Dahlgren's Raid/Affair

[Riggs]

Great talk on the Dahlgren raid.
This individual and the subsequent controversy he tragically found himself in are of much interest to me, as the previous year he had rode thru my hometown, where he intercepted the dispatch from Richmond to Lee informing the latter of no reinforcements coming to Gettysburg, and now stands a historical marker at the spot Dahlgren and his men were positioned for the ambush on the Confederate party.

After Gettysburg he's again in town and attacks the portions of the retreating column and wagon train with actual citizens (are there any other examples of this happening in the North?)

Heading South, in Hagerstown. in street fighting, Dahlgren is wounded, recovers in DC, where he joins up with Kirkpatrick for the raid, and you all know the rest.

What books are out there on this individual and the Raid, and what is the consensus, based on everything available, on who was also in on the plans for the assassination, and to what effect, if any, this had on the war once made public?

Dahlgren's service, the raid itself, how it came about, what it looked like on paper vs how it played out, and how & why Dahlgrens unit is eventually left on their own, chased thru enemy territory is such a sad and thrilling story.

 

[Legion Para]

For further reading.

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

The Schultz book is okay, but it really overstates its case--he claims that the St. Alban's Raid was a direct result of the raid, but I don't begin to buy that for a moment.

My book is a comprehensive, full-length biography of Ulric Dahlgren and is not a monograph about the raid, although the raid obviously plays a major role in the story.

The Charles River thing is a collection of Wikipedia articles that isn't worth the paper it's printed upon.

Bruce's book will likely stand as the definitive work on the raid for a very long time. It's a fine book, and I recommend it to you.

 

[War Horse]

I've always wondered where the orders came from. Is this something Dahlgren and Kilpatrick came up with on their own or was it the missions purpose from the beginning. What I've read about the raid is simply their mission was to free the prisoners held in Libby Prison.

 

[Riggs]

Thanks guys

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

I've always wondered where the orders came from. Is this something Dahlgren and Kilpatrick came up with on their own or was it the missions purpose from the beginning. What I've read about the raid is simply their mission was to free the prisoners held in Libby Prison.

As I say in the book, I believe that Kilpatrick and Stanton cooked this thing and then found a ready and willing participant in Ully Dahlgren. When Dahlgren was killed, he then became a very convenient patsy.

 

[War Horse]

As I say in the book, I believe that Kilpatrick and Stanton cooked this thing and then found a ready and willing participant in Ully Dahlgren. When Dahlgren was killed, he then became a very convenient patsy.

I own your book, just haven't had time to read that one yet It's on the agenda.

 

[Riggs]

The Schultz book is okay, but it really overstates its case--he claims that the St. Alban's Raid was a direct result of the raid, but I don't begin to buy that for a moment.

My book is a comprehensive, full-length biography of Ulric Dahlgren and is not a monograph about the raid, although the raid obviously plays a major role in the story.

The Charles River thing is a collection of Wikipedia articles that isn't worth the paper it's printed upon.

Bruce's book will likely stand as the definitive work on the raid for a very long time. It's a fine book, and I recommend it to you.

Thank you Eric, I will get a copy of your book as well as Bruce's. Thank you for the recommendations.

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

Thank you Eric, I will get a copy of your book as well as Bruce's. Thank you for the recommendations.

I'm happy to help. I hope you enjoy the book.

 

[Riggs]

I'm happy to help. I hope you enjoy the book.

Just realized you're a coauthor on "One Continuous Fight". I loved it. I'm sure this one will be just as great. It is a pleasure to talk with you sir and thanks again.

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

Just realized you're a coauthor on "One Continuous Fight". I loved it. I'm sure this one will be just as great. It is a pleasure to talk with you sir and thanks again.

My pleasure, Riggs. Enjoy.

 

[Drew]

I own your book, just haven't had time to read that one yet It's on the agenda.

Read it, War Horse. I already did, well worth it. Now, Eric's One Continuous Fight is still in my pile and I need to get off the internet and into my reading chair.

Bruce Venter's book is now on my shopping list.

 

[rpkennedy]

Read it, War Horse. I already did, well worth it. Now, Eric's One Continuous Fight is still in my pile and I need to get off the internet and into my reading chair.

Bruce Venter's book is now on my shopping list.

I'm about halfway through it.

Ryan

 

[War Horse]

Read it, War Horse. I already did, well worth it. Now, Eric's One Continuous Fight is still in my pile and I need to get off the internet and into my reading chair.

Bruce Venter's book is now on my shopping list.

OCF is well worth the time! I know what you mean. Balancing Internet with quality reading. It's difficult at best unless you're superhuman

 

[FarawayFriend]

OCF is well worth the time! I know what you mean. Balancing Internet with quality reading. It's difficult at best unless you're superhuman

[Plus there is a thing called real life that always tries to interfere with both internet studies and reading... ]

 

[Mike Griffith]

The last time I saw this issue discussed on a CW board, the pro-Union folks were saying that the Dahlgren papers were forged by the Confederates. To his credit, Stephen Sears has admitted that the evidence indicates the papers are authentic (Controversies and Commanders: Dispatches from the Army of the Potomac, pp. 236-246) . William Tidwell agrees that the papers were not forged but are genuine, and he notes that they persuaded many Southerners that Lincoln himself was behind the total war tactics that were causing heavy destruction in the South (Come Retribution: The Confederate Secret Service and the Assassination of Lincoln, pp. 241-252).

