Cawley, Marianne; South Carolina Room Manager. "The German Community of Colonial Charleston", (Charleston County Public Library, no date.)
Ervin, Sara Sullivan. South Carolinians in the Revolution: With Service Records and Miscellaneous Records, (Baltimore, MD: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 1965.)
Hendrix, Ge Lee Corley and Morn McKoy Lindsey, compilers. The Jury Lists of South Carolina: 1778-1779, (Baltimore, MD: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 1980.)
Lewis, James A. Neptune's Militia: The Frigate South Carolina during the American Revolution, (Kent, OH: The Kent State University Press, 1999.)
Moss, Bobby Gilmer. Roster of South Carolina Patriots in the American Revolution, (Baltimore, MD: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 1983.)
Revill, Janie, copier. Copy of the Original Index Book: Showing the Revolutionary Claims Filed in South Carolina Between August 20, 1783 and August 31, 1786, (Baltimore, MD: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 1969.)
Romen, Rachel. "Revolutionary War: The German Fusiliers", (www.oocities.org, posted - August 10, 1999.)
Rosengarten, Joseph George. The German Soldier in the Wars of the United States, (Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippincott Company, 1886.)
Salley, A.S., Jr. Stub Entries to Indents: Issued in Payment of Claims Against South Carolina Growing Out of the Revolution, Books Y-Z, (Columbia, SC: The Historical Commission of South Carolina, 1927.)
Trinkley, Michael, Natalie Adams and Debi Hacker. "The Property Nobody Wanted: Archaeological and Historical Investigations at Fort Johnson, S.C., Research Series 43", (Columbia, SC: Chicora Foundation, Inc., June 1994.)
The immediately previous post, entitled "'Michael Kalteisen - Gillon's Captain of Marines', Pt. II: Pre-revolutionary and Post-revolutionary Activities and Contributions of Michael Kalteisen" and posted on "03/23/2018" addresses the activities and contributions of Michael Kalteisen in the 18th century society of Charleston, SC both prior to and following the American Revolution. He was a positive presence in the society of his adopted hometown and helped create and perpetuate the German Friendly Society which is not only still in existence to this day but, continues to revere him as their founder. His business interests, though their nature is obscured by the passage of time, were successful and caused him the prosper and rise in the affluent society of Charleston, SC. But, as time proceeded onward and the "winds of war" began to blow upon the American colonies, Michael Kalteisen rose to that challenge and became a martial personality with which to be reckoned within the colony of South Carolina.
Moss's work, Roster of South Carolina Patriots in the American Revolution, page 519, provides an excellent chronological overview of Michael Kalteisen's military services during the American Revolution. The entry for Michael Kalteisen, which is cited on this page, reads as follows:
"He served as a lieutenant in the German Fusiliers of Charleston during 1775 before resigning to become Wagon Master General of the Provincial Army of South Carolina. At some time, he was Captain of Marines aboard the frigate South Carolina.
Council of Safety, December 2, 1775; Yearbook, 1885; A.A.404; A.A.4154A; Y822; Z377."
The above cited information, coupled with the knowledge that Michael Kalteisen became the Commandant of Fort Johnson, located on James Island, South Carolina, at some point prior to his death in 1807, forms a sequential analysis of the military life and contributions of Michael Kalteisen. It seems that from the very beginning of the American Revolution, Michael Kalteisen was involved on the patriot's side of the conflict and served there heroically.
According to Romen's article, "Revolutionary War: The German Fusiliers", page 2, at the outset of the American Revolution, "...the German Fusiliers, of Charleston, South Carolina, was organized in the year 1775.". Again according to the same article, same page, the genesis of this militia unit is found in a resolution adopted and published on January 17, 1775 and is as follows:
"'Resolved, that it be recommended by this Congress to all the inhabitants of this colony that they be diligently attentive in learning the use of arms, and that their officers be requested to train and exercise them at least once a fortnight.'
Peter Timothy, Secretary"
The German Fusiliers of Charleston SC were one of those militia groups the idea of which formed in the days preceding the actual outbreak of war with Great Britain. According to Romen's article, "Revolutionary War: The German Fusiliers", page 2:
"...when the stirring news of Lexington [MA] and Concord [MA] reached Charleston, it led forthwith to the organization of the Fusiliers. In May, 1775, Alexander Gillon, Peter Bouquet, Michael Kalteisen, William Livingston and Gideon Dupont 'collected together one hundred and thirty-seven Germans,' who at once organized under the name of the German Fusiliers.".
