The material used in compiling the PDFs primarily derives from eyewitness accounts, including diaries, letters, memoirs, the Official Records (OR), and newspapers. I have not simply recycled the views of modern historians. When not using direct quotes, I have précised eyewitness recollections, keeping their salient words. While this enhances credibility and validity, I acknowledge that American language and culture have undergone significant changes since the mid-19th century. Of course, eyewitness stories are not perfect. Indeed, participants could give diametrically opposed interpretations! Participants wrote their accounts (sometimes many years later) within a particular political and social context, with an agenda to promote. Far more sources depict the Union's position. This inevitably leads to a subject bias that one must acknowledge. This imbalance is especially acute with the OR, a source that, although imperfect, has an immediacy and formality that breeds a high degree of trust.

    In analyzing texts, I embrace a “qualitative” approach, one I have used in academic research. Rather than selecting references that conform to some subjective view and ignoring those that do not agree, qualitative principles seek to acknowledge and represent conflicts. The process is "interpretative,” which I make as transparent as possible. There are gaps in the story; I highlight these honestly rather than gloss over them, suggesting probable scenarios. To create a coherent and trustworthy account for each event, I employ multiple sources (where possible) and, through “triangulation,” anchor the narrative onto less contentious events. The aim is to build credibility through merging evidence.

    As with all Civil War academic texts, I have adopted standard conventions. By 1865, Union officers could hold multiple ranks simultaneously. I use the brevet ranking employed at the time in the OR. The formal naming of Confederate units was complicated, as it was based on previous commanders who were sometimes long replaced. This has led to confusion and mistakes in other narratives. Federal units adopted a numbering system. For ease of reading, in my text and maps, I use the person actually commanding the unit at the battle as the possessive identifier for both sides.

​

    I hope you enjoy the following pages and agree that the Battle of Hatcher's Run is a story worth telling.

​

​