DOCSLIB.ORG

Civil War, This Battle Gave Abraham Lincoln the Perceived Victory He Desired to Release the Emancipation Proclamation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Civil War, This Battle Gave Abraham Lincoln the Perceived Victory He Desired to Release the Emancipation Proclamation Important Battles of the Civil War These battles represent significant events in the American Civil War. The important event(s) of the battle or its aftermath follow the name of the battle in text. 1. First Bull Run (First Manassas) Virginia First significant action of The American Civil War, Bull Run shocked the North into the realization that it would not be a three-month war. The battle falsely buoyed the South's hopes of negotiating an end to the war. Casualties: 4,700 2,950 Union 1,750 Confederate 2. Shiloh (Pittsburg Landing) April 6, 1862 - April 7, 1862 Tennessee At the time, Shiloh was both the bloodiest single day and bloodiest two-day battle in American history. It served as America's introduction to the "total warfare" of the rest of the Civil War. Until Ulysses S. Grant's advance down the Tennessee River, engagements in the Civil War had been relatively small. The engagement also saw the death of Sidney Albert Johnston, on whom Jefferson Davis had pinned his hopes in the West. Casualties: 23,741 13,047 Union 10,694 Confederate 3. Antietam September 17, 1862 Maryland Bloodiest day of the Civil War, this battle gave Abraham Lincoln the perceived victory he desired to release the Emancipation Proclamation. The costly battle also ended Robert E. Lee's advance into Maryland. Casualties: 23,100 4. Vicksburg (surrendered July 4, 1863) Mississippi Lincoln realized early in the war that control of the Mississippi was a major goal of the Western forces. Ulysses S. Grant delivered the city when the Army of Mississippi surrendered after a prolonged siege. In response Lincoln proclaimed "I have found the man who can win this war." Casualties: 19,233 10,142 Union 9,091 Confederate 5. Seven Days Retreat {June 25, 1862 to July 1, 1862 With the success of George McClellan's Peninsula Campaign, Lincoln and Edwin Stanton agreed on closing the recruitment offices in the north. Then Lee replaced Joe Johnston as commander of the Army of Northern Virginia and aggressively pursued the Army of the Potomac as it retreated down Virginia's Lower Peninsula. Lincoln and Stanton had to admit they were wrong and re-open the offices. 6. Gettysburg July 1, 1863 to July 3, 1863 Pennsylvania George Meade won the largest and most costly battle in American history fought on the farms and hillsides of southern Pennsylvania. The Union victory ended Lee's belief that a single massive victory would defeat the Army of the Potomac. Casualties: 51,000 23,000 Union 28,000 Confederate 7. Chattanooga November 23, 1863 to November 25, 1863 Tennessee Following the worst defeat of any United States army at Chickamauga Lincoln dispatched three of his best generals (Grant, William Tecumseh Sherman, and Joseph Hooker) to Chattanooga. Six weeks later Grant broke out of the city, drove the Confederate Army into Georgia, and began preparing for the Spring campaigns. Casualties: 12,485 5,815 Union 6,670 Confederate 8. Fort Sumter April 12, 1861 to April 13, 1861 South Carolina First action between United States and Confederate forces, this artillery duel resulted in the surrender of the bastion of Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor but no casualties. It served as an indication that the South was willing to fight for federal property it considered to be its own following secession. Casualties: none .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chickamauga the Battle
    Chickamauga the Battle, Text and Photographs By Dennis Steele Senior Staff Writer he Battle of Chickamauga flashed into a white-hot clash on September 19, 1863, following engagements in Teastern and central Tennessee and northern Mississippi that caused the withdrawal of the Confederate Army of Tennessee (renamed from the Army of Mississippi) under GEN Braxton Bragg to Chattanooga, Tenn. Bragg was forced to make a further withdrawal into northwest Georgia after the Union’s Army of the Cumberland, under MG William S. Rosecrans, crossed the Tennessee River below Chattanooga, flanking Bragg’s primary line of defense. Chattanooga was a strategic prize. Union forces needed it as a transportation hub and supply center for the planned campaign into Georgia. The South needed the North not to have it. At LaFayette, Ga., about 26 miles south of Chattanooga, Bragg received reinforcements. After preliminary fights to stop Rosecrans, he crossed Chickamauga Creek to check the Union advance. In two days of bloody fighting, Bragg gained a tactical victory over Rosecrans at Chickamauga, driving the Army of the Cumberland from the battlefield. The stage was set for Bragg to lose the strategic campaign for Chattanooga, however, as he failed to pursue the retreating Union force, allowing it to withdraw into Chattanooga behind a heroic rear-guard stand by a force assembled from the disarray by MG George H. Thomas. The Battle of Chickamauga is cited as the last major Southern victory of the Civil War in the Western Theater. It bled both armies. Although official records are sketchy in part, estimates put Northern casualties at around 16,200 and Southern casualties at around 18,000.