Romen's article, "Revolutionary War: The German Fusiliers", pages 2-3, contain the original roll of the German Fusiliers Company as organized under the leadership of the above referenced men. Indeed, the vast majority of the cietd name son that roster do appear to be German in origin or to be Anglicized names of German settlers. Many of these same names of these enlisted soldiers also appear on the membership roll of the German Friendly Society. Thus, there was most likely already in existence a mutual bond of respect and recognized established authority among the membership of the German Fusiliers.
(Note: the writer of this blog has cross referenced these names on the original roster of the German Fusiliers with the website, "Southern Campaign American Revolution Pension Statements & Rosters". In doing so, he has located five members of the company who filed pension applications after the conclusion of the American Revolution. These individuals are as follows:
Christian Belser W21651
Daniel Cobia W21233
Nicholas Cobia W22843
Adam Gitsinger (Goetzinger) W8880
Jacob Sass S21956
The "W" designation for the first four of these pension applications indicates that it was the widow of the veteran of the American Revolution who applied for the pension application after his death and received it. The final pension application, that of Jacob Sass, is marked by an "S" which indicates that the actual veteran of the American Revolution applied for and received the pension.
Of the widows who applied for their husband's rightful pensions, only one of their applications does not mention the German Fusiliers as the military company of which their husbands were a part. This is the pension application of Daniel Cobia's widow, Margaret B. Gruber. who had remarried in the meantime. Obviously, these men were proud to have served in the German Fusiliers and most have frequently spoken of it during the subsequent lives for their spouses to remember this fact after their deaths.)
According to Rosengarten's work, The German Soldier in the Wars of America, page 33, offers slightly different information concerning the same events. The following information is recorded concerning the actual formation of the German Fusiliers:
"On the 12th of July, 1775, he [Michael Kalteisen] set on foot the plan of a German military organization, which under the name of the German Fusiliers, by 1776, counted over a hundred Germans in its ranks. Its captain was Alexander Gillon, first lieutenant Peter Bouquet (brother of the general of that name), second lieutenant [Michael] Kalteisen, ensign Gideon Dupont. From the day of their organization they proved themselves true and ardent patriots.".
Romen's work, "Revolutionary War: The German Fusiliers", page 2, indicates that the German Fusiliers were founded in May 1775, right after the news of the battles of Lexington and Concord had arrived in Charleston, SC. But, Rosengarten's work, The German Soldier in the Wars of United States, page 33, states that that exact date for the formation of the German Fusiliers was July 12, 1775, almost two months after the battles of Lexington and Concord had occurred. Neither of these works are footnoted, so we have no way of knowing the veracity of the sources utilized by either of these works or if they even used verified sources at all. At the conclusion of Romen's article there does exist a very brief statement indicating that the information included in the article was "...copied from the Charleston Year Book, 1885, [by] H.H. Cawley, Savannah, Ga....".
Also, these two sources differ concerning the number of mustered members of the German Fusiliers company. According to Romen's work, the company immediately had a complement of "...one hundred and thirty-seven Germans..." who were organized as the German Fusiliers. Yet, according to Rosengarten's work, the German Fusiliers "...by 1776, counted over a hundred Germans in its ranks...". Now, it is possible that the original membership of the German Fusiliers had dropped from one hundred and thirty-seven in May 1775 to around one hundred by "...1776...". due to any number of personal or military factors. But, the discrepancy is slight, as it exists in records of the history of this specific militia unit.
The German Fusiliers took part in the disastrous expedition against Port Royal in early 1779 and the equally disastrous assault on the Spring Hill Redoubt at Savannah, GA on October 9, 1779, in which they lost one of their lieutenants as well as a significant portion of their enlisted personnel who were present at the attack. The final military appearance of the German Fusiliers during the American Revolution was at the British capture of Charleston, SC on May 12, 1780 when they were surrendered along with almost the entire Continental line of the southern colonies. This was the largest single capture of patriot troops during the American Revolution and constituted a total prisoner-of-war count of over 3300 troops, which meant that no organized American army existed in the southern colonies after the capture of Charleston, SC.
