I. Activity One, Parts One through Three:

Upon completing this activity, the student will be able to:

1. identify and list the major events and locations before and during the Battle of Wilson’s Creek.
2. identify and consider those individuals who played significant roles in the Battle of Wilson's Creek.

Materials needed: For historical background, see Leo Huff's "The Struggle for Missouri" or Kenneth Elkins's account "The Battle" included in the EDUCATORS' GUIDE. The OFFICIAL MAP AND GUIDE for Wilson's Creek National Battlefield, also in the EDUCATORS’ GUIDE, may also be useful. Feel free to copy these materials as necessary.

II. Activity Two:

Upon completing this activity, the student will be able to:

1. identify, in correct chronological order, the major events corresponding to the Battle of Wilson's Creek.

Materials needed: Use and copy as necessary Huff's "The Struggle for Missouri," Elkins's "The Battle," or the OFFICIAL MAP AND GUIDE.

III. Activity Three:

Upon completing this activity, the student will be able to:

1. identify, list, and discuss some of the possible ways the people of Wilson's Creek, Springfield, and southwest Missouri were affected by troop movements and battles during the Civil War.

Materials needed: In addition to the materials listed above, please see August Klapp's The Ray House and Edwin Bearss' The Battle of Wilson's Creek, both available at the battlefield.

IV. Activities Four, Five, and Six:

Upon completing these activities, the student will be able to:

1. critically analyze primary source documents to determine the course of historical events and their effects on individuals.
2. Identify and understand how historians use primary sources to draw conclusions about the past.

Materials needed: In addition to the short accounts of the Battle of Wilson's Creek listed above, you will need the excerpts included below from E. F. Ware’s personal account of Lyon’s campaign in 1861, Colonel Franz Sigel’s two reports on his involvement in the Battle of Wilson’s Creek, and Michael Fellman’s history of guerrilla warfare in Missouri, Inside War. Feel free to make copies as necessary.

Fill-in-the-blank. Please complete the following historical statements by writing the appropriate term in the space provided to the left.

____________________ 1. Elected in 1860, . . . was the pro-secessionist governor of Missouri at the beginning of the Civil War.
____________________ 2. Early conflicts between the radically pro-Union Captain Nathaniel Lyon and Southern sympathizers took place in the city of . . . .
____________________ 3. The first true battle of the Civil War in Missouri took place in . . . on June 17, 1861.
____________________ 4. The skirmish at . . . on August 2 not only led Confederate leadership to distrust General Price's Missourians, but also gave General Lyon a false impression of the fighting ability of the Rebel forces in Southwest Missouri.
____________________ 5. A light rain shower on August 9 kept Southern forces from attacking Lyon's army in the city of . . . .
____________________ 6. Federal reports referred to the August 10th battle as Wilson's Creek, while the Rebels knew it as the Battle of . . . .
____________________ 7. General Lyon was killed while leading Union forces in the area that came to be known as . . . .
____________________ 8. During the Battle of Wilson's Creek, the. . . lost a higher percentage of its men engaged in the battle than its opponent.
____________________ 9. Technically, Wilson's Creek was a victory for the . . . . Army because it held the field at the end of the battle.
____________________ 10. The Battle of Wilson's Creek and the Battle of . . . in March 1862 are generally considered to be the two most important Civil War battles west of the Mississippi River.

Activity One, Part Two

True/False: Please read carefully each statement below. If the entire statement is true, please circle the "T" in the left column. If any part of or the entire statement is false, please circle the "F" in the right column.

T or F 1. By December 1860, the vast majority of the people of Missouri were violently pro- Confederate and thus eager to secede.

T or F 2. General Lyon's uncompromising attitude and zeal in opposition to Governor Jackson's equally stubborn pro-secessionist stance, not only forced Missourians to take sides but also made bloody civil war a bitter reality in Missouri.

T or F 3. On May 10, 1861, pro-Southern Missouri State Militia forces killed 28 Union sympathizers in St. Louis.

T or F 4. General Lyon decided on a simultaneous, two-sided attack on Confederate forces at Wilson's Creek rather than an immediate retreat to Rolla.

T or F 5. Union forces at the Battle of Wilson's Creek outnumbered Confederate forces by over 2 to 1.

T or F 6. Colonel Sigel's troops were routed when they mistook the gray uniforms of the 3rd Louisiana for those of the friendly 1st Iowa.

T or F 7. The heaviest fighting during the Battle of Wilson's Creek took place in John Ray's cornfield.

T or F 8. Neither Union or Confederate artillery units played a significant role in the Battle of Wilson's Creek.

