Civil War Collection, 1837-1914
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
1 on Lee's Management of Cavalry During The
ON LEE'S MANAGEMENT OF CAVALRY DURING THE GETTYSBURG CAMPAIGN Terrence L. Salada and John D. Wedo High on the list of reasons for the Union victory at Gettysburg is the erratic performance of the Confederate cavalry. Toxic side effects galore get ascribed to the absence of General James Ewell Brown (J.E.B.) Stuart and his three brigades, especially in the days leading up to the battle. Because of this, the Army of Northern Virginia (ANV) entered the battle blind to the location of the Federal Army and to the topography and cartography of the Gettysburg area. Without a doubt cavalry was scarce where it was needed; blame is normally assigned to cavalry commander Stuart for his dispositions and for placing his command incommunicado with his commander, General Robert E. Lee. As commander, however, Lee was responsible for the army's operations and was therefore accountable for its defeat despite the errors of his subordinates. Many questions arise concerning Lee's management of the Confederate cavalry, particularly what this paper calls the "proximal cavalry," which remained with the main body of the ANV. Is it true that "Stuart's absence" is equivalent to "Lee had no cavalry," as many interpret? How much of the blame for its dispositions and usage should be assigned to Lee, if any? In addition, could Lee have attempted any correction to his cavalry operations based on hearing no word from Stuart? Finally, how does Lee's performance compare to commanders in other wars who were compelled to use forces considered substandard? This paper analyzes the command decisions relative to the Confederate cavalry to determine if the forces with Lee were adequate to substitute for the tasks that Stuart 1 should have done. -
National Register of Historic Places Registration Form
NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin, How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form. If any item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. 1. Name of Property Historic name: Little River Rural Historic District_____________________________ Other names/site number: VDHR File No. 030-5579 ___________________________ Name of related multiple property listing: _______N/A____________________________________________________ (Enter "N/A" if property is not part of a multiple property listing _________________________________________________________________________ 2. Location Roughly bounded on E by SR 629, on N by SR 776 & USR 50, on W by Cromwell’s Run RHD, on S ¾ mile N of SR 55, and on SE by Broad Run RHD City or town: The Plains_____ State: VA__________ County: Fauquier________ Not For Publication: Vicinity: N/A X ____________________________________________________________________________ 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this X nomination ___ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property _X__ meets ___ does not meet the National Register Criteria. -
March 10, 2005, the One Hundred and Forty-Fourth Year of the Civil War
Old Baldy Civil War Round Table of Philadelphia March 10, 2005, The One Hundred and Forty-Fourth Year of the Civil War March 10th Thursday Meeting The President’s Letter "Lee's Real Plan at Gettysburg" We want to thank Pat Caldwell for a fine program in February. We now know who General John Curtis The March 10th Meeting of the Old Baldy Civil War Caldwell was and his contribution to the Union cause (no Round Table will start at 7:30 pm on Thursday at the Civil evidence yet that the Caldwells are related). Of course War and Underground Railroad Museum at 1805 Pine the answer to my question in the last issue of the newslet- Street in Philadelphia. Troy D. Harman a National Park ter was "Who took command of the Second Corps when Service ranger at Gettysburg NMP is a native of General Hancock was wounded at Gettysburg?" Although Lynchburg, VA. and is a graduate of Lynchburg College it was for a short time, it was John Curtis Caldwell. and Shippensburg University. A park ranger since 1984, Troy has served at Appomattox Court House, Weather permitting we look forward to another fine Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania, Independence Hall and program with Gettysburg Park historian Troy Harman. the Eisenhower Farm. His book "Lee's Real Plan at Troy's book "Lee's Real Plan at Gettysburg" has been Gettysburg" has been well received and has been the the source of some debate since publication. Troy makes subject of some lively debate in the Civil War Community. a very good point to this novice on the Battle of Gettysburg. -
Stephen Dill Lee: a Biography
Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1969 Stephen Dill Lee: a Biography. Herman Morell Hattaway Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Hattaway, Herman Morell, "Stephen Dill Lee: a Biography." (1969). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 1597. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/1597 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 70-244 HATTAWAY, Herman Morell, 1938- STEPHEN DILL LEE: A BIOGRAPHY. The Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, Ph.D., 1969 History, modern University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan © HERMAN MORELL HATTAWAY 1970 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. STEPHEN DILL LEE: A BIOGRAPHY A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Herman Morell Hattaway B.A., Louisiana State University, 1961 M.A., Louisiana State University, 1963 May, 1969 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish first to express my thanks to my major professor, Dr. T. Harry Williams for help, guidance, advice, and encouragement. He first suggested that I work on Stephen D. -
Confederate Soldiers and Southern Society, 18611880
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Carolina Digital Repository “What A Fall Was There—My Country Ruined!”: Confederate Soldiers and Southern Society, 18611880 David Christopher Williard 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 2012 Approved by: William L. Barney W. Fitzhugh Brundage Laura Edwards Joseph T. Glatthaar Heather Andrea Williams © 2012 David Christopher Williard ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT DAVID WILLIARD: “What A Fall Was There—My Country Ruined!”: Confederate Soldiers and Southern Society, 1861‐1880 (Under the direction of William L. Barney) This dissertation traces the paths that former Confederate soldiers took in attempting to reclaim control over their personal lives and reconstitute their relationship to southern society at large in the aftermath of the Civil War. Participation in the war gave men status, purpose, a sense of worth in the eyes of their families and white southern society at large, and investment in a collective endeavor. Defeat shattered Confederate soldiers’ self‐image and led soldiers to doubt the purpose of their sacrifices, to believe that hardships came unequally, and to question whether their society had any right to determine the status of men whose experiences it did not understand. At the war’s conclusion, the links of ideology and experience that had bound Confederate soldiers and civilians together stood largely broken. The consequences of this division became evident in the postwar South. -
Civil War Collection, 1860-1977
Civil War collection, 1860-1977 Emory University Stuart A. Rose Manuscript, Archives, and Rare Book Library Atlanta, GA 30322 404-727-6887 [email protected] Descriptive Summary Title: Civil War collection, 1860-1977 Call Number: Manuscript Collection No. 20 Extent: 10 linear feet (23 boxes), 7 bound volumes (BV), 7 oversized papers boxes and 29 oversized papers folders (OP), 4 microfilm reels (MF), and 1 framed item (FR) Abstract: The Civil War collection is an artificial collection consisting of both contemporary and non-contemporary materials relating to the American Civil War (1861-1865). Language: Materials entirely in English. Administrative Information Restrictions on Access Unrestricted access. Terms Governing Use and Reproduction All requests subject to limitations noted in departmental policies on reproduction. Additional Physical Form The Robert F. Davis diaries in Subseries 1.1 are also available on microfilm. Source Various sources. Citation [after identification of item(s)], Civil War collection, Stuart A. Rose Manuscript, Archives, and Rare Book Library, Emory University. Processing Reprocessed by Susan Potts McDonald, 2013. This collection contains material that was originally part of Miscellaneous Collections A-D, F, and H-I. In 2017, these collections were discontinued and the contents dispersed amongst other collections by subject or provenance to improve accessibility. Emory Libraries provides copies of its finding aids for use only in research and private study. Copies supplied may not be copied for others or otherwise distributed without prior consent of the holding repository. Civil War collection Manuscript Collection No. 20 Sheet music in this collection was formerly part of an unaccessioned collection of sheet music that was transferred to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in 2019. -
1 March 2014
