DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter III the ROAD to SHILOH A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Chapter III THE ROAD TO SHILOH A. The War in the West - Kentucky announces neutrality - Governor pro-south - legislature pro-north - CSA troops move into the state breaking the neutrality - Kentucky invites the USA into the state B. Forts Henry & Donelson February, 1862 - USA General Ulysses Simpson Grant invades Tennessee, teaming with the navy he takes both forts which gives the USA control of both the Tennessee and Cumberland rivers, forcing CSA forces to abandon Nashville TN, the first southern capitol to fall to USA forces. - surrender of Ft. Donelson - 2 of the 3 CSA commanders sneak out, leaving CSA Gen. Simon Buckner (an old friend of Grant’s) to deal with the surrender. - Buckner asks for conditions and Grant responds that he will only accept an “Unconditional Surrender”. - the press seizes on this victory to find a new hero, “Unconditional Surrender” Grant. (U. S. Grant) C. The Battle of Shiloh (Pittsburg Landing) April 6-7, 1862 Commanders: USA Major Gen. U. S. Grant 40,000 men - Army of the Tennessee USA Major Gen. Don Carlos Buell 23,000 men - Army of the Ohio CSA Gen. Albert Sidney Johnston 40,000 men CSA Gen. P.G.T. Beauregard (advisor) PHASE I Grant sets up camp near the Mississippi boarder and waits to link up with Buell. Johnston calls together all of the troops in the western theatre to attack Grant before he is reinforced by Buell. Due to inexperience, Johnston’s troops take 3 days to travel 23 miles, however, USA troops (USA Gen. William T. Sherman) don’t heed the warnings of enemy forces in the area. Johnston launches the attack and with the element of surprise forces Grant’s troops back. Johnston’s attack begins to loose steam due to the loss of command caused by the order of battle. Johnston lined up his corps in long lines so as the attack ensued they became disconnected from one another. The USA center fails to fall back due to a stubborn defense at an area dubbed the “Hornets Nest”. As Johnston arrives on the field to direct an attack on the “Hornet’s Nest”, he is wounded and eventually dies from his wound at around 2:30 in the afternoon. (an artery is severed behind his kneecap and he eventually bleeds to death). PHASE II Grant organizes a defense around Pittsburg Landing and holds off a final attack following the collapse of the “Hornet’s Nest”. Another larger final attack was called off by Beauregard who was miles away, unaware of the situation Grant was in. During the night Buell’s troops arrive and reinforce Grant’s position. On the following day Grant & Buell attack Beauregard and begin to push him back. Beauregard eventually orders a retreat. Grant learns to always be prepared. CASUALTIES*: Federal 13,000 CSA 10,700 (1/4 of all the troops involved) RESULTS: Union Victory - CSA looses western & central Tennessee Chapter IV LEE TAKES COMMAND A. The Peninsular Campaign: March – May, 1862 Commanders: USA Maj. Gen. George McClellan Manassas 70,000 men Peninsula 100,000 men CSA Maj. Gen. Joseph Johnston Manassas 50,000 men Peninsula 10,000 men 1. The Plan - McClellan plans to bypass Johnston’s defenses near Manassas and using ships to transport his army to Ft. Monroe, VA move upon Richmond by land. 2. The Wrinkle – The Ironclads - USS Merrimack floated and outfitted, CSS Virginia - John Ericsson (in 1844 his newly designed naval gun exploded killing Secretary of State) designed USS Monitor. - The presence of the CSS Virginia brings a halt to McClellan’s plans. - March 8, 1862, CSS Virginia steams into Hampton Roads and sinks the USS Cumberland & the USS Congress surrenders - Monitor arrives at dusk and is moored next to the USS Minnesota, the CSS Virginia’s next probable target. - March 9, 1862, CSS Virginia moves on the USS Minnesota but the Monitor intervenes. Both ships spar for four hours. - CSS Virginia hits the Monitor’s pilot house and wounds the pilot, the Monitor drifts uncontrolled. Virginia believes that it has won and steams back to port. - The CSS Virginia is eventually scuttled. - The age of the wooden ships has ended. 2. The Execution - Beginning in April, McClellan begins to inch his way toward Yorktown, then Williamsburg & then Richmond. - Johnston is able to bring his troops to the peninsula and slowly retreat backwards toward Richmond waiting until McClellan has moved up to his defenses and then pulling back to a new position. 