(Note: An unusual story concerning the German Fusiliers developed and has been passed down to this date as a result of the capture of Charleston, SC on May 12, 1780. This story is related in Romen's article, "Revolutionary War: The German Fusiliers", page 6, and appears under the heading "A Revolutionary Relic". and is as follows:
"Soon after these events, [the disastrous assault in Savannah, GA] 1780, Charleston feel into the hands of the British, and the "Continental" Fusiliers, not being in good order with the Royal Army, were compelled to disband. In accordance with the terms of the surrender, the company gave up the one hundred superior muskets which had been presented to them by the Provincial Government. The arms were deposited in the magazine at the southwest corner of Magazine and Market Streets, which was subsequently destroyed by an explosion of gunpowder, together with all the muskets, except one, which was saved in the following manner:
Mr. John Horlbeck, one of the privates, an original member of the company, dropped his gun between the wainscoting of his house and the wall, on the north side of Horlbeck's Alley, being in the western tenements of buildings destroyed in the fire of 1861, and carried another musket and surrendered that to the British military authorities. Mr. Horlbeck had carried this gun in the siege of Savannah, and did not relish giving it up. So 'he hid it', as has been related, and it has been preserved in the family ever since.".
This same story, but, with fewer details, is also related in Marianne Cawley's article, "The German Community of Colonial Charleston", page 21. Further research has indicated that this story is much older than the two sources cited above and in its original form extends at least back to the early 1920s and, possibly, quite further back in time. According to Leiding's work, Historic Houses of South Carolina, (Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippincott Company, 1921), pages 180-181, the rectition of this singular incident is provided by a "John A. Moroso" and is as follows:
"'Mr. John Horlbeck, one of the privates in the original Fusiliers, who did such valiant service for America and Charleston during the Revolutionary War, particularly at the siege of Savannah, when the corp after heroic action reached home (under the command of Lieuts. Strobel and Sass) sadly diminished'. Soon after these events, 1780, Charleston fell into the hands of the British. The Continental Fusiliers were compelled to disband and relinquish one hundred superior muskets which had been presented to them by the British officers in control. Mr. Horlbeck had carried his gun in the siege of Savannah and did not relish giving it up, so he hid it by dropping it between the wainscoting of his home and the wall. He then surrendered another gun and this historic fusee has been in possession of the Horlbeck family ever since.".
A colorful and interesting family story, to say the least, and informing upon the history of the German Fusiliers, which Michael Kalteisen was partially instrumental in forming at the beginning of the American Revolution. Obviously, the preceding/latter story was drawn from this earlier account of the incident but, a few pieces of elaboration are excluded in the earlier form of this narrative. There is no verification for the origin point of these latter elaborations.)
According to Moss's work, Roster of South Carolina Patriots, page 519, Michael Kalteisen resigned from the German Fusiliers at some point in 1775 in order to become the Wagon Master General of the Provincial Army of South Carolina. There exists two citations for Michael Kalteisen in Ervin's work, South Carolinians in the Revolution. Both of these citations address Michael Kalteisen's time and duty as the Wagon Master General of the Provincial Army of South Carolina. His name would appear to be recorded on two separate lists but, in reality, these two lists have identical headings and the second seems to be a continuation of the first list. The name is abbreviated but a reference back to the beginning of the list on page 55 of the above referenced work gives the full title of the list of officers as "The Names, As Far As Can Be Ascertained of the Officers Who Served in the South Carolina Regiments on the Continental Establishment" and was prepared by Wilmot G. DeSaussure and "...published by the order of the General Assembly, 1886...". This list gives the first and last name of the officer, his rank and regiment or organization in which he served, as well as any recorded comments associated with his name. Michael Kalteisen first appears on page 59 with the rank and organization citation being "Captain, Wagon Master General". His second citation appears several pages further on in the text on page 71 and records this same information along with the source being "Journal of Council of Safety, December 2, 1775.".
