it's my ple introduce jonathan to you all. he is your first speaker, and

i'm delighted to be to to enjoy yet another presentation from him. jonathan nogales, directorsity's mccormick civil war institute and, a professor in our history department. he's the author and editor of 15 books and has published more than 100 reviews, articles rs in scholarly and popular publications. najjar has consulted on public history projects with organizations such as the national park service, americorps and battlefield trust and national geographic. he is the recipient of numerous awards for his teachingshenandoah university's exemplary teaching award, the first year seminar the university's wilkins award and the state council for higher education in virginia's outstanding faculty award. the highest honor that can be given to anyone teaching at a or in virginia. nogales is next book the blood

tented waters of the shenandoah. i want to read that one? a book that focuses on the battle ocool spring anldiers and families. it will be released inby savage beauty. all proceeds from the sale of this book will support the mccormick civil war institute's effortion sheets about. the book are located at the front the room and i know you ' thanthank you, dr. coker, for that introduction. i feel very blessed and fortunate to work at an n administration that so supportive of the civil warra course who really kind of brought me to and also our president, who is not here today dr. tracy fitzsimmons, and our university provost, dr. karen abraham. so before we get into our official remarks this morning, i wanted to just make a few announcements and go over some

logistics about the daso first and foremost, i want to thank all you for attending so many of you are here for the ninth year or the 10th year or whatever it some of you are here for the first time. if you're here for the first timely you're going to come back next year. and for many, many years to folders, there are things related schedule, there is a comment card in thatlder. so we're to know about, you know, how you learned about see at future conferences. so throughout the course of the day, if you have ideas in your mind about future, you can jump them down on that yellow card and then give them to one of my four students who are serving as ing. or you can give it to me. ticket. that's the real winner of today right? the culinary delights of allen dining hall. you can access those without. thch ticket. we also have information about fall seminar and tour program in november coming up. so if you are interested in are multiple ways that you can register and you certainly look at the flier that

is in your folder. also we have a book raffle as we do every year. again to raise money to support student research and our efforts out on our cool spring campus and other programs. so i a student in the back, josh brooks, his grade depends on how many raffle tickets he josh to graduate from shenandoah or buyim next because he is supposed to thinks. i do want to say that the general city of our donors, whether you're you're giving donations or buying ffle tickets, these things make an impact. so for the first time ever, the university fees mccormick civil war institute was able to scholarships to and teachers from eight different institutions throughout the country. and you know part of what the is making history accessible to the masses. and so we're able to do that significant a significant way through, awarding scholarships.

so thanks to all of you who have donateds over the course of the start. so we are fortunate to hav the q&a session, i willhave a please raise your hand and wait for a crophone to get to you. also, those of you who know me well know i love to run a tight ship. okay, so we will stick to theschedule. exist for a reason. it's to keep things on track. so if you have a question that you would like to a today aren't able to fit it into regularly time. all of our historians are nice people and they're happy to speak with you during breaks. so see that as an opportunity as well. and finally, i would like to point out in the back of the room, we have, a representative from the fort collins war center. so several years the civil war institute decided partner after an invitation with the fort collinsr to really help provide and

educational out at fort collier throughout the nfo(psáe,ttlithought that if we don't

engage any sort of adverse activity against civilians, it might sway. nderstand that when the war begins and really throughout the in a place like,

winchester or frederick county, virginia, where we're at right now, not everybody supported the confederacy, 15% of this city's population were pro-unio and there's another segment of the population who are what i like to call leave alone. the stein fort collier during civil war fell into this category. guys, in his early forties has a wife and several kids. his primary concern is survival, but they that if you engage in this policy conciliation, it would sway. it might make those leave owners want to more aggressively support the union. and certainly united states officials whoon, they thought that it would perspectives among confederate soldiers were not as a pro confederate resident of front royal, lucy bourque wrote in her diar march 1862. that soldiers were nothing more than a tool of despotism for. as she wrote, the arch fiend also thought that if

you in this policy of easier once the conflict ended to up the na and the country forward among those individuals who believed that was the best approach, not just early on in the conflict, bch of the war. is that man right there, colonel thorburn? so if hoban spent a considerable portion of his military service in the shenandoah valley, so from his time as colonel of the virginia u.s., what became the first west virginia through his tenure as division. in 1864? colonel thorburn witnessed civilians cut in the midst of wars. maelstrom and he largely believed that the practice war against. he thought that taking civilian property, however much youcivilian property that for any short term benefits it might

