D5- A New Twist to Spencer Chamberlain’s Family History

Alexis Nadeau and Marie Ursule Gueret dit Dumont are Spencer Chamberlain’s grandparents. This is based on recently discovered DNA evidence which I will explain later in this post. This new DNA evidence connects two life stories, solves a 250-year-old mystery and shatters a cherished Chamberlain family tradition. My conclusions for this report are based on scientific evidence, historic facts and recorded family history.

On October 22, 1758, Alexis Nadeau married Marie Dumont. They lived in Kamouraska, a beautiful village in Québec, nestled on the south shore of the Saint Lawrence River. The name “Kamouraska” is an Algonquin word which means “where rushes grow at the water’s edge.”1

Kamouraska, Quebec today

The Battle of Quebec

Less than one year after their marriage, there was an historic battle for the control of North America. Fifty British warships and 150 transports sailed up the Saint Lawrence past Kamouraska. They were heading toward Quebec City 100 miles further up the river. On July 12, 1759, three thousand British troops, under the command of General James Wolfe, scaled the cliffs to the Plains of Abraham. The British formed their battlelines in traditional European warfare manner. The French regulars and French Militia also formed their lines. The French’s allies, the Indians, picked off British troops in the flanks from cover in the nearby brush. The French charged but were mowed down by the British who held their fire until the enemy were only a few paces away.2

Battle of Quebec

After the defeat at Quebec, the power of the French in North America was on the decline and the bond between the French and Indians began to weaken.

The Nadeau Family

Alexis Nadeau was 25-years-old and likely served in the French Militia at that time. The Nadeau family were French. The Catholic Church maintained excellent records, and all their family lines trace back to Mother France. They had 13 children, 7 boys and 6 girls. All had a baptism record. Their infant baptism date gives us an approximate date of their birth. All these children lived their entire lives close to their home in Quebec, Canada. That is, all except for one child, Marie Rose Nadeau.

Marie Rose Nadeau is their first child. She was born in 1761 and some believe she died sometime before 1775. Her parents definitely believed she died because in 1778 they gave their 11th child her name, Marie Rose. It was customary, at the time, to repeat a name of a deceased sibling.

What really happened to Marie Rose Nadeau?

Chamberlain legends and family history paint a picture of what happened to Marie Rose Nadeau. We don’t know the details, and can only imaging the grief of her parents when Marie Rose disappeared. One thing we do know, however, is that she was not dead. We know this because she is my 4th great-grandmother.

DNA results combined with our recorded family traditions give powerful evidence that Rose Marie Nadeau was captured by Indians when she was a baby or very young child. They gave her a new name by which she became known to the Chamberlain family as “Winona”.

I believe that Spencer Chamberlain’s mother, Winona, was a French girl raised by Indians. She probably believed she was an Indian. It is certain that her family believed that she was.

Spencer Chamberlain’s family believed Winona was and Indian

Spencer Chamberlain’s daughter, Jeanette Chamberlain Phillips, described her father in a poem she wrote in 1860. “Though fair in the face and soft was his hair, the blood of the red man still lingered there”.3

In 1927, Jeanette’s son, Alonzo Chamberlain Phillips, sent a package of information and photos to his “cousins in the west”. At the end of a two page, type written family history, he wrote by hand, “Spencer Chamberlain’s mother was a full blooded Iroquois.”4

Harry Alonzo Phillips’ 1929 poem about Runaway Pond indicates that he also believed Winona was 100% Indian. He wrote of Spencer, “Was born in seventeen-eighty-six, Half Red, half white, as blood did mix.”5

In 1815, Spencer Chamberlain’s Army discharge paper described him as “6 feet high, Light Complexion, Blue eyes and Black hair.”Since Spencer Chamberlain had blue eyes, I have always believed his mother Winona was part French. However, like everyone else in my family I believed she was an Indian. I now believe, based on new DNA evidence and our strong family traditions, that Winona was a French girl raised by Indians. Also, that she lived the way of the Indians, spoke their language and that she believed she was an Indian.

How John Chamberlain met Winona

This unpublished tradition about John Chamberlain is further evidence that Winona was raised by Indians. My uncle Robert Chamberlain revealed this information in a family interview. We met at the home of Robert and Louise Chamberlain on March 5, 2019. In attendance were: Robert Chamberlain and his wife Louise, my brother Lyle Brent Chamberlain, my sister Deanna Chamberlain Grant, my daughter Lara Chamberlain and myself Dennis Chamberlain.

Robert reported what he remembered from his father Harry Chamberlain. Harry lived with his grandfather Alonzo Chamberlain until he was 10 years old. Alonzo was the son of Spencer Chamberlain, the son of John and Winona.

“John Chamberlain, he was a frontiersman, dad said. He did not like people very well and if the frontier came within 50 miles, he would move. He just liked being by himself, well I can see why he married an Indian. But he was very, very respected because he was a super sharp shooter and John was also a super runner….  He dealt a lot with the Indians, dad said, and they more or less accepted him in the tribe.  But he was so fast that he would out run the braves, so John had to slow down a little to make sure the Indians would win sometimes. So I guess that carried on, on to Spencer.”

“Dad told me too that…. the villagers respected him so much because he would be able to communicate between the Indians and them. But apparently they feared John, the Indians feared John, so in him to their little community he was their life guard. He was such a sharp shooter and knew the Indian’s style….  That is about what he told me.” – Robert Chamberlain

My eight-year DNA search for Winona began in 2017

In 2017, my daughter, Lara, took the “23andMe” DNA test which showed she has a small amount of Indian ancestry. This encouraged me to send in my own DNA sample with the hope I could discover more about my 4th great grandmother’s Indian heritage. The report was very disappointing. It said I had zero indigenous American ancestry. It turned out that Lara inherited hers from her mother. My wife thought this was hilarious.

