The American Civil War

[scoundrel]

Incidentally today is also the 152nd anniversary of the culmination of the siege of Vicksburg. Lt General Pemberton surrendered his force of over 29,000 men on 4th July 1863, same day as Pickett's charge. The high water mark of the Confederacy in the West was in 1862, before the fall of Fort Donelson and Fort Henry unblocked the Cumberland River and enabled the Union to send invasion armies straight through Tennessee. In Vicksburg, it wasn't until 1945 that the city fathers would agree to hold any form of annual celebration for American Independence Day because that is not what the 4th July represented there. The Union forces nicknamed Vicksburg "Stacksville" because when it fell, it had been so bombarded that all the wooden houses had burned down and only the stone chimneys remained. One can imagine what that meant for the civilians trapped in this besieged city, which was starved into submission. No wonder the city fathers didn't think good thoughts on 4th July.

Faced with a similar problem to Lee in Virginia, Albert Sidney Johnston in the Western Theatre did nothing like as well. He lacked the natural defences Lee could rely on, such as the almost impenetrable wilderness forests on the western flank and the intricate and not very navigable network of tidal rivers on the eastern flank which made it so very hard to go end-round and bypass Lee's front. The war in the west was a war of manoevre and this needed an imaginative and clever general to use speed of movement as a compensating tactic to make up for weaker numbers.

The CSA did nearly pull this one off at Shiloh, where Johnston's strategy was right, but was undermined by his outdated tactics in the field. He took far too many casualties, but might still have won the battle had the CSA attack been pressed all the way home and Grant driven back across the river; that didn't happen mainly because Albert Sidney Johnston participated in the action and got himself killed. He was a true soldier and for a true soldier, one of the worst things is to be right next to a battle and duty bound not to get involved; but senior generals are too high value to become involved directly in firefights. His death left the CSA forces becalmed, inadequately generalled by Beauregard, who had serious injuries of his own to endure and no doubt did his best, but really wasn't as clear sighted a strategist as Johnston. He was much better than Lt General Pemberton though, who made no proactive plans in 1863 and made no attempt to seize the initiative against Grant as Lee would have done, frequently did do in the Virginia fighting against attacking Union generals. Pemberton sat still and tried to hold ground; chased after diversionary raiders like Grierson but never mounted his own raids to throw doubt into Union minds; he had no strategic ideas.

Once the Union side consolidated their conquest of Tennessee at Shiloh, Mississippi and Alabama in general and Vicksburg in particular were highly exposed. Vicksburg was a key target; it was built on high bluffs above the eastern shore of the Mississippi River and held a commanding view of the river. Gun emplacements there were strong enough to repel Union naval forces. Vicksburg was the only remaining strong place in CSA hands holding open a corridor between the CSA states east and west of the Mississippi River. Once it fell, it cut off the eastern CSA states from support and rendered the western CSA states irrelevent.

[Ennath]

I read recently that in the fall of 1862, Britain and France were actually planning to intervene in the American Civil War. What scuppered the plan was Garibaldi's invasion of the Papal States, which had a French garrison. Although Garibaldi was defeated by the Italians themselves, the affair caused a political firestorm in France, absorbing French attention. Britain was unwilling to go it alone and so the idea died.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by Ennath

I read recently that in the fall of 1862, Britain and France were actually planning to intervene in the American Civil War. What scuppered the plan was Garibaldi's invasion of the Papal States, which had a French garrison. Although Garibaldi was defeated by the Italians themselves, the affair caused a political firestorm in France, absorbing French attention. Britain was unwilling to go it alone and so the idea died.

