DOCSLIB.ORG

National Register of Historic Places Registration Form

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
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mile N of SR 55, and on SE by Broad Run RHD City or town: The Plains_____ State: VA__________ County: Fauquier________ Not For Publication: Vicinity: N/A X ____________________________________________________________________________ 3.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. I recommend that this property be considered significant at the following level(s) of significance: ___national ___statewide _X__ local Applicable National Register Criteria: __X_A ___B _X__C ___D Signature of certifying official/Title: Date ___Virginia Department of Historic Resources_____________________________ State or Federal agency/bureau or Tribal Government In my opinion, the property meets does not meet the National Register criteria. Signature of commenting official: Date Title : State or Federal agency/bureau or Tribal Government 1 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Little River Rural Historic District Fauquier County, Virginia Name of Property County and State ______________________________________________________________________________ 4. National Park Service Certification I hereby certify that this property is: entered in the National Register determined eligible for the National Register determined not eligible for the National Register removed from the National Register other (explain:) _____________________ ______________________________________________________________________ Signature of the Keeper Date of Action ____________________________________________________________________________ 5. Classification Ownership of Property (Check as many boxes as apply.) Private: X Public – Local X Public – State X Public – Federal Category of Property (Check only one box.) Building(s) District X Site Structure Object Sections 1-6 page 2 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Little River Rural Historic District Fauquier County, Virginia Name of Property County and State Number of Resources within Property (Do not include previously listed resources in the count) Contributing Noncontributing ______849_______ ___1,237_______ buildings _______79 ______ _____35_______ sites ______515_______ ____ 440___ ___ structures ________2 ____ ______5_____ _ objects _____1,445________ ___ 1,719_______ Total Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register *77________ *4 buildings have since been demolished in Burrland Historic District, but not subtracted from total, see inventory _____________________________________________________________________________________________ 6. Function or Use Historic Functions (Enter categories from instructions.) DOMESTIC/Single Dwelling, Multiple Dwelling, Secondary Structure LANDSCAPE/Natural Feature – River, Mountain, Valley, Meadow OTHER/Stone Wall/Fence, FUNERARY/Cemetery, Burying Ground RECREATION and CULTURE/Sports Facility AGRICULTURE/SUBSISTENCE/ Processing, Storage, Agricultural Field, Agricultural Outbuilding, Animal Facility, Horticultural Facility INDUSTRY/PROCESSING/EXTRACTION/Manufacturing Facility, Waterworks, DEFENSE/Battle Site TRANSPORTATION/Road Related (vehicular) Current Functions (Enter categories from instructions.) DOMESTIC/Single Dwelling, Multiple Dwelling, Secondary Structure LANDSCAPE/Natural Feature – River, Mountain, Valley, Meadow OTHER/Stone Wall/Fence FUNERARY/Cemetery, Burying Ground RECREATION and CULTURE/Sports Facility AGRICULTURE/SUBSISTENCE/Processing, Storage, Agricultural Field, Agricultural Outbuilding, Animal Facility, Horticultural Facility INDUSTRY/PROCESSING/EXTRACTION/Manufacturing Facility, Waterworks TRANSPORTATION/Road Related (vehicular) Sections 1-6 page 3 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Little River Rural Historic District Fauquier County, Virginia Name of Property County and State _____________________________________________________________________________ 7. Description Architectural Classification (Enter categories from instructions.) OTHER/Hall-Parlor, Single Cell, Center Hall EARLY REPUBLIC/Roman Revival, Federal MID-19TH CENTURY/Greek Revival LATE 19TH AND 20TH CENTURY REVIVALS/Colonial Revival, Classical Revival LATE 19TH AND EARLY 20TH CENTURY AMERICAN MOVEMENTS/ Bungalow/Craftsman MODERN MOVEMENT/Ranch, Neoeclectic, Neocolonial, Minimal Traditional ___________________ Materials: (enter categories from instructions.) Principal exterior materials of the property: STONE/Sandstone, Limestone, Slate; BRICK; TERRA COTTA; CONCRETE/Cinder Block; WOOD/Log, Timber-Frame, Frame, Weatherboard, Board and