T or F 9. Lyon was the first Union general to die in combat during the Civil War.

T or F 10. Missouri had both Union and Confederate governments during the Civil War.

Matching Names: Please match the individuals on the left with their description on the right by placing their associated letters in the appropriate spaces at the far left.

___ Frank Blair, Jr.
___ Sterling Price
___ N.B. Pearce
___ Benjamin McCulloch
___ Samuel Sturgis
___ John C. Fremont

A. Overall commander of Southern forces during the Battle of Wilson's Creek.

B. Missouri politician and staunch Unionist who supported Lyon's actions in St. Louis.

C. Commander of Arkansas State troops at Wilson's Creek.

D. General Lyon's immediate superior, he refused to send reinforcements to southwest Missouri.

E. A former Missouri governor, he commanded the Missouri State Guard at Wilson's Creek.

F. He assumed command of the Union forces at Wilson's Creek after the death of General Lyon.

Part One (Fill-in-the-blank):

1. Claiborne Fox Jackson
2. St. Louis
3. Boonville
4. Dug Springs
5. Springfield
6. Oak Hills
7. Bloody Hill
8. Federals or Union
9. Southern or Confederate
10. Pea Ridge, Arkansas

Part Two (True/False):

1. False
2. True
3. False
4. True
5. False
6. True
7. False
8. False
9. True
10. True

Part Three (Matching):

B—Blair
E—Price
C—Pearce
A—McCulloch
F—Sturgis
D—Fremont

Instructions: Listed below are some major events that took place in Missouri between February and October 1861. Organize them in their correct chronological sequence from earliest to latest and list them at the bottom of the page.

1. Skirmish at Dug Springs
2. Siege of Lexington.
3. Missouri admitted as 12th member of the Confederacy.
4. Battle of Wilson's Creek.
5. Lincoln called for volunteers after the fall of Fort Sumter.
6. Battle of Carthage.
7. Congressman Blair and General Lyon met with General Price and Governor Jackson.
8. Battle of Boonville.
9. Camp Jackson Affair and riot in St. Louis in which 28 civilians were killed by Lyon's troops.
10. Missouri Convention voted 89 to 1 to remain in the Union.

The Civil War in Missouri in 1861:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

The Civil War in Missouri: chronological sequence (with dates).

1. Missouri Convention voted 89 to 1 to remain in the Union (March 9).
2. Lincoln called for volunteers after the fall of Fort Sumter (April 15).
3. Camp Jackson Affair and riot in St. Louis in which 28 civilians were killed by Lyon's troops (May 10).
4. Congressman Blair and General Lyon met with General Price and Governor Jackson (June 11).
5. Battle of Boonville (June 17).
6. Battle of Carthage (July 5).
7. Skirmish at Dug Springs (August 2).
8. Battle of Wilson's Creek (August 10).
9. Siege of Lexington (September 12-20).
10. Missouri admitted as 12th member of the Confederacy (November 28).

INSTRUCTIONS: Depending upon your class situation, have your students identify and list a given number of ways the people of Wilson's Creek, Springfield, and southwest Missouri were affected by the Civil War.

This activity is intended to provoke thought, therefore there is no one correct answer or answers. A few of the possible ways civilians were affected might include:

1. Loss of crops and/or livestock due to military appropriation.

2. Damage to property from military use, either peaceful or during combat. Examples: the use of split rails for firewood and/or the loss of orchards due to gunfire.

3. Interruption of commerce.

4. The loss of loved ones, either by disease or as casualties of war.

5. The dire need for civilians to provide short and long term medical aid for wounded military personnel.

6. Civilian injury and/or death due to military activities.

7. Polarization of popular support for opposing sides due to real, exaggerated, or imagined military injustices.

8. The disruption of local law enforcement with a resultant rise in criminal activities, often thinly veiled as legitimate military actions (i.e., guerrilla activities).

9. The disruption of educational activities.

10. Immediate political chaos with resultant long-term bitterness that would hamper the political process for years to come.

11. Conscription into the armed forces.

12. The need for civilians to provide food, clothing, and other material support to troops in the field as well as taxes.

13. Employment opportunities for civilians, such as work in arsenals and factories, or attached to the armies, such as teamsters and sutlers.

14. War time inflation and the rise in the cost of living, along with war profiteering.

15. Interruption of communications.

16. Restriction on personal freedoms: speech, press, travel, habeas corpus.

17. Displacement of civilians, refugees fleeing advancing armies.

18. The fleeing of slaves in response to Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, issued in September 1862, even though it did not technically apply to Missouri as a border state still affiliated with the Union.

INSTRUCTIONS: After students have read below Eugene Ware’s first person accounts of (Part One) his perspective on why men in his Iowa community were so eager to enlist at the beginning of the war as well as (Part Two) his recollections of his own combat experience during the Battle of Wilson’s Creek, have them respond as appropriate to the set of questions that follow.

These excerpts are from Ware’s The Lyon Campaign in Missouri, pages 72-79 and 315-327. Within a few days after the Civil War began in April 1861, Ware voluntarily enlisted in the First Iowa Infantry. After extensive training, in mid-June his unit joined Union forces in Missouri under General Nathaniel Lyon. Through the sweltering summer months of July and August, Lyon’s small army pursued the pro-Southern governor of Missouri and his State Guard forces moving to join regular Confederate forces in southern Missouri. After a series of maneuvers, skirmishes, and engagements, the two armies finally met in bloody battle at Wilson’s Creek on August 10, 1861. Later Ware would write at length about "one of the bloodiest pitched battles ever fought on American soil" and his experiences in that battle.

My old grandfather came along . . . the fence and asked, "What are you trying to do?" I said: "I am learning to throw up earth-works. What do you think of the prospect of war?" He said: "I have been expecting it for twenty years. The country is all gone to smash. The Constitution is of no use anymore. . . . [t]here never will be any more such good times as there used to be. About everybody’s going to get killed unless something stops it, and I don’t see what there is that can stop it. It is State against State, and it will be family against family and man against man. I don’t never expect to live to see the end of it. . . . I said to him: "I expect I will be in the war. Nobody seems to think it will last long; some say it won’t last over ninety days." My old grandfather said: "Oh, ninety days ain’t no time. You can’t get ready in ninety days; but," he said, "I guess you might as well go as anybody. War is a great school. It is a mighty good school, or it is a mighty bad school, according to the way you take it." . . . When I found out that I had been selected as one to go to the war . . . my happiness knew no bounds. My sister was very proud of it, and her many young lady friends congratulated me. I felt that I might become a favorite, and might ultimately be considered by the young ladies generally as being a good deal of a fellow. . . . [after my selection it was] the happiest day of my life, and those who were successful all felt similar elation. . . . Cash was frequently offered by outsiders for a place as private soldier in the company. When I announced to my parents that I had been accepted in the Zouaves, things seemed to change with them. . . . There was a constant stream of secession talk in Northern newspapers, and a constant iteration of the fact that any parent could take any boy out of the army, under twenty-one. That was what made it hard for me to get in, and the question with me was whether or not my parents would take me out. . . . My father’s demeanor changed a very great deal when he found that I was in. He was not half as profoundly stirred up over slavery as he had been before. I was his only grown son. My mother took a very sensible view of things. She cried some, but said that if I wanted to go I ought to go. She said that I must write her every week if I went, and she very sensibly said, "Now you want to be careful and not do anything that would make you ashamed to come back.". . . As soon as our company had been organized, we who were uniformed were marched down to a church where a sermon was to be preached. . . . I shall never forget that sermon. I do not remember the name of the minister. . . . He told us that, if we were called upon, we must uphold the country and the flag, and he made the distinct statement that the Lord Almighty had organized the United States for the purpose of keeping out kings and kingdoms. . . the great curse of the world. . . . [The U.S. government] was to be a beacon-light in the world, and if we lost our lives in the supporting of the government we would go right straight to Heaven as soon as we were killed. I remember what a very assuring effect that had. I was beginning to have a little doubt upon the subject at that time, but the sermon seemed as if it had been prepared in a very sensible, scientific, patriotic and politic way to give the boys enthusiasm. It was without doubt all prearranged, although we did not then understand it. At any rate, the sermon had a very fine effect, and as the church was large, and all the girls in town were there, the boys marched out very pompously and felt that they were going either down to the tropics or to heaven, and it was safe either way. . . [later] The German company was organized under an old German officer as captain. . . .[who was] one of the best men. . .I ever knew. . . [and] was idolized by everybody who knew him. He was a thorough lover of liberty, a brave and capable man. . . . Before we were accepted a couple of our men changed their views and politics, and became "secesh" and would not go in. It was not to be wondered at that under steady disloyal persuasion a young man here and there should yield. There were hundreds of open seces-sionists and hundreds of "Southern sympathizers," and they were all at work doing what they could to tie the hands of the North and of the soldiers of the Union. . . . [Still], the new sol-diers whenever they marched felt that they were keeping step to the music of the Union. . . .[and] our company was probably the prettiest-looking lot of young men who ever stood up in a row.

