interesting comment on the 2nd card note that on 6 October 1861, he was promoted to Sergeant.  Then on 17 June 1863, he was “reduced to ranks,” presumably back to Private.  There was a re-enlistment which occurred at Portsmouth, Virginia, on 18 November 1863.  Finally, he was mustered out of the service on 13 August 1865.

When Joseph applied for a pension, he did not include his service in the 10th Pennsylvania Infantry, although it is clear from the muster rolls that he did serve in that regiment.  The above Pension Index Card is from Ancestry.com and references the pension application files in the National Archives in Washington, D.C. About 16 pages from that pension file can be found at the Gratz Historical Society as part of an early collection provided by researcher, Margaret Dowling.

Previously, a brief history of the 10th Pennsylvania Infantry was provided here – including the disappointment of many of the men from the Lykens Valley area who were in Company F who did not get involved in ay real fighting before their discharge – so, most of the men re-enlisted in other regiments.  This was the case with Joseph Witman, who enrolled in the 11th Pennsylvania Cavalry.  His experiences in that cavalry regiment most likely paralleled the regiment’s history which is stated in The Union Army:

11th Pennsylvania Cavalry.-Col. Josiah Harlan, Col. Samuel P. Spear, Col. Frank A. Stratton; Lieut.-Col. Samuel P. Spear, Lieut.-Col. George Stetzell, Lieut.-Col. Frank A. Stratton, Lieut.-Col. James A. Skelly, Maj. George Stetzell, Maj. Samuel Wetherill, Maj. Noah M. Runyon, Maj. Frank A. Stratton, Maj. George T. Curnog, Maj. Albert J. Ackerly, Maj. James A. Skelly, Maj. John Cassells, Maj. Samuel N. Titus, Maj. J. E. McFarland, Maj. Robert S. Monroe, Maj. John S. Nimmon, Maj. Archibald A. Menzies. The 11th Cavalry (the 108th regiment of the line), known first as Harlan’s Light Cavalry, was recruited in different states in August and September 1861, as an independent regiment and was mustered into the U. S. service at Philadelphia for three years. Co. A was recruited in Iowa, parts of Company E and Company F in New York, part of Company I in New Jersey, Company M in Ohio and the remainder of the regiment in Pennsylvania. It moved to Washington, 1,130 strong, early in October and was assigned to Gen. I. N. Palmer’s Brigade, then encamped at Ball’s Crossroads, Va. On 13 November 1861, it was designated the 108th regiment, Pennsylvania volunteers, as only state organizations were accepted. From 17 November 1861 to March 1862, it was stationed at Fortress Monroe. In March 1862, two companies were sent to Newport News; in May 1862, five companies were sent to Portsmouth and thence to Suffolk, being relieved by one of the companies from Newport News; the other five companies joined the Army of the Potomac in June at White House, moving to Suffolk on the 20 May 1862. From Suffolk many excursions were made into the surrounding country and the enemy was frequently encountered, the most important actions being at Deserted House, the attack on Franklin and the defense of Suffolk. On 21 June 1862, the regiment moved to Hanover Court House, where it arrived on 26 June 1862, having been joined by the company which had been stationed at Portsmouth and Norfolk. The works at this place, with a number of prisoners, were captured and the regiment moved to White House, where it started on a raid on the Richmond & Fredericksburg Railroad. Returning to Portsmouth an expedition was undertaken into North Carolina and the enemy encountered at Jackson. An expedition into Mathews County, Virginia, followed in October, after which headquarters were established at Camp Getty near Portsmouth, whence various raids were made during the early winter. At this time 400 members of the regiment reenlisted. On 23 January 1864, the 11th Cavalry was ordered to Williamsburg, but returned to Portsmouth early in April 1864. In February, Company G was sent to eastern Virginia on special duty. In May a raid was made on the Weldon Railroad, near the Nottoway River, followed by a raid on the Danville Railroad at Coalfield and the South Side Railroad. From 28 May, to 9 June, the regiment encamped at Bermuda Hundred, after which an unsuccessful attempt was made to destroy the railroad bridge over the Appomattox. On 11 May, Company B and Company H were ordered on special duty at the headquarters of the 18th Corps, Company B rejoining the regiment on 20 June. Late in June the Cavalry Division undertook the destruction of the Danville Railroad, along which and the South Side Railroad, miles of track and much other property were destroyed and sharp engagements fought at Stony Creek and Reams’ Station. July was spent in camp at Jones’ Neck on the James and while here Company L relieved Company G in Eastern Virginia, the latter returning to the regiment. Late in the month the division was made a part of Gen. Sheridan’s force and joined in his famous operations, engaging the enemy at Reams’ Station and at other points along the Weldon Railroad. Stationed during September at Mount Sinai Church, the regiment returned to Jones’ Neck on Sept. 28, and was joined by Company H. In October the cavalry participated in a number of engagements in the vicinity of Petersburg and in November went into winter quarters north of the James. In December it was engaged at New Market Heights and in February 1865, made a raid into Surrey and Isle of Wight Counties. Late in March it moved to join Gen. Sheridan at Reams’ Station and with him shared in the success at Five Forks on 1 April, and the pursuit which followed, with frequent encounters culminating in Lee’s surrender at Appomattox Court House. Returning to Richmond it moved to Staunton and returned to Charlottesville, remaining there and in the vicinity until ordered to Richmond to be mustered out, which took place on 13 August 1865.