produce. what ultimately in the long run prove detrimental? on july 22nd, 1864. this four days after his fought a very, very fierce along the banks ofthe battle of cool spring. many of you have been out to that battlefield with me at the university of course owns, 195 acres of that property. but this is what thorburn wrote in his journal four days a the battle of cool spring that is manifested toward the people of the sz& but it is not calculated to win back to the union and have fraternity with. justice must be with mercy. the government should be mild and forgiving as well as firm and true to its own integrity. thorburn was not alone in this ef more than two years earlier,fen philip h.

sheridan this sheridan who in the autumn of 1864 comshenandoah in the valley presided that destructive period of the burning in late september and early october o y he thought early in the conflict is relations with civilianslarge and deep political troubles in the future. in the early part of 1862, sheridan, serving as the chief commissary quartermaster for major general samuel curtis's army of, the southwest. so curtis's was tasked tasked driving general stirling price out of missouri. and during price's camp, excuse me, during curtis's, there were all kinds of challenges he whether was a major challenge. the nature, the landsca challenge. but one of the most sfi confronted was that because the horrific weather conditions because the nature

of the rough landscape over which his army traversed, he was using up horses a very alarming rate. and an army at this is only going to move as fast as you have fresh horses to carry command forward. and so he was always obsessed with makingof horses. and it was sheridan's had enough. so february 18th, 1862, general curtis issued an order which really didn't. it did not sit well at all sheridan. and here's the order. necessary to your loss in horses. you will buy or press in a service as to keep up the efficiency of the several arms andportation of this army. this an order that greatly was authorized to purchase them, sheridan believed the instructions to press into service was really to stealing. and here's what he wrote on

march 5th to general curtis. i will buy artillery cavalry or quartermaster stock, which is the only authority i have to make purchases and, which is the only way that purchases can be made. i will not. jayhawk or steel in any way on any orderl the right of any person under my supervision in thissheridan thought in particular thatpractice which to engage in a state like. missouri as all know, was a border state. sheridan and i think rightfully so that impressing horses into the service of the united states, it would not only further solidify confederate allegiance, but it might actually sway unionist allegiance to the confederate hey might saying, okay, sheridan comes and takes these horses, we're loyal to the union. is thist union. so sheridan was very very uneasy

about this. and what of sheridan's staff officers he wrote that state of missouri was a sensitive line. if the people were fairly dealt with by the union, people getting for the property taken would go far to keep them on the union side. and sheridan considered this this is also that confederates share. in the summer of 1864 as confederate jubal early army is moving through the shenandoah valley in the maryland en route. eventually to the gates of the capital. there were some in earliest command, including this man right here, brigadier general warren, who believed that as the army moved further as army got into places like berkeley co specifically the city of martinsburg, where live a place

that confederate soldiers in 1861 called quote unquote, little massachusetts the strength of the union, a sentiment in martinsburg gabriel ght that as early as army to a place like might have the impulse to want to take things he said we should refrain because. he thought that there would be significante go into that city and just take things from civ did not happen. when earley's army entered in john b gordon's division, they cleaned it were and wrote in a letter to his wife. but warren, i think thought more deeply aboutngs than maybe some other confed commanders. ught that doing this in a border region where loyalties in a state of constant flux, he thought that you're going alienate potential supporters. and he also thought consequences. this is what wharton wrote his

wife on july six, 1864 from the sharpsburg, maryland. i fear yankee officers, ed lincoln, to fill up hi prolong the war. so i want to just of step back a and offer maybe a little bit of a broader perspective. i don't think he's far off the mark here. if think about ben butler union ben butler when he occupied new orleans. in may of 1862. and you think about bs order and all the stuff that that entailed, that became a rallying cry to help garner recruits into the confederate army. because he's doing this, you know, at the time, confederate conscription is going effect and was it worked? i mean, this this recruiting effort and support for the draft because butler it brought troops confederate forces who were going after butler. i don't think this is some kind of i think there is precedent happens during the war tond if we

