Just when did Lee know?

   It had been a successful (but costly) summer campaign. In late June 1862, Robert E. Lee and his Army of Northern Virginia had pushed the Army of the Potomac from the outskirts of Richmond back down the Peninsula. Then, portions of Lee’s army tangled with another Federal army at Cedar Mountain in August, scoring a victory. In August, Stonewall Jackson stole a march on his Federal counterpart, destroying a large Federal supply depot, then falling back into a defensive position and inviting the Federals to attack. They did, and Jackson was able to hold on until Lee arrived with the rest of the Army, beating the Federal army in detail. This was followed by another small victory at Chantilly on September 1.

   Lee and his lieutenants had faced a couple of different commanders. Major General George B. McClellan had commanded the Army of the Potomac during the Seven Days Battles, while Jackson had faced off against Maj. Gen. John Pope at Cedar Mountain. Lee, Jackson, and James Longstreet fought Pope, reinforced by elements of McClellan’s command, at Second Manassas.

   The campaigns in Virginia had led Lee to the outskirts of the Washington, D.C., the Federal campaign. However, with wrecked rail lines and a war-ravaged countryside, Lee was unable to support his army. He chose to move north into Maryland, hoping that the people of that state would rally to the colors and carry the state out of the Union. Lee would go on to fight a Federal force led by McClellan at South Mountain, Sharpsburg, and Shepherdstown.

   McClellan was an early rising star of the Federal army. After winning a victory at Rich Mountain, McLellan was brought in to take command of the Army of Potomac following the defeat at First Manassas. When General-in-Chief Winfield Scott retired in November 1861, McClellan was appointed to the role. McClellan was a brilliant organizer.  However, he failed to use the army he had built. In the spring of 1862, Abraham Lincoln removed him as General-in-Chief. McClellan then allowed the Confederates to slip away from a thinly defended line in Northern Virginia, back behind the Rappahannock River. After landing on the Peninsula east of Richmond, McClellan squandered an opportunity to brush aside a small Confederate force and capture Richmond, instead becoming bogged down in a month-long siege at Yorktown. Eventually he was able to advance to the outskirts of Richmond, not so much a deed performed due to his daring, but because the Confederate command at the time was trying to draw McClellan away from his naval support. In a series of bloody battles, new Confederate commander, Robert E. Lee, pushed McClellan back down toward his base. Unable, or more likely unwilling, to take the offensive, McClellan was ordered to abandon his position at Harrison’s Landing on August 3 and transfer the army to Washington, D.C. The movement began on August 14 and was completed on August16. McClellan was without a field command from the time he left Harrison’s Landing until September 2, when he was placed in command of the troops in the fortifications around Washington, D.C.[1]

   However, Henery Halleck, who had been appointed General-in-Chief after McClellan, testified that the meeting between Lincoln, Halleck, and McClellan took place on the morning of September 7.[2]

   So the greater question is just when Lee knew McClellan was back in command of Federal forces in and around Washington, D.C. On August 30, 1862, Lee writes Davis that he has won “a signal victory over the combined forces of Genls. McClellan and Pope.” While there were elements of McClellan’s army present (like Porter’s Corps) it was in no way a combined army. If McClellan had been present, he would, by nature of rank, have assumed command of both forces.[3] Lee wrote Jefferson Davis on September 3 that there were now “two grand armies of the United States that have been operating in Virginia.” Lee wrote that he had “been told by some prisoners” that “Pope’s army, and. . . that the whole of McClellan’s, the larger portion of Burnside’s and Cox’s, and a portion of Hunter’s, are united to it.” Lee never states that McClellan was in command or even present.[4] Lee’s missive the next day refers to “the movements of McClellan’s army,” and that his “latest intelligence shows that the army of Pope is concentrated around Washington and Alexandria in their fortifications.”[5] His letters to Davis on September 5-7 make no mention of the commanders of Federal armies. On September 8, Lee writes that “nothing of interest, in a military point of view, has transpired.”[6] Again on September 9, he writes that “Nothing of interest, in a military point of view, has transpired since” the previous day. Lee does have intelligence that Federals-- Sumner, Sigel, Burnside, and Hooker--are advancing along the Potomac River toward Seneca Mills.[7]

   In a postwar account, Maj. Gen. John G. Walker recalled meeting with Lee on September 9 in Frederick. As Lee laid out the upcoming campaign to Walker, Walker recalled Lee directly mentioning McClellan.[8]

   What do the historians say? Stephen Sears writes that Lee had learned of McClellan’s reappointment as army commander when Lee wrote to Davis on September 3.[9] Michael Korda writes that Lee “could not have guessed that McClellan would replace the ignominious and clumsy Pope as his opponent…”[10] Freeman writes, regarding McClellan assuming command right before Sharpsburg, that “It was known that McClellan had replaced Pope in general command, and that was not pleasant news, for Lee regarding McClellan as the ablest of the Federal commanders…”[11] Clifford Dowdey: “McClellan had just been restored to command and, given his second chance…”[12] Emory Thomas: Sooner “or later, Lee knew that McClellan or someone else would lead the Union army out of Washington to confront him.”[13] Joseph Harsh: “Unknown to Lee, John Pope had already been stripped of army command. The very panic that Lee had worked so hard to create had impelled Lincoln—over the angry protest of his cabinet—to restore George McClellan to a measure of authority.” However “by midday of the 9^th Lee did surmise he would be contending against McClellan [;] his assumption was based on inconclusive information he had received within the last twenty-four hours.”[14] 

   Every one of the accounts by historians misses a key point. What evidence did Lee have that McClellan was not in command? McClellan was the ranking field commander. If McClellan and Pope’s armies were merging into one unified fighting force, McClellan would, by nature of seniority, have been in command. When McClellan arrived in Washington, D.C., he would have assumed command as the ranking officer (Henry Halleck, as General-in-Chief, would technically outrank McClellan due to his position. However, Halleck’s confirmation to major general was dated February 10, 1862. McClellan’s confirmation was August 3, 1861.) Many of Lee’s missives mentioned McClellan, and Lee must have assumed that McClellan exercised some element of command. It does not seem that the conflict between McClellan, Lincoln, and the cabinet filtered into any of Lee’s correspondence at the time.

   We will probably not ever really know the answer to this question and speculation will continue for some time.

---

[1] Sears, Georga McClellan, 259-60; Carman, The Maryland Campaign, 1:121.

[2] Hartwig, To Antietam Creek, 703, n4.

[3] Freeman, Lee’s Dispatches, 60.

[4] OR, 19, 2:590-91.

[5] OR, 19, 2:591-2.

[6] OR, 19, 2:600.

[7] OR, 19, 2:602.

[8] B&L, 2:605.

[9] Sears, Landscape Turned Red, 66.

[10] Korda, Clouds of Glory, 462.

[11] Freeman, R.E. Lee, 2:356.

[12] Dowdey, Lee, 303.

[13] Thomas, Robert E. Lee, 257.

[14] Harsh, Taken at the Flood, 84, 141.

The Confederate National Anthem

   As far as we can tell, the Confederate government never adopted a National Anthem. That might seem odd, but the “Star Spangled Banner” was not adopted as the national anthem by the United States Congress until 1931. (The words were penned by Francis Scott Key in September 1814, while watching the attack on Fort McHenry in Baltimore).

   Many people today probably believe that “Dixie’s Land" was the official Confederate national anthem. It does not appear that it was ever even considered. “Dixie’s Land” was composed in New York City by Ohio-born Daniel Decatur Emmitt. Dan Emmitt was a performer in the Black-face Bryant’s Minstrels. Minstrel troops were wildly popular forms of entertainment in the 19^th century. The genre was created by Manhattan native Thomas D. Rice, a traveling actor who popularized a slave song, “Jump Jim Crow.”

