> [BN] Because most of the records of the Texas brigade were lost or destroyed. The records we have were developed from the 1870's to the 1900's from official documents and interview.
I knew that the muster roll records I'm looking at are obviously not copies of the originals (a paragraph at the bottom of the "oldest", dated Jan/Feb 1862, talks about the 27th being "re-organized on May 8, 1862").
But you're saying that the Confederate records of the 27th that we do have were written up between 1870 - 1900 based on looking at other (original) documents and interviewing people? Were these records for the 27th developed there in Texas, after the war? Who performed that work?
> [BN] If little was known of a soldier he would have less records.
Right. And I suppose it might have been even more difficult in the case of someone who was no longer around (those who were killed, along with those who landed elsewhere after the war; to our knowledge R.W. never went back to Texas -- I think this is a very safe assumption). Did they take the trouble to go and look for the rank and file soldiers who came home, to help fill in the blanks? Or did they just interview officers?
> [BN] The Parole records from May 1865 were Union records and came from list supplied by the regiments to their higher headquarters.
From your December 3 post:
> [BN] Until the start of the Atlanta Campaign, prisoners were traded. Soon they filled prisons in the North and South. The Units got smaller and smaller. When they arrived back in Mississippi and Alabama after the Tennessee Campaign there were hardly two hundred in any regiment. This is what was surrendered in May 1865. There were many more names on the rosters than were actually there. They were in hospitals, and homes all across the South. They were in prisons and in graves. Some had give up and gone home and some just gave up. No one knows where they went.
Please clarify: by "The parole records from May 1865" and "rosters" you're talking about the Prisoner of War rolls, dated Jacson, Miss., May 13, 1865, correct?
I'd like to focus on your comment that "there were many more names on the rosters than were actually there" ...
So the U.S. Federal parole records from May 1865 (which "came from a list supplied by the regiments to their higher headquarters") included names of Confederates that weren't actually captured in May 1865? They'd been, what, captured earlier, captured/paroled, deserted, or even killed?
I guess I can imagine some reasons why this would be the case; but if so, could you help me with that? Clerical error, honest mistakes, deliberate padding of the numbers?
If so then the following two particular pieces of proof that we have aren't really that much proof at all:
- Copy of a slip of paper specifying that R.W. "Appears on a Roll of Prisoners of War from Jackson, MS, on May 13, 1865"
- Copy of a slip of paper from the United States War Department to the Tennessee Board of Pension Examiners
Both show surrender at Citronelle, AL, on May 4, 1865, and parole at Jackson, MS, May 13, 1865; they are both probably from the same source: the Roll of POWs from May 13, 1865.
____________________________________________________________
I guess my most burning question at the moment concerns the idea that R.W. rejoined the 27th (at any time) after his parole; the idea that the names on the parole records aren't accurate makes me even more curious:
> [BN] From what I see, your kin returned to the 27th in July of 1863 and was with the unit until the end in may of 1865.
I agree that there is evidence to support that, including the POW roll from May 13, 1865; R.W.'s own words in his pension application letters; and on a separate page for the original 1899 pension application where 27th Co. A Captain JN Zachary and fellow Co. A Private Henry DM Rice both supported the facts in his application and signed the document (as witnesses and stating that he'd served with them in Co. A of the 27th) ...
In fact, that notion is supported by almost everything I've seen (there are some questionable comments in a couple letters of his but I can follow up with that, later; this is getting complex and lengthy enough for one post).
I personally have seen only one piece of evidence that is completely contrary to the idea that he returned to the 27th after his parole, at any date in 1863: the May/June 1864 (eighteen-sixty-FOUR) company muster roll which has him "Absent in arrest prison" and being last paid on Apr 30, 1863.
*******************************************
A | 27 Cav. | Texas
R. W. Acuff
Pvt, Co. A, 1 Texas Legion Cavalry.
Company Muster Roll of the organization named above, for May & June, 1864
Enlisted:
When Feb. 7, 1862
Where Daingerfield
By whom E.R. Hawkins
Period 12 mos.
Last paid:
By whom Capt. Lee
To what time Apr. 30, 1863
Present or absent Absent
Remarks Absent in arrest prison.
B. R. Stough
*******************************************
Even if this is accurate it doesn't necessarily mean that he didn't rejoin the group at a later point (as early as July, 1864) ...
> [BN] By July 1863 Unit record keeping began to deteriorate. By July 1864 recording keeping ceased.
Although that would mean he was somewhere (perhaps living in Haywood County, TN, where he'd settle after the war?) else for a year ...
I appreciate your advice, too; I understand that we have to make assumptions, fill in blanks, and correct our mistakes as we go.
Every day I still seem to have more questions than I had the day before ... it's frustrating!
But it's also extremely interesting and quite moving to learn about this ancestor of mine. I appreciate all the help, Bill N - thanks again.
More later ...
Bill Acuff