23andme DNA Report

I was confident of my Indian ancestry. Therefore, I dismissed the 23andme report as some kind of sampling error. About 1% to 2% of my DNA comes from Winona, so I continued my search to find DNA matches who were descendants of Winona’s family.

The Descendants of Chief Madockawando

In July 2017, I published a hypothetical story about Winona based on family history in Maine which suggested that the Penobscots of Maine might be her family.

A French Barron, Jean-Vincent D’Abbadie-de-St-Castin, was adopted into the tribe and married two of Chief Madockawando’s daughters. They had a large progeny, all of whom likely carried the recessive blue-eyed allele, which, I speculated, may have been passed down to Spencer Chamberlain.

In 2019, Harold Myshrall invited me to join his new Facebook group  “The Descendants of Chief Madockawando.”. The members of the group were very kind. They were interested in my story and were willing to help me. Many listed their pedigree through various family lines back to Chief Madockawando.

I did not find a direct connection to any of these lines. However, many of my DNA matches had French names like the members of this Facebook group. When the French converted the Indians to the Catholic faith, they gave them Christian (French) names. Their recorded French names became permanently established. Since all of my other pedigree names are British or Swedish, this gave me an important lead.

Ancestry.com DNA Matches

I have 64,581 Ancestry.com DNA matches, 26,854 of these matches were from my father’ line. (Matches are persons who have at least one segment of DNA on their chromosomes that matches my DNA). This indicates we have an ancestor in common. About 3% of matches from my fathers line should be descendants of my 4th great-grandmother Winona’s family.

I selected matches from my father’s line who were distant relatives with very large, publicly available, family tree charts, (5000 names or more). When I found French names, I expanded the chart to the sixth or seventh generation. Any DNA segment or segments that we have in common will pass down the pedigree chart through at least one person in every generation.

I was looking for the generation of Winona’s parents. Since Spencer Chamberlain was born in 1786, my estimate for Winona’s birth year was between 1740 to 1770. Couples bearing children within this range were the generation of Winona’s parents.

Then I analyzed and printed out the pedigree charts of several different DNA matches. Names of some couples in these pedigree charts reoccurred several times on different people’s charts. One of these reoccurring couples, in the right generation, was likely Winona’s parents.

Ancestry.com ThruLines

Thru Lines is a program that uses Ancestry customer pedigree charts, linked with customer DNA results, to predict ancestry. Customers who have DNA segments which match yours can help predict your ancestry pedigree.

I found about 10 to 15 couples who possibly were Winona’s parents. I began to enter these in my pedigree chart as Winona’s parents one couple at a time. It takes Ancestry’s ThruLines computers about 24 hours to calculate and show the number of matches for each couple.

Winona’s parents are my fifth great-grand-parents. All of my matches through Winona’s parents are descendants of one of Winona’s siblings. Most of these matches are my sixth cousins. Closer cousins are not available because none of Winona’s direct ancestors know who her parents are. Therefore, they are not recorded in Ancestry.

Husband and wife are rated individually. Since both biological parents are related to their children, they generally have the same number of matches. On the other hand, uncles and aunts will show more matches for the DNA relative. Couples that show O or 1 match are distantly related or unrelated.

DNA will not tell us which child of the family is Winona. We can only guess this by determining which sibling best fits what we know about her.

Results

A different set of possible parents were entered each day into my Ancestry pedigree chart. The matches were observed 24 hours later in Ancestry “ThruLines”.

Most couples showed 0 to 1 matches. However, the following couples have 4 to 9 matches, showing they have a strong relationship to Winona.  All of the following couples have children born between 1740 to 1770 which is Winona’s likely birth range.

Names, birth years and number of matches:

1- Michel Gueret Dumont 1708  (9 matches), Marie Rose Levasseur 1711 (9 matches)

2- Jean Baptiste Gueret Dumont 1711 (7 Matches), Madeleine De La Bouitier 1730 (0 matches).

3- Alexis Nadeau 1701 (4 matches), Marie Ann Albert 1709 (4 matches).

Husband and wife #1 have equal number of matches, as does couple #3. Therefore, these couples are candidates as Winona’s possible parents. In couple #2, Jean Dumont has 7 matches and his wife has 0. This indicates he could be Winona’s uncle. As it turns out, Jean Dumont is Michel Dumont’s brother.

Couple #1 had three sons and five daughters. Two daughters died as infants and have death and burial records. The other three daughters were married and raised a family and died in Canada. Therefore, none of these are strong candidates to be Winona.

Couple #3 had five sons and six daughters. Five daughters raised families in Kamouraska, three of these women were too old to be Winona. One daughter died as a child and has a recorded death date. Likewise, none of these daughters are strong candidates to be Winona.

However, I was electrified to find that a daughter from couple #1 married a son of couple #3. This is a strong indication that couples #1 and #3 are Winona’s grandparents!!!

Winona’s parents and grandparents in Ancestry. ThruLines predicts additional generations.

Winona’s family

Alexis Nadeau and Marie Ursule Gueret dit Dumont are the son and daughter of couple #3 and #1 respectively. I entered their name in my pedigree chart as Winona’s parents. Ancestry DNA ThruLines showed that I have 9 DNA matches for both of her parents! That means that I have 9 sixth cousins who are descendants from both her mother and her father through four different siblings. Also, I have a total of 13 sixth or seventh cousins who are descendants of their parents, Winona’s grandparents.

Father and mother both show 9 DNA matches in Ancestry’s ThruLines

Next, I had to determine if they had a child who matches what we know about Winona. I had to find a daughter born between 1740 and 1770.

They had thirteen children. Twelve of the children have a record of their specific location and date they died. Ten of twelve were married and raised a family. Two boys died as children. All twelve lived and died in Quebec.

