4504Re: CS Signal Corps in the Maryland Campaign
- Mar 19, 2008Larry,
Sorry to be late responding, but just returned from two weeks away.
Dr. Freeman was wrong. (How that does pain me to say it!) But he was
the victim of mis-identification stemming from the OR editors. At
Second Manassas, the signalman serving Lee, by transmitting the query
to Jackson, was the same man who was serving Jackson during the
investment of Harper's Ferry the following month. After a long time
trying w/o success to identify "Capt. Bartlett," I went after the
original of Bartlett's HF report in the National Archives. Mike
Musick tracked it down, filed with the Second Manass report. Since it
was a report from "the signal person," that person was first ,is-
identified as "the signal officer." Then he became "Captain." Etc.,
etc. The name was published and indexed incorrectly compounded by the
incorrect rank. (In contemporary and post-war narratives, the rank
was also erroneously stated by H.K. Douglas and Imboden.) But (as
Brian has indicated in the introductory material to Antietam on the
Web), the individual was a detailed private. (He may, by 1864 have
been integrated into the "regular" signal corps as a Signal Sergeant,
but I can't yet confirm that. He was killed that summer.) That's the
story in a nutshell and "off the top."
--- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "eighth_conn_inf"
> I just noticed a passage in Freeman's "R. E. Lee" vol. 2 pg. 331:"
> Lee turned to his signal officer, Captain J. L. Bartlett, who had
> established his station near headquarters, and had him flag to
> Jackson...." also found in OR, vol. 12, pt. II, 562-3.
> You had mentioned Bartlett in your GM article.
> Larry F.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>