DOCSLIB.ORG

Guerrilla Warfare in Western Virginia, 1861-1865 ! !

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Guerrilla Warfare in Western Virginia, 1861-1865 ! ! ! LIBERTY UNIVERSITY ! ! “THEY CANNOT CATCH GUERRILLAS IN THE MOUNTAINS ANY MORE THAN A COW CAN CATCH FLEAS”: GUERRILLA WARFARE IN WESTERN VIRGINIA, 1861-1865 ! ! A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE HISTORY DEPARTMENT IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF HISTORY ! ! BY KARISSA A. MARKEN ! ! LYNCHBURG, VIRGINIA APRIL 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS! ! !Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………1 Chapter I—Family and Cause: Guerrillas !Who Fought for Military Strategy…………………………………………………….…………29 Chapter II—Bandits, Outlawry, and Terror: !Guerrillas Motivated by Personal Advancement…………………………….…………………..73 Chapter III—A True People’s War: Guerrillas !Involved for Self-Preservation………………………………….………………………………100 !Conclusion…………………………………………………………..….….….….…..….….….132 !Bibliography………………………………………………………………….….….….………146 ! ! INTRODUCTION The American Civil War unleashed great violence and chaos in the western mountains of Virginia. There, in Appalachia, guerrilla warfare impacted a greater number of southerners than the war’s organized military campaigns. It quickly evolved into two distinct types: hostilities aimed against outside invaders and violence that occurred among neighbors. Missouri and Arkansas experienced this conflict on the largest scale, but the Appalachian Mountains, where the terrain provided shelter and the element of surprise for guerrillas, also suffered a sizable amount of armed internal conflict. From northern Georgia, western North Carolina and Virginia, and eastern Tennessee and Kentucky, mountaineers battled national and state upheaval while trying to discern which political allegiances offered the securest future. This was especially challenging for those who lived along the northern border of the Confederacy, an area that changed hands as organized troops battled for supremacy. In addition, those in western Virginia experienced turbulence on two levels—a division of the state occurring within the division of the country. The conflict there between Unionists and secessionists remained bitter throughout the war, even after 50 counties split away to form the state of West Virginia in 1863. Guerrilla conflict in the Confederacy created an outlet for those with strong family ties to contribute to the war effort close to home, but it also opened the door for violence and lawlessness to spread in contested areas. According to historian Daniel Sutherland, guerrilla conflict was not a sideshow to the larger war, but a crucial part, influencing the strategy of both politicians and soldiers. “It touched the lives of untold numbers of southern civilians and their communities. In much of the South, it was more than just part of the larger war; it was the war itself, a war with its own rules, its own chronology, its own policies, its own turning points, its !1 own heroes, villains, and victims. In the end, it altered the nature of the entire conflict to a startling degree.”1 An understanding of that guerrilla conflict, then, is essential to gain a complete picture of the Civil War. However, for nearly a century after the war’s end, scholars largely ignored this particular subject. In the foreword of Virgil Carrington Jones’s 1956 groundbreaking work Gray Ghosts and Rebel Raiders, Bruce Catton lamented that guerrilla warfare in the Civil War had been treated “as a colorful, annoying, but largely unimportant side issue.”2 For the citizens who lived under the terror and anarchy guerrilla warfare provoked, however, the subject was anything but a side issue. Soldiers who fought in the great campaigns could clearly identify their enemies, but those left at home often had no such luxury. As law and order collapsed in the chaos of a lingering war, southerners became trapped in a style of conflict that did not differentiate between combatant and civilian. The unpredictability of when violence might occur added to the horror, as neighbor turned against neighbor and communities split over political differences.3 Western Virginia’s unique civil war occurring within the context of the national struggle caused an area once united against the aristocratic eastern half of the state to be divided by a new state line in June 1863. The area impacted included all of present-day West Virginia and southwestern Virginia. The northern counties bordered the Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Ohio state lines, while the western and southern boundary continued along Virginia’s 1861 boarder touching Kentucky, Tennessee, and North Carolina. The eastern border followed the higher 1 Daniel E. Sutherland, “Sideshow No Longer,” Civil War History 46:1 (Mar. 2000): 5. 