Headstone mystery

[Phogan87]

If anybody can help me out with this, I greatly appreciate it. I've recently found the location of the burial site of my great-great-great uncle, Dennis Holden. All the obvious family information seems to line up, I definitely had an uncle named Dennis Holden who participated in the Civil War and the grave is located in the town I know he lived in alongside his brother who also served. The problem is the inscription. The headstone was contracted in 1884 and it lists him as being part of the 139th Indiana infantry company k. The problem is that all government records seem to list him with the 142nd Indiana infantry. After searching through all the records for the 139th there is no Dennis Holden mentioned. My question is, how can this be? I can't imagine the family making an error with headstone that is this egregious, however, government records put him with 142nd, and I would think these records would be pretty precise. Any thoughts about this mystery? Thanks for all of your help.

 

[BrianB]

Phogan87 - I think the marker for Benniah is correct! There is a Benjamin Holden listed as serving as a musician in F, 35 Indiana from 11/4/61 to sometime in 5/62 (when he was discharged for disability). He was from Lawrenceburg, Indiana.

The same Benjamin Holden, from Lawrenceburg, then enlisted in K, 142 Indiana as a musician, and served from 9/12/64 to 628/65.

So, the same individual seems to have served in BOTH units, and the headstone only reflects service in the 35th....

 

[gary]

At the link below is the Vol. 7 Report of the A-G of Indiana showing the rosters for both of the regiments mentioned. (The report is derived from official rolls, returns and other documents).

Report of the Adjutant General of the state of Indiana .. : Indiana. Adjutant General's Office. cn : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

16

archive.org

The shown rosters of the 139th IN Infantry (see pp. 416 - 427) shows no soldier with the last name of 'Holden' in the regiment.

However, the displayed rosters of the 142nd IN Infantry (see pp. 444 - 458) reveals the name of 'Pvte. Dennis Holden' as a member Co. K. He was a resident of Lawrenceburg, m/i on Oct. 27, '64 and m/o on Jul. 15, '65. (See p. 457).

It's also noted that the period of service in the Union army for both regiments were:-

139th IN - Jan. 5, '64 to Sep. 29, '65

142nd IN - Nov. 3, '64 to Jul. 14, '65

These periods of regimental service are compared to determine whether he may have transferred between these units. This does not appear to be a possibility.

Based on the above information found, it appears Pvte. Dennis Holden belonged to Co. K, 142nd IN Infantry. The unit inscription shown on the headstone seems to be incorrect. This could have been due to any one of a variety of unknown reasons for any mix-up. But this finding needs further corroboration to be conclusive.

It could be that his term of enlistment did not expire and after the disbanding of the 142nd (July, 1865), he was temporarily transferrd to the 139th for the remainder of his enlistment. That happened a quite a bit to soldiers in WW II. If their regiment/division was being sent home and their term of enlistment wasn't up, they were transferred to a unit that was staying behind.

 

[Championhilz]

I applied for a Veteran's tombstone for my G-G Uncle, Miles Adams, who was buried in an unmarked grave in Grand Rapids, Michigan. I filled out all the paperwork taking great care to make sure everything was filled out correctly. I put on the form the two regiments he had served in: 3rd Michigan Infantry and 20th Regiment, Veteran Reserve Corps. When the tombstone came in, carved into the marble was 20th Michigan Infantry. I was very annoyed.

 

[Fairfield]

Mistakes on official government headstones are not infrequent. If we had the form requesting the stone it would be helpful. Some times family members were confused and submitted inaccurate information.

Absolutely! A gravestone record is not primary; mistakes often occurred. The carver wrote as he was told and, at the time of death of a loved one, factual accuracy wasn't high on the list of priorities. Or the records may have been mixed.

Considering that both the 139th and 142nd were in service at pretty much the same time, it is unlikely that both services are correct (i.e. 2 different terms of service). Civil War researchers are pretty precise about units but non-military family members certainly could have been vague--after all, his death came nearly 20 years later. At least they knew he was in an Indianan regiment ("close enough for government work").

 

[Phogan87]

So sorry that I didn't realize that comments were being made to this post - after several days of watching it with no response, I thought it was dead. Thank you very much for the insight and the research that was done. I guess I will be continuing down this rabbit hole!