MARCH 2014 MARCH 26 MEETING Thoughts from the President … 7:00 PM I hope you have enjoyed this year’s programs on TAMPA HISTORY CENTER Andersonville and meeting President Lincoln as SECOND FLOOR much as I have. This month Laura Ward and her LAURA & EDWARD WARD father, Judge Ward, will tell us about their ancestor Presenting a program who participated in Andrews’s Raid, also known as CHASING THE GENERAL the Great Locomotive Chase. Being a native of AND PURSUING THE MEDAL OF HONOR Atlanta, this story is near and dear to my heart. I have a tenuous tie to the story. After Andrew’s Raid, Edward H. Ward earned his Bachelor of Science in Georgia Governor, Joseph Brown, formed the Business Administration (B.S.) in 1958 and his Independent State Railroad Guards to prevent any Master of Business Administration (M.B.A.) in 1968 future such raids. William Fuller was the Conductor from Bowling Green State University in Ohio. Mr. on the Western & Atlantic Railroad who chased Ward earned his Juris Doctor (J.D.) from the down Andrew’s Raiders. Fuller was made a Captain University of Michigan in 1961. From 1961-1965, in the Guards. My mother’s grandfather served in he served in the United States Navy JAG Corps. Captain Fuller’s company. Mr. Ward has held numerous academic positions Next month, our Newsletter Editor Gail Crosby will specializing in business law. Specifically, Mr. Ward present a program, “Black Soldiers in the War served as an Assistant Professor of Business Law at Between the States; Confederate and Union”. -
Colonel Thomas T. Munford and the Last Cavalry Operations
COLONEL THOMAS T. MUNFORD AND THE LAST CAVALRY OPERATIONS OF THE CIVIL WAR IN VIRGINIA by Anne Trice Thompson Akers Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS in History APPROVED: l%mes I. Robertson, Jr., Chiirmin Thomas Al"/o Adriance Lar;b R. Morrison December, 1981 Blacksburg, Virginia ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I acknowledge, with great respect and admiration, Dr. James I. Robertson, Jr., Chairman of my thesis committee, mentor and friend. He rekindled my ardor for history. With unstinting encouragement, guidance, support and enthusiasm, he kept me in perspective and on course. I also thank Drs. Thomas Adriance and Larry Morrison who served on my committee for their unselfish expense of time and energy and their invaluable criticisms of my work. Special thanks to , Assistant Park Historian, Petersburg National Battlefield, for the map of the Battle of Five Forks, and to , Photographer with the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, who reproduced the map and the photograph. To ., Indian fighter par excellence, I extend warmest regard and appreciation. Simply, I could not have done it without him. I further acknowledge with love my husband who thought I would never do it and my mother who never doubted that I would. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDG}fENTS. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • . • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • ii Chapter I. MtJNFORD: THE YOUNG MA.N'. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2 II. MUNFORD: THE SOLDIER. • • . • . • . • . • • • . • . • • 13 III. FIVE FORKS: WATERLOO OF THE CONFEDERACY .....•...•..•....•• 31 IV. LAST DAYS OF FITZ LEE'S CAVALRY DIVISION .....••..•.••.••... 82 V. MUNFORD: THE RETIRED CAVALRYMAN •.....•......•.......••..•. -
Using Communication Theory in the Analysis of Controversial Gettysburg Orders
USING COMMUNICATION THEORY IN THE ANALYSIS OF CONTROVERSIAL GETTYSBURG ORDERS John D. Wedo and Terrence L. Salada Many controversies surrounding historical battles center on orders. The outcome of combat, victory or loss, might be partly due to certain features of commands issued before or during fighting: Were they received on time? Were they obeyed? Were they clear? Did they allow for proper judgment on the part of the receiver? For example, were the instructions sent from Washington, D.C, to commanders in the Pacific before the Pearl Harbor attack explicit enough? Such inquiry is particularly apt for the American Civil War, for which even today historians still parse certain controversial orders: Did Confederate General Robert E. Lee's directives to General James (Jeb) Stuart give him the discretion to ride around the Federal army during the Gettysburg campaign? This paper analyzes several contentious messages from that campaign employing characteristics of communication theory (CT). The Gettysburg campaign ran from June 3, 1863, to July 14, 1863, and is considered by many to be the most controversial of the war. After reviewing the characteristics relevant to battle orders, the paper then offers examples of other historical orders, often considered successful or unsuccessful from both the Civil War and World War II. Analysis of controversial commands is usually done in situ, discussing only the situation, transmitter, message, medium, receiver, and the result without comparison. Alternately, the core of this paper examines five 1 controversial Gettysburg orders, applying CT precepts and measuring the conclusions against other successful and unsuccessful orders. Analysis of orders is a critical step in clarifying either why a battle occurred or why it occurred as it did. -
The Slave Owners' Foreign Policy
