Rosecrans Leads the Union Army South Occupation of Murfreesboro

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Rosecrans Leads the Union Army South Occupation of Murfreesboro Camp ofthe I 15th Ohio, fortress walls in background courtesy Timothy R. Brookes Rosecrans Leads The citizens of Murfreesboro never The Union army was far from its the Union Army South dreamt "they would ever hear the supply base at Louisville. General roar of cannon, the rattle of Rosecrans' troops constructed a musketry, the groans of the dying." depot, along with a fort to defend it, So wrote John Spence, founder of at Murfreesboro to distribute arms, the Red Cedar Bucket Factory in food, and equipment. From January Murfreesboro, Tennessee and an to June, 1863, the soldiers labored to opponent of secession. The bloody complete the 200-acre earthen fort. Union victory at Stones River in It•was named Fortress Rosecrans. 1863 brought destruction and death to Murfreesboro. But the North gained a much-needed boost to morale. General William Rosecrans planned to press the Confederates south to Chattanooga, gain control of the vital rail link, and drive a Union wedge through Tennessee. General William S. Rosecrans Occupation Military occupation drastically One gun at the fort was trained on the of Murfreesboro altered life in Murfreesboro. Houses courthouse. This elegant landmark was were torn down and the lumber constructed shortly before the Civil War. hauled off to construct buildings for During the war it served as barracks and the army. John Spence wrote that a prison. By the end of the war, half the "the streets were crouded [sic] at all roof was blown off by the wind, times with wagons and soldiers, windows and doors were broken, and giving the place much the appear­ plaster crumbled from the ceiling. The ance of a wagon yard. Soldiers courthouse, now restored, still stands at camping thick in and round town." the center of the downtown square. The officers particularly loved milk, "making use of citizens cows." When the Federals set off on the Tullahoma campaign, Spence noted that Rosecrans was "scarcely leaving forces sufficient to man the forts." The new recruits and convalescents who stayed behind reportedly had orders to shell the town and burn it in the event of a Confederate raid. Rutherford County Courthouse Library of Congress Fortress Rosecrans in 1863 When fully garrisoned, the fortress presented a formidable defense ofthe transportation routes. National Archives Confederates Threaten Confederate cavalry threatened The next day, December 7, 1864, the Fort Murfreesboro and Fortress Rosecrans Union General Robert H. Milroy, in October 1863. Deterred by the with two brigades, faced the Confed­ fort's strength, the horsemen turned erates on the field about a mile from BLOCK·HOUSE SKETCHES '°"'" pra..Uor.a ~ 111 .,, neld.. south of town, burned a bridge, and the fort in the Battle of the Cedars. t"t:P,JH. IK.&._,,,.,,._Yl.Vs..Dt1N· ""'fl'e...r ..._,, ("_,_,.... ~. tore up railroad track before moving After spirited fighting, the Confeder­ toward Shelbyville. ates retreated and Milroy's troops retired to the fortress. The battle, In late 1864, the Confederates hoped fought along Wilkinson Pike, was to recapture Tennessee and move considered a Union victory. Fortress into Kentucky. After a desperate Rosecrans remained unscathed. fight at Franklin in November, in which six Confederate generals died, The-weakened-€onfederate army was­ the Southern army followed the crushed at Nashville. With their Federals' retreat north toward hopes for recapturing Tennessee Nashville. Meanwhile, Confederate dashed, the army fled to Mississippi. General Nathan Bedford Forrest rode southeast toward Murfreesboro to Blockhouses formed a final defense ifthe destroy the railroad and blockhouses earthworks were overrun. They also protected and to disrupt the supply depot. The railroad bridges. Tennessee State Library and Archives Union forces retreated to the fort. Preserving Five months later, the war was over the National Park Service. Of the Fortress Rosecrans and John Spence's sympathies had four interior forts within Fortress changed: "The prospect was gloomy Rosecrans, only Redoubt Brannan to those returning from war." For­ remains. tress Rosecrans was no longer needed. During its two years' exis­ As the garrison discovered, earth­ tence, the fort had deteriorated works require constant maintenance. despite the garrison's efforts to You can help by staying on the trail maintain the works. The rains of and by leaving nothing behind. winter and heat of summer conspired Fortress Rosecrans tells the story of to wear away the sod covering the the soldiers who fought and toiled earthworks. In April 1866, the Union here, and of townspeople like John army abandoned Fortress Rosecrans. Spence who survived the great conflict. Since then, most of the earthworks have been lost as Murfreesboro has grown past the fort. Only 3,000 feet of an original 14,000 feet of earth­ works remain. In 1993, the city transferred remnants of the fort to ~RECYCLED ENPMA April 2000 40,000 .
