What Morning Reports Can’t Tell You: Where to Look Next-Unit Histories and After Action Reports

Image created by ChatGPT 5.2 

Note: While this post focuses on U.S. Army records based on my research, similar types of records are available for other branches of service, including the Navy, Marine Corps, and Army Air Forces. The names of the records and where they are located may differ, but the overall research approach is often very similar.

I have been spending a great deal of time with the morning reports for my father in Company G, 393rd Infantry Regiment. Morning reports are one of the most valuable records available for World War II research. They provide a daily snapshot of a soldier’s status, tracking assignments, transfers, hospitalizations, and returns to duty.

But as useful as they are, morning reports have their limits.

If you have spent time working with them, you have probably noticed that what is not there can be just as important as what is. It was that realization that pushed me to take the next step in my research and start searching for the records that could fill in those missing pieces of my father’s story.

What Morning Reports Don’t Tell You

Morning reports are administrative records held by the National Archives and Records Administration. They were not created to tell a story. Because of that, they often leave out the very details researchers are hoping to find.

They typically do not include:

• Detailed accounts of combat
• Personal experiences or narratives
• Exact locations beyond general references
• The circumstances surrounding wounds or injuries
• The broader actions of the unit

In my own research on my father, Bruce Glover, I found morning report entries noting his status changes from August 1943 to February 1946, but this was not the full story of his World War II service. I could see when something happened, but not what happened. The reports documented movement and condition, but they did not explain the events unfolding around him.

That gap is where the next phase of research begins.

Because World War II military history research is so vast, I plan to break where to look next into sections in upcoming posts. This first section focuses on the types of records that help fill in those gaps, beginning with unit histories and then moving into After Action Reports.

Unit Histories

Unit histories provide the operational context that morning reports lack. They describe what the unit was doing, where they were located, and what they experienced over time.

While morning reports tell you when something happened to a soldier, unit histories begin to explain what was happening around them.

Unit histories are part of a specific record series at the National Archives titled Unit Histories, 1943–1967, located in Record Group 339, Records of U.S. Army Operational, Tactical, and Support Organizations (World War II and Thereafter). These records were created by the Department of Defense, Department of the Army, within the Adjutant General’s Office, Administrative Services Division, Departmental Records Branch.

This series contains compiled histories for Army units, often summarizing their movements, locations, and activities over time. Some include narratives, maps, and occasional photographs, depending on the unit and the time period.

After Action Reports

After Action Reports provide some of the most detailed accounts available for understanding what a unit experienced during specific operations.

These reports were created after combat actions and were intended to document what happened, how the operation unfolded, and what could be learned from it. Unlike morning reports, which focus on personnel status, After Action Reports focus on the mission itself.

They often include:

• Narrative summaries of combat operations
• Objectives and whether they were achieved
• Enemy activity and resistance encountered
• Casualty figures and equipment losses
• Lessons learned and recommendations

In some cases, these reports include maps, overlays, or supporting documents that help illustrate troop movements and positions during an engagement.

For researchers, After Action Reports can be especially valuable when trying to understand the circumstances surrounding events noted in morning reports, such as wounds, transfers, or sudden changes in status. They help answer the question that morning reports leave behind: what was happening at that moment?

After Action Reports are also held at the National Archives, most often in Record Group 407, Records of the Adjutant General’s Office, 1917–. For World War II research, they are commonly found in the series known as “World War II Operations Reports.” Some of these records have been digitized and can be searched in the National Archives Catalog, while others must be accessed in person at the National Archives in College Park, Maryland.

Because they are organized by unit, knowing your soldier’s division, regiment, or battalion is essential when searching for them. For my father’s service in Company G, 393rd Infantry Regiment, these reports offer the opportunity to better understand the combat operations his unit was involved in during the periods reflected in his morning reports.

Together, Unit Histories and After Action Reports provide a clearer picture of a unit’s wartime experience. When combined with the daily detail of morning reports, they allow researchers to move beyond dates and status changes and begin to reconstruct the lived experience of the soldiers themselves.

In the next post, I will look at organizational records at the National Archives and how they can further expand this research.

AI Disclosure

This post was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) tools.

While the research, interpretation, and writing reflect my own work, ChatGPT 5.2 was used to support the process in the following ways: suggesting titles, assisting with grammar, spelling, and proofreading, and helping create a visual research path image to illustrate the progression of sources.

