Salient Points

Civil War Technology

2012-01-25T14:13:00.000-06:00

I recently asked my fellow members of the LinkedIn Civil War Sesquicential Network "Which of the following scientific/technological inventions had the greatest impact on the Civil War?"

The members selected the rifled gun (41%) as their first choice, followed by using trains to transport troops (28%), telegraph communications (15%), battlefield sanitation and triage (10%), and ironclad ships (5%). The results are based on a 5.8% participation.

Other websites came up with the following ideas:

* Railroads, medicine, rifled musket and the minie ball - Hackman-Adams
* Photography, submarines, railroads, rifles and the minie ball - Civil War Academy
* Rifled gun, railroads, telegraph, ironclads - History.com - videos
* Rifled musket, telegraph, railroads - Technology and the Civil War
* Telegraph and aerial reconnaisance, railroads, ambulance corps, long-range weapons and the minie ball, the Gatling gun, ironclads, naval mines & torpedoes - History Detectives

Based on these surveyed websites, I selected the most prominent technologies for my poll.

You might also want to check out these books.

The Battle of Fort Donelson by James R. Knight

2012-01-19T15:13:00.002-06:00

The Battle of Fort Donelson by James Knight is a well-done presentation of this key battle in the Western Theater. James does a great job setting the scene including construction of Forts Henry and Donelson, commissioning the Union ironclads and gunboats, and the relationship between Generals Grant and Halleck.

Knight has skillfully blended information from the Official Records, personal memoirs, and other authors to produce a very readable and interesting work. The book makes good use of historic photographs and Hal Jespersen's maps to complement the well-written narrative. The chapter foot notes help document Knight's book and provide additional resources for further reading and analysis.

James Knight is a former pilot for Federal Express turned historical writer. He is the author of Bonnie and Clyde: A 21st Century Update and Letters to Anna. Knight lives in Franklin, TN where he works a a part-time interpreter for the Battle of Franklin Trust. Hi first title in The History Press' Sesquicentennial Series, The Battle of Franklin, was published in 2009.

This compact (141 pages) presentation of the battle should be mandatory reading before visiting Fort Donelson.

I rate The Battle of Fort Donelson

Hal Jespersen's Civil War Maps

2012-01-09T11:27:00.000-06:00

Good news for those of you who are fans of Hal Jespersen's Civil War maps on Wikipedia. Hal has his own brand new web site at http://www.CWMaps.com.

For those of you not familiar with his work, Hal is a freelance cartographer who specializes in creating battle and campaign maps for the American Civil War. Since 2004 Hal has written hundreds of Wikipedia articles about the war and illustrated them with 200+ elaborate maps, which are available for free.

The site contains a table with his free maps. Here's Hal's map of the Fort Henry Campaign.

Hal is now offering his services to the public and I am happy to report that he has agreed to prepare maps for my biography of Major General C. F. Smith. Hal describes his services and fee structure on the services page of his site.

I might add that Civil War writers would do well to have Hal prepare maps for their efforts. His clear, easy to read maps will enhance any manuscript.

Please visit Hal's site for more information.

Sesquicentenial Events for 2012

2012-01-04T14:12:00.002-06:00

Antietam, MD

The Civil War enterted its second year in 1862 with major victories in the West and devastating defeats in the East. If we can judge by critical and strategic battles (class A), the year 1862 was the most significant of the war.

1861 - 3 class A battles
1862 - 14
1863 - 8
1864 - 13
1865 - 7

Fort Donelson, TN

The year also marked the emergence of U.S. Grant, Robert E. Lee, Nathan Bedford Forrest, and William T. Sherman. On the downside, Union generals McClellan, Pope, and Burnside fell from grace.

Plan on celebrating the Sesquicentennial of these battles in 2012.

Mill Springs, KY - January 19, 1862 B
Fort Henry, TN - February 6, 1862 B
Roanoke Island, NC - February 7-8, 1862 B
Fort Donelson, TN - February 11-16, 1862 A
Valverde, NM - February 20-21, 1862 B
New Madrid/Island No. 10, MO - February 28-April 8, 1862 A
Pea Ridge, AR - March 7-8, 1862 A
Hampton Roads, VA - March 8-9, 1862 B
New Berne, NC - March 14, 1862 B
Kernstown I, VA - March 23, 1862 B
Glorieta Pass, NM - March 26-28, 1862 A
Fort Macon, NC - March 23-April 26, 1862 C
Yorktown, VA - April 5-May 4, 1862 B
Shiloh, TN - April 6-7, 1862 A
Fort Pulaski, GA - April 10-11, 1862 B
Forts Jackson & St. Philip, LA - April 16-28, 1862 A
New Orleans, LA - April 25–May 1, 1862 B
Corinth, MS I- April 29-June 10, 1862 B
Drewry's Bluff, VA - May 15, 1862 B
Williamsburg, VA - May 5, 1862 B
Winchester I, VA - May 25, 1862 A
Seven Pines, VA - May 31-June 1, 1862 B
Memphis, TN I - June 6, 1862 B
Cross Keys, VA - June 8, 1862 B
Port Republic, VA - June 9, 1862 B
Secessionville, SC - June 16, 1862 B
Beaver Dam Creek, VA - June 26, 1862 B
Gaines' Mill, VA - June 27, 1862 A
Glendale, VA - June 30, 1862 B
Malvern Hill, VA - July 1, 1862 A
Baton Rouge, LA - August 5, 1862 B
Cedar Mountain, VA - August 9, 1862 B
Manassas (Second Bull Run), VA II - August 28-30, 1862 A
Richmond, KY - August 29-30, 1862 B
Chantilly, VA - September 1, 1862 B
Harpers Ferry, WV - September 12-15, 1862 B
South Mountain, MD - September 14, 1862 B
Munfordville, KY - September 14-17, 1862 B
Antietam, MD - September 16-18, 1862 A
Corinth, MS II - October 3-4, 1862 A
Perryville, KY - October 8, 1862 A

Prairie Grove, AR - December 7, 1862 B

Fredericksburg, VA - December 11-15, 1862 A

Chickasaw Bayou, MS - December 26-29, 1862 B
Parker's Cross Roads, TN - December 31, 1862 C
Stones River, TN - December 31, 1862-January 2, 1863 A

Civil War Northern Virginia 1861 by William S. Connery

2011-12-29T18:33:00.000-06:00

When I began reviewing Civil War books, I realized that I might be faced with giving some of my reads less than a glowing review. Sadly this is the case with William s. Connery's Civil War in Northern Virginia 1861.

There are several things I liked about the book. It is obvious that Mr. Connery knows a great deal about the area's involvement in the Civil War. I found his information on Mount Vernon and the efforts to maintain it fascinating. I also liked his description of the Battle of Dranesville. The book has a number of fine photographs that add to the narrative.

I present the following criticisms/suggestions in the hope that the author and publisher might consider a revised second edition. What I found lacking was a good readable map of Northern Virginia. The map included is impossible to read. Yes, I could have opened a Virginia state map, but that kind of defeats the purpose of a self-contained book. Maps would help me locate the various places described in the book. A driving tour in an appendix would be a great addition.

I wish the author had included a time line of events in Northern Virginia during 1861. This would have provided a reference point for the events and places described. I had trouble finding a unifying format in the book. A county-by-county or a month-by-month framework would have helped immensely.

The most disturbing point of the book was the absence of footnotes. True there is a bibliography, but the historian/scholar in me wanted to know exactly where these morsels of information came from. For example, I would have liked a reference for the casualty numbers for Ball's Bluff.

It is for the above reasons that we limit our recommendation to the rank of Brigadier General.

Christmas in the Civil War

2011-12-17T11:54:00.000-06:00

Poem by Confederate soldier William Gordon McCabe describes his thoughts on Christmas Night 1862.

Santa Gives Gifts to Union Troops
T. Nast 1863

The wintry blast goes wailing by,
the snow is falling overhead;
I hear the lonely sentry's tread,
and distant watch-fires light the sky.

Dim forms go flitting through the gloom;
The soldiers cluster round the blaze
To talk of other Christmas days,
And softly speak of home and home.

My saber swinging overhead,
gleams in the watch-fire's fitful glow,
while fiercely drives the blinding snow,
and memory leads me to the dead.

1860 Vintage Christmas Card

My thoughts go wandering to and fro,
vibrating 'twixt the Now and Then;
I see the low-browed home again,
the old hall wreathed in mistletoe.

And sweetly from the far off years
comes borne the laughter faint and low,
the voices of the Long Ago!
My eyes are wet with tender tears.

I feel again the mother kiss,
I see again the glad surprise
That lighted up the tranquil eyes
And brimmed them o'er with tears of bliss

As, rushing from the old hall-door,
She fondly clasped her wayward boy -
Her face all radiant with they joy
She felt to see him home once more.

Husband and wife separated by war
T. Nast 1862

My saber swinging on the bough
Gleams in the watch-fire's fitful glow,
while fiercely drives the blinding snow
aslant upon my saddened brow.

Those cherished faces are all gone!
Asleep within the quiet graves
where lies the snow in drifting waves, -
And I am sitting here alone.

Antietam Luminary

There's not a comrade here tonight
but knows that loved ones far away
on bended knees this night will pray:
"God bring our darling from the fight."

But there are none to wish me back,
for me no yearning prayers arise
the lips are mute and closed the eyes -
My home is in the bivouac.

Best wishes for a joyous holiday season with friends and family.

Please pray for our troops defending our ability to enjoy our lives in freedom.

Source: "Christmas Night of '62" Civil War Trust.

Dishonorable Discharge Origins

2011-12-13T15:21:00.000-06:00

In compiling research for my biography of Major General Charles F. Smith, I came across a journal posting of a January 12, 1844 letter sent to Brigadier General R. Jones, Adjutant General of the US Army, suggesting that the US Army use a discharge similar to that used by the British Army.

"It has often occurred to me that the service would be benefited if a discharge somewhat similar to that granted in the British Army was given in ours. I mean to make it obligatory on the Comp. Commander to state that the man's genl. conduct has been good when such is the case and to cut off the space for character whenever it has been such as ought to prevent a re-enlistment.

"I am inclined to believe that owing to the want of some such evidence of character many worthless men have been re-enlisted who were discharged under the late law for reducing the army. For example: such men as a Capt. of Art. who not re-enlisted would go to the West & get into an Inf. Regt.; & such men as could not get a re-enlistment in the Inf. would come to the Seaboard & join the Art.

"I have 2 or 3 men who came from the Inf., & who I am satisfied would never have been re-enlisted by their former Co. Commander, judging them by their qualifications & conduct since joining my Comp.

"I make a copy of the form of discharge used in the British Service; also a form taken from this & from that now used by us, which I think might be used advantageously in our Service."

"The soldier's character would be inserted only when recommendatory. If the general conduct of the soldier, while in the service, has been such as to give him no claim to having anything said in his favor, the space for character in the above certificate is to be cut off under the black line following the confirmation of the discharge, thereby leaving no opportunity for an addition to be made after the certificate is given to the man.

"When a soldier is discharged on account of disgraceful conduct that will appear in the body of the certificate."

I have not determined whether Smith's suggestion was endorsed by the US Army. I would appreciate any information that readers might have on this subject.

Thanks for Your Interest

2011-12-07T08:17:00.000-06:00

Thank you for reading our blog.

Allen shooting rifle

Salient Points has now exceeded 10,000 pageviews.

We have made over 122 posts since beginning in 2008.

Among our most popular posts are:

Remembering Civil WarAfrican American Soldiers and Sailors - 852 pageviews

Congressmen Behaving Badly - 409 pageviews

Christmas During the Civil War - 208 pageviews

THE Turning Point of the Civil War - 176 pageviews

Please tell your friends and other students of the Civil War about our blog.

Thanks Again.

Allen Mesch

13th Amendment Restored

2011-12-07T07:54:00.000-06:00

A rare copy of the 13th Amendment ending slavery has been restored for display at the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum.

The 13th Amendment states:

13th Amendment in
National Archives

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

The nearly 147-year-old document showed its age with "its surface creased and buckled, its inscriptions faded and an edge yellowed by old adhesive." Russ Maki, owner a paper conservation company in Chicago, restored the historic document for free.

There are at least 14 duplicate copies of the 13th Amendment signed by Lincoln. Congress passed it two years after his 1863 Emancipation Proclamation and it represented the culmination of his efforts to end slavery. But he apparently stopped signing the duplicates after lawmakers complained he was overstepping his executive powers because constitutional amendments are passed by Congress and ratified by the states.

Please see "Rare copy of 13th Amendment signed by Lincoln restored for viewing at Illinois museum" and Thirteenth Amendment for more information.

The Civil War at Perryville by Christopher L. Kolakowski

2011-12-05T17:30:00.004-06:00

Braxton Bragg

The Civil War at Perryville – Battling for the Bluegrass State by Christopher Kolakowski describes the Confederate failure to gain control of Kentucky. Mr. Kolakowski has produced a well-researched account of the battle at Perryville, KY. The reader follows the day-long conflict on October 8, 1862 as the Confederate Army of Mississippi led by General Braxton Bragg drives the Union Army of the Ohio commanded by Major General Don Carlos Buell from the field.

Union Defense - Starkweather's Brigade

Kolakowski sets the stage for the engagement as Confederate forces under Bragg and General Kirby Smith conduct the Confederate Heartland Offensive. We follow Confederate forces through the Cumberland Gap and victories at Richmond and Munfordville as they gain control of most of the state. Finally the two armies collide over the farmland near Perryville. There the author describes the troop movements and flow of battle that ends with the climax at Dixville Crossroads. We learn about the Union’s stout defense at Starkweather Hill and the courage of both northern and southern forces to win the fight.

Don Carlos Buell

The author includes a discussion about the Buell Petition including a description of the meeting of officers written by Col. John M. Harlan of the 10th Kentucky Regiment. Harlan’s account indicates that the meeting took place after the Battle of Perryville. The officers present agreed to sign a petition to the President asking for Buell’s removal because the general had “lost the confidence of the Army of the Ohio.” The document was never sent because Harlan learned that Lincoln had removed Buell the day before.

The book contains numerous photographs and maps (see comment below). The narrative is sprinkled with first-hand accounts of the battle. I would definitely recommend reading the account before visiting Perryville.

I found the maps a little hard to read due to the size and orientation of the font. More distinctive coding on the units and movements would have helped considerably. I would have liked to see the unit sizes included with the order of battle information. The casualty figures for each unit would have been a good addition.

We gave this book a rating of two-stars or Major General.

Christopher L. Kolakowski was born and raised in Fredericksburg, Virginia. He received his BA in history and mass communications from Emory & Henry College, and his MA in public history from the State University of New York at Albany. Chris has spent his career interpreting and preserving American military history with the National Park Service, New York State government, the Rensselaer County (New York) Historical Society and the Civil War Preservation Trust. From 2005 to 2008, Chris was executive director of the Perryville Enhancement Project. During his tenure he added 152 acres of critical battlefield land and increased Perryville’s national profile. Chris works as a military historian in Atlanta, Georgia. The Civil War at Perryville: Battling for the Bluegrass State is his first book.

A pdf copy of this book was provided by Mr. Kolakowski.

Check out Mr. Kolakowski's interview by Civil War Trust.

Please see Perryville for pictures of the battlefield and other information on the battle. Also check out the Battle of Perryville on Wikipedia.

"Killed, none; wounded, none; fooled, everybody"

2011-11-29T12:18:00.000-06:00

A New York Herald reporter issued the above summary shortly after peace was made in the Mormon War. The "war," known as the Utah War, Mormon War, Utah Expedition, or Mormon Rebellion, lasted from May 1857 to April 1858. The campaign reestablished Federal control over the Utah Territory and had an impact on the Civil War.

John B. Floyd

There were many causes of the conflict with blame falling equally on the Church of Latter Day Saints theocracy and the incompetence of the Federal government. An intriguing explanation of the Mormon War centered upon John B. Floyd and concerned the growing rift between the North and the South.

According to this interpretation, Floyd and his Southern sympathizers in Washington, traitors first and last, saw in an involvement of the United States with the Mormons an opportunity to advance their treasonable purposes. Fearing a Republican victory in the 1860 election, they were determined, it is postulated, to bankrupt the treasury by a costly expedition to Utah. This expenditure would leave the North financially incapable of opposing secession. Other investigators accused Secretary Floyd of scattering the nation's military forces, with the objective of leaving the North powerless to preserve the Union if pro-Union forces gained control of the Government. A Mormon publication accused Floyd of using the expedition to distract attention from his various nefarious schemes.