The position of "Wagon Master General" does not carry a specific rank in itself but, rather a distinct set of responsibilities and duties attendant with the position. A "Wagon Master General" can possess any officer rank and does not necessarily have to be a "General" to hold the position. His duties include, but are not limited to, planning routes for the transportation of materials and foodstuffs for the army, care of the horses utilized by the wagons, making sure his wagoneers (sometimes referred to as "carters") are taken care of and properly paid for their services, arrange for the transporting of wagons and stock animals across difficult terrain or rivers, and numerous other tasks associated with the movement of wagons and supplies for the army. Officials in the government of the colony of South Carolina must have confidence in Michael Kalteisen to place him in such an important position as that of Wagon Master General for the entire colony of South Carolina. But, in the previous post immediately preceding this post, Michael Kalteisen's business possibly involved the transporting of goods from Charleston, SC into the interior of the colony. If this was indeed the particular type of business that in which Michael Kalteisen was involved, then it would have uniquely prepared him to take on the responsibilities and tasks of being Wagon Master General of the Provincial Army of South Carolina. Thus, his rather low officer's rank of captain instead of his being of a higher rank such as colonel or brigadier-general.
This brief amount of information is all the concrete evidence the writer of this blog has been able to locate concerning Michael Kalteisen's service as the Wagon Master of the Provincial Army of South Carolina. Some type of scandal, serious error, or infraction in the performance of his duties would have merited notation and comment in the official records of the Provincial Army of South Carolina. But, on this count the record is silent. The writer of this blog feels that the silence of the sources on the performance of Michael Kalteisen may well indicate that he performed well and without negative consequence in his role as Wagon Master of the Provincial Army of South Carolina.
In the same manner as in resigning from the German Fusiliers in order to become the WagonMaster of the Provincial Army of South Carolina, we have very little concrete information concerning Michael Kalteisen's resignation as Wagon Master of the Provincial Army of South Carolina and accepting the position of Captain of Marines on board the frigate South Carolina. We have a relatively firm date for his departure from the American mainland for France as a part of the delegation bound for the courts of Europe and, in particular, for the royal court of France. According to Lewis's work, Neptune's Militia, pages 15-17:
"While armed privateers and spur-of-the-moment arrangements might handle many maritime threats, only large warships permanently stationed in Charleston, could provide the comprehensive security that South Carolina's trade and population required.... With rank of commodore, Alexander Gillon headed the South Carolina delegation.... There was also a cadre of lesser officers, midshipmen, and aides -- just how many is unclear, but Gillon mentioned an entourage of thirteen men shortly after arrival in Europe.... The delegation did not depart for France together or simultaneously.... The bulk of the delegation left in a tiny flotilla of three commercial ships in August 1778, making a curious but important stop on the way. Gillon's entourage paid a visit to Havana.".
The endnote associated with this specific set of pages in Lewis's work, Neptune's Militia, appears on page 177, note 13, of the above referenced work and is cited as follows:
"It is difficult at this juncture to be certain who these thirteen were. However, the following names are associated with Gillon early in France:..."
Michael Kalteisen's name appears in this list of the thirteen men who early on accompanied Commodore Alexander Gillon in France. The next citation pertinent to this point is as follows:
"Many of these went on to serve on the South Carolina, while some soon returned home. The first eleven appear in the Commodore's Ledger during a stop in Havana. The rest may have been part of this group or may have appeared in France shortly after Gillon's arrival there.".
Michael Kalteisen's name is once again within the first eleven who appeared in the ledger of the Commodore concerning a stop in Havana, Cuba. But, there is no indication which direction to frigate South Carolina would have been travelling at that point in her voyage - either prior to crossing the Atlantic Ocean towards Europe to seek out the frigate or on the return voyage to America when the Commodore and the frigate South Carolina aided the Spanish in capturing New Providence, Bahamas in May 1782. The implication by association is that it is the initial voyage across the Atlantic Ocean towards Europe and France that is being spoken of here.
Michael Kalteisen was connected with the frigate South Carolina as her "Captain of Marines" from the initial formulation of the plans of the colony of South Carolina to obtain her for the express purpose of the defence of the colony's home waters. He would remain so until sent towards Charleston, SC, along with John Mayrant, by Commodore Alexander Gillon to recruit sailors and marines in an effort to complement the crew roster of the patriot frigate. These instructions and the circumstances surrounding the departure of these two officers are addressed in the "Pension Application of John Mayrant S32390", page 2:
"Thence they sailed to Philadelphia, refitted there and Commodore Gillon dropped down to New Castle. That at this time it was expected daily that Charleston would be evacuated by the British, and Commodore Gillon sent the deponent [John Mayrant] and Capt. Kalteisen [Michael Kalteissen] to Philadelphia supplied with money to buy a carriage & horses and proceed to Charleston, and it evacuated [14 December 1782], to open a rendezvous for marines and seamen of whom he wanted about 100. That they reached Charleston soon after the evacuation. That shortly after their arrival they learnt that the Frigate South Carolina in attempting to get to sea had been captured by three British frigates.".