3. The Diversion (Jackson’s Valley Campaign, March-June 1862) - The Shenandoah Valley was a major source of food for the Confederacy and it was a natural invasion route into the south. - With never more than 16,000 men, Jackson held off 64,000 Union troops fighting four large battles and six small engagements that resulted in 7,000 Union troops killed, wounded or captured. - In 48 days Jackson marched his troops 676 miles over mountain passes and up and down valleys winning battles over and over again and referring to his men as “foot cavalry”. - Jackson’s presence also caused Lincoln to keep General McDowell’s command near Washington instead of allowing it to move on Richmond preventing a link up with McClellan. - The Confederacy had its first hero! 4. The Battle of Seven Pines – May 31, 1862 Commanders: USA Maj. Gen. George McClellan 100,000 men CSA Maj. Gen. Joseph Johnston 60,000 men – McClellan’s army is divided by the Chickahominy River. – Johnston plans an attack with a complicated timetable. – Johnston’s attack is piecemeal and McClellan is pushed back but is able to hold on. – Johnston moves up to the front but is wounded in the shoulder by a bullet and the chest by a shell fragment. – The following day Davis appoints Gen. Robert E. Lee to take over for Johnston. – Lee orders his troops back into the defenses of Richmond. 5. Results of the Battle of Seven Pines - McClellan is convinced that since the Confederates attacked him they must have him outnumbered. - By shifting troops to the southern side of the Chickahominy River McClellan has now weakened his right flank which also protects his major supply base. 6. Lee Prepares - Lee takes the next four weeks to strengthen the defenses around Richmond which his soldiers criticize him and begin calling him the “King of Spades”. - Lee uses the time to gather troops in from the south and also secretly calls Jackson and his troops from the valley. - Lee send cavalry leader Jeb Stuart on a reconnaissance mission to determine the exact location of the Union Army. - Stuart and 1,200 men ride completely around McClellan’s army and inform Lee that McClellan’s right flank is only covered by 30,000 men. 7. Lee Strikes (The Seven Days Battles, June 26-July 1, 1862) - Leaving only 25,000 men to protect the trenches outside of Richmond, Lee attacks McClellan’s right flank and pushes him back across the Chickahominy River until McClellan is finally able to hold off Lee at Malvern Hill. - Lee attempts to dislodge McClellan but is repeatedly beaten off. - McClellan withdraws to the shore of the James River under the protection of his naval guns. CASUALTIES: Federal 16,000 CSA 20,000 Results: Richmond is saved and Lee evolves into a major military commander. Chapter V LEE MOVES NORTH A. A New Command Structure for the Union Army - Gen. Henry Hallack is named General in Chief and he organizes two armies in Virginia: 1. The Army of Virginia under the command of Gen. John Pope (who openly stated that western soldiers were better fighters) and who would keep his headquarters in his saddle (often altered to say that he seemed to have his headquarters where his hindquarters ought to be!). 2. The Army of the Potomac under the command of Gen. George McClellan which was then recalled from the Peninsula leaving Pope isolated. - Lee names his army the Army of Northern Virginia and sends Jackson north to cut off Pope’s lines of communication and supply. - Jackson raids Popes supplies at Manassas and then goes into hiding on the old Manassas battlefield. - Lee & Gen. James Longstreet move north with the remaining army once it is clear the McClellan is returning to Washington. B. The Second Battle of Bull Run (Manassas) August 29-30, 1862 USA Maj. Gen. John Pope 70,000 men The Army of Virginia USA Maj. Gen. George McClellan The Army of the Potomac CSA Gen. Robert E. Lee 55,000 men The Army of Northern Virginia Phase I - Jackson battles Pope from an excellent defensive position in an old railroad cut. - Pope attacks piecemeal throughout the day and is convinced that Jackson is retreating. - Longstreet arrives late in the day and but doesn’t attack. Phase II - On the following day Pope renews the attack on Jackson’s troops but Longstreet launches his attack and throws Pope’s army into disarray. - Pope is able to stave off a disaster only by heroic fighting around the Henry House Hill. - Pope is able to retreat the next day. CASUALTIES: Federal 14,000 CSA 9,000 B. The Antietam Campaign - Lee crosses the Potomac River into Maryland, his objective is Harrisburg, the capital of Pennsylvania and the hope that a victory on northern soil would bring in the much sought after European intervention. - Lee’s army is divided with Jackson’s portion laying siege on the Union troops at Harpers Ferry. - McClellan is given the command of all of the Union forces and quickly rebuilds them and begins an uncharacteristic swift pursuit of Lee. - At Frederick Maryland a copy of Lee’s Special Order 191 is found wrapped around 3 cigars and Lee’s entire troop disposition is now in McClellan’s hands.
Recommended publications
  • James River Geography

