Amory, Charles Bean

About the author

Charles Bean Amory (born in 1841) was an American soldier and chronicler affiliated with the Union cause during the Civil War, best remembered for his involvement in documenting the men and experiences of the 24th Regiment, Massachusetts Volunteers. Unlike prominent military historians whose narratives encompassed broad theaters of war, Amory’s work zeroed in on a microcosm of regimental life, forging a detailed portrait of community ties, personal sacrifice, and the complex interplay of loyalty on the battlefield. His focus on Company I exemplifies the tradition of local regimental histories produced in the postbellum era—publications that strove to honor the memory of comrades and offer genealogical or historical references to families.

In the Roster of Company I, 24th Regiment, Massachusetts Volunteers, Amory methodically listed names, ranks, enlistment dates, and notable service incidents for the men under Company I. While the volume contained essential facts—such as promotions, medical discharges, and casualties—what set his roster apart was the interspersed anecdotes and glimpses of personality. Amory’s records sometimes included mention of a soldier’s civilian occupation, reasons for enlistment, or noteworthy acts during campaigns like those waged in North Carolina. By personalizing the dry muster details, he constructed a tableau of ordinary citizens turned soldiers, each molded by the era’s defining conflict.

Amory’s impetus for compiling the roster likely stemmed from a deep sense of camaraderie and the realization that, without careful stewardship, the precise memory of who served and how they contributed could vanish. In an America reeling from the war’s vast scope, local and regimental histories became crucial for shaping communal memory. Veterans returning to small towns needed tangible markers of shared sacrifice, and these rosters provided a pivot for reunions and oratorical events commemorating unit pride. Historians, genealogists, and relatives found them equally invaluable for reconstructing individual service records—particularly important before the widespread archiving of military documents.

Though Amory’s authorship did not extend to grand strategic analysis, his enumerations and anecdotes form part of the mosaic that makes Civil War historiography so richly layered. Modern researchers can cross-reference the Roster of Company I with pension records, diaries, and official reports, thus gleaning a robust understanding of the 24th Massachusetts’s composition and the men’s postwar fates. Meanwhile, the roster’s survival attests to how grassroots documentation played a major role in shaping national consciousness around the war—ensuring even small units’ legacies were enshrined alongside the famous battles and generals. Such private or semi-private historical efforts complement high-level narratives, weaving the human element back into accounts of America’s grueling path through internal conflict.