Home History What is a Good Source?

What is a Good Source?

Written by William Beard

Monday, 30 April 2007

What Is A Good Source? © 2000 William A.Beard III The Seventy-Ninth Thistle, Seventy-Ninth New York Highlanders National Newsletter; Vol. III No. 2 Winter 2000 (pp. 13-18) One of the most frequent questions I am asked is, “How do I tell a good source from a bad one?” One way is to eliminate all the bad sources, and look at what is left. Usually these good sources will include the original sources written by the men of the regiment. There are many books written on general Civil War subjects, which contain information about the 79th. In this author’s opinion, most of these latter books are terrible sources of information on the regiment. These dubious sources include nearly all of the books written for the mass market. Many of these books portray the 79th as “kilt-wearing, blue-face-painted, claymore-swinging, Scottish roughnecks,” or similar descriptions looking more modern “do-what-I-want-to-do-history-be-damned-reenactor” than a real Civil War soldier. This simply was not the case with the 79th. They were Scottish, and they did not need to wear their kilts or glengarries or do anything else to prove they were Scottish. Sadly, people in America today feel they need to wear kilts, glengarries, claymores, and run around bad-mouthing rival Scottish clans to prove they are “Scottish.” There is more to history than just playing “dress-up.” It has become a fad for reenactors, both Federal and Confederate, to wear glengarries, Tam o’shanters, and balmorals on the battlefield to show their Scottish heritage. Not only do these hats have no place in the Civil War except in very rare circumstances, but the styles worn are all modern such as the World War One style glengarry; World War One helmet would be just as accurate. The 79th did not need to do these things to keep their Scottish identity. I do not need to go to Europe and wear a T-shirt with a slogan on it, baseball cap, a pair of Bermuda shorts, tube socks, and a pair of Nike tennis shoes to prove that I am American. Their Scottish accents were mostly all they took with them into the field during the war. But many modern Highland-Game-mentality “authors” have changed history to suit their dramatic inclinations or to justify their own reenacting impressions. Another sign of a bad book (source) is if the author depicts the 79th wearing kilts on the battlefields during the war. The 79th left their kilts in Washington D.C. before leaving for Bull Run. Only a third of the unit ever had them. There was not enough tartan floating around in 1861 to make kilts for all of the men who joined the regiment for the war. In addition to the prewar unit, more than 600 soldiers were mustered into Federal service with the 79th in 1861. Six hundred kilts would be at the minimum of over 3,600+ yards of tartan. Another 2,400 yards of cloth would be needed to outfit 600 pairs of trews. Who would have paid for all of this? Where would they have acquired all of this tartan in such short notice? It took many months for the prewar tartan order to come to America. The Adjutant General for New York was not supportive of the regiment wearing kilts so no money would have come from that direction. The state could not even get rifles and weapons to supply the new army and this was the priority, not a specialized uniform for a single regiment. Another sign of a bad source is if the author writes about the pipeband or pipers in the 79th. Robertson’s band, which was with the 79th from 1861 to 1862, was a brass band. No pipers were with the 79th; they all stayed in New York. Even Lieutenant Colonel Samuel M. Elliot mentioned in his book, The Highland Brigade, that when he returned to New York on furlough he would try to find some pipers for the regiment. He also stated that he might have to go to Canada to find them. He never returned to the regiment because he was discharged, and the 79th went without pipers. The pipers in New York were from the Caledonian Society and did not join the 79th. There was a piper from Michigan who went with the unit to Vicksburg, but he was not a member of the 79th. The problem with most Civil War uniform books is that they are wrong when it comes to the 79th New York. The problem with their information stems from too much plagiarism and not enough authors are doing their own research. In many uniform books produced for the mass market, bad information has been passed from one book to another without any further research into original sources. To summarize, some indications of a bad source are: No. 1. If the author portrays them wearing kilts in the war. The 79th did not even wear them at First Bull Run, let alone during the rest of the war. Some reenactors have found secondary sources that mention the kilts after Bull Run and use this as proof of the 79th wearing kilts at Bull Run. There has never been a dispute that the 79th took what kilts they had in New York to Washington, and