    James River Geography

    James River Geography Welcome to NOAA's James River Interpretive Buoy, located at latitude 37 degrees 12.25 minutes North, longitude 76 degrees 46.65 minutes West. It lies off Jamestown Island about a quarter-mile south of Captain John Smith's statue, where he can see it well as he looks out over the river. This buoy is anchored in 43 feet of water at the edge of the narrow shoal that runs along the island. The river's channel is deep here, as the James narrows down between Swanns Point on the south and Jamestown on the north, but it quickly shoals as it sweeps through the broad meander curve from Cobham Bay around Hog Island and down toward Burwell Bay. The buoy lies about thirty miles above the mouth of the James at Hampton Roads. Jamestown Island lies at a transition point on the James. Five miles upstream is the mouth of the Chickahominy River, which adds a strong current of fresh water to the heavy flow already coming out of the James watershed from deep in Virginia's uplands, the mountains at the eastern edge of the Alleghany Plateau. In wet years, the water here is nearly fresh. The mouth of the James, however, lies close to the Chesapeake's mouth, so salt water can also flow upriver with the tides. In John Smith's time here, the region suffered a multi-year drought, so the river and the colonists' drinking water was probably brackish, an irritating factor that may account for some of the bickering and poor health that plagued them.
  • The Lincoln- Mcclellan Relationship in Myth and Memory

    The Lincoln- Mcclellan Relationship in Myth and Memory

    The Lincoln- McClellan Relationship in Myth and Memory MARK GRIMSLEY Like many Civil War historians, I have for many years accepted invita- tions to address the general public. I have nearly always tried to offer fresh perspectives, and these have generally been well received. But almost invariably the Q and A or personal exchanges reveal an affec- tion for familiar stories or questions. (Prominent among them is the query “What if Stonewall Jackson had been present at Gettysburg?”) For a long time I harbored a private condescension about this affec- tion, coupled with complete incuriosity about what its significance might be. But eventually I came to believe that I was missing some- thing important: that these familiar stories, endlessly retold in nearly the same ways, were expressions of a mythic view of the Civil War, what the amateur historian Otto Eisenschiml memorably labeled “the American Iliad.”1 For Eisenschiml “the American Iliad” was merely a clever title for a compendium of eyewitness accounts of the conflict, but I take the term seriously. In Homer’s Iliad the anger of Achilles, the perfidy of Agamemnon, the doomed gallantry of Hector—and the relationships between them—have enormous, uncontested, unchanging, and almost primal symbolic meaning. So too do certain figures in the American Iliad. Prominent among these are the butcher Grant, the Christ-like Lee, and the rage- filled Sherman. I believe that the traditional Civil War narrative functions as a national myth of central importance to our understanding of ourselves as Americans. And like the classic mythologies of old, it contains timeless wisdom about what it means to be a human being.
  • The Battle of Sailor's Creek

