Monthly Archives: January 2009

Defenses of Leesburg – Part 1

Leesburg, Virginia offers many reminders and place-names echoing the Civil War.  One that has interested me since moving here is the numerous defensive works built in and around town by both sides during the course of the war.   These works span the time from just after the First Manassas to about mid-way through the war.  Some of the works were active during the Battle of Balls Bluff.  Others may be reminders of Federal occupation.    Three historical markers discuss these works:  Virginia State marker T-51 “Balls Bluff Masked Battery“, A similarly titled Civil War Trails Marker, and finally a Civil War Trails Marker discussing wartime activity in and around Leesburg.

The most useful resource I’ve discovered thus far is a report commissioned by the town to survey these works as historical artifacts. Documentation of Eight Civil War Forts and Earthworks in the Vicinity of Leesburg, Virginia was delivered  in 2002, and was prepared by Joseph Balicki and Walton Owen II,  of John Milner Associates.    About a third of the report included actual documentation of the sites and analysis of source material.  The remainder reprinted several Federal advisories with regard to earthwork management.

Source material for the report included the Official Records, but also Confederate Engineer: Training and Campaigning with John Morris Wampler by George Kundahl (University of Tennessee Press, 2000).  Wampler was a native of Leesburg, and originally joined the 8th Virginia Infantry.  Wampler would serve on the staff of General Nathan “Shanks” Evans in an engineering capaicity in the fall of 1861.  Later Wampler was transferred to the west, serving as Chief Engineer for the Army of Tennessee for a time.  He was killed by a Federal bombardment at Battery Wagner, outside Charleston in August 1862.

Eight sites were surveyed – Fort Evans, the Masked Battery, the Richmond Howitzers winter camp, the Goose Creek battery position, an infantry winter camp with entrenchments, Fort Beauregard, Fort Johnston, and a trench line near the Balls Bluff battlefield.  Fort these works, the survey team provided rather detailed site survey diagrams for all but Forts Beauregard and Johnston.  Furthermore, of interest of those wishing to visit the sites today, all but the three named forts (Evans, Beauregard, and Johnston) are either clearly visible from roads or open for on site visits.   I would stress that the three named forts and the masked battery stand on private property.

Fort Evans was the largest, most active, and most important.  The fort today is on the site of an international corporation’s North American headquarters.  While the names and particulars of ownership are easily netted via searches, I’m reluctant to say too much about the owners here.  While the management there is approachable, they are concerned about trespassing.   I was allowed to tour the grounds, but out of respect for their wishes, I’ll only post photos of the grounds that are taken from the public roads.

The Masked Battery and Richmond Howitzers winter camp were built within sight of Fort Evans and lay adjacent to Edwards Ferry Road.  While the Masked Battery is on private property, the road bisects the works, which are easy to see from a passing car.  The artillery camp is within a city “set-aside” further up a ridge line from the battery.  Any earthworks around the camp are difficult to make out except in the winter when undergrowth is dead.  The most significant remains around the camp are depressions from the winter huts.

The Goose Creek Battery position is just north of Virginia highway 7 and boasts two easily identified gun pits.  The position defended the southeast approaches to Leesburg and a crossing point over the creek.  Today the site is part of another “set-aside” sandwiched between the creek, a housing subdivision, and the highway.

The infantry winter camp site extends north from Fort Evans Road, east of the modern Highway 15 bypass (and the large outlet mall complex).  A new strip mall development has encroached upon this site since the survey.  Portions of the works that were indicated by the survey team are not extant today.  However, the city must have required the developers to preserve portions of the earthworks, as today the line is within a “tree preservation area.” The 13th, 17th and 18th Mississippi garrisoned the line at different times in the winter of 1861-62.

Fort Beauregard is more of a place name than an actual fort, in my opinion.  A housing development stands on the site – a ridge line overlooking Leesburg from the southeast.  Sections of the development have the “look” of earthworks, but could just as easily be post war terrain modifications. The location is entirely private property.