After returning to Gratz from the war, Joseph Witman married Lydia Ann Schoffstall, who had been previously married to Henry Crabb.  There is some confusion as to the death date of Henry Crabb (he either died in 1856 or 1865), but Lydia had at least three children with Henry Crabb, one of whom, William P. Crabb (1843-1917) also served in the 11th Pennsylvania Cavalry.  Henry Crabb an African American was an older brother of Edward Crabb and John Peter Crabb, both of Gratz, and William P. Crabb, was light-skinned enough to pass as white and enroll in the 11th Pennsylvania Cavalry.  Also confusing is the fact that Lydia Ann Schoffstall is believed to have had at least one child with Joseph Witman – Lydia Ann Witman – who supposedly was born in 1852, which would have been while she was married to Henry Crabb and after the three children she had with Henry were born.  Lydia Ann Schoffstall died in 1873 and is buried in Gratz Union Cemetery in the Crabb family plot – next to her brother-in-law Edward Crabb – but she is buried as Lydian Witman (see stone picture below), indicating that she was married to Joseph Witman at the time of her death.

In 1870, Joseph Witman, Lydia Ann, and their daughter Lydia Ann Witman, were living in Williams Township, Dauphin County, where Joseph was working as a tinsmith.  After Lydia Ann’s death in 1873, Joseph Witman married Catharine A. Miller at the Lutheran Church in Halifax, Dauphin County, and he then moved to Halifax, continuing in his employment as a tinsmith.  In 1898, he died of kidney and bladder trouble, and is buried at Long’s Cemetery, Halifax (his stone pictured at top of this post). It was Joseph’s second wife, Catharine A. [Miller] Witman who applied for pension benefits as Joseph’s widow.  Joseph and Catherine had only one known child, Charles E. Witman, who was born in 1875 and died in 1899.

Lydia Ann Schoffstall, the first wife of Joseph Witman, was a direct descendant of Johann Peter Hoffman through both of her grandmothers whose maiden names were Hoffman.  Her maternal grandfather was a Buffington and a direct descendant of the first Buffington‘s to settle in the Lykens Valley, and her paternal grandfather, a Schoffstall, also was an early settler in the valley.  William P. Crabb, the son of Lydia and Henry Crabb, and a Civil War veteran, married a Welker (another family with deep roots in the Lykens Valley) and they had at least 10 children, some of whose descendants are still in the Lykens Valley area today.  At this time it is not known what happened to the daughter of Lydia and Joseph Witman, Lydia Ann Witman.  It is possible that Samuel Schoffstall was the brother of Lydia Ann Schoffstall, but this has not yet been confirmed; he served as a Musician in the 36th Pennsylvania Infantry (Emergency of 1863), Company C.