    The Battle of Sailor's Creek

    THE BATTLE OF SAILOR’S CREEK: A STUDY IN LEADERSHIP A Thesis by CLOYD ALLEN SMITH JR. Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS December 2005 Major Subject: History THE BATTLE OF SAILOR’S CREEK: A STUDY IN LEADERSHIP A Thesis by CLOYD ALLEN SMITH JR. Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Approved by: Chair of Committee, Joseph Dawson Committee Members, James Bradford Joseph Cerami Head of Department, Walter L. Buenger December 2005 Major Subject: History iii ABSTRACT The Battle of Sailor’s Creek: A Study in Leadership. (December 2005) Cloyd Allen Smith Jr., B.A., Slippery Rock University Chair: Dr. Joseph Dawson The Battle of Sailor’s Creek, 6 April 1865, has been overshadowed by Lee’s surrender at Appomattox Court House several days later, yet it is an example of the Union military war machine reaching its apex of war making ability during the Civil War. Through Ulysses S. Grant’s leadership and that of his subordinates, the Union armies, specifically that of the Army of the Potomac, had been transformed into a highly motivated, organized and responsive tool of war, led by confident leaders who understood their commander’s intent and were able to execute on that intent with audacious initiative in the absence of further orders. After Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia escaped from Petersburg and Richmond on 2 April 1865, Grant’s forces chased after Lee’s forces with the intent of destroying the mighty and once feared iv protector of the Confederate States in the hopes of bringing a swift end to the long war.
  • Pocahontas and Captain John Smith Revisited

    Pocahontas and Captain John Smith Revisited

    Pocahontas and Captain John Smith Revisited FREDERIC W. GLEACH Cornell University The story of Pocahontas and Captain John Smith is one that all school­ children in the United States seem to learn early on, and one that has served as the basis for plays, epic poems, and romance novels as well as historical studies. The lyrics of Peggy Lee's hit song Fever exemplify these popular treatments: Captain Smith and Pocahontas Had a very mad affair. When her daddy tried to kill him She said, 'Daddy, oh don't you dare — He gives me fever ... with his kisses, Fever when he holds me tight; Fever — I'm his Mrs. Daddy won't you treat him right.' (Lee et al 1958) The incident referred to here, Pocahontas's rescue of Smith from death at the orders of her father, the paramount chief Powhatan, was originally recorded by the only European present — Smith himself. While the factu- ality of Smith's account has been questioned since the mid-19th century, recent textual analysis by Lemay (1992) supports the more widely held opinion that it most likely occurred as Smith reported. Other recent studies have employed methods and models imported from literary criticism, gen­ erally to demonstrate the nature of English colonial and historical modes of apprehending otherness.1 While my work may be easily contrasted to these approaches, two re­ cent studies must be mentioned which have employed understandings and methods similar to my own. Kidwell (1992:99-101) used Pocahontas as an example in her discussion of "Indian Women as Cultural Mediators", 1ln addition to the comments of participants in the Algonquian Conference I have had the benefit of discussion with members of the Department of Anthropol­ ogy of Cornell University, where I presented some of these ideas in a departmental colloquium.
  • Simulated Changes in Salinity in the York and Chickahominy Rivers from Projected Sea-Level Rise in Chesapeake Bay

    Simulated Changes in Salinity in the York and Chickahominy Rivers from Projected Sea-Level Rise in Chesapeake Bay

    Prepared in cooperation with the City of Newport News Simulated Changes in Salinity in the York and Chickahominy Rivers from Projected Sea-Level Rise in Chesapeake Bay Open-File Report 2011–1191 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover photograph: St. Michaels Marina, Chesapeake Bay, Maryland. Simulated Changes in Salinity in the York and Chickahominy Rivers from Projected Sea-Level Rise in Chesapeake Bay By Karen C. Rice, Mark R. Bennett, and Jian Shen Prepared in cooperation with the City of Newport News Open-File Report 2011–1191 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2011 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1-888-ASK-USGS For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Rice, K.C., Bennett, M.R., and Shen, Jian, 2011, Simulated changes in salinity in the York and Chickahominy Rivers from projected sea-level rise in Chesapeake Bay: U.S.
  • “Never Have I Seen Such a Charge”

    “Never Have I Seen Such a Charge”