 

[leftyhunter]

The last time I saw this issue discussed on a CW board, the pro-Union folks were saying that the Dahlgren papers were forged by the Confederates. To his credit, Stephen Sears has admitted that the evidence indicates the papers are authentic (Controversies and Commanders: Dispatches from the Army of the Potomac, pp. 236-246) . William Tidwell agrees that the papers were not forged but are genuine, and he notes that they persuaded many Southerners that Lincoln himself was behind the total war tactics that were causing heavy destruction in the South (Come Retribution: The Confederate Secret Service and the Assassination of Lincoln, pp. 241-252).

What total war tactics are you refering to? Are you comparing the ACW to say WW2 in terms of intentional property damage? We have had past threads that showed Sherman didn't deliberately burn down Atlanta. Did the Union burn down or force tens of thousands of Southners to flee captured cities such as New Orleans, Nashville, Memphis etc?
Leftyhunter

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

The last time I saw this issue discussed on a CW board, the pro-Union folks were saying that the Dahlgren papers were forged by the Confederates. To his credit, Stephen Sears has admitted that the evidence indicates the papers are authentic (Controversies and Commanders: Dispatches from the Army of the Potomac, pp. 236-246) . William Tidwell agrees that the papers were not forged but are genuine, and he notes that they persuaded many Southerners that Lincoln himself was behind the total war tactics that were causing heavy destruction in the South (Come Retribution: The Confederate Secret Service and the Assassination of Lincoln, pp. 241-252).

I'll do you one better...

In 1958, in conjunction with the release of his book Eight Hours Before Richmond, author Virgil Carrington Jones hired a police handwriting expert named Ira Gullickson to examine the photos of the Dahlgren papers and to write a report of his analysis of their authenticity. I happen to own one of two known copies of the report--I happened to purchase Jones' own copy of his book, and the report was tucked inside the book when I bought it. Fortunately, Admiral Dahlgren was quite the pack rat and saved every scrap of paper, and when he died, his widow donated about 10,000 pages to the Library of Congress, including Ully's diary and every letter that Ully ever sent to his father, so there are plenty of exemplars to choose from.

Using what was the state of the art in handwriting analysis in 1958, Gullickson concluded that the documents are authentic. I agree completely. Having read all of that correspondence and the diary in the course of writing my biography of Dahlgren, I am quite familiar with Ully Dahlgren's handwriting, and there's little doubt in my mind that they were written entirely in his very neat, very precise handwriting. I say so in an appendix to my book, and I quote from the report at some length in that appendix.

The bigger question is not the authenticity of the documents, but rather who was involved: was Dahlgren cowboying? Or was this part of a bigger plot? After years of researching this, I came to the conclusion that Stanton and Kilpatrick cooked up the plot, found a very willing participant in Dahlgren--he had proposed a raid on Richmond in the spring of 1863 that was rejected by Stanton--and then disavowed him after the raid failed. Again, when you know this story as well as I do, it's quite clear that Kilpatrick lied through his teeth in disavowing Dahlgren.

The proof is in the pudding. Not long after Richmond fell, Stanton ordered that the originals of the Dahlgren papers be brought to him. Francis Lieber delivered them to Stanton, and they were never seen again. Conclusion: Stanton burned them in the hope of covering this up. Fortunately for us modern historians, there were several photographic copies made of them that survived the war; I know of two sets of original photographic copies, both safely in archives.

 

[Bee]

I'll do you one better...

In 1959, in conjunction with the release of his book Eight Hours Before Richmond, author Virgil Carrington Jones hired a police handwriting expert named Ira Gullickson to examine the photos of the Dahlgren papers and to write a report of his analysis of their authenticity. I happen to own one of two known copies of the report--I happened to purchase Jones' own copy of his book, and the report was tucked inside the book when I bought it. Fortunately, Admiral Dahlgren was quite the pack rat and saved every scrap of paper, and when he died, his widow donated about 10,000 pages to the Library of Congress, including Ully's diary and every letter that Ully ever sent to his father, so there are plenty of exemplars to choose from.

Using what was the state of the art in handwriting analysis in 1959, Gullickson concluded that the documents are authentic. I agree completely. Having read all of that correspondence and the diary in the course of writing my biography of Dahlgren, I am quite familiar with Ully Dahlgren's handwriting, and there's little doubt in my mind that they were written entirely in his very neat, very precise handwriting. I say so in an appendix to my book, and I quote from the report at some length in that appendix.

The bigger question is not the authenticity of the documents, but rather who was involved: was Dahlgren cowboying? Or was this part of a bigger plot? After years of researching this, I came to the conclusion that Stanton and Kilpatrick cooked up the plot, found a very willing participant in Dahlgren--he had proposed a raid on Richmond in the spring of 1863 that was rejected by Stanton--and then disavowed him after the raid failed. Again, when you know this story as well as I do, it's quite clear that Kilpatrick lied through his teeth in disavowing Dahlgren.

The proof is in the pudding. Not long after Richmond fell, Stanton ordered that the originals of the Dahlgren papers be brought to him. Francis Lieber delivered them to Stanton, and they were never seen again. Conclusion: Stanton burned them in the hope of covering this up. Fortunately for us modern historians, there were several photographic copies made of them that survived the war; I know of two sets of original photographic copies, both safely in archives.

Talk about a pot of gold! How lucky of you to find that report tucked in the book! I just find old receipts used as bookmarks

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

Talk about a pot of gold! How lucky of you to find that report tucked in the book! I just find old receipts used as bookmarks

No doubt, particularly because I bought it when I began researching Dahlgren. The timing could not have been any better.