THE PETERSBURG PHOTOGRAPHS
Fort Haskell Rediscovered
Detail of stereoscope 00532 showing interior of Fort Haskell, misidentified as "Fort Meikle."
On March 25, 1865, embattled Confederates broke through the cordon of Federal entrenchments east of Petersburg in a dawn assault. Fort Stedman and its adjacent batteries were overrun. Despite this initial success, the operation collapsed under a brutal artillery crossfire and Federal counterattacks. General Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia lost some 3,500 soldiers killed, wounded, and captured, losses it could ill afford. Union soldiers’ stubborn defense of the next fort south of Stedman—Fort Haskell—was key to stalling the attack. Until now, Fort Haskell has been lost—well, photographically, that is. An image showing the interior of Fort Haskell and much of the Fort Stedman battlefield has been misidentified as “Fort Meikle,” since it appeared in Francis Trevelyan Miller’s Photographic History of the Civil War in 1911, a hundred years ago. In fact, at least three stereoscopic images were taken by Timothy O'Sullivan from inside Fort Haskell within a week of the Federal occupation of Petersburg.
Our work with the Petersburg photographs over the last few years, has led the authors to what we hope is a healthy skepticism. We have discovered a number of faulty or misleading captions. When we first examined the “Fort Meikle” image in detail in the Library of Congress on-line Civil War Photographs Collection and then looked at Fort Meikle on the map, we were suspicious at once. “Meikle” would have been a rather odd fort to photograph. Photographers of the time were encumbered by large cameras and a great deal of heavy (and breakable) equipment and supplies. Federal engineers’ plans of the Petersburg forts, copied from the National Archives, depicted Fort Meikle as a relatively small redoubt designed for four field guns. Access from the east was blocked by the railroad. From the west there was no clear road depicted on the maps, although there must have been a way to get the guns in there. Getting a camera wagon to Fort Meikle, though, would have been risky. And why go to all that trouble, when nearby Forts Morton and Rice were more accessible, larger, more imposing and more photogenic? Look again at the photo. The fort shown in the "Meikle" image was a sprawling structure with differently spaced gun embrasures. Instead of one large internal work, there are at least five smaller ones. Something was clearly amiss with the image's identification.
Our work with the Petersburg photographs over the last few years, has led the authors to what we hope is a healthy skepticism. We have discovered a number of faulty or misleading captions. When we first examined the “Fort Meikle” image in detail in the Library of Congress on-line Civil War Photographs Collection and then looked at Fort Meikle on the map, we were suspicious at once. “Meikle” would have been a rather odd fort to photograph. Photographers of the time were encumbered by large cameras and a great deal of heavy (and breakable) equipment and supplies. Federal engineers’ plans of the Petersburg forts, copied from the National Archives, depicted Fort Meikle as a relatively small redoubt designed for four field guns. Access from the east was blocked by the railroad. From the west there was no clear road depicted on the maps, although there must have been a way to get the guns in there. Getting a camera wagon to Fort Meikle, though, would have been risky. And why go to all that trouble, when nearby Forts Morton and Rice were more accessible, larger, more imposing and more photogenic? Look again at the photo. The fort shown in the "Meikle" image was a sprawling structure with differently spaced gun embrasures. Instead of one large internal work, there are at least five smaller ones. Something was clearly amiss with the image's identification.
Caption from the sleeve: "Petersburg, Virginia. Fort Meikle (named for Lt. Col. George Meikle, 20th Ind. Inf.) in front of Petersburg." The original image is a stereographic negative, the left half of which is cracked. (LC-DIG-cwpb-00532 ).
Another telltale discrepancy. The profiles of Fort Meikle as depicted on the engineers plan show the parapets held up by revetments (retaining walls) of fascines and gabions, not logs as shown in the photograph. No gabions. Ergo. No Miekle. The image was definitely not Fort Miekle. We then reexamined the Engineer fort plans, and only one fort was profiled with log revetments--Fort Haskell. Therefore, we were looking at an image taken from inside Fort Haskell. Then the expansive background made sense.
