View Full Version : My new books

11-17-2006, 03:23 PM
Hello all,

I wanted to let everyone on here know that I have just put up my first book on the history of the 57th North Carolina in the Civil War. It also is full of war letters from James Calvin Zimmerman of Co D. Along with official reports and officers first hand acounts of the battles the 57th NC fought it. I took this on as I a had family that fought in the 57th and was working on the history of the unit. And David Zimmerman, gg-grandson of J.C. Zimmerman had his familys war letters. So now they got lumped together in this offering. And to date there has not been anything written on just the history of this unit. While they started in 1862, they saw all parts of the war and were right in the middle of most all of the big and small battles of the war. Please follow the link to my new book. http://www.lulu.com/content/339149

The 2nd book is the full Historical Sketch and Roster of the 57th North Carolina. Along with all the spellings of the men in the unit it also has there rank in and out. http://www.lulu.com/content/430511

And my 3rd book is a reenactors hand book. It has a copy of our bylaws, photos, the hardies manuel of arms, drills, a how to make your own rounds, and a bacis shopping list of items all new to the hobbie will need along with some detail on the items and photos. Great for anyone just starting out. http://www.lulu.com/content/435580

You can also find links to my books and other Civil War reenactors items on my webpage store at http://www.geocities.com/anv57regnc/store.html

Thank you for helping me keep the memory of these me alive.

Major William Hartley
Commanding Officer
Civil War Reenactment Unit
57th North Carolina

11-19-2006, 02:09 AM
I have an honest question for you. This is not done in a manner to encite a riot, or belittle research done by any person or persons. In your new book, do you list the roster for the 57th NC as it appears on your website, or did you actually go through the roster and weed out obvious duplicated entries, and different listings/mis-spellings of the soldier's names?

The only reason I would ask is that as I read the roster, it is quite clear that many of the men are listed more than once. While it may not be uncommon for men to have the same name in the same geographical area during this time, it is HIGHLY unlikely that you would have three people in the same company with exactly the same name, for example; first, middle, last.

A further example would be Company F, 57th NC (Cabarrus County). Within this company, there is not a single man that has exactly the same first and last name as any of his comrades, or any obvious bastardization of any surname.

A snippet for proving my point: (This is a random sampling of names)

Alexander Phi
Ardzell J.
Arts John D.
Barrier John D.
Barrier John J.
Barringer J.J.
Barringer John J.
Bart I.W.
Baugher A. J.

The above names are how they are listed on your website roster listing. These men are all from Company F, Cabarrus County, NC.

Below are the names as they actually appear:

Alexander, Phil
Artz, John D. (died October 1862, typhoid)
Barrier, John Daniel
Barringer, John J.

The other names listed in the first list for this company do not appear in the listing I took my names from in any form of spelling. (See URL below.) The list I pulled from contains 100 men plus 3 officers: 1 Capt, 1 2nd Lt, and 1 1st Lt. However it is possible that these names may have transferred to this regiment and company from another.

Below is a more obvious sampling: (all names listed as spelled on your website)

Fonts Peter E. (does not exist)
Fouts Peter E. (this is the correct spelling of this 1st Lt. )

Prapst William (does not exist)
Prophet William (ibid)
Propot William (ibid)
Propst William (this is the correct spelling of this 2nd Lt.)

Wiggans Elam A.
Wiggens E. A.
Wiggins E. A. (this is Elam A. Wiggins, the correct spelling)

William Propst was promoted to 1st Lt in May 1863 after Peter Fouts died in March of 1863, cause unknown. William B. Klutts would be promoted from CPL to 2nd Lt in June of 1863. James Cannon, Capt would resign due to injury 10 days later.

Your links section does not reference this series of books, which is probably the definitive work on this subject:


Early record compliation was hampered by misspellings, poor penmanship, lost memory, phonetical spelling of names, etc. Also quality education was not the normal practice of the day. Hundreds upon thousands couldn't read or write, and those that could did so poorly.

The only reason for posting this is because I have an ancestor who served in this Regiment. If I were dissiminating historical information, I would want to make sure that the people receiving it were getting the most accurate that I could provide. I'm not saying that thought wasn't put into the research, I am just concerned.

11-19-2006, 09:55 PM
Yep, proper research is a wonderful thing.

11-22-2006, 01:54 PM
To be honest with you, I did think to do that but decided that from my own research on some of my family I found that if I did not have one of the other spelling I would not have found some info that I was looking for. And yes I do know that it might have been far better to just make sure the spellings were right, but I decided that if it was listed 3 or in some cases more then I would show it that way. If someone was to pick up a copy of a roster and see it spelled all them different ways and they know for sure what is the right way, then it really does not matter about the other spellings.

The link you posted on NC troops books is a great site and the books are the very best. My roster book is only just that, a roster. I do not go in to detail about the men. The NC troops book does that very well. Mine is really just a referance book. And if I could have gone back and done it again, I would have just added it to my first book, the Fighting 57th North Carolina.

Thank you for the question. And again I do agree with you on the misspelling of names, and maybe I should have weeded them out. But like the letters of JC Zimmerman in my first book, I really did not want to change what was already writen just to make it easier on the reader. **** I needed to reread some of the letters a few times until I got it. And it played **** on my spell check.

Major Bill Hartley
57th North Carolina

11-23-2006, 12:42 PM
Bully for the man in the arena who actually publishes a book or two instead of only thinking about it. Subsquent editions are opportunities for additional information and refining the research.

bill watson
11-23-2006, 02:06 PM
Additionally, this spelling thing is much overrated. My ggf's name was spelled several different ways. He had no idea how to spell it and every new company clerk had a different twist. Toerp, Torpe, Torpes. An Irishman, and after the spelling was standardized, "Thorpe." The oddities were apparently caused by company clerks trying to find some way to depict the odd noise he was making when giving his name.... say "toidy toid street" for "thirty-third street" like an old Brooklyn accent and there you are.

Additionally, there was in fairly recent history a crime among the Amish in which the name of the victim was exactly the same as the name of the perpetrator, something like "Abraham Dystilfink" or whatever. Same name. No relation. Same part of the world, same small culture. So it is not completely out of the question that two men with exactly the same name could be in the same regiment and same company, at least not to the point where I'd just arbitrarily toss one out because logic alone dictates it's a clerical duplication.

Additionally, to move overseas, did not some British regiments have so many Joneses of the same first name that they were routinely listed with an assigned number as an identifier? "Kenneth Jones 121," "Kenneth Jones 323" etc.?

Just thinking out loud. And yes, congratulations on actually publishing. Just getting it done and out there is a fine accomplishment. And with Lulu or any outfits like that, changing around the second and subsequent editions to reflect new information is keystrokes on a computer, no big deal. We live in an iterative age or something. Takes some getting used to, and of course perfectionists are left behind stuttering and angry, "left behind" being the key phrase.