Five Days in December, Part 2: Understanding My Father's Experience at Elsenborn

After sharing the story of those five days in December 1944, I found myself returning to the record again, this time with a different perspective.

Morning reports were never meant to tell a story. They are brief, structured, and filled with abbreviations that can feel impersonal at first glance. Lines of text. Short phrases. Numbers and codes.

But for me, they are anything but impersonal.

Within those lines is my father.

What follows is the wording from the morning reports for Company G, 393rd Infantry Regiment, dated December 19 and 20, 1944, along with a cleaned transcription and explanation of the abbreviations used.

These reports place my father, Bruce Glover, at Elsenborn during the opening days of the Battle of the Bulge. He was nineteen years old.

Nineteen.

When I read these reports, I am no longer just researching a unit. I am trying to understand what my father experienced as a young soldier, far from home, in freezing conditions, under constant fire.

MORNING REPORT 19 December 1944 Co G, 393d REGT INF 

STATION OR LOCATION Elsenborn K 902086 

RECORD OF EVENTS

13 Dec 44 to 19 Dec 44 inclusive Co departed Assembly Area at 0900 GWT Rocherath, 3 miles NE F 020089 Encountered enemy Pill Box Required mortar & small arm fire Prepared defensive position for the night Co organized an assault platoon for attack on enemy pill box Mortar & Machine Gun fire was used on pill box Co remained in defensive position & acted as Bn rear guard while Companies E F H 393d Inf Regt withdrew to high ground At 1400 GWT Co withdrew to high ground to the rear and dug in for the night

At 0700 GWT Co withdrew approximately 500 yards less 1st and 2d platoons which acted as rear guard for the Co At 0930 GWT Co made contact with 395th Inf Regt and prepared defensive positions 1 EM BC MIA Co underwent continuous barrage all night & day from enemy mortar fire & 88 MM 3 EM BC WIA Co traveled by foot approximately 4 miles & arrived Elsenborn K 902085 at midnight hours 19 Dec 44 

1 Officer BC WIA 
1 EM BI 
1 EM self-inflicted wound (NBC) 
3 EM NBC 

Understanding the Abbreviations

Morning reports rely heavily on abbreviations. Once understood, they reveal much more detail than first appears.

Co = Company
GWT = German War Time
NE = Northeast
F = Map grid coordinate reference
Bn = Battalion
Inf = Infantry
Regt = Regiment
EM = Enlisted Man
BC = Battle Casualty
MIA = Missing in Action
WIA = Wounded in Action
MM = Millimeter
& = and
1st = First
2d = Second

When I first looked at these reports, I saw what they were designed to show: movement, casualties, and position.

Now, I see something more.

I see a group of young men, including my father, moving through cold, mud, and fear. I see them encountering enemy fire, digging into frozen ground, withdrawing under pressure, and returning to defensive positions again and again.

I see exhaustion.

I see uncertainty.

I see resilience.

And I think about the man I knew. The father who lived a full life after the war. The man who never spoke in this kind of detail about these days.

It is hard to reconcile the two. The father I knew, and the nineteen-year-old soldier described in these reports.

But this is where they meet.

In these lines, so brief and technical, is a part of his life that I can now begin to understand.

The record is concise.

But what it holds is anything but.

Reference:

U.S. War Department. Technical Manual TM 12-236: Preparation of Morning Reports and Unit Rosters. Washington, D.C., 1945.

Golden Arrow Research. Guide to WWII Army Abbreviations. October 2020. https://www.goldenarrowresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Guide-to-WWII-Army-Abbreviations.pdf. Accessed 1 March 2026

Golden Arrow Research

For this research, I worked with Geoff at Golden Arrow Research, who assisted in documenting my father’s World War II military history, including locating and compiling the morning reports used in this post. His work provided the foundation that allowed me to focus on understanding and sharing my father’s experience. More information about his services can be found at https://www.goldenarrowresearch.com/

AI Disclosure

This post was researched and written by me as part of my ongoing work to understand my father’s WWII service. I used ChatGPT 5.2 to assist with title suggestions, proofreading, transcription of the morning report images, and defining abbreviations. All content has been carefully reviewed, edited, and reflects my own research and interpretation.

Five Days in December, Part 1: Finding my Father in the Battle of the Bulge

Silence in the Records, Chaos on the Ground

There are times in research when what is not written is just as important as what is.

As I worked through my father Bruce Glover’s morning reports for Company G, 393rd Infantry Regiment, I focused on five days, December 16 through December 20, 1944. These dates mark the opening of what would become known as the Battle of the Bulge.