Six of their children were daughters, three are too young to be Winona. Five were married and raised a family. Only one of these daughters stand out as one who could be Winona.

Their oldest child was Marie Rose Nadeau. Her infant baptism date is July 21, 1761. However, that is the only record of her. There are no marriage, death or burial records for her. Somehow, she just disappeared.

They assume she died sometime before 1775. But, that is not correct. She gave birth to Spencer Chamberlain eleven years later when she was 25-years-old.

Conclusions:

The Nadeau family is well documented in Family Search. To my surprise, every line goes back all the way to France.

I was looking for an Indian girl who’s family had been given a French name. Ironically, I found a French girl who had been given and Indian name. The Chamberlain family knows her as “Winona”.

I am sorry this discovery may be quite a shock for some, as it was to me. Perhaps, like myself, you may even experience a minor identity crisis. I believed I was part Indian all my life. Nevertheless, new DNA evidence combined with our family tradition tells us that Winona is a little French girl who was raised by Indians.

On the other hand, I am very happy that I found Marie Rose Nadeau, my French 4th great-grandmother, who has been missing for over 250 years.

References:

(1) https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/kamouraska-que

(2) The Battle of Quebec, Full Movie, (2009) Noel Burton, Arthur Holden, Marcel Jeannin https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Osj47uHJkUs

(3) Poem by Jeanette Chamberlain Phillips, daughter of Spencer Chamberlain, written in 1860 to defend her father as the hero of Runaway-Pond.

(4) Alonzo Chamberlain Phillips packet of family information sent Dec. 21, 1927. His letter began “Dear cousins in the West”. He apparently sent this information to the families of Amanda Chamberlain Warren and John Harry Chamberlain. Both families lived in Spencer, Iowa at the time.

(5) From Harry Alonzo Phillips poem about Runaway written in1929. Harry Phillips is the grandson of Spencer Chamberlain.

(6) Spencer Chamberlain’s Army discharge papers, 1815

E20- A New Book, “The Chamberlains in New England”

The Chamberlains in New England by Walter E. Chamberlain, Jr. For questions or comments about this book, email the author at: chamberlain.history@gmail.com

Walter E, Chamberlain, Jr. has written a new book titled The Chamberlain’s in New England, A History of My Family. It covers an unbroken 13 generation journey of his Chamberlain family line. The author included one or more biographical sketch for each generation.

The story begins with William Chamberlain who came to America in 1635, and extends to his present day family. The author assigned each person a generation number including himself, Walter E. (12). This clearly identifies alike names of different generations.

The book is an attractive,180 page paper back, printed by Rocky Heights Print and Binding, Birmingham, Alabama. It is full of illustrations and photos, most of which are in color. Though it’s reader audience focus is largely aimed toward the author’s present-day family/posterity, it is a valuable resource for every descendant of the early American Chamberlains.

William Chamberlain and his brothers come to America.

The Chamberlains in New England gives a concise, accurate report of how and when the three Chamberlain brothers arrived in America. It also reports the latest research as to who is the father of Thomas, Edmond and William Chamberlain. Modern Y-DNA tests exclude Henry as their father, however, Francis is still a matter of speculation.

It presents a detailed account of the settling of the town of Billerica, Massachusetts by William Chamberlain and others. There, William and Rebecca raised their family of 13 children.

The author credits research of The World Chamberlain Genealogy Society, The Chamberlain Story website, and his own family’s records and traditions for his information. Also, the late James Parker has contributed Chamberlain family research and information to many, including Walter E. Chamberlain.

Perhaps the most valuable feature of Walter’s writing is that it is in print. It is tangible asset in a digital world. I don’t know how many copies have been printed, but many of them will endure years into the future.

This is not true for much digital information. For example, The Chamberlain Story information and research will disappear from the public domain the day the annual light bill* is not paid. (Host site, Site backup, Domain name, Domain privacy protection and Sitelock security)*

I generally do not solicit donations, but if you feel the desire to contribute to The Chamberlain Story website, please purchase a copy or two of my own book, Run Chamberlain, Run!, Solving the 200-Year-Old Mystery of Runaway Pond. If you don’t need the book, please donate it to a library or thrift store. Thanks.

If you have comments or questions about Walter E. Chamberlain’s new book The Chamberlains in New England, here is his contact information: chamberlain.history@gmail.com

Historical Context

Walter’s love for history makes the names and dates come off the pedigree chart and become real people. He explains the religious movement in Europe which caused the “Great Migration”. Then he devotes a full 40 pages to the history of Indian culture and wars of New England, (interspersed with ancestor biographical sketches). The Chamberlains were in the middle of this. He correctly observed that “these were terrifying times lived by extraordinary people”.

In the midst of the Indian wars, the residents of Billerica, Massachusetts, including the Chamberlains, were afflicted by the Salem witch trials.

Walter included reference links to several posts of my website www.thechamberlainstory.com. This is very much appreciated. One specific side story from post Rebecca Chamberlain and the Salem Witch Trials caught his attention. Its mention was followed by a very generous complement:

Dennis Chamberlain has a section of his article that explains the irony of Mary Toothaker’s fate. The reader would be well served to read this post, (Chapter 5) and indeed, his entire site. He’s an excellent researcher and writer who brings the family alive.

Thank you Walter. That is my goal and it is really gratifying to hear this from a reader!

Jacob Chamberlain (1658) the son of William (1619)

Walter’s family pedigree extends through Jacob born in Billerica in 1658.

William and Rebecca Chamberlain had thirteen children, ten sons and three daughters. Jacob was their sixth child, fifth son.

Jacob married Experience French.