    [Show full text]
  • Not Written in Letters of Blood: the Forgotten Legacy of the Army of the Cumberland”
    Cedarville University DigitalCommons@Cedarville The Research and Scholarship Symposium The 2016 yS mposium Apr 20th, 3:00 PM - 3:20 PM Not Written in Letters of Blood: The orF gotten Legacy of the Army of the Cumberland Andrew R. Perkins Cedarville University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/ research_scholarship_symposium Part of the Military History Commons, and the United States History Commons Perkins, Andrew R., "Not Written in Letters of Blood: The orF gotten Legacy of the Army of the Cumberland" (2016). The Research and Scholarship Symposium. 5. http://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/research_scholarship_symposium/2016/podium_presentations/5 This Podium Presentation is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@Cedarville, a service of the Centennial Library. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Research and Scholarship Symposium by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Cedarville. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Drew Perkins 2 March 2016 “Not Written in Letters of Blood: The Forgotten Legacy of the Army of the Cumberland” There is a chapter missing in the annals of Civil War history. The story of an entire army, and the thousands of men that comprised it, is not being told. That army is the Army of the Cumberland, which teeters on the verge of being lost to history due to three main factors: poorly timed defeats and victories in battle, personal feuds and politicking between Union officers, and the undue emphasis of Civil War historians on Southern Romanticism. While the largest Union army of the war, the Army of the Potomac, has received dozens if not hundreds of publications written about it in the last few decades, the second largest army, the Army of the Cumberland, has garnered no such attention.
    [Show full text]
  • Florida's Civil War Generals
    BIOGRAPHIES OF FLORIDA’S CIVIL WAR GENERALS JAMES PATTON ANDERSON Major-General James Patton Anderson was born in Tennes- see about 1820. Like other en- terprising Americans he lived in so many different sections of the Union that it is a diffi- cult matter to decide to which State he really should be assigned in this record of Confederate generals. At the opening of the Mexi- can war he was living in Mississippi and became lieutenant-colonel of Mississippi volunteers. Al- though he had not had the advantages of an educa- tion at the United States military academy, the Mexi- can conflict proved a good school for him in the military art. The good use he made of his opportu- nities in that practical military training school was afterward evidenced by the skill with which he man- aged troops upon the great arena of war from 1861 to 1865. The man who obtained a good reputation on that great theater of action had to keep abreast of many illustrious men of the same rank with him- self, and that is what General Anderson did. After the close of the Mexican war General Anderson lived for a time in Olympia, in what was then Wash- ington Territory, and served as territorial delegate to the national House of Representatives in 1855. eBooksOnDisk.com eBooksOnDisk.com Before the opening of the Confederate war he had removed to Florida, and as a citizen of Jefferson county he was a member of the secession conven- tion. Feeling, as did most Southern men, that the South was right, he entered heart and soul into the struggle to maintain Southern rights and honor.
    [Show full text]
  • The Day Was December 31, 1862 by Murfreesboro, Tennessee
    A UNITED CAUSE: A LOOK AT THE SOLDIERS IN THE ARMY OF TENNESSEE AND NORTHERN VIRGINIA Ryan J. Czapar History 489 May 4, 2009 Copyright for this work is owned by the author. This digital version is published by McIntyre Library, University of Wisconsin Eau Claire with the consent of the author. CONTENTS ABSTRACT 2 INTRODUCTION 3 Give me liberty or give me death 6 My state is counting on me 10 I would rather die than be known as a coward 15 In God we trust 20 A unity of differences 23 My life is in your hands 28 Winning changes everything 33 BIBLIOGRAPHY 35 1 Abstract The American Civil War was the bloodiest war fought on American soil. In a single battle at Gettysburg, over fifty thousand men were wounded, killed, or missing in action. Even with the severity of war, fathers and brothers marched away from their homes to defend their country. In the South, states seceded from the Union due to states’ rights; however, the soldiers that joined the Confederate armies fought for far more. Whether from Florida, Virginia, Texas, or Alabama, soldiers went to war with the same reasons in mind. This research paper will look at the writings from soldiers in the Army of Tennessee and of Northern Virginia and draw conclusions on whether the soldiers that fought for the Confederacy as a whole had the same reasons for joining and continuing to fight. While many writings put emphasis on the soldiers’ bond to their state or the reasons behind fighting in both Union and Confederate armies, this paper will focus on just soldiers of the Confederacy in hopes to better understand the point of view of the soldiers in two different armies.