Fort Johnson also stands on private property, overlooking Leesburg from the west.  One can only view it from a distance, but the outline of the fort is visible in Google Earth maps.  The fort itself may be the most impressive of the set, but pending close inspection, that remains undetermined.

Lastly, the trench line on the Balls Bluff Regional Park grounds is accessable, but only after a good hike!  The works were not used in the battle of Balls Bluff, but possilbly occupied during the following winter by Confederates and by Federals during different occupation periods.  Portions of the earthwork line were lost to a housing development in the 1990s.  About 300 feet remain.  Just enough to leave an interesting set of questions regarding the purpose and function.

The eight sites represent a loose ring around Leesburg:

Leesburg's Defenses (Based on Google Earth image of town)

Leesburg's Defenses

The image is based on a Google Earth satellite view of the town and surrounding area.  Indicated for reference are the locations of Edwards Ferry, the Alexandria-Leesburg Pike, and the Balls Bluff Battlefield.   Over the next several weeks I’ll present each site in more detail, as my notes can be polished for presentation.

Follow Up Posts:

Part 2:  Fort Evans.

Part 3:  Masked Battery.

Part 4:  Artillery Camp.

Part 5:  Infantry Trenches (SE of Fort Evans).

Part 6:  Goose Creek Battery.

Part 7:  Forts Beauregard and Johnston.

Part 8:  Potomac Crossing Trenches.

For Want of a Period…

I was entering the text for Sweitzer’s Brigade Tablet at the Wheatfield of Gettysburg into HMDB as part of my morning mental calisthenics today.  Maybe it was operating on one cup of coffee at the time, but the description of the brigade’s activities just had me stuck proofing the typing over and over.  As I’ve complained about before, Gettysburg’s Battlefield Commission seems to have abhorred any punctuation on the tablets as a general rule.


July 2   After 4 p.m. moved from the Baltimore Pike near Rock Creek with the Division left in front to support of Third Corps line Third Brigade was detached to occupy Little Round Top and the Brigade crossed Plum Run followed by First Brigade and went into position on the edge of woods west of the Wheatfield facing partly toward the Rose House First Brigade on the right   Brig. Gen. Kershaw’s supported by Brig. Gen. Semmes’s Brigade having attacked this position and First Brigade having retired the Brigade retired across the Wheatfield Road and formed on the north side of the woods facing the road when by order of Brig. Gen. J. Barnes the Brigade advanced to the support of First Division Second Corps and engaged Brig. Gen. Anderson’s Brigade at the stone wall at the south end of the Wheatfield but the supports on the right having given away the Brigade was attacked on the right and rear and it retired under a heavy fire to a line north of Little Round Top and there remained until the close of the battle

Generally I try to follow explicitly the punctuation used on the marker, tablet, monument, etc.  I’ve compromised that standard a bit to make the text as displayed “in the field” work within a “as displayed on the web” marker entry.   Because ALL CAPS doesn’t look good in the web displays, of course capitalization is modified.  The most apparent change is the use of period punctuation where a period is clearly implied by a leading capitalization.   For example, looking at the actual bronze tablet, while there is no period after “Third Corps line” on the second line of the tablet, the third line leads with “Third Brigade…”, without any conjunctions, as such implying the end of a sentence and the beginning of the next.  In other cases, where the text lists unit after unit, and a comma is flat needed just to avoid confusion, I’ve added those.   I know some sources like to seed in more punctuation where clearly more is needed.   I’m not going to fault them, as it makes the text easier to read.  However, I stick to my purist views and contend the text should be presented as close as possible (to include misspellings) to what is seen on the field.