2 Sutherland, “Sideshow No Longer,” 5; Bruce Catton, foreword to Virgil Carrington Jones, Gray Ghosts and Rebel Raiders: The Daring Exploits of the Confederate Guerrillas (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1956), vii. 3 For a more in-depth study on the characteristics of guerrilla warfare during the Civil War, see Michael Fellman’s introduction in Inside War: The Guerrilla Conflict in Missouri During the American Civil War (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989). !2 Hancock Western Virginia Brooke Ohio 1860 *Wheeling Pennsylvania Marshall Wetzel Monongalia Ohio Maryland Pleasants Tyler Marion Preston Morgan Doddridge Harrison Taylor Hampshire Berkeley Wood Ritchie Barbour Tucker Wirt Lewis Hardy Calhoun Gilmer Randolph Mason Upshur Jackson Roane Braxton Pendleton !3 Webster Putnam Clay Cabell Charleston Highland Kanawah* Nicholas Pocahontas Wayne Boone Bath Fayette Greenbrier Virginia Logan Raleigh Alleghany Kentucky Wyoming Monroe McDowell Craig Mercer Buchanan Giles Tazewell Montgomery Bland Pulaski Wise Russell Wythe Floyd Smyth Scott Lee Washington Carroll Grayson Western Virginia Map. April 2014. Image created by author. All rights reserved. Tennessee North Carolina elevation on a Virginia topographic map, with Carroll, Floyd, Montgomery, Craig, Alleghany, Bath, and Highland Counties marking the boundary. A study of guerrilla warfare in western Virginia is valuable to the historiography of Civil War studies in at least four ways. First, it supports findings from studies of other areas of Appalachia that seek to explain the prevalence of such conflict in the mountains. The importance of kin was central to mountaineers’ actions, and family ties contributed to the brutality of the guerrilla conflict in the area. Second, such a study challenges the myth of a Union Appalachia during the war. While some areas of the mountains remained loyal to the Union, the region as a whole was not united and contained much secessionist sentiment. Third, it offers the backdrop for the political wrangling on both state and national levels that culminated in the creation of the state of West Virginia. Some politicians in favor of the new state argued that a separate state was necessary to pacify the region. Finally, it fills an important gap in the historiography of Civil War Virginia. What work has been done on guerrilla warfare in Virginia focuses mainly on northern Virginia. Western Virginia needs further study and consideration because it was unique from any other area in Appalachia or the Confederacy. When historian Stephen Ash wrote about the occupied South, he opted not to consider western Virginia at all, because in that area it was debatable “just who the real ‘invaders’ were,” and he believed it deserved a separate telling.4 Although Appalachia Virginia was similar to other areas of Appalachia in some respects—the citizens, for example, held firm to their beliefs regardless of outside influences or what the political climate dictated—it was unique in that a portion of its residents successfully seceded 4 Stephen V. Ash, When the Yankees Came: Conflict and Chaos in the Occupied South, 1861-1865 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1995), x. !4 from their state, thereby officially asserting their independence and intention to do what was best for themselves, regardless of consequences. In the few studies available on western Virginia, historians have separated the southwestern portion from the group of counties that now make up West Virginia and do not consider the area as the bloc that it was before the war, with no clear line dividing north from south.5 By the mid-nineteenth century, western Virginia was separated from the eastern part of the state by geology, economic systems, social characteristics, and political orientations. These regional tensions had existed since the earliest days of settlement. The Allegheny Mountains formed the most distinct physical division within Virginia, separating eastern Virginia from western. Eastern Virginia’s agricultural economy relied extensively on slave labor, a system not conducive to the rough terrain in the west where significantly fewer slaves lived. The most divisive differences, however, lay in the political realm. The planter aristocracy from mostly English descent in the Tidewater and Piedmont regions dominated Virginia politics, while settlers in the western part of the state were Scotch-Irish with more democratic roots. Those Scotch-Irish roots had created a culture filled with endemic violence and retributive justice where individuals were the guardians of their own interests and self-sovereignty kept the order. Politically, eastern and western Virginia differed on issues such as internal improvements, education, land policies, and taxation; ultimately eastern control of state politics ensured those disagreements were 5 Kenneth Noe correctly points out that several regions existed within these east/west sections, and that antebellum
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CWSAC Report Update
    U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service American Battlefield Protection Program Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields Commonwealth of Kentucky Washington, DC October 2008 Update to the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields Commonwealth of Kentucky U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service American Battlefield Protection Program Washington, DC October 2008 Authority The American Battlefield Protection Program Act of 1996, as amended by the Civil War Battlefield Preservation Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-359, 111 Stat. 3016, 17 December 2002), directs the Secretary of the Interior to update the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission (CWSAC) Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields. Acknowledgments NPS Project Team Paul Hawke, Project Leader; Kathleen Madigan, Survey Coordinator; Tanya Gossett, Reporting; Lisa Rupple and Shannon Davis, Preservation Specialists; Matthew Borders, Historian; Renee S. Novak and Gweneth Langdon, Interns. Battlefield Surveyor(s) Joseph E. Brent, Mudpuppy and Waterdog, Inc. Respondents Betty Cole, Barbourville Tourist and Recreation Commission; James Cass, Camp Wildcat Preservation Foundation; Tres Seymour, Battle for the Bridge Historic Preserve/Hart County Historical Society; Frank Fitzpatrick, Middle Creek National Battlefield Foundation, Inc.; Rob Rumpke, Battle of Richmond Association; Joan House, Kentucky Department of Parks; and William A. Penn. Cover: The Louisville-Nashville Railroad Bridge over the Green River, Munfordville, Kentucky. The stone piers are original to the 1850s. The battles of Munfordville and Rowlett’s Station were waged for control of the bridge and the railroad. Photograph by Joseph Brent. Table of Contents Acknowledgments ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Music and the American Civil War