    [Show full text]
  • History and Battle Flag of the 32Nd & 45Th Mississippi Infantry Regiment
    “LOST NATIONAL TREASURE” DISCOVERED! Compiled by Robert E. Swinson & Edited by Greg Biggs Hardee/Cleburne 1864 (Type 1) Battle Flag Issued to the 32nd & 45th Mississippi Volunteer Infantry Regiment (Field Consolidated) HARDEE / CLEBURNE 1864 (Type 1) Pattern Flag Confederate Regimental Battle Flag Issued February 1864 to: 32 nd & 45 th Mississippi Volunteer Infantry Regiment (Consolidated); 45 th Mississippi Also Known As 33 rd (Hardcastle’s) And Third Battalion Mississippi Infantry Copyrighted: 2002-2006 – Robert E. Swinson HARDEE / CLEBURNE 1864 (Type 1) Battle Flag Table of Contents “Lost National Treasure” Discovered 3 Introduction 4 Lowrey’s Brigade and the Third Mississippi Infantry Battalion; 32nd Mississippi, 33rd Mississippi (Hardcastle’s) and 45th Mississippi Infantry Regiments 4 Hardee Pattern Battle Flags; and the 32 nd & 45 th Mississippi Flag 22 The “Colorful” Flag Bearer of the Third Battalion Mississippi Infantry 27 Virtual CSA Purple Heart Award 33 What Lowrey’s Brigade Faced at the Battle of Franklin From Soldiers’ Views 33 Carnton Plantation and McGavock Confederate Cemetery 38 Fountain B. Carter House and Battle of Franklin 40 Finding This Flag and Discovering Its Heritage 41 Flag Authentication 43 Unpublished Sources - Documents and Items of Support 44 Published Sources (Partial List) - Documents and Items of Support 46 Additional Identified Sources (Mostly Unpublished) 46 Contact Information 47 Work in progress 47 Civil War Flag, Regiment and Name Research Services Available 47 May 8, 2006 2 HARDEE / CLEBURNE 1864 (Type 1) Battle Flag HARDEE / CLEBURNE 1864 (Type 1) Pattern Flag Confederate Regimental Battle Flag Issued February 1864 to: 32 nd & 45 th Mississippi Volunteer Infantry Regiment (Consolidated); th rd 45 Mississippi Also Known As 33 (Hardcastle’s) And Third Battalion Mississippi Infantry Hardee/Cleburne 1864 (Type 1) Battle Flag Issued to the 32nd & 45th Mississippi Volunteer Infantry Regiment (Field Consolidated) (Copyrighted: 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 – Robert E.
    [Show full text]
  • Legacy Commission Streets Named in Honor of Slavery, Slave Owners
    Legacy Commission Streets Named in Honor of Slavery, Slave Owners, Confederate Veterans, and Supporters of White Supremacy Compiled by Dr. Willie Griffin- Levine Museum of the New South As announced by The Charlotte Observer, on June 24, 2020, amid a nationwide movement to remove monuments of the Confederacy, Mayor Vi Lyles, through a memorandum, announced plans to create the 15-member commission that would review monuments and street names tied to the Confederacy and the legacy of Jim Crow. This commission will then make recommendations for how to contextualize the history properly around these monuments and street names by December. The following streets are named for leaders of the Confederacy and white supremacists who actively fought to defend slavery and against racial equality. The Commission has recommended these streets for name changes. 1) Jefferson Davis Street (City Street) During the Civil War, Jefferson Davis served as President of the Confederate States from 1861 to 1865. At the war’s end, he encouraged reconciliation and implored Southerners to be loyal to the Union. However, by the 1880s, former Confederates saw him as a hero of the Lost Cause of the Confederacy. Jefferson Davis was born in Fairview, Kentucky, and died in New Orleans, Louisiana. He had no extensive ties to Charlotte, beyond retreating to the city during the last days of the Civil War and holding his final executive cabinet meeting at William Phifer’s home.1 There is a Jefferson Davis Street located in the Druid Hill community in West Charlotte. The street is dead-ended at both ends and has only one cross street, Moretz Avenue.