do this, we can potentially these types of. now beyond civilians might potentially shiftopposing side. there were some who simply believed that anything negative of toward civilian populations that simply it was wrong it was uncivil. it was barbarous and they thought it would have an adverse effect on their own personal development as human beings. this is a moment, i think, the historian jacquyn, who wrote a great book about quakers from indiana during the civil war, i think captured this this very very well. and nelson observed that there are so many soldiers the outset particular, that they thought if they engage activities against civilians, that they sense as to the value of human. they would lose their

sensitivity as to why it is wrong to destroy private property. there was a vermont soldi very simply that if i stay in this army for the thr enlistment he wrote and i'm quoting now, i will become a barbarian barbarian. others thought that it was unwise to wage war against civilians and property, as it would erode the army's discipline. and so maintaining discipline in an army. this is a ve critical thing to do, potentially subjecting soldiers who lag behind, who are more interested in looting and pillaging that it could subject them to being captured by irregular forces, bushwhackers and the like. so throughout the course of the conflict, officers on both sides and this is notr the other, this is for both sides they always constantly trying to figure out what can we do? what kind of ord in place to make certain that these types of things don't ine does not break down and men are not unnecessarily brought into

harm' way. so they're issuing orders preventing this type o behavior. and also, they are issuing at various points orders for civilian property. somorning. in the spring of 1862, josia baker, who is there on the right resident of winchester who sympathized withderacy when he union forces coming into winchester there in the early spring 1862. he was deeply concerned about what might happen. things on his 150 acre property. and so he went to the first ld find. that guy right there major jonathan lockwood of the seventh virginia u.s. and asked if he could issue a protective order and lockwood did. and here's the order and the order prohibited troops from trespassing upon the premises. and it noted that those who did would be strictly punished. so what does the punishment look

like? united states army regulations article 52 clearly stipulates what h don't have orders from an officer to go and forage? if j ypower to a property and take stuff that doesn't belong to you and? the regulations state any officer or soldier who shall plunder and pillage every offender being duly convicted thereof shall suffer death or. such other punishment as shall be ordered by the of a martial. while waging war in any form t might indeed as it did lead to discipline. while it might allegiances which did. there are some soldiers who thought if you weigh balance, the pros and the cons, recognizing that we do not, in an ideal world, that their actions were indeed justified. so i want to spend some this morning talking about how they felt they were justified because this whole presentation this morning is the soldier

perspective. will give all the perspectives about militarygs. but this is a very intimate exploration morning. first and foremost, soldiers, as the war goes, are going to justify actions because they recognize the of doing so for reasons of survival, self-preservation, what we m self-care. so if we look, for instance, at is barker, isaac barker was a quaker from westfield, indiana who served in 147th indiana regiment. he served in the final months of the conflict. and at his letters he is really to survive. and in his letters, he writes a lot about how he misses mom's home cooked meals. and certainly fare is not remotely close to mom's chicken thinking, can i do re comfortable?

how can i benefit from the environment around me? so actually writes in one of his letters about going to a farm and just taking cherries from this farm. now he was taking cherries only for himself to eat, but he was taking cherries so that he could bring in them back to the camp, not to shaitcomrades, but to sell to his comrades because he thought, if i can't get what i want, i can sell available and use that money to purchase what i feel need. so confederate soldiers also engaged this type of activity. this is a jackson's 1862 volley campaign, there are examples that exist of confederate soldiers who see the uniform on their back as a free pass to go any piece of property and tahatever it is, want. and this is something that, quite honestly, if you look at the large array of diaries and

letters written in the moment, thist bothered confederate sympathizers the valley. understand right, that not everyone who was a confederate sympathizer as it was like, hey, great, we're going to open up my farm and you could have whatever you want. not the case. the stein that lived at fort collier, mr. sent the every month for stuff had taken from his property. file now at the national confederate civilians, they want the confecyde succeed but they don't want it to succeed necessarily at their own personal expense. and so as conderate s are coming and just taking their civilians are bothered.there was one confederate civilian wrote that these stragglers thesezx soldiers are more troublesome than the yankees because they go anywhere without fear. now as conflict wore on for union soldiers, those who once

favored this policy conciliation that we talked about earlier in my remarks this morning, those perspectives began to harden. and the reason that they began to harden was of their encounters with people. as more and more union soldiers in particular had encounters, civilians. as they had more and more encounters with enslaved populations, they began to feel okay to do whatever they wanted to confederate civilians because of how brutally the slavery was. one of these individuals who was woodworth. so samuel woodworth enlisted in the first michigan engineers and mechanics in the summer of 1863, he brought with him no outward hatred to, the conso he was a guy