    “LIBERTY’S GREAT AUXILIARY”: MUSIC AND THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR by CHRISTIAN MCWHIRTER A DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History in the Graduate School of The University of Alabama TUSCALOOSA, ALABAMA 2009 Copyright Christian McWhirter 2009 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ABSTRACT Music was almost omnipresent during the American Civil War. Soldiers, civilians, and slaves listened to and performed popular songs almost constantly. The heightened political and emotional climate of the war created a need for Americans to express themselves in a variety of ways, and music was one of the best. It did not require a high level of literacy and it could be performed in groups to ensure that the ideas embedded in each song immediately reached a large audience. Previous studies of Civil War music have focused on the music itself. Historians and musicologists have examined the types of songs published during the war and considered how they reflected the popular mood of northerners and southerners. This study utilizes the letters, diaries, memoirs, and newspapers of the 1860s to delve deeper and determine what roles music played in Civil War America. This study begins by examining the explosion of professional and amateur music that accompanied the onset of the Civil War. Of the songs produced by this explosion, the most popular and resonant were those that addressed the political causes of the war and were adopted as the rallying cries of northerners and southerners. All classes of Americans used songs in a variety of ways, and this study specifically examines the role of music on the home-front, in the armies, and among African Americans.
    [Show full text]
  • UC Davis Books
    UC Davis Books Title Checklist of Reports Published in the Appendices to the Journals of the California Legislature 1850-1970 Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5wj2k3z4 Author Stratford, Juri Publication Date 2018 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ 4.0 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Checklist of Reports Published in the Appendices to the Journals of the California Legislature 1850-1970 Revised Edition 2018 Juri Stratford Copyright © 2016, 2018 Juri Stratford 2 Introduction The California Legislature published reports in the Appendices to the Journals from 1850 to 1970. The present Checklist covers the reports published in the Appendices to the Journals from 1850 to 1970. The Checklist is arranged by volume. The Appendices include reports produced by California executive agencies as well as the California Legislature. In a few instances, the reports include work by the United States federal government or the University of California. Each entry gives the volume number for the report in one of two formats: 1909(38th)(1) This first example indicates Appendix to the 1909 Journals, Volume 1, 38th session. The Legislature stopped assigning session numbers after the 57th session, 1947. For later years, the Appendices were published as separate series of Senate and Assembly volumes. For some years, only Senate volumes were published. 1955(S)(1) This second example indicates Appendix to the 1955 Senate Journals, Volume 1. 3 4 1850(1st)(Journal of the Legislature) McDougall, Lieut. Governor and President, &c.. [G] 1850(1st)(Journal of the Legislature) Special Report of Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Uncertainty and Civil War Onset
    Uncertainty and Civil War Onset Iris Malone∗ Abstract Why do some armed groups escalate their campaigns to civil war, while others do not? Only 25% of the 960 armed groups formed between 1970 and 2012 became violent enough to surpass the 25-battle death threshold, often used to demarcate \civil conflict.” I develop a new theory that argues this variation occurs because of an information problem. States decide how much counterinsurgency effort to allocate for repression on the basis of observable characteristics about an armed group's initial capabilities, but two scenarios make it harder to get this decision right, increasing the risk of civil war. I use fieldwork interviews with intelligence and defense officials to identify important group characteristics for civil war and apply machine learning methods to test the predictive ability of these indicators. The results show that less visible armed groups in strong states and strong armed groups in weak states are most likely to lead to civil war onset. These findings advance scholarly understanding about why civil wars begin and the effect of uncertainty on conflict. ∗Department of Political Science, 100 Encina Hall West, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. ([email protected], web.stanford.edu/~imalone). 1 Introduction Why do some armed groups escalate their campaigns to civil war, while most do not? Using an original dataset, I show that only 25% of the 960 armed groups formed between 1970 and 2012 became violent enough to surpass the 25-battle death threshold, often used to demarcate \civil conflict.”1 Only 8% of armed groups surpassed the higher \civil war" threshold of 1000 fatalities per year.