The distance between Philadelphia, PA and Charleston, SC is right at 670 miles. There are many, many factors that can negatively impact road travel, not the least of which are road conditions and adverse weather situations. But, being that the two officers had bought their own "...carriage & horse...", they could have ostensibly made better mileage in a day. So, for arguments sake, the pair could have covered the distance between these two colonial cities in about ten to twelve days. If they arrived "...soon after the evacuation...", they must have left Philadelphia, PA at some point around or shortly after December 1, 1782. The frigate South Carolina was captured off the Capes of the Delaware on December 21, 1782. Michael Kalteisen and John Mayrant, the two officers on detached duty from the patriot frigate, would have probably received the news of the capture of the frigate South Carolina via merchant shipping entering the harbor. If they received the news of the capture "...shortly after their arrival..." in Charleston, SC, then they probably received the news just prior to or after New Year's Day, 1783.
After the capture of the frigate South Carolina, John Mayrant and Michael Kalteisen would have not had a patriot ship-of-war to which to return and would have applied to the governmental authorities within the city for orders. According to "Pension Application of John Mayrant S32390", the account continues as such:
"That the deponent was then ordered by Commodore Gillon to remain in Charleston, and by his direction and that of Governor Guerard [Benjamin Guerard, Governor February 4, 1783 - February 11, 1785] to receive prisoners, make exchanges &c. That he continued there under the orders of Commodore Gillon untill the peace in 1783, where by an act of the Legislature of South Carolina the naval force was discharged.".
It is to be assumed that Michael Kalteisen continued under the same orders as John Mayrant. After all, their assignment was "...to open a rendezvous for marines and seamen...", it made perfect sense for Commodore Alexander Gillon to send one naval officer, 3rd Lieutenant John Mayrant, and one marine officer, Captain of Marines Michael Kalteisen, to do the proper recruiting of the respective personnel. Thus, he would have most likely received the same orders and functioned in much the same manner as John Mayrant. So, the end of hostilities with Great Britain in 1783 would have found Michael Kalteisen back in his adopted homeland of South Carolina and his beloved city of Charleston.
When Michael Kalteisen filed his claim against the state of South Carolina at the cessation of hostilities in 1783, he appears to have only filed for his services on board the frigate South Carolina and not for his services rendered in the German Fusiliers nor as Wagon Master General of the Provincial Army of South Carolina. It is possible that he filed for those separately and received them as such. According to Salley's work, Stub Entries to Indents, Book Y, page 124, the stub entry for Captain of Marines Michael Kalteisen appears but, is prefaced by a rather unusual "Note". This "Note" and the following stub entry asre as follows:
"Note. Since issuing this Indent, to wit the 14 November 1787. The Commissioners &c. by Indorsement on the audited account, have agreed to allow the Grantee Michael Kalteisen Interest from 1 April 1783. see that account No--. 822, Book Y --
No. 822, Lib. Y:
Issued December 31, 1785 to Mr. Michael Kalteisen for 623,,8 pounds Sterling pay due him as Captain of marines on Board the Ship South Carolina. as per the Resolve of the senate & House of Representatives and accounts audited --
Principal: 623..8 pounds
Interest: 43p/12s/9d
see No--. 377 Book Z --
...there to be noticed".
(Note: the writer of this blog has read numerous stub entries and pension applications in the course of this overall blog. Yet, this is the first time that the writer has ever experienced a special "Note" such as the one preceding the stub entry of Captain of Marines Michael Kalteisen immediately above. This "Note" states to all reading it that the government of the state of South Carolina have agreed to "allow" Michael Kalteisen to draw interest for a period of four and one-half years prior to the actual issuing date of this indent which was November 14, 1787. No reason is indicated for this decision taken by "...The Commiss: &c..." on the above date.)
A reference to the latter stub entry, Z377, finds a nearly verbatim entry, except for the specific date of its actual issuance to Captain of Marines Michael Kalteisen:
"No. 377, Lib. Z (Included in No. 822 Lib. Y)
Issued November 14, 1787 to Mr. Michael Kalteisen 623..8/ pounds sterling, pay due him as Captain of Marines on board the ship South Carolina as per Resolve of the senate & House of Representatives, & account audited
,,here to be noticed.