that loved the union. he wanteobviously to win. he wanted to be part of that triu effort. but he really seemed to favor a policy o conciliation. but the more he encountered enslaved people, he thought that in the end, anything that union field or the home front anything that they did that might help bring about victory. th[? indeed justified. on october 15th, 1864, he wrote his wife from alabama. ome to thety learn something of the hard wd how conversed with a great many from all parts the south and that i've comen to their sad repeated time and time and time again among literally of thousands of letters from union soldiers. there is nothing that makes n emancipate nation more than seeing is one of

many examples. thought that taking war to civilian populations was warranted, particularly in areas where civilians were violent and aggressive toward union occupiers. i'm not talking about, you know what what women? winchester. confederate women in winchester like, you know, getting off the ier was walking down or not walking the shadows of the stars and stripes. i'msoldiers. on. july 25th, 1862. there were at least one. there was at least one civilian confederate sympathizer. more in newburn, carolina, who usly wounded a soldier over from the 23rd massachusetts infantry. while soldier was on picket duty and. showing that regiment in newburn. so it kind of gives you a sense what that community looked like

the soldier wasn'twounded. and the massachusetts thought that if we don't get now, this is a situation that very, very rapidly. now,they were not able to capture the person who fired the shot or the but what they were able to do was identify the building from which shot was fired. and so ultimately they to send a very clear message by tearing that house down. henry valentine, who was a veteran of the rt,imrecalled that soldiers were ordered to remove furniture from the house while others attack the fences cut the corn, destroy the peach orchard and outbung men directed their attention to the house itself. they just in the humor for the operation, and soon everything was level with the ground. on, attitudes evit's rather interesting to kind of look thry of this because early in the conflict

people like winfield scott elenant wheeler and thorburn, others, they thought that the speediest way to about an end to the war was conciliation. clearly, by late 63, early 64 that was not working. and so they to think that maybe being more aggressive in military policy, civilians would actually speed up the end of the conflict and end the conflict more swiftly. and so you to see people changing their mind. among those individuals whochanged their mind waseph. on october 4th, 1864. so this is just, you know, a couple of months after he's writing letter to hi conciliation and still in the summer of 1864 is the best approach. by october, the first week of october, 1864, as the army of the shenandoah engages in campaign of the burning slow burn begins to perspective as the army was in

harrisonburg. he wrote a letter to his brother about how, in retrospect, burning taking things of military, destroying things of military value, making certain that they were not accessible to confederate forces was really strategically beneficial and would bring about a much swifterend to the conflict. now thorburn recognizes this that this is perhaps the lesser of two evils. and you start see soldiers on both sides civilians on both sides thinking about this. so what's worse to, burn a barn or kill a man? and he writes, to destroy as are doing, is a very painful be military necessity and the which though not a very good rule. as an individual man may do in war for all elements of war are the taking of life is certainly worse than the destruction of property.

there is no ideal. there is no perfect solution. in tobin's but the of his perspective. again, not unusual. and there also is that is not unusual about theo burnsrationalization. ldiers throughout the conflict as they are engaging in this type of activity. they're trying to rationalize in their sleep at night. is this just or not. three months after. or excuse me. three months before. o'byrne really altered his ederate cavalry from general john mccausland into southern part of pennsylvania and as we all know burned chambersburg one of the mbers of mcclellan's command was j. kelly bennett served in the eighth virginia cavalry. and bennett remembered was he received this order.

they were going to go into chambersburg. we're going to burn it. and as torches were basically being passed around, he recorded his diary, how he thought was wrong, that we should not be doing this because he's thinking s written in his diary previously. how he was conof. individuals like union general david hunter in the valley and he thought, well, now we're doing the same kind of thing. but very quickly he begins to about this. he begins to rationalize in own mind and he begins to rationalize it in the context of the destruction that did occur. thought, well this is this is a this is a fair retaliation. this is a fair revenge for what happens the shenandoah valley. bennett is, in some weird believed that the destruction co more humane and civil.