    [Show full text]
  • The Use of Helicopters Against Guerrillas the Israeli Model
    JEMEAA - FEATURE The Use of Helicopters against Guerrillas The Israeli Model DR. TAL TOVY ince its establishment, the State of Israel has been facing a bloody struggle against terrorism and guerrilla warfare, in addition to four conventional wars.1 The Israeli war against guerrilla fighters or terrorists began almost Simmediately after the War of Independence. Palestinian terrorists attempted to infiltrate Israel from the surrounding Arab countries and perform sabotage ac- tions near the border, which were little more than lines drawn on a map and proved wholly inadequate in stopping the infiltrations. After the 1967 war, most terrorists crossed over from Jordan. Following the “Black September” conflict in 1970 and up until 1982 (Operation Peace for Galilee), most terrorists infiltrated through the Lebanese border. In the 1980s and 1990s, Israel fought against the Shiite Amal Movement and Hezbollah organization in Lebanon. Since October 2000, Israel has struggled against widespread military uprisings in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. To counter these activities, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) uses various opera- tional methods. Special Forces have raided known terrorist bases and routine se- curity activities have been conducted along the borders and in the major cities. A third method has been targeting specific terrorist leaders or installations in the Middle East and in Europe. Most operations of the first and third categories are still classified. The IDF has launched a few large attacks targeting terrorist infra- structure—for example Karameh and Litany—with the most extensive one being the Lebanon War (1982), at least initially. In these large-scale operations, Israel has deployed massive infantry, armor, and artillery forces.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil War Generals Buried in Spring Grove Cemetery by James Barnett
    Spring Grove Cemetery, once characterized as blending "the elegance of a park with the pensive beauty of a burial-place," is the final resting- place of forty Cincinnatians who were generals during the Civil War. Forty For the Union: Civil War Generals Buried in Spring Grove Cemetery by James Barnett f the forty Civil War generals who are buried in Spring Grove Cemetery, twenty-three had advanced from no military experience whatsoever to attain the highest rank in the Union Army. This remarkable feat underscores the nature of the Northern army that suppressed the rebellion of the Confed- erate states during the years 1861 to 1865. Initially, it was a force of "inspired volunteers" rather than a standing army in the European tradition. Only seven of these forty leaders were graduates of West Point: Jacob Ammen, Joshua H. Bates, Sidney Burbank, Kenner Garrard, Joseph Hooker, Alexander McCook, and Godfrey Weitzel. Four of these seven —Burbank, Garrard, Mc- Cook, and Weitzel —were in the regular army at the outbreak of the war; the other three volunteered when the war started. Only four of the forty generals had ever been in combat before: William H. Lytle, August Moor, and Joseph Hooker served in the Mexican War, and William H. Baldwin fought under Giuseppe Garibaldi in the Italian civil war. This lack of professional soldiers did not come about by chance. When the Constitutional Convention met in Philadelphia in 1787, its delegates, who possessed a vast knowledge of European history, were determined not to create a legal basis for a standing army. The founding fathers believed that the stand- ing armies belonging to royalty were responsible for the endless bloody wars that plagued Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • The Border Star
    The Border Star Official Publication of the Civil War Round Table of Western Missouri “Studying the Border War and Beyond” April 2011 The bombardment of Fort Sumter on April 12, 1861 was the The Civil War Round Table Cwas was e opening engagement of the American Civil War. The 150th Anofnive Westernrsary onMissouri April 12, Anniversary of the American Civil War is upon us! ………………………………………………………………………………................. 2011 Officers President --------------- Mike Calvert 1st V.P. -------------------- Pat Gradwohl 2nd V.P. ------------------- Art Kelley President’s Letter Secretary ---------------- Karen Wells Treasurer ---------------- Beverly Shaw Many years ago when I was just a lowly freshman at the University of Missouri, Historian ------------------ Open Rolla there was a road sign just as you made the turn onto Pine Street (the main Board Members street) that read “Rolla Missouri, the Watch Me City of the Show Me State” Delbert Coin Karen Coin Little did I know that that same sign could have describe Rolla in 1861. At the Terry Chronister Barbara Hughes terminus of the St Louis-San Francisco Railroad, Rolla was a strategic depot for Don Moorehead Kathy Moorehead all the campaigns into southwest Missouri to follow. Seized by Franz Siegel for Steve Olson Carol Olson Liz Murphy Terry McConnell the Union on June 14, 1861 it remained in Union hands throughout the war. So important as a supply depot that two forts were built to protect it (Fort Wyman The Border Star Editor and Fort Dettec). 20,000 troops were stationed there under orders from President Dennis Myers Lincoln to hold it at all costs. Phil Sheridan was stationed there as a Captain in 12800 E.