Recommended publications
  • Any Victory Not Bathed in Blood: William Rosecrans's Tullahoma
    A BGES Civil War Field University Program: Any Victory Not Bathed in Blood: William Rosecrans’s Tullahoma Advance With Jim Ogden June 17–20, 2020; from Murfreesboro, TN “COMPEL A BATTLE ON OUR OWN GROUND?”: William Rosecrans on the objectives of his Tullahoma advance. A “victory not bathed in blood.” A campaign with no major battle. Only a “campaign of maneuver.” You are a real student of the Civil War if you have given serious consideration to this key component of Maj. Gen. William Starke Rosecrans’s command tenure. Sadly, if not entirely overlooked, it usually is only briefly reviewed in histories of the war. Because of the way it did turn out, it is easy to say that it is only a campaign of maneuver, but as originally conceived the Federal army commander intended and expected much more. Henry Halleck’s two “great objects” were still to be achieved. Rosecrans hoped that when he advanced from Murfreesboro, much would be accomplished. In this BGES program we’ll examine what Rosecrans hoped would be a campaign that might include not the but rather his planned “Battle for Chattanooga.” Wednesday, June 17, 2020 6 PM. Gather at our headquarters hotel in Murfreesboro where Jim will introduce you to General Rosecrans, his thinking and combat planning. He is an interesting character whose thinking is both strategic and advanced tactical. He was a man of great capacity and the logic behind this operation, when juxtaposed against the expectations of the national leadership, reveals the depth of Rosecrans’s belief in his ability to deliver decisive results that supported Lincoln’s war objectives.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancestors of Nicholas Andrew Harvey
    Ancestors of Nicholas Andrew Harvey Prepared by: GrandPop Bo Hagen 1734 Montain Heights Drive Salem, Virginia 24153 Table of Contents .Ancestors . of. .Nicholas . Andrew. .Harvey . .1 . .First . Generation. .1 . .Second . Generation. .3 . .Third . Generation. .5 . .Source . .Citations . .9 . .Fourth . Generation. .11 . .Source . .Citations . .18 . .Fifth . Generation. .19 . .Source . .Citations . .42 . .Sixth . Generation. .43 . .Source . .Citations . .83 . .Seventh . .Generation . .85 . .Source . .Citations . .138 . .Eighth . .Generation . .141 . .Source . .Citations . .183 . .Ninth . .Generation . .185 . .Source . .Citations . .230 . .Tenth . Generation. .231 . .Source . .Citations . .263 . .11th . .Generation . .265 . .Source . .Citations . .282 . .12th . .Generation . .283 . .Source . .Citations . .300 . .13th . .Generation . .301 . .Source . .Citations . .307 . .14th . .Generation . .309 . .Source . .Citations . .311 . .15th . .Generation . .313 . Produced by Legacy on 8 Oct 2014 Table of Contents . .Source . .Citations . .315 . .16th . .Generation . .317 . .Source . .Citations . .323 . .Name . Index. .324 . Produced by Legacy on 8 Oct 2014 Ancestors of Nicholas Andrew Harvey First Generation 1. Nicholas Andrew Harvey, son of Edmund Francis (Ed) (Eddie) Harvey and Amy Lou Hagen, was born on 4 May 2005 in Blacksburg, Va.. General Notes: Nicholas was delivered via C-Section at Montgomery County Regional Hospital. Noted by Amy Hagen Harvey in May 2006: "One interesting tidbit you might want to add [to the family story] is that Ed's grandfather on his mom's side (Theodore Chorazak) had the middle name Andrew. We liked the name Andrew before we found that out but it helped us "seal the deal" on choosing that for his middle name." Nicholas at the Piano Showing his talent at Gramma's house in Salem (2014) 1 Produced by Legacy on 8 Oct 2014 Ancestors of Nicholas Andrew Harvey 2 Produced by Legacy on 8 Oct 2014 Ancestors of Nicholas Andrew Harvey Second Generation (Parents) 2.
