Hendershot then rattled his way from coast to coast, from GAR posts to regimental reunions, winning back the support of veterans, one old man at a time. By the time of the national encampment of 1893, in Indianapolis, he had won his fight. There his title was reinstated to thunderous applause, after which former President Benjamin Harrison presented him with a diamond-studded, solid-gold medal inscribed ‘Robert H. Hendershot, Drummer Boy of the Rappahannock, from G.A.R. and W.R.C. comrades, Indianapolis, 1893.’ Soon afterward, Hendershot strengthened his claim with another biography, Camp Fire Entertainment: The True Story of R. H. Hendershot, Drummer Boy of the Rappahannock. Although Spillaine also continued to claim the title, and used it as a springboard to commander of the Michigan Department of the GAR in 1912, Hendershot apparently felt no further need to defend his title.

Subscribe Today

• Did you enjoy our article?
• Read more in America's Civil War magazine
• Subscribe online and save nearly 40%!!!
 

Was Hendershot a hero or a clever liar? How could he convince many of the great men of his day of his sincerity and worth while the citizens of his own hometown viewed the tales of his spectacular exploits with extreme suspicion, if not outright disbelief? His first captain, Charles DeLand, made no mention of Hendershot in his History of Jackson County, though he wrote with pride of many of Jackson’s other Civil War heroes. Hendershot’s absence was also conspicuous in Michigan in the War, the official history of the state’s part in the Civil War.

Many newspapers did publish reports about a drummer boy crossing the Rappahannock; however, the initial reports were vague. They only told of a drummer boy, 13 years old, who belonged to either the 7th or the 8th Michigan Infantry. Although Hendershot could claim that only he fit the correspondents’ description, in the weeks that followed many of these same correspondents began calling the tale a myth.

Too many high-ranking individuals endorsed Hendershot’s claims to make them entirely spurious. Among his supporters was General Burnside, who only days after the battle wrote, ‘He served under me faithfully…and at the battle of Fredericksburg displayed most distinguished courage.’ Many who endorsed his claims, however, had not actually witnessed Hendershot’s actions.

The same can be said of those who criticized Hendershot. They disbelieved his story because they had not seen him cross the river or perform his heroic deeds. In fact, they had not seen him at all. During the 1891 debate, most who crossed in the boats could not recall any drummer boy among them.

Only one man claimed to have seen Hendershot on the day in question — the Reverend George Taylor. How did he remember that day? Hendershot had frequently strayed from his camp during the previous 10 days, Taylor recalled, but December 11, 1862, was different. Stimulated by the occasion and the excitement, Robert had wandered much farther afield.

Taylor, alarmed by Hendershot’s prolonged absence in the midst of battle, went to find him and came upon Hendershot coming back across a pontoon bridge. ‘I met him with a bundle of clothes under his arm,’ Taylor wrote. The story Hendershot then told Taylor was in many ways the same as the one the drummer would continue to tell for years. He told Taylor he had crossed the river by clinging to the stern of a boat, and that with others he had gone into deserted houses. He claimed to have set fire to a building, and that he had found a Rebel soldier hiding in a cellar ‘to escape being forced back to the confederate camp.’ The deserter asked Hendershot for help. ‘So carrying his gun he assisted him and gave him up to our men.’

In another building, Taylor wrote, Hendershot said he found ‘a beautiful clock’ and started to bring it over to me.’ Startled by a shell bursting nearby, Hendershot dropped it and it broke into pieces.

Taylor remembered, ‘In all he told he did not seem [conscious] that he had done any very meritorious act, nor was there in his manner the least element apparent of anything that is necessary to constitute a hero.’ Hendershot gave his account ‘within the hearing of a number of persons, among them representatives of the press,’ Taylor recounted. ‘I have no doubt but that either from a misunderstanding of his statement, or designedly for the sake of making a sensation, the whole story originated.’

Help HistoryNet by bookmarking to