    [Show full text]
  • Social-Property Relations, Class-Conflict and The
    Historical Materialism 19.4 (2011) 129–168 brill.nl/hima Social-Property Relations, Class-Conflict and the Origins of the US Civil War: Towards a New Social Interpretation* Charles Post City University of New York [email protected] Abstract The origins of the US Civil War have long been a central topic of debate among historians, both Marxist and non-Marxist. John Ashworth’s Slavery, Capitalism, and Politics in the Antebellum Republic is a major Marxian contribution to a social interpretation of the US Civil War. However, Ashworth’s claim that the War was the result of sharpening political and ideological – but not social and economic – contradictions and conflicts between slavery and capitalism rests on problematic claims about the rôle of slave-resistance in the dynamics of plantation-slavery, the attitude of Northern manufacturers, artisans, professionals and farmers toward wage-labour, and economic restructuring in the 1840s and 1850s. An alternative social explanation of the US Civil War, rooted in an analysis of the specific path to capitalist social-property relations in the US, locates the War in the growing contradiction between the social requirements of the expanded reproduction of slavery and capitalism in the two decades before the War. Keywords origins of capitalism, US Civil War, bourgeois revolutions, plantation-slavery, agrarian petty- commodity production, independent-household production, merchant-capital, industrial capital The Civil War in the United States has been a major topic of historical debate for almost over 150 years. Three factors have fuelled scholarly fascination with the causes and consequences of the War. First, the Civil War ‘cuts a bloody gash across the whole record’ of ‘the American .
    [Show full text]
  • The Ohio National Guard Before the Militia Act of 1903
    THE OHIO NATIONAL GUARD BEFORE THE MILITIA ACT OF 1903 A thesis submitted To Kent State University in partial Fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts By Cyrus Moore August, 2015 © Copyright All rights reserved Except for previously published materials Thesis written by Cyrus Moore B.S., Ohio University, 2011 M.A., Kent State University, 2015 Approved by Kevin J. Adams, Professor, Ph.D., Department of History Master’s Advisor Kenneth J. Bindas, Professor, Ph.D, Chair, Department of History James L Blank, Ph.D., Dean, College of Arts and Sciences Table of Contents Introduction………………………………………………………………………………1 Chapter I. Republican Roots………………………………………………………19 II. A Vulnerable State……………………………………………………..35 III. Riots and Strikes………………………………………………………..64 IV. From Mobilization to Disillusionment………………………………….97 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………….125 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………..136 Introduction The Ohio Militia and National Guard before 1903 The second half of the nineteenth century witnessed a profound change in the militia in the United States. Driven by the rivalry between modern warfare and militia tradition, the role as well as the ideology of the militia institution fitfully progressed beyond its seventeenth century origins. Ohio’s militia, the third largest in the country at the time, strove to modernize while preserving its relevance. Like many states in the early republic, Ohio’s militia started out as a sporadic group of reluctant citizens with little military competency. The War of the Rebellion exposed the serious flaws in the militia system, but also demonstrated why armed citizen-soldiers were necessary to the defense of the state. After the war ended, the militia struggled, but developed into a capable military organization through state-imposed reform.
