Oh, goodness… what do we have here?
Obviously, the video has a number of issues, but I’m just going to stick to the “Southern = Confederate” issue rearing its ugly head, yet once again.
There is no doubt that Maryland does indeed qualify as a Southern state… and therefore… her residents at the time of the war certainly qualified to be called Southerners. And, yes, “tens of thousands”… well, approximately 25,000 of her citizens, to be more specific… opted to wear gray. In fact, I have a cousin who did just that, and was killed at Culp’s Hill.
On the other hand, this whole mis-history video… nahh, let’s just call it for what it is… “wannabe Confederate revisionist history”… seems to overlook (conveniently?) some VERY important points.
For starters, I have a hunch that some 60,000 (vs. that 25,000 in gray) Marylanders (and that would include the white and black Union soldiers who came out of Maryland) might have a problem being associated with the Confederacy. Indeed… these fellows fought for what? Come on, now, you can say it… that’s right, the Union. Ah, and yes… since they supported the Union AND were Southern, we can therefore put them under the category known as Southern Unionists.
And as for those who didn’t fight… well, ya know, there were lots of Unionists in Maryland who were still Unionist without wearing a blue uniform… and not just in the urban areas, mind you. Just think of the wonderful reception that the Army of Northern Virginia didn’t have in September 1862, as it marched into some of the finest agricultural lands in Maryland. I’m guessing Robert E. Lee didn’t get the memo, but, do have fun with this piece that appeared in a Hagerstown newspaper in December 1861. (… and, if you didn’t know, Hagerstown is just a skip up the road, don’t ya know, from the Sharpsburg/Antietam battlefield).
And, for good measure… a little reminder from one who has ancestral connections to some of those 60,ooo Marylanders in blue…
Flag of Col. Henry Cole's 1st Potomac Home Brigade, MARYLAND Cavalry. A couple of my "Southron" Maryland kin happened to serve in this unit.
... and the other side of this really sharp looking flag! *Ya'll pay close attention now, but that sure is heck isn't a Confederate shield on that eagle's chest...
For those who still aren’t convinced… be sure to stop by again. I’ve got a lot more interesting stuff to post about Maryland in the months to come.
*Don’t you find it interesting that lots of Confederate imagery in this video clip is from places other than Maryland?
** I discovered this mis-history clip, during random searching on the Web, on the Confederate Digest blog
Related Articles
- … and as for Marylanders and 1861… (cenantua.wordpress.com)
- Maryland, my Maryland, wherefore art thou, my Maryland? (cenantua.wordpress.com)
Cenantua's Blog 
James F. Epperson
April 3, 2011
I’m not sure the 25K figure for Confederate Marylanders is accurate. There were very few Maryland formations in Lee’s army (I think we can agree that almost all the Marylanders would have been in the Virginia theatre). I know that many Marylanders enlisted in units from other states, but a back-of-the-envelope computation says that, for the 25K figure to be accurate, nearly every regiment in Lee’s army would have to have a full company of Marylanders.
Robert Moore
April 3, 2011
I looked all over for specific numbers, and the best I could find was in a dissertation completed by Kevin C. Ruffner in 1991… and, yes, that number does seem a bit high. If you have exact numbers, and a source for those numbers, please feel free to provide an update. I’ll be only more than happy to correct the number shown in the post.
Robert Moore
April 3, 2011
I forgot to add… one of the things that struck me most in my work in the Virginia Regimental Histories Series, was that Marylanders seemed to be all over the place in Virginia units. Granted, many moved over to the Maryland Line, but some remained in Virginia units still. I especially found their numbers plentiful in my work on the Stuart Horse Artillery.
Will Hickox
April 3, 2011
Beautiful flag. Those Marylanders were very proud of their service to the Union.
Robert Moore
April 5, 2011
Loved learning that it still existed, a couple years back. IIRC, it was on display in the Maryland State House in 2005
Robert Moore
April 5, 2011
Clearly, they held that Loudoun Heights battle honor in high regard, having beaten back Mosby in the dark, and in the snow. Regretfully, also the beginning of a dead-end journey to Andersonville for several Clear Spring, Maryland boys… including a Moore cousin.