This tablet, however, pushes the bounds of any rules I might try to craft!  Look at that long run-on third sentence – Brig. Gen. Kershaw’s supported by Brig. Gen. Semmes’s Brigade having attacked this position and First Brigade having retired the Brigade retired across the Wheatfield Road and formed on the north side of the woods facing the road when by order of Brig. Gen. J. Barnes the Brigade advanced to the support of First Division Second Corps and engaged Brig. Gen. Anderson’s Brigade at the stone wall at the south end of the Wheatfield but the supports on the right having given away the Brigade was attacked on the right and rear and it retired under a heavy fire to a line north of Little Round Top and there remained until the close of the battle.

My goodness!  Say that without taking a breath!  Elementary School English teachers are passing out as they read this.  No wonder we find the fighting at the Wheatfield confusing!  This one long sentence sums up about two hours of combat in the Wheatfield for the Brigade.  “They attacked us and we moved there and then we were told to move there and we fought again and were put in a bad spot and moved back over there and stayed for the rest of the battle.”  You still with me?  Every brain cell that still functions in my head calls out to edit this sentence; rewording to pull out passive voice and breaking it into three, maybe four sentences.

But there in lays my point.  I could write a better sentence.  I could possibly relate the actions in the Wheatfield better in the space permitted on the tablet (although better minds than mine have committed volumes to the topic and still not clarified it to the pedestrian level of consumption required for a “public display”).   But I would be tampering with an artifact.  It was written by a team of respected authorities of the battle, who were mostly veterans of the battle, with their perception of what occurred in mind.  In spite of nearly 100 years of further research which might have illuminated the events, could anyone really say the tablet is invalid on its face?  Perhaps the “running and rambling” of the text was actually meant to convey the confusing and fluid nature of the combat in the Wheatfield.  Or perhaps it was just the way a particular member of the board spoke and wrote.   Or perhaps the copy-editor just took the day off when the tablet was sent to the vendor for casting.

But it is a reminder, if you will, that we have to view history with the good and the bad; the proper with the unkempt; the simple with the complex.  Even if the history is written in run-on sentences with no pausing for a breath and with no punctuation and having been written in passive voice with no end to the string covering hours if not days worth of activity mentioning half a dozen units by numerical designation only and referencing three different battlefield positions….

HMDB Civil War Updates – Week of 26 January

Yet another 100 plus entry week for the Civil War category.   This week the states of Georgia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wisconsin are represented.  And the weekly highlights are:

– Another impressive Civil War Memorial from Ohio this week, from Athens County.

– A couple of new entries this week indicate actions the 46th Pennsylvania Infantry fought in.  First the regiment’s monument in Chattanooga.  The second entry is on the Cedar Mountain battlefield in Virginia.  Completing the set is a monument to the regiment at Gettysburg on Culp’s Hill, which was entered back in November.    The regiment was not represented at the Antietam Battlefield by a monument, but is mentioned on Crawford’s Brigade tablet.

– A state marker from La Crosse, Wisconsin details the career of General Cadwallader Washburn.

– Many, many markers from Virginia this week, a preponderance of which detail the defenses and siege lines around Richmond.  First off a set from Fort Harrison and a companion set for Fort Brady.   Napoleons are used to mark the 2nd Line of Defenses and the Inner Defensive line on the west side of the city.

– Before leaving Richmond, a couple of markers indicate some important wartime “infrastructure” sites.  The Confederate Navy Yard’s location is indicated by a bronze plaque on East Main Street.  On East Grace Street, another plaque marks the site of Chimborazo Hospital.

–  Thirteen additions to the collection of markers at Appomattox.  These improve the overall coverage of the Appomatox Court House related set.

– Thanks to Cenantua, we now know that “Stonewall” Jackson was a fair to middling gardener.  The marker says the General grew “lima beans, snap beans, carrots, parsnips, salsify, onions, cabbage, turnips, beets, potatoes, and some inferior muskmelons.”   This entry is one of several from around Lexington, Virginia entered by Robert this week.