Fort Meikle (left) revetted with gabions and fascines. Fort Haskell (right) revetted with logs. NARA RG77 Dr. 150-18
 Federal Army Engineers plan of Fort Meikle. NARA RG77 Dr.150-18
Fort Meikle sat adjacent to the Petersburg & Norfolk Railroad, about 750 yards south of Fort Morton, which is within Petersburg National Battlefield Park. Fort Meikle was an irregularly shaped redoubt enclosing about 0.4 acres with roughly five sides -- three short faces measuring about 17, 27, and 18 yards, and two longer flanks of 30 and 41 yards, the longest pierced by a sally port. As shown on maps from early in the campaign, Fort Meikle started out as a simple lunette-shaped battery, consisting of the shorter faces, and was afterwards enclosed by the two longer flanks. The parapets were pierced with embrasures for four field guns, making Meikle one of the smaller forts on the Petersburg lines. The Army engineers plan of the fort shows a single combined magazine and bombproof of unusual design that fills much of the interior. The site of Fort Meikle is about 535 yards south of the battlefield park on private property. Nothing of the fort remains as the ground was extensively stripped for fill dirt to construct Rte. 460 and I-95.
|
 Federal Army Engineers plan of Fort Haskell. RG77 Dr. 150-18
Fort Haskell sat, still sits, atop a hill 650 yards south of Fort Stedman in Petersburg National Battlefield. The fort is a square-ish redoubt enclosing almost 1 acre with three sides measuring 80 yards long and a front of about 70 yards. The parapets were pierced with embrasures for eleven field pieces. The National Archives plan of the fort shows three magazines, two bombproofs, three raised artillery platforms, five short traverses extending behind the parapet, and a traverse that covered the sally port entrance. The image in question (00532) matched the plan of Fort Haskell exactly, particularly in the interior configuration, the spacing of embrasures, and the angles at which the fort’s faces joined. A new magazine appears in the image that does not appear on the plan. This would not be unusual as the fort plan was dated October 1864, and these forts were under constant renovation.
|
These three stereographic images were taken inside Fort Haskell. (Left to right: 01324/01325, 01326, and 00532.)
Once establishing that “Meikle” was actually Fort Haskell, the authors searched the Library of Congress collection, looking for the distinctive log revetment and interior works, and found two other stereoscopic images (with additional prints) where internal details can be linked together. These two images were captioned generically as “Fortifications in front of Petersburg.” When examined closely there is no doubt that the three images are from Fort Haskell. the first was taken from atop a bombproof inside the fort looking almost due north toward Fort Stedman. (The park has recently cleared the viewshed between the two forts.) The other two images were taken from nearly the same spot on the northern face of the fort, looking southwest and westerly. Suddenly, a vista opened before us. The resulting panorama, published here together for the first time, shows nearly a mile of the Petersburg siege lines from the Crater in the south through Gracie’s and Colquitt’s Salient to Fort Stedman in the north. These images reward minute inspection. In future posts, we will examine close-up many of the interesting details in these photos.
00532. View from Fort Haskell. Fort Stedman is nestled among the grove of hardwoods on Hare House Hill, flanked by batteries X and XI. This was all ground fought over during the March 25th battle.
This schematic (by Philip Shiman) points out some interesting features in the above photograph.
01326. Stereographic image by Timothy O'Sullivan looking westerly from the interior of Fort Haskell.
01324. Blow-up detail looking southwest from Fort Haskell to the Crater in the distance. (LC-DIG-cwpb-01324) The stakes driven into the traverse were used to sight a cohorn mortar.
|
01326. Blow-up detail from behind the fraise at Fort Haskell looking to the Confederate chevaux-de-frise defending Colquitt's Salient. (LC-DIG-cwpb-01326)
|
01324. Right half of a stereographic image, looking southwest from the interior of Fort Haskell.