This later excerpt from The Lyon Campaign in Missouri provides the reader with Ware’s very personal recollections of his combat experience at Wilson’s Creek on August 10, 1861.

We all laid down on this rock to get rested. The cool, dewy night air made me feel chilly in the "linings" which I was wearing; but the radiating heat which the rock during the day had absorbed, was peculiarly comfortable. I went to sleep in from five to ten seconds and slept deliciously. I had made up my mind that if we were going to have a battle I certainly would not get killed, but might need all my strength and ability in getting away from the enemy’s cavalry. . . . In a short time we found that the enemy were alive and active. . . . As we marched up the hill, it came in my way to step over one of the skirmishers who was shot right in front of us. He was a blue-eyed, blonde, fine-looking young man, with a light mustache, who writhed around upon the ground in agony. While I was walking past, I asked him where he was shot, but he seemed unable to comprehend or answer. . . . As we started up the ridge a yell broke from our lines that was kept up with more or less accent and with slight intermissions for six hours. . . . Across the creek, which was not very far, perhaps about a third of a mile, a battery of artillery made a specialty of our ranks, opening out thunderously. . . . When we saw the puff of the artillery we dodged and went down flat, and in the course of fifteen minutes gained so much confidence that we felt no hesitation in walking around and seeing what we could see, knowing that we could dodge the artillery ammunition. . . . Considerable damage was done to our artillery, but they were not silenced. One of the large roan artillery horses was standing back of the gun over the crest of the hill. A shell from the battery in front of us struck this horse somehow and tore off its left shoulder. Then began the most horrible screams and neighing I ever heard. . . . [T]he voice of this roan horse was the limit; it was so absolutely blood-curdling that it had to be put to an end immediately. One of the soldiers shot the horse through the heart. . . . In a little while, in front of us, appeared, advancing in the meadow, a body of men that we estimated at about one thousand. . . . As they got nearer to us, their own artillery ceased to fire, because it endangered them. When they got close the firing began on both sides. How long it lasted I do not know. It might have been an hour; it seemed like a week; it was probably twenty minutes. Every man was shooting as fast, on our side, as he could load, and yelling as loud as his breath would permit. . . . Finally, the field was so covered with smoke that not much could be known as to what was going on.

At one time we were charged by a large detachment of Louisiana troops. They made the most stubborn fight of the day. . . . During that fight Corporal Bill [William J. Fuller] received a minie ball on the crest of the forehead. The ball went over his head, tearing the scalp, sinking [into] the skull at the point of impact about one-eighth of an inch. He bled with a sickening profusion all over his face, neck, and clothing. . . . From that depression in the skull, wasted to a skeleton, he, an athlete, died shortly after his muster-out, with consumption. How could it be?

About this time we heard yelling in the rear, and we saw a crowd of cavalry coming on a grand gallop, very disorderly, with their apex pointing steadily at our pieces of artillery. We were ordered to face about and step forward to meet them. . . . We kept firing, and awaited their approach with fixed bayonets. Our firing was very deadly, and the killing of horses and riders in the front rank piled the horses and men together as they tumbled over one another. . . . Some few spasmodic efforts were made to dislodge us, all of which we repulsed. Finally the hostile artillery in front ceased firing, and there came a lull; finally the last charge of the day was made, which we easily repulsed, and the field was ours. . . . [We] sat down on the ground and began to tell the funny incidents that had happened. We looked after the boys who were hurt, sent details off to fill the canteens, and we ate our dinners. . . . We regretted very much the death of General Lyon, but we felt sanguine over our success, and thought the war was about ended.

After a little while . . . . we moved forward about one hundred feet. . . . We supposed that we were going to chase the enemy down Wilson’s creek, but instead of this an order came for us to wheel to the right, and take up a position in the rear. . . . We were the last off the field and never had a shot fired at us. . . . The boys were highly pleased that they had got through with the day alive, and there was no idea that the day had gone against us.

1. Please identify and briefly discuss three possible reasons why many men were so eager to join volunteer units and fight during the first year of the war.

2. What do you think Ware’s grandfather meant when said that "War is a great school?" How might the choices men made while in the military help determine whether the experience of war was a good one or a bad one for them?

3. With respect to his combat experience, why do you think Ware wrote about these particular events? Why does he seem to know so little about the overall events and results of this battle?

4. Does Ware write anything about being afraid? Why or why not? In your opinion, would Ware have been more or less afraid during subsequent battles? Why or why not?

5. Why is it important for students and historians to have primary sources, or personal accounts, like that of Eugene Ware’s for us to better understand the American Civil War?

