The Weary Boys: Colonel J. Warren Keifer & the 110th Ohio Volunteer Infantry by Thomas E. Pope (review)

Thomas E.Pope. Tbe Weary Boys:Colonel J.Warren Keifer 6 tbe 1101' Obio Volunteer Infantry. Kent, Ohio: Kent State University Press, 2002. 183 pp. ISBN: 0873387295 ( paper), $ 16.00. Archives, the Library of Congress, and numerous other libraries. And, impressively, Pope exhaustirely searched peric, d newspapers for tidbits on the regiment. Another contribution of Tbe We, try Bo)' s is Pope's inclusion of the regiment' s official roster, as compiled by Ohic,' s Adjutant Cieneral' s Office between 1886 and 1895. The roster provides readers with each soldier' s induction date,age upon joining the regiment.and a brief i, verview of each soldier's service record, especially useful information for persons interested in genealogy. The author could have provided additional insight into the regiment by identifying its members in other records as well. Census records and personal and real property tax records, for instance, niight have 7]] 0rved Pope to n Tbe Weary Boys,Thomas Pope pr() vides st,idents of the American Civil War with an indepth accounting of the 110'h Ohio Volunteer Infantry's escapades. In doing so, the author hopes to disprc, ve General Winfield Scott Hancock's depiction of the 110'h Ohio as the " Weary Boys," and to make a case for valuing the 110'h Ohi o' s important contributic, ns to the Union war effort. Pope provides readers with the first detailed histi, ry ever published of the 110' h Ohio. Taking a chronological approach ,the author begins with the i / THOMAS E. POPE 110" ps formati() 111 and colitinues with the regiment' s initial training, k< 31* ST itsfirsttasteofcc,mbat,itstransition ' '| ¥4 from a group ot raw recruits to sea- " ' .«, -' 16 -:, _ soned veterans,and finally.the war' s r ·-' »-- ·-, 1. conclusion. This approach makes a great deal of sense, but unfortunately , Pope routinely introduces evidence from 1864 and 1865 in chapters that were to fc, cuS on 1861 and 1862. This makes it difficult for si. j 7' *, (. the reader to understand what life was like for the soldiers in earlier years when Pope uses evidence from later years to prove his points. In addition,most chapters have no introduction or conclusion, leaving the reader to wonder how the information presented in each chapter advances the story. The book also lacks a clear conclusion,leaving the reader uncertain whether or not Pope proved his point that the 1106 Ohio did not deserve to be known disparagingly as the " Weary Boys." But the book does have its good points. It is based on research in the niost pertinent rep(, sitories , including the Ohio Historical Society, the United States Army History Institute,the Natic, nal pro\' ide niore dehniti e information on the trpe of men who served in the 110' h Ohio. Tbe Weary Boys is an interesting story. It fills a gap in Civil War history by providing a detailed history of the 110'h Ohio Volunteer Intantry's exploits. Genealogists especially will find the roster useful. Unfortunately,Pope fails to impart to the reader why this story is important and worth telling, and he avoids entering into any of the major debates currently gripping Civil War historiography. Pope seems not to have consulted any of the numerous significant works on Union soldiers published in the last fifty years,such as studies by Reid Mitchell,James McPherson, and Gerald Linderman. Similarly, although a significant portion of the book details the 110' h Ohio' s interaction with Con federate civilians ,Pope did not address issues raised in any of the niajor works on this topic, including those written by Charles Royster and Mark Grimsley. Michael Mangus Obio State University at Newark SUMMER 2004 67 ...