    [Show full text]
  • FOR THOSE WHO STILL HEAR the Gunsrm by William Glenn Robertson
    FOR THOSE WHO STILL HEAR THE GUNSrM by William Glenn Robertson Dave Rmh of B&G The Armies (~ollide Bragg }~orces His Way Across (~hickamattga (~reek The failure of Gen. Braxton Bragg's bold and bring the remainder to La Fayette, Ga. (see Mills on the previous day by elements of effort to cripple the Federal XIV Corps in Pg. 51). By 8:30a.m., Bragg had decided upon Thomas J. Wood's Federal division, was to McLemore's Cove on September 11, 1863 (see the next offensive action to take. Believing that remain in contact with the Federals in its Maps, Pp. 10-ll) did not break the offensive Maj. Gen. Thomas L. Crittenden's XXI Corps front. On Armstrong's right, Brig. Gen. John spirit of either the Army of Tennessee or its might be vulnerable, he resolved to send forces Pegram was to deploy his two brigades in an commander. After a few hours of fitful rest, north from La Fayette to strike any elements arc stretching southeast toward the hamlet Bragg was again issuing orders as early as of that corps that could be found. ofVillanow, Ga., on the direct route from La seven o'clock the morning of the 12th. At that Accordingly, Lt. Gen. Leonidas Polk was Fayette to Resaca. When he learned around hour he directed Brig. Gen. Bushrod R. told to move Frank Cheatham's large five­ noon that Armstrong had broken contact with Johnson to continue shielding the army's supply brigade division ten miles north on the the Federals at Lee and Gordon's Mills, line by blocking any Federal push toward Chattanooga road to Rock Spring Church (see Bragg sternly sent him forward again.
    [Show full text]
  • John Cook Was a Diminutive 4 Feet 9 Inches Tall Upon His Enlistment at the Age of 14 on June 7, 1861
    Photo courtesy of G. Dodge John Cook was a diminutive 4 feet 9 inches tall upon his enlistment at the age of 14 on June 7, 1861. He was born on August 10, 1846 in Cincinnati, Ohio. Before the war he was a laborer. At the Battle of Antietam, the young bugler was awarded the Medal of Honor for serving the guns. See story on page 25 . 6 ARLINGTON HISTORICAL MAGAZINE The Civil War Medal of Honor Recipients of Arlington National Cemetery BY GEORGE w. DODGE Medal of Honor recipients did not initially hold Arlington National Cemetery in high regard since it originated as a potter's field during the Civil War on May 13, 1864. Over 5,000 soldiers were interred within a year. 1 After the war, the remains of several thousand soldiers within a cir­ cuit of fifty miles from Washington were disinterred and reinterred in Ar­ lington. Many were unknown. It would take the burials of distinguished high-ranking officers to begin to alter the perception of Arlington Burial Grounds as a potter's field. When General Philip H. Sheridan died on August 5, 1888 at Nonquitt, Massachusetts, he held the highest ranking position in the U.S. armed forces. Sheridan is popularly regarded as one of the three most prominent Union gen­ erals from the Civil War, along with Ulysses S. Grant and William T. Sherman.2 Sheridan's burial in front of the main entrance of Arlington House ushered in an era in which interment at Arlington was desirable. A series of interments of major generals and an admiral followed Sheridan's burial: General George Crook 1890 Admiral David Porter 1891 General Montgomery Meigs 1892 General Abner Doubleday 1893 General Stephen Burbridge 1894 General Walter Gresham 1895 General John Gibbon 1896 General John Mason 1897 General William Rosecrans 1898 General Horatio Wright 1899 The next sequence which gradually increased the status of Arlington Na­ tional Cemetery was the series of interments of 95 Civil War Mydal of Honor recipients.