1. Possible reasons why men enlisted during the Civil War.

1) Ware "expected" to be in the war. He implies that involvement in the war was probably unavoidable, though he also implies that it would end quickly, perhaps in less than ninety days. His grandfather had also been "expecting it for twenty years," though he did not expect it to end so quickly.

2) Since the war might last less than ninety days, Ware implies that if one wanted to experience war one should enlist immediately.

3) Ware’s grandfather told him that war could be "a great school" if one took it the right "way." In other words, one could learn much that was valuable by experiencing war as long as you had the right attitude and made the right choices.

4) Ware was happy about enlisting and being selected by such a flashy and recognizable group as the Zouaves, Union and Confederate regiments that modeled their bright uniforms and drill on the original Zouaves of the French colonial armies. Here his motive seems to be mostly a desire for adventure, excitement, and public attention.

5) Ware hoped to gain the favor of his sister’s "many young lady friends" by enlisting voluntarily and quickly. While he might have been looking forward to marriage, it would seem he was more interested at that time in becoming more popular with young women and interacting with them socially. Further, the historian Michael Fellman (see Activity Six below) argues persuasively that many wives, girlfriends, and sisters put a significant degree of pressure on the men in their lives to fight.

6) Young men often wanted to join the military because so many were doing so, either to be with friends or simply to be a part of what their peers were jumping into. Some were so interested in joining military units that "Cash was frequently offered by outsiders for a place as private soldier in the company." Please note that during the first few months of the war so many men wanted to enlist, especially in the South, that some had to be turned away, a problem that was much less common after the first few major battles were fought with their high casualties.

7) To a different extent, his parents supported his enlistment, or at least did not oppose it. His mother seems to have believed that her son could make the right choices and "not do anything that would make you [Ware] ashamed to come back."

8) Local religious leaders often encouraged men to serve. Not too long after his enlistment, Ware heard one minister claim from the pulpit that God "organized" the United States government to end rule by kings throughout the world and that, thus, men willing to fight and die for their government would "go right straight to Heaven as soon as we were killed."

9) Men sometimes enlisted because they were attracted to a strong leader, such as Ware’s "old German officer" who was "one of the best men and one of the bravest officers" he had ever known and who "was idolized by everybody who knew him."

2. Ware’s grandfather seems to have believed that war could, "if properly used," teach much about duty, honor, friendship, and discipline to those that experienced it. In other words, if one was strong and made the right choices, war could teach its participants much about human life. It could also be "a mighty bad school" if one chose unwisely.

3. Because these were the things he saw and heard that made a lasting impression on him. In the midst of all the struggle, smoke, noise, and confusion on the battlefield, it would have been easy to miss much.

4. Ware does not mention being afraid. For some unexplained reason, he claims to have convinced himself that he would not die that day. But he did make note of those that were wounded or killed. Eventually, like nearly all other soldiers, he would have realized that death could come to any man on the field of battle, including himself. Even worse, men would have become painfully aware that they might be terribly wounded. Consequently, it is little wonder that desertions became much more common by the end of the war than at the beginning.

5. Because primary sources are eyewitness, firsthand evidence about what people in other historical periods experienced and believed. In other words, they are windows to the past. While such sources must be used cautiously because of the limited, often faulty, and sometimes self-serving nature of human memory, they are still some of our best sources of information about the motives and actions of men and women in the past.

INSTRUCTIONS: Read carefully the following excerpts, both of which were written by Union Colonel Franz Sigel about his role in the Battle of Wilson's Creek. What discrepancies exist between Sigel's first account, written eight days after the battle, and the second account, written over twenty years later? What might be some possible reasons for these discrepancies? Second, drawing on both these eyewitness accounts, write a short version of Sigel's part in the battle. What precautions should we observe as historians when using such first-hand accounts, or primary sources? Why is it advantageous to have more than one first-hand account of a historical event? Finally, why must historians be careful with accounts written at such different times?

ANSWER KEY: Results will vary on this assignment, but note how Sigel's second account lessens considerably his portion of the blame for the rout of his men. As for precautions, one should always be aware that first-hand accounts can be problematic because of personal biases and/or agendas, the limited perspective of individuals caught up in sweeping historical events, and the frequently dubious nature of human memory. We can, however, by drawing on more than one first-hand account, eliminate inconsistencies and create a more factual narrative of past events.

Excerpt from the report of Colonel Franz Sigel in The Official Records of the War of the Rebellion, Series I, Volume III, pages 87-88. Report dated August 18, 1861.