Batten, Shingle; STUCCO; METAL/Tin, Copper, Iron Narrative Description (Describe the historic and current physical appearance and condition of the property. Describe contributing and noncontributing resources if applicable. Begin with a summary paragraph that briefly describes the general characteristics of the property, such as its location, type, style, method of construction, setting, size, and significant features. Indicate whether the property has historic integrity.) ______________________________________________________________________________ Summary Paragraph Containing over 23,000 acres including the land of five individually-listed properties, the Little River Rural Historic District is composed of the northeastern region of Fauquier County between The Plains and Middleburg (south-north) and the Bull Run Mountains and Cromwell’s Run (east-west) in the watershed of Little River, a tributary of the state scenic river, Goose Creek, that flows north into Loudoun County and the Potomac. The western boundary of the Little River district follows the eastern perimeter of the Cromwell’s Run Rural Historic District (030-5434). The southeastern border joins the northwestern line of the Broad Run/Little Georgetown Rural Historic District (030-5514). The Fauquier County part of the Middleburg Battlefield, south of John S. Mosby Highway, lies within the Little River area. The district extends approximately eight miles vertically, south to north and varies to about six-and-three- quarter-miles wide, west to east. Lying near the base of the Blue Ridge Mountain range on the west and below the Bull Run Mountains on the east, the Little River Rural Historic District is the definitive model of the characteristics of the Piedmont region’s topography. Established in Goshen, New York, in 1900 and officially relocated to Fauquier County in 1903, the Orange County Hunt is the geographical and recreational heart of the territory.1 Since settlement in the late eighteenth century, the pastoral agricultural landscape has remained fertile and green by the headwaters of Little River and other Goose Creek tributaries: Cromwell’s Run, Long Branch Section 7 page 4 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Little River Rural Historic District Fauquier County, Virginia Name of Property County and State of the Little River, Whitewood Branch, Burnt Mill Run, Bartons Branch, and Hungry Run in their drainage from surrounding mountain ranges. Tall, white, sycamores and oaks landmark these glistening waterways. The landscape features stone, rail, and board-fenced, undulated pastures of grazing black Angus, Holstein, and Longhorn cattle, thoroughbred hunter, race, and event horses, Connemara, Dartmoor, and Nokota ponies, sheep, goats, and poultry. Several farms engage in honeybee revitalization as shown by stacked wooden hives near gardens or fencerows. Glen-Ora on Green Peace Lane provides shelter for rescued horses, donkeys, and potbelly pigs. There are numerous natural slate and stone quarries. The rising landscape embraces frequent notable bank barns,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 138904 02 Classic.Pdf
    breeders’ cup CLASSIC BREEDERs’ Cup CLASSIC (GR. I) 30th Running Santa Anita Park $5,000,000 Guaranteed FOR THREE-YEAR-OLDS & UPWARD ONE MILE AND ONE-QUARTER Northern Hemisphere Three-Year-Olds, 122 lbs.; Older, 126 lbs.; Southern Hemisphere Three-Year-Olds, 117 lbs.; Older, 126 lbs. All Fillies and Mares allowed 3 lbs. Guaranteed $5 million purse including travel awards, of which 55% of all monies to the owner of the winner, 18% to second, 10% to third, 6% to fourth and 3% to fifth; plus travel awards to starters not based in California. The maximum number of starters for the Breeders’ Cup Classic will be limited to fourteen (14). If more than fourteen (14) horses pre-enter, selection will be determined by a combination of Breeders’ Cup Challenge winners, Graded Stakes Dirt points and the Breeders’ Cup Racing Secretaries and Directors panel. Please refer to the 2013 Breeders’ Cup World Championships Horsemen’s Information Guide (available upon request) for more information. Nominated Horses Breeders’ Cup Racing Office Pre-Entry Fee: 1% of purse Santa Anita Park Entry Fee: 1% of purse 285 W. Huntington Dr. Arcadia, CA 91007 Phone: (859) 514-9422 To Be Run Saturday, November 2, 2013 Fax: (859) 514-9432 Pre-Entries Close Monday, October 21, 2013 E-mail: [email protected] Pre-entries for the Breeders' Cup Classic (G1) Horse Owner Trainer Declaration of War Mrs. John Magnier, Michael Tabor, Derrick Smith & Joseph Allen Aidan P. O'Brien B.c.4 War Front - Tempo West by Rahy - Bred in Kentucky by Joseph Allen Flat Out Preston Stables, LLC William I.