    The Army of Northern Virginia in the Gettysburg Campaign “Never Have I Seen Such a Charge” Pender’s Light Division at Gettysburg, July 1 D. Scott Hartwig It was July 1 at Gettysburg and the battle west of town had been raging furiously since 1:30 p.m. By dint of only the hardest fighting troops of Major General Henry Heth’s and Major General Robert E. Rodes’s divisions had driven elements of the Union 1st Corps from their positions along McPherson’s Ridge, back to Seminary Ridge. Here, the bloodied Union regiments and batteries hastily organized a defense to meet the storm they all knew would soon break upon them. This was the last possible line of defense beyond the town and the high ground south of it. It had to be held as long as possible. To break this last line of Union resistance, Confederate Third Corps commander, Lieutenant General Ambrose P. Hill, committed his last reserve, the division of Major General Dorsey Pender. They were the famed Light Division of the Army of Northern Virginia, boasting a battle record from the Seven Days battles to Chancellorsville unsurpassed by any other division in the army. Arguably, it may have been the best division in Lee’s army. Certainly no organization of the army could claim more combat experience. Now, Hill would call upon his old division once more to make a desperate assault to secure victory. In many ways their charge upon Seminary Ridge would be symbolic of why the Army of Northern Virginia had enjoyed an unbroken string of victories through 1862 and 1863, and why they would meet defeat at Gettysburg.
  • Chickahominy Riverfront Park Raw Water Intake and Water Treatment Facility Public Information Meeting July 25, 2016 PERMITS THAT DETERMINE AVAILABLE WATER CAPACITY

    Chickahominy Riverfront Park Raw Water Intake and Water Treatment Facility Public Information Meeting July 25, 2016 PERMITS THAT DETERMINE AVAILABLE WATER CAPACITY

    Chickahominy Riverfront Park Raw Water Intake and Water Treatment Facility Public Information Meeting July 25, 2016 PERMITS THAT DETERMINE AVAILABLE WATER CAPACITY GROUNDWATER WATERWORKS OPERATION WITHDRAWAL PERMIT PERMIT ANNUAL AVG = 8.8 MGD MAX = 9.973 MGD MAX MONTH = 11.8 MGD 2 Why do we need a new water supply? Eastern Virginia GroundwaterEastern Virginia Groundwater Management AreaManagement Area • Declining groundwater levels • Advancing salt water intrusion • Land subsidence JCSA Permitted Groundwater Withdrawal Reduction (DEQ Proposal: 8.8 mgd reduced to 3.8-4.0 mgd) 3 JCSA Water Supply . Existing Supply DEQ VDH Capacity Production Facility Annual Withdrawal (mgd) (mgd) Five Forks WTP 5.9 5.000 7 Well Locations 2.9 4.973 • Owens-Illinois • Stonehouse • Ford’s Colony • Kristiansands • The Pottery • Canterbury Hills • Ewell Hall and Olde Towne Road TOTAL 8.8 9.973 . Potential Future Water Supply Newport News Waterworks (NNWW) Purchase Agreement = 2 mgd (drought condition)* *JCSA infrastructure improvements required for delivery. 4 Average water demand is projected to increase. 5 Future demand will exceed existing permitted capacity. Average Day Demand Maximum Day Demand 6 Reduction in DEQ permitted groundwater withdrawal to 4.0 mgd will result in immediate deficit. Current DEQ Groundwater Withdrawal Reduced DEQ Groundwater Withdrawal IMMEDIATE DEFICIT 7 Reduction in DEQ permitted groundwater withdrawal to 4.0 mgd impacts VDH permitted maximum capacity Current DEQ Groundwater Withdrawal Reduced DEQ Groundwater Withdrawal IMMEDIATE DEFICIT 8 Water Supply Alternatives No Action Water Conservation Only Alternative Water Supply with Water Conservation 9 Water Conservation Measures – Already in Effect . Water conservation and drought management program . Install low water use fixtures – Building Code .
  • RICHMOND Battlefields UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR Stewart L

    RICHMOND Battlefields UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR Stewart L