– Three more new interpretive markers at the Chantilly / Ox Hill Battlefield Park in Fairfax, Virginia.  Those added this week are at a kiosk at the parking area.  If you visited the site in the past, you know parking was minimal.  Now the park offers more than ample parking.   One focus of the interpretation, beyond relating details of the battle, has been comparing the historical view to that today.

– Over fifty markers, monuments, and tablets this week from Gettysburg.   Included in this week’s set are entries from Warfield Ridge, the South Cavalry Battlefield, the Wheatfield, U.S. Regulars loop, and the Army of the Potomac Itinerary Tablets.

Closing this week, I’ll make a “mini” trip report.  Last weekend, the staff and I walked the trails at Balls Bluff in order to burn off some energy.  Here’s a view overlooking the channel on the Virginia side:

Icy Potomac

Icy Potomac

Ice rafts and cold water.  Personally even if Marse Robert had ordered so, I wouldn’t ford that river in January!

3rd Winchester – Federal Left Flank

A few weeks back I was asked by a friend to do some stomping around the Third Winchester Battlefield, specifically sections outside the Civil War Preservation Trust property boundaries.  My friend is not able due to health and other circumstances to walk the ground on his own, so my task was to be his eyes on the ground.  He provided some pin points on the map and directions to look.  My chore was to navigate to those points and report what I saw.  Sort of a job an old scout platoon leader can relate to.

I arrived in the battle area by way of the Berryville Road (Va. 7), and after crossing the Opequon, I took the turn southwest on Valley Mill Road (CR. 659).  Abrams (or Abraham’s) Creek passes through a parallel valley to the Berryville Canyon (itself drained by Hollow Run).

Valley Mill Road Bridge over Abrams Creek

Valley Mill Road Bridge over Abrams Creek

The War Department maps (made in 1873) indicate a mill stood in this vicinity, with a supporting mill race running down the valley. The valley opens up somewhat to the west, but not enough to allow full freedom of maneuver.  The maps of the time indicate several abandoned farms stood along the road.

Abrams Creek Valley

Abrams Creek Valley

Further to the west, the Valley Mill Road intersects Greewood Road (CR 656) between the Shenandoah Hills and Greenwood Heights subdivisions.  Turning north on Greenwood Road, a convenient place to take in the head of Berryville Canyon is a church parking lot just before where Greenwood Road meets Va. 7.


Center of First Federal Line

In this view looking north, Greenwood Road passes from the left down to the Berryville Road (modern Va. 7).  As one can see, Va. 7 is a divided highway with heavy traffic.  The widening of the road did modify the landscape somewhat.  But not as much as the school seen in the background beyond the highway.  The position of the Federal center around 11 a.m. can be appreciated from this perspective.  Ricketts’ (3rd) Division of Wright’s VI Corps dressed across what is now the school grounds facing west (left).  Beyond them to the north Emory’s XIX Corps deployed and advanced into the trees seen in the center horizon.  Those trees are the south end of the CWPT Third Winchester Battlefield.

However, Getty’s (2nd) Division of Wright’s Corps deployed on the south side of Berryville Road.  The ground they dressed on is today broken by modern development and difficult match with War Department map.  High ground just west of the intersection of Greenwood and Valley Mill Roads matches to that used by the Division’s artillery.  Unfortunately, the intersection is busy and does not offer much chance for the visitor to stop.   Nor is there much to be excited about viewing the hill from a nearby subdivision:

High Ground Overlooking Branch of Abrams Creek

High Ground Overlooking Branch of Abrams Creek

Getty’s advance was generally parallel, if not astride, the Valley Mill Road.  However, again with so much development there is little to pick out of note.  Further west on Valley Mill Road, just before the intersection back with Berryville Road, is a County Workshop.  The bend of the road to intersect with the main highway marks the point of contact between Getty and Ramseur’s Confederate Division main line.

Getty and Ramseur

Getty and Ramseur

The battle lines extended south behind what is today the workshop.