    [Show full text]
  • Heart Leads Redvers to Sea the Stars Colt
    WEDNESDAY, 23 OCTOBER 2019 SMULLEN: PROMOTION OF THE SPORT IS KEY HEART LEADS REDVERS TO By Pat Smullen SEA THE STARS COLT Oisin Murphy didn't end up with a big winner on Saturday but he's had a big year and that is the important thing. On Saturday I was thinking back to the work rate he has put in this year. He has ridden all over, travelling by plane, by helicopter, however he could get there to ride horses at two different meetings in a day, wherever they may be. His work ethic is something that needs to be applauded--that's what you need to do to be champion jockey. Oisin is not only an excellent rider but he is great for the game. He promotes our industry extremely well and I hope he does so for many years to come. I must admit, earlier in the year I was hoping that Danny Tudhope would be able to pull it off as the work that Danny has to put in to maintain his weight is phenomenal, and nobody sees that behind the scenes, but it wasn't to be. Cont. p5 Lot 98, who brought i400,000 Day 1 at the Arqana Oct Sale IN TDN AMERICA TODAY By Emma Berry SAFETY & WELFARE WITH BREEDERS’ CUP IN SIGHT DEAUVILLE, France-The seasons may change but the name at Dan Ross offers an in-depth look at the measures taken by Santa the top of the Arqana consignors' list does not. Ecurie des Anita in the run up to next month’s Breeders’ Cup.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Gender and Virginia's Early-Twentieth Century Equine Landscapes Mary C
    University of Mary Washington Eagle Scholar Student Research Submissions Spring 5-4-2016 Gender and Virginia's Early-Twentieth Century Equine Landscapes Mary C. Fesak Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.umw.edu/student_research Part of the Historic Preservation and Conservation Commons Recommended Citation Fesak, Mary C., "Gender and Virginia's Early-Twentieth Century Equine Landscapes" (2016). Student Research Submissions. 72. https://scholar.umw.edu/student_research/72 This Honors Project is brought to you for free and open access by Eagle Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Student Research Submissions by an authorized administrator of Eagle Scholar. For more information, please contact [email protected]. GENDER AND VIRGINIA'S EARLY-TWENTIETH CENTURY EQUINE LANDSCAPES An honors paper submitted to the Department of Historic Preservation of the University of Mary Washington in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Departmental Honors Mary C. Fesak May 2016 By signing your name below, you affirm that this work is the complete and final version of your paper submitted in partial fulfillment of a degree from the University of Mary Washington. You affirm the University of Mary Washington honor pledge: "I hereby declare upon my word of honor that I have neither given nor received unauthorized help on this work." Mary C. Fesak 05/04/16 (digital signature) University of Mary Washington Gender and Virginia’s Early-Twentieth Century Equine Landscapes By Mary Fesak Thesis Advisor: Michael Spencer 1 Acknowledgements I would like to thank my faculty adviser Michael Spencer for his advice and support throughout the course of this project.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 138904 08 Juvenilefillies.Pdf