Winfield Scott

Instead of disappearing after 1858, the charges of fraud continued to be advanced as the basic cause of the Mormon War. This belief was advocated by historians of the Latter-day Saints. They were encouraged in this explanation by Lt. Gen. Winfield Scott, the commander in chief, who later wrote: "The expedition set on foot by Mr. Secretary Floyd, in 1857, against the Mormons and the Indians about Salt Lake was, beyond a doubt, to give occasion for large contracts and expenditures, that is, to open a wide field for fraud and peculation." Further evidence of the goals of government contractors comes from noting that "army contracts, made during recent Indian difficulties in Florida, were running out and the contractors wanted to switch their profits to Utah."

The reluctance to put down the rebellion with force and the peaceful settlement of the war might have energized the secessionist forces and encouraged them to pursue their initiative. At the least, the response of the Buchanan Administration to the Mormon Rebellion provided a preview of how the government would respond to the events in 1860 and 1861 including the seizure of Fort Sumter.

In March 1857, Floyd became Secretary of War in the cabinet of President James Buchanan, where his lack of administrative ability was soon apparent, including the poor execution of the Utah Expedition. In December 1860, on ascertaining that Floyd had honored heavy drafts made by government contractors in anticipation of their earnings, the president requested his resignation. Several days later Floyd was indicted for malversation (corruption) in office, although the indictment was overruled in 1861 on technical grounds. There is no proof that he profited by these irregular transactions; in fact, he went out of the office financially embarrassed.

Although he had openly opposed secession before the election of Abraham Lincoln, his conduct after the election, especially after his breach with Buchanan, fell under suspicion, and he was accused in the press of having sent large stores of government arms to Federal arsenals in the South in the anticipation of the Civil War.

After his resignation, a congressional commission in the summer and fall of 1861 investigated Floyd's actions as Secretary of War. All of his records of orders and shipments of arms from 1859 to 1860 were examined. It is recorded that in response to John Brown's raid on Harper's Ferry he bolstered the Federal arsenals in some Southern states by over 115,000 muskets and rifles in late 1859. He also ordered heavy ordnance to be shipped to the Federal forts in Galveston Harbor, Texas, and the new fort on Ship Island off the coast of Mississippi.

In the last days of his term, he apparently had an intention to send these heavy guns, but his orders were revoked by the president. During the year 1860, the Southern states actually received less than their full quota of arms and the heavy guns were a normal shipment required to complete the construction of Federal forts.

James Buchanan

His resignation as Secretary of War, on December 29, 1860, was precipitated by the refusal of Buchanan to order Major Robert Anderson to abandon Fort Sumter, which eventually led to the start of the war. On January 27, 1861, he was indicted by the District of Columbia grand jury for conspiracy and fraud. Floyd appeared in criminal court in Washington, D.C., on March 7, 1861, to answer the charges against him. According to Harper's Weekly, the indictments were thrown out.

[Sources: Norman F. Furnis, The Mormon Conflict 1850-1859 and John B. Floyd, Wikipedia]

Hearts Touched by Fire edited by Harold Holzer

2011-11-21T17:51:00.001-06:00

"We have shared the incommunicable experience of war. We have felt, we still feel, the passion of life to its top. In our youths, our hearts were touched with fire." --- Oliver Wendell Holmes

A friend alerted me to an estate sale in North Dallas that was offering books on the Civil War. As I was perusing the assortment of volumes available, my wife brought me a large (2 1/2 inch thick book) entitled Hearts Touched by Fire. The price was right and so I added it to the pile of books that I had selected. Several days later I had an opportunity to study the book and discovered a wonderful collection of first-hand accounts about the North-South conflict.

Let me give you some examples:

P.G.T. Beauregard on “The First Battle of Bull Run”
Joe Johnston discusses “Responsibilities of the First Bull Run”
“The Capture of Fort Donelson” by Lew Wallace
U.S. Grant on” The Battle of Shiloh”
“The Building of the Monitor” by John Ericsson
“The Vicksburg Campaign” by Grant
“Early’s March to Washington in 1864” by Jubal A. Early
James Longstreet’s observations on “The Battle of Fredericksburg”

The book, which was issued as part of the sesquicentennial celebration, contains the best of the articles published in the magazine series “The Battles and Leaders of the Civil War” and later four-volume book edition printed in 1888.

The value of Hearts Touched by Fire is in the recollections and opinions of these Civil War leaders. They are not always correct, but they convey the prevailing attitudes and beliefs of the authors in justifying their actions and those of their superiors. Be sure to read Harold Holzer’s introduction to learn how the series was created.

We applaud the efforts of Holzer and fellow contributors James McPherson, James Robertson, Stephen Sears, Craig Symonds, and Joan Waugh for bringing these stories to a new generation of Civil War enthusiasts.

We give Hearts Touched by Fire four stars and the rank of General.

Please click on the following link to order a copy.

The Battle of the Crater by Newt Gingrich and William Fortschen

2011-11-13T10:41:00.006-06:00

Sketch of the Explosion
from Union Lines
by Alfred Waud

U. S. Grant called it a "stupendous failure" and blamed it on the "inefficiency on the part of the corps commander and the incompency of the division commander who was sent to lead the assault."

In The Battle of the Crater, the authors, Newt Gingrich, William Fortschen, and Albert Hanser, allow us to relive the events of July 1864 outside of Petersburg, VA. The historical team has created a compelling novel examining the actions of the soldiers and officers involved in this sad chapter of the Civil War.

The story is told through the eyes of James Reilly who is an artist for Harper's Weekly and a friend of President Lincoln. After Reilly's brother is killed at Cold Harbor, the artist travels to Arlington, VA where he helps carry his brother's body to a grave site. There he meets Sergeant Major Garland White of the 28th United States Colored Troops (USCT). He visits with Garland and shows him the sketches from Cold Harbor. As the burial detail hurries to finish their night time task, their commander Colonel Russell announce that they have been assigned to the First Brigade of the Fourth Division of Ninth Division of the Army of the Potomac and are headed to the Union forces at Petersburg. Reilly and Garland begin a bond of friendship that will eventually reunite them at Arlington.

Reilly meets with Lincoln to brief him on the disaster at Cold Harbor. He is reluctant to continue his services as a White House spy, but Lincoln convinces him that he needs his eyes and ears at the front. Reilly agrees under the condition that he can be imbedded with the 28th USCT. Thus, Reilly finds himself in one of the colossal mistakes of the Civil War, the Battle of the Crater.

At the Union line outside of Petersburg, we meet Colonel Henry Pleasants and his force of former Pennsylvania coal miners. The miners come up with a plan to blow up "Pegram's Battery" or "Elliot's Salient" by tunneling below the Rebel works and planting explosives. Pleasants likes the idea and so does his commander, Ambrose Burnside. The authors present Burnside as an innovative general who is haunted by his failures at Fredericksburg. Burnside see the plan as a means to cut Lee's defenses, march into Petersburg, and end the war. Unfortunately, his proposal is only given lukewarm support by Meade and Grant. When the 28th USCT march into camp, Burnside designates them to lead the attack on the Confederate position.

Gingrich and Fortschen allow us to follow the training of the 28th, the construction of the tunnel, and the petty fighting between Meade and Burnside. Meade's lack of support peaks when he changes the order of attack and removes the 28th from leading the assault. Burnside's response is a complete collapse in judgment and total failure of leadership.

We join the units at the front and march with them into battle, sensing the outcome, but hoping that success can be salvaged. The hope of triumph is dashed as Confederate forces rally and slaughter the Union troops trapped in the crater a victim of their own leaders as much as the enemy.

The novel ends with the whitewash court of inquiry and Lincoln's indifference to its outcome. Burnside and the 28th are sacrificed on the altar of the greater public good.

What makes the story of Garland White especially compelling is that it is based on fact. He enlisted as a private on December 14, 1863 in the 28th USCT and left the service as a Chaplin with the rank of Major. At the time of his enlistment, he was 25 years old 5 feet 6 inches with black hair and eyes. To learn more about Garland White and the 28th USCT, please read the February 1994 issue of The Indiana Historian.

I rate this novel a Lieutenant General with 3 out 4 stars. However, it should be mandatory reading for all African Americans to better understand the heroics of their ancestors who helped preserve the Union in spite of impediments placed by their own generals. This would be an excellent novel to read during Black History Month.

Readers may want to read William H. Powell's account "The Battle of the Petersburg Crater" and Henry Goddard R. Thomas' recollections of "The Colored Troops at Petersburg" published in Hearts Touched by Fire: The Best of Battles and Leaders of the Civil War (Modern Library).

A copy of this book was provided for review by the publisher St. Martin's Press.

Rebel Flag Plate Denied

2011-11-11T13:31:00.000-06:00

The Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) rejected for the second time in 2011 a license plate design proposed by the Sons of Confederate Veterans. Governor Perry's opposition to the plate might have swayed the vote from the 4-4 deadlock in April to the 8-0 vote.

The design was seen as offensive by African American groups and others who said that the flag was a symbol of slavery and racism. Nelson Linder, president of the Austin NAACP told the board that the flag ".. is full of death, destruction, fear and chaos and has no place in any civilized state or nation." Granvel Block, Texas division commander of the Sons of Confederate Veterans said "The board took the easy way out and collapsed under the pressure of unjustified emotions " that have "nothing to do with our logo."

As a State agency the DMV certainly should respond to its citizens. Many of whom voiced their criticism of the proposed license plate.

Fort Pillow Massacre

Civil War historians know that the behavior of Confederate soldiers towards US Colored Troops was not always in keeping with the prevailing standards of war. Atrocities were committed by Confederate soldiers on numerous battlefields where African American soldiers fought. Fort Pillow and the Battle of the Crater are well-known examples. So it seems reasonable that African Americans might get a little upset by honoring the battle flag under which some of these crimes were committed.

However, as we celebrate Veterans Day, it is well to remember and honor those who fought to defend and preserve the United States of America. Today we should honor those who fought to preserve the Union and not those who fought to dismantle it.

Representative Al Green of Houston led the crowd in the DMV hearing room in the Pledge of Allegiance. His words following the Pledge ring true.

"This is the flag that bonds us together. This is the flag that makes America for all Americans."

New Civil War Class - The Armies Clash - First Bull Run and Wilson's Creek

2011-11-07T14:33:00.000-06:00

First Bull Run

On November 10th and 17th, I will be presenting the Civil War class The Armies Clash - First Bull Run and Wilson's Creek. Southern armies under P. G. T. Beauregard defeat Union forces commanded by Irvin McDowell in Manassas, VA on July 21,1861. In the west, Brig. Gen. Nathaniel Lyon is killed at Wilson's Creek, MO on August 10, 1861. The victory by the Southern troops gave the Confederates control of southwestern Missouri.

Wilson's Creek Film

The class will be presented in the SAIL program at Collin College in Plano, TX. Please see The Armies Clash - First Bull Run and Wilson's Creek for more information.

The Frogs Who Desired a King

2011-11-07T11:59:00.000-06:00

While doing research for my biography of Major General C. F. Smith, I came across a reference to the fable of King Log and King Stork. Smith refers to this moral tale in regard to his promotion to command the Camp Floyd post in Utah in 1859.

Seeking to understand the reference, I Googled the phrase and came up with the Wikipedia link The Frogs Who Desired a King. With election day approaching, I found the many interpretations of this fable quite timely.

A tile design by William de Morgan, 1872

The story concerns a group of frogs who called on the great god Zeus to send them a king. He threw down a log, which fell in their pond with a loud splash and terrified them. Eventually one of the frogs peeped above the water and, seeing that it was no longer moving, soon all hopped upon it and made fun of their king. Then the frogs made a second request for a real king and were sent a water snake, later changed to a stork, that started eating them. Once more the frogs appealed to Zeus, but this time he replied that they must face the consequences of their request.

The fable is a political lesson. Initially it was that people feel the need of laws but are impatient of personal restraint. Later the lesson was that the people are uneasy without a ruler, but they are never satisfied with either situation. Another view was expressed by Martin Luther when he alludes to this fable to illustrate how humanity deserves the rulers it gets: "frogs must have their storks."

Do we get the government we desire or the government we deserve or Luther observed is the lack of good rulers a punishment for human wickedness.

Hiram's Honor by Max R. Terman

2011-11-01T11:21:00.000-05:00

Many of us fantasize about going back in time, Max Terman actually does. In Hiram's Honor: Reliving Private Terman's Civil War we travel with Private Hiram Terman of the Ohio 82^nd Volunteer Infantry back to the American Civil War. This historical novel allows readers to see the war from the perspective of Union soldier. Terman has crafted this story of his great uncle from various first-hand accounts. Unfortunately, Private Terman left no written descriptions in the form of journals or letters to support Dr. Terman’s dialogue.

Therefore, Hiram’s Honor, is a well-crafted, voyage of discovery in which Professor Terman’s invented dialogue makes you believe you are with Hiram and share his experiences.

Terman’s first person narrative takes you the battlefield to “see the elephant” and experience the conflict. The author's vivid descriptions such as the artillery bombardment at Cross Keys, the casualties at Chancellorsville, and the walking skeletons at Andersonville bring the reader to scene. The reader experiences both combat and confinement in all its stark and brutal reality.

As a backdrop we have campfire discussions among Isaiah, Seth, and Hiram. While the cursing Seth complains about the poor Union leadership, Isaiah turns his heart towards the heavens and prays for God to protect them, and Hiram moderates the disagreements and uses his grandmother's folk medicine to keep the men alive.

Terman’s narrative follows the experiences of 82^nd Ohio from camp at Grafton, WV to battles at McDowell, Cross Keys, Cedar Mountain, Second Manassas, Chancellorsville and Gettysburg. After Hiram and his friends are captured, we join them on the journey south to Belle Island POW Camp in Richmond to Andersonville.

Dr. Terman has crafted a poignant drama of men enduring the horrors of battle and the nightmares of captivity. As I read the narrative I was drawn into the suffering the men experienced at Andersonville and their desperate efforts to survive with their honor and dignity intact. Private Hiram succeeded. As we joined Hiram at the Columbus train station, we joined the reunited black family to thank Hiram for his sacrifice and celebrate his return. So too do we acknowledge Dr. Terman’s skills in creating such a compelling narrative and excellent basis for a sesquicentennial movie.

A couple of additions would help immensely. A map showing the locations of the places in the novel would be a worthwhile supplement. I would also include a brief paragraph summarizing the political and military events. There doesn't seem to be a connection between the Sultana and Hiram's return to Ohio via Annapolis and the B&O railroad.

Dr. MaxTerman is professor emeritus at Tabor College in Kansas. He is the author of three books and numerous articles.

Dr. Terman supplied a pdf copy of this book for my review.

Using my general officer ranking system, I give the book a rank of Lieutenant General or 3 stars out of 4.

Ranking System:

   *       1 star -   Brigadier General
   **     2 stars - Major General
   ***   3 stars - Lieutenant General
   **** 4 stars - General

Gov. Perry Opposes Confederate License Plates

2011-10-27T12:50:00.001-05:00

Texas Governor Rick Perry told a Florida TV station that he opposes a vanity license plate honoring the Sons of Confederate Veterans. He said that, "We don't need to be scraping old wounds." His announcement runs counter to Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson who proposed the plate on behalf of Sons of Confederate Veterans to the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles.

We commented in a recent blog on this issue.

The public outcry over the proposed plate includes a petition of 25,000 signatures and a letter signed by seventeen state lawmakers.

Perry's position is in contrast to his opposition to remove a pair of bronze plates with symbols of the Confederacy that were in the state Supreme Court building. Perry said, "I believe that Texans should remember the past and learn from it."

It is uncertain whether Governor Perry was influenced by his fight for the Presidency or he feels that the plates are not the same as allowing Confederate plaques, monuments and memorials from public buildings.

As seen in our post on this subject, we regard them as different issues. It is right for Texas to honor our Civil War dead and remember that sad time in our history. Associating Texas with the Sons of Confederate Veterans, especially relative to the opposition, is an entirely different situation. Perry decided that it was not appropriate for Texas to link its name with the Sons of Confederate Veterans.

We applaud Governor Perry on both positions.