The Slave Owners’ Foreign Policy David S. Reynolds June 22, 2017 Issue This Vast Southern Empire: Slaveholders at the Helm of American Foreign Policy by Matthew Karp Harvard University Press, 360 pp., $29.95 A slave family, Savannah, Georgia, early 1860s The US Civil War was once commonly interpreted as a conflict between a progressive North, industrially strong and committed to a powerful central government, and a backward South that clung to states’ rights and agrarianism in its effort to preserve slavery. In this reading, proposed most influentially by the late Eugene D. Genovese, the South was distanced from modern society and the world scene. Recent historians increasingly have recognized the inadequacy of this explanation. As the producer of America’s leading export, cotton, the South in the first half of the nineteenth 1 century was a major participant in the global economy. Its rate of urbanization relative to population, while not as rapid as the North’s, exceeded that of England, France, or the American Midwest. Politically, the South was dominant. Slave owners occupied the presidency for about three quarters of the nation’s first sixty-four years. A slave owner, John Marshall, served as the chief justice of the Supreme Court for over three decades and was succeeded by another one, Roger Taney, who headed the Court for almost as long. For much of this time, southerners had a grip on the cabinet and lower government positions as well. The expansion of slavery was one of the South’s main goals. The immediate trigger of the Civil War was the election of Abraham Lincoln, whose aim of halting the westward spread of slavery led to the South’s secession and the outbreak of war. -
Confederate Street Renaming Policy August 2021
INVENTORY OF CONFEDERATE STREET NAMES IN ALEXANDRIA, VA June 2021 Note: This is an update to the 2016 Inventory of Confederate Street Names in Alexandria, VA, based on additional research by the Office of Historic Alexandria. Sources include the City’s 1952 ordinance on street naming, post-annexation maps of Alexandria’s West End, and newspaper articles. Additions to the 2016 Inventory are noted with an asterisk (*). Armistead Street – Named for Lewis Addison Armistead, General CSA; Armistead was married at Christ Church, Alexandria Beauregard Street – Named for Pierre G.T. Beauregard, General, CSA; designer of the Confederate “Battle Flag” Bragg Street – Named for Braxton Bragg, General, CSA Breckinridge Place – Named for John Cabell Breckinridge, elected Vice President of the United States in 1856; later served as Brigadier General, CSA Calhoun Avenue – Named for J. Lawrence Calhoun, Major, CSA Chambliss Street – Named for John Randolph Chambliss, Jr., Brigadier General, CSA *Davis Avenue – Named for Jefferson Davis, former president of the Confederacy Dearing Street – Named for James Dearing, the last Confederate general to die in battle Donelson Street – Named for Daniel Smith Donelson, Brigadier General, CSA Early Street – Named for Jubal A. Early, Brigadier General, CSA *Evans Lane – Named for Clement A. Evans, Brigadier General, CSA Floyd Street – Named for John Buchanan Floyd, Brigadier General, CSA Forrest Street – Named for Nathan Bedford Forrest, General, CSA; or for French Forrest, Confederate navy commander and builder of the CSS ironclad Virginia French Street – Named for Samuel Gibbs French, Brigadier General, CSA Frost Street – Named for Daniel Marsh Frost, Brigadier General, CSA Gordon Street – Named for John Brown Gordon, General, CSA Hardee Place – Named for William Joseph Hardee, General, CSA Imboden Street – Named for John D. -
The Road to Gettysburg
The Road to Gettysburg At the Battle of Brandy Station on June 9, 1863 Hooker was still in command of the Army of the Potomac. He sent his cavalry under the command of General Alfred Pleasonton to break up a concentration of Confederate cavalry around Culpeper. He feared Jeb Stuart was either going to mount a massive raid into Maryland and Pennsylvania or move around the Federal flank as he had done nine months earlier during the Second Manassas Campaign. The full day of cavalry fighting at Brandy Station resulted in a draw, with neither side winning a clear victory. It was, however, the largest cavalry battle ever fought on the American continent and the first time the Union cavalry had stood up to Stuart's cavaliers in an open fight without being driven from the field. Even as the battle was being fought, however, Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia was quietly moving toward the Shenandoah Valley, their roadway into Maryland and Pennsylvania. Hooker knew only that Lee had left his trenches along the Rappahannock, but he did not know where the Confederate army was or where it was going. To get that information, he needed his cavalry. One of the cavalry's main functions during the war was to scout around and find the enemy while also keeping the enemy cavalry ignorant as to the location of one's own army. No one was better at the first task than Jeb Stuart. During the Loudoun Valley Campaign, he would prove his skill at the second as well.