This was the state of affairs at 8:30 o'clock in the morning, when it was reported to me by Dr. Melchior and some of our skirmishers that Lyon's men were coming up the road. Lieutenant Colonel Albert, of the Third, and Colonel Salomon, of the Fifth, notified their regiments not to fire on troops coming in this direction, whilst I cautioned the artillery in the same manner. Our troops in this moment expected with anxiety the approach of our friends, and were waving the flag, raised as a signal to their comrades, when at once two batteries opened their fire against us, one in front, placed on the Fayetteville road, and the other upon the hill on which we had supposed Lyon's forces were in pursuit of the enemy, whilst a strong column of infantry, supposed to be the Iowa regiment, advanced from the Fayetteville road and attacked our right.

It is impossible for me to describe the consternation and frightful confusion which was occasioned by this unfortunate event. The cry, 'They (Lyon's troops) are firing against us,' spread like wildfire through our ranks; the artillerymen, ordered to fire and directed by myself, could hardly be brought forward to serve their pieces; the infantry would not level their arms till it was too late. The enemy arrived within ten paces from the mouth of our cannon, killed the horses, turned the flanks of the infantry, and forced them to retire. The troops were throwing themselves into the bushes and by-roads, retreating as well as they could, followed and attacked incessantly by large bodies of Arkansas and Texas cavalry. In this retreat we lost five cannon, of which three were spiked, and the color of the Third Regiment, the color-bearer having been wounded and his substitute killed. The total loss of the two regiments, the artillery and the pioneers, in killed, wounded, and missing amounts to 292 men, as will be seen from the respective lists.

In order to understand clearly our actions and our fate, you will allow me to state the following facts:

1st. According to orders, it was the duty of this brigade to attack the enemy in the rear and cut off his retreat, which order I tried to execute, whatever the consequences may be.

2d. The time of service of the Fifth Regiment Missouri Volunteers had expired before the battle. I had induced them, company by company, not to leave us in the most critical and dangerous moment, and had engaged them for the time of eight days, this term ending on Friday, the 9th, the day before the battle.

3d. The Third Regiment, of which 400 three-months men had been dismissed, was composed for the greatest part of recruits, who had not seen the enemy before and were only insufficiently drilled.

4th. The men serving the pieces and the drivers consisted of infantry taken from the Third Regiment, and were mostly recruits, who had only a few days instruction.

5th. About two-thirds of our officers had left us. Some companies had no officers at all; a great pity, but the consequences of the system of the three months service."

Excerpt from Battles and Leaders of the Civil War, Volume I, 1887, pages 305-306.

All these circumstances--the cessation of the firing in Lyon's front, the appearance of the enemy's deserters, and the movement of Reid's artillery and the cavalry toward the south--led us into the belief that the enemy's forces were retreating, and this opinion became stronger by the report of Dr. Melcher. . .that 'Lyon's troops' were coming up the road and that we must not fire. So uncertain was I in regard to the character of the approaching troops, now only a few rods distant, that I did not trust to my own eyes, but sent Corporal Tod, of the 3rd Missouri, forward to challenge them. He challenged as ordered, but was immediately shot and killed. I instantly ordered the artillery and infantry to fire. But it was too late--the artillery fired one or two shots, but the infantry, as though paralyzed, did not fire; the 3d Louisiana, which we had mistaken for the gray-clad 1st Iowa, rushed up to the plateau, while Bledsoe's battery in front and Reid's from the heights on our right flank opened with canister at point-blank against us. As a matter of precaution I had during the last moment brought four of our pieces into battery on the right against the troops on the hill and Reid's battery; but after answering Reid's fire for a few minutes, the horses and drivers of three guns suddenly left their position, and with their caissons galloped down the Fayetteville road, in their tumultuous flight carrying panic into the ranks of the infantry, which turned back in disorder, and at the same time received the fire of the attacking line. . . .