    [Show full text]
  • Bloody Battle at Chickamauga
    Bloody Battle at Chickamauga http://civilwar150.longwood.edu The week of September 15-21, 1863 would see the second bloodiest battle of the American Civil War—the famous engagement at Chickamauga, Georgia which resulted in a Confederate victory, but one which was not as complete as it may have been because of the actions of a stubborn Union general. While the Chickamauga campaign dominated activities in the war’s western theater, in the east there was minor skirmishing between the Army of the Potomac and the Army of Northern Virginia as the former moved southward towards the Rapidan River against Robert E. Lee’s depleted force. President Abraham Lincoln actions overshadowed those of the military as on September 15 he ordered suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus which allowed for the holding of individuals by military or civil authorities without charge. The country’s attention, however, was focused along the Tennessee-Georgia border, where the Union Army of the Cumberland under William Rosecrans and the Confederate Army of Tennessee under Braxton Bragg moved towards a collision. In the preceding weeks, Rosecrans had outmaneuvered Bragg and forced a Confederate evacuation of Chattanooga. The southern commander was then frustrated in two attempts to destroy isolated elements of the Federal army, and by September 18 the two forces faced each other near Chickamauga Creek in north Georgia. Bragg hoped to move to the north and cut Rosecrans off from Chattanooga. The main fighting began on Saturday, September 19, when Union General George Thomas engaged Confederate cavalry under Nathan Bedford Forest. By the end of the day the two sides were fighting along a three mile long line in heavily wooded terrain.
    [Show full text]
  • Military Occupation in Four Southern Cities, 1861-1865
    A MOST UNPLEASANT PART OF YOUR DUTIES: MILITARY OCCUPATION IN FOUR SOUTHERN CITIES, 1861-1865 Anne Karen Berler A dissertation submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History. Chapel Hill 2013 Approved by: William L. Barney Joseph T. Glatthaar Richard H. Kohn Alex Roland Heather Williams ABSTRACT ANNE KAREN BERLER: A Most Unpleasant Part of Your Duties: Military Occupation in Four Southern Cities, 1861-1865 (Under the direction of William L. Barney) This dissertation examines Union army military government in four Southern cities and the implications of its failures and successes for the conduct of the war and for post-war Reconstruction. President Lincoln’s flexibility with respect to occupation policies resulted in a lack of leadership from Washington and left each military governor on his own. However, despite different commanders with different policies, the outcomes were virtually the same in each area. Military occupation began in each of these four cities with the same assumption on Lincoln’s part, that the strength of pro- rebel sentiment was tenuous and that the presence of the Union army would encourage Unionists to step forward and reassert their control over civic functions, providing a base from which Unionism could spread and weaken Confederate nationalism and bring the war to successful conclusion. Union policy at the outset was thus conciliatory. Rules enjoined Northern troops from abusing Southern civilians in their persons or property. Events soon demonstrated that these assumptions about the strength of pro-Union sentiment were incorrect.