Looking to the South Down the Battle Lines

Looking to the South Down the Battle Lines

Heading up to the intersection of Valley Mill and Berryville Roads, just before the light is a section of the old road bed that offers a view down the Canyon.

Ricketts' Advance

Ricketts' Advance

Two items to note.  First Ricketts’ left flank was roughly on the pike, with his division on the north side (left), advancing west in line with Getty.  Second, this view well illustrates the effects of highway widening and development on the battlefield landscape;  and why it is difficult to appreciate the true magnitude of the Battle of Third Winchester just from the small tracts which have been preserved.

One other stop on the “Federal Left” to make.  In the Regency Lakes subdivision lays the ground over which Gen. Russell’s Division (1st) of Wrights’ Corps advanced.  This view looks from the far west bend of Regency Lakes Drive, to the east over a modern impoundment of Hollow Run.

Russell / Upton Advance

Russell / Upton Advance

As Getty and Ricketts advanced, a gap opened between VI Corps and XIX Corps (see the panorama above for the starting positions).  This gap offered the Confederates under General Robert Rodes a chance to split the Federals before Crook’s VIII Corps could be engaged.  Russell’s Division, in reserve behind Ricketts, was moved into the gap.  Somewhere among the trailer pads General Russell was mortally wounded.  General Emory Upton assumed command, with his brigade in the “hot corner” of the fight.  On the Confederate side, and probably behind the camera in this view, General Rodes was also mortally wounded in the fighting.

After that series of charge and counter charges, the action on the south half of the battlefield paused for a few hours.  Sheridan maneuvered Crook’s Corps to the right and Torbert’s Cavalry were then coming in from their flanking march to the north.  After the hammer blows were delivered on the north side of the battlefield, the Federals in Wright’s Corps would advance in pursuit of the retreating Confederates.  Eventually the last stand of the Confederates of Ramseur’s  Division was made just north of where the National Cemetery stands today (in an early 20th Century residential part of town).

The side trip taken to view the Federal left’s battleground is not far out of the way for visitors to the CWPT Third Winchester Battlefield – all told probably less than twelve miles driving distance.  However with traffic patterns and stops to appreciate the ground, the trip can take up to thirty minutes.  Little stands to interpret the south end of the battlefield, only two state markers J 3 and J 13.  However, as interest in the battlefield has risen in the local community recently, perhaps someday one or two interpretive waysides might orient the visitor to the battle lines, even if they have to use a lot of imagination to picture the wartime landscape.

Gettysburg Reproduction Parrotts

Often imitated, never duplicated?

The Parrott 10-pdr/3-in Rifle, in either of its two forms, was indeed a widely used type in the Civil War armies.   All told West Point Foundry produced 276 of the 10-pounder type and 279 of the 3-inch model.  Yet in the 1890s when all the first generation battlefields were being populated with cannon, the War Department came up with a shortage of Parrott rifles.  Not enough Parrotts had survived the war and post-war.  And of those that did survived, a good quantity had already been released to veterans organizations for use as memorials in towns across the country.

So what were the options?  Ask the folks at West Point to kick in another batch?  Well by that time the foundry was in receivership and on its way to closure.  Instead the Gettysburg Commission opted to have other sources produce some crude castings.  Calvin Gilbert, himself a veteran of the war and a captain from the 87th Pennsylvania, produced several batches of Parrotts and Ordnance Rifles.  Gilbert is also identified in the Commission journals as the contractor who modified 6-pounder Field Guns into “False Napoleons.”

These Gilbert replicas must have met expectations.  Unlike the Gettysburg Battlefield Memorial Association procured replicas (which we see on a lot of photos of the battlefield from the 1880s), the Gilberts are still on the battlfield today.  At a glance, from a distance, the Gilbert guns pass muster.

It is only close up that the “cat is out of the bag.”  As with the 10-pounder and 3-inch Parrott, perhaps it is best to compare these guns where they are side by side for good effect.  A good spot for that is next to the 4th New York Independent Battery (Smith’s) at the Devil’s Den.