What I found, at first glance, was almost nothing.

The entries for December 16, 17, 18, and 19 all read the same:  no change or no event.

Four days of silence in the official record.

And yet, those four days were anything but quiet.

On December 16, 1944, German forces launched a massive surprise offensive through the Ardennes, along the border of Belgium and Germany. It was a last major attempt to push back the Allied advance. Units were hit with overwhelming force, communication broke down, and confusion spread quickly across the lines.

My father was there.

In the only account he left of that moment, he wrote:

"On the morning of December 16, 1944 all hell broke loose on the border between Belgium and Germany and especially in the Ardennes where the German forces launched a huge last gasp counterattack against the allied forces. All I remember is hearing guns, mortars, and artillery shells exploding all around us. The closest I ever got to this battle which became known as the “Battle of the Bulge” was having pieces of shrapnel landing in the fox hole beside me, but miraculously did not receive a scratch. I never actually saw a German soldier, but there was confusion everywhere. Less than a quarter mile to the right of our company the Germans broke through our lines. My good buddy, Bill Fisher, was in that company and was captured and became a prisoner of war."

While the morning reports show “no change,” his words tell a completely different story.

For four days, there were no recorded changes in status. No transfers. No hospitalizations. Nothing that required administrative notation.

But those entries do not reflect the reality on the ground.

The 393rd Infantry Regiment, part of the 99th Infantry Division, was positioned near Elsenborn Ridge, a critical defensive position in the opening phase of the Battle of the Bulge. While German forces broke through in nearby areas, the stand at Elsenborn helped prevent a deeper advance.

The fighting was intense. The weather was bitterly cold. Snow, mud, and constant exposure took a toll on the men as much as the enemy did.

It is within this context that I read those four days of “no change.”

No administrative change does not mean no action. It likely means there was no time to record anything beyond the essentials. The focus was survival, holding the line, and responding to a rapidly changing situation.

Then comes December 20, 1944.

The silence breaks.

The morning report finally records a change, and it is my father’s name:

Source: U.S. War Department. Morning Reports, Company G, 393rd Infantry Regiment, 99th Infantry Division. December 1944. Records of the War Department, Record Group 64: Morning Reports, 1940–1946. National Archives and Records Administration, St. Louis, Missouri. Digital images provided by Golden Arrow Research.

Glover, Bruce D.   36560921   Pfc    746
From dy to sk LD 2d Evacuation Hosp Sta Location Unknown NBC Slight trench foot Dec 17 44 per Sect II cir 69 Hq ETOUSA RELD FROM ASGMT SSN 746

Here is an expanded transcription:

From duty to sick in line of duty to the 2nd Evacuation Hospital Station, location unknown.

Non-battle casualty. Condition: slight trench foot.

Dated December 17, 1944, per Section II, Circular 69, Headquarters, European Theater of Operations, United States Army.

Relieved from assignment, Secondary Service Number 746 (My note: Military Occupational Specialty 746, Automatic Rifleman).

In a few lines, the official record catches up to what had been building over the previous days.

His own words explain what led to that moment:

"A couple of days later our company regrouped and the medics inspected us for any injuries. They asked me to take off my boots which I did not want to do because I had a feeling if I did, I might not get them back on. When I finally removed them, my feet were swollen and discolored. That is when they sent me to the rear."

After days of cold, wet conditions, constant exposure, and little relief, his body had reached its limit.

When I place these two sources side by side, the official record and my father’s memory, a fuller story begins to emerge. One tells me what happened. The other tells me what it felt like.

Those four days of “no change” are no longer empty. They are filled with the sound of artillery, the confusion of a nearby breakthrough, the loss of a friend to capture, and the slow physical toll of cold and exposure.

My father rarely spoke about his time in World War II. Even though he later taught high school history, he did not share these experiences, as his former students told me after his death.

Years later, when he did speak of it, he told me he never really felt that he had contributed.

I think about that now as I read these records. I see where he was. I see what he endured in those first days of the Battle of the Bulge. I see how close he came to injury, and how the conditions themselves took him out of the line.

History does not always measure contribution the same way those who lived it do. To me, being there, holding the line, enduring those conditions, and surviving them is contribution enough.

For me, these five days represent more than a timeline. They show how history is recorded and how it is lived.

The morning reports give structure to the past.

My father’s words give it life.