—————————–

Comments are invited – add to this post – or submit by e-mail.

Category: Research, Resources, Stories | 1 Comment »
Tags: African American, Gratz Borough, Halifax, Williams Township

Posted By Norman Gasbarro on March 19, 2013

A message from Alex Fofonoff:

I am in my last year at NYU Tisch for film, and about to embark on my thesis film. It is a 19th century post Civil War period piece that deals with how returning soldiers dealt with not only the transition from war to peace, but a national transition, how to accept half the country that’s been considered an enemy for the last four years, and what price is paid for that acceptance.

I recently launched an indiegogo campaign, in an attempt to have my project crowd-funded (small donations from a lot of people). I am trying to reach out to groups and individuals that are passionate and invested in such an important part of our nation’s history, which is why I’m contacting you. In this message, I’ve included a link to the indiegogo page.

 

http://www.indiegogo.com/kingdomcomingthefilm/x/291644

In the gallery section, you can find a book I’ve put together that discusses the project in much more detail:

http://www.indiegogo.com/kingdomcomingthefilm/x/291644?c=gallery

I would appreciate any sort of promotion you could give it, as I truly believe this is one story that is dying to be told and has yet to be given the attention it deserves. If you know of any other writers that would be interested in helping me get the word out, let me know.

Thank you for your time,

Alex Fofonoff

Category: Queries, Research | Comments Off on A Student Film Project on Returning Soldiers and the Transition from War to Peace
Tags:

Posted By Brian Tomlin on March 18, 2013

In America we use the term Victorian fairly loosely, especially in reference to architectural styles. Queen Victoria reigned in Britain  from 1837 to 1901, a long sweep of time that incorporates several styles and periods of fashion. We have come to use the term Victorian in America as a general term, and yet many of the features we think of as Victorian were actually late Victorian (gingerbread architecture, Queen Anne style). The earlier Victorian period was much more restrained.

As we talk about architectural styles, and in later posts interior decorating, we have to remember that average people did not live as grandly as many of the examples in books and museums. It is still worth studying, though, because we can see the influence of these styles in our own middle and working class communities. And just as happened today, the styles of the wealthy became aspirational examples to everyday people in the nineteenth century. In Gratz, for example, the situation of the town as a commercial center for the surrounding farm community brought a build up of a surprising number of businesses in the nineteenth century. These business owners were able to become prosperous due to the agricultural and mining successes in the area. Many of the houses in Gratz at the time have been discussed in our Gratz  walking tour series.

Influential Architecture Styles Around the Civil War Era

• Second Empire.  (popular in the U.S. between 1855-1885)
  

  This is an example of the influence of Second Empire style on a house on Market Street in Gratz. Note the center tower of the roof especially.

  In the United States, the Second Empire style usually combined a rectangular tower, or similar element, with a steep mansard roof, the roof being the most noteworthy link to the style’s French roots. This tower element could be of equal height as the highest floor, or could exceed the height of the rest of the structure by a story or two. The mansard roof crest was often topped with an iron trim, sometimes referred to as “cresting”. In some cases, lightning rods were integrated into the cresting design, making the feature useful beyond its decorative features. Although still intact in some examples, often this original cresting has deteriorated and been removed. The exterior style could be expressed in either wood, brick or stone. More elaborate examples frequently featured paired columns as well as sculpted details around the doors, windows and dormers. The purpose of the ornamentation was to make the structure appear imposing, grand and expensive.

  Floor plans for Second Empire residences could either be symmetrical, with the tower (or tower-like element) in the center, or asymmetrical, with the tower or tower-like element to one side.

• Stick Style. (popular in the U.S. between roughly 1860-1890)
  

  The feature elements of the Stick style, also the related Eastlake style.