   There was considerable discussion about “Dixie’s Land” during the war, and scores of different lyrics were written to the tune. That discussion spilled over into the after-war years. Some groups preferred the lyrics penned by former Confederate general Albert Pike over those by Dan Emmitt. Regardless, “Dixie’s Land” was never adopted as an official  National Anthem.[1] 

   In 1861, George H. Miles (1824-1871), an English professor in Maryland, under the pseudonym Earnest Halphin, penned the words to “God Save the South!” Although trained in law, Miles had found success in writing books and Broadway plays. He was obviously a Confederate sympathizer, but his further participation in the war effort seems lost to history.

   “God Save the South!” seems to have first appeared in print in New Orleans in June 1861. No author is given, only that it was “Contributed to the Sunday Delta.”[2]  New Orleans was the leading printer of Confederate sheet music during the war, with 167 pieces identified as coming from presses in the city.[3] Just a couple of weeks after the words appeared in the New Orleans newspaper, there appeared an advertisement in a Charleston newspaper advertising a “supply of new Southern” music. “God Save the South” was included in the listing.[4] Three months later, at a concert in the Odd Fellows Hall in New Orleans, “God Save the South! Set to the air of Britian’s national hymn, [was] the other performance of the evening.”[5]                                                                                                                   

   New Orleans fell in the spring of 1862, and several of the sheet music publishers went to Georgia. Starting in October 1862, Virginia newspapers began calling “God Save the South!” the Southern national anthem.[6] A version of the sheet music was published by C.T. DeCoeniel in Richmond, bearing a similar phrase: “Our National Confederate Anthem.” There were other editions as well, published in Baltimore, Charleston, and Macon/Savannah.[7]

   One Southern newspaper thought that the song was “what we have long wished for—a national anthem, breathing a spirt of patriotism and devotion suited to our troublous times. The pure and simple religious feeling which pervaded the poetry of this piece is beautifully interpreted by, and carried home to, the heart, in the deep pathos and majestic tones of the music. The sentiments of the anthem are perfectly in accordance with the religious feeling and faith of our people. . . . As a national anthem, we know nothing to compare with this sublimity.”[8]

   What did “God Save the South!” sound like? It was set to the same turn as “God Save the King,” the National anthem of the United Kingdom. “God Save the South!” is little remembered today. And if you ask the casual observer what the Confederate National anthem is, you will probably get the response, “Dixie.” It is unlikely that the high-browed members of Southern society would have ever consented to a minstrel tune being bestowed with the title, National Anthem, on Dixie’s Land.

For more information on Confederate music, check out Richard B. Harwell’s Confederate Music (1950) or Lawrence Abel’s  Singing the New Nation (2000).

---

[1] Hardy, “Dixie’s Land,” America’s Civil War, May 2018.

[2] The Sunday Delta, June 30, 1861.

[3] Wolfe, “Music,” Encyclopedia of the Confederacy, 3:1100-1105.

[4] Charleston Daily Courier, July 19, 1861.

[5] The Times-Picayune, October 16, 1861.

[6] Richmond Enquirer, October 21, 1862.

[7] Harwell, Confederate Music, 59.

[8] Moore, The Civil War in Song and Story, 360.

Did Grant visit the site of Jackson’s death?

    After Stonewall Jackson was wounded and his arm amputated, he was taken via wagon to the Chandler Farm (also known as Fairfield). The farm was very near the railroad and many Confederates were brought to this site, to later be transported to Richmond by train. (You can read a previous post about one of those soldiers here.) Jackson was placed in a room

Chandler Office (NPS)

in the office building on the farm, with plans to transport him to Richmond for better care. Of course, Jackson died in the Chandler office building on May 10, 1863.   A story emerged in the page of Confederate Veteran in 1897 of another famous visitor to the site. It was May 1864, and the visitor was U.S. Grant.

   “While our people were putting up the tents and making preparations for supper, Gen. Grant strolled over to a house near by, owned by a Mr. Chandler, and sat down on the porch. . . In a few minutes a lady came to the door, and was surprised to find that the visitor was the general-in-chief. He was always particularly civil to ladies, and he rose to his feet at once, took off his hat, and made a courteous bow. She was ladylike and polite in her behavior, and she and the General soon became engaged in a pleasant talk. Her conversation was exceedingly entertaining. She said, among other things: ‘This house has witnessed some sad scenes. One of our greatest generals died here just a year ago: Gen. Jackson, Stonewall Jackson, of blessed memory.’”

