As some one living over the other side of the pond I certainly don't want to appear disrespectful of that
fantastic resource, The Official Reports, but I wonder how accurate they are? I don't mean how much credence we can
place on what the authors wrote but on the accuracy of the transcription from what would have been handwritten sheets (probably written at times under adverse
conditions) to the type written version we are able view to today.
I shall give an example of what I mean:
After the battle of Fair Oaks (which is my main focus at present) Colonel Frank's OR (52nd NY, French's brigade; Richardson's div) identified the Confederate regiments the 52nd NY had engaged as follows;
3rd AL; 41st VA; 53rd VA (so far so good, units belonging to Mahone or Armistead brigades) 11th MS, of Law's brigade, [supporting 3rd AL?]; 3rd GA of Blanchard's and finally 105th NC.
Of course Colonel Frank could have misidentified 3rd GA and 11th MS but 105th NC? Did the regiment ever exist; it certainly wasn't in the OOB for Seven Pines/Fair Oaks
(As far as I have been able to ascertain).
I think that this could have been a transcription or typo error; perfectly understandable for some one trying to decipher the somewhat spidery handwriting of the time (any one who has a copy of General G W Smith's book' The Battle of Seven Pines' will no doubt agree)
How many errors are lurking in the OR's…… and does it matter?
I would suppose that professional researchers, of which I am not one, will be able to see past the error and get to the truth, but less knowledgeable types, like me, could come away from viewing the OR's with inaccurate information, but assume it to be valid because of it's provenance.
I hope I haven't stepped on any toes, or ruffled any feathers, by my questioning of the ORs .My object was not to offend but to pose what I think a pertinent question.
(or has this topic been already discussed ,done, and dusted?)