I very vaguely remember learning about Garibaldi, Count Cavour and the Italian Unification in school; but I'm pretty sure the idea of Britain actively taking part in the US civil war did not come up in that specific connection. All this was long before the "special relationship" and the cold war. Being British, we kids did have a bit of a laugh when our teacher explained to us that the White House became white to paint over the scorch stains after the redcoats burned it down in the War of 1812; and our general and his staff ate President Madison's dinner before we did it, so swift and completely successful was the surprise they achieved when seizing America's new capital city. It is our equivalent of you Yankees listening to Jonny Horton singing The Battle of New Orleans. But even so, anyone who thinks the history curriculum in any country is not doctored to suit the preferred narrative of that country's government and its establishment is fooling themselves; and while the fact was not concealed or denied, our history lessons did not heavily emphasise the sheer enmity which existed between Britain and the USA in the middle 19th Century.

We were taught about President James K Polk and how he got elected in 1844 during the Oregon crisis on the slogan "Fifty Four Forty or Fight!!" Clearly in 1844 a lot of US voters were on board for the idea of war with Great Britain. Lords Russell and Pamerston were in opposition at the time but were privy councillors and under the British system senior opposition figures are briefed on current foreign policy issues through the Privy Council, allowed to offer opinions and advice there if they so choose, and can sometimes influence and guide the serving government that way, both sides wanting to serve the national interest. There is no way that in 1862 Russell and Palmerston had either forgotten or forgiven America for James K Polk and "Fifty Four-Forty or Fight!!" Revenge, as they say, is a dish best eaten cold.

But there was really no sound or advantageous policy objective to be achieved by Britain participating directly in the US Civil War, except to bring about the dismemberment of the Union; Russell and Palmerston would have needed to ask themselves how much, if at all, Britain would benefit from this result. They were clever men and very conversant with foreign policy problems. They had no principles and no shame whatsoever. Palmerston had been the main instigator of the truly wicked and despicable First Opium War of 1839-42 to use armed force against China after China banned the opium trade to protect her own people. Imagine if Colombia declared war on the USA and actually won, and forced the USA to legalise the importing and use of crack cocaine; that's how bad it was, and that is who Lord Palmerston was. But he did that for a specific and achievable objective which had a direct and measureable benefit to Britain.

To declare a war without a clear and specific short term gain in view was not Lord Palmerston's MO. Never in a million years would you catch him invading Iraq just to overthrow someone who he didn't like, or because his family had unfinished business; but only with a clearcut plan whereby Britain would seize and control Iraq's oilfields and rip off Iraq's oil for Britain's gain. Palmerston and Russell were just like Tony Soprano and Uncle Julius; terribly naughty, but very rational and logical executives who acted only for intelligent policy reasons. It may well be that they seriously contemplated joining the US civil war on the side of the CSA, but I am not at all surprised that they ended up staying out of it and perhaps just deceitfully encouraging the CSA to think they might join in so that the CSA would carry on fighting and weakening the Union while Britain smoked a cigar and enjoyed a free boxing match; not much different to the US approach after the USSR invaded Afghanistan in 1979. The reasons for staying out made a lot more sense than the reasons for joining in, and that would not have been lost on such high class gangsters as Palmerston and Russell. Truth is, if America could find a pair like Palmerston and Russell in her present politicians, she'd have the best Republican ticket since Nixon and Spiro Agnew.

Instead of wasting blood and treasure on someone else's war and with no concrete profit to be had in return, Palmerston and Russell decided to keep the pot boiling from the sidelines by covertly assisting the CSA, maintaining her commerce raiders in British navy yards and selling arms to the South on the quiet. It was a bit like Lend-Lease. But the real prize was that the Union were totally preoccupied with internal civil war and almost totally impotent when Mexico, very bad timing, did a Greece and disavowed her crippling foreign debts in 1861.

The Mexicans under President Juarez had decided that they didn't want to pay anymore and, because the main creditors were British, French and Spanish banking houses, they counted on the USA and the Monroe Doctrine to confine the Europeans to economic sanctions which the Mexicans would have simply laughed off. Remember what I said about how Palmerston handled it when China banned the opium trade? The USA was in absolutely no position to do anything to prevent European military operations in the Gulf of Mexico in 1861-65, and Mexico had openly told Britain and France that she had spunked all that British and French money and had no intention of ever paying back one single peso, and Britain and France could go take a running jump. Oh dear. Oh dear me.