In the next post, I will take a closer look at the unit reports from these same days and what they reveal about what Company G experienced during this time.

Golden Arrow Research

For this research, I worked with Geoff at Golden Arrow Research, who assisted in documenting my father’s World War II military history, including locating and compiling the morning reports used in this post. His work provided the foundation that allowed me to focus on understanding and sharing my father’s experience. More information about his services can be found at https://www.goldenarrowresearch.com/

AI Disclosure

This post was researched and written by me as part of my ongoing work to understand my father’s WWII service. I used ChatGPT 5.2 to assist with title suggestions, proofreading, transcription of the morning report images, and defining abbreviations. All content has been carefully reviewed, edited, and reflects my own research and interpretation.

From Foxhole to Hospital: My Father's Experience with Trench Foot in World War II

Source: U.S. Army soldiers in a snow-covered defensive position during the Battle of the Bulge, Ardennes, Belgium, winter 1944–1945. Photograph by U.S. Army Signal Corps. National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). Public domain.

Conditions like these, cold, wet, and unrelenting, led to one of the most common, yet often overlooked injuries of the war: trench foot.

My father, Bruce Glover, experienced one of those conditions firsthand during the winter of 1944 while stationed near Elsenborn, Belgium. What began as days in cold, wet foxholes turned into something much more serious, a diagnosis that would send him across three countries before he recovered: trench foot.

In his own words, he described the moment everything changed:

"A couple of days later our company regrouped and the medics inspected us for any injuries. They asked me to take off my boots which I did not want to do because I had a feeling if I did, I would never get them on again. I was right because I had contacted 'Trench Foot' which was a result of the combination of prolonged cold and wetness in which we had endured the past couple of months. We literally ate, slept, and exercised in our fox holes leaving only long enough to go to the bathroom and maybe once every couple of weeks going behind the lines and getting a shower which consisted of going inside a big barn structure where barrels of cold water were hanging from the rafters and drips of water were released as you pulled a rope hanging from the barrels.

As a result of the inspection, I was sent behind the lines to a temporary hospital in Liege, Belgium and in subsequent weeks to Paris, France and finally to Birmingham, England. My feet were terribly swollen and somewhat painful, but bearable. It took the better part of two months or more before I was finally released from the hospital. One unforgettable moment I remember was a soldier in the next bed to me had a much more severe case of trench foot than I did and developed gangrene in his leg. The doctor came by one morning and with his forceps lifted the entire big toe nail off and the patient (soldier) never felt it. He eventually had to have his lower limb amputated, I heard later."

Trench foot, also known as immersion foot, is a non-freezing injury caused by prolonged exposure to cold and wet conditions. Unlike frostbite, it does not require freezing temperatures. Soldiers standing in wet socks and boots for long periods could lose circulation in their feet, leading to swelling, numbness, pain, and in severe cases, infection or gangrene. 

As long as I can remember, my father was meticulous about keeping his feet dry. What once felt like a simple routine now connects directly to his experience with trench foot during the war.

The official records confirm what my father described. Morning reports document the moment his condition was recognized:

 "Glover Bruce D 36860891 Pfc MOS 746 From dy to ak LD 2d Evacuation Hsp Sta Location Unknown NBC Slight Trench Foot per Sec II Cir 69 HQ ETOUSA"

Just days later, he was admitted to the hospital.

Hospital Admission Record
Date: 23 December 1944
Name: Bruce D. Glover
ASN: 36860891
Grade: Pfc
Organization: 393rd Infantry
Diagnosis: Trench Foot
Condition: Moderate
Hospital: 108th U.S. General Hospital

Even more telling, 18 out of 35 men in that same admission group were diagnosed with trench foot. This was not an isolated case, but part of a larger pattern affecting soldiers in the same harsh winter conditions.

From the front lines near Elsenborn, he was moved through a chain of care: first to a temporary hospital in Liege, then to Paris, and finally to Birmingham, England. He remained hospitalized until May 8, 1945. What my dad remembered as the better part of two months was, according to the records, closer to four and a half months.

This progression reflects the larger evacuation system used during the war, moving soldiers farther from the front as they stabilized but still required care.

One of the most striking memories he carried was not his own injury, but that of another soldier. It is a reminder that trench foot could range from painful to life-altering, depending on severity.

This was just one chapter in my father’s wartime experience, but it offers a glimpse into the realities soldiers faced beyond the battlefield.