    breeders’ cup JUVENILE FILLIES BREEDERs’ Cup JUVENILE FILLIES (GR. I) 30th Running Santa Anita Park $2,000,000 Guaranteed FOR FILLIES, TWO-YEARS-OLD ONE MILE AND ONE-SIXTEENTH Weight, 122 lbs. Guaranteed $2 million purse including travel awards, of which 55% of all monies to the owner of the winner, 18% to second, 10% to third, 6% to fourth and 3% to fifth; plus travel awards to starters not based in California. The maximum number of starters for the Breeders’ Cup Juvenile Fillies will be limited to fourteen (14). If more than fourteen (14) horses pre-enter, selection will be determined by a combination of Breeders’ Cup Challenge winners, Graded Stakes points and the Breeders’ Cup Racing Secretaries and Directors panel. Please refer to the 2013 Breeders’ Cup World Championships Horsemen’s Information Guide (available upon request) for more information. Nominated Horses Breeders’ Cup Racing Office Pre-Entry Fee: 1% of purse Santa Anita Park Entry Fee: 1% of purse 285 W. Huntington Dr. Arcadia, CA 91007 Phone: (859) 514-9422 To Be Run Saturday, November 2, 2013 Fax: (859) 514-9432 Pre-Entries Close Monday, October 22, 2013 E-mail: [email protected] Pre-entries for the Breeders' Cup Juvenile Fillies (G1) Horse Owner Trainer Artemis Agrotera Chestertown Farm Michael E. Hushion B.f.2 Roman Ruler - Indy Glory by A.P. Indy - Bred in New York by Chester Broman & Mary R. Broman Concave Reddam Racing, LLC Doug O'Neill B.f.2 Colonel John - Galadriel by Ascot Knight - Bred in Ontario by Windways Farm Limited Dancing House Godolphin Racing, LLC Kiaran P.
    [Show full text]
  • 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 •.....•......•.......••..•.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • BROODMARE ANALYSIS REPORT a Broodmare’S Nicking Analysis with up to 50 Potential Stallions
    COMPILED SPECIFICALLY FOR Tempo BROODMARE ANALYSIS REPORT A broodmare’s nicking analysis with up to 50 potential stallions Copyright © 2011 The Jockey Club Information Systems, Inc. BROODMARE ANALYSIS REPORT TrueNicks: An Explanation Nicks in History Compatibilities between stallions from one sire line with mares of another sire line has helped shape the breed since the Eclipse/Herod cross of the late 18th century. These successful crosses, called nicks, have impacted Thoroughbred development through such examples as Hermit/Stockwell, Lexington/Glencoe, Bend Or/Macaroni, and Phalaris/Chaucer. In the modern era, the prolific Mr. Prospector/Northern Dancer cross has produced outstanding racehorses and sires such as Kingmambo, Distorted Humor, and Elusive Quality. Fast-Forward to the 21st Century Computer databases have made it possible to measure and rate nicks, giving rise to a commercial market for such statistics. The first nick ratings offered to the public, though popular, were compromised by incomplete data and yielded results based on hypothetical rather than actual opportunity. This statistical gap was the impetus behind the development of TrueNicks. A Statistically Valid Approach Unlike other ratings that are calculated based on hypothetical opportunity within a limited group of horses, TrueNicks references the international database of The Jockey Club—the world’s most complete record of Thoroughbreds and their performance—to produce a sophisticated rating based on all starters and stakes winners on a given cross. The Statistics The TrueNicks rating is derived from two statistical elements: the Sire Improvement Index (SII) and the Broodmare Sire Improvement Index (BSII). Each figure compares the percentage of progeny stakes winners to starters.
