Here's a fun one! (Lithograph)

[Old Soldier]

I always wonder what the people who were actually there thought of this kind of representation. Did they have a different expectation of accuracy? Or did they just not say anything at the time?

If they were anything like the guys who fought in two world wars they would have said very little - not wishing to revive memories of what really happened. They would just have nodded their heads and sais 'I was there'. The ones who brag about what they did were never there in the front line.

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

I've come across a couple comments in diaries in which the writer eagerly awaits the newspapers because he expects to read about the wonderful actions of his unit in a recent fight, only to be disappointed because it is either not mentioned at all or is only credited with a small part in the overall battle. It's all about perspective sometimes.

I have Henry Walke's scrapbook which he (or, more likely, his clerk) kept for accumulating relevant news stories-- Walke clearly had strong ideas about which newspapers were more consistently accurate (he appears to have favored the Cincinnati Enquirer, though that may be because it was more reliably available to him on the rivers than some other papers). It appears little has changed in the world of journalism-- some strive for accuracy, some go for sensationalism, and some just sort of muddle through.

(My hypothesis is that he used this scrapbook and his letter-book as the basic sources for the book he later wrote.)

 

[Pete Longstreet]

I've seen this picture before... and I'll never look at it the same lol. Interesting topic, good post.