[Tmee2020]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

... Being British, we kids did have a bit of a laugh when our teacher explained to us that the White House became white to paint over the scorch stains after the redcoats burned it down in the War of 1812; and our general and his staff ate President Madison's dinner before we did it, so swift and completely successful was the surprise they achieved when seizing America's new capital city.

Digressing, but in relation to this action, I saw a really interesting Antiques Roadshow programme where a life-size painting of one of the young officers who took part was discovered- Sir George de Lacy Evans.

He served on Wellington's staff at Waterloo and commanded the 2nd Division in Crimea at the age of 66. In between he found time to serve several terms as a radical MP.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Lacy_Evans

[otiscleotus]

There was also some bad blood between the US and England with William Walker's filibustering expeditions into central America in throughout the 1850s where the British still had strong trade and colony interests. Walker was the most successful of the filibusters (the name originally meant something akin to 'land pirates') whose aim was to continue manifest destiny further into Mexico, central America, and the Caribbean.

You can get an e-copy of his autobiography for free here: https://books.google.com/books/about...d=XrcWAAAAYAAJ

[Ennath]

Walker's career was interesting. He intervened in Nicaragua in 1855 at the invitation of the Liberal faction during another round of civil war, defeated the Conservatives and then managed to get himself named head of state. He found himself at war with Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador and, especially Costa Rica. A southern man, Walker legalized slavery and envisaged a great slave-owning empire in Central America.
Walker was often successful militarily against larger forces, but made the fatal mistake of antagonizing Cornelius Vanderbuilt by threatening his shipping interests in the area. Vanderbuilt financed the Central American armies and enabled them to swamp him and force him to flee. He mad a return attempt in Honduras in 1860, but was captured by the British, who turned him over to the local authorities and he died in front of a Honduran firing squad.
The left wing was very fond of bringing up William Walker during the 1980s when the US was supporting the Nicaraguan Contras, explaining condescendingly that Walker was the reason everyone down there hated us and why the Sandinistas could not be defeated. After 1988, they forgot Walker again.

[otiscleotus]

Before Nicaragua Walker tried grabbing Baja and Sonora (in Mexico). That didn't work out too well for him either and he was lucky to escape across the desert with his life.

He made a couple more attempts at returning to Nicaragua that were pre-empted before they got very far prior to his last attempt when he was executed.

Also of note was John Quitman and his support of Narciso López in a failed attempt to grab Cuba.

With Quitman unexpectedly dying in 1858 and Walker's execution in Sept. 1860 there's a lot to ponder as to how these two in particular would have affected the Confederate government and military had they been alive just a little longer.

[scoundrel]

To understand military history it is frequently helpful to understand geography. In the case of the American Civil War, a lot of what took place was dictated by geography.

The area on General Lee's left/western flank was mountainous and heavily forested and very difficult to penetrate with the sort of armies which could do real damage. But the mountains in the western counties of Virginia, the eastern counties of West Virginia and in the eastern end of Pennsylvania run south-west to north-east. To simplify:

1. The border of West Virginia is flanked by the Allegheny Mountains.
2. East of that and inside the Virginia side of the border a big, winding river runs on a wide flat floodplain: this is the North Fork of the Shenandoah River.
3. Once across this river and plain and going east, there is a mountain ridge.
4. Further east there is a second river and braod flood plain: this is the South Fork of the Shenandoah River.
5. East of that there is a larger mountain complex running north-south from Georgia to Pennsylvania. These are the Blue Ridge Mountains.
6. Continue eastwards and you reach the US east coast coastal plain, passing though places such as Lynchburg VA, Charlottesville and Chancellorsville; past Richmond and the James River and you will eventually reach the sea at Chesapeake Bay.

Images of the Shenandoah Valley

The Chesapeake Bay area and the mouth of the Potomac River guards the right/east flank of General Lee's front, and especially guards Richmond, Virginia. There were numerous naval skirmishes in these waters but the Union controlled them throughout the war and fought several amphibious campaigns, including the campaign of 1865 which led to Lee's defeat. But this was marshy land which favoured static defence and it took a lot and cost a lot for the Union to operate here.

To Lee's front there is/was the floodplain of the Potomac River and this theoretically was the most vulnerable place. In practise, the Potomac River and its tributaries were an obstacle when seeking to advance with large forces and supply those men in either direction. Several times the Union forces attempted offensives on this route and were rebuffed, only for Lee to be thwarted in his turn when wanting to chase them back. The rivers run west-east and they were inconvenient when marching north or south.

To the west of the Potomac flood plain, the land gets mountainous and in the 1860s it was much more forested than today. This area, being the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains, is criss-crossed by small rivers or creeks, usually flowing eastwards and barring the path of troops who want to march north or south. In addition, there were few gaps in the trees, few roads and what roads there were were rougher than an alligator's backside. This was the "wilderness" area, where several grim and costly battles such as Chancellorsville were fought.

Finally, at the far west/left end of General Lee's front, there was a pair of broad, flat valley bottoms with two big, navigable rivers in them called the North and South Forks of the Shenandoah. Up these valleys, the Shenandoah River unites near Front Royal and simply becomes the Shenandoah River. It continues north-east and joins the Potomac at Harper's Ferry (of John Brown fame). The valley of the Potomac then emerges on the coastal plain north and west of Washington DC. This was an extremely obvious strategic invitation for General Lee to call on President Lincoln and Lee's attempts to use this route led to the Battle of Antietam in 1862 and to Gettysburg in July 1863. Jubal Early attempted a diversionary offensive in the Shenandoah region in 1864 which led to a shattering counter-offensive from Phillip Sheridan's army in which he laid waste to the valley.

When faced with a strong defensive position you have three options. You go through it, you bypass it on the left or you bypass it on the right.

[scoundrel]

Earlier on this thread I expressed my support for General William T Sherman regarding the March through Georgia in 1864-5. I still think that.

However, I read recently of a previous episode which I consider most certainly to be a war crime and a pretty mean and despicable one at that.

During the first phase of the Atlanta campaign in July 1864, the three armies commanded by Sherman in the Tennessee theatre were closing in on the northern outskirts of Atlanta. Sherman had 110,000 men and planty of supplies, artillery etc. Joseph E Johnson only had 50,000 men and was nothing like as well equipped or supplied as Sherman was. For over three months Johnson had fought a delaying action, avoiding encirclement but retreating as slowly as he dared.

On 5 July, forces commanded by Major General Gerrard reached the small mill town of Roswell, Georgia. The CSA soldiers demolished the bridge (Vickery Creek), delaying the Union forces further advance. But on Vickery Creek there was a cluster of water powered cotton mills spinning and weaving the local crop into grey cloth which was used for CSA army uniforms. These mills employed about 400 women - no men, as the men were all without exception conscripted. The Union army immediately arrested and confined the women. On 7 July, General Sherman's official log notes.

I have ordered General Gerrard to arrest for treason all owners and employees, foreign and native, and send them under guard to Marietta, whence I will send them North...The women can find employment in Indiana.

The prisoners were sent to a captured military school 60 miles north at Marietta, Georgia (the school was burned down afterwards) and held there for a week before being sent in goods wagons to Indiana and summarily dumped there as homeless refugees. They were not well treated when held in the military school either - there are allegations that many of them were raped and I suspect it is true. Sherman certainly doesn't seem to have cared how they were treated. Later, when abandoned in mid winter in Indiana among a hostile Yankee population and in a place already too full of displaced refugees, many of the women starved and froze to death. Eventually, a new mill was opened in the town in Indiana where these women were abandoned and the mill-owners took pity and recruited them, providing them with the means of life.

I must admit I am shocked by the callousness and meanness of what Sherman did here. These women were enemy civilians but they had done absolutely nothing to deserve to be victimised like this. God will punish General Sherman for this deed.

[Mal Hombre]

Those women were working for an army that sent free black people captured in the North South to be sold as slaves,If God cares so much why does permit these things to happen ?