these kilts were still in the camps before and after the battle, as there are several references to the 79th soldiers wearing them around Washington and in camp. The original sources are very clear that the men did not take the kilts to battle (Bull Run). All Scottish paraphernalia stayed in camp. No.2. If the author depicts the mutiny as caused by anything to do with kilts or weapons. At least four books claim the 79th mutinied because they were not allowed to wear their kilts. This myth is an example of authors ignoring a good source and passing some bad information from one book to another. Other books state that the mutiny occurred when the 79th was forced to trade in their poor smoothbore weapons for muskets that were not much better. This incident happened several months before the mutiny (regimental history page 13). Yes, there are still many things unknown about the practices of the 79th. I offer a wonderful quote right from the “horse’s mouth” about the 79th and their “mutiny-causing” kilts from the second edition of Battles and Leaders of the Civil War Vol. 1, page 185: “William Todd, of Company B, 79th New York (Highlanders), writing to correct a statement to the effect “that the 79th New York wore the Highland dress at the battle of Bull Run,” says: “If by that is meant the “kilts,” it is an error. It is true that all the officers and many of the men did wear that uniform when we left the city in June, 1861, and on dress-parade occasions in Washington, but when we went into Virginia it was laid aside, together with the plaid trousers worn by all the men on ordinary occasions, and we donned the ordinary blue. Captain ________ was the only one who insisted on wearing the kilts on the march to Bull Run, but the day before we reached Centreville the kilts were the cause of his drawing upon himself much ridicule, and when he started for the battlefield on that Sunday morning he, also, appeared in ordinary blue Uniform.” If the regimental historian said they did not wear the kilts to Bull Run when it would have been allowed, why on earth would they mutiny for not being allowed to wear them? They were never told they couldn’t wear them, although, even before the war the Adjutant General of New York frowned upon the practice. No.3. If the authors assigns a pipe band or pipers to the 79th. The only pipers recorded with the 79th were the Caledonian pipers before and after the war in New York City. The only reference is to a piper from Michigan who followed the regiment to Vicksburg and maybe into East Tennessee for a month or two. The band of the 79th under the direction of Bandmaster William Robertson was a brass band from New York. Any statement or claim that the 79th’s band was detained in Washington to play for the President while the rest of the unit went to was is a good indication of a bad source. The 79th band did play a concert in Washington, but they did not stay there as evidenced by the fact that they are mentioned many more times in the regimental history (page 60). Robertson’s band, whom the regimental historian, William Todd, said taught the “country” bands, and left the 79th in 1862. How could they teach a “country” band consisting of brass instruments if the 79th band were pipers? (Regimental history page 185) The bagpipe is not even in the same concert key or mode. Obviously they couldn’t have been able to teach them anything if they were pipers. Several sources claim the “pipeband” stayed in Washington playing concerts for the President. One source tried to add that no Scottish soldier would have stayed behind while his regiment marched off to war, and that the pipers must have escaped from Washington and went to their regiment in the field. This preposterous notion has been a source of humor for real historians ever since the book from which this incident came was published. Whenever you see any of the above referenced in a book, a red warning flag should go up and the rest of the book should be read with extreme scrutiny. There is no book that is 100% accurate regarding the 79th. It is strongly recommended that one reads everything about the 79th critically and carefully. There is an old axiom that states, “if it sounds to good to be true, it probably is.” This certainly should be applied to 79th New York research. The next criterion should be that if it does not follow along with the original sources, it should be read with extreme scrutiny. For instance, I have seen several sources which stated that the 79th’s mascot dog was named “Tip” because he only had three legs and would tip over. If one needs proof on this matter it can be found in the regimental history on page 127. Todd explained that the dog was named so because of “a peculiarity in his caudal appendage.” Exactly which appendage Todd referred to may never be known, but caudal means “of or at the tail.” Always follow the best original sources, which are those written by the men who were there.

Last Updated ( Wednesday, 10 October 2007 )

 

< Prev