    [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 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]
  • Braxton Bragg on Leadership: a Historical Case Study On
    BRAXTON BRAGG ON LEADERSHIP: A HISTORICAL CASE STUDY ON LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE IN THE ARMY OF TENNESSEE By Robert Daniel Stinson Approved: John A. Freeman Vicki N. Petzko Professor Professor (Chair) (Committee Member) Wilfred M. McClay Lucien Ellington Professor Professor (Committee Member) (Committee Member) Owen Sweatt External Reviewer (Committee Member) Tony Lease A. Jerald Ainsworth Dean of the College of Health, Education, Dean of the Graduate School and Professional Studies BRAXTON BRAGG ON LEADERSHIP: A HISTORICAL CASE STUDY ON LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE IN THE ARMY OF TENNESSEE By Robert Daniel Stinson A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of Doctor of Education The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga Chattanooga, Tennessee May 2013 ii Copyright © 2013 By Robert Daniel Stinson All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT This historical case study was designed to analyze and describe the quality of the relationships between one historical, military commander, GEN Braxton Bragg, commander of the Confederate Army of Tennessee, and his senior lieutenants, through the lens of a contemporary, relationship-centered model of leadership dynamics, Leader-Member Exchange (LMX). The results of this research fill a void in the examination of historical leadership in light of contemporary theoretical frameworks. In addition, this study enables organizational leaders, from a variety of contexts, to identify the various dynamics between leader-member
    [Show full text]
  • Harvard Confederates Who Fell in the Civil
    Advocates for Harvard ROTC HARVARD CONFEDERATES H Total served Killed in Action Died by disease & accidents Harvard College* 145 19 5 (all by disease) Harvard Law School 227 33 7 (all by accidents) Harvard Medical School 3 0 0 Miscellaneous /unknown NA 12 ? Total 357 64 12 *Including the Lawrence Scientific School at Harvard The above total of Harvard alumni serving in the Confederate military included five major generals and eight brigadier generals, three of which were killed in battle. In addition, there were 29 Harvard alumni serving as civilians in the Confederate government. It surprises some that 28% of all Harvard alumni who served in the Civil War fought for the South but Harvard Confederates represent 44% of the sons of Harvard killed in action during this conflict. As result among Harvard alumni, Confederate military losses were 21% compared with a 10% casualty rate for the Union Army. Confederate soldiers were forced by the statutes of the Congress of the Southern Confederacy to serve throughout the war, regardless of the terms of their enlistment or commission, which was not the case on the Union side. Thus, Confederate soldiers generally participated in more engagements than the Union troops. Thus, Confederate soldiers generally participated in more engagements than the Union troops. Among the Confederate casualties from Harvard were: • An officer who was killed in the same battle where his brother fought as an officer in the Union Army • A brigadier general who was the brother in law of Abraham Lincoln. As expected, most of the Harvard alumni killed in the service of the Confederacy were born and raised in the Southern states.
    [Show full text]
  • The Confederate Use and Efficacy of Irregular Warfare in the American Civil War
    James Madison University JMU Scholarly Commons Masters Theses The Graduate School Spring 2014 "Young bloods of the South:" The onfedeC rate use and efficacy of irregular warfare in the American Civil War Lucas Allamon James Madison University Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/master201019 Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Allamon, Lucas, ""Young bloods of the South:" The onfeC derate use and efficacy of irregular warfare in the American Civil War" (2014). Masters Theses. 130. https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/master201019/130 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the The Graduate School at JMU Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of JMU Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. “Young Bloods of the South:” The Confederate Use and Efficacy of Irregular Warfare in the American Civil War Lucas Allamon A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of JAMES MADISON UNIVERSITY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Department of History May 2014 To my parents, who always encouraged my interests, and to my wife Ali, for her patience, love, and support. i Acknowledgments Special thanks to Dr. Dillard for his careful and patient editing and his conceptual insight, and to Dr. Guerrier and Dr. Gubser for their editing assistance and service on my Orals committee. Along with these professors, I would like to thank Drs. Ardnt, Linear, King, Hyser, and Van Norman. Every class and faculty member I have taken during my time at J.M.U.
    [Show full text]
  • The Kentucky Campaign and the Battle of Antietam-2
    Melanie Cartron IB History of the Americas Period 1 The Civil War 1862 By 1862, the success of the Confederate army was declining. The Union was thriving after victories at Fort Donelson and Fort Henry and had gained control of several key points of power, including New Orleans and much of West Tennessee. The Confederacy was looking for a way to improve their standings in the war, especially in the Western Theatre. General Braxton Bragg Born on March 22, 1817 in Warrenton, North Carolina Graduated from West Point in 1837 where frontal assaults were the most popular war tactic Served in the Seminole and Mexican Wars Characterized as temperamental and rash Relationship With Jefferson Davis During the Mexican War, Braxton Bragg helped the regiment of Jefferson Davis to hold off an army of Mexicans. Both men admired and respected each other greatly, which would lead Davis to favor and prioritize Bragg in several key and critical decisions. The Confederate Heartland Offensive In June 1862, Jefferson Davis appointed Braxton Bragg as General of the Army of Mississippi, hoping he would gain the much needed success for the Confederacy. Bragg plotted to invade Kentucky, hoping to gain support and troops as well as shift the focus of the war. Main goal was to make Kentucky part of the Confederacy Kentucky as a Border State At the beginning of the war, Kentucky remained neutral Was a slavery state, but did not secede While the Kentucky government would eventually become Unionist, Kentucky’s potential to becoming supportive of the Confederacy sparked interest Bragg’s Invasion of Kentucky In August of 1862, Bragg began his invasion of Kentucky He left Mississippi with 34,000 men and hoped to join forces with Lieutenant General Edmund Kirby Smith's 18,000 soldiers once in Kentucky.
    [Show full text]