Bryant Gumbel Insults African Americans

2011-10-26T15:42:00.001-05:00

Plantation

First, let me say that I am not a fan of Sportscaster Bryant Gumbel. As I far as I am concerned, he is a member of the IASWICHSI* Club who blesses us humble beings with his words. When he sticks to sports, he is merely annoying. However, his latest comment comparing NBA labor-management conflicts with slavery is way off the mark.

David Stern

He said that David Stern's "efforts were typical of a commissioner, who has always seemed eager to be viewed as some kind of modern plantation overseer treating NBA men as if they were his boys." Gumbel said, "It’s part of Stern’s M.O. Like his past self-serving edicts on dress code or the questioning of officials, his moves are intended to do little more than show how he’s the one keeping the hired hands in their place."

NBA Owner Jordan

How can anyone in the world feel sorry for these athletes whose average salary is $4.8 million. According to Rich Walcoff in the San Francisco Examiner, "in the last quarter of a century while the typical American saw his annual compensation increase about 160 percent, NBA players pay shot up 1,500 percent."

Any comparison with the horrors of slavery is absurd. Heck comparing the NBA players to any working man or woman is absurd. Gumbel's remarks are an insult to Black Americans and others who fought long and hard to free themself from slavery and gain their civil rights.

This is the third time Gumbel has played the race card in sports commentaries. It is most unfortunate because sports has played such an important role in improving race relations and breaking down racial barriers. Are we there yet. Absolutely not.

In addition, Gumbel's remarks were laced with anti-Semitic undertones. Attacking Stern and other NBA owners who are Jewish. This dispute is not a black and white thing or a black and Jew issue. It's a labor and management conflict. We do have white players in the NBA and some of them actually lead their team to a championship.

In an ESPN editorial Shaun Powell said that "It always annoyed Stern that the company he controlled, and the men in the owners' club, didn't reflect the same color of the players on the floor. And so not long after he became commissioner, Stern went about fixing the flaw. The NBA offices took on a different complexion, but that was small stuff. Stern wanted black representation at the highest level. He wanted to crash the old-boy network. He wanted to go where no commissioner had gone before (or since). And so Stern sought black ownership, even at the risk of his own reputation."

Gumbel and HBO should apologize for his remarks to both the Jewish and African American community.

* I Am So Wonderful I Can Hardly Stand It

Fort Donelson Celebrates 150th Anniversary

2011-10-17T12:31:00.000-05:00

In February and March of 2012, Fort Donelson will present several exciting programs on the historic battle.

Fort Henry

During the weekend of February 4-6th, Park Rangers from Fort Donelson National Battlefield will introduce visitors to the Fort Heiman story and will interpret the Battle of Fort Henry, which happened 150 years ago on February 6th. A unique living history event will commemorate the Confederate evacuation of Fort Henry towards Fort Donelson.

Fort Donelson

The following weekend, a living history encampment will interpret life at Fort Donelson from the Confederate perspective. This event will explore why men chose to join the Confederate States Army, how their lives were changed, and how their decisions affected their families. The encampment, held in much the same weather they experienced 150 years ago, has the potential of exploring the hardships soldiers on both sides faced. On February 11th, Kendall Gott, author of Where the South Lost the War: An Analysis of the Fort Henry-Fort Donelson Campaign, February 1862, will share his unique insights on the battle.

USS Carondelet

On February 13 and 14, 2012, Park Rangers will offer programs at the River Batteries to share the incredible stories of Confederate guns exchanging fire with US Navy ironclad boats. On February 15, 2012, Park Rangers will offer programs to explain the daring Confederate attempt to escape from Fort Donelson towards Nashville, and Ulysses Grant’s eventual retaking of his demolished line. On February 14th, Myron J. Smith, author of a new history of the USS Carondelet, will mark the 150th anniversary of the gunboat battle on the Cumberland.

On February 16, 2012, the 150th anniversary of the surrender of Fort Donelson, a historian portraying Ulysses Grant will be at the Dover Hotel to share his thoughts on this, one of his great personal triumphs. The Civil War Singers will share their talents with us that day, as the community commemorates this important event.

The weekend of February 18 and 19 will witness a Union living history encampment, interpreting Union life inside Fort Donelson and the town of Dover after the Confederate surrender.

On February 25th, noted author and former park historian, Benjamin F. Cooling, will talk about the campaign and the aftermath. On March 24th, legendary historian, Ed Bearss, will walk the grounds with visitors and share his gift for storytelling.

Please contact the park (931-232-5706) or visit their web site for more information.

To learn more about the battle, see the Battle of Fort Donelson and THE Turning Point in the Civil War.

Texas License Plate

2011-10-14T10:27:00.000-05:00

(Source The Dallas Morning News, October 14, 2011)

The Sons of Confederate Veterans have asked the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to issue license plates that contain the group’s logo featuring a Confederate battle flag. As might be expected, there is opposition to proposed vanity plate. More than 22,000 people have signed petitions opposing the Texas license plate. The Dallas Morning News of October 14th has urged DMV board members to vote no. The editorial, DMV Should Wave the Flag, concluded that approval of the Confederate plate would only reinforce the “backward-looking” stereotype of Texas and that would be a “distorted representation of what this state stands for.”

This is more than a freedom of speech issue. No one will dispute an individual’s right to display his beliefs in support of a political, social, recreational, collegiate or environmental cause. Texas has more than 200 specialty license plates with these motives. In addition, cars are adorned with stickers in support of these same causes. License plates with the logo are available Georgia, North Carolina, Alabama, Maryland, Mississippi, Louisiana, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia.

So why is this proposal different?

First, the Confederate flag is considered by many black Americans as a symbol of slavery. I have commented on this issue before and it is important to differentiate the use of this flag to honor the service of Southerners who fought for what they believed in. While the war was about slavery, most Confederate soldiers served to defend their homes from “Northern invasion” and the “Yankees” telling them how to run their businesses. Honor the men, but not the slave owner’s cause.

Second, the Sons of the Confederate Veterans may be regarded by some as a closet racist organization. This same attack could be made on any Southern-based Civil War group including Civil War Round Tables and battlefield preservation groups. The majority of members are history buffs, re-enactors, and, most importantly, ancestors of civil war veterans. Like all social, national and religious organizations, these groups have bigoted members. However suspicious outsiders may view these groups, we need to respect their rights to their opinions and the motivations of the majority of their members. According to their web page, the “Sons of Confederate Veterans is preserving the history and legacy of these heroes, so future generations can understand the motives that animated the Southern Cause.”

Third, this group’s proposal is offensive to many people. The twenty-two thousand who signed the petition exceeds the 2,300 members of the group. The wishes of the majority do not override the rights of the minority. Because this license plate represents Texas, the DMV must decide what is in the interest of all Texans.

We cannot and should not do away with the Confederate flag. It is a part of our history and culture. Allowing the license plate should serve not as reminder to where we were as a country but to honor the sacrifices that all Americans made to become the nation we are. Texas has become a unique state --- not southern, not western --- with a blend of cultures --- Hispanic, African American, German, and even Yankee. However, the State of Texas must determine, not if this license plate is an historic tribute, but if it is offensive to the majority of Texans, its fit with Texan culture and values, and if Texas wishes to have its name publicly associated with the Sons of Confederate Veterans.

The Role of Tariffs in the Civil War - Part 4

2011-10-11T14:16:00.000-05:00

We conclude our series of posts on The Role of Tariffs in the Civil War by commenting on the current economic situation and the possible role of protective tariffs.

Do we need tariffs today?

My answer is a resounding Yes!

One of the greatest lies perpetrated on the American people is that we are operating on a level playing field as far as international trade. Our leaders say we are exporting low skilled jobs so we can focus on high skilled positions for Americans. I guess our public officials assume that we are stupid.

The American educational system is not preparing our young people to compete for jobs with candidates from other countries. Students in India, China, Japan and other countries are better equipped. The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a system of international assessments that measures 15-year-olds' performance in reading literacy, mathematics literacy, and science literacy every 3 years. On the 2009 PISA, U.S. 15-year-olds’ average score in reading literacy was 500, which was not measurably different from the OECD average of 493. In mathematics literacy, U.S. 15-year-olds’ average score of 487 on the 2009 PISA was lower than the OECD average score of 496. The average mathematics literacy score in the United States was lower than the average score in 17 of the 33 other OECD countries. In science literacy, the average score of 15-year-olds in the United States was not measurably different from the OECD average score. The U.S. average science literacy score was lower than the average score in 12 of the 33 other OECD countries. The average scores for the US are 500 in reading, 487 in mathematics, and 502 in science. Japan scores are 520, 546, and 538; Russia 459, 468, and 478; China 556, 600, and 575; and Singapore 526,562, and 541.

The labor costs are, of course, much lower. The hourly compensation costs in manufacturing in 2009 were $33.53 for the US, $30.36 for Japan, $17.50 for Singapore, 14.20 for the Republic of Korea, and $7.76 for Taiwan.

Taking these statistics at face value implies that companies can get higher skilled workers for lower pay in countries outside of the US.

If we include in these figures the added costs that US companies incur for government regulation, the level playing field tilts decidedly towards the Chinese and other non-US manufacturers. We have regulations that protect the health and safety of workers, provide for equal hiring opportunities, guarantee a minimum wage, prohibit child and prison labor, protect the environment, and insure safe products. Low cost foreign products are not produced under these constraints. US corporations driven by the holy grail of shareholder value or return to investors, have little choice but to move operations to other countries. US corporations unlike Chinese are not controlled by the government and are not an instrument of foreign policy. Additionally, where government and industry are at loggerheads in the US, they work in concert in many parts of the world. Foreign governments actually try to protect their growing industries much as the US did in the first half of the nineteenth (and perhaps the entire century).

Our politicians want us to wait until our foreign competitors enact legislation that protects workers, consumers, and the environment. They don't want to upset foreign governments. Waiting for China to enact legislation to level the playing field, is like waiting for the Dallas Cowboys to win a Supper Bowl. It might happen, but don't write for game tickets this year.

What is needed is legislation to protect American workers and create a real level playing field. Without it, our standard of living will continue to drop and the legacy to our children will be poverty.

I wrote to both major political parties today asking for their positions on tariffs. I'll let you know if I receive an answer. I did this three years ago on another issue facing the candidates and I'm still waiting for answers. While waiting for answers, I found these "positions" on 2012 Presidential Candidates.

Romney advocates free trade with Columbia, Panama, and South Korea and sanctions on China for unfair trade practices. The US should reach out to China and charter a course that is equivalent to a free economy and a free society. This goal should be at par with those of the US.

Perry is a firm believer in the power of the free market, and is convinced that excessive regulatory control stifles the ability of the private sector to grow.

Paul advocates free market but didn't specifically address tariffs and he believes that trade with China should not be tied to human rights. The US should reach out to China and charter a course that is equivalent to a free economy and a free society. This goal should be at par with those of the US.

On his 2009 visit to China Obama looked for concessions on climate, currency, trade and human rights but all he got was a bland statement promising no firm commitments without any mention of Internet censorship or Tibet.

The Role of Tariffs in the Civil War - Part 3

2011-10-05T09:32:00.000-05:00

Why didn't Southern entrepreneurs take advantage of the protectionist tariffs to increase their manufacturing base?

This question may be the most perplexing. Most historians are familiar with the industrial disparity between the North and South at the beginning of the Civil War.

28% of the 120,000 US manufacturing establishments were in the North
92% of the nation's 1.4 million factory workers were in the North
72% of America's railroads were in the North
The value of Southern farm land was $1,871,000,000 in 1860

The Confederacy's industrial workforce was characterized by its wide and extensive use of slaves. In the 1850s, anywhere from 150,000 - 200,000 slaves were used in industrial work. Nearly 80% of these slaves were owned by industrial owners and, the remaining were rented out by plantation owners. Often, manual labor performed by slaves would be combined with skilled white artisans in order to better compete with northern and foreign industry.

Despite the profitability of slave industry, Southern industry had been under capitalized for years by the time of the outbreak of the war. Besides a social preference for ownership of real property (slaves and land), agriculture in staple goods (cotton, tobacco, sugar cane) was considered the easiest route to profitability. Therefore agriculture always outbid industry when it came to capital allocation. As early as 1830, Southern industry was a generation behind, and by the Civil War, was vastly inferior to northern and foreign manufacturing. [Source: Robert S. Starobin The Economics of Industrial Slavery in the Old South The Business History Review, Vol. 44, No. 2 (Summer, 1970), pp. 162 as quoted in Economy of the Confederate States of America]

With the Southern economy tied to agriculture and slave labor, it is no wonder that the influential plantation owners refused to end the practice. Their failure of foresight in funding manufacturing and building a more diversified industry, lead to the Civil War and the loss of the Confederacy in that war.

The Role of Tariffs in the Civil War - Part 2

2011-09-27T17:20:00.000-05:00

Continuing our discussion of The Role of Tariffs in the Civil War...

Were these tariffs designed to hurt the Southern economy?

While the tariffs were designed to protect American industries, they were not designed to punish the South. Most industries were in the North due to a good supply of raw materials, plentiful skilled labor, and cheap energy. At the dawn of the Industrial Revolution, American business and political leaders recognized that the country would have to have a strong industrial base to compete with the European nations and insure the young country's survival.

Southern businessmen had limited resources to draw on. They did not have access to raw materials, energy, or skilled labor. Moreover, they were tied to flawed agricultural society that was based on slave labor. Their unwillingness or inability to see the possibilities of a transition to an industrial economy cost the South dearly. It forced them to defend slavery and, when the war broke out, it left the South without the necessary industry to support the war effort.

Ultimately, the tariffs were beneficial.

How did the tariffs hurt the Southern economy?

While not designed to hurt the Southern economy, the impact on the South was profound. The "40 bales theory" tried to quantify the impact of tariffs on the South. The theory attempted to explained how tariffs on manufactured goods reduced demand for the South’s raw cotton: a 40% tariff on cotton finished goods led to 40% higher consumer prices, which translated to 40% fewer sales, since consumers had less money to spend following the Panic of 1819. And 40% fewer sales meant cotton manufacturers purchased 40% less cotton.

What enraged the South was that the Federal Government was seen as using policy to favor the economic health of one part of the country at the expense of another. Southern leaders worried that Northern Abolitionists would use the same tactic to end slavery and destroy the heart of the Southern economy.

While tariff funds did not go to Northern industrialists, the northern manufacturers could obtain higher prices by virtue of the higher prices paid for foreign imports. Manufacturers would be allowed to raise prices to the level of foreign imports. These prices would be passed on to both northern and southern consumers. Based on the population distribution, northern consumers should have paid more in total than their neighbors in the South.

The South contended that the tariffs would hurt cotton production and exports. Plantation owners argued that while northern industries increased output and market share, southern plantations would see less demand.

The statistics don't support that conclusion as shown in the following graph using data from the Economic History Association.

The Role of Tariffs in the Civil War - Part 1

2011-09-21T16:10:00.001-05:00

I received an -mail from Dennis M. saying that I had understated the impact of "crippling tariffs" on the Southern economy. Dennis cited the import tariffs from 1789 to 1842 and said that the North paid its "debts on the back of the South, while crippling the Southern economy and bolstering Northern manufacturing."

I found his comments interesting on many levels and they raised several questions.

· Where did the money collected go? Was it used to pay "Northern debts?"

· Were these tariffs designed to hurt the Southern economy?

· While the tariffs hurt the South were they beneficial to the whole nation?

· Did the tariffs help cause the Civil War?

· Why didn't Southern businessmen use the tariff protection to industrialize the South?

Let's start with a review of the tariffs and their role in government finance. According to US statistical data, tariff income provided a substantial portion of the Federal government's budget.

Year	Tariff Income, $ million	Budget % of Tariff	Average Tariff, %
1792	4.4	95.0	15.1
1795	5.6	91.6	8.0
1800	9.1	83.7	10.0
1805	12.9	95.4	10.7
1810	8.6	91.5	10.1
1815	7.3	46.4	6.5
1820	15.0	83.9	20.2
1825	20.1	97.9	22.3
1830	21.9	88.2	35.0
1835	19.4	54.1	14.2
1840	12.5	64.2	12.7
1845	27.5	91.9	24.3
1850	39.7	91.0	22.9
1855	53.0	81.2	20.6
1860	53.2	94.9	15.0

2010	25,289	1.2	1.3

Tariffs have played different roles in trade policy and the nation's economic history. Tariffs were the largest source of federal revenue from the 1790s to World War I, when income taxes became the major source of government funding. From 1789 to 1861, the US Government enacted the following tariffs:

· 1789: Hamilton Tariff - Rates were between 5 and 10%. Alexander Hamilton wanted to establish the tariff as a regular source of government revenue and to encourage the growth of domestic manufacturing to lessen America's dependence on foreign-made products.

· 1790: Tariff of 1790 - Increased average rate from 5% to 7-10% and increased the number of items taxed.

· 1792: Tariff of 1792 - Increased tariff rates.

· 1816: Tariff of 1816 - protective tariff introduced in 1816 and in force between 1816 and 1824.

· 1824: Tariff of 1824 - Designed to protect American industry in the face of cheaper British commodities, especially iron products, wool and cotton textiles, and agricultural goods.

· 1828: Tariff of 1828 - Protect industries in the northern United States which were being driven out of business by low-priced imported goods by putting a tax on them. The South was harmed directly by having to pay higher prices on goods the region did not produce, and indirectly because reducing the exportation of British goods to the US made it difficult for the British to pay for the cotton they imported from the South. The reaction in the South, particularly in South Carolina, would lead to the Nullification Crisis of 1832. The tariff marked the high point of US tariffs.

· 1832: Tariff of 1832 - reduced tariffs to remedy the conflict created by the tariff of 1828, but it was still deemed unsatisfactory by some in the South, especially in South Carolina.

· 1833: Tariff of 1833 - The "Compromise Tariff" of 1833 was proposed as a resolution to the Nullification Crisis. It was adopted to gradually reduce the rates after southerners objected to the protectionism found in the Tariff of 1832 and the 1828 Tariff of Abominations, which had prompted South Carolina to threaten secession from the Union. This Act stipulated that import taxes would gradually be cut over the next decade until, by 1842, they matched the levels set in the Tariff of 1816—an average of 20%.

· 1842: Tariff of 1842 - The "Black Tariff"

· 1846: Walker Tariff - The Walker Tariff was enacted by the Democrats, and made substantial cuts in the high rates of the "Black Tariff" of 1842, enacted by the Whigs. The Walker Tariff reduced rates by 25% to 35%; it coincided with Britain's repeal of the Corn Laws and led to an increase in trade. It was one of the lowest tariffs in American history.

· 1857: Tariff of 1857 - The Tariff of 1857 was a major tax reduction and created a mid-century low point for tariffs. It amended the Walker Tariff of 1846 by lowering rates to around 17% on average. The bill was offered in response to a federal budget surplus in the mid 1850s.

· 1861: Morrill tariff - The Morrill Tariff of 1861 was an protective tariff adopted on March 2, 1861 during the administration of President James Buchanan.

Where did the money collected go? Was it used to pay "Northern debts?"

If we examine the above tariffs, it is apparent that they changed from being an instrument to raise Federal revenue to a devise to protect Northern industries. This was most apparent in legislation from 1824 to 1842. Tariff levels fluctuated based on the political party in power. Conflict over tariffs, perhaps even more than the tariffs themselves, contributed to the North-South schism.

The revenue raised by tariffs was not used by the North to pay its debts. Tariffs provided the Federal Government with enough money to pay its operating expenses and to redeem at full value U.S. Federal debts and the debts the states had accumulated during the Revolutionary War. Tariffs helped pay for wars and military actions including the Second Cherokee War (1776-1777), Chickamauga Wars (1776-1794), Northwest Indian War (1785-1795), First Barbary War (1801-1805), War of 1812 (1812-1815), Second Barbary War (1815), the First Seminole War (1816-1818), Florida Wars (1835-1842), the Mexican American War (1846-1848), and Utah War (1857-1858). The tariff money also helped pay for roads, canals, and railroads and western expansion. So ALL Americans benefited from the revenue raised.

Fort Negley, TN

2011-09-13T15:23:00.000-05:00

After Confederate forces were driven from Forts Henry and Donelson in February 1862, Confederate commanders decided to leave Nashville. After Nashville was abandoned, it was almost immediately occupied by Union forces, who began preparations for its defense. Fort Negley was the largest of the fortifications protecting the city. The fort was a star-shaped limestone block structure atop a hill south of the city. Captain James St. Clair Morton supervised the fort's construction. The fort is 600 feet long, 300 feet wide, and covers four acres. The fort was constructed from 62,500 cubic feet of stone and 18,000 cubic feet of earth at a cost $130,000.

It was mainly built by the labor of local slaves, newly freed slaves, and free blacks. The newly freed slaves flocked to Nashville after it was taken by Union forces with the understanding that their status as slaves was to be revoked were they to work for the Union. The free blacks were forcibly conscripted for the work. Records show that 2,768 blacks were officially enrolled in its construction. During construction 600-800 men died and only 310 ever received any pay. The fort, completed in 1862, was named for Union Army commander General James S. Negley.

On April 19, 1861, Negley was appointed brigadier general in the Pennsylvania Militia. He raised a of Pennsylvania volunteers and served under Robert Patterson in the Shenandoah Valley in 1861. His appointment as brigadier general expired on July 20 but he was reappointed brigadier general of volunteers on October 1, 1861. In October, he was placed in command of the 7th Brigade in the Department of the Ohio. He commanded the Union expedition against Chattanooga during the Confederate Heartland Offensive. The expedition proved to be a successful demonstration of the Union Army's ability to strike deep into the heart of Confederate held territory.

On November 29, 1862, he was appointed major general of volunteers and took command of the 8th Division in the Army of the Ohio. His division became the 2nd Division in George H. Thomas' Center Wing of the XIV Corps during the Battle of Stones River. On the second day of fighting, he led a successful counterattack against Maj. Gen. John C. Breckinridge on the Union left flank. He commanded his division during the Tullahoma Campaign and the Battle of Chickamauga. During the maneuvering that preceded the battle, Negley's division, in the advance of Maj. Gen. George H. Thomas's corps, was almost trapped in a cul-de-sac named McLemore's Cove, but command confusion in the Confederate Army of Tennessee allowed them to escape. After the Union defeat at Chickamauga, Negley, whose division became scattered during the second day's fighting, was relieved of command, but was acquitted of any wrongdoing during the battle. When Ulysses S. Grant became general-in-chief in 1864 he discussed restoring Negley to command. However, after serving on several administrative boards, Negley resigned in January 1865

When the Battle of Nashville finally began in December 1864, it was largely fought on the heights farther south of the city than Fort Negley. Despite its then-impressive appearance, Fort Negley never played a leading military role. Shortly after the war, the fort was abandoned and fell into ruin. During the Reconstruction period, the area was used as a meeting place for the Ku Klux Klan.

The remains of Fort Negley are located at Chestnut Street and Fort Negley Blvd, Nashville TN 37203 (just southeast of intersection of I-40 and I-65). An interpreted trail leads from the parking lot through the fort. Signs describe the Battle of Nashville from the fort’s perspective. Open daylight hours. Free. A visitor center, also free, with exhibits and an introduction to the fort is open Tuesday–Saturday 9 am–4:30 pm. 615-862-8470

For more information, please see:

Union Fort Negley

Fort Negley

Defending Nashville: The Story of Fort Negley

US Army Heritage & Education Center (USAHEC)

2011-08-30T16:22:00.000-05:00

The US Army Heritage & Education Center (USAHEC) is an excellent resource for Civil War researchers. I've spent several days there over the past two years. Their staff is wonderful to work with, and the facilities and research materials are top notch. The Center is located in Carlisle, PA west of Harrisburg off Interstate Highway 81 and north of Gettysburg. I heartily recommend a visit when you are in the area.

However, don't let its distance affect your use of its resources. Allow me to take you on a virtual tour on its web-based resources. At the top of the home page, you will see a horizontal menu with the following topics: About USAHEC, Organizations, Plan Your Visit, Exhibitions, Research, Media Galleries, Get Involved, and Home. These topics have drop-down menus USAHEC is an excellent source for all Army information, but I want to concentrate on the Civil War resources. Plan Your Visit contains directions operating hours, and events if you can travel to Carlisle. Exhibitions contains information on current and past exhibits including the Army Heritage Trail. After a day in the books, I enjoyed a walk along the trail to see the exhibits.

Our first stop is the Media Galleries. The Perspectives in Military History Lecture Series contains seven lectures of interest to students of the Civil War. Under Photo Galleries you will find the MOLLUS Civil War Image Collection. with over 23,000 photographs. On this site you will find the US Army Heritage Collections Online. Within this area are a Research Catalog, Reference Bibliographies, and Digitized Material. The Research Catalog is a searchable database. The Reference Bibliographies have three files devoted to the Civil War: Civil War Unit Bibliographies, Civil War Union Biographies, and Civil War Confederate Biographies. Under Digitized Material you will find searchable files of manuscripts/archives, photographs, military publications, audio visual, and oral histories.

I hope this brief introduction has whet your appetite.

Monuments at Alatoona Pass

2011-08-23T08:35:00.001-05:00

Mississippi Monument

In October 2007, I met two gentlemen who were in the process of erecting a monument to Confederate soldiers who fought in the Battle of Allatoona Pass. I was quickly recruited to take pictures of the event for the local paper. Gary Wehner told me he would keep in touch with his project to place other monuments at the site.

Therefore, it was with great pleasure that this week's mail brought a letter from "Captain" Gary Wehner of Company F of the 5th Missouri. Captain Wehner reported that it appears that monuments from all eleven states represented at the battle will be in place in time for the 150th anniversary on October 5, 2014. The states of Ohio, Wisconsin, and Louisiana have formed committees for the project.

On the Union side, units from Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin fought in the battle. Confederate states represented include Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, and Texas. For more information, please see the Order of Battle.

In the next few years, Gary will be joined by other volunteers to work on landscaping and paths. This is a great project celebrating the efforts of Union and Confederate soldiers who fought then and their descendants who want to honor them by erecting these monuments.

Please see the following sites for more information on the battlefield and preservation efforts:

The Battle of Allatoona Pass - Civil War Journeys
Allatoona Pass Battlefield - Official Site
Allatoona Pass Battlefield Restoration
Battle of Allatoona - Wikipedia
Allatoona Pass - Civil War Virtual Tours

Using Civil War Names

2011-08-18T10:14:00.000-05:00

Have you been Shermanized?

Inspired by ABC's Good Morning America's report on texting, I decided to try my hand at forming verbs, adverbs, adjectives from the names of Civil War leaders. Let the silliness begin.

Shermanized - the total destruction of property, i.e. "The fire shermanized the once beautiful forest" or "After the hostile takeover, the acquiring company quickly shermanized the firm shedding 20% of the workforce."

McClellanly - cautious, timid, i.e. "Frank mcclellanly approached the beautiful blond at the end of the bar."

Grantful - determined, dogged, relentless, i.e. "US Marshall Owens grantfully pursued the murderer until he found near Wichita Falls, Texas."

Granted - slander, libel, malign, i.e. "The defense attorney granted the witness with accusations of illegal drug use."

Sheridanistic - opportunistic, i.e "Black Mountain Finance's success was characterized by a series of sheridanistic investments."

Custerial - vain, egotistical, i.e. "John's superiors were impressed by his abilities, but could not tolerate his custerial behavior."

Smarthalleck - impertinent, sassy, cheeky, i.e. "Walter's classmates considered him a teacher's pet and a real smarthalleck for always knowing the answers."

Leeful - esteemed, honored, revered, i.e. "Reverend Johnson was leefully regarded in the McKinney community for his many charitable acts.

Jacksonly - aggressive, forceful, uncompromising, i.e. "Linda jacksonly pursued the vice president position inspite of the opposition of the all-male board of directors."

Longstreetish - defensive, protective, i.e. "Coach Ryan's longstreetish defense kept teams in check within the twenty-yard lines, but was susceptible to the big play."

Stuartly - flamboyant, charismatic, i.e. "Not only was Peter brilliant; he was also stuartly."

Johnstonish - stable, steady, constant, i.e. "As a quarterback, Sinclair was amazingly johnstonish, neither forcing throws into coverage or fumbling the ball."

Hooded - demoralized, defeated, i.e. "After the primary, a hooded former-Governor Smith dropped out of the Republican presidential campaign."

Forrestful - tough, gregarious, i.e. "The President's advisers wanted him to adopt a more forrestful persona."

Lincolnable - clever, resourceful, i.e. "Among her other traits, Betsy was considered a most lincolnable researcher."

Davisish - contrive, plan, scheme, i.e. "Rick was a davisish man who always considered all options before speaking"

Please add your own contributions.

Most Influential Women of the Civil War

2011-08-10T12:37:00.000-05:00

Harriet Beecher Stowe

Women played a large role in the Civil War as nurses, spies, and diarists. Here's my ranking of the most influential ladies of that era.

25. Susie Baker - African-American nurse, laundress, and educator

24. Elizabeth Scott Neblett - Southern diarist

23. Abbey House - "Angel of Mercy" to Confederate soldiers and became first woman to vote

22. Anita Ford Willard - Confederate spy

21. Pauline Cushman - Union spy

20. Phoebe Yates Levy Pember - nurse and administrator of Chimborazo Hospital at Richmond

19. Sarah E. Thompson - Northern diarist from Tennessee

18. Alice Williamson - Southern diarist

17. Mary Chesnut - Southern diarist

16. Mary Todd Lincoln - Lincoln's wife

15. Mary Edwards Walker - Doctor who was assistant surgeon of Army of the Cumberland and winner of Congressional Medal of Honor

14. Elizabeth Cady Stanton - women's rights leader

13. Susan B. Anthony - women's rights leader

12. Sojourner Truth - African-American abolitionist and women's rights activist

11. Lucretia Mott - abolitionist and Political and social reformer

10. Varnia Jefferson Davis - Davis' wife

9. Harriet Tubman - Underground railroad and nurse

8. Sally Tompkins - "Angel of the Confederacy" who founded a hospital in Richmond and was commissioned as a Captain by Davis

7. Belle Boyd - Confederate spy

6. Rose O'Neal Greenhow - Confederate spy

5. Julie Ward Howe - composer of the "Battle Hymn of the Republic"

4. Clara Barton - nurse and founder of the American Red Cross

3. Dorothea Lynde Dix - Superintendent of Nurses for the Union Army

2. Mary Ann Bickerdyke - Union nurse and hospital administrator

1. Harriet Beecher Stowe - author of Uncle Tom's Cabin

Lincoln may have said "so you are the little woman who wrote the book that started this great war." Whether true or not, she had a tremendous impact on public opinion. Southern diarist Susan Bradford wrote "Our old friend, Mr. Burgess, says: 'If Mrs. Harriet Beecher Stowe had died before she wrote 'Uncle Tom's Cabin,' this would never have happened.' He says, 'she has kindled a fire which all the waters of the earth cannot extinguish.' Isn't it strange how much harm a pack of lies can do?"

To learn more about the contributions of women during the war, please see

http://www.civilwarwomenblog.com/ and

http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/1993/spring/women-in-the-civil-war-1.html.

Officer's Petition to Replace "Old and Disabled Officers"

2011-08-04T12:34:00.000-05:00

Fall of Mexico City

On September 24, 1847 U. S. Army officers serving in Mexico signed a petition asking for the "passage of a law providing for the retirement of old and disabled officers." The document was "signed by almost every member of the old regiments serving" in Mexico.

The petition to the 30th Congress read,

We, the undersigned, officers of the army, most respectfully represent to your honorable bodies, that, in consequence or age, infirmity, and other causes, many of the officers of the army are permanently unfitted for active duty in the field, and that their places are supplied, and their duties were formed by their juniors, to the great injury of the service, and to the prejudice of the younger officers of the army, we would most respectfully urge, that faithful servants, having spent all the best years of their lives in the service of their country, are entitled to an honorable competence on their retiring from active service; and we respectfully express the opinion that the pay proper, as proposed, some years since, by Major General Macomb, and recently renewed by the Adjutant General, is not such a competence. For the purpose, therefore, of rendering the army more efficient of doing justice, both to those who remain in, and to those who may retire from the service, we respectfully petition ---

1st. That officers of the army, who, in the opinion of a board of officers, approved by the President of the United States, may, from age, infirmity, or other causes, become permanently unfitted for duty in the field, shall retire from active service in the army.

2d. That officers who have faithfully served their country for thirty years may have the privilege of retiring from active service in the army.

3d. That all officers so retiring from active service in the army, shall, during their natural lives, receive the pay proper of their respective rank and the service rations to which they may be entitled at the time of their retiring.

4th.That the places or officers so retiring shall be filled by regular promotion of the officer next in rank; and the officers so promoted receiving only the allowances of the higher grade to which they shall be promoted.

Your petitioners entertain the belief that the enactment of a law, founded on the foregoing principles, will not only be beneficial to individual officers, but will essentially tend to the usefulness and efficiency of the army; and they therefore solicit its passage. [1]

This petition addressed the problem of promotion that infested the peacetime army. Unfortunately, Congress appears to have done nothing to address the issue. The reduction of the size of the army after the war meant that fewer promotions and, more importantly, pay increases, would be awarded. This economic hardship forced many young officers to resign while their older superiors did little but collect their pay and gather dust. Among those who resigned were Jackson, McClellan, Rosencrans, and Sherman.

Special thanks to Betsy R. Miller for locating this document.

[1] Petition of Officers of the United States Army in Mexico, December 20, 1847, 30th Congress, 1st Session, "The passage of a law providing for the retirement of old and disabled officers."

Top Rated Civil War Generals

2011-08-03T11:33:00.001-05:00

"The Best Civil War General"

The debate rages on! Who was the best Civil War general? We weigh-in with our ranking based on the following factors: number of victories in "A" rated battles, number of battles won, winning percentage, net casualties, and enemy casualties. Before readers get too excited, this system only considers results, not intangible factors.

So here's our top 25 generals

25. Meade - Union - inflicted a lot of casualties, but suffered net losses
24. Warren - Union - four wins
23. Longstreet - Confederate - shocking to some, but not the cadre of those who don't like Pete
22. Pleasonton - Union - underrated cavalryman
21. Sibley - Union - undefeated but far from quality wins
20. Magruder - Confederate - two wins, Civil War Oscar
19. Burnside - Union - 9,600 net casualties, really doesn't belong on the list
18. Price - Confederate - 5,900 enemy casualties
17. Ewell - Confederate - 12,900 enemy casualties
16. Johnston - Confederate - 20,600 enemy casualties
15. Early - Confederate - 4,000 net casualties put him on list
14. Curtis - Union - two "A" ranked victories
13. Blunt - Union - five wins
12. Banks - Union - five wins
11. Thomas - Union - 9,700 enemy casualties, one "A" ranked victory
10.Forrest - Confederate - nine wins, 5,500 enemy casualties
9. Grant - Union - high net casualties hurts his ranking, most wins
8. Farragut - Union - undefeated in battle, two "A" ranked victories
7. Beauregard - Confederate - nine wins, 15,300 casualties, two "A" ranked victories
6. Sherman - Union - seven wins, inflicted 18,000 enemy casualties
5. Sheridan - Union - six wins, three "A" ranked victories
4. Rosecrans - Union - 34,000 enemy casualties, two "A" ranked victories
3.Lee - Confederate - 11 wins, 168,000 enemy casualties, six "A" ranked victories
2. McClellan - Union - surprising place for most prodded general, 26,000 enemy casualties, two "A" ranked victories
1. Jackson - Confederate - You may not agree with the other rankings, but this one seems correct - 9 wins, three "A" ranked victories, 20,000 enemy casualties

Observations: What's that they say about liars and statistics? Some of the rankings make sense, but others (Rosecrans, Longstreet, McClellan) don't. I'd like to revise the system to show impact of performance on battles where the officers were not the primary commanders.

Mr. Smith Goes to War

2011-07-27T10:58:00.001-05:00

In writing the biography of Major General C. F. Smith, I noticed that a number of Civil War generals named "Smith" came up in my research. My curiosity prompted me to find out just how many "Smiths" served as general officers. The un-exhaustive research found 20 names.

There were 12 Union and 8 Confederate officers.

Andrew Jackson Smith - USA
Charles Ferguson Smith - USA
Edmund Kirby Smith - CSA
Giles Alexander Smith - USA
Green Clay Smith - USA
Gustavus Adolphus Smith - USA
Gustavus Woodson Smith - CSA
James Argyle Smith - CSA
John Eugene Smith - USA
Martin Luther Smith - CSA
Morgan Lewis Smith - USA
Preston Smith - CSA
Thomas Benton Smith - CSA
Thomas Church Haskell Smith - USA
Thomas Kilby Smith - USA
William "Extra Billy"Smith - CSA
William Duncan Smith - CSA
William Farrar "Baldy" Smith - USA
William Sooy Smith - USA
Thomas Alfred Smyth - USA

Some interesting facts about the "Smith" gang:

Nine were graduates of West Point.
Five served in the Mexican War.
Four died during the Civil War.
Three were born in Pennsylvania and Tennessee and two were from Kentucky, Massachusetts, and New York.
Three fought at Fort Donelson
If you are confused about the Smiths at Shiloh, it's because nine of the men were involved in the bloody battle.
The best nicknames are William F. "Baldy" Smith and William "Extra Billy" Smith.
Thomas Alfred Smyth was the last Union general to die in the war.
Two Smith brothers (Morgan L. and Giles A.) fought for the Union.
Confederate Brigader General Tomas Benton Smith lived until 1923, but spent his last years in a mental asylum in Tennessee.
Lieutenant General Edmund Kirby Smith held the highest rank among the Confederates and was the last surviving full general of the Confederacy.
Two were named Gustavus --- Gustavus Adolphus Smith - USA and Gustavus Woodson Smith - CSA
Charles Ferguson Smith was cousin to Elizabeth Todd Grimsley Brown, first cousin to Mary Todd Lincoln.
Thomas Kilby Smith was US Consul in Panama and Morgan Lewis Smith was US Consul in Honolulu.
Six were lawyers/politicians, six were involved in education, and four were engineers.
Gustavus Adolphus Smith was a Internal Revenue collector.

Learn more at Mr. Smith Goes to War.

The Cause(s) of the Civil War

2011-07-19T13:40:00.000-05:00

I just finished teaching a class on the beginning of the Civil War. The lecture traced the war from Lincoln's election to the attack on Fort Sumter. As part of the class, I reviewed the causes of the conflict.

I am a member of the group that says the war was about slavery, but I have recently adjusted that perspective. From the South's perspective, the war was about wealth or economics. The wealthiest people in the country lived in the South and more specifically the Deep South. They derived their income from agriculture and their wealth from the assets that produced their revenue. The assets of the Deep South were slaves and land. The economics was based on the difference between value of the crops produced and the costs to raise and harvest those crops. The price of cotton fluctuated on the world market due to a variety of factors and could not be controlled by the landowners. That left the costs of production which was primarily labor. While the slaves earned no wages, they did incur expenses in food, shelter, and medical care. This cost was low relative to the earning power of the slave in producing crops or leased to other employers for other tasks.

Losing this cheap labor, would destroy the wealth of landowners. The cash flow from slaves would be gone and the land they worked would be worthless without the help to produce crops. The dual impact from these two outcomes forced the agricultural South to leave the Union rather than become paupers. So from the Southern point-of-view, the war was about slavery and the ability to maintain that economic institution.

In the North, the issue of slavery was the battle cry of the abolitionists. However, the majority of Northerners wanted nothing to do with freeing the slaves. According to John Fazio of The Cleveland Civil War Roundtable, "The evidence is strong that abolitionists were not particularly popular in the North and were positively anathema in the South. They were frequently spat upon, shouted down and otherwise abused when speaking to Northern audiences." Slavery was a side issue in the North. The main cause of the war in Unionist minds was the destruction of the Union by the secessionists. The Union recruits would fight to preserve the Union by not to free the slaves. This position was clearly outlined by Lincoln before the war when he defended the Southerner's rights to own slaves. It was clearly not in his interest to free the slaves as he demonstrated by repealing Fremont's and Hunter's emancipation proclamations. The Unionists believed, as quoted in Adam Goodheart's 1861, "Shall all this be thrown away to please a few villains and Traitors[?]"

Therefore, we have two causes of the war: slavery and preservation of the Union.

Please see The Cleveland Civil War Roundtable article by John Fazio, Adam Goodheart, 1861, p. 155, Disunion: The Civil War, and From Springfield to Fort Sumter.

"Treue der Union"

2011-07-13T16:31:00.000-05:00

In the town of Comfort, Texas located off of route 10 between Kerrville and Boerne in the Hill Country, memories of the Civil War are kept alive by Anne Stewart, She spends her time, with the Comfort Heritage Foundation inside the old Comfort State Bank, researching events surrounding the Nueces Massacre.

Ms. Stewart, a self-taught archivist and historian, is a descendant of Germans who arrived in Comfort in 1861determined to shed more light on the fatal decision by a group of Hill Country Germans, loyal to the Union, to reject the Confederacy and escape to Mexico.

When German communities in Texas voted against secession, they became the subject of suspicion and distrust. The communities had formed local militias to protect themselves against Indian raids. Confederate authorities were concerned that the loyalists might join Union invading armies to capture Texas. Older immigrant families were angry that the loyalists were focusing animosities on the entire German population. The entire community was viewed as traitors. According to historical accounts, dozens to hundreds of Germans in the Hill Country were lynched or shot, and their farmhouses burned, on the mere suspicion of treason.

Germans mostly opposed slavery, but it wasn’t a burning issue in the Hill Country, where farmers grew wheat and not cotton. When Texans voted on secession, the newer immigrants voted to remain in the Union. Among those opposed to the Confederacy, were the Freethinkers, who helped found the towns of Comfort and Sisterdale. The Freethinkers had immigrated to Texas after a failed democratic revolution in Germany in 1848. They disliked organized religion, believed in civil liberties, and opposed slavery.

Though the Freethinkers’ beliefs did not reflect the views of longer-established Texas Germans, they fed the growing distrust of Confederate authorities toward the Hill Country communities. In response to concerns, the Confederate authorities declared martial law on May 30, 1862, and required all white males over age 16 to take a loyalty oath.

Capt. James Duff, a ruthless Confederate officer, was sent from San Antonio to enforce the decree. Duff with the help of vigilante mobs, the Germans called hangebund or “hanging gangs,” hunted down and hanged any Germans suspected of being pro-Union.

The violence persuaded some Hill Country Germans to leave Texas. A group of about 70, led by Fritz Tegener of Comfort, refused to take the loyalty oath and set out for Mexico. Some of them planned to wait out the war there. Others hoped to join federal forces in New Orleans.

Duff learned about the escape from a spy and ordered about 100 Confederate troops to pursue the Germans. On the night of August 9, 1862, scouts spotted Tegener’s group on the Nueces River in Kinney County, about 40 miles east of present-day Del Rio on the Mexican border. The Confederates attacked the next morning killing 19 and wounding 9 others. The nine wounded were executed shortly after being taken prisoner. The 28 bodies were stacked in a pile near the river and left unburied.

The rest of the Union loyalists escaped. Two months later, eight more were killed by Confederates while trying to cross the Rio Grande into Mexico. After the war, relatives of the dead recovered the bodies and buried the remains in Comfort.

On Aug. 10, 1866, a 20-foot-tall limestone monument was dedicated at the burial site. The monument was inscribed with the names of the victims and the words "Treue der Union" or "Loyalty to the Union." The memorial holds a unique place in Texas history as the state’s first Civil War monument, and one of only two dedicated solely to the Union in a state that overwhelmingly voted to join the Confederacy. In 1906, a statue was erected in Denison honoring Union veterans who lived in Grayson County, which voted to keep Texas in the Union.

Has anyone heard of events such as this occurring in Union states?

THE Turning Point of the Civil War

2011-07-07T11:58:00.002-05:00

In an article in the April 2011 issue of Civil War Times, Gary W. Gallagher discusses "The War's Overlooked Turning Points.[1]" He concludes that, "Because of its striking reorientation of the strategic situation during the summer of 1862, as well as the long-term consequences of Lee's generalship regarding morale, the possibility of emancipation and the duration of the war, the Seven Days' Campaign belongs in the front rank of Civil War turning points."

Intrigued by Dr. Gallagher's article, it was decided to conduct a review of strategic battles. The analysis started with the National Park Service's listing of "A" ranked battles. These battles are considered as "having a decisive influence on a campaign and a direct impact on the course of the war." The list contains 45 battles from 33 campaigns

The first issue to address is the definition of a turning point. According to the Free Online Dictionary, a turning point is the point at which a very significant change occurs; a decisive moment, a moment when the course of events is changed a point at which there is a change in direction or motion.[2] Applying this definition to the Civil War suggests that there may be many turning points in a war where the trend in battle changes from one side to the other.

The initial approach was to find the single battle or campaign that changed the result of the entire war. For this analysis, a "turning point" was judged as an event that after which the outcome was inevitable. In sports parlance, it would be the play which changed the course of the game and allowed one team to win. With that definition, the turning point in the American Civil War would have to be a battle or campaign in which the outcome indicated that the Union would eventually win the war. In respect to military actions, this event would have to be a battle won by Union forces.

To begin the analysis, the list of Civil War battlefields compiled by the National Park Service were reviewed. The review started with the A ranked battles "having a decisive influence on a campaign and a direct impact on the course of the war."[3] The 45 "A" battles were culled using several criteria.

The obvious first cut on the "A" battles were those that the South won. This eliminates Confederate victories at Chancellorsville, Chickamauga, Fredericksburg, Cold Harbor, First Winchester, Fort Sumter, First and Second Manassas, Wilson's Creek, Gaines Mill, Mansfield, The Crater, and Second Petersburg. Not surprising, Union casualties in these engagements (99,717) outnumbered Confederate losses (61,597). Inconclusive battles, such as Spotsylvania Court House and The Wilderness, were also eliminated from the candidates. These edits reduced the list to 30 battles in 24 campaigns.

Several fascinating facts emerge from this new list. First, nine of the battles can be associated with General-in-Chief Winfield Scott's Anaconda Plan that emphasized the "blockade" of the Southern ports, and called for an advance down the Mississippi River to sever the South in two. These battles include Forts Jackson and Phillip (New Orleans & Mississippi River), New Madrid/Island No. 10 (Mississippi River), Vicksburg and Champion Hill (Mississippi River), Fort Fisher (Wilmington & Atlantic Coast), Mobile Bay and Fort Blakely (Mobile and Gulf of Mexico), and Fort Donelson and Shiloh (Cumberland and Tennessee Rivers). Secondly, the Confederate casualties in these victories were 32,223 greater than Union losses (156,216 vs. 123,993). In seven of these Federal triumphs, Union losses exceeded Confederate casualties. Two thirds of the difference occurred in three battles: Fort Donelson (12,736), Gettysburg (5,000) and Franklin II (3,935). The highest number of Confederate losses were at Gettysburg (28,000), Fort Donelson (15,067), Shiloh (10,699), Antietam (10,320), and Stones River (10,266). These five battles accounted for nearly half of the 156,216 Confederate casualties. Thirdly, of the thirty Union victories, seven battles list U.S. Grant as the Union commander and four list Sheridan or Sherman serving under Grant as the Union commander.

Some battles, while significant were limited in impact to securing a state for the Union. In this category, would be Pea Ridge, Perryville and Glorieta Pass. Battles and campaigns that took place in 1865 can also be eliminated. The tide of battle was clearly in evidence by the beginning of the last four months of the war. Seven battles were Union victories in 1865 with three in the Appomattox Campaign and one in the Campaign of the Carolinas. This drops the number of candidates to 20.

This left a roll of the usual "suspects:" Federal Penetration up the Cumberland and Tennessee Rivers [1862 - Fort Donelson and Shiloh], Expedition to, and Capture of, New Orleans [April-May 1862 - Forts Jackson and Phillip], Maryland Campaign [September 1862 - Antietam], Gettysburg Campaign [June-August 1863 - Gettysburg], Chattanooga-Ringgold Campaign [November 1863 - Chattanooga], Atlanta Campaign [May-September 1864 - Jonesborough], Sheridan's Valley Campaign [August-October 1864 - Opequon and Cedar Creek], and Franklin-Nashville Campaign [September-December 1864 - Franklin and Nashville]. The only campaign not identified is the Overland Campaign in which the two major battles Spotsylvania Court House and Wilderness are classified as inconclusive and a third, Cold Harbor, is a Confederate victory.

In order to analyze these turning points, a monthly accounting was developed of the Civil War battles using the National Park Service (NPS) classification.[4] The NPS classifies battles from D to A.[5] A battles were given a numeric value of 4, 3 for B, 2 for C, and 1 for D. The NPS determination of the outcome as either a Confederate or Union victory or inconclusive was used to define the result. The Confederate victory at Fort Sumter, an "A ranked" battle, would earn 4 points. This rating was calculated for the 382 battles identified by the NPS. The points for the Union and Confederate victories were added to produce a series of monthly totals. Then the monthly difference in the sum of points between Union and Confederate victories was determined. These monthly points were added to create a cumulative monthly total and plotted on the following graph.

The chart reveals five distinct turning points in the war. This explains why historians have championed those presented above. The reality is that there were many turning points in the war. The first turning point occurs in February 1862 with Grant's victories at Forts Henry and Donelson or the Federal Penetration up the Cumberland and Tennessee Rivers campaign (Fort Henry through Shiloh). The second turning point occurs in May 1862 with "Stonewall" Jackson's victories in the Shenandoah Valley and Lee's victories in the Peninsula Campaign (Seven Days). These two campaigns stopped the trend in Union victories (from points 1 to 2) and ushered in a period of intense fighting by both sides as the war settled in to a stalemate from May 1862 until May 1863. Both sides won significant battles and the outcome was in doubt. The third turning point occurs in May 1863 with Grant's victory at Champion Hill and subsequent siege and eventual capture of Vicksburg. The trend of Union victories continues with Lee's defeat at Gettysburg. The Confederacy compiles enough victories to force a stalemate from July 1863 to November 1863. The South wins at Chickamauga, but the Federals are successful at Chattanooga. Then in September 1864, Sherman's Atlanta (Jonesborough) and Sheridan's Valley (Opequon) campaigns turn the tide for the last time in the Union's favor.

General U. S. Grant is the common theme associated with these turning point battles and campaigns. He was commander at Fort Donelson and Shiloh (turning point 1) and Champion Hill and Vicksburg (turning point 2). Lincoln placed him in overall command on March 12, 1864, and Grant implemented the new strategy of destroying the Confederate armies composed of the Atlanta, Valley, and Overland campaigns. Interestingly, General Lee is only directly involved in the Peninsula campaign and Gettysburg.

If the stalemate periods are removed from the graph, the turning point becomes clear.

The course of the war was defined from Grant's victory at Fort Donelson making this THE turning point of the war. While Confederate victories and brilliant leadership by Lee and Jackson prolonged the war, the ultimate industrial might and population advantage of the North made the result inevitable. The analysis indicates the validity of Sherman's predictions, "You are rushing into war with one of the most powerful, ingeniously mechanical and determined people on earth – right at your doors. You are bound to fail" and "At first, you will make headway, but as your limited resources begin to fail, shut out from the markets of Europe as you will be, your cause will begin to wane."

Please see Civil War Turning Points for more information.

[1] "The War's Overlooked Turning Points," by Gary W. Gallagher, Civil War Times, April 2011, pp. 21-23.

[2] Turning Point, http://www.thefreedictionary.com/turning+point

[3] Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields, http://www.nps.gov/hps/abpp/battles/tvii.htm

[4] Civil War Sites Advisory Commission Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields, http://www.nps.gov/hps/abpp/battles/tvii.htm

[5] A Rated - 45 - [having a decisive influence on a campaign and a direct impact on the course of the war] B Rated - 104 - [having a direct and decisive influence on their campaign] C Rated - 125 2 - [having observable influence on the outcome of a campaign] D Rated - 108 2 - [having a limited influence on the outcome of their campaign or operation but achieving or affecting important local objectives]

Legacies of the Civil War

2011-06-29T17:06:00.000-05:00

The June 2011 edition of AARP Bulletin contained an article "The Civil War: Freedom and 49 Other Ways It Changed American Life." Among some of the more interesting impacts were the following:

13th Amendment - slavery banned
14th Amendment - citizenship for all born in the U.S.
15th Amendment - voting rights for all male citizens regardless of race
Modern hospital organization
Embalming techniques
Safer surgical techniques
Improved anesthesia
Organized ambulance and nurses' corps
15,000 miles of new telegraph lines
Mass production of canned food
Battlefield photography
Can openers
Home-delivered mail
Left and right shoes shaped differently
Standard pre-made clothing in small, medium, and large sizes
National paper currency
Soldier ID tags
Ironclad ships
First national cemeteries
Network of soldiers homes that becomes Veterans Administration
Social care for veterans' widows and orphans

To read the rest, please see the article by Betty Towner in AARP Bulletin, June 2011, Vol. 52 No. 5, p.39.

What Would Lincoln Say?

2011-06-17T08:58:00.000-05:00

"Upon the subject of education, not presuming to dictate any plan or system respecting it, I can only say that I view it as the most important subject which we as a people can be engaged in. That every man may receive at least, a moderate education, and thereby be enabled to read the histories of his own and other countries, by which he may duly appreciate the value of our free institutions, appears to be an object of vital importance, even on this account alone, to say nothing of the advantages and satisfaction to be derived from all being able to read the scriptures and other works, both of a religious and moral nature, for themselves. For my part, I desire to see the time when education, and by its means, morality, sobriety, enterprise and industry, shall become much more general than at present, and should be gratified to have it in my power to contribute something to the advancement of any measure which might have a tendency to accelerate the happy period." ---- Abraham Lincoln, March 9, 1832.

Time has past since Lincoln's pronouncement. The Republican Party has transformed from the organization that wanted to end slavery to one that advocates a new kind of servitude --- economic slavery. Following the Civil War the Republican Party embraced big business at the expense of labor. The post-war enforcement of Civil Rights reverted to Jim Crowism and de-facto slavery. Now we find that Republicans are engaging in a new form of class warfare ---- attacking education. Nowhere is this more prevalent than in Texas.

The Texas House approved a measure to disenfranchise teachers and further reduce the quality of public education. The legislation was passed on an 81-55 vote with 11 Republicans joining the 44 Democrats to oppose the bill. The bill allows districts to place teachers and other professionals to be placed on unpaid furloughs for up to six non-instructional days; to reduce salary to save money; remove seniority protection so more experienced teachers could be fired to save money while keeping less experienced lower-paid teachers;  reduce times to notify teachers of contract cancellation from 45 days to 10 days; increase class above the 22 pupils in kindergarten through fourth grade; and deny teachers to the right to an independent hearing if they are laid off and appeal their dismissal.

In the 2009-2010 school year, Texas led the nation with 1,237 school districts with 4.8 million students (2nd to California). Texas was 25th in student to teacher ratio, 31st in teacher salaries, and 36th in revenue per student.   (Source: Rankings & Estimates, NEA, December 2010) Education Week gave Texas a C+ rating and placed them 13th. Texas received a C- for K-12 achievement, a D+ for school finance, and an F for spending.

The provisions passed by the Texas House will only drop the ratings.

By failing to provide adequate education, Republican legislators are widening the gap between the wealthy and middle class, dismantling public education, and fostering economic serfdom. Without proper education, children in Texas and other states operating under the Republican agenda will not be able to compete for high tech, well paying jobs.

Some Southern historians have viewed the Republican stand on slavery to be economic warfare by northern industrialists.  The actions of Republican legislators since the Civil War suggest that these historians may be right. The war was more about depriving the South of economic power than ensuring freedom for slaves. Did business-backed Republican interests pervert the noble ideas of freedom for their own political agenda? What do you think?

Fort Zachary Taylor at Key West

2011-06-14T15:35:00.000-05:00

We recently visited Fort Zachary Taylor in Key West, Florida. The fort was built over a 21-year period starting in 1845. During the Civil War, the fort served as a base of operations for Union Navy's East Gulf Coast Blockade Squadron.

The most interesting aspect of the fort is how the Army used cannons as rebar for constructing two new batteries in 1898. The Friends of Fort Taylor provides funds to help maintain and restore the fort.
Please see Fort Taylor Zachary Taylor Picture Gallery for more information.

While in Key West we encourage you to enjoy the other historic sites. You might want to take a day trip to Fort Jefferson on Dry Tortugas. The trip is expensive, around $150/person, including a tour of the fort, snorkeling, breakfast, and lunch. We hope to take the trip on our next visit to the Keys.

We would also suggest that you stay at one of the bed and breakfasts in Key West. We stayed at The Artist House and would recommend it. It is walking distance from the historic district and has a delightful happy hour. To add to your enjoyment, the house is said to be haunted by Robert the Doll as explained in this YouTube Video. Fortunately, we didn't experience any voicely interruptions during our visit, but we didn't stay in The Turret Suite.

History Channel's Civil War Offerrings

2011-06-08T09:13:00.000-05:00

Last week the History Channel offered two two-hour specials on "Gettysburg" and "Lee and Grant." Unfortunately, neither lived up to my expectations. Viewers of both specials had to sit through a maddening array of commercials that destroyed any flow of the story.

"Gettysburg" was disappointing with an absence of sufficient scene setting for the stories about the individual soldiers. The special was not billed as an overview of the battle. Instead it focused on stories about specific soldiers on both sides. It had some of the same issues that bothered historians about the movie made from The Killer Angels, namely focusing on specific battle segments and neglecting others. Many notables from the battle were omitted --- Hancock, Buford, Reynolds, Chamberlain, Hood, Armistead, and others. Of course, that is the screen writers/directors choice. As with many "historical" movies, there were many errors and omissions. Eric Wittenberg counted "ten ten major factual inaccuracies in the first ten minutes" as reported in his blog The History Channel's Gettysburg.

My displeasure with "Gettysburg" was topped by a more unsatisfactory "Lee and Grant" special the following evening. Like "Gettysburg," the two-hour program was marred by numerous commercials. (I recorded both films on my cable box, so I could fast-forward through the ads.) This version featured an endless array of interviews with historians and authors. Their comments were interesting, but too much time was devoted to images of the experts talking in various settings. I liked the computer graphics of the battles. The major flaw in the story was that it stopped when Grant moved to the east and confronted Lee. I would have hoped that a story about both of these generals would have devoted some time to the cat-and-mouse game they played in 1864 and 1865. In the east, Lee's victories were shared with his able lieutenants Hill, Jackson, Longstreet, and Stuart. However, in the west, it appeared that Grant won the theater by himself with a little help from Sherman. Grant was given undue credit for Scott's Anaconda Plan, rallying the troops at Fort Donelson, and winning the second day at Shiloh.

Neither movie will be added to my collection of Civil War films.

Ken Burn's Favorite Civil War Sites

2011-05-22T09:43:00.000-05:00

USA Weekend featured an article by Ken Burns with his top ten Civil War locations.

The following sites should be at the beginning of any Civil War buff's bucket list. I have added my own comments in brackets. The links are to pages on Civil War Journeys where you can find out additional information.

Fort Sumter, SC [A great place to begin. While there visit Ft. Moultrie and Charleston's other historic sites]
First Battle of Bull Run, Manassas, VA [Tour the First Battle in the morning and Second Bull Run in the afternoon. Watch out for traffic.]
Shiloh, TN - [One of my favorite battles. I would start at Ft. Donelson, TN, then go to Shiloh, and end at Corinth, MS]
Anietam, MD - [A great battlefield to tour]
Fredericksburg, VA - [Be sure to see the other aspects of the battlefield, not just Maryre's Heights next to the visitor center. Drive down Lee Drive and visit the Slaughter Pen Farm]
Gettysburg, PA - [Granddaddy of them all. Plan on several days at this battlefield including a stop at the new visitor center]
Vicksburg, MS - [The only way to see this battlefield is with a guide. Also stop and see the USS Cairo.]
Chattanooga, TN - [Not on my top ten list, but a nice battlefield to tour.]
Petersburg, VA - [Also see the sites in the Richmond vacinity.]
Appomattox Court House, VA - [Take the road tour from Petersburg to Appomattox. Make sure that you have a co-pilot. Get the audio tape in Petersburg.]

Before you start, visit the following links to make your trip more enjoyable: Guide to Touring Civil War Battlefields and Battlefield Road Trips.

Road to Seccession

2011-05-18T14:49:00.000-05:00

On December 1-5, 2010, a symposium "The Road to Secession" symposium was held at Camp Gilmont in Upshur County, Texas. The event was presented by the Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans.

The presentations featured the following topics and speakers:

"Reasons for the War," H.G. Manning, Lt. Col., U.S. Army (Retired) and former Commander, Texas Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans
"Indian Territory and the Confederate Alliance," Dr. Les Tucker
"Essay on the Events Which Forced the South to Secede from the Union," Roger M. Young, Lt James Woodward Camp 1399, S.C.V. Warner Robins, GA
"Religion and the Road to Secession," Elizabeth Young
"Robert E. Lee, the Tragic Secessionist," Scott Bowden
"Secession: Did The Compact Of 1787 Allow States The Right To Secede? Was Lincoln Right When He Argued to Congress That the States Were Never Free, Sovereign, Independent Entities?" David E. Pierson, P.E., Colonel (ret.) USAFR
"The Irrepressible Conflict In the words of John H. Reagan," Gary Williams

Mark Vogel outlined the conferences intent in his openning remarks:

"The Road to Secession" was organized to demonstrate that secession from the Union had many different causes. The papers presented in this Proceedings, and the speakers who addressed the symposium approached the national crisis from a wide array of perspectives. It was the original aspiration of this conference to offer at least one paper addressing each of the southern states and territories and identify the issues, personalities, and chronology which shaped the eventual decision on secession in each state. It is posed here, that were someone to look across the states individually, it would become apparent that there were many different causes for secession."

This was not a conference that intended to look at Northern and Southern perspectives on the roots of the war. The papers offer a decidely Southern bias and place the blame for the war on the north, Lincoln, and the radical Republicans. With that understanding, the papers present a interesting analysis of the causes of the Civil War.

H. G. Manning's paper, "Reasons for the War," offers two causes: "First, is the unfair levying of tariffs against the South combined with an ‘unequal’ distribution of those funds in the development of the nation. In short, funds were used predominantly for internal projects within the northern States of the Union. Today, we refer to these as ‘redistribution of funds’ and this is a continuing socialist legacy resulting from the South losing the war. The second cause for the South leaving the Union is the radical change of power in Washington’s City resulting from the election of President Abraham Lincoln and the success of the radical republicans in the elections of 1860. In the early history of the country, the South may not have held control of the Legislative branch of the federal government, but this was often countered by retaining the Executive Branch. In 1860, the Southern States were appalled at the loss of both branches of the federal government combined with the rants and physical attacks of the radical fringe of the Republican Party – the abolitionists."

Roger Young's "Essay on the Events Which Forced the South to Secede from the Union" concludes that the "South seceded because of unfair Federal taxation, other States control of destiny, other States interference in economic development, other states control of banking institutions, and other states and Federal Government control of infrastructure development."

Elizabeth Young's "Religion and the Road to Secession" states that: "When the Presbyterian, Methodist, and Baptist denominations split, shock waves rolled over the country. Politicians, such as South Carolina Senator John C. Calhoun and Kentucky Senator Henry Clay, realized that religious division would have political consequences, wondering how long North and South could share political union when they no longer worshiped in the same Christian churches."

Secession: Did The Compact Of 1787 Allow States The Right To Secede?" David Pierson argues that the Compact of 1787 provided such a right. He quotes Jefferson, "...whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party; that this government, created by this compact, was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself...each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress." Pierson presents an impressive collection of opinions that support a state's right to secede.

"The Irrepressible Conflict in the Words of John H. Reagan," presents arguments made by Reagan, an Anderson County, Texas judge in a series of debates in 1857. According to John H. Reagan’s memoirs published in 1906, he believes the foremost cause of secession and war was slavery. He clearly states his views and history of slavery in the United States. He was certain that the institution of slavery had legal status under the Constitution prior to the War Between the States. Reagan portrays the North as deadly hostile to the rights, property and citizens of the South
.
The proceedings make interesting reading and present arguments that go beyond the usual "states rights" issues. Please contact the Texas Divison of the Sons of Confederate Veterans for more information.

The Battle of Port Jefferson, Texas

2011-05-10T11:26:00.000-05:00

More than 700 Civil War reenactors invaded Jefferson, Texas for the weekend "Battle of Port Jefferson."
The three-day event featured a living history day on Friday, a skirmish on Austin Street and battle on Saturday, and a battle on Sunday. The annual May event is believed to be the largest in Texas.

We attended the events on Saturday morning and afternoon. Our day started with a parade down Austin Street that became a heated skirmish between Federal and Confederate troops. The fighting was intense with both sides taking "casualties." The engagement was over before noon and we wandered over to the sutlers tents to look over their wares. We stopped at a few of the many antique shops in Jefferson before sitting down for lunch. Then it was more antiquing until 3:30.

The afternoon battle was held at the Tuscumbia Ranch about 5 miles out of town. The battle began with a cannon exchange that left the pecan grove in smoke and the combatants and onlookers covered in a layer of fine dirt. Then cavalry units from both sides charged across the field exchanging gun and rifle fire. Finally, the Union infantry attacked. After some initial success, the Confederate line stiffened. Reinforcements arrived and the Confederates tried to flank the Union line. The Federal forces regrouped and made an orderly withdrawal. The Union forces formed a new line and halted the Confederate advance. The Confederates continued to attack, but blistering fire from the reestablished Union defenses inflicted heavy casualties. Finally the battle ended with both sides agreeing to a truce to remove their "dead and wounded."

No it wasn't a reenactment of a historic battle, but it sure was a lot of fun.

Please check our site for more Battle of Port Jefferson skirmish and battle pictures.

This event is a great opportunity to experience a Civil War era battle. Jefferson is about 3 1/2 hours from Dallas and one hour from Shreveport. Please check out the Chamber of Commerce site for more information on this event and others in Jefferson. I hope to see you there in May 2012.

Civil War at the Movies

2011-05-05T15:53:00.000-05:00

Just learned about a site that rates Civil War movies. It's called Civil War Movies: Truth or Fiction? The listing is part of a larger site called Only Good Movies. What are your favorite Civil War movies? I've listed mine below.

Charleston Celebrates 150th Anniversary

2011-05-04T11:41:00.000-05:00

Charleston magazine celebrated the 150th Anniversary of the Civil War with "A Civil Discourse." The article has commentaries from "noted historians, authors, and educators" on what the anniversary means to them and to the Charleston community. The following are among some of the observations:

"I hope that over the next four years, we Americans use the events of the Civil War to investigate our current social, political, and economic climate" --- Dr. Patricia Williams Lesane, Executive Director of the Avery Research Center

"The sesquicentennial is not merely a look into the past. More importantly, it shows us who were are [sic], and it dramatizes how far we've traveled together." --- Glenn McConnell, South Carolina Senate president pro tempore

"The next time you hear someone proclaim that secession was about state's rights, not slavery, ask what right it was that the seceding states were so anxious to protect." --- Gordon C. Rhea, attorney, historian, and author [I've been telling people this for some time. Perhaps it time that the state's rights argument in put to rest forever.]

(Source: "A Civil Discourse," Charleston Magazine, April 2011, pp.67-73. Also visit them on the web at http://www.charlestonmag.com.)

Also check out the article, "Stamp Act," by Margaret Allen. The photos of Fort Sumter are from our collection on http://www.civil-war-journeys.org/fort_sumter_sc_I.htm. Unfortunately, Ms. Allen didn't give us the photo credits.

Sic Semper Tyrannis

2011-05-02T11:35:00.000-05:00

Sic semper tyrannis - thus always to tyrants!

Osama bin Laden is dead! Congratulations to the United States Government and Military for destroying this monster. We can only hope and pray that by cutting of the head, that the body of al Qaeda will start to wither and die. Our thoughts and prayers are with all families who have suffered losses in the 9-11 and other attacks. We also want to honor and thank members of the world intelligence services who identified bin Laden's hiding place. Our thanks to the members of the United States military and their families who make the sacrifices necessary to destroy the evil forces that threaten our safety.

Sic semper tyrannis, the phrase that serves as the official motto of the State of Virginia and appears on its seal and flag, now may applied to the death of bin Laden. The phrase had its supposed origin with Brutus and the assassination of Julius Caesar, and was shouted by John Wilkes Booth after shooting Lincoln. Now we can apply it to true villain. Whether you employ the literal translation or mistranslations, "death to tyrants" or "down with tyrants," we now have a villain most deserving of the phrase.

Remembering Civil War African American Soldiers and Sailors

2011-04-27T08:47:00.000-05:00

I have read newspaper accounts about the lack of interest and resentment of African Americans about the Civil War Sesquicentennial. Many associate the Confederate flag as a symbol of the slave-South. Others see the flag as a badge worn by racists and hate groups. However, African Americans who associate the Sesquicentennial with racism miss two extremely important points.

The Civil War ended slavery as a tolerated practice in the United States. That should be an accomplishment honored by all Americans. There is nothing redeeming in that "peculiar institution." African Americans should look to the war as the first step on their road to freedom and equality. The Confederate flag should be a reminder of the oppression suffered by their ancestors over 150 years ago. It should serve to remind all Americans of the battles we have fought to bring democracy to the world --- whether at Antietam or in Afghanistan.

My second point is that many African Americans are unaware of the contributions made by Black soldiers to preserve the Union. We should honor these brave men who fought and died for their freedom. Over 186,000 African Americans comprised 163 units amounting to 10% of the Union Army. By the end of the Civil War, roughly 179,000 black men (10% of the Union Army) served as soldiers in the U.S. Army, and another 19,000 served in the Navy. The soldiers fought in segregated units designated as United States Colored Troops (USCT). More than 20% died during the conflict. Sixteen black soldiers were awarded the Medal of Honor for their valor.

Following the Emancipation Proclamation, blacks were recruited for the Union Army. Volunteers from South Carolina, Tennessee, and Massachusetts composed the first authorized black regiments. African American leaders like Frederick Douglas encouraged blacks to enlist. USCT fought in many of the war's most pivotal battles: Appomattox Court House, VA - April 9, 1865, Fort Blakely, AL - April 2-9, 1865, Crater, VA - July 30, 1864, Fort Fisher, NC - January 13-15, 1865, Fort Wagner, Morris Island - July 18-September 7, 1863, Nashville, TN - December 15-16, 1864, and Port Hudson, LA - May 21-July 9, 1863.

I hope that African Americans will embrace the heroism of these soldiers and sailors and honor them as we celebrate this 150th Anniversary. Let us recall the words of Frederick Douglas: "Once let the black man get upon his person the brass letter, U.S., let him get an eagle on his button, and a musket on his shoulder and bullets in his pocket, there is no power on earth that can deny that he has earned the right to citizenship."

Please see The African American Soldier: The Fight for Respect to learn more.

The Conspirator - Interesting Drama, Bad History

2011-04-22T07:50:00.000-05:00

Robert Redford's The Conspirator isinteresting viewing for any student of the Civil War. Unfortunately, the movie, like most Hollywood portrayals of the Civil War, strays from the facts.

The story of the military trial of Mary Surratt reveals the radical Republicans at their post-war worse. Robin Wright is excellent as the wrongly accused Surratt, a Southern sympathizer, but not assassin. James McAvoy as Frederick Aiken plays the role of the reluctant defense lawyer who becomes Surratt's champion. Kevin Kline is a mean-spirited Secretary of War Edwin Stanton who oversees the Redford's kangaroo-court military tribunal. The movie provides a sober presentation of government and public attitudes in Washington after Lee's surrender.

The movie, produced by American Film Company, heightened my interest in learning more about the trial. Unfortunately, the more I read the more disappointed I became with the theatrical presentation. Liberties are certainly granted in storytelling, but the movie had some glaring differences with the historical record.

I discovered Trail of the Lincoln Assassination Conspirators on the Famous American Trials web site. The site has transcripts from the trial, newspaper accounts, and biographies of the conspirators.

I started to compile a list of discrepancies between the movie and the historical record, when I discovered that Carrie Suntken's The Civil War Project's "The Conspirator vs. Facts." The web page lists an amazing number of differences. I would also refer readers to the Wikipedia account of the trail of Mary Surratt for other information. As with all Wikipedia information, I encourage you to visit the suggested reading and other sites as well.

Some of the major differences are as follows:

• The movie has only one lawyer defending Surratt, while she actually had three --- Reverdy Johnson, Frederick Aiken, and John Clampitt

• The movie has Frederick Aiken meeting with Anna Surratt at the boardinghouse, but, according to Suntken's research, Anna never returned to the house after her release and stayed with friends.

• The movie portrays Mary Surratt's daughter, Anna, as having a minor role in the events and not being allowed to visit her mother. Anna visited her mother on many occasions; she also spent a lot of time talking with Powell, as she was trying to convince him to help persuade the court that her mother was innocent. Anna Surratt pleaded repeatedly for her mother's life with Judge Advocate General Joseph Holt, but he refused to consider clemency. She also attempted to see President Andrew Johnson several times to beg for mercy, but was not granted permission to see him.

• In the movie, the case against Mary Surratt is presented as very weak based on the testimony of two witnesses. In the actual trial, the prosecution presented a total of nine witnesses to build its case. Several witnesses corroborated Weichmann's and Lloyd's testimonies.

• Only two witnesses were called for the defense in the movie version. However, the record indicates that 31 people testified in the trial. Many witnesses were called at the end of the defense's case to testify to Mary Surratt's loyalty to the Union, her deep Christian faith, and her kindness. A number of Catholic priests were called to the stand to testify about Surratt's faith, good character, and incorruptibility. Portraying Surratt as a good Christian woman incapable of committing the crimes for which she was accused.

One issue that was not touched on during the movie was the widespread anti-Catholicism present in the United States in the mid nineteenth century. Protestant leaders became alarmed by the heavy influx of Catholic immigrants from Ireland and Germany. In the 1830s and 1840s, prominent Protestant leaders, such as Lyman Beecher and Horace Bushnell, attacked the Catholic Church as an enemy of republican values. Some scholars view the anti-Catholic rhetoric of Beecher and Bushnell as having contributed to anti-Irish and anti-Catholic mob violence.

Beecher's Plea for the West (1835) urged Protestants to exclude Catholics from western settlements. The Catholic Church's official silence on the subject of slavery also garnered the enmity of northern Protestants. Intolerance became more than an attitude on August 11, 1834, when a mob set fire to an Ursuline convent in Charlestown, MA.

The resulting "nativist" movement, which achieved prominence in the 1840s, was whipped into a frenzy of anti-Catholicism that led to mob violence, the burning of Catholic property, and the killing of Catholics. This violence was fed by claims that Catholics were destroying the culture of the United States. Irish Catholic immigrants were blamed for spreading violence and drunkenness.

These sentiments certainly created an atmosphere of prejudice toward Mary Surratt and probably contributed to her conviction and punishment.

Doug Linder, on the Trail of the Lincoln Assassination Conspirators web site, concludes:

"Over the years, critics have attacked the verdicts, sentences, and procedures of the 1865 Military Commission. These critics have called the sentences unduly harsh, and criticized the rule allowing the death penalty to be imposed with a two-thirds vote of Commission members. The hanging of Mary Surratt, the first woman ever executed by the United States, has been a particular focus of criticism. Critics also have complained about the standard of proof, the lack of opportunity for defense counsel to adequately prepare for the trial, the withholding of potentially exculpatory evidence, and the Commission's rule forbidding the prisoners from testifying on their own behalf. The critics have a point: The 1865 trial of the Lincoln conspirators did fall short of commonly accepted norms of procedure and the verdicts--by modern standards--seem harsh.

"There does seem little question, however, that four of the convicted conspirators participated--in ways either large or small--in Booth's plan to assassinate key federal officials. Lewis Powell clearly attempted to stab to death Secretary Seward. David Herold, Dr. Samuel Mudd, and Edman Spangler aided Booth's escape from Washington. Herold and Mudd provided aid to Booth with full knowledge of his crime--and Spangler most likely did as well."

So, how do we view Redford's movie? It is a thought-provoking piece about the politically charged atmosphere in Washington after the Lincoln assassination. The movie provides a preview of how the radical Republicans would treat the defeated Confederate states. In spite of its liberties with the historical record, it shows how vindictive the government was relative to the South, and, perhaps more importantly, how no one in government wanted to be considered as favoring or sympathizing with the enemy. The Conspirator contains some fine acting and is a worthy fictional, historical, courtroom drama.

The First Shots Fired at Fort Sumter

2011-04-12T13:45:00.000-05:00

The nation's Civil War Sesquicentennial celebration started with a bang or more correctly a mortar firing this morning. I've added links to several You-tube videos that captured the moment to the web page Fort Sumter, SC I.

I made my annual pilgrimage to the local post office to mail my taxes. I only hope that some small portion goes to preserving our national parks, monuments, and battlefields. As I was leaving, I asked if there were any stamps commemorating the Sesquicentennial. To my delight, the postal service has issued two stamps honoring the major battles at Fort Sumter and First Bull Run. Information on the new issues can be found at 2011 Stamp Program Debuts and Ft. Sumter National Park to host First-Day-of-Issue Ceremony for 1861 Civil War Sesquicentennial stamps. The postmistress sold me the twelve-stamp package and told me that she was related to General Robert E. Lee. I plan to keep my stamps safe and sound.

Confederate Flag Removed in Palestine, TX

2011-04-05T14:52:00.000-05:00

On Monday evening April 5, 2011, the Confederate flag that was raised Friday over the Anderson County Courthouse in Palestine, Texas was taken down. The flying of the flag had divided the community of Palestine. Palestine Mayor Bob Herrington called an emergency meeting Monday night to request Anderson County officials to back down from flying the original version of the Confederate flag.

The intent of flying the flag was to honor 1,100 local men who served in the Confederate Army during the Civil War. Ronnie Hatfield of the John H. Reagan Camp No. 2156, Texas Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans raised an early version of the Confederate flag over the Anderson County Courthouse last Friday. Mr. Hatfield also proposed a resolution declaring the month of April as Confederate History and Heritage Month. “The purpose of our organization is to remember and honor the accomplishments of Confederate soldiers and tell their story to future Americans,” Hatfield said. “We are not affiliated with hate groups, nor do we promote bigotry of any kind.”

Unfortunately, the Confederate flag is associated with the rebellion of Southern States which had its origins in maintaining the institution of slavery in the agricultural South. The use or misuse of the flag is also associated with numerous hate groups. According to Wikipedia, "The display of the Confederate flag remains a highly controversial and emotional topic, generally because of disagreement over its symbolism. Some groups use the Southern Cross as one of the symbols associated with their organizations, including racist groups such as the Neo-Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan. The flag is also sometimes used by separatist organizations such as the Aryan Nations."

The association of the historic association of the Confederate flag with slavery as well as its current use by racist groups upsets African Americans. They discount the historic desire to honor Confederate veterans and see only the evils of slavery and hate crimes.

The Palestine community realized that the flag has mixed messages. What was especially upsetting to African Americans in this community was that the flag was flown on government property. In some minds this was a defacto recognition of the negative perceptions of the flag. Mayor Herrington expressed his concern when he said "I don't pledge allegiance to the Confederate flag." Herrington added, "When you fly a flag on a government-owned piece of property that divides people, it destroys the concept of unity."

As to declaring the month of April as Confederate History and Heritage Month, I'd suggest that the city and county rephrase the declaration to read Civil War History and Heritage Month. This would allow the community to celebratte both the Confederate veterans and ancestors of the black slaves who gained their freedom after the war.

Watching over this issue is the statue of John Henry Reagan. Reagan practiced law in Palestine and Buffalo, Texas. He was elected a district judge in Palestine, serving from 1852 to 1857. Reagan was a moderate and a supporter of the Union, but resigned from Congress on January 15, 1861 and returned to his home state when it became clear that Texas would secede. President Jefferson Davis picked Reagan to head the new Confederate States of America Post-office Department. Another thought for the good folks of Anderson County would be to include a seminar on their hometown boy, who historian Ben H. Procter included Reagan in his list of the "four greatest Texans of the 19th century," along with Sam Houston, Stephen F. Austin, and James Stephen Hogg.

Five Forks - "The Confederate Waterloo"

2011-04-01T14:31:00.000-05:00

On April 1, 1865, Union forces under Major General Phillip Sheridan defeated a Confederate force lead by Major General George Pickett at Five Forks, VA. The following morning, Lee informed President Davis that Petersburg and Richmond must be evacuated. Grant launched an all-out assault (the Third Battle of Petersburg) on the thinly manned Confederate entrenchments.

The events of the battle are illustrated nicely on the Petersburg National Battlefield site Five Forks. The National Park Service provides a downloadable brochure of the battlefield at Five Forks Battlefield.

Today the juncture of these five roads is marker by few markers and a small museum. The battlefield brochure guides visitors to a five stop driving tour.

You can learn more about the battle at the following sites: Five Forks, VA - Civil-War-Jouneys, Five Forks - National Park Service, Harper's Weekly - The Battle of Five Forks - Son of the South, and Decision at Five Forks - HistoryNet.

Civil War Sesquicentennial Lecture Series

2011-03-25T12:01:00.000-05:00

During the next five years, I will be presenting a series of lectures as part of the SAIL program at Collin College's Civil War Sesquicentennial Lecture Series. The eleven class program will cover the events from Lincoln's election to Booth's capture. The lectures will use PowerPoint slides with personal photographs, internet animations, and videos.

Last Picture of Lincoln

From Springfield to Fort Sumter

The class will trace the events from Lincoln's election to the Union response to the capture of Fort Sumter. (1 session - Summer 2011)

Battle of Wilson's Creek

The Major Civil War Battles of 1861

The class will discuss the battles at Manassas (First Bull Run), VA on July 21, 1861 and Wilson's Creek, MO on August 10, 1861. (2 session - Fall 2011)

Battle of Fort Donelson

The Major Civil War Battles in Spring of 1862
The class will discuss the battles at Fort Donelson, TN (February 11-16, 1862), New Madrid/Island No. 10, MO (February 28-April 8, 1862), Shiloh, TN (April 6-7, 1862), Glorieta Pass, NM (March 26-28, 1862), Forts Jackson and St. Philip, LA (April 16-28, 1862), and Pea Ridge, AR (March 7-8, 1862). (5 sessions - Spring 2012)

Stonewall Jackson

Stonewall Jackson's Valley Campaign
The class will cover Jackson's Shenandoah Valley Campaign from March through May. The battles discussed will include Kernstown I, Winchester I, Cross Keys, Port Republic, and Front Royal. (2 sessions - Spring 2012)

Battle of Malvern Hill

The Peninsular Campaign
The Peninsular Campaign, which includes the Seven Days Battles, was a contest between General Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia and General George McClellan's Army of the Potomac. The campaign includes Hampton Roads, Gaines' Mill, and Malvern Hill. (3 sessions - Fall 2012)

Battle of Antietam

The Major Civil War Battles in Fall 1862
The class will discuss the battles at Manassas (Second Bull Run) (August 28-30, 1862), Antietam, MD - September 16-18, 1862, Fredericksburg, VA (December 11-15, 1862) and Stones River, TN (December 31, 1862-January 2, 1863). (4 sessions - Fall 2012)

Battle of Vicksburg

Civil War Battles in Spring 1863
This class will discuss two of the major Union victories in the Civil War: Vicksburg and Gettysburg. The battles covered include Lee's brilliant victory at Chancellorsville, VA (April 27-May 4, 1863), Grant's Vicksburg Campaign, and Port Hudson (May 21-July 9, 1863). (5 sessions - Spring 2013)

Battles of Chattanooga

Civil War Battles in Fall 1863
The battles near Chattanooga marked Grant's transition from the Western to Eastern theater of war. The class will cover Chickamauga, GA (September 18-20, 1863) and Chattanooga, TN (November 23-25, 1863). (2 sessions - Fall 2013)

Battleof the Wilderness

Civil War Battles in Spring/Summer 1864
Grant moves east and engages Lee's Army of Northern Virginia in a series of battles in the Overland Campaign. Among the battles discussed will be the Wilderness, VA (May 5-7, 1864), Spotsylvania Court House, VA (May 8-21, 1864), and Cold Harbor, VA (June 3-12, 1864). (3 sessions - Spring 2014)

Civil War Battles in Fall 1864
This class will focus on Sheridan's Valley Campaign including the battles of Opequon, VA (September 19, 1864) and Cedar Creek, VA (October 19, 1864) and Hood's disastrous Franklin-Nashville Campaign including the battles of Franklin, TN (November 30, 1864) and Nashville, TN (December 15-16, 1864).
(2 sessions - Fall 2014)

April 1865
This class will trace the last days of the Civil War using Jay Winik's book, April 1865. The class will cover each day of the war during that historic month including the collapse of Confederate defenses around Petersburg, the flight of the Confederate government from Richmond, Lee's desperate retreat to and surrender at Appomattox Court House, Lincoln's assassination, and Booth's capture. (2 sessions - Spring 2015)

Copies of the lectures will be available on Civil-War-Journeys.org

Cotton Prices Double

2011-03-18T08:55:00.000-05:00

Higher demand, reduced supplies, and tight cotton stocks have driven cotton prices to over $2/pound in March. Last July prices were 80 cents/pound. The $2/pound erased the longstanding record of $1.89/pound that was set during the Civil War.

Before the Civil War, cotton sold for 10 cents/pound in 1860. The Union "boycott" of Confederate ports forced prices to rise to $1.89/pound in 1863 and 1864. In real dollar (adjusted for inflation) terms the Civil war price would be around $30/pound in today's dollars.
Pictures are from the South Carolina Cotton Museum in Bishopville.

Civil War Sesquicentennial

2011-03-12T17:22:00.000-06:00

With the 150th Anniversary of the Civil War upon us, we decided to compile a list of 150 places you should see over the next five years. You can view the list by clicking on the link Sesquicentennial 150. Please contact us if we have missed your sesquicentennial event.

The list contains suggestions on how you can celebrate the 150th Anniversary with events for 2011 to 2015. The list contains battlefields, museums, reenactments, and driving and walking tours. You can download the list as pdf file.

First United States Infantry

2011-03-09T09:12:00.000-06:00

I attended the North Texas Irish Festival on March 5th and was surprised to find representatives from several Civil War reenactment groups. The Sons of Confederate Veterans had a booth. However, what I found surprising was a reenactment group representing Union soldiers --- the First United States Infantry. The organization does not represent an actual military unit, but represents "a unit of the United States Regular Army who were career soldiers and 'Guardians of the Frontier.' "

Some 2,000 Texans joined the Union Army. The most notable was Edmund Davis who would become governor of Texas. Davis was commander of the 1st Texas Cavalry and rose to the rank of brigadier general. Read about the formation of the Texas National Guard.

Also check out the Union Soldier Statue and Memorial in Denison, TX.

I would be interested in any other information on Union Army units with Texans.

3-D Civil War Photos

2011-03-04T11:25:00.000-06:00

I just learned about two new books that would be great additions to any Civil War library. The first in Lincoln in 3-D by John Richter and the second is Gettysburg in 3-D by Greg Dinkins. Please check them out at the following links:

Please visit Civil War Photography to learn more.

From West Point to Fort Sumter

2011-02-23T11:53:00.000-06:00

Starting on February 24, 2011, I will be presenting a four-session class entitled "From West Point to Fort Sumter." This class traces the development of eight Civil War generals from their enrollment at the U. S. Military Academy at West Point to the start of the conflict at Fort Sumter. On the Union side the class will profile U.S. Grant, George B. McClellan, William T. Sherman, and Philip H. Sheridan. From the Confederacy, the class will highlight the development of Robert E. Lee, James Longstreet, Thomas Jackson, and J.E.B. Stuart.

The class will cover the training they received at West Point and those instructors who shaped their early education. After graduation these future leaders gained valuable experience under Zachary Taylor and Winfield Scott in the Mexican War. After the war, many were forced by their economic situation to leave the army and seek civilian jobs. The outbreak of war at Fort Sumter allowed them to obtain high-ranking positions in the Union and Confederate armies.

Please visit From West Point to Fort Sumter to learn more about this class. For those of you in the vicinity of Plano, TX, please visit SAIL at Collin College to register.

Nathan Bedford Forrest License Plate

2011-02-16T08:42:00.000-06:00

Mississippi Govenor Haley Barbour announced that he would not "denounce" a proposal by the Mississippi Division of Sons of Confederate Veterans for a state-issued license plate that would honor Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest. However, the Govenor does not think that Mississippi legislators will approve the license plate honoring Forrest who was an early leader of the Ku Klux Klan.

This is another chapter in the controversial life of General Forrest. Forrest was a slave trader and shrewd businessman, He was one of the richest men in the South and had a personal fortune of over $1.5 million. Forrest joined the Confederate army as a private and was promoted during the war to Lieutenant General.

He was a brilliant leader and an early advocate of mobile warfare. Forrest achieved fame at Fort Donelson, Fallen Timbers, First Murfreesboro, Shiloh, Parker's Crossroads, Brice's Crossroads, and Chickamauga.

At the Battle of Fort Pillow, Forrest's troops massacred surrendering U.S.C.T. in what one historian described as "intentional murder." This event plagued Forrest for the rest of his life as he strived to defend his actions.

Often overlooked among General Forrest's accomplishments are his farewell instructions to his troops. He said, "You have been good soldiers, you can be good citizens. Obey the laws, preserve your honor, and the Government to which you have surrendered can afford to be, and will be, magnanimous." Forrest could have easily instructed his men to wage a guerrila war against the Union, but he choose the higher road.

Forrest did join the KKK in 1866-67 and later became one of its leaders. He was involved in Klan violence toward African Americans and white Republicans. He became disillusioned with the Klan and reported in 1875 that his setiments on race now differed from the Klan.

The question about tributes to General Forrest have focused on his involvement in the KKK. Was the proposed tribute for his generalship during the Civil War or for his post-war racism? The question applies to more than Forrest. Are we honoring the services of Confederate war veterans or the political and social attitudes of the slave-based Southern economy?

African Americans and the Sesquicentennial

2011-02-09T09:44:00.012-06:00

Dana Shoaf interviewed James Robertson, professor of history at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, in the April 2011 issue of the Civil War Times. The interview touched on problems the Centennial Commission encountered during the 1961-65 celebration.

Robertson gave the following response to Shoaf's question, "How did African Americans react to the commission's efforts?"

"It was just one of those tragic coincidences of history that the Centennial and the civil rights movement came at the same time --- and that produced friction, understandable friction, certainly."

"We tried as hard as we could. We were not as successful as we would have liked to have been. I think that many black Americans wanted to be involved with the Centennial, but their leaders said otherwise."

Eric Wittenberg, published an entry in his blog entitled "An African American's perspective on the Sesquicentennial." He reproduced an editorial by Harold Jackson of The Philadelphia Inquirer. Mr. Jackson urged Americans to "Commemorate, don't celebrate Civil War's 150th." Jackson fells that we should honor those to who "fought to preserve the Union and end slavery." Mr. Wittenberg counters that to say the war was not about slavery alone, and that the Confederate soldiers fought to defend their states and pursue a vision of states rights."

First of all, the war was initiated for economic reasons. The end of slavery meant the loss of wealth to the richest men in the South. I will not dwell on this here and refer you to the web page, Causes of the Civil War, where you can read my arguments.

The issue of states rights was a common theme after the war. The abrogation of the Civil Rights Amendments with the passage of Jim Crow laws illustrates that many former Confederate states wanted to maintain de facto-slavery in the form of economic and political disenfranchisement. Southerners were not convinced that African Americans should be treated as equals. That struggle for equality continues today.

Unfortunately, the celebration of the Civil War 150th anniversary brings reminders to the African American community of slavery and the 150 year struggle for human rights. They see the commemorative activities as a reminiscences by some Southerners about the "good old days." They miss the pivotal role that African Americans played in winning the war, ending slavery, and preserving the Union.

The Civil War should be remembered as a history lesson. We should honor the sacrifices of the Americans who lost their lives in this terrible war. Soldiers fought in this war, like all wars, to save their lives and those of the men fighting with them. African American leaders should celebrate the war as the beginning of the ongoing struggle for equality and make sure that activities in their community remember the horrors of slavery and the honor of those who fought to stop it.

Texas Declaration of Causes

2011-02-02T17:43:00.011-06:00

On February 2, 1861 a Texas convention of delegates issued an ordinance of secession. In the statewide election on the secession ordinance, Texans voted to secede from the Union by a 76% majority.

Read A Declaration of the Causes which Impel the State of Texas to Secede from the Federal Union.

You might think that in 2011, Texas secession would be a topic reserved to historians. Unfortunately, Texas governor and not-a-Presidential-candidate, Rick Perry raised the specter of Texas independence in a April 2009 speech to a Tea Party meeting in Austin.

Read Texas Secession Movement.

Union and Confederate Forces Win at the Wilderness

2011-01-26T13:00:00.003-06:00

In a confrontation as dramatic as some Civil War conflicts, historians, preservationists and local residents defeated retail giant Wal-Mart. On January 26, 2011 Wal-Mart dropped plans to build a store near the Wilderness Battlefield in northern Virginia.

We congratulate the residents of Locust Grove, VA and the many preservationists who fought the 2009 local decision that approved the project. We would especially like to recognize the efforts of the Civil War Preservation Trust.

The Battle of Mill Springs

2011-01-19T09:18:00.005-06:00

On January 19, 1862 Union forces under Major General George B. Thomas defeated Confederate forces led by Major General George B. Crittenden troops at Mill Springs, KY. This battlefield is maintained by the Mill Springs Battlefield Association. There will be a short ceremony commemorating the battle at 1:00 pm on January 22, 2011 in Nancy at the Zollicoffer Park. No reenactment is planned for the 149th anniversary.

Please check the events list for the future programs.

For more information on the battle, please visit the Civil War Journeys page for Mill Springs.

Fort Fisher

2011-01-12T10:16:00.012-06:00

After Major General Benjamin Butler's was relieved of command of the Army of the James, he was assigned to lead an expedition against the Confederate fort at Fort Fisher, NC. The fort protected Wilmington, NC which was the Confederacy's last open port on the Atlantic Coast. The fort was shelled by a Union fleet under the command of Rear Admiral David D. Porter. An infantry division of Union soldiers was landed to test the fort's defenses. The timely arrival of Confederate troops under Major General Robert Hoke caused Butler to stop the attack and return to Fort Monroe. For more information, please see Fort Fisher, NC I for additional pictures of the fort.

Following his failure to take the fort, Butler was relieved of command and replaced by General Alfred Terry. Terry was placed in charge of a "Provisional Corps" including General Paine's division of Colored Troops. He was supported by a fleet of 60 ships under command of Admiral Porter.

A second attempt to capture the fort began on January 13, 1865 with an artillery bombardment by Porter's fleet. Union forces landed and prepared for an attack on Hoke's infantry line. On January 15th a select force attacked the fort from the rear. A naval force was repulsed with high casualties. However, a courageous attack late in the afternoon captured the parapet and the garrison was forced to surrender. For more information, please see Fort Fisher, NC II.

Citadel Cadets Fire First Shots in Civil War

2011-01-05T16:29:00.006-06:00

The Civil War started on January 9, 1861 when Cadets from The Citadel fired on the Union steam-powered supply ship, Star of the West. Cannon fire from the Cadets on Morris Island and batteries at Fort Moultrie forced the Star of the West to abandon her mission to resupply Major Robert Anderson's garrison at Fort Sumter. The Star of the West was given a warning shot across her bow, turned around and left the mouth of the harbor. She was hit three times and returned to her home port of New York Harbor.

The Star of the West Medal is awarded annually to the "best drilled cadet" at The Citadel. Each medal awarded has a small piece of wood salvaged from the original Star of the West ship. Please see Recognizing the 149th anniversary of the "Star of the West."

Pemberton's Message in a Bottle

2010-12-26T09:08:00.021-06:00

The Museum of the Confederacy has recently uncovered a coded message sent from General Joe Johnston to General John C. Pemberton. The message informs Pemberton that he will not receive any support from Confederate troops on the other side of the Mississippi River. Pemberton had been under siege in Vicksburg, MS for six weeks by Union forces under General U.S. Grant.

The message, in a vial with a bullet, was written in the Vigenere cipher" in which letters of the alphabet are shifted a number of places so that an "a" in the uncoded text becomes a "d" in the coded document. The date on the coded document is July 4th.

"Gen'l Pemberton
You can expect no help from this side of the river. Let Johnston know, if possible, when you can attack the same point on the enemy's lines. Inform me also and I will endeavor to make a diversion. I have sent some caps. I subjoin a dispatch from General Johnston."

Pemberton surrendered the city to Union forces on the same day that the cipher was sent.

Vicksburg was so scarred from the experience that the residents refused to celebrate the Fourth of July for the next eighty years.

Please see Battle of Vicksburg to learn more.

[Source: "Civil War Letter Decoded: No Help on the Way," Steve Szkotak, Associated Press]