James F. Epperson
April 3, 2011
I don’t have any authoritative numbers. My memory is that there were 2-3 Maryland infantry units—some of which may not be unique—about 5-6 artillery batteries, and one cavalry regiment. I’m too lazy right now to scan OBs looking for precise details. If every one of those units had three times the usual enrollment over the course of the war, it would account for 13,800 men. That means some 12,200 Marylanders (or 122 full strength companies’ worth) are floating around in other units. Lee’s whole army had about 150 regiments (again, going on memory; corrections welcome); so, to make the 25,000 figure on this basis—which I think is being generous on the enrollment in the Maryland units—nearly every regiment has to have a full strength company of Marylanders. That just doesn’t seem plausible to me.
I think the extent of Maryland support for the Confederacy is overstated. Like my adopted home state of Kentucky, Maryland didn’t join the Confederacy until after Appomattox 😉 I once read an interesting article about Bradley Johnston’s postwar efforts to maximize the impression of Maryland support for the CSA.
Robert Moore
April 3, 2011
2 Infantry, 2 cavalry, Gilmore’s battalion, and 4 batteries under Maryland designation. What you’re not seeing are all those in Virginia AND SC, yes… SC… units. There were about 20 Maryland companies in regiments from those states.
James F. Epperson
April 3, 2011
OK, you come up with about 14,700 men worth of units, figuring on my basis. I know this doesn’t count the Maryland companies in other regiments (hell, I’ve heard of Marylanders in a Georgia regiment) but the point is you end up needing a Maryland company in nearly every other regiment in Lee’s army, and that seems unreasonable to me. The simplest explanation to me is that the 25K figure is inflated.
Robert Moore
April 3, 2011
Seemingly, by about 10K.
Robert Moore
April 3, 2011
How many are you figuring per artillery, cavalry, and infantry company?
James F. Epperson
April 3, 2011
I assumed what I understand to be regulation strength—1,000 men per regiment, 100 per battery; I counted Gilmer’s battalion as half a regiment. So all those additional companies are full-strength, which we know they wouldn’t be.
Robert Moore
April 4, 2011
Your artillery numbers are low. Out of the 27 batteries that I covered in the VRHS, numbers varied. “Healthy” artillery companies had, usually, between 180 and 240 total on their rosters (over the course of the war). Those that were usually in jeapardy of consolidation/disbanding, usually number 100 or less.
Regimental strength estimates may also be low, but only slightly.
I’m going to have to do a bit of legwork in the coming work, to see if I can get a more accurate count. Still, I think that much more over 15,000 might be exceedingly generous. Even though I mentioned those miscellaneous Maryland companies in Virginia and South Carolina regiments/batteries, the companies weren’t exclusively made-up of Marylanders. Breathed’s Battery is a fine example.
James F. Epperson
April 4, 2011
I thought the full complement strength of a battery was 100 men.
Robert Moore
April 4, 2011
Not necessarily. That’s more just a “by-the-book” figure, than a realized figure. I’ve traced trends in different batteries, as to company strength, month-to-month. I’ll give you some examples of the figures if you are curious.
James F. Epperson
April 4, 2011
I think much of any error in base unit strength is made up in my generous (IMO) estimate of triple-enrollment.
Robert Moore
April 4, 2011
Triple enrollment?
James F. Epperson
April 4, 2011
What I mean by “triple enrollment” is that I assumed that each formation had three times the usual number of men enlist over the course of the war. A regiment’s “official” full strength was 1,000, but most regiments had more than this number enlist, with the extra men being replacements for casualties. I think this is generous for the Marylanders, if only because it would have been more difficult for a Marylander to cross the lines to enlist later in the war. So I suspect replacement rates were low for the Marylanders.
Comprende?
Andy Hall
April 3, 2011
If only the dubious historical claims were the most offensive thing about that video.
Robert Moore
April 3, 2011
Exactly.