    RICHMOND Battlefields UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Stewart L. Udall, Secretary NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Conrad L. Wirth, Director HISTORICAL HANDBOOK NUMBER THIRTY-THREE This publication is one of a series of handbooks describing the historical and archeological areas in the National Park System administered by the National Park Service of the United States Department of the Interior. It is printed by the Government Printing Office and may be purchased from the Superintendent of Documents, Washington 25, D.C. Price 25 cents. RICHMOND National Battlefield Park Virginia by Joseph P. Cullen NATIONAL PARK SERVICE HISTORICAL HANDBOOK SERIES NO. 33 Washington, D.C., 1961 The National Park System, of which Richmond National Battlefield Park is a unit, is dedicated to conserving the scenic, scientific, and historic heritage of the United States for the benefit and inspiration of its people. Contents Page Richmond 1 The Army of the Potomac 2 PART ONE THE PENINSULA CAMPAIGN, SUMMER 1862 On to Richmond 3 Up the Peninsula 4 Drewry's Bluff 5 Seven Pines (Fair Oaks) 6 Lee Takes Command 9 The Seven Days Begins 12 Beaver Dam Creek (Ellerson's Mill) 13 Gaines' Mill 16 Savage Station 18 Glendale (Frayser's Farm) 21 Malvern Hill 22 End of Campaign 24 The Years Between 27 PART TWO THE FINAL STRUGGLE FOR RICHMOND, 1864-65 Lincoln's New Commander 28 Cold Harbor 29 Fort Harrison 37 Richmond Falls 40 The Park 46 Administration 46 Richmond, 1858. From a contemporary sketch. HE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR was unique in many respects. One Tof the great turning points in American history, it was a national tragedy op international significance.
  • Defining the Greater York River Indigenous Cultural Landscape

    Defining the Greater York River Indigenous Cultural Landscape

    Defining the Greater York River Indigenous Cultural Landscape Prepared by: Scott M. Strickland Julia A. King Martha McCartney with contributions from: The Pamunkey Indian Tribe The Upper Mattaponi Indian Tribe The Mattaponi Indian Tribe Prepared for: The National Park Service Chesapeake Bay & Colonial National Historical Park The Chesapeake Conservancy Annapolis, Maryland The Pamunkey Indian Tribe Pamunkey Reservation, King William, Virginia The Upper Mattaponi Indian Tribe Adamstown, King William, Virginia The Mattaponi Indian Tribe Mattaponi Reservation, King William, Virginia St. Mary’s College of Maryland St. Mary’s City, Maryland October 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY As part of its management of the Captain John Smith Chesapeake National Historic Trail, the National Park Service (NPS) commissioned this project in an effort to identify and represent the York River Indigenous Cultural Landscape. The work was undertaken by St. Mary’s College of Maryland in close coordination with NPS. The Indigenous Cultural Landscape (ICL) concept represents “the context of the American Indian peoples in the Chesapeake Bay and their interaction with the landscape.” Identifying ICLs is important for raising public awareness about the many tribal communities that have lived in the Chesapeake Bay region for thousands of years and continue to live in their ancestral homeland. ICLs are important for land conservation, public access to, and preservation of the Chesapeake Bay. The three tribes, including the state- and Federally-recognized Pamunkey and Upper Mattaponi tribes and the state-recognized Mattaponi tribe, who are today centered in their ancestral homeland in the Pamunkey and Mattaponi river watersheds, were engaged as part of this project. The Pamunkey and Upper Mattaponi tribes participated in meetings and driving tours.
  • Confederate Invasions – the Union in Peril Part 1 – the Maryland Campaign: Antietam and Emancipation Class Notes

    Confederate Invasions – the Union in Peril Part 1 – the Maryland Campaign: Antietam and Emancipation Class Notes

