Generals Gordon and Barlow at Gettysburg

Powelltc1

Private
Joined
Feb 17, 2016
Location
Ohio
I have only been on the forum for a few weeks, and I am sure that most know of the incident at Gettysburg between Generals Gordon and Barlow. I read about this last night in an old book I have on Gettysburg, and it serves as just another example of why I am so drawn to the ACW. There has never been anything else like it. There was an underlying honor and respect among most men between the sides that was remarkable.
That they should both survive and meet again later, both having positions of prominence is also remarkable.


Returning from the banks of the Susquehanna, and meeting at Gettysburg, July 1, 1863, the advance of Lee's forces, my command was thrown quickly and squarely on the right flank of the Union army. A more timely arrival never occurred. The battle had been raging for four or five hours. The Confederate General Archer, with a large portion of his brigade, had been captured. Heth and Scales, Confederate generals, had been wounded. The ranking Union commander on the field, General Reynolds, had been killed, and Hancock was assigned to command. The battle, upon the issue of which hung, perhaps, the fate of the Confederacy, was in full blast. The Union forces, at first driven back, now reënforced, were again advancing and pressing back Lee's left and threatening to envelop it. The Confederates were stubbornly contesting every foot of ground, but the Southern left was slowly yielding. A few moments more and the day's battle might have been ended by the complete turning of Lee's flank. I was ordered to move at once to the aid of the heavily pressed Confederates. With a ringing yell, my command rushed upon the line posted to protect the Union right. Here occurred a hand-to-hand struggle. That protecting Union line once broken left my command not only on the right flank, but obliquely in rear of it. Any troops that were ever marshalled would, under like conditions, have been as surely and swiftly shattered. There was no alternative for Howard's men except to break and fly, or to throw down their arms and surrender. Under the concentrated fire from front and flank, the marvel is that any escaped. In the midst of the wild disorder in his ranks, and through a storm of bullets, a Union officer was seeking to rally his men for a final stand. He, too, went down, pierced by a Minié ball. Riding forward with my rapidly advancing lines, I discovered that brave officer lying upon his back, with the July sun pouring its rays into his pale face. He was surrounded by the Union dead, and his own life seemed to be rapidly ebbing out. Quickly dismounting and lifting his head, I gave him water from my canteen, asked his name and the character of his wounds. He was Major-General Francis C. Barlow, of New York, and of Howard's corps. The ball had entered his body in front and passed out near the spinal cord, paralyzing him in legs and arms. Neither of us had the remotest thought that he could possibly survive many hours. I summoned several soldiers who were looking after the wounded, and directed them to place him upon a litter and carry him to the shade in the rear. Before parting, he asked me to take from his pocket a package of letters and destroy them. They were from his wife. He had but one request to make of me. That request was that if I should live to the end of the war and should ever meet Mrs. Barlow, I would tell her of our meeting on the field of Gettysburg and of his thoughts of her in his last moments. He wished me to assure her that he died doing his duty at the front, that he was willing to give his life for his country, and that his deepest regret was that he must die without looking upon her face again. I learned that Mrs. Barlow was with the Union army, and near the battlefield. When it is remembered how closely Mrs. Gordon followed me, it will not be difficult to realize that my sympathies were especially stirred by the announcement that his wife was so near him. Passing through the day's battle unhurt, I despatched at its close, under flag of truce, the promised message to Mrs. Barlow. I assured her that if she wished to come through the lines she should have safe escort to her husband's side. In the desperate encounters of the two succeeding days, and the retreat of Lee's army, I thought no more of Barlow, except to number him with the noble dead of the two armies who had so gloriously met their fate. The ball, however, had struck no vital point, and Barlow slowly recovered, though this fact was wholly unknown to me. The following summer, in battle near Richmond, my kinsman with the same initials, General J. B. Gordon of North Carolina, was killed. Barlow, who had recovered, saw the announcement of his death, and entertained no doubt that he was the Gordon whom he had met on the field of Gettysburg. To me, therefore, Barlow was dead; to Barlow, I was dead. Nearly fifteen years passed before either of us was undeceived. During my second term in the United States Senate, the Hon. Clarkson Potter, of New York, was a member of the House of Representatives. He invited me to dinner in Washington to meet a General Barlow who had served in the Union army. Potter knew nothing of the Gettysburg incident. I had heard that there was another Barlow in the Union army, and supposed, of course, that it was this Barlow with whom I was to dine. Barlow had a similar reflection as to the Gordon he was to meet. Seated at Clarkson Potter's table, I asked Barlow: "General, are you related to the Barlow who was killed at Gettysburg?" He replied: "Why, I am the man, sir. Are you related to the Gordon who killed me?" "I am the man, sir," I responded. No words of mine can convey any conception of the emotions awakened by those startling announcements. Nothing short of an actual resurrection from the dead could have amazed either of us more. Thenceforward, until his untimely death in 1896, the friendship between us which was born amidst the thunders of Gettysburg was greatly cherished by both.