    [Show full text]
  • Lincoln: Peacemaker Or Warrior? Phillip C
    Lincoln: Peacemaker Or Warrior? Phillip C. Stone March 15, 2010 Phillip C. Stone is President emeritus of Bridgewater College and founder of the Lincoln Society of Virginia. he almost universal perception of Abraham Lincoln is of a kind, big-hearted and almost pacifist T personality who, in spite of being caught in the maelstrom of war, never really endorsed its cruelty or harshness. He himself confessed that he had felt shame and remorse as a youth after shooting and killing a wild turkey, a rather common occurrence on the frontier, where people killed game in order to eat. Except for some immature political attacks made as a young man, his manner even with his political enemies was unfailingly gracious and kind. He did not hold grudges and saw no value in revenge or retaliation. Both as a lawyer and politician, he developed a reputation as one who could reconcile and conciliate. Doris Kerns Goodwin, in Team of Rivals describes in a masterful way how Lincoln brought together in his cabinet men who had competed with him for the presidential nomination.1 She correctly identified that achievement as a tribute to his lack of ego and his ability to work with disparate personalities. When he discharged the disreputable and ineffectual Simon Cameron as Secretary of War, he turned to a Democrat, Edwin Stanton, a surprising choice both because he was a Democrat and because Stanton had humiliated Lincoln years earlier in a court case. Stanton not only snubbed him in the trial, even though they were on the same side, but referred to him as “that d____d long armed ape.”2 Lincoln patiently tolerated personal attacks, never answering in kind.
    [Show full text]
  • "Impracticable, Inhospitable, and Dismal Country": an Examination of the Environmental Impact on Civil War Military Op
    Marshall University Marshall Digital Scholar Theses, Dissertations and Capstones 2018 "Impracticable, inhospitable, and dismal country": An examination of the environmental impact on Civil War military operations in West Virginia John Martin McMillan [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://mds.marshall.edu/etd Part of the Military History Commons, Political History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation McMillan, John Martin, ""Impracticable, inhospitable, and dismal country": An examination of the environmental impact on Civil War military operations in West Virginia" (2018). Theses, Dissertations and Capstones. 1147. https://mds.marshall.edu/etd/1147 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Marshall Digital Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses, Dissertations and Capstones by an authorized administrator of Marshall Digital Scholar. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. “IMPRACTICABLE, INHOSPITABLE, AND DISMAL COUNTRY”: AN EXAMINATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ON CIVIL WAR MILITARY OPERATIONS IN WEST VIRGINIA A thesis submitted to the Graduate College of Marshall University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts In History by John Martin McMillan Approved by Dr. Michael E. Woods, Committee Chairperson Dr. Kevin Barksdale Dr. Robert Deal MARSHALL UNIVERSITY MAY 2018 © 2018 John Martin McMillan ALL RIGHTS RESERVED iii DEDICATION To Big For trips in the “Gray Van” to Shiloh and Lookout Mountain, I am continually thankful. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Enjoying the process is a necessity for any worthwhile endeavor – a master’s thesis is one such exertion. With the completion of this thesis, I owe much thanks to many people.
    [Show full text]
  • Conflict and Controversy in the Confederate High Command: Johnston, Davis, Hood, and the Atlanta Campaign of 1864
    The University of Southern Mississippi The Aquila Digital Community Dissertations Spring 5-1-2013 Conflict and Controversy in the Confederate High Command: Johnston, Davis, Hood, and the Atlanta Campaign of 1864 Dennis Blair Conklin II University of Southern Mississippi Follow this and additional works at: https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations Recommended Citation Conklin, Dennis Blair II, "Conflict and Controversy in the Confederate High Command: Johnston, Davis, Hood, and the Atlanta Campaign of 1864" (2013). Dissertations. 574. https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations/574 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by The Aquila Digital Community. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of The Aquila Digital Community. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The University of Southern Mississippi CONFLICT AND CONTROVERSY IN THE CONFEDERATE HIGH COMMAND: JOHNSTON, DAVIS, HOOD, AND THE ATLANTA CAMPAIGN OF 1864 by Dennis Blair Conklin II Abstract of a Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate School of The University of Southern Mississippi in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy May 2013 ABSTRACT CONFLICT AND CONTROVERSY IN THE CONFEDERATE HIGH COMMAND: JOHNSTON, DAVIS, HOOD, AND THE ATLANTA CAMPAIGN OF 1864 by Dennis Blair Conklin II May 2013 The Union capture of Atlanta on September 2, 1864 all but assured Abraham Lincoln's reelection in November and the ultimate collapse of the Confederacy. This dissertation argues that Jefferson Davis's failure as commander-in-chief played the principal role in Confederate defeat in the war's most pivotal campaign. Davis had not learned three important lessons prior to the campaign season in 1864.