    Confederate Invasions – The Union In Peril Part 1 – The Maryland Campaign: Antietam and Emancipation Class Notes Lecture 2 – “You Are All Green Alike”: Campaigns of 1861-1862 A. Both Sides Mobilize • North has advantages in manpower; manufacturing; and railroad network • South has advantages in 3.5 million slaves; armed state militias; geography • U.S. military has only 15,000 men; 42 ships (only 3 ready on 15 Apr) • Many Southern officers resign, join Confederacy • Lee turns down command of Federal forces; Goes with Virginia B. Political & Military Strategies • Lincoln and Davis – contrasting Commanders-in-Chief • Union Strategy: Scott’s Anaconda Plan – Subdue south with minimum of bloodshed • Southern Strategy: Defend the homeland and erode Union public support • Northern Pressure to Act: On to Richmond C. Eastern Theater – First Manassas; McClellan’s Peninsula Campaign • First Manassas/Bull Run (21 July 1861) – demolishes many myths • Rise of McClellan - “Little Napoleon” • Lincoln forced to become his own general-in-chief • Peninsula Campaign (April-May 1862) – plan to flank Confederate defenses • Army of Potomac, 100,000 strong, advances slowly, cautiously • Battle of Seven Pines – Johnston wounded; Lee assumes command • Jackson’s Valley Campaign – one bright spot for Confederacy D. Western Theater – 1862 Early Union Successes – Grant Emerges • Grant captures Forts Henry & Donelson in February 1861 • Nashville is abandoned by retreating Confederates • Battle of Pea Ridge (8 March): Union victory • Battle of Shiloh (6-7 April): Grant again victorious • New Orleans falls to Admiral Farragut on 25 April • Halleck’s Union forces capture Memphis on 6 June E. Political Dimension • Despite Union successes in the Western Theater, the key to victory in the Civil War is the public’s “will to continue” in the face of mounting costs.
  • John Bankhead Magruder

    John Bankhead Magruder

    JOHN BANKHEAD MAGRUDER AND THE DEFENSE OF THE VIRGINIA PENINSULA 1861-1862 by Leonard W. Riedel, Jr. B.S. May 1975, Virginia Military Institute A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS HISTORY OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY August, 1991 ADDroved bv: Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Copyright by Leonard W. Riedel, J r., 1991 All Rights Reserved ii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ABSTRACT JOHN BANKHEAD MAGRUDER AND THE DEFENSE OF THE VIRGINIA PENINSULA 1861-1862 Leonard W. Riedel, Jr. Old Dominion University Director: Dr. Harold Wilson The v ia b ility of the Confederacy depended on its a b ility to organize a government and m ilitary defense force. Two early concerns were the operation of Gosport Naval Shipyard and protection of the Confederate capital at Richmond. Poised between them was Fortress Monroe. With undisputed Union mastery of the Chesapeake Bay, Fortress Monroe was a constant reminder of the tentative security of these critic a l points. The man chosen to protect the Peninsula was Virginian, John Bankhead Magruder. Less than one year later, his efforts were denigrated by Commanding General Joseph E. Johnston who wanted to pursue his own strategic plan. Under constant stress, Magruder performed with alacrity. Although the Peninsula was evacuated in May 1862, Magruder did an admirable job of defense. Magruder’s place in history has been discolored by perceived b attlefield failures at Savage’ s Station and Malvern H ill.
  • Proposed Signature Tours Virginia Sesquicentennial of the American Civil War Commission

    Proposed Signature Tours Virginia Sesquicentennial of the American Civil War Commission

    Proposed Signature Tours Virginia Sesquicentennial of the American Civil War Commission The Commission may wish to consider sponsoring a series of signature tours, including battlefield tours as well as historical tours of particular cities, regions, or sites in Virginia which played a prominent role in the Civil War. These tours could be held in conjunction with regular meetings of the Commission. For example, a commission meeting, with a reception and dinner, might be held the night before the tour, with local participation. A keynote speaker might provide an introduction for each tour. The city or regional tours could take a broader view of the Civil War era, and include the most significant sites in that particular area. The battlefield tours might be scheduled one or two months prior to the actual commemoration dates of the battles, in order to raise public awareness in advance of events which may be planned locally. In each case, local government officials and the media should be included, along with the local Civil War sesquicentennial committee, if one has been appointed, and representatives of local colleges and universities, and museums. Efforts should also be made to involve students and young persons. June 25-26, 2009: Kick-Off Tour in Harpers Ferry Focus: The Commission’s first tour is being planned in conjunction with a series of events commemorating John Brown’s raid (October 17, 1859). This tour will include an evening reception and dinner, a panel presentation, and the tour. In addition to the lower town of Harpers Ferry and the site of the federal arsenal, the tour may include Bolivar Heights, Schoolhouse Ridge and the Murphy Farm, covering Stonewall Jackson’s victory of September 15, 1862, immediately preceding the Battle of Antietam.