regimental histories

[gary]

OK, I've read somewhere that regimental histories aren't reliable.

Granted that many of them were written years afterwards and are sterilized, but what's why the distrust?

[johan_steele]

Originally Posted by gary

OK, I've read somewhere that regimental histories aren't reliable.

Granted that many of them were written years afterwards and are sterilized, but what's why the distrust?

Some were written by unpopular officers out to merely make their own actions seem more important. While for the most part they are accurate there are those out there that are pure fiction which is why cross checking info is so important.

[amhistoryguy]

IMO, Regimental Histories are no more or less reliable than any other written record or story of the CW. Certainly an author of his own regimental history would like to present himself and his unit in a positive light, and this should be taken into consideration. A person writing for publication is very likely to write differently than a person writting in a letter home, or in his diary.

It should also be considered that a contemporary regimental history might be written largely from rememberances, sometimes helped along by a diary, which could be affected by time. Many early regimentals were written for the veterans themselves, and shared at their reunions. When reading a regimental history it is always a good idea to look at other evidence and take all accounts into consideration.

Two or three sources in agreement may make an action more credible, although still subject to error. Many times a single source, such as Dyer's Compendium, is used in multiple writings and results in the repeating of the same error over several works that seem to support one another.

Having written a regimental history myself, I realize that I've had the advantage of many sources not available to those of that actual period. I've had the opportunity to use the National Archives, viewing the records of every soldier in the unit, as well as all available unit information. I've done the same in the state library and archives. Using local resources such as county historical societies, period newspapers, and NBP archives provides a far greater chance to compare accounts and get it right. Being able to utilize writings and records from the opposing forces is another advantage most likely far beyond the capabilities of those participants who wrote.

The recipe for developing a regimental history has changed over time. Old isn't necessarily unreliable, nor is newer necessarily better. Works written by the participants may provide first hand knowlege and detail. Being removed in time from the events is an advantage, in that it provides a more broad perspective. They both have a place in educating us.

IMO, it is up to the reader to become skilled at sifting through the information in order to make an individual judgement on the reliability of a work, and that needs to be done on a book by book basis, rather than by lumping all regimentals into an "unreliable" catagory.

Regards, Dave Gorski

[larry_cockerham]

Originally Posted by amhistoryguy

IMO, Regimental Histories are no more or less reliable than any other written record or story of the CW. Certainly an author of his own regimental history would like to present himself and his unit in a positive light, and this should be taken into consideration. A person writing for publication is very likely to write differently than a person writting in a letter home, or in his diary.

It should also be considered that a contemporary regimental history might be written largely from rememberances, sometimes helped along by a diary, which could be affected by time. Many early regimentals were written for the veterans themselves, and shared at their reunions. When reading a regimental history it is always a good idea to look at other evidence and take all accounts into consideration.

Two or three sources in agreement may make an action more credible, although still subject to error. Many times a single source, such as Dyer's Compendium, is used in multiple writings and results in the repeating of the same error over several works that seem to support one another.

Having written a regimental history myself, I realize that I've had the advantage of many sources not available to those of that actual period. I've had the opportunity to use the National Archives, viewing the records of every soldier in the unit, as well as all available unit information. I've done the same in the state library and archives. Using local resources such as county historical societies, period newspapers, and NBP archives provides a far greater chance to compare accounts and get it right. Being able to utilize writings and records from the opposing forces is another advantage most likely far beyond the capabilities of those participants who wrote.

The recipe for developing a regimental history has changed over time. Old isn't necessarily unreliable, nor is newer necessarily better. Works written by the participants may provide first hand knowlege and detail. Being removed in time from the events is an advantage, in that it provides a more broad perspective. They both have a place in educating us.

IMO, it is up to the reader to become skilled at sifting through the information in order to make an individual judgement on the reliability of a work, and that needs to be done on a book by book basis, rather than by lumping all regimentals into an "unreliable" catagory.

Regards, Dave Gorski

Dave is more than right on target. I'm only familiar with the H. E. Howard, Inc series on Conferate Units. A cousin, Jeff Weaver wrote several of these and I had the opportunity to review three or four of them prior to publication. Jeff, just as Davd described, lived quite near the national archives and spent countless hours with the original documents plus his decades of interest in regional history in western North Carolina, southwest Virginia and upper East Tennessee. I have purchased a couple more written by other authors which I find equally as detailed and well-researched such as Chapla's History of the 48th Virginia. These 'modern' works are far better than essays such as for example William C. Oates' history of the 15th Alabama. That's not a slam on Oates' priceless writing, but rather to say modern technology greatly broadens the database in skilled hands. The other aspect of this is that the published books allow feed-back from readers who can make contributions for future editions. That means it gets better as time goes on. I'd love to get my hands on a good history of the 13th TN US Cav and 10th TN US Cav if anyone sees them go by. Thanks!

[Freddy]

I have a 1998 reprint of the History Of The Thirty-Fifth Regiment, Massachusetts Volunteers, 1862-1865. With A Roster, 1884, by A Committee Of the Regimental Association. The Committee consisted of one veteran from each company and two Field Staff officiers. My great-grandfather's 1884 copy is also in my possession. They used several diaries to show POW conditions what most of the veterans had not experienced. It states, " All the descriptions are by members who were present at the scenes described; imagination has no part in the account." Using my great-grandfather's diary to judge the book was useful as dates, places, battles, marches, camps and other events were identical. Of course while wounded and a POW the diary does not help. I would suggest that if a diary is available it would be a useful tool to make a comparison with a regimental history.

[larry_cockerham]

Diaries are indeed a blessing when available. Your mention of the term comparison is also a wise thought. Southern regiments didn't share the abundance of organized recording on the regimental level that was there for the U.S. Army. The AOT and ANV didn't have much of a repository even if the records had been produced. "Our" 63rd Virginia was remembered in some detail by Pvt. Calvin Livesay from Independence, Virginia who spent much of the 1864 Tennessee campaign with his regiment. He apparently wasn't in on decision making at the highest level as one might suspect from a private, but he heard the sounds and described the battle field at Franklin far too accurately. Anyone who can handle the task of writing a well-researched history of a regiment or company can do a service to thousands of folks to come, not to mention help fulfill our duty to the guys who were there.