Source: "Reminiscences Of The Civil War" by John B. Gordon
 
Gordon was a very good storyteller but some of his reminiscences need to be taken with a grain of salt. Especially as time went on, his embellishments also grew in proportion.

R
 
Sorry to disappoint, @Powelltc1, but this entire story has been pooh-poohed and generally disavowed by Gettysburg historians as an invention by Gordon. It wasn't until Barlow was safely dead and buried that it was first told by him and later included in his Reminiscences, no doubt after much careful polishing. This isn't exactly to detract from the book which remains a wonderful telling, but there are other problematic aspects of it, such as his account of dealings with Jubal Early during the 1864 campaign in the Shenandoah Valley which casts Gordon in likely a too-favorable light.
 
Last edited:
Sorry to disappoint, @Powelltc1, but this entire story has been pooh-poohed and generally disavowed by Gettysburg historians as an invention by Gordon. It wasn't until Barlow was safely dead and buried that it was first told by him and later included in his Reminiscences, no doubt after much careful polishing. This isn't exactly to detract from the book which remains a wonderful telling, but there are other problematic aspects of it, such as his account of dealings with Jubal Early during the 1864 campaign in the Shenandoah Valley which casts Gordon in likely a too-favorable light.

IIRC, Gordon also wrote glowingly about himself at Ewell's expense in regards to incidents during the Wilderness.

R
 
Sorry to disappoint, @Powelltc1, but this entire story has been pooh-poohed and generally disavowed by Gettysburg historians as an invention by Gordon. It wasn't until Barlow was safely dead and buried that it was first told by him and later included in his Reminiscences, no doubt after much careful polishing. This isn't exactly to detract from the book which remains a wonderful telling, but there are other problematic aspects of it, such as his account of dealings with Jubal Early during the 1864 campaign in the Shenandoah Valley which casts Gordon in likely a too-favorable light.
Awwwwww man...are you serious? That stinks.
 
Sorry to disappoint, @Powelltc1, but this entire story has been pooh-poohed and generally disavowed by Gettysburg historians as an invention by Gordon. It wasn't until Barlow was safely dead and buried that it was first told by him and later included in his Reminiscences, no doubt after much careful polishing. This isn't exactly to detract from the book which remains a wonderful telling, but there are other problematic aspects of it, such as his account of dealings with Jubal Early during the 1864 campaign in the Shenandoah Valley which casts Gordon in likely a too-favorable light.

My dread fear: not being able to recognize historical fiction (which I would not have known the difference in this case)
 
Last edited:
Like I said in the first post, I was reading an old book on Gettysburg. I checked the print date, and it was written in 1922. So whatever story General Gordon came up with, it would have had to have been in place by then.
 
Somebody asked Gordon on the first day at Gettysburg, "General, where are your dead men?" Gordon replied, "I haven't got any, sir! The Almighty has covered my men with his shield and buckler!" Well, not quite. This exchange probably took place after the fighting was over and Gordon's men were reorganizing. Back around Barlow's knoll, Gordon's brigade had sustained at least 500 casualties, including over 100 dead. It appears Gordon had a flair for hyperbole even when a battle was in progress.
 
I read an analysis of this story in the forward of an edition of Gordon's memoirs. It was suggested that the story was meant to promote reunification and the New South. Maybe? What do I know.
 
Back
Top