   “Indeed?” Remarked Gen. Grant. “He and I were at West Point together for a year, and we served in the same army in Mexico.”

   “Then you must have known how good and great he was,” said the lady.

    “O yes,” replied the General. “He was a sterling, manly cadet, and enjoyed the respect of everyone who knew him. He was always of a religious turn of mind and a plodding, hard-working, student. His standing was at first very low in his class, but by his indomitable energy he managed to graduate quite high. He was a gallant soldier and a Christian gentleman and I can understand fully the admiration your people have for him.”

   The soldier making the observation was Brig. Gen. Horace Porter, personal secretary to Grant, and the article originally appeared in an the article “Campaigning with Grant,” published in Century magazine, now what we call Battles and Leaders.

Most decisive Confederate victories.

   There was one goal for army commanders: to obliterate the opponent. While this was their objective, it seldom happened. The enemy often escaped to fight again another day. The American Battlefield Trust has 10,000 battles and engagements fought between 1861 and 1865. Which ones were the most decisive Confederate victories is a hard list to determine. Here are five on my list.[1]

Brice’s Crossroads, Tennessee

   Fought in June 1864, this battle pitted Maj. Gen. Nathan B. Forrest, with 3,500 men, against 8,122 Federal soldiers under Brig. Gen. Samuel D. Sturgis. The Federals were moving from Memphis toward Northern Mississippi in an effort to keep Forrest preoccupied and away from the major supply line stretching from Nashville into North Georgia. Federal forces were able to slowly push back Confederate cavalry. With Confederate reinforcements arriving, the Federals called for infantry support. Confederate attacks forced the Federals into a tighter defensive line. A Confederate attack across a bridge spanning the Tishomingo River failed but caused panic in the Federal lines. Federal soldiers fled in disorder, and many were captured by the pursuing Confederate cavalry. The Federals lost sixteen of their eighteen artillery pieces, and 2,249 men, a loss of about 27%. Sturgis finished the war “awaiting orders.” Brice’s Crossroads is considered one of Nathan Bedford Forrest’s greatest victories.[2]  

Olustee, Florida

   The often-overlooked February 1864 battle of Olustee, Florida, could have been another Richmond, Kentucky, had Confederates cavalry been a little more active in securing the fleeing Federal army. Once again, the two sides were almost evenly matched. Federal general Thuman Seymour, with a force of 5,500 men, faced off against general Joseph Finegan, with 5,000 men (all estimates). The Federals had disembarked at Jacksonville and were moving toward Lake City. The Confederates were waiting for them at Ocean Pond/Olustee, and the Federals attacked in piecemeal fashion. Federal losses were 1,861, about 34%, including six artillery pieces. The Civil War Book of Lists, due to the ratio of troops involved, places Olustee as the second bloodiest battle of the war for the Union. The Federals retreated back to Jacksonville. [3]

(Historical Marker Database.)

Richmond, Kentucky

   Fought at the same time as Second Manassas, the August 1862 battle of Richmond, Kentucky, often gets overshadowed. Confederate forces under Maj. Gen. E. Kirby Smith tangled with Federal forces under Brig. Gen. William “Bull” Nelson. The forces were about even: 6,580 US v. 6,500 CS. Often described as a “running fight,” the Federals took up at three defensive positions, the last being in and around the cemetery in Richmond. In the end, the Federals lost an estimated 5,353, killed, wounded, and captured, including Bull Nelson, who was wounded, but escaped. Smith wrote that the Federals lost “some twenty pieces of artillery,” or, all that the Federals brought to the field. “Indeed, everything indicates the almost entire annihilation of this force of the enemy,” Smith wrote. Confederate forces were able to capture the capital of Kentucky a few days later. Federal losses were 81% of those engaged.[4]  