Through his words and the official records, I am able to see not just where he served, but what he endured. Trench foot was not simply a diagnosis, it was the result of weeks of exposure, resilience, and survival under harsh conditions. My father always felt that someone was looking out for him in December of 1944. He never returned to combat, as the war in Europe ended on 6 May 1945, and he entered officer training at Fontainebleau, France on 8 May 1945.

Moments like this remind me that military records and personal accounts together tell a fuller story. One gives the facts, the other gives the experience. And it is in combining the two that history becomes something we can truly understand.

Golden Arrow Research

For this research, I worked with Geoff at Golden Arrow Research, who assisted in documenting my father’s World War II military history, including locating and compiling the morning reports used in this post. His work provided the foundation that allowed me to focus on understanding and sharing my father’s experience. More information about his services can be found at https://www.goldenarrowresearch.com/

AI Disclosure

This post was researched and written by me as part of my ongoing work to understand my father’s WWII service. I used ChatGPT 5.2 to assist with title suggestions, proofreading, transcription of the morning report images, and defining abbreviations. All content has been carefully reviewed, edited, and reflects my own research and interpretation.

Tracing WWII Army Service with Morning Reports: Bruce Glover’s Story

Source: National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), St. Louis, Missouri. U.S. Army Morning Reports, 1912–1974 for Bruce David Glover, Records of the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC), St. Louis, Missouri; accessed by Golden Arrow Research. Transcribed by Brenda Leyndyke. 2026

The morning reports didn’t look like much at first. Just lines of typed entries, abbreviations, and dates, the kind of record that feels more administrative than personal. But I knew better. Somewhere in those pages was my dad’s story, Bruce Glover’s path through the Army, waiting to be pieced together. All it would take was time, careful transcription, and a willingness to look beyond the format to see the life behind the record.

Morning reports are not the easiest records to work with. They are typed, abbreviated, and often feel impersonal at first glance. But like so many military records, they tell a story if you are willing to slow down and read them carefully.

I began by transcribing every entry and paid special attention to those that mentioned my dad, Bruce Glover. Line by line, I pulled out the dates, locations, transfers, and notes that marked his and his regiment's movement through the Army. At first, it felt like a series of disconnected entries. A transfer here, a status change there. But as I worked through them, a pattern began to emerge.

What I had, without fully realizing it at first, was a timeline of his service.

Once I had transcribed the relevant details, I turned to a tool I have been using more in my research, ChatGPT 5.2. I provided the extracted information and asked it to organize the data into a clear, chronological timeline.

What it returned was something I hadn’t quite been able to see on my own so clearly. The structure of his service. The progression from induction to training, from training to deployment, and eventually to leadership.

Next, I took ChatGPT's timeline and compared it to my transcription. ChatGPT can make mistakes and it does. I forgot to put do not add anything to the timeline in my prompt and I got a few weird dates and places. Editing ChatGPT's version was still easier than creating my own timeline. I was able to tell ChatGPT want I wanted almost exactly.

Here is that timeline:

June 4, 1943: Sworn in as a private in the U.S. Army Infantry in Detroit, Michigan.

July 1943: Reported to Fort Custer, Battle Creek, Michigan for orientation and processing, attached to Co. D 135th TDTB.

24 July 1943: Traveled to Camp Hood, Texas for 13 weeks of basic infantry training. 137 enlisted men unassigned left Fort Custer for Camp Hood.

28 July 1943: Transferred to Co. D, 128^th TDTP

14 August 1943: Transferred to Co. D, 144^th ASTB.

27 October 1943-4 November 1943: North Camp Hood, Texas

4 November 1943-20 March 1944: Selected for a specialized program and sent to Hendrix College, Conway, Arkansas, for 4 months of academic military training, in the ASTU Unit No. 3889.

13 March 1944: orders dated that assigns named men to 99^th Infantry Division, Camp Maxey, Texas.

21 March 1944: assigned to 393^rd Infantry Regiment, Company G, Camp Maxey, Texas.

21 March 1944- 10 September 1944: at Camp Maxey, Texas for intensive training.

10 September 1944: departed Camp Maxey by railroad and traveled to Camp Myes Standish, Massachusetts with stops in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, Montgomery, Alabama for calisthenics, Atlanta, Georgia for calisthenics, Rocky Mountain, and North Carolina for calisthenics.

14 September 1944-27 September 1944: Camp Myles Standish, Massachusetts for training, inoculations, and lectures.

29 September 1944-11 October 1944: Departed by ship from Boston to Southampton, England.

11 October 1944-15 October 1944: departed by rail approximately 40 miles, the traveled by truck 5 miles to Camp D-6, Piddlehinton, Dorset, England.