I remained with the right wing, the 3d Missouri, which was considerably scattered. I re-formed the men during their retreat into 4 companies, in all about 250 men, and, turning to the left, into the Fayetteville road, was joined by Captain Carr's company of cavalry. After considering that, by following the left wing toward Little York, we might be cut off from Springfield and not be able to join General Lyon's forces, we followed the Fayetteville road until we reached a road leading north-east toward Springfield. This road we followed. Captain Carr, with his cavalry, was leading; he was instructed to remain in advance, keep his flankers out, and report what might occur in front. . . So we marched, or rather dragged along as fast as the exhausted men could go, until we reached the ford at James Fork of the White River. Carr had already crossed, but his cavalry was not in sight; it had hastened along without waiting for us; a part of the infantry had also passed the creek; the piece and caissons were just crossing, when the rattling of musketry announced the presence of hostile forces on both sides of the creek. They were detachments of Missouri and Texas cavalry, under Lieutenant Colonel Major, Captains Mabry and Russell, that lay in ambush, and now pounced upon our jaded and extended column. It was in vain that Lieutenant Colonel Albert and myself tried to rally at least a part of them; they left the road to seek protection, or make good their escape in the woods, and were followed and hunted down by their pursuers. In this chase the greater part of our men were killed, wounded, or made prisoners, among the latter Lieutenant Colonel Albert and my orderly, who were with me in the last moment of the affray. I was not taken, probably because I wore a blue woolen blanket over my uniform and a yellowish slouch-hat, giving me the appearance of a Texas Ranger. I halted on horseback, prepared for defense, in a small strip of corn-field on the west side of the creek, while the hostile cavalrymen swarmed around and several times passed close to me. When we had resumed our way toward the north-east, we were immediately recognized as enemies, and pursued by a few horsemen, whose number increased rapidly. It was a pretty lively race for about six miles, when our pursuers gave up the chase. We reached Springfield at 4:30 in the afternoon, in advance of Sturgis, who with Lyon's troops was retreating from the battlefield, and who arrived at Springfield, as he says, at 5 o'clock. The circumstance of my arrival at the time stated gave rise to the insinuation that I had forsaken my troops after their repulse at Sharp's house, and had delivered them to their fate. Spiced with the accusation of "plunder," this and other falsehoods were repeated before the Committee on the Conduct of the War, and a letter defamatory of me was dispatched to the Secretary of War (dated February 14th, 1862, six months after the battle of Wilson's Creek). I had no knowledge of these calumnies against me until long after the war, when I found them in print.

In support of my statements, I would direct attention to my own reports on the battle and to the Confederate reports, especially to those of Lieutenant Colonel Hyams and Captain Vigilini, of the 3d Louisiana; also to the report of Captain Carr, in which he frankly states that he abandoned me immediately before my column was attacked at the crossing of James Fork, without notifying me of the approach of the enemy's cavalry. I never mentioned this fact, as the subsequent career of General Carr, his cooperation with me during the campaigns of General Fremont, and his behavior in the battle of Pea Ridge vindicated his character and ability as a soldier and commander.

Instructions: Please read the following excerpt from Michael Fellman’s Inside War; The Guerrilla Conflict in Missouri During the American Civil War, pages 193-195. In this short passage, Fellman considers different ways women responded to the Civil War in general and guerrilla warfare in Missouri in particular. Please note that as a historian Fellman sees womens’ motives for supporting the war as much more complex and for more ideological reasons than did the young Eugene F. Ware when he wrote about why young men entered the war in 1861.

Women as well as men carried romantic preconceptions into war. War meant sacrifice, but this was a noble means to achieve victory---peace with honor. Women would be brave and supportive of their warrior fiances, fathers, and sons. They would remain true and loving, patient yet eager to welcome home their conquering heroes.

At the end of the evening of December 29, 1861, Adelia Allen sat by her fireside in Princeton, Illinois, writing to her "dear friend" Dan Holmes, who had gone soldiering through rural Missouri. She recalled their having sat together late one evening by such a fire . . . . She reminded Dan of dinner parties other evenings with their chums, when "fine sentiment—-polished wit-—keen sarcasm—-and charming originality-—" flew around the table. In a similar schoolgirl-pretentious tone she also exhorted him to fight the noble war: "strike till the last armed foe expires . . . we do hope you will succeed in crushing this unholy rebellion. I am glad you see it your duty to stiffen the sinews and summon up the blood." Dan was killed by guerrillas in 1862.

This was a conventional war letter to a soldier in the field from a young woman back home. Recalling happy times, . . . [it] also promised a future worth fighting to preserve. Such domestic anticipation was explicitly linked to the higher morality of the war. Adelia was preparing Dan and herself for his possible sacrifice, which was all the more reason to intensify general war aims in such personal, emotional ways. For Dan and Adelia, death could have value, and this meant that life could have more meaning as well.

In some cases, women were more ideologically committed than their male friends and kin whom they pushed into war. Lizzie Brannock wrote to her brother from the village of Chapel Hill concerning her southern principles and behavior. For her, the Republicans were abolitionist rebels who had captured and destroyed the "dear old government with all its rights and privileges," most especially the right of freedom of thought.