Walter’s book points out that Jacob bought 120 acres in Newton, Massachusetts in 1699. The property, purchased with buildings, was near Oak Hill, (now Ward V). He lived there until he died in 1712 at age 54. At that time, his five sons were about ages Jacob 20, John 18, William 15, Jason 11 and Ebenezer 8.

Newton is about 10 miles west of Boston and 20 miles south of Billerica.

In 1718, Jacob’s son William moved to Dover, New Hampshire, about 80 miles north. It became very unsafe on the outskirts of Dover during the Indian wars of 1724. So he returned to the safety of Newton where he bought a farm. He lived there until 1729.G

This connection to Newton is interesting to my own family research because Jacob’s nephew, Thomas Chamberlain (Chapter 11), moved to Newton a few years later. There, Thomas’ son John, (my 4th great-grandfather), was born in about 1739.

Lieutenant William Chamberlain (1697)

William Chamberlain, born 8 September 1697, was the third son of Jacob in Walter’s line. He learned the carpenter trade in Boston, then moved to Dover, New Hampshire in 1718. He married Mary Tibbetts a year later (about 1719).

They left their farm near Dover for his family’s safety in 1724 at the onset of the Indian conflict known as Father Rale’s war or (Governor) Dummer’s war. During this conflict, Colonel John Lovewell lead three expeditions against the Indians. Walter believes William and Mary’s move back to Newton was a wise decision which may have preserved their family line.

William returned to Dover in 1729, but later exchanged some land with his wife’s uncle and moved to Rochester, New Hampshire in about 1733. He was a prominent citizen in Rochester where he served as a constable, selectman and town clerk. First Church of Rochester admitted him to their communion on 12 February 1741.

The Saint Francis Indians attacked Rochester on 27 June 1746. William held the rank of lieutenant during the war with the Indians.

William died in Rochester NH at age 55 on 30 may 1753.

“Paugus” John Chamberlain

Walter’s book gives an excellent account of Colonel Lovewell’s third and most tragic expedition, and the duel between John Chamberlain and Chief Paugus. The duel ended the battle because the Indians had been conscripted by an outsider, the war chief Paugus. When Paugus was killed, the remaining Indians left the battlefield and went home. (Chapter 6)

Duel between John Chamberlain Chamberlain and Chief Paugus, May 8, 1725

Early news reports gave Ensign Seth Wyman well deserved credit for the victory. He was the leader by default when Colonel Lovewell and other officers were killed. An early ballad, The Song of Lovewells Fight written by an unknown author, was sung for many years in Massachusetts and New Hampshire. It’s lyrics stated that Seth Wyman “shot the old chief Paugus which did the foe defeat”1. However, this was not the case, and neither Wyman nor his family ever claimed this to be true.

John Chamberlain was not mentioned in the early news articles. However, the truth of the story was well known locally by word of mouth. In 1799, a historical publication, reported that the duel was between Paugus and John Chamberlain. This began a heated discussion across the country as to who really shot Chief Paugus. In an 1883 article, historian Samuel A. Green mentioned the controversy. “An attempt has been made in modern times to take from Chamberlain the credit of killing the Indian chief, but the earlier records and traditions seem to confirm the story.

In 2016, The Chamberlain Story website, (Chapter 7) defended the Paugus John tradition against internet historians who didn’t have all the facts.

In Walter’s book, The Chamberlain’s in New England, he explains one reason we know for sure that John Chamberlain was the one who fought the duel with Paugus:

John Chamberlain had a first cousin of the same name. To mitigate confusion the two men were nicknamed. The above-mentioned John became “Paugus” John (for obvious reason), while his cousin became Souhegan John. Souhegan being so nicknamed because he owned property and opened the first mills in Souhegan Falls.

Paugus John contemporaries

William Chamberlain (1697) of Water’s line, and Thomas Chamberlain (1703) in my line were first cousins. They were contemporaries of the Chamberlain cousins Paugus John (1692) and Souhegan John (1706).

The two John Chamberlains were great-grandsons of the immigrant Thomas Chamberlain (1615). Therefore, they would be second cousins once removed to William (1697) and Thomas (1703)

Connection to Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain

Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain

Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain is unquestionably the historic hero of the Chamberlain family in America. Walter’s book encapsulates his profile in a single paragraph:

“Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain was a Colonel in the Union Army and one of the heroes of the Battle of Gettysburg. He also accepted the surrender of arms of the Confederates at Appomattox at the end of the war. Later he became Governor of Maine, and the President of Bowdoin College.”

Walter’s ancestor William Chamberlain (1697), was the great-great-grandfather of Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain. This makes Lorenzo D. Chamberlain (1832), Colonel Chamberlain’s 3rd cousin. Therefore, Lorenzo’s progeny are 3rd cousins (x times removed) of the Colonel. Walter E. Chamberlain is Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain’s 3rd cousin 5 times removed.

My great-grandfather John Harry Chamberlain (1849) was Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain’s 5th cousin. This makes me his 5th cousin 3 times removed.

The Chamberlain Story’s first post on Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain covers his life through the Battle of Gettysburg:  Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, Path to Little Round Top

Jacob Chamberlain (1738)

Jacob Chamberlain, born in Rochester New Hampshire on May 18, 1738, was the son of William. (1697) and Mary. He married Alice Rollins about 1763. Jacob and his brother Ephraim settled New Durham Gore which became know and Alton, NH in 1770. Jacob and Alice’s son, Jacob Jr., was born there in November, 1771. He was the first white (non-Indian) child born in Alton.

Apparently, first child status in new settlements was often recorded. In my own family, Thomas and Abigail had a son in 1841. Increase Chamberlain was reported to be the first white, male child born in Westmoreland, NH. However, he was preceded by the birth of a white female.

Jacob (1738) and three of his brothers, William (1725), Ebenezer (1729) and Ephraim (1742) served in the War for Independence. Jacob (1738) served under General John Stark.

John Stark was a great military leader and the hero of the Battle of Bunker Hill. (Chapter 12) Walter points out in his book that the Battle of Bunker Hill was fought mainly by men from New Hampshire, (1200 compared to 600 for Massachusetts and 200 for Connecticut). The New Hampshire men served under Colonel Stark and Colonel Reed.

Jacob Chamberlain served in General Stark’s Brigade in the Battle of Bennington, August 16, 1777. This battle, fought in the south-west corner of Vermont, was a major victory for the American Army. It truly was the turning point of the Revolutionary war, as It weakened British forces and created momentum for the Americans who then went on to win at Saratoga.

George William Chamberlain (1857)

George William Chamberlain is number (8) in Walter’s direct Chamberlain line. Numbers (5) through (7) are Jacob Jr. (1771), Asa (1805) and Lorenzo D. (1832).

Born on 17 July (possibly 24 July) 1857, George was the last of Walter’s line born in the town of Alton, NH that was founded by his great-great-grandfather Jacob Sr. He was a teamster, farmer and carpenter.

What impressed me about George was his family. George’s parents divorced when he was six and he apparently lived with his mother. He married Pearly Teabo in Lowell MA on 11 December 1882. They had thirteen children, eight boys and five girls.

George is Walter’s great-great grandfather so Walter must have hundreds of third cousins that will recognize their Chamberlain family name and certainly be interested in Walter’s new book.

Walter E. Chamberlain’s family Chart

Walter’s book includes an easy to read family chart. It shows in bold type the names and year-of-birth of his 13 generation direct Chamberlain line. It also includes all of their siblings, his great uncles and great aunts.

Family Ancestor Chart by Walter E. Chamberlain Jr.

The Chamberlains in New England by Walter E. Chamberlain, Jr. For questions or comments about this book, email the author at: chamberlain.history@gmail.com

 

E19- Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, Path to Little Round Top

In July 1862, Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, a 33-year-old professor at Bowdoin College, received a two year leave from the College to pursue his studies in Europe. However, exactly one year later, Chamberlain would find himself on a hill in Gettysburg called “Little Round Top”. His orders were to hold his positions at all cost. Out numbered and out of ammunition, they could not withstand another assault. They had to strike first. Colonel Chamberlain gave the order to his 20th Maine in one word. “Bayonet!!!!”

Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, Professor Bowdoin College

Chamberlain graduated from Bowdoin with highest honors in 1852. He then entered Bangor Theological Seminary where, along with regular courses, he studied Arabic and oriental languages. After graduation, Bowdoin College immediately offered him a position as special instructor in the department of natural and revealed religion. The next year he was elected professor of rhetoric and oratory and later appointed instructor of French and Germain. Now (July 1862), as a professor of Modern Languages of Europe, he was preparing for a well earned leave to study abroad.1

Unfortunately, the war of secession was not going well for the Union. In a series of battles (June 25-July 1, 1862), the Confederate army under General Robert E. Lee drove back General George B. McClellan’s Union forces and thwarted the Northern attempt to capture the Confederate capital of Richmond, Virginia.2 On July 2, 1862, President Abraham Lincoln put out a desperate call for more troops.

Joshua Chamberlain immediately tendered his services to the Governor for any military duty for which he might be capable.1

Lieutenant Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain

Chamberlain’s decision to join the military was strenuously opposed by his colleagues in the faculty who filed a formal protest. Nevertheless, he felt it was his patriotic duty. After all, he had attended Major Whiting’s military academy at Ellsworth, Maine, where he prepared for West Point. However, by 1848 the Mexican-American war was over. And therefore, he chose to attend Bowdoin College.1

The army offered him a rank of colonel to lead a new regiment, but he deemed it wiser to first serve under an officer of the regular army.1 He was appointed lieutenant-colonel of the 20th Maine infantry under Colonial Adelbert Ames was a young officer who graduated from West Point in 1861, and was recognized for gallantry in the first battle at Bull Run.3a

Chamberlain began duty on August 8, 1862, and by the end of the month, completed the organization of the one-thousand man regiment. The new regiment was assigned to Butterfield’s famous Light Brigade in the Fifth Corps of the Army of the Potomac.1

Antietam, Maryland

The battle of Antietam was one of the bloodiest battles of the Civil war. During the carnage of September 17, 1862, the inexperienced 20th Maine was held in reserve. Their first sharp encounter with the enemy came three days later.

On September 20, they waded through Shepherdstown Ford of the Potomac in pursuit of Lee’s retreating army. Union artillery gave them some cover. A few units of the Fifth Corps crossed into Virginia the day before. Therefore, Stonewall Jackson hurried A. P. Hill’s troops to the high ground overlooking the river. Their repulse began when the 20th Maine and others were in the water.1

As soon as they reached the Virginia shore the bugles sounded from the Maryland side calling for a hasty retreat. Incessant rifle fire from the bluff soon surrounded them with little water spouts. Seemingly unperturbed, Chamberlain calmly steadied his men through the treacherous water. Sitting on a white horse in the middle of the Potomac made him an inviting target. The confederates missed him, but his horse was shot out from under him. He soon arrived back in Maryland as wet as any of his men.3b

Antietam was not the complete victory President Lincoln hoped for. Nevertheless, they chased Lee out of Maryland, and that would have to do. On September 22, 1862, he issued the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, announcing that, if the rebels did not end the fighting and rejoin the Union by January 1, 1863, all slaves in the rebellious states would be free. This boosted moral of the Union and dissuaded European powers from backing the confederacy.1

A new commander, General Ambrose E. Burnside

General Ambrose E. Burnside

President Lincoln replaced General George B. McClellan for not pursuing Lee more aggressively.  McClellan passed command of the Union army to General Ambrose E. Burnside on November 7, 1862.

Burnside organized his army into three Grand Divisions. The Right Grand Division under Major General Edwin V. Sumner, the Left Grand Division under Major General William B. Franklin, and the Center Grand Division under Major General Joseph Hooker. Hooker was commander of the Fifth Corps which included the 20th Maine.3c

The battle of Fredricksburg, Virginia

Burnside knew that a more aggressive move was called for and proposed marching on Fredricksburg with the goal of moving south to Richmond ahead of Lee’s army.

A shipment of Pontoons needed to cross the Rappahannock River were greatly delayed. When they finally arrived, the window of opportunity had passed. Nevertheless, Burnside preceded with the plan. Lee’s 72,000 men were now dug in on highly defensive ground. Chamberlain was not at all impressed with the new commander.

A small brigade of rebel sharp shooters in Fredricksburg held off the 116,000 man Union army by firing on the bridge construction engineers. The Union responded by pulverizing the town with an artillery barrage and sent in infantry to flush out the small group of defenders.3c

The army began crossing the Rappahannock on December 12. Burnside ordered Franklin to attack Lee’s right flank and roll it up, and Sumner to drive through the center left at Marye’s Heights. Hookers Division was held in reserve on the north side of the river to be used where needed.

The stone wall on Marye’s Heights

The Heights, on the other side of Fredricksburg, were defended by a stone wall behind which defenders stood three deep on a sunken road bed. The results of the attack at this location was a bloody catastrophe as wave after wave of Union soldiers were mowed down. In the meantime, Franklin’s attempt to roll up Lee’s right flank failed. Believing his superior numbers could break through, Burnside persisted in the assault.

On December 13, the 20th Maine crossed the narrow crowded pontoon bridge. It swerved and swayed. Horses were rearing and men lost their balance. Artillery shells were exploding all around. It was a nerve wracking experience.

They moved through Fredricksburg then toward the heights, stepping over and around the bodies of the fallen dead and wounded. The stone wall ahead appeared as a solid sheet of flame. At the final crest they dug in and exchanged volleys until dark.

There was little sleep to be had that night laying in the blood and mud next to the dead and moaning wounded. The cold wind prompted some to borrow coats from those who no longer needed it. Chamberlain, who had covered himself with the flap of an overcoat, was startled when someone tried to pull it away. The man jumped in freight when Chamberlain spoke to him.

At  dawn, about 200 confederates came from behind the stone wall to fire on their left flank where they had little protection. Quickly, the troops gathered the dead to build a breastwork of bodies. They crouched or laid there all day and somehow survived. That night they received orders to withdraw.3d In the dead of night, they began the march back through the ghastly scene toward Fredricksburg.

The 20th Maine bivouacked in the streets of Fredricksburg for the rest of the night, where they endured constant shelling from confederate artillery.

Lookout out for them Yanks!

On the afternoon of the 15th, there was a rumor brought by prisoners that Stonewall Jackson was about to swoop down on the right side of town and drive the whole Union army into the river. Chamberlain had little doubt that he could do it. At night fall, the 20th Maine and two other regiments were again sent out to the front to cover movements of the enemy. Their orders: “Hold to the last.” Last of what? Chamberlain wondered.3e

The men quickly dug in to build a protective mound of earth between them and the enemy. The Southern trenches were so close they could hear the anxious chatter of the enemy. Chamberlain crept along in the dark to check his defenses. He noticed one man digging his fox hole incorrectly. “Throw to the other side, my man. That is where the danger is!” Chamberlain corrected.

“Don’t ya s’pose I know which side them Yanks be?!!! came his retort.

Hiding his surprise, Chamberlain responded in his best southern accent, “Dig away then, but keep a right sharp lookout.” Then walked swiftly away.3f

“The whole army is across the river!”

They had just finished the trenches when a staff officer rushed in with a message “Get out of here as quick as God will let you, the whole army is across the river.”

Chamberlain was startled, not at the message, but that it was so loud that the enemy was alerted to the army’s retreat. “Steady in your places men, this is a stampeding coward! Arrest this man as a spy, and hold fast your lines.”.3f

His voice tone calmed his men and the enemy alike. They held the line for a time, then slowly and calmly the odd numbered men of the regiment dropped back about 100 yards and formed a new battle line. Then the even numbered men alternately repeated the maneuver.

The pitch black stormy night aided their stealth retreat. However, a brief break in the clouds made their muskets glisten in the moonlight. A musket cracked in the distance and a volley of musket balls passed over their heads as the men hit the ground. When the clouds closed in and darkened the moon again, the quiet retreat continued.3g

When they got back to Fredricksburg they found the army was gone and the shattered town completely deserted. Dead were seen everywhere on sidewalks roads and home porches.  There were some wounded who could not be moved and some devoted surgeons and medical staff who volunteered to stay for their care.

The 20th Maine had buried their four dead and carried out their 32 wounded. The ghostly quiet town prompted great anxiety that they had arrived too late to cross the river. However, they made it in time and as soon as the last man crossed into Maryland, the cables were cut and the pontoons removed.

Chancellorsville, Virginia

Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain’s part at the battle of Chancellorsville was not what he wanted or expected. They were detailed to guard the telegraph line from Falmouth to General Hooker’s headquarters.3h This assignment may have been given because some men in his regiment had contracted smallpox. They were sequestered and put into a quarantine camp by itself.

When Colonel Ames was detached as an aide on the staff of the corps commander, General Meade, left the regiment in command of Lt. Colonel Chamberlain. Chamberlain immediately rode to general headquarters and begged to have his regiment given some place at the front. His request was denied. In frustration, he presented his final plea, “if we can’t do anything else, we can give the rebels the smallpox!”1

Calming a mutiny

On May 20, 1863  Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain was promoted to Colonel. A short time later a hundred and twenty men of the Second Maine Volunteers were transferred to his regiment. They were in a state of mutiny. Though they had signed up for three years, they had served as long or longer, but were not being discharged with men with two-year contracts. They had openly refused to obey orders and they were sent to Colonel Chamberlain under guard of a Pennsylvania regiment with loaded rifles and fixed bayonets. Orders from the corps commander were to fire on them if they refused duty.

Colonel Chamberlain immediately rode to General Meade and got permission to manage the men in his own way. He then took off all the guard, supplied them with proper clothing and food, and assigned them to companies without giving them any specific orders. He expected them to be treated and behave like other soldiers. They caused no more trouble except for a couple of men who were tried by court martial. The men from the Second Maine were afterwards among his very best.1

Gettysburg, Pennsylvania

After Robert E. Lee’s great victory at Chancellorsville, the confidant General decided to take the offensive in the north. General George Mead replaced Joseph Hooker as commander of the Army of the Potomac on June 28, 1863. On June 30 Lee was in southern Pennsylvania with Mead in pursuit. They met in the small town of Gettysburg on July 1, 1863.

Little Round Top

Monument on Little Round Top

On the morning of July 2, 1863 the Union established their battle lines. In the great confusion, General Daniel Sickles of the Third Corps, failed to protect a very strategic position, a boulder laden hill called Little Round Top. If this location were held by the confederates, they could rain cannon fire down on cemetery ridge and most of the Union army.

That afternoon, General Meade sent General G. K. Warren, to assess the situation on Little Round Top. Warren was horrified to find Little Round Top completely undefended. He hastily sent messengers to Meade and Sickles requesting immediate assistance. By then Sickles was engaged in battle and had no troops to spare.4

Colonel Strong Vincent’s 3rd Brigade

3rd Brigade Commander on Little Round Top Colonel Strong Vincent

Colonel Strong Vincent commanded the 3rd Brigade in the 1st Division of the Fifth Corps.  A harried courier informed him of the immediate threat at Little Round Top. Vincent led his men to the hill at the double-quick and lined his four regiments along the south-western base of the hill. These regiments, placed from right to left, were the (356 man)16th Michigan, (313 man) 44th New York, (308 man) 83rd Pennsylvania and the (358 man) 20th Maine under Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain.4

Vincent left Chamberlain with the following instructions: “I place you here. This is the left of the Union line. You understand? You are to hold this ground at all cost!” .3i

Immediately after Vincent’s troops had taken up their positions, the (415 man) 4th Texas and (409 man) 5th Texas regiments, of General John B. Hood’s division, charged up the slope. The battle was fierce and Colonel Vincent was mortally wounded. Under the massive assault, the right-center defensive line was greatly weakened and on the verge of collapse. Colonel Patrick O’Rorke’s (526 man) 140th New York rushed in and saved and greatly strengthened the right flank of 3rd Brigade.4

Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain’s 20th Maine

Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain3q

Chamberlain was to protect the left flank of 3rd Brigade which was the left flank of the whole Union army. However, he also had to protect his own exposed left flank. He lined up nine companies (314 men) in a right angle so that his formation faced both the south and the east.

He stationed his (44 man) Company B, led by Captain Walter G. Morrill in a ravine to the far left.  They were separated from, but within supporting distance of the main regiment. They were to act as needed. A fourteen man squad of Major Homer Stoughton’s 2nd U. S. Sharpshooters, armed with .52 caliber breechloading rifles, was attached to Company B.4

The Confederate action quickly extended toward the left flank. Soon, the 20th Maine was engaged in fierce combat with the (275 man) 4th Alabama and part of the (133 man) 47th Alabama.

Lieutenant James Nichols of K Company summoned Chamberlain’s immediate attention. There was more trouble just over the horizon.

Chamberlain leaped onto a boulder where he could see “thick groups in grey” between the two round tops. They were marching toward his left flank. It was Colonel William C. Oates’ (499 man) 15th Alabama3j who had just hiked 25 miles in 11 hours. They were worn and thirsty, but eager to erase the thin blue line that now held the key to victory.

Colonel William C. Oates’ 15th Alabama

Colonel William C. Oates

The Alabamans made their assault on Chamberlain’s front and what they believed would be his exposed left. However, to their surprise, every tree and rock seemed to suddenly explode with bursts of fire and smoke. The Alabamans fell back to regroup and then attack the two fronts with even more vigor and greater numbers.

Again and again was this mad rush repeated, each time to be beaten off by the ever thinning line that desperately clung to it’s ledge of rocks. -Captain Howard Prince, 20th Maine.3k

The line moved back and forward over and over again. Oates thought his Alabamans had penetrated Maine’s stubborn defense five times, but each time the Northerners somehow drove them back. The action seemed to go on forever. Chamberlain compared the line of action to ocean waves against the shore:

The edge of conflict swayed to and fro, with whirlpools and eddies. Gaps opening, swallowing, closing again with sharp convulsive energy… All around, strange mingled roar, shouts of defiance, rally and desperation. -Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain3k

The flag was still there

Company F, which included the color guard, was at the apex of Chamberlain’s 90 degree angle formation. When some sudden brutal crossfire hit the center of his regiment, Chamberlain feared that the color guard had been annihilated. However, when the smoke cleared, he was relieved to again see his three color-bearers. It was especially remarkable to see Sergeant Andrew J. Tozier with his left arm wrapped around the flag, loading, firing and reloading a borrowed rifle.5a

“Ammunition!”

After repelling the third assault, their situation was critical. About one third of Chamberlain’s men had fallen. His right foot was bleeding from a wound and his left leg was badly bruised when a Minnie ball hit his sword scabbard.3l

He then heard a terrifying demand from his own men. “Ammunition!”, they shouted.

The regiment had shot off almost 25,000 rounds, nearly depleting the 60 round per man allotment. They gathered ammunition from the dead and wounded on the slope but there was little to be found.3m

The 47th Alabama opened fire on Captain Ellis Spears’ left wing, and the formidable 15th Alabamans were now orderly moving toward the center with quiet determination. With no ammunition the 20th Maine could not stand another assault. They had to strike before they were hit with overwhelming force.6a

The rebels were now thirty yards away and pressing forward up the hill.5a

“Bayonet!!!”

Chamberlain told Lieutenant Holman Melcher of F company to prepare for the order, “right wheel forward” of the entire regiment. Melcher stepped out in front. Tozier lifted up the colors.

Chamberlain yelled his order in one word, “Bayonet!!!”3n

“One word was enough. It ran like fire from man to man.”6a All eyes were now focused on the banner of red, white and blue.

The bayonet charge of the 20th Mane on Little Round Top

Melcher listened for the steel on steel clatter to subside as blades were fixed in place. He then leaped forward, his drawn sword flashed in the sunlight.3n Sergeant Tozier’s flag billowed as it moved forward through the air. About two hundred wildly shouting men with steel blades were now charging down the hill toward the bewildered enemy.

Captain Ellis Spears’ was already under fire. His company was the first to introduce themselves to the rebels and flush them out from between the rocks. A scattering of the enemy in the advanced position had only time to chose between surrender and cold steel.5b

Chamberlain’s other eight companies were close behind. The surprised Alabamans were in a state of confusion and panic. One Confederate officer drew his pistol and fired it point blank at Chamberlain’s face. He missed, or the pistol miss fired. He threw down his weapons and surrendered at the point of Chamberlain’s sword.3n

Captain Walter G. Morrill’s Company B

Captain Walter G. Morrill7

The second line of Alabamans had time to regain their composure. They headed for a stone wall. From there they could certainly make a stand and turn the tide on their ammunition impaired rivals.

However, hope quickly turned to shock and panic when fifty-eight men in blue or green uniforms arose from behind a wall with rifles blazing. It was Captain Morrill’s Company B and the squad of sharpshooters that Oates had driven off of Big Round Top.

Now under attack from front and rear, Oates gave the order to retreat. However, he did not anticipate the severe panic that would follow. “We ran like a herd of cattle”, Oates later admitted.3o 

Company B’s position, which was separate from the rest of the regiment, had not been under assault from the rebels. Therefore, they had the needed ammunition to turn panic into a route.6b

The road to Richmond

The 20th Maine was like a swinging gate. While still hinged to the 83rd Pennsylvania on their right, their sweep completely cleared the southern slope of Little Round Top. Chamberlain’s men were on a roll and nothing could stop them. Some declared they were on the road to Richmond.3o

When they reached the front of the 44th New York, Chamberlain called a halt, got his men under control and returned his regiment to their assigned position.

Securing Big Round Top

That night Chamberlain received a message from brigade commander Colonel James C. Rice. They were to secure the heights of Big Round Top where the 15th Alabama had fled. The ammunition and re-enforcements requests had not arrived. So once again he called on his weary but heroic men to press up the mountain through the darkness with bayonet alone.1

They secured that part of the field and captured 25 more prisoners from the 4th Texas. This brought the total number captured to almost 400.1,3p

Brigade commander

At about noon on July 3, 1863, the 3rd Brigade which includes the 20th Maine, was relieved of their stations at the Round Tops. And after replenishing their cartridge boxes, they moved about a mile up the battle line near Fifth Corps headquarters.

There, as they were away from the from front line action, they received numerous visitors who had heard of the bayonet charge and had to get more details. Chamberlain’s first mentor, now Brigadier General Ames, was first to congratulate him.5c

All of Chamberlain’s superiors recommended him for promotion to the rank of brigadier-general for heroic conduct on Little Round Top. The promotion was not made, but Colonel Chamberlain was immediately placed in command of his brigade.1

Spencer Chamberlain

Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain is a descendant of William and Rebecca Chamberlain, William immigrated to America in 1635. Spencer Chamberlain, also a descendant of William, is a 3rd cousin twice removed of Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain.

On September 11, 1814, 14,000 elite British soldiers invaded Plattsburgh, New York. Only about 2000 American ground troops were there to hold the city against this overwhelming force. Spencer Chamberlain was with the Vermont 31st Infantry. Their orders were to defend Fort Brown in Plattsburg “to the last man”. Chapter 17- Spencer Chamberlain in the Battle of Plattsburgh

© Copyright Dennis D. Chamberlain, All rights reserved. The Chamberlain Story, 2022.

References:

1- George Thomas Little and A. M. Litt. D. Lewis The Genealogical and Family History of the State of Maine, Historical Society Publishing Company, New York, 1909.

2- Seven days battles, https://www.britannica.com/

3- Willard M. Wallace, Soul of a Lion, A Biography of General Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain
Page numbers: a p.38, b p.42, c p51, d p.55, e p.56, f p.57, g p.58-59, h p.67, i p.92, j p.93, k p.97, l p.100, m p.101, n p.102, o p.103, p p.107. q cover photo

4- Defense of Little Round Top, https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/defense-little-round-top

5- Edward D. Longacre, Joshua Chamberlain, The Soldier and the Man, Combined Publishing, 1999
Page numbers: a p.137, b p.142, c p.149

6- John J. Pullen, Joshua Chamberlain, A Hero’s Life and Legacy, Stackpole Books, 1999
Page numbers: a p.140, b p.144

7- James B. Vickery, Walter G. Morrill: The Fighting Colonel of the Twentieth Maine, 1968, University of Maine Special Collections. Little Round Top