Interest 623..8.. -- [pounds]"
According to Revill's work, Copy of the Original Index Book, page 386, Michael Kalteisen received his claim against the state of South Carolina in Return 96. Again according to this same work, page 182, Michael Kalteisen evidently filed two claims against the state of South Carolina - one included in Return 5 and another in Return 96. According to the same source, pages 378-379, Return 5 was sent to the legislative council on February 24, 1784 while Return 96 was sent to the same council on December 31, 1785. This may be the reason for the two, almost identical stub entries associated with Captain of Marines Michael Kalteisen.
The period following the cessation of hostilities between Great Britain and America is ill-defined as to the role of Michael Kalteisen in South Carolinian society. According to Cawley's article, "The German Community of Colonial Charleston", page 18, Michael Kalteisen was appointed by the federal government as a captain of the First Artillery of Engineers in 1794. There appears to have been no organization by that name, which may simply be a confusion of two separate units with similar titles that operated in the Charleston area. Rosengarten's work, The German Soldier in the Wars of the United States, page 32, indicates that in 1805-1806 Michael Kalteisen was indeed a captain of Artillery on their establishment. It is the opinion of the writer of this blog that Michael Kalteisen was most probably a Captain of Artillery with a possible special emphasis on engineering skills, which Michael Kalteisen may have acquired in his voyages with Commodore Alexander Gillon.
The final military experience of Michael Kalteisen was inexorably linked to Fort Johnson, located at Windmill Point on James Island across the bay from the city of Charleston, SC. According to Cawley's article, "The German Community of Colonial Charleston", page 18, Michael Kaltiesen was appointed as commander of Fort Johnson in 1802. He was still in that position as commanding officer when he died in 1807 as noted on his headstone/obelisk in Bethany Cemetery in Charleston, SC. As noted in Irish's entry for "Find a Grave Memorial: Michael Kalteisen (1729-1807)", page 4, the facing panel of the black granite headstone/obelisk states that:
"Died at Fort Johnson
Charleston Harbor, S.C.
as its Commandant,
November 3, 1807"
The construction of Fort Johnson, named after the colonial governor of the Carolinas from 1703-1709, Sir Nathaniel Johnson, was begun in 1709. But, soon the actual, physical fort began its strange but, inexorable struggle against the most deadly of all elements - the forces of nature itself. The impact of natural forces did not manifest itself immediately but, soon enough after the initial construction of the fort this ever-marching force did begin to make itself known at the fort. According to Trinkley, Adams, and Hacker's article, "The Property Nobody Wanted", page 31:
"The history of the fort during the first half of the eighteenth century was relatively peaceful. A May 7, 1709 statute established a guard of a Captain, Lieutenant, and 12 men. A road was ordered cleared and built from Fort Johnson to 'causey leading to Wappoo Bridge' in 1719. This is likely the same road shown on the Charleston Harbor inset of Mouzon's 1776 An Accurate Map of North and South Carolina. By 1723 the guard was being encouraged to 'clear, fence, plant provisions, make gardens and other improvements to their own proper use', likely to encourage them to stay close to the fort and also to reduce the cost of upkeep.".
The very next paragraph of the article advances the time frame of the fort and makes first reference to the never-ending struggle against the natural forces that assailed Fort Johnson from time to time:
"On June 12, 1724 the Commons House received a report on the condition of Fort Johnson. They found the carriages, arms, and ammunition all in good order, although the fort itself was showing considerable signs of deterioration.".
According to the same article, page 32, the following year the committee for reviewing the condition of the fort had found little positive change stating that the "...planks of the Embrazier on the battery is intirely gone & [a] great part of the mudd wall washed away & that the Com'ittee are of the opinion [a] great part of the remainder will likewise be carried off...".
Further down on the same page, we find the statement that "...this plea for repairs was taken more seriously and 634.2.0 pounds Sterling were appropriated for at least some of the needed repairs although curiously, this seems to have had little effect...". In 1737 again the fort was reported to be "...always in poor condition...".
According to the same article, page 35, an inventory was taken at one point between 1736 and 1737 that suggested "...that life was spartan at Fort Johnson, with relatively few of the items expected for even a modest size plantation -- and certainly not adequate equipment to maintain the fort's earthworks.".