"I think every man is entitled to his honest opinion and no one has a right to interrupt or disturb him for his sentiment." The Union had turned barbarian, burning and plundering her county to impose an alien antislavery ideology upon it. Lizzie wrote that she had come to these secessionist conclusions five months prior to her husband, and that only on August 15, 1862, had he "voluntarily" gone South to join J. O. Shelby’s cavalry regiment rather than submit to an oath and enlist in the local Union militia. He had become "an honest Christian soldier from principle and conscience battling for what we think the right." Lizzie Brannock was clearly in the political lead and not merely by five months. "Mr. Brannock would be willing to live on as a loyal citizen if he could, but I am not willing he should take an oath that he desires the north to triumph over the south, [an oath] which would be against conscience and it would be guilty before God and man." Political correctness, conscience, and Christianity were all activating appeals made by his wife to Mr. Brannock, who had preferred to stay home and take it easy. His wife defined the cause in which he had to fight.

I am not arguing that most women were so eager to send their male kin into war nor that many men were so much more reluctant than their women relatives to go off and fight, but rather that there was a constellation of values—-traditional liberty, Christian conscience, defense of the domestic realm—which were generally held ideals leading many women to conclude that this war was just and necessary. There is no reason to believe that women were intrinsically more pacifistic than men in defense of this configuration of values and feelings, even if later generations of suffragists, often citing the Civil War, argued that such was the case in nature and society. War as a traditional defense of cherished institutions and intimate relationships was as necessary to women as to men, and these women did not see themselves as victims but as participants.

Other women, even among those who preferred one side to the other, believed that the war was not worth fighting and that their male relatives would be well off out of it. An inelegant, if common, expression of this form of antiwar sentiment, one far more widespread in the North than copperheadism, was written by Lucy Thurman of Pine Oak to her cousin Larkin Adamsay. "Do come home if you can get out of old Abe’s clutches, for I think you have served the old ape long enough. We are getting along first rate since the [slave] . . . stealers are all gone to Dixie to whip the southern boys. I tell you they can’t do it for they have not the pluck to whip a swarm of gnats." Antiwar northerners as well as Southerners commonly enough referred to Old Abe as "old ape" and as leader of the "black Republicans" and to the North as an effeminate society during most of the war. Doubtless, there were as many such reluctant Union participants as there were those committed to the higher cause.

In a civil war of such great dislocations and carnage, in the daily grind of a region experiencing guerrilla war, ideological and moral commitments were put under just as severe a stain for women as for men. Women were left behind on farms when their husbands joined armies or went into the bush. They tried to remain loyal to their beliefs, but they also had to survive at any cost, had to come to terms with wildly contradictory pressures. Women had somewhat more leeway than men in being able to "get away" with the expression of overt opinion, as soldiers on both sides were generally horrified about the implications of making war on women; yet women too were severely injured by guerrilla war. In this sense they were compelled to be full participants in the war and to use all the cunning they could muster to the great goal of survival.

Instructions: Only recently have historians started to reassess the attitudes and roles of women in the American Civil War. Men were generally seen as having a much more ideological perspective of why the war should be fought. After reading Michael Fellman’s account of womens’ views on the Civil War in general and on guerrilla warfare in Missouri in particular, please answer the following questions.

1. Please identify and briefly discuss two possible reasons why many women encouraged or pressed their husbands, sons, brothers, or boyfriends to enlist and fight during the Civil War.

2. According to Fellman, why was it more necessary for women in Missouri to make tough choices about their beliefs and actions during the Civil War?

3. How does Michael Fellman use primary, or first hand, sources to support his arguments about womens’ roles in the Civil War?

1. In Activity Four, Eugene Ware suggests that some women, like his sister, encouraged men to join and fight because it made women proud and, perhaps, because it honored their families. Some young women may have encouraged their male peers to join because it made the young men appear brave and exciting. Fellman, on the other hand, believes some women had more complex reasons. Some wanted their men to protect cherished traditional values such as freedom of thought; others believed God was on their side and thus men willing to fight were doing God’s will. Many, especially in the South, wanted men to protect their families, homes, and way of life.

2. Because they were in the middle of not only the war but also an even more bitter guerrilla conflict that devastated much of southern Missouri. In many ways, then, their beliefs and moral commitments, as well as their very lives, were too often as threatened if not sometimes more threatened than those of their men.

3. Fellman supports each of his arguments with clear, specific quotes from women who lived during the war. When Adelia Allen wrote to her "dear friend" Dan Holmes that he should fight "till the last armed foe expires . . . [and he and the North had succeeded] in crushing this unholy rebellion," one is left with little doubt about how strongly she felt about the justness of the North’s cause or how much pressure she put on her male friend to do his duty, even unto his death.