    [Show full text]
  • Gettysburg Campaign
    MARYLAND CIVIL WAR TRAILS How to Use this Map-Guide This guide depicts four scenic and historic driving tours that follow the routes taken by Union and Confederate armies during the June-July 1863 Gettysburg Campaign. Information contained here and along the Trail tells stories that have been hidden within the landscape for more than 140 years. Follow the bugle trailblazer signs to waysides that chronicle the day-to-day stories of soldiers who marched toward the Civil War’s most epic battles and civilians who, for a second time in nine months, watched their countryside trampled by the boots of the “Blue and Gray.” The Trail can be driven in one, two or three days depending on traveler preference. Destinations like Rockville, Westminster, Frederick, Hagerstown and Cumberland offer walking tours that can be enjoyed all-year long. Recreational activities such as hiking, biking, paddling and horseback riding add a different, yet powerful dimension to the driving experience. Amenities along the Trail include dining, lodging, shopping, and attractions, which highlight Maryland’s important role in the Civil War. For more detailed travel information, stop by any Maryland Welcome Center, local Visitor Center or contact any of the organizations listed in this guide. For additional Civil War Trails information, visit www.civilwartrails.org. For more travel information, visit www.mdwelcome.org. Tim Tadder, www.tadderphotography.com Tadder, Tim Biking through C&O Canal National Historical Park. Follow these signs to more than 1,000 Civil War sites. Detail of painting “Serious Work Ahead” by Civil War Artist Dale Gallon, www.gallon.com, (717) 334-0430.
    [Show full text]
  • Gettysburg 8X11.Pub
    Fauquier County in the Civil War From 1861-1865, Fauquier County’s “hallowed grounds” were the site of twelve battles and count- less troop movements, raids, skirmishes, and en- Gettysburg campments. With its proximity to Wash- ington, DC, the county was key terri- Campaign tory in Union and Confederate strategy. In 1862 and 1863, General Robert E. Lee used Fauquier County to his advan- tage. The engage- Warrenton Courthouse,1862. ments at Rappahan- Photo by Timothy O’Sullivan. New nock Station I and York Historical Society collection. Thoroughfare Gap were indispensable to his victory at Second Manas- sas in August 1862, while the cavalry battles at Brandy Station, Aldie, Middleburg, and Upperville shielded Lee’s infantry as he commenced his sec- ond invasion of the North during the spring of 1863. After a fateful engagement in Gettysburg, Pennsyl- vania, Fauquier County’s role in the war changed. No longer the cradle of Confederate invasion, the battle lands of Manassas Gap, Auburn, Buckland Mills, and Rappahannock Station II were Lee’s path of retreat. Yet, much as Gettysburg did not end the war, Lee’s retreat was not the last that Fauquier County saw of Civil War soldiers. Throughout the Civil War, the “hallowed grounds” of Fauquier County were con- tested fields of battle. ■ June-July 1863 Goose Creek Bridge in 2008. Photograph by Garry Adelman. Gettysburg Campaign June-July 1863 Following a brilliant yet costly victory at Chancellorsville in May 1863, Confederate General Robert E. Lee set his sights, and his army, on a second invasion of the North. In June 1863, Lee moved his army north toward Pennsylvania.
    [Show full text]
  • Lesson Plan HISTORY
    Lesson Plan HISTORY JUNE 3–JUNE 30, 1863 HIGHLIGHTS Prelude to the Battle of Gettysburg Robert E. Lee, CSA Commander of the Army OPENING/ESSENTIAL QUESTION of Northern Virginia George G. Meade, USA Robert E. Lee was Commander of the Army of the Potomac the Confederacy’s Why did the greatest land battle ever fought on the greatest and most loved This native Pennsylvanian would find commander. He led North American continent occur at Gettysburg? himself in command of the Union Army of one of the most daring the Potomac only three days before the armies ever organized, In the summer of 1863, the southern Pennsylvania hamlet of Gettysburg Battle of Gettysburg. His temperament was the Army of Northern harsh and he could be difficult to deal with, Virginia. The general would hardly have been chosen as the site of the turning point of the Civil War. but Meade would lead his army into the was at the pinnacle of greatest battle they had seen and would his career and his army Gettysburg was a rural crossroads. It had no military significance to either the prove to be equal to the task in defeating apparently unstoppable Union or Confederate army. Yet this sleepy little town would be the site of Lee. His success at Gettysburg would be when they marched into later marred by critics who felt that he was the North that summer the greatest land battle ever fought in North America during the three days too slow in chasing Lee back into Virginia. of 1863, but the Battle of Gettysburg would prove of July 1-3, 1863.
    [Show full text]