15 October 1944-3 November 1944: Left Piddlehinton, Dorset, England by truck convoy and arrived in Dorchester, England. Left Dorchester and traveled by train arriving in Southampton. Boarded SS Mecklenberg and departed Southampton at 1800 GMT enroute to LeHavre, France.

4 November 1944: Arrived in Le Havre, France, traveled approximately 125 miles by truck convoy to Paris, France. Traveled another 76 miles to bivouac in an apple orchard.

5 November 1944-7 November 1944: departed Paris France area by truck convoy to Aubel Belgium. Bivouacked in orchard, later moving to 2 barns in area.

7 November 1944-10 November 1944: left Aubel, Belgium area and traveled by truck to Rocherath, Belgium where they moved into defensive positions and relieved 39^th Infantry Regiment at midnight.

11 November 1944-18 December 1944: in and around Rocherath, Belgium in defensive positives. Patrols were sent out to spot enemy positions. Some light action, mortar section laid fire on enemy,  rocket bombs overhead, heavy artillery fire from friendly troops, and listening post set up behind enemy lines. The men moved on foot when changing positions.

16 November 1944: assigned to 12^th Army Group and further assigned to First U.S. Army.

13 December 1944: still in or near Rocherath and received orders and prepared for an offensive movement in freezing temperatures.

16 December 1944: Experienced what is now known as the beginning of the Battle of the Bulge.

19 December 1944: removed to Elsenborn. Belgium

20 December 1944: Diagnosed with trench foot; evacuated to hospitals in Liege (Belgium), Paris (France), and Birmingham (England).

23 December 1944: in Paris, France hospital, 108^th General Hospital HQ.

25 December 1944: evacuated to United Kingdom hospital.

No morning reports until 8 May 1945. I need to look for hospital records, if available.

6 May 1945: War in Europe ends (V-E Day). (My addition, not ChatGPT's)

8 May 1945: Attends Reinforcement Depot Ground Forces Training at Fontainebleau, France.

6 July  1945: Honorably discharged from enlisted service to accept a commission.

7 July 1945: Appointed Temporary Second Lieutenant, Army of the United States.

7 July 1945-30 October 1945: no reports

30 October 1945 – 2 May 1946: Served as Second Lieutenant, Company D, 7th Battalion, 2nd Regiment, IRTC, Fort McClellan, Alabama. Physical Training and Bayonet Instructor.

This is the end of the morning report dates I was given. I can fill in gaps especially until the war in the Pacific ends with other documents.

Seeing it laid out this way changed everything.

The morning reports had given me the raw data. But the timeline gave me the story.

I could follow him from Detroit to Fort Custer, then to Texas, Arkansas, and eventually across the ocean to England and into the Ardennes. I could see the moment his experience shifted from training to combat. I could see the toll, trench foot and evacuation, and then something more, his transition into leadership as an officer.

This is where I see real value in using tools like ChatGPT 5.2 in genealogy research. It did not replace the work. It did not find the records. It did not interpret the meaning of his service.

That part is still ours.

What it did do was help organize, structure, and present the information in a way that made the story clearer. It allowed me to step back and see the full arc of his military experience.

And once I could see it, I could feel it.

This is one of many examples of how combining careful transcription with modern tools can deepen our understanding of the past. The records are still at the heart of the work. But sometimes, a different way of looking at them can bring everything into focus.

Research Notes:

The morning reports are housed at the National Archives in St. Louis. Here are the Record Groups used in my research.

Morning reports:  Record Group 64- Morning Reports, 1940–1946 War Department. (1789 - 09/18/1947)

Muster rolls: Record Group 64- Muster Rolls and Rosters, November 1, 1912–December 31, 1943 , War Department. 1789-9/18/1947

OMPF: Record Group 127-Official Military Personnel Files, 1905–1998

I knew I wouldn’t take the time to compile these myself, so I treated myself to having Geoff at Golden Arrow Research do it for me. My father’s name was highlighted on each image where he appeared, which made my job much easier when looking through more than 400 pages of scans. He did an excellent job and even included a letter I could use to request my father’s pension record, which I didn’t even know he had. The image above is blurry here, but it is perfectly clear on the scans I received. 

If you have the time, patience, and access to St. Louis, go for it. For me, it was worth having someone else compile them. I have heard that morning reports are now digital and accessible through the National Archives catalog, but I have not confirmed this.