    [Show full text]
  • The Battle of Stones River: the Soldiers' Story
    National Park Service Teaching with Historic Places U.S. Department of the Interior The Battle of Stones River: The Soldiers' Story The Battle of Stones River: The Soldiers' Story (Stones River National Battlefield) If a soldier ever saw lightning, and heard the thunder bolts of a tornado at the same time the heavens opened and the stars of destruction were sweeping everything from the face of the earth, if he was in this charge, he saw it.¹ The bloody Civil War battle fought among the rocky cedar glades near the town of Murfreesboro, Tennessee, left an indelible imprint on the lives of many a soldier and his family. As one gazes across the narrow waters of Stones River today, it is difficult to imagine the carnage of a Civil War battle. The quiet waters no longer echo the sound of cannon fire or screams of death. The cold limestone and cedar thickets no longer resound with the sharp sound of 10,000 muskets delivering their deadly charges. But perhaps we can imagine soldiers struggling along what was once a cotton field, picking the harvest’s remains to stuff in their ears so that the din of battle might somehow seem more distant. For many, the quiet came too soon. The battle at Stones River claimed 23,000 casualties--it was the second bloodiest battle fought west of the Appalachians during the Civil War. The Stones River National Battlefield stands today as a silent reminder of those individuals who lost their lives there. ¹W. J. McMurray, M.D., History of the Twentieth Tennessee Regiment Volunteer Infantry C.S.A.
    [Show full text]
  • The Army of Tennessee in War and Memory, 1861-1930
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 8-2016 Experiencing Defeat, Remembering Victory: The Army of Tennessee in War and Memory, 1861-1930 Robert Lamar Glaze University of Tennessee, Knoxville, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Part of the Cultural History Commons, Military History Commons, Other History Commons, Social History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Glaze, Robert Lamar, "Experiencing Defeat, Remembering Victory: The Army of Tennessee in War and Memory, 1861-1930. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2016. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/3860 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Robert Lamar Glaze entitled "Experiencing Defeat, Remembering Victory: The Army of Tennessee in War and Memory, 1861-1930." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in History. Stephen V. Ash, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: Luke E. Harlow, Daniel Feller, Martin Griffin Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) Experiencing Defeat, Remembering Victory The Army of Tennessee in War and Memory, 1861-1930 A Dissertation Presented for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Robert Lamar Glaze August 2016 Copyright © 2016 by Robert L.
    [Show full text]
  • May 2013 Program
    137TH ANNUAL COMMENCEMENT MAY 11, 2013 The University Charter The origins of Southern Illinois University Carbondale date to “An Act to Establish and Maintain the Southern Illinois Normal University” approved by the Illinois General Assembly on March 9, 1869. The Act defined the new university’s purpose as “to qualify teachers for the common schools of this state by imparting instruction in the art of teaching in all branches of study which pertain to a common school education in the elements of the natural sciences including agricultural chemistry, animal and vegetable physiology, in the fundamental laws of the United States and of the State of Illinois in regard to the rights and duties of citizens and such other studies as the board of education may from time to time prescribe.” It included provisions for appointment of a Board of Trustees. One of the Board’s first orders of business under the act would be to “advertise for proposals from localities desiring to secure the location of said Normal University.” The Act required the Board to “locate the institution at such point, as shall, all things considered, offer the most advantageous conditions. The land shall be selected south of the Railroad, or within six miles north of said road, passing from St. Louis to Terre Haute known as the Alton and Terre Haute railroad, with a view of obtaining a good supply of water and other conveniences for the use of the institution.” The Act defines how buildings would be constructed as well as procedures for selecting students. It assigned a budget of $75,000 for construction of buildings and for furnishings.
    [Show full text]