Robert Moore
April 3, 2011
Did you notice the name of the producers, Red Shirt Army, or something like that.
Andy Hall
April 3, 2011
It seems Red Shirt Army is opposed to the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. flag at public events. Imagine that.
Robert Moore
April 3, 2011
Why am I not surprised?
Robert Moore
April 3, 2011
How’s this for another top-o-the-line video from their collection… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLPeSa9cDH4&feature=related
Mike Simons
April 6, 2011
What a bunch of Nutts Maryland was a Border State like Kentucky that sent troops to both sides.
Robert Moore
April 6, 2011
Yes, and 3-4 times as many appear to have worn blue. This may be about the worst case of Lost Cause memory eclipsing the actual history… although, Kentucky has a strong claim on that as well.
jgo
April 6, 2011
War of 1812 vet, US senator, briefly SecNav, MD speaker of the House (and some-time patron of EAPoe), John Pendleton Kennedy, with relatives in both Baltimore and the Shenandoah Valley, stood firmly straddling the fence and trying to get both sides to stay at or get back to the negotiating table.
shenandoah1864
April 6, 2011
Hi Robert: I noted that the flag has Winchester No. 3 on it. I have never seen Cole’s cavalry referenced as a participant at Third Winchester or Opequon Creek and it is not mentioned in the Order of Battle or any of the Cavalry reports for the battle. Is the a reference to the Second Battle of Kernstown, July 24, 1864, which was called the Battle of Winchester by most Federals?
Robert Moore
April 7, 2011
Scott,
Good question there. I find the history of Cole’s Cavalry (a regiment by Opequon) a bit of a mystery. I’ve seen mixed information that leaves me with lots of questions for the time. As “Winchester No. 3” honor on the flag, I really wish they would have left us notes as to just how the regiment participated. May look into one more thing over the weekend, but have doubts as to finding a definite answer.
shenandoah1864
April 7, 2011
A beautiful flag nonetheless.
Robert Moore
April 7, 2011
Indeed it is…
Andy Hall
April 7, 2011
I see RedShirtArmy has now been picked up by a certain blog that claims to be “your voice in the Sons of Confederate Veterans.”
/bangs head on desk
Robert Moore
April 7, 2011
Nice…
shenandoah1864
April 7, 2011
Robert:
If the reference is to the September 19, 1864 Battle of Opequon Creek, my hunch is that some of Cole’s men were serving in some of the scouts that Sheridan and Averell had organized. They often wore gray uniforms and slipped into the Confederate ranks, serving as the famous Jesse Scouts. I know that the WV and PA cavalry regiments contributed many to the ranks of the scouts and I suspect that with the knowledge Cole’s men had of the valley that they would be in demand.
Scott
Robert Moore
April 7, 2011
That was going to be my next guess, Scott. I was thinking they served as couriers and scouts. I’ve also heard something about some of them being Jesse Scouts, but have found nothing to verify that. My last relative parted company with the regiment in September, so suspect he missed that.
Ironic, but I also had someone comment, just today, on my “dormant” blog about Page County Confederates. His ancestor started out with the 10tg Virginia Infantry, deserted, joined a WV cavalry unit, and served as a Jesse.
Robert Moore
April 7, 2011
By the way, Scott, we really need to figure out a tine, perhaps this summer, to sit down, enjoy a beverage, and have that talk about Southern Unionists.
Historical Digression
April 14, 2011
Well this was certainly an eye-opener. Glad you took this to task. It’s no wonder so many public officials are shying from the sesquicentennial with stuff like this going around. Yikes.
Robert Moore
April 14, 2011
Thanks for the comment. I’m still wondering, however, why “Maryland, My Maryland” never got ousted as the state song. With so many Union men, who clearly, were proud of their service (active G.A.R.), I don’t know why, at the very least, the wording wasn’t changed. I just get the idea that the “despot’s heel” thing got on their nerves.
igoddard
October 1, 2017
Thanks for posting these photos of a Unionist Maryland flag. Did you take them? In what museum is this flag kept? I’d like to cite a primary source for it in a report I’m writing.