First the authentic Parrott:

10-pounder Parrott No. 248

10-pounder Parrott No. 248

Note the same form as seen on the venerable Number 241 over by the Pennsylvania Memorial – typical 10-pounder Parrott with muzzle swell and the “step.”  Now compare the real gun to this replica a few feet away:

A Replica Parrott

A Replica Parrott

At first glance, this passes muster.  Perhaps a hybrid type, without muzzle swell, but with the step past the trunnions.  But if you double click the image to “zoom” and examine a bit closer, you’ll start seeing some casting lines running longitudinal.

Muzzle of the Replica

Muzzle of the Replica

Aside from the visible seams on the sides, the muzzle shows no traces of markings.   While some authentic Parrotts are weathered to the point the markings are hard to locate (and many authentic Confederate copies lack markings completely), this reproduction clearly was not marked.   Compare to a the muzzle of the real Parrott:

Muzzle of the Real Parrott

Muzzle of the Real Parrott

Two other visible attributes that betray the replica.  First, but not always an easy call, the rifling.  The real Parrotts had machined rifling, running the length of the bore to the chamber.  The replicas had the “rifling” as part of the casting and thus is not a clean cut.  Furthermore, the rifling often only extends a foot or so down the bore.  Either the Park Service or the War Department plugged the bores of many replicas (and many real Parrotts)  over time,  so this is not always an easy check to make.

The other attribute to check are the sights.  The real Parrotts had a rear sight socket to the upper right, fixed into a tapped hole in the reinforcing band.  Going back over by the Pennsylvania Memorial, take a look at the breech of an authentic Parrott next to the 9th Michigan Battery (Battery I, 1st Artillery) Monument.

Breech of 3-inch Parrott No. 14

Breech of 3-inch Parrott No. 14

Note the rusted “hole” to the upper right.  Some Parrotts have the socket still attached, with the appearance of a node or lump sticking out of that section of the band.  And yes the “3 Inch Bore” is crisp and clear.  On the other hand the replica shows no stampings, nor any place to fix the rear sight.

Breech of Replica at the Michigan Battery

Breech of Replica at the Michigan Battery

Also in this view, the seams run across the knob.  The knob itself is flatter than the real Parrott, but I find that a rather subjective measurement for the field.  Notice however, even with the absence of the rear sight, the front sight blade over the right trunnion was reproduced in the replica.   Go figure.

Another View of the Michigan Battery Replica

Another View of the Michigan Battery Replica

At any rate, just as a consumer advisory, should someone try to pass off one of these “seamed” Parrotts, you might want to ask for pedigree papers.  However, considering the origin of these replicas, and their tie to the history of the battlefield park, these “fakes” have a story to tell just like the authentic Parrotts.  Granted not as glamorous or glorious as their “real” stable mates, as the replicas’ story is a bit more of the dry administrative history of the park.  Still tells us how we got where we are.


Aside from on site notes, sources consulted for this post were:

Hazlett, James C., Edwin Olmstead, and M. Hume Parks. Field Artillery Weapons of the Civil War, Revised Edition. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2004.

Smith, Timothy B.  The Golden Age of Battlefield Preservation:  The Decade of the 1890s and the Establishment of America’s First Five Military Parks, Knoxville, Tenn.:   The University of Tennessee Press, 2008.

Have you seen this marker?

For any readers around the Atlanta area, I have a “marker hunting” request.  Promise it won’t hurt, and it may give an excuse to take a visit to a battlefield.

As noted yesterday, one of our contributors at HMDB submitted the first of several old photos of markers from Kennesaw Mountain.  The first was an “overview” of the Atlanta Campaign.  Others cover aspects of the battle in more detail.  These are 1950s era markers, placed by the Park Service.  While these resemble the Georgia state markers, in size and silhouette, the form and text layout are different.  

