>Historians have not only underestimated the sheer number of underage soldiers who fought for the Union. As a historian by trade myself, that just makes me sad

>Historians have not only underestimated the sheer number of underage soldiers who fought for the Union. As a historian by trade myself, that just makes me sad for the profession. The whole underage volunteerism to fight has been a long-standing tradition, (heck, my grandfather was 16 when he enlisted to fight in WWII). Whole article reeks of "think of the childrens" modern sensebilities recontextualizing of historical facts. But I suppose the US historians have their own issues grappling with the aftermath of their civil war.