AI Disclosure (ChatGPT 5.2)

Journey to the Past blog posts may use the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) tools.

While the content reflects my ideas, writing, and research, ChatGPT 5.2 is used for grammar and style suggestions, as well as for creating timelines.

Headlines on this blog may also be suggested by AI. I review, select, and edit them to ensure they accurately reflect the content.

Beyond the Records: A Personal Discovery at the National Archives

National Archives in Washington, DC, photographed by Brenda Leyndyke

Last summer, I had the opportunity to attend Gen-Fed in Washington, DC, and the main highlight of that trip was spending time at the National Archives.

This was something I had wanted to do for years.

As a family historian, we spend so much time working with digital records, indexes, and transcriptions. Those tools are invaluable, but they are not the same as being there in person.

Walking into the research room, I felt a sense of awe. I knew that somewhere in that building were records connected to my own family.

When I was finally able to sit down, look at, and touch the documents, it became something more than research.

It became personal when I looked through logbooks from the 1890s and early 1900s for Point Betsie Lighthouse in Frankfort, Michigan, and saw entries for my great-grandfather, Frank H. Glover.

Lighthouse Log Book at NARA in Washington, D.C.

I had the opportunity to view log books from my great grandfather’s time as an assistant lighthouse keeper. Seeing his name written in those records was one thing. But actually being there, turning the pages, and knowing that these were the very documents created during his lifetime, is hard to put into words.

I am emotional just writing this.

There is something powerful about touching a piece of your family’s history. It connects you to them in a way that no digital image ever can.

The log book entry, on the last entry, for Frank H. Glover's resignation in June, 1900

In that moment, my great grandfather was no longer just a name, a date, or an entry in my family tree. He was a person who kept those logs, who lived that life, and whose work was recorded in those pages.

It is an experience I had hoped for, and one I will never forget.

Research Notes:

• Repository: National Archives I

• Record type: Lighthouse log books

• Time period: 1898-1902

• Location: Record Group 25, Entry Number NC 1 106, Bound volume number 10

• Access notes: Accessed in person 

This was just one of many records I found documenting my great-grandfather’s life, each adding another piece to his story. But this moment felt different. It reminded me why I spend so much time doing this work, not just to gather names and dates, but to better understand the lives behind them. Moments like this turn research into connection and make family history feel truly personal.

The Little Creamer on the Table

You may have read about items I have been fortunate to receive and care for as part of my family history. This small glass creamer is one of those pieces.

It belonged to my grandmother, Daisy Fredricks, and it is the only item I have from her.

Photograph by Brenda Leyndyke

My grandmother came from very humble beginnings, and this creamer reflects that. It is simple pressed glass with a scalloped edge, the kind of everyday piece found in many homes in the early 20th century. Pieces like this were affordable and meant to be used. Today, they are often associated with what collectors call Depression-era glass.

I remember this creamer from visits to her home.

She would make coffee for my mom and set the creamer on the table. There was always a plate of cookies, and for me, a glass of milk.

I can still picture myself sitting at that table.

I do not remember exactly what kind of cookies she served, only that there was always a plate on the table. A few years ago, I shared my grandmother’s oatmeal cookie recipe, written in her own hand. I often wonder if those were the cookies she made when we visited.

I am emotional just writing this. I did not think of these moments as anything special at the time. They were simply part of visiting Grandma. Now, I realize how much those small moments mattered especially since we didn't visit often as we lived hours away from her.

When I look at this creamer today, I think about her hands setting it on the table. I think about the conversations between her and my mom. I think about being included, even as a child, in those quiet visits.

As family historians, we spend a lot of time looking for records and documenting facts. But sometimes it is the everyday items that tell us the most.

This creamer is simple, but it represents something much larger.

It represents a place at the table.

Ten Things I Learned Researching at the National Archives in D.C. and MD

This summer I spent eight days researching at both National Archives I (downtown Washington, D.C.) and National Archives II (College Park, Maryland). It was an eye-opening experience. Each location has its strengths and quirks, and as a first-time researcher at both, I learned a lot, sometimes the hard way. Here are ten takeaways from my visit.

1. The Catalog Is Huge and Overwhelming

The NARA catalog is not as user-friendly as other archives or library catalogs. The Archives has billions of records in its collection. Search terms that seem obvious do not always work, and narrowing down to the right record group can take persistence. I often felt like I was missing something, especially with less-used collections such as lighthouse records or postmaster files.