  Stick-style architecture is recognizable by the relatively plain layout often accented with trusses on the gables or decorative shingles. The Stick style did have several characteristics in common with the later Queen Anne style: interpenetrating roof planes with bold paneled brick chimneys, the wrap-around porch, spindle detailing, the “paneled” sectioning of blank wall, radiating spindle details at the gable peaks. Highly stylized and decorative versions of the Stick style are often referred to as Eastlake.

   

• Colonial Styles. 

Zerfing house, Gratz, PA built around 1857

While Colonial style of American Architecture was largely out of fashion by the mid-nineteenth century, its simplicity and appeal to American life in growing small towns meant examples were still being built. Gratz is a good example of this: most of the houses built in the first three quarters of the nineteenth century in Gratz were built as colonial style homes. Later in the Victorian era these were sometimes modified to add more elaborate decorative details. The original log structures lining Market Street were also later modified to look like Victorian homes as they were added onto and remodeled.

Why were styles of home building so much out of fashion still being built in the mid-century in towns like Gratz? The simplicity of their designs meant they were relatively easier to build. Perhaps the carpenters and builders had learned their skills when these types of structures were fashionable. Perhaps the conservative religious beliefs of area residents had some impact. Possibly residents building homes were inspired by other houses in the town built earlier of colonial designs. This is a good cautionary note to all of us studying the past that periods in styles of architecture and decoration don’t fit into neat sequences of years.

If you study the homes in Gratz today you can see the largely simple, colonial influence on most; even many that were later fancied up with ornamentation and varying windows and roofs and porches had much simpler origins. The intervening centuries have changed the appearance of these houses as well.

The main styles of homes built around the time of the Civil War had their influence on homes in Gratz, but that influences was slower to be felt and noticed than it would be today.

The rest of the posts in this series will focus on  use of specific rooms and areas and decorating as done in the mid-nineteenth century.

Category: Culture | 1 Comment »
Tags:

Posted By Jake Wynn on March 17, 2013

The Civil War Institute at Gettysburg College held a conference gathering together many of the nation’s premier academic and public historians from Thursday, March 14 through Saturday, March 16.

The focus of this gathering, titled The Future of Civil War History: Looking Beyond the 150^th, centered on examining the ways Civil War interpretation may change in the coming years. The Institute, combined with the force of the Gettysburg Military Park, succeeded in bringing in many of the leading minds in both academic and public history.

Topics examined included the changing dynamics of Civil War history in the classroom, on the battlefields, and in the hearts and minds of the general public. Presenters included notable Civil War historians, National Park rangers and teachers, all of whom practice Civil War history.

For the concentration of this piece, I will report and analyze the interesting roundtable discussion on the first day of the conference.

The first session of the conference zeroed in on some of the most deeply held misconceptions surrounding the military history of the Civil War. Gettysburg professor and author Dr. Allen Guelzo moderated the session which delved into the typical myths of Civil War combat.

Dr. Guelzo introduced the three most common myths of the Civil War.

1. Civil War soldiers were equipped with weapons they did not understand.
2. The idea of total war first reared its head during the Civil War.
3. Civil War commanding officers came from two different styles of warfare: the earlier Napoleonic style and the idea of fighting for ground.

Guelzo then corrected these myths, connecting them to our concepts of American exceptionalism and the belief that we were the origin of many military concepts of the mid-19^th century.

Four speakers exemplified their areas of knowledge, including two from the National Park Service and two traditional academic historians. These topics explored under this session included the audience for Civil War related media such as books and film, the teaching of history in public schools, and the overlooked study of Civil War logistics.

The nature of this conference allows for many of the most important public historians to intermingle and discuss ideas for breaking new ground in terms of the Civil War. It provided the opportunity to analyze our own commemoration of the 150^th anniversary of the Civil War as it is happening. This point is vital. As one of the speakers said, “how we handle the Civil War during the 150^th Sesquicentennial will go a long way towards creating interest in future generations.”

A recap of the event can be found through Twitter by using #cwfuture. This idea and its successful utilization was the highlight of the conference.

Category: Events, Overviews, Reflections | Comments Off on Civil War Conference at Gettysburg College
Tags: