Civil War - Identity of Two Star General in Photo?

Anscojohn · Sep 29, 2009

Ed Sukach said:
"Absolutely"??? You've lost me. Burnside was promoted to Major General on March 18th, 1862... he was 38 years old at that time.
Was he demoted, or ...?
*******
That fella was much older than 38, methinks; and, although I do not recall seeing a post-Civil War picture of him, I cannot believe he ever got rid of the famous "Sideburns" that he made famous.

As I see it ... (not easy at the present time ... off subject), he retired with the rank of Major General.
*******
I expect he did, but I would have to check if it was as a MG in the Regular Army, rather than as a volunteer. He started out as a Colonel in a Rhode Island volunteer regiment.

I wonder if a determination of the subject's age would be accurate, given the conditon/ quality of the photograph.

*******
You wonderment is well founded. If I can isolate the URL for that image, I will send it to an old grad school friend who has published widely on uniforms. Perhaps he can provide some information.

Anscojohn · Sep 29, 2009

jon koss said:
I have been trolling the uncharted recesses of my photo collection and dredged up this photo CDV of what appears to be a two star general. I have never been able to identify him. Does anyone have any ideas on his identity or even possible sources of information about same?

Thanks in advance,

Jon

******
Jon, If you would send the file to my email address, JayKhill@aol.com, I will forward it to an old grad school friend who is an expert on all manner of Civil War-era military uniforms and historical artifacts.
I am going to withhold judgment about the Chamberlain i.d. Chamberlain's nose, in the Bowdoin College portrait, is straight; this nose is slightly humped. Moreover, a dated portrait of JLC taken in 1876 shows a much younger-looking man than this.

TheFlyingCamera · Sep 29, 2009

I'm not entirely certain those are stars - they could be oak leaf clusters, at which point he would be either a Major or a Lieutenant Colonel, not a 2-star General. Given his overall age in the photo, I'd go with Lieutenant Colonel.

http://www.civilwarhome.com/unionofficerrank.htm

Take a look at the above for comparison.

cowanw · Sep 29, 2009

jon koss said:
cowanw, can you flesh out the scenario wherein the Brady name is showing on the back of an image actually made by Antony co.? Did Antony publish absolute facsimiles, or would the reprint actually say Antony?Best, Jon

According to my information on the Meserve collection, Brady and Gardner supplied E. and H.T. Anthony & Co of New York with Brady negatives after they had been used for the custom trade.
Brady was given credit on the back of Anthony cards (cartes de visites).
In 1861 Brady made $4000 dollars on this arrangement.
The back reads
Published by E. & H. T. Anthony & Co.from the photographic Negatives in Brady's National Portrait Gallery
Frederick Meserve bought 15000 to 18000 glass negatives from Anthony's in 1902.
All I know

eclarke · Sep 30, 2009

How about General Buell at an older age? His hair was already starting to grey during the war...EC

TheFlyingCamera · Sep 30, 2009

Again, the more I look at the insignia, the more I'm convinced he's a Lieutenant Colonel - those aren't stars, they're oak leaves. The rank insignia haven't changed much in 150 years, and we still use the same oak leaf design for Majors (in gold) and Lieutenant Colonels (in silver). The rank insignia on his shoulders are too blob-ish to be stars, and too close to the ends of the epaulets.

Anscojohn · Sep 30, 2009

jon koss said:
I have been trolling the uncharted recesses of my photo collection and dredged up this photo CDV of what appears to be a two star general. I have never been able to identify him. Does anyone have any ideas on his identity or even possible sources of information about same?

Thanks in advance,

******
Jon, Flying Crane has a point worth pursuing. If you will send the file you uploaded to APUG to me as a PM at JayKhill@aol.com I will send it on to a grad school friend who is a museum curator specializing in such uniforms. He is also interested in historical photographs. Please send the original file; not one schrunched down to be uploadable to APUG.

removed account4 · Sep 30, 2009

TheFlyingCamera said:
Again, the more I look at the insignia, the more I'm convinced he's a Lieutenant Colonel - those aren't stars, they're oak leaves. The rank insignia haven't changed much in 150 years, and we still use the same oak leaf design for Majors (in gold) and Lieutenant Colonels (in silver). The rank insignia on his shoulders are too blob-ish to be stars, and too close to the ends of the epaulets.

i think you are right,
if you look at them carefully they are leaves, not stars ...

John Koehrer · Sep 30, 2009

I must politely suggest that there are five visible points on the items in question.
The spacing between the edge of the star(leaf) to the edge may be slightly different but at that time I don't think these guys just buzzed down to the PX to get their insignia. I don't know if these were machine made or hand made to a pattern but without the consistency of programed technology I could understand some variation in spacing or size.
The illustration in the civil war site indicates a much smaller star than in the picture and the leaf tapers from a rounded base to a rounded point away from the ends.

eclarke · Sep 30, 2009

This is an excellent mystery!!...EC

RobertP · Sep 30, 2009

Brady closed his New York Gallery in 1872. In 1890 he opened his last Washington gallery (his fifth). In 1895 he broke his leg in a traffic accident and never fully recovered. He died in 1896 so I'd say he closed his Washington Gallery sometime in between 1895 and 1896. Robert

jon koss · Sep 30, 2009

Thanks for the nudge TFC. You really had my curiosity up! So I looked at the original under a 4x loupe and it is pretty clear to my eyes that they are stars, as opposed to oak leaves as shown below. Are the oak leaves shown what you had in mind? They are from the uniform of a Lt. Colonel.

Thanks,
J

TheFlyingCamera said:
Again, the more I look at the insignia, the more I'm convinced he's a Lieutenant Colonel - those aren't stars, they're oak leaves. The rank insignia haven't changed much in 150 years, and we still use the same oak leaf design for Majors (in gold) and Lieutenant Colonels (in silver). The rank insignia on his shoulders are too blob-ish to be stars, and too close to the ends of the epaulets.

photomc · Sep 30, 2009

jon, check with the Center for Military History they may be able to help. For one they have extensive research that has already been completed and more important to you and them (and all of us) they have an ongoing project to scan and identify photographs of all soldiers. It is the considered opinion that every member of the military has been photographed (in uniform) since the Civil War. Good Luck, let us know what you find.

Photo Engineer · Sep 30, 2009

They are stars IMHO.

I'm adding this as a reasoning. The current mess dress shoulderboards for officers use a similar layout to the normal shoulderboards of the Civil War era up until about WWI for normal wear. These resemble the shoulderboards of a General, and not a Lt. Colonel.

Besides, in the photo, you can see the points on the stars. There are not enough for oak leaves.

PE

Civil War - Identity of Two Star General in Photo?

Anscojohn

Anscojohn

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

cowanw

eclarke

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

Anscojohn

removed account4

John Koehrer

eclarke

RobertP

jon koss

Attachments

photomc

Photo Engineer

Civil War - Identity of Two Star General in Photo?

Membership Council

Membership Council

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency