A Short History of the 187th Infantry Regiment (Airborne)

 

Bob Broumley (my dad) at Kumwha, Korea.

I've always thought that the 187th Airborne was another seriously underappreciated parachute infantry unit in American military history. Especially for their service in Korea. I was even more amazed at the dedication of these paratroopers after I read Edward Flanagan's "The Rakkasans: The Combat History of the 187th Airborne Infantry." Not only did they make two combat jumps, but the theater's strategic reserve was used as a stopgap to avert disaster on more than one occasion. As some of the regular readers know, my dad is a Korean War veteran who served with the 187 Airborne Regimental Combat Team (RCT), as did one of my uncles. Pictures in this article are courtesy of his photo album.

View the Index of Unit Histories

The 187th Infantry Regiment (Airborne)

"Rakkasans"

Shoulder Sleeve Insignia of the 187 RCT.

Soldiers of the 187^th Infantry Regiment (Airborne) have the distinction of belonging to the only airborne regiment that has served in every conflict since the inception of American airborne forces. Today, the First Battalion (1/187) and Third Battalion (3/187) of the 187^th carry on the tradition while assigned to the 3^rd Brigade Combat Team (BCT) of the 101^st Airborne Division. The 3d BCT carries on the nickname “Rakkasans,” the nom de guerre of the 187 Airborne.

The Regiment was constituted on November 12, 1942, and activated on February 25, 1943, as the 187 Glider Infantry Regiment (GIR) at Camp MacKall, North Carolina. The two-battalion regiment was assigned to the 11^th Airborne Division for the duration of World War II.

The first major milestone for the 11^th Airborne Division, which along with the 187^th Glider Infantry included the 188^th Glider Infantry and the 511^th Parachute Infantry, was to convince the War Department that the divisional airborne concept was viable. Airborne operations during 1943 in Sicily and the Italian mainland had not gone well. The 11^th and 17^th Airborne Divisions conducted the Knollwood Maneuvers in late 1943 and early 1944 that demonstrated to observers that an airborne division could be flown at night, land on their planned drop zones, be resupplied by air, and hold their objective until relieved. The success of the Knollwood Maneuvers was a major factor in the approval of future parachute operations during WWII.

Paratroopers of the 187th Airborne RCT
on a training jump in Korea, circa 1953.

The 187^th Glider Infantry and the rest of the 11^th Airborne Division embarked for the Pacific Theater out of Camp Stoneman, California in May of 1944. Their first combat action was to join the campaign in New Guinea on May 29, 1944. The regiment joined the fight in the Philippines, landing on Leyte on November 18, 1944. The 187 GIR then landed on Luzon on January 31, 1945. The regiment, along with the 188^th GIR, entered Luzon by making an amphibious landing on the enemy-held Lingayen Gulf in order to flank the Japanese lines. The 187^th Glider Infantry fought in other notable actions on Luzon, like “Purple Heart hill,” Tagatay Ridge, Nichols Field, and Mount Macelod. As part of the 11^th Airborne Division, the 187 GIR was one of the units instrumental in liberating the Philippine capital of Manila. The regiment was given the honor of garrisoning the city. Moreover, the 187th was awarded a Presidential Unit Citation for action at Tagatay Ridge and later a Philippine Presidential Citation for valorous combat performance in the liberation of Luzon and Manila.

At the end of WWII, the 11^th Airborne Division was selected as the first troops to enter Japan on occupation duty. On August 30, 1945, flew to Atsugi Airfield in Yamamoto, Japan. The 187^th Infantry was the first American occupation troops, and the first foreign military force to enter Japan in more than 2,000 years. It was in Japan that the regiment earned its nickname. The regiment had been converted from glider infantry to the 187^th Airborne Infantry Regiment. The Japanese had no word to describe these soldiers falling from the sky, so they used the made-up Japanese word “rakkasan” to describe what the American soldiers did. The literal translation means “falling down umbrella men.” The locals started calling the troopers “Rakkasans,” and the name stuck.

The 11^th Airborne Division, along with the 187^th Airborne Infantry Regiment, was returned to the United States in 1949. The 11^th Airborne Division was stationed at Camp Campbell, Kentucky. Along with the 82^nd Airborne Division, the 11^th was part of the strategic reserve of the American Armed Forces. In February and March of 1950, the Rakkasans took part in Operation Swarmer, the largest peacetime airborne maneuvers ever to be conducted. Their performance in these maneuvers was instrumental in being redesignated an Airborne Regimental Combat Team on August 27, 1950. The 187 Airborne RCT returned to Japan to serve as General MacArthur’s airborne forces during the Korean War. While attached to the 1^st Marine Division, the 187 RCT followed up on the success of the Inchon Landing, clearing the Kimpo Peninsula between the Han River and the Yellow Sea.

Training jump during the Korean War Era

On October 20, 1950, the 187 Regimental Combat Team made combat jumps near the towns of Sukchon and Sunchon in North Korea in an attempt to cut off fleeing communist forces. The Rakkasans fought named engagements at Suan, Wonju, Kaesong, and Inje. In Operation Tomahawk the 187^th Airborne made the second combat parachute jump of the Korean War at Munsan-ni on March 23, 1951. The regiment returned to Japan to serve as the strategic reserve in June 1951. In May 1952, the Rakkasans were ordered to quell a North Korean and Chinese Communist prisoner of war (POW) uprising on the Japanese island of Koje-do. The 187 was inserted into the line on two other occasions, in October 1952 and June 1953, as a stop-gap against Chinese offensives at Wonton-ni and Kumwha.

During their time in the Korean War, the Rakkasans were awarded a Presidential Unit Citation and two Korean Presidential Citations, as well as earning five more Battle Streamers for their flag. Three soldiers from the 187 were awarded the Medal of Honor: Lester Hammond, Jr., Rodolfo Hernandez, and Richard Wilson. Their success in Korea re-energized the belief in using paratroopers as a strategic response. Soon after, the XVIII Airborne Corps at Fort Bragg, North Carolina was reactivated.

During the early 1960s, the Rakkasans were part of a series of transfers and redesignations to help experiment with new division formations for the Cold War. This included being part of the 11^th Air Assault Division (Test). By 1964, the 3/187^th Airborne was the only battalion of the regiment on active duty. They were assigned to the 3^rd Brigade of the newly reactivated 101^st Airborne Division. The 3^rd Brigade, which included the 1^st and 2^nd Battalions of the 506^th Airborne, deployed to Vietnam in December 1967. The Rakkasans spent the next four years in Vietnam, fighting in twelve major engagements. They earned two Valorous Unit Awards and two Presidential Unit Citations for the battles at Trang Bang and Dong Ap Bia Mountain. The latter is better known as “Hamburger Hill.” Another Rakkasan, Captain Paul W. Bucha, was awarded the Medal of Honor for his actions near Phuoc Vinh in March of 1968. The 101^st Airborne, along with the 3/187, returned to Fort Campbell in 1972.

By the Persian Gulf War in 1990, the 101^st Airborne, along with the Rakkasans of the 3^rd Brigade had converted from airborne to air assault troops. During that 100 days of ground combat, the 1/187 Infantry conducted an air assault 155 miles behind enemy lines to Objective Weber capturing over 400 Iraqi soldiers on February 25, 1991. The operation into the Euphrates River valley cut off the retreating enemy out of Kuwait. The Rakkasans had advanced further than any other Allied unit, proving the viability of the air assault on the modern battlefield, and did so without a single soldier killed in action.

As part of the Global War on Terror (GWT), the Rakkasans deployed to Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) in December 2001. As such, the 3^rd Brigade, 101^st Airborne became the first Army brigade to deploy in the ongoing war on terror. The Rakkasans fought against the Taliban in eastern Afghanistan, which included Operation Anaconda in March 2002.

Seven months after their return from Afghanistan, the 3^rd Brigade deployed to Kuwait for Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF1). On March 20, 2003, the Rakkasans led the 101^st Airborne Division into Iraq, establishing Forward Area Refueling Points (FARPs) to support deep attacks into Iraq. They seized the city of Hillah and participated in the liberation of Saddam Hussein International Airport before going on to occupy portions of Baghdad. The BDE then moved to western Ninewah province along the Syrian border for the remainder of the deployment, establishing fledgling governance and reconstruction projects for the betterment of the local population, while continuing operations against insurgents.

The 3^rd Brigade, 101^st Airborne Division returned to Fort Campbell in early 2004 and was reorganized under Army Transformation as the 3^rd Brigade Combat Team (BCT). The 3BCT then began a train up for returning to Iraq. They deployed in September 2005 for OIF rotation 05-07. During this year-long deployment, the Rakkasans fought the growing Sunni insurgency in Salah Ad Din Province, which included Saddam Hussein’s hometown of Tikrit.

The Rakkasans deployed again to Iraq for OIF 07-09 as part of the Iraq Surge in September 2007. This rotation took the 3BCT to southwest and southern Baghdad between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. This time the brigade was deployed for 15 months and conducted operations against both Sunni and Shia insurgents.

The Rakkasans returned home in November 2008. After their fourth refit and re-training period since 9/11, the 3^d Brigade Combat Team deployed again in January 2010. This time they went to Afghanistan in support of OEF 10-11 as part of Regional Command-East near the Afghan-Pakistan border. The Rakkasans were home in early 2011 but redeployed to Afghanistan again in September 2012. They came home to Fort Campbell in May 2013 and are again preparing for their next deployment.

The banner under the distinctive unit insignia of the 187^th Infantry Regiment (Airborne) bears the Latin words Ne Desit Virtus, meaning “Let Valor Not Fail.” The soldiers of the 187 Infantry from every era have certainly upheld their motto.

View the Index of Unit Histories

A Short History of MACV

View the Index of Unit Histories

MACV shoulder sleeve
insignia (unit patch).

The Military Assistance Command, Vietnam (MACV)

The United States Military Assistance Command, Vietnam, known as MACV (pronounced “mac-vee”), was a joint service command under the Department of Defense. MACV was created on February 8, 1962, in order to increase assistance to South Vietnam as well as command and control all advisory and assistance efforts in Vietnam. The command was dissolved on March 29, 1973, after the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Vietnam. MACV was the highest level of command “in-country.” Therefore, the history of MACV is really the military history of the Vietnam War.

Prior to WWII, the territory that is the modern country of Vietnam was part of French Indochina, a colonial possession of France. During the Second World War, the Japanese occupied the country, temporarily removing French rule. At the end of the war, the French returned to once again establish their authority over the region. However, a communist revolutionary movement under the leadership of Ho Chi Minh, known as the Viet Minh, had established itself by fighting the Japanese. Both the French and the Viet Minh were in a weakened state after the war, so both existed in what would become North Vietnam for several years. But Ho was a passionate Vietnamese nationalist and planned for an independent, united, and communist Vietnam.

In what is called the “Indochina War” in France, and the “Anti-French Resistance War” in Vietnam, the Viet Minh fought the French for control of North Vietnam from December 1946 until France’s departure in August 1954. South Vietnam was granted independence in 1949 as the State of Vietnam, an anti-communist country whose capital was established in Saigon. After the defeat of the French, the Viet Minh established the communist government of North Vietnam with their capital in Hanoi.

During the Indochina War, the United States provided some limited military assistance to France, mostly in the form of military equipment, some naval and sir support, and CIA covert operations. In September 1950, U.S. President Harry Truman sent the Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) to Vietnam to assist our French and Vietnamese allies. With the departure of the French, the communist insurgency in South Vietnam continued to grow, and with it, U.S. military aid. For example, in 1961 military aid jumped from $50 million per year to $144 million. U.S. advisors were pushed down to the battalion level and their numbers increased from 746 in 1961 to over 3,400 when MAAG was placed under the command of MACV when it was created in 1962.

The commanding general of MACV (and MAAG) was General Paul Harkins. In May 1964, combat deployments became too complicated for an advisory group to control. Therefore reorganization was effected that expanded the role of MACV and absorbed MAAG's mission and personnel. The following month General William Westmoreland took command of Military Assistance Command, Vietnam. During his tenure, MACV would grow to command and control the following major command components:

• -      United States Army, Vietnam (USARV)
• -      I Field Force, Vietnam (I FFV)
• -      II Field Force, Vietnam (II FFV)
• -      XXIV Corps
• -      III Marine Amphibious Force (III MAF)
• -      Naval Forces, Vietnam (NAVFORV)
• -      Seventh Air Force (7AF)
• -      5^th Special Forces Group
• -      Civil Operations and Revolutionary Development Support (CORDS)
• -      Studies and Observations Group (SOG)
• -      Field Advisory Element, MACV

The commanding general of Military Assistance Command Vietnam (COMUSMACV) was therefore responsible for four corps-sized maneuver commands, all naval and air assets within the territorial borders of Vietnam, all special operations assets, as well as all military advisors to South Vietnamese forces. At the height of American involvement in the war in Vietnam, there was 9,430 Army personnel acting as advisors on the district and battalion levels training, advising, and mentoring Vietnamese in the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN), Republic of Vietnam Marine Corps, Republic of Vietnam Navy and the Vietnam Air Force.

The major special operations command within MACV was the Studies and Observation Group (SOG). Contrary to popular belief, the acronym “SOG” does not officially stand for “Special Operations Group.” Although “Studies and Observation” was an attempt to hide what the command did, which was unconventional warfare and highly classified operations throughout Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. MACV-SOG was comprised of U.S. Army Special Forces (Green Berets), Navy SEAL teams, Air Force Combat Controllers, Marine Recons, Air Force Special Operations pilots of the 90th Special Operations Wing, and other special operations personnel.

Naval Forces Vietnam (NAVFORV) was made up of those naval forces which were in direct operational support to ground forces within the borders of South Vietnam. This excluded the aircraft carriers, amphibious ships, and naval gunfire support. However, it did include the Navy's units in the II, III, and IV Corps Tactical Zones. Over the course of the war the Coastal Surveillance Force (Task Force 115), River Patrol Force (Task Force 116), and Riverine Assault Force (Task Force 117) came under the control of NAVFORV. TF 116 and TF 117 were used in the joint Army-Navy Mobile Riverine Force. MACV, through the Commander Naval Forces, Vietnam (COMNAVFORV), also commanded the Naval Support Activity, Saigon, and the NSA Danang. These bases provided logistical support to the naval and marine forces in South Vietnam. Also under NAVFORV were the Naval Advisory Group, the 3d Naval Construction Brigade (the Seabees), the Military Sea Transportation Service Office (coordinating sealift of supplies to Southeast Asia), the Officer-in-Charge of Construction (civilian construction projects), the Naval Research and Development Unit (testing new equipment in the field), and Commander, Coast Guard Activities, Vietnam.

The news of the enemy’s Tet Offensive which began on January 31, 1968, proved to be contrary to what General Westmoreland had touted as “positive indicators” in the progress of the war. The American public’s support for the war spiraled. In June 1968, General Westmoreland was replaced by General Creighton Abrams. While Westmoreland is best known for his prosecution known as “search and destroy,” Abrams implemented the “winning of hearts and minds” and the “Vietnamization” of the war. Abrams was largely successful, demonstrated through the ability of the South Vietnamese Army to repel the NVA’s Easter Offensive of 1972. However, public and political support for the war in Vietnam could never be regained after Tet. Abrams was replaced by General Frederick Weyand in June 1972 and, like Westmoreland before him, went on to serve as Chief of Staff of the Army.

General Weyand oversaw the drawdown of U.S. armed forces in Vietnam during the last half of 1972. The Paris Peace Accords that ended the United States' combat involvement in Vietnam were signed on January 27, 1973. The agreement provided for a 60-day ceasefire during which time all remaining American and other United Nations combat forces were required to be withdrawn from Vietnam. Therefore, with no forces to command, MACV was no longer needed. The command was disbanded on March 29, 1973. Any American military personnel remaining in Vietnam at that time came under the control of the Defense Attaché Office (DAO) in Saigon.

The huge complex that was built to house MACV Headquarters and the ARVN Joint General Staff at Tan Son Nhut Airbase was dubbed the “Pentagon East” during the war. After the disbanding of MACV, Pentagon East housed the DAO. This compound was used as one of the two evacuation points for Operation Frequent Wind, the removal of American civilian and Vietnamese evacuees from Vietnam during the Fall of Saigon in April 1975 (the other was the U.S. Embassy, Saigon). It is also the site of the last American ground casualties in Vietnam. At 3:30 a.m. on April 29, 1975, a North Vietnamese rocket hit Guard Post #1 at the gate of the DAO Compound, killing 21-year-old Marine Corporal Charles McMahon and 19-year-old Lance Corporal Darwin Lee Judge.

View the Index of Unit Histories

Mary Hays, AKA: Molly Pitcher

The Molly Pitcher Monument

Last week I posted about Hannah Duston and her escape from the Indians. Another monument to a strong female historical figure is the Molly Pitcher grave and statue in the Old Public Graveyard in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. Molly Pitcher is one of those stories that can be filed under the heading of “If it ain’t true it outta be.” Of course, that’s my Texas heritage coming out. But I’m convinced that there really is only one Molly Pitcher, her real name was Mary Hays, and she’s buried in Carlisle.

Here's her story: During the American Revolution, Mary Hays followed her husband, William Hays, to war, as a large number of women did. In those days, women would follow the army to care for their soldier family members in a variety of ways, like cooking, sewing, laundry, or assisting with medical care. One other task these volunteers provided was bringing water to the soldiers during training, or even during battle. These women earned the nickname “Molly Pitcher.” Molly is a way of saying Mary, and Pitcher of course is for the pitcher of water they’d carry.

The current monument is from 1916.

William Hays enlisted in Proctor’s 4^th Pennsylvania Artillery in 1777. Mary first went with the battery to Valley Forge, then the next year to the Battle of Monmouth Courthouse in New Jersey. This is not disputed. During the battle, Mary was bringing water to the artillerymen in her husband’s battery. When her husband fell, either from a wound or heatstroke, Mary took over his job, using a ramrod to swab and load the canon.

Legend has it that during the battle she was seen working with the gun’s crew by General George Washington. The General supposedly congratulated her and made her a sergeant as a reward for her bravery. None of that can be proven, although Mary reportedly went by the nickname “Sergeant Molly” for the rest of her life. However, in 1830 a war veteran’s narrative was published that described the incident of a woman taking over for her husband on an artillery piece during the Battle of Monmouth. In it, the writer says that a British cannon ball passed between the woman’s legs, tearing through her skirt but leaving her unharmed.

After the battle, Mary Hays and her husband returned to their home in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. William Hays died in 1786. Mary later married again, to a man named John McCauley. In 1822, Mary was granted a pension by the state of Pennsylvania for her service. Mary died in 1832 and is buried in the Old Public Graveyard as Mary McCauley. The current Molly Pitcher monument was erected in 1916.

Union troops were behind this wall
during a Civil War skirmish.

There are a number of Molly Pitcher monuments. Some are in the form of street names, murals, and even business names. I believe that Molly Pitcher is a moniker given to women who followed their husbands to war during the Revolution. Mary Hays is the personification of that. Much like Rosie the Riveter was a name for women working in the defense industry during WWII and Naomi Parker was the inspiration for that. However, there is still controversy. You can read a Wikipedia article that does not question the existence of Molly Pitcher. An article on the American Battlefield Trust website, says that she is a composite character, made up of the many Molly Pitchers. Yet finally, there is an article from Smithsonian that says she probably never existed.

If you ever get the chance to walk around Carlisle, please do. Lots of history there from the Revolution to the Civil War. Take a look at the Old Public Graveyard on South Street at Bedford. It’s an interesting place, with the oldest burial from 1757. The east wall protected approximately 200 Union soldiers when Jeb Stuart’s Confederate cavalry raided Carlisle during the Gettysburg Campaign. They traded shots with Confederate skirmishers who were deployed in what would become Letort Park, on the other side of the creek. But that’s a story for a future post. 

Hannah Duston and Two Massacres

Hannah Duston's Capture and Escape from the Indians

The Hannah Duston statue is in
Haverhill, Massachusetts.

I did not make a special post for Women’s History Month last March. But I should have written about Hannah Duston (or sometimes it’s spelled Dustin). When I told my wife about Duston - the first woman in the United States to have a statue erected in her honor - she said, “This woman sounds like a badass.” I’d have to agree with that, based simply on her story. But the memory of Hannah Duston is also an example of how we interpret our history through the years.

I really enjoy it when I catch myself in some preconceived notion. When you think of Puritan settlers in 1600s Massachusetts, do you think of a bunch of devoutly religious, passive people, kind of like the pilgrim mythology? Me too! Then while I was on the west coast, I read the story of Hannah Duston in the book “Massacre on the Merrimack: Hannah Duston's Captivity and Revenge in Colonial America” by Jay Atkinson. That book dissuaded me from my preconceptions and when we were recently passing through Massachusetts, I just had to take a look at the area where this story took place.

On the base of the statue you'll 
find a panel that shows Thomas
Duston defending his children.

First, here's the story in a nutshell:
Haverhill, Massachusetts, is on the north side of the Merrimack River, just 14 miles west of the Atlantic, or thirty-five miles north of Boston as the crow flies. Puritan settlers first arrived as early as 1640. Almost fifty years later, when our story takes place, it was still the edge of civilization, assuming the perspective of the English settlers. One of those settler families was the Dustons: Thomas and Hannah and their nine children.

During King William’s War (1688 – 1697), the governor of New France encouraged Native American tribes to raid English settlements. On March 15, 1697, Abenaki Indians from Quebec, made a raid on Haverhill. A “garrison house,” that was more heavily fortified (think brick, stone, or heavy logs) than your average farmhouse was on a hill above the Duston farm, but some distance away. As they had been instructed, eight of the Duston children headed that way when they heard the raid begin. Hannah, age 40 at the time, had given birth to her ninth child a couple of weeks earlier. She had a difficult birth and was still recovering. Present that morning was a neighbor/nurse, Mary Neff. Husband Thomas was working on building a brick garrison house of his own about half a mile away. When he heard the gunfire and whoops of Indians, he mounted his horse and headed for his house.

Another panel shows the killing
of the Indians.

When Thomas got to his house, he saw Indians heading across his fields. He knew that they would be able to catch his other children heading for the garrison house, so he grabbed his rifle and went to get between the Indians and his kids. Hannah, Mary, and the newborn were to sneak out a back door and make a run for it on their own. Thomas was successful in blocking the Indians who were after his kids. They withdrew when Thomas and the children made it to within rifle range of the three militiamen who were in the garrison house. Thomas borrowed a fresh horse and headed back with one of the militiamen to find his wife, but it was too late.

The Abenaki killed 27 colonists and took 14 captives, two of those were Hannah and Mary. The Indians took them on a speed march away from any potential pursuers. If any of the captives slowed them down, they were killed. Hannah’s newborn was stripped from her arms and killed in front of her. On the trail she and Mary received help in their survival from a fourteen-year-old boy named Samuel Lennardson who had been taken from Worcester, Massachusetts up to a year prior and had some modicum of trust from their captors.

The Duston Garrison House.

After weeks on the trail, other captives had all been killed or traded away. Hannah, Mary, and Samuel were left with a family group of two warriors, three adult women, and seven children. Along the trail Hannah had, along with the horrors she had witnessed, been told that her husband and children had all been killed and that when they arrived at their destination she would be tortured and either killed or sold into slavery. While camping on an island in the Merrimack River near present-day Boscawen, New Hampshire, the Indians let their guard down and all went to sleep. One version says that the warriors shared a bottle and passed out. Regardless, Hannah enlisted Mary and Samuel to participate. After the Indians went to sleep, they were able to get ahold of hatchets. Hannah and Samuel each killed one of the men while they slept. The three then proceeded to attack the women and children. Hannah left one of the children alive, a boy who had been kind to her on the trail. He subsequently fled. One of the women was severely wounded but also escaped. Hannah scalped the bodies in order to collect a bounty offered by the colony and to prove her story. The three captives made their escape in one of the Indian canoes, heading down the river to an English settlement.

The Aftermath
Hannah never wrote down her story, nor did Mary or Samuel. Hannah died in Haverhill sometime between 1736 and 1738. However, several people have written the story, claiming that they interviewed Hannah for the details. The most prominent of these was Cotton Mather. We know that she really did take the Indian’s scalps because her husband petitioned the government of the Massachusetts Colony to collect the bounty.

About a hundred years after Hannah’s death, her story was resurrected and she became a heroine. Some historians believe the story resonated with the public because of the Indian removal efforts that began in the 1820s. The first statue in her honor was erected in 1874 in Boscawen, New Hampshire (the site of her escape). The 35-foot statue depicts her with a hatchet in one hand and scalps in the other. In 1879 a statue of Hannah was placed in the GAR park in Haverhill. This one has Hannah holding a hatchet, but she’s pointing with the other hand as if to say, “You were bad.” On the sides of the base are depictions of the four events in her story: her capture, her husband’s defense of the children, killing her captors, and returning in a canoe. Today, some question why Hannah Duston was elevated to hero status, particularly considering that she killed six children along with the adults, like the tone of this article from Smithsonian. I’m afraid I don’t agree. You just can’t judge someone in those circumstances through the lens of our modern morality. And although it’s not right to say “they did it too” as an excuse, one source said that many of the settlers killed in the Abenaki raid were children. And what about Hannah's newborn?

By the way, the garrison house that Thomas was working on got finished. You can visit it, just outside of Haverhill. Like visiting a Civil War battlefield, when you’re stopping off at Dunkin’s and fighting the going to work traffic, it’s hard to visualize what it was like there in the 1600s. The Hannah Dustin statue and the Duston Garrison House help us remember. 

Changes to the C & O Canal NHP

Picture from 2011 post. You can
see the missing wall on the side
of the aqueduct. Click on the
picture to see a larger version.

We revisit the C & O Canal National Historical Park in Williamsport, Maryland.

After a ten-year stint on the west coast we’ve returned to the mid-Atlantic and the first thing we did was visit some of our old haunts and favorite historical sites. One of the first places we went to was the C & O Canal National Historical Park site in Williamsport, Maryland. I did a post on the canal towpath and the park back in 2011, as well as a post about the Paw Paw Tunnel, located up the canal about thirty miles. Give that first post a read to find out the history of the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal and what it is today. Here is a pretty good video that will also give you a rundown on the history of the canal.

An aqueduct is a bridge
for water.

Okay, if you didn’t go to those sources above, let’s review. Before roads and railroads, passengers and freight were moved by water. To conquer unnavigable rivers, canals were built that included aqueducts and locks to cross rough terrain and move boats through rises in elevation. These canal projects were a product of the industrial revolution and Europe got a big head start on the United States. Our most famous, the Erie Canal in New York state, opened in 1825 (you have the song stuck in your head now, don’t you?). The C & O Canal got a late start, not opening until 1850, navigating the Potomac River from Georgetown in Washington D.C. to Cumberland, Maryland. It continued to operate until the 1920s, so through the efforts of some dedicated individuals, we have a well-preserved example of these kinds of narrow boat canals AND a 184-mile recreational trail for biking and hiking.

Now there is water in the
aqueduct at Williamsport.

So what changed since I was in Williamsport a decade ago? First off, there is a new park headquarters building just up the hill from the visitors center and the turning pond. This makes sense to me, as Williamsport is just about midway between Cumberland and Georgetown. They have also restored the aqueduct over Conococheague Creek where it flows into the Potomac. That needs a little more explanation.

An aqueduct is built to carry water. In the case of the C & O, the aqueducts were built to carry boats over existing rivers. When I visited ten years ago, the aqueduct in Williamsport was missing a wall and visitors used it like a bridge to cross Conococheague Creek. The old canal had been filled in so you could walk from the visitors center around the turning pond and immediately be on the towpath. Now the aqueduct has been restored. The canal was dug out so that it connects to the turning pond, fills the aqueduct, and runs maybe forty yards beyond the north end of the aqueduct. This is a great improvement. My wife shared with me that before the improvement, she couldn’t visualize what the aqueduct did, since it looked like, and was used as, a bridge. Now that it has been repaired and has water in it, its function is clear.

That small portion of the
canal connects to the 
turning pond.

One more plug: I also think it’s a good place to put the park headquarters as Williamsport is (again in my humble opinion) the best place to visit the C & O if you only have a day to spend there. In Williamsport there is a turning pond, which you only find at the two ends of the path. There is a restored aqueduct with water. There is the elevated railroad bridge to see. Less than half a mile walk down the towpath is Lockhouse 44 with an excellent example of a canal lock. (If you need to know how one of these locks works, here’s a video I found that shows how one works, it’s from a canal in Great Britain, but I chose it to share with you because it looks very similar to the C & O.) And for a bonus, there is some Civil War history as well. Confederate forces crossed the Potomac here and in other locations along the canal during both campaigns in the north. Williamsport is an hour and a half drive from Washington D.C., less than an hour from Gettysburg, and only fifteen minutes from Antietam Battlefield. If you’re planning a trip in the area, consider adding this piece of history to your itinerary.

Less than a half mile walk down
the towpath is Lock #44.

A walkway on the elevated 
railroad bridge allows access to
the towpath.

There is a new park headquarters
up the hill, but the Visitors Center
is still in the barn by the pond.

The towpath trail is pet
friendly. Elvis the Corgi
approves. Please stay 
leashed and pick up. ;-)

The National Guard's Birthday: The First Muster

"The First Muster," a National Guard Heritage
Painting by Don Troiani, courtesy of the
National Guard Bureau.

For many Marines, the celebration of the Marine Corps Birthday is the social event of the year. The Corps was first established on November 10, 1775, by an act of the Second Continental Congress. That means this year the Marines will turn two hundred and forty-seven years old. The Navy beats them though, also established by an act of Congress on October 13, 1775, making that service just short of a month older. How about the Army you say? The United States Army claims June 14, 1775, as its birthday. On that date, the Continental Congress authorized the enlistment of expert riflemen to serve the United Colonies for one year. This was only two months after the Battle of Lexington and Concord, the event that kicked off the American Revolution.

However, the National Guard has them all beat by well over a hundred years. The roots of the modern National Guard are the colonial militias. The first formal militia was born on December 13, 1636, when the General Court of the Massachusetts Bay Colony ordered the organization of the Colony's militia companies into three regiments. The regiments were simply named the North, South, and East Regiments. Simple enough naming convention since the perceived threat was to the west, namely the Pequot tribe of Native Americans. All males between the ages of 16 and 60 were required to maintain arms and participate in the defense of the Colony. They drilled once a week and guards were posted in the event of an attack. The threat manifested itself in the Pequot War that took place from 1636 to 1638.

Although the order to organize the militia was given in December, the birthday of the National Guard is considered to be the date of the first unit to muster. You have to consider those New England winters, the colonists had to wait until the following spring to formally gather. The exact date has been lost, but we do know that the first regiment to muster was the East Regiment in Salem, Massachusetts. This year will mark the 385th year since that first muster, making the National Guard the oldest component of our military. On Saturday, April 9, 2022, a ceremony and reenactment will be held commemorating the event on Salem Common.

The Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal

 I don’t know how these things come up on my radar. But they do. I keep lists of things to look up and usually that just leads to more things to look up. Not complaining, but curiosity can be a harsh taskmaster.

(I thought) I knew that the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal was awarded to all services for participation in military operations against enemy forces, like Grenada (Operation URGENT FURY) and Panama (Operation JUST CAUSE). It was for the short-term deployments that weren’t considered a war or a campaign. So I thought to myself, what other operations received the AFEM? Turns out, quite a few.

The medal was created by executive order in 1965 to recognize the deployment of military personnel to Southeast Asia (specifically think Vietnam) prior to that time. Over the years it has been authorized for twenty deployments around the world during the Cold War and after. By definition: “The Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal can be earned through U.S. military operations, operations in direct support of the United Nations and U.S. operations of assistance to friendly foreign nations.”

The list of operations begins with Lebanon, Vietnam, and the Taiwan Straits in 1958. It concludes with Operation JOINT GUARDIAN in Kosovo after 1 Jan 2014 and continues. In between are several deployments to Haiti, the Berlin Crisis, two deployments to the Congo. Stuff I wasn’t even familiar with. If you want to see the whole list, here’s a link to a pdf provided by the Department of Defense Personnel and Readiness website.

I’m glad I looked this up. It was a little exercise in reminding myself that everyone’s service is important. We should not forget the men and women who earned this service ribbon any more than we should fail to recognize the sacrifices of veterans of any declared war. And you can bet I'll be looking up some of the items on this list. ;-)

Defending Puget Sound: Fort Casey State Park

Spring finally sprung here in the Seattle area. We took an unusually nice day off weather-wise and drove to Fort Casey State Park on Whidbey Island, one of our favorite picnic spots. Along with Fort Worden and Fort Flagler state parks, Fort Casey is a former coast artillery position built around the turn of the twentieth century for the defense of Puget Sound. All three state parks are great for hiking, camping, or letting kids play on the old concrete batteries. Each one is around a two-and-a-half-hour drive from Seattle, including sometimes waiting for a ferry. But Fort Casey is my favorite.

A new coat of paint and a restored
"disappearing gun"

Fort Casey has always been less crowded than the more noteworthy Fort Worden. Fort Worden, located at Port Townsend was the shooting location for the movie “An Officer and a Gentleman” with Richard Gere. Also, Port Townsend is a picturesque tourist destination. Not that it’s a bad thing, but it brings with it crowds and there is a bit of litter and graffiti on the walls of the batteries. Fort Casey is quiet and clean. As a matter of fact, on our visit we saw that the park is being restored to its original condition in that workers are applying a fresh coat of paint and are mounting two restored “disappearing guns.” This work should be complete by the end of May.

During the second half of the nineteenth century the United States was concerned about the defense of their new territories in the Pacific Northwest, particularly Puget Sound. There was a sense of urgency that came with increased tensions with Spain in the lead-up to the Spanish-American war. A survey of Puget Sound by the Corps of Engineers easily noted that Admiralty Inlet was a narrow gateway into the rest of Puget Sound. In fact, Admiralty Inlet is only about four miles wide. Construction was started in the late 1890s on all three forts, Casey, Worden, and Flagler, that would create a “triangle of fire” for any invading fleet.

It is only 4 miles across Admiralty Inlet
between Forts Worden and Casey

Fort Casey was activated in 1901. By 1907 there were 34 pieces of coastal artillery sitting 100 feet above sea level. Similar strength was located at the other two points of the triangle. This investment in defense didn’t last very long. The threat of invasion diminished. So much so that during the First World War, 13 of the guns were removed from Fort Casey and sent to France as heavy artillery and rail guns. Battleships got bigger, matching the forts for the size of guns. Also, the advent of the airplane that was able to bomb the forts necessitated removing the cannons and replacing them with anti-aircraft guns during the Second World War. 

Great views at Fort Casey

After WWII, Fort Casey stood vacant and fell into disrepair. The fort was officially deactivated in 1953 and was later transferred to the Washington State Parks. If you would like to know more about the defenses of Puget Sound, read this article on HistoryLink.org, or visit the Coastal Artillery Museum at Fort Worden. You also might take a look at the book, "The Pictorial History of Fort Casey" by Terry Buchanan.

Book R & R: Agent Sonya

This book “Recommendation and Review” is for “Agent Sonya” by Ben Macintyre.

I am a Cold War veteran, having spent three years patrolling the East German border back in the 1980s. Maybe that’s why I like spy stories so much. Fiction or nonfiction, it doesn’t matter. At least from a media standpoint, the Cold War made for some good spy stories. You had definitive bad guys (that would be the Soviets) versus us, the good guys. This book isn’t like that.

“Agent Sonya: Moscow’s Most Daring Wartime Spy” by Ben Macintyre is the true story of Ursula Kuczynski, also known as Ruth Werner, Ursula Beurton, Ursula Hamburger, or her code name: Sonya. She was born in Germany in 1907 and was a teenager and young adult during the political upheaval immediately following World War I. She became a devout, ideological communist, passionately opposed to the rise of fascism in her country. When her husband was offered a job in Shanghai, she went with him. There in China, she met other communists and was recruited into working for Soviet intelligence. Over her career worked in China, Poland, Switzerland, and Great Britain. Although Sonya didn’t “spy” firsthand, she did run agents in these locations and radio information back to Moscow.

I’ve read books by Ben Macintyre before, specifically Rogue Heroes and Agent Zigzag. So I knew the writing would be excellent and that this book, like the others mentioned, would be a true story that reads like fiction. What makes this book different from the usual spy story is that it is told from the perspective of Kuczynski. I gained an understanding of why a person would embrace Communism during the 1920s, especially if faced with a weak government (the Weimar Republic) and a threat of Fascism. As an aside, Ursula became disillusioned with the Soviet Union after the purges by Stalin in the 1930s, but she never lost her idealistic faith in communism. During the story of her career as a spy during the 30s and 40s, you of course sympathize with Ursula and are on the virtual edge of your seat during the times she was nearly caught.

SPOILER ALERT! If you don’t want to know the rest of the story, skip the next paragraph.

Why a book devoted to this one spy? One of her agents she ran in Great Britain was another German Jew, a talented physicist by the name of Klaus Fuchs. Fuchs had escaped from Hitler’s Germany and was sponsored into Great Britain. He was investigated and cleared to work on Britain’s atomic bomb project, despite being a devout communist. Once Fuchs realized what the project was about, he decided to share all the information about his work with the Soviet Union. Agent Sonya was his handler in Great Britain. When Great Britain’s nuclear bomb program was merged with the Manhattan Project (the United States nuclear bomb project), Fuchs was sent to work in the U.S. and passed off to a KGB handler in America. The information that Fuchs passed to the Soviets arguably gave them the bomb or certainly allowed them to develop their own five years earlier than expected. When Fuchs' treachery was found out, it would lead straight back to Ursula. In 1950 she escaped Great Britain and settled into retirement in East Germany, eventually writing a book about her own escapades.

So you have to ask: Did Agent Sonya help to start the Cold War or did she prevent World War III by helping to maintain a balance of power? Don’t try to answer that question without reading the book. I think it will change the way you look at that period of our history. It did mine. 

Book R & R: The Boy Who Followed His Father into Auschwitz

This book Recommendation and Review is for “The Boy who Followed His Father into Auschwitz” by Jeremy Dronfield.

By the cover design and title, I mistakenly at first thought this book was a work of fiction. So did my wife who first saw it on the shelf in our local bookstore. She read it; she was enthralled by it. Then she insisted that I read it. She is not a big reader of nonfiction history and rarely pushes me to read nonfiction (that’s because my nonfiction reading stack is always piled so high). So, I moved this read to the top of the list. Really glad I did.

This is a true Holocaust story that reads like fiction. In fact, the author started out a fiction writer but switched to narrative nonfiction. If you read a lot of books about World War II, you might know Jeremy Dronfield from his previous nonfiction work, “Beyond the Call.” At the time I’m writing this, “The Boy Who Followed His Father into Auschwitz” has 4.8 stars on 1853 reviews on Amazon. With numbers like that, it is no wonder it is a bestseller and I'm probably wasting your time telling you that the book reads like a novel. A “page-turner” as my dad would say.

The book is about the Kleinmann family of Vienna, Austria. There is the father, Gustav, a combat veteran of the First World War, his wife Tini, and their four children, Edith, Fritz, Herta, and Kurt. They are a Jewish family, but not overly devout, living in a Jewish neighborhood. They are part of the community; they have non-Jewish friends and neighbors. The story begins with the impending vote in Austria on Anschluss, the joining of Germanic peoples together under the Third Reich. The family lives through the arrival of the Nazis, the growing prejudice of their non-Jewish neighbors, and Krystallnacht. All this beginning in March of 1938, a year and a half before the beginning of World War II in Europe and over three and a half years before America entered the conflict.

Soon after, the Nazis begin to arrest Jewish adult males, initially as political prisoners. Gustav and his eldest son, Fritz, are caught up in this and sent to Dachau. Fritz was only sixteen. I had the opportunity to visit Dachau, a concentration camp outside of Munich, when I was stationed in Germany back in the 1980s. This connection allowed me to visualize the Kleinmanns in this evil and depressing place. Gustav and Fritz are transferred to other camps during the course of their years as slave laborers. While they are in captivity, Tini attempts to get her other children sponsored to immigrate to Great Britain and the United States. She is only partially successful. After years of starvation and beatings with no word from the other members of his family, Gustav is informed that he and hundreds of other prisoners will be sent to Auschwitz, the infamous Nazi concentration camp in Poland. Upon hearing this news, Fritz volunteers to go to Auschwitz with his father. Both believe this is a sentence of certain death, but they believe that it is better to be together than to die alone.

The book is based on a diary Gustav kept during his six years in concentration camps. Not only will you learn of the horrors of the concentration camp system, but also how difficult it was to flee Germany or an occupied country. Hint: countries like the United States and Great Britain limited the intake of refugees, and once the war was declared on and by these countries, even this avenue was cut off to the victims of the Nazi regime. This is an amazing story and through the experiences of this one family the reader gains a visceral understanding of the different ways that people suffered during the Holocaust.

I wish that every American would read this book. I spent three years in Germany, forty years after the war. I found the German people to be warm and friendly. I enjoyed my time there. Though I could never reconcile how the people I met there who were alive during that time could possibly allow the rise of fascism and the Holocaust to take place, much less enter a pathway to war that would eventually destroy their country. I worry that we have demonized the Nazis to such a level that we can’t learn anything from this period of history. I hope that is not the case. This is different than reading about fighting the war. This is about learning about the cause and effect of it. Please read two books. First, “The Nazi Seizure of Power” by William Sheridan Allen. In this book, you’ll learn how the Nazis took over Germany, not by Hitler from the top down, but on a grassroots level through local action by Nazi party members. The other is this book, “The Boy Who Followed His Father into Auschwitz” by Jeremy Dronfield. If you’ll make that investment of time, and it won’t be boring, then you’ll understand the what and the how. I doubt we’ll ever understand the why.