    [Show full text]
  • • Congressional Record-House
    - 3966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. M..A.RCH 19, VillGINIA. Carpenters Jacob Jacobson and Lewis S. Warford to be chief Stith Bolling to be postmaster at Peteraburg, in the county of carpenters in the Navy from the 20th day of February, 19.06, Dinwiddie and State of Virginia, in place of Stith Bolling. In­ upon the completion of six years' service. cumbent's commission expires April 26, 1906. Cllarles T. Holtzman to be postmaster at Luray, in the county WITHDRAWAL. of Page and State of Virginia, in place of Charles T. Holtzman. Incumbent's commisaion expired 1\Iarcb 4, 1906. Executive nomination withdrawn March 19, 1906. John 0. Jackson to be postmaster at Blackstone, in the John Hiller, jr., to be postmaster at Kenilworth (late New county of Nottoway and State of Virginia, in place of John 0. Orange), in the State of New Jersey. Jackson. Incumbent's commission expired February 10, 1906. WEST VffiGI~IA. Ricllard A. Hall to be postmaster at Weston, in the county HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. of Lewis and State of Weat Virginia, in place of Richard A. 1\:foNDAY, March 19, 1906. Ilall. Incumbent's commission expired 1\Iarch 3, 1906. Alonzo E. Linch to be .Postmaster at 1\Ioundsville, in the The House met at 12 o'clock m. cotmty of Marshall and Sta.te of West Virginia, in place of Prayer by Rev. A. B. CHURCH, president of Buchtel College, Alonzo E. Linch. Incumbent's commission expired 1\Iarch 4, Akron, Ohio. 1906. The Journal of the proceedings of Friday last was read and WISCO.
    [Show full text]
  • West Virginia Trail Inventory
    West Virginia Trail Inventory Trail report summarized by county, prepared by the West Virginia GIS Technical Center updated 9/24/2014 County Name Trail Name Management Area Managing Organization Length Source (mi.) Date Barbour American Discovery American Discovery Trail 33.7 2009 Trail Society Barbour Brickhouse Nobusiness Hill Little Moe's Trolls 0.55 2013 Barbour Brickhouse Spur Nobusiness Hill Little Moe's Trolls 0.03 2013 Barbour Conflicted Desire Nobusiness Hill Little Moe's Trolls 2.73 2013 Barbour Conflicted Desire Nobusiness Hill Little Moe's Trolls 0.03 2013 Shortcut Barbour Double Bypass Nobusiness Hill Little Moe's Trolls 1.46 2013 Barbour Double Bypass Nobusiness Hill Little Moe's Trolls 0.02 2013 Connector Barbour Double Dip Trail Nobusiness Hill Little Moe's Trolls 0.2 2013 Barbour Hospital Loop Nobusiness Hill Little Moe's Trolls 0.29 2013 Barbour Indian Burial Ground Nobusiness Hill Little Moe's Trolls 0.72 2013 Barbour Kid's Trail Nobusiness Hill Little Moe's Trolls 0.72 2013 Barbour Lower Alum Cave Trail Audra State Park WV Division of Natural 0.4 2011 Resources Barbour Lower Alum Cave Trail Audra State Park WV Division of Natural 0.07 2011 Access Resources Barbour Prologue Nobusiness Hill Little Moe's Trolls 0.63 2013 Barbour River Trail Nobusiness Hill Little Moe's Trolls 1.26 2013 Barbour Rock Cliff Trail Audra State Park WV Division of Natural 0.21 2011 Resources Barbour Rock Pinch Trail Nobusiness Hill Little Moe's Trolls 1.51 2013 Barbour Short course Bypass Nobusiness Hill Little Moe's Trolls 0.1 2013 Barbour
    [Show full text]
  • The American Civil War: a War of Logistics
    THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR: A WAR OF LOGISTICS Franklin M. Welter A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS December 2015 Committee: Rebecca Mancuso, Advisor Dwayne Beggs © 2015 Franklin M. Welter All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Rebecca Mancuso, Advisor The American Civil War was the first modern war. It was fought with weapons capable of dealing death on a scale never before seen. It was also the first war which saw the widespread use of the railroad. Across the country men, materials, and supplies were transported along the iron rails which industrial revolution swept in. Without the railroads, the Union would have been unable to win the war. All of the resources, men, and materials available to the North mean little when they cannot be shipped across the great expanse which was the North during the Civil War. The goals of this thesis are to examine the roles and issues faced by seemingly independent people in very different situations during the war, and to investigate how the problems which these people encountered were overcome. The first chapter, centered in Ohio, gives insight into the roles which noncombatants played in the process. Farmers, bakers, and others behind the lines. Chapter two covers the journey across the rails, the challenges faced, and how they were overcome. This chapter looks at how those in command handled the railroad, how it affected the battles, especially Gettysburg, and how the railroads were defended over the course of the war, something which had never before needed to be considered.
    [Show full text]