Plymouth, North Carolina

   Combined Confederate army and navy operations during the war were rare, and the April 1864 battle of Plymouth might be the pinnacle of Confederate success. The Federal garrison at Plymouth was commanded by Brig. Gen. Henry W. Wessells, with about 3,000 men, excluding the US Navy, which included four ships. Confederate commander Brig. Gen. Robert F. Hoke commanded around 4,500 men, excluding two Confederate naval vessels. At the end of the three-day siege, two Federal vessels were sunk, while Wessells listed his losses in killed, wounded, and captured at 2,843. A handful of members of the 2^nd North Carolina Volunteer Infantry (US) and Black recruits for various United States colored Troop regiments escaped. Losses were around 97%, including some twenty cannons, mostly heavy seacoast guns.

Munfordville, Kentucky

   Located south of Elizabethtown, Kentucky, Munfordville just might just vie with Plymouth as one of the most complete victories of the war. Munfordville was garrisoned by a Federal force just over 4,000 men under the command of Col. John T. Wilder. Braxton Bragg, commanding 16,000 Confederate soldiers, launched his campaign to wrest control of Kentucky from the Federals in September 1862. Initial Confederate attacks were repulsed with losses. Bragg brought up the rest of his command, encircling the Federal garrison. All 4,133 Federal soldiers were surrendered by Wilder. Federal loss was 100%.[5]

   So, how doe these battles stack up? Federal losses at Gettysburg were 24%; Chickamauga 26%; Chancellorsville, 17%; Sharpsburg, 14%; Perryville, 7%; Pea Ridge, 12%; Murfreesboro, 31%; Cedar Mountain, 29%; Port Republic, 28%.[6]

---

[1] https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/civil-war-facts

[2] Boatner, The Civil War Dictionary, 85.

[3] The Civil War Book of List, 97.

[4] Lambert, When the Ripe Pears Fell, 234; OR, Vol. 16, pt. 1, 932-33.

[5] Boatner, The Civil War Dictionary, 575.

[6] Aall American Battlefield Trust numbers.

Wounded at Chancellorsville

   Diaries written by common soldiers provide the best insights into the day-to-day life of soldiers. They were not written for wide publication, nor to ‘set history straight,’ as post-war reminiscences. Lieutenant James M. Malbone chronicled his life in a diary that now resides in the collection of the New York State Military Museum and Veterans Research Center in Saratoga Springs, NY.

   Malbone was born in 1828, probably in Princess Anne County, Virginia. Prior to the war, he served as a private tutor. He enlisted March 25, 1862, in Interior Line, Virginia. Malbone was mustered in as a private in Company B, 6^th Virginia Infantry. About six weeks later, Malbone was elected 2^nd lieutenant. He was reported as present until wounded at the battle of Chancellorsville, and remained absent until March 1864 when he was reported on light duty in Gordonsville, Virginia. It does not appear that he ever rejoined his company. Malbone passed away on February 20, 1917, and is buried in the Moore Family Cemetery, Virginia Beach, Virginia.[1]

   At the time of Chancellorsville, the 6^th Virginia Infantry was assigned to Mahone’s brigade. Mahone’s brigade led the advance of Anderson’s division on May 1, moving toward the Federals who were positioned west of Fredericksburg. Malbone’s company was on picket duty and rejoined the 6^th Virginia just in time. He mentioned in his diary advancing some two miles.[2]

   As Jackson launched his attack late on the afternoon of May 2, Mahone was busy holding the attention of the Federals on the eastern front. The skirmishers of the 6^th Virginia captured the flag on the 107^th Ohio. Chronicling a few days after the event, Malbone stated that he was wounded in the right arm about six that morning. As soon as he was wounded, he headed to the rear, “a bout two miles,” to the hospital to have his wound treated. On May 3, he started for Guinea Station, some twenty miles away, walking the entire distance. When he arrived, he found his captain, William C. Williams, mortally wounded.  Malbone stayed with his captain “in the depot house and on a few old bags close by my Capt.” until he died. Malbone then procured a coffin and had Williams buried. [3]

   Malbone found the hospital at Guinea Station “An awful place, for wounded men[.]” After Williams was buried, Malbone returned to Guinea Station, “sick & my wound was very painful.” Later that day, he set out on foot in the rain, looking for his regimental commissary. “[A]t last I found him after so long a time,” he wrote. He returned to Guinea Station the next day and attempted to board a train to Richmond. Federal cavalry had cut the rail lines and it was two days before Malbone could be transported South. During that time, he was able to “sleep in a negro kitching.” On May 8, he was transported to General Hospital No 10, “A regular officers Hospitals.”[4]

   The battle of Chancellorsville produced 9,233 Confederate wounded. Most did not leave accounts of their ordeal, but James M. Malbone did, and his account might represent the rest.

 

---

[1] James M. Malbone, CMSR, RG109, M324, Roll#0442, NA.

[2] Sears, Chancellorsville, 198-99; Malbone, Diary, May 1, 1863.

[3] Sears, Chancellorsville, 282; Malbone, Diary, May, 4, May 5, May 8, 1863.

[4] Malbone, Diary, May 4, May 9, 1863.

 

Florida Leading the Historiography Charge!

   There have been tens of thousands of books written about the war. Even with that seemingly gluttonous number, there are huge gaps in that historiography. For the longest time, Florida seemed to be lagging behind in that quest to document that history. There were just a handful of books – Dickison and His Men (1890), Civil War in Florida  (1899), Florida During the Civil War (1975), Confederate Florida; The Road to Olustee (1990),  Blockaders, Refugees, and Contraband: Civil War on Florida’s Gulf Coast, 1861-1865 (1993), or the volumes that Lewis G. Schmidt wrote in the late 1980 and early 1990s.

   However, in the twenty-first century, the sunshine state has really been making up for lost time. Now there are numerous forays into the history of Florida and the war, as evidenced by the list below. This list is not conclusive. It only looks at books published in the last two decades or so. And, there are several books not included. Claude Kenneson has several books looking at Civil War Veterans buried in various Florida cemeteries. But, is there a state that has done a better job? These books are from both academic presses and public presses, with a few self-published as well. I do not have all of these, nor have I read them all. I think other states need to catch up!

 

Thunder on the River: the Civil War in Northeast Florida (University Press of Florida, 2010) Daniel L. Schafer

The Battle of Natural Bridge, Florida: The Confederate Defense of Tallahassee (Dale Cox, 2010) Dale Cox

A Small but Spartan Band: the Florida Brigade in Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia (University of Alabama Press, 2010) Zach C. Waters and James C. Edmonds

The Battle of Marianna, Florida (Dale Cox, 2011) Dale Cox

Florida’s Civil War (Keith Kohl, 2011) Keith Kohl

Florida Civil War Blockades: Battling for the Coast (History Press, 2011) Nick Wynee and Joe Crankshaw

Discovering the Civil War in Florida: A Reader and Guide (Pineapple Press, 2012) Paul Taylor

By the Noble Daring of her Sons: The Florida Brigade of the Army of Tennessee (The University of Alabama Press, 2012) Jonathan C. Sheppard

Civil War Memories: A Compilation of Remembrance from the Families of Boca Grande Residents (Friends of Boca Grande, 2013)  Sandy Ross Jacobs

Recalling Deeds Immortal: Florida Momunemts to the Civil War (University press of Florida, 2014) William B. Lees and Frederick P. Gaske

Central Florida’s Civil War Veterans (Arcadia, 2014) Bob Grenier

St. Augustine and the Civil War (History Press, 2014) Robert Redd

The Yacht America in Florida’s Civil War (Old Book Shop Publications, 2015) Jack Owen

On this Day in Florida Civil War History (History Press, 2015) Nick Wynee and Joe Knetsch

Civil War Correspondence of Florida’s Governor John Milton (CreateSpace, 2015) M. Edward Hughes

Governor John Milton & the War for Southern Independence (FriesenPress, 2015) M. Edward Hughes

Florida’s Civil War: Terrible Sacrifices (Mercer University Press, 2016) Tracy J. Revels

The 1^st Florida Union Cavalry in the Civil War (Sharon D. Marsh, 2