At any rate, the request – if anyone is up on Kennesaw to visit, if you see anything like this marker from the entry linked above, can you shoot a comment?  I’d like to know if these are still standing, or have been removed. 

Have You Seen This Marker?

Photo soon to appear on a milk carton near you!

My contacts with the Georgia Marker Hunting Mafia (you know who you are, and I know you are smiling!) has come up with NO info on these markers.  Hard to believe, but the Chief Marker Hunter of the Oglethorpe-Gordon Chapter of the Georgia Marker Hunters, who has by my estimate 30 years experience locating obscure Georgia markers, has no details on these!

HMDB Civil War Updates – Week of 19 January

Another 100 plus week for the Civil War category.  The number this week is 105, spread across   seven states – Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and New York.   (Only two of which you can see from Rock City, by the way.)  Here are the highlights:

– In late 1861, New River County, Florida was changed to Bradford County in honor of Captain Richard C. Bradford.  Bradford was the first Confederate officer from Florida to die in the war.  He fell in October that year in fighting around Fort Pickens, Pensacola, Florida.

– Several interesting entries from Georgia this week.  A simple bronze plaque for the McKelvey House in Cassville, Georgia begs for more background.  Most of the historical facts are related on a nearby state marker, but the plaque is several feet off the road-way in the underbrush, on private property.  Perhaps the plaque was an effort by the Patriots of Bartow to denote the location for future generations when the house was removed.

– Helping with my quest for Happel Panels  from Fredericksburg-Spotsylvania, one of our contributors also retrieved photos of an old marker from Kennesaw Mountain, Georgia.  Certainly a “vintage” marker dating to the 1950s.  However several other contributors have indicated the marker was replaced in recent years. 

– Another Georgia marker caused me a bit of a fuss.  In Habersham County, a marker states the Habersham Iron Works made cannon for the Confederacy, and that some of those guns are on display at the Chickamauga battlefield.  Thinking it would make a good topic photo addition, I scanned through my field notes and secondary sources for Habersham guns.  Evidence seems to be lacking.  I’m at a loss.  Not wanting to call the marker wrong without my ducks in a row, I’ll just say I’m skeptical.

– There is more supporting evidence for the Confederate Gun Shop in Robinson, Georgia, which armed the Taliaferro County Stephen Home Guard (Company D, 15th Georgia Infantry).

– The lone Civil War marker this week from New York relates that newly raised regiments marched off to war from the Clarksville Inn, West Nyack, New York.

– From Pocotaligo, South Carolina, a marker points out a section of earthworks from the Frampton Line used to defend the nearby Charleston and Savannah Railroad.  The works were built under the direction of Robert E. Lee early in the war.

– Another South Carolina marker, from Kelton, in Union County, indicates the landing site of Professor Thaddeus Lowes’ balloon.  The episode was the feature of a Washington Times article last fall.  Instead of recounting all the details here, lets just say Lowe dropped into South Carolina to a hostile reception in April 1861.

– For the Gettysburg project this week, fifty-eight additions.  These entries complete the first day battlefield from Reynolds Avenue to the Peace Memorial.  Later this week I’ll add the geographic groupings to the Gettysburg page.

– Anyone who has ventured around Northern Virginia knows space comes at a premium and many historic sites (Civil War and other) have been lost to development.  However, one of our seasoned “marker hunters” at HMDB has a knack for locating traces of Civil War fortifications in the area.  This week we have some views of fortifications built around Centreville during the stalemate after First Manassas.   If only we could plant a few Quaker guns….

– Lastly, we have a set of over fifty entries this week covering Pamplin Park, Petersburg, Virginia.  So while the park is on a limited schedule, at least one can browse the on site interpretation, in the on-line mode.  Not as fun as a battlefield walk, but enough to wet the palate.

Looking forward to next week for marker entries, I see my editor’s queue already has several interesting markers awaiting review.  Hopefully another 100 plus entries next week!