The next paragraph on the same page as the last citation clearly states that "...a 1740 appraisal of Fort Johnson found that the 'Captain's House is not habitable' and a carpenter advised it was not even worth repairing -- the culmination of at least 16 years of neglect.".
Yet, greater, as well as unpredictable, forces of nature intervened from time to time and had a detrimental impact on Fort Johnson as indicated on page 37 of the same article:
"The French and Indian War, which began in 1754 and which was officially declared tow years later, caught South Carolina off guard. The hurricane of September 15, 1752 was perhaps the worst South Carolina had survived since its founding. The damage to low lying structures was extensive and Governor James Glen noted that the 'shadow' fortifications as he called them, were wrecked.".
On page 39 of the same article it is records that even during the inner war period of 1763 to 1775, there were reports of continued deterioration with the inclusion that "...in 1764 cracks appeared in the seaward face of the old fort, some extending down to the foundation.". The article described the condition of the fort as being in a "...rapidly deteriorating condition...".
According to other sources, during the American Revolution, both sides -- patriot and Crown -- alternately occupied the fort and accounts seem to indicate that the fort was destroyed by retreating patriot forces. According to the article, page 43, Sir Henry Clinton described the fort as "destroyed" though "...whether by military order or by storms is not known...".
Again according to the same article, page 43, after the British evacuation of Charleston, SC on December 14, 1782 "...attention was again turned to the defence of the harbor.... in 1787 plans were submitted by Col. John Christian Senf, the Engineer for the State of South Carolina, for an enclosed battery of eight guns, near the location of the old fort, which is shown on the drawing [as] dashed lines, suggesting an advanced state of disrepair.".
When George Washington toured South Carolina in 1791 he visited the site of Fort Johnson and described the fort as "...quite fallen...". A travel diary dating back to that specific time period described the fort as such:
"The irregular works, of no particular strength or compass, are run up of oyster shells and lime. They were in part blasted by the Americans themselves when they abandoned this fort in 1779, and storms and waves have done the rest.".
Further references state that another substantial hurricane was experienced by the South Carolina coastline in October 1800 accompanied again by widespread destruction of low lying structures. According to the same article, page 44:
"...an April 1807 report by Lieutenant Colonel Jonathan Williams reported that ,' nothing has been said as to the present state of Fort Johnson, as the subscriber does not perceive that any part of the ruins can be brought into use unless it be by forming a mass in front to prevent the future depredation of the sea.".
The last applicable pronouncement being made concerning the deplorable state of Fort Johnson in the early 1800s is final in its tone and states that:
"Fort Johnson is little better than a battery in ruins the gale of 1813 having nearly destroyed it. Lieutenant Gadsden recommended the abandonment of the site and the construction of a new work of a 12 gun battery a short distance in the rear of it.".
Once again according to the Trinkley, Adams, and Hacker article, "The Property Nobody Wanted", page 47, indicates that both a survey conducted in 1821 and an 1833 map of the fort show the fortification as being a ruined battery.
From the June 12, 1724 report to the Common's House concerning the fort at Windmill Point until the 1833 mapping expedition, Fort Johnson had endured the forces of nature, hurricanes, encroachment of wave actions, and marked human neglect. For over a hundred years, the fort had stood the test of time and was slowly and inexorably losing ground and falling into ruins. As the above collection of citations from different time periods are meant to indicate, these conditions had persisted all throughout the existence of the fort.
The period of Michael Kalteisen's association with Fort Johnson is relatively brief in comparison to the overall period of steady decay and decline of Fort Johnson. According to Cawley's article, "The German Community of Colonial Charleston", page 18, Michael Kalteisen became the Commandant of Fort Johnson in 1802 and continued as such until his death on November 3, 1807. Evidently, when President George Washington visited South Carolina in 1791, he was escorted by Captain Michael Kalteisen for at least a portion of the tour. It is of course possible that Michael Kalteisen accompanied the President through the works at Fort Johnson. There is the implication that Michael Kalteisen actually died at Fort Johnson as indicated by the inscription on his headstone/obelisk. Yet, the writer of this blog has encountered no indications in any of the sources that touch upon exactly what condition Michael Kalteisen had contracted that caused his death in November 1807. He was seventy-eight years old at the time.
The silence of these sources regarding the marital status of Michael Kalteisen seem to indicate that he never married nor fathered children in his natural lifetime.