and he wrote i part that burning, per se is wrong. deny, but there may be ch justifiable but becomes duty instead of snatching from the hands of the ladies what they had saved from burning houses and throwing it back into flames. our men could be seen all over the city checking the fire or carrying trunks, etc. for the ladies. how beautiful. it' kind of moments. now, regardless of how soldiers justified taking war to civilian populations, there were some soldiershat it was acceptable in any form. they maintained throughout the conflict that it was wrong. they maintained that was unjust. and if you read diaries and letters of these soldiers throughout the course of the conflict, you see a lot of amples of how this type of aggressive activity really

appalled them. so for in of 1864, sergeant the fifth michigan cavalry, as he oftentimes in his diary, he recorded how distraught he was over seein his command just out and taking things without orders, looting, pillagin like. so one of his typical diary entries larean raid. he wrote, duty is duty. but i have known men under, the guise of duty to pillage buildings of even beds and carpets. what is the need of this lawlessness? no good soldier will do such thing. i say such men were not soldiers. but the worst of sneaking dogs. i would argue that perspective is not&] unique. you think about your own personal there are things that you see.

there are things that you truly appalling. and you might say to your spouse or friend, wow, that's bad. that's appalling. you might write about it in your this is terrible. but only a small percentage of human beings will problem. it's very easy tofi paper, but actually up to do somethinto stop that is think remarkable and unique. there are examples of soldiers standing up they see these types of things happening, saying enough. this crosses line. this behaviorstopped. want to look at a couple of examples to illustrate this point, both of w surprise come from the shenandoah valley in late may of 1864 uniav commandn

, he implemented a very aggre confederate civili was without precedent. it had been done everywhere, but he was aggressive toward confederbelieved and is right in this, that confederate civilians, the key to success for those irregular partizans bushwhackers. and so when hunter came to the valley, he recognized there was no way the united states was ever going to assert control over this region unless that partizan problem was dealt with first. and so he any property ofm talking military property and civilian property was or taken by those irregulars that anysympathizer who lived within a ten mile radius of where property was taken or destroyed,

that people living sympathizers would that. directed that ifattacked. so this is going beyond attacking wagon that if you're attacking a soldier, a human being in his army guerillas or bushwhackers. he ordered that the houses of secessionists would be burned withoutter came to the valley, he implemented policy in newtown, virginia which is present day. stepheso on that day, a contingent of union cavalry enteredtephen's city and they burned structures that believed were connected to an attack upon a union wagon train the previous day. after that attack and after hunter out his order. needless to say, the anxiety levels went wayp among the civilians of. newtown, in in a rather

interesting way that i think goes beyond just discussions of civilians and soldiers, but also, i think, into issues of loyalty. so the dayty was burned, at least three structures were burned. contingent civilians from newtown o sympathizers, wanted to meet general hunter tow we avoid this type of thing in the future. well, hunter wou them. he's like, i am not even talking to them. but what he will what did ultimately do was? he sent one of his staff officers, his cousin david hunter strother. and soher met with these confederate civilians and. they asked him, what can we do in order to certain that our victimized from perspective. he said, it's really simple. tell us inwho is aid and assiwhirregulars. if you do we will safeguard your

property. these are confederate civilians. confederate sympathizers who presumably want the confederacy to. but now they're balancing tha loyalty to a cause with loyalty to their house, to their family, and to their property. guess what wins out? loyalty to family, house and property. and so they omit, really, when strother tells them this is the dealy rat out one particular woman. herwamary wilson was a 60 year old widow, notorious for having her dent be a gathering place for. bushwhackers and bushwhackers. for those of you aren't aware, these are essentially people who are supportive of the confederacy but are not part of any organized regular unit. they come and go as. they please an wwant. so when hunter learned of this, he said, okay, guess what we're going to do. we are going to go and burn down

the widow wilson's. bso may 25th, contingent of soldiers from the 20th pennsylvania calvary they show up in newtown. they're ready to burn the home. andmething rather interesting. she didn't actually own the that the order was written. so this this is the fine print of a contract basically the way that the that could only burn the property that was owned by secession if she didn't own it. hunter didn't actually know who owned the house. the cavalryman from the 20th cav did not know. who owned the home. and so they thought, well, this is a conundrum. so they well, let' thing. so they decided actually empty thnt the home furniture, the clothing, chairs, everything, pile it up in the middle of thetreet. and when the soldiers started to do widow wilson, like, okay, you're going to burn the but at least i'll have my stuff that was inside of the house.

so does something that is maybe a little bit unthinkable. she actually helps the union soldiers. like you need a hand with that. just door. i' onoh dete ex