2. NARA I Staff Are Friendlier

The staff at Archives I were consistently more approachable, patient, and helpful. They guided me through record requests and explained things clearly. At Archives II, the staff felt more rushed and less friendly, and in some cases the interactions felt accusatory.

3. Accusations at NARA II Felt Uncomfortable

At Archives II, staff patrolled the research room checking for declassification tags on documents being scanned. I was asked multiple times: Do you have a tag? Are you using it on every document? Did you take pictures without it? At one point I was even asked if I had put rusty paper clips on the records. It felt accusatory and unnecessary, especially since paper clips would never make it past security. 

4. Supplies Are Easier to Access at NARA I

At Archives I, basic supplies like weights were readily available. At Archives II, you had to ask for everything, even weights, and sometimes sign them out. It slowed the process and added unnecessary frustration when you didn't know where they were. 

5. Wait Times Vary, but NARA I Did Better

At both archives, wait times for record pulls averaged about 45 minutes. NARA I generally handled requests more smoothly. At NARA II, you had to look up box and row information yourself using binders, while NARA I staff filled that in for you. As a beginner, I really appreciated the extra help.

6. Rules Control the Fun

One thing to know before you go: NARA has 86 rules for researchers. They are available online here: Research Room Rules (https://www.archives.gov/research/research-room-rules). It is best to review them in advance so you know what to expect.

7. Cafeteria and Eating Areas at NARA II Were Better

If you want a good lunch during your research break, Archives II is the place. The cafeteria had more options, and the eating area was spacious and newer. NARA I’s food options were far more limited and others said not as good.  

8. Research Assistance Was Stronger at NARA I

At Archives I, I could easily find someone to answer questions about the materials I was using. At NARA II, there was one specialist for Army records, and he was swamped. I often felt on my own.

Neither archive was able to suggest the correct search terms when I asked about German Prisoners of War at Fort Custer. I was repeatedly told to use “Custer,” which returned results about General Custer. Searching “German Prisoners of War” brought up records about United States soldiers held in Germany. The key term turned out to be “enemy prisoners,” which I eventually discovered on my own. Once I tried that, I found far more relevant information. I was also directed to Record Group 394, Continental Commands, which contained cartographic records but not for the time period I needed. In contrast, Record Group 389, Records of the Provost Marshal (1941– ), was filled with information. 

9. Tracking Records Was Hit or Miss

At NARA II, the electronic monitor in the research room made it easy to know when my records were ready. At NARA I, it was inconsistent. Sometimes staff told me my records were upstairs, sometimes to check if they had been submitted downstairs. Once I wasted two and a half hours looking for my lighthouse records before giving up and coming back the next day. Thankfully, that was an exception, not the rule.

10. Strengths of Each Archive

Archives I excels at military and land records, while Archives II is known for 20th-century military records and modern federal agency records. Accuracy was solid at both locations. Only once did I receive the wrong time period for a record request. 

Rules Control the Fun

One thing to know before you go: NARA has 86 rules for researchers. They are available online here: Research Room Rules (https://www.archives.gov/research/research-room-rules). It is best to review them in advance so you know what to expect.

Final Thoughts

Researching at the National Archives can be rewarding, but it requires patience, persistence, and sometimes a thick skin. I am glad I had the chance to experience both NARA I and II. I learned not only about my research subjects but also about how the archives work.

If you are planning a visit, do your homework ahead of time. The NARA website is filled with finding aids and preparation guides that will make your time there more productive. Some resources I found helpful include:

1. Guide to Genealogical Research in the United States (available at HathiTrust)

2. NARA’s Catalog Guide: https://www.archives.gov/research/genealogy/catalog-guide

3. Preliminary Inventories available online through the Allen County Public Library in Fort Wayne. These help identify the records within each record group. Not all preliminary inventories are digitized here.

4. Prologue Magazine, a NARA publication now out of print, but past issues are available online at archives.gov. It contains a wealth of research tips and background articles.

These tips come from my personal experience, and yours may be different. I spent days preparing for my visit and thought I was ready, only to discover that the archives had even more to teach me. My best advice is to embrace the process and enjoy the experience. Visiting the National Archives had been a dream of mine for years, and finally walking into those research rooms felt like stepping into history itself. No matter the challenges or frustrations, I will always be grateful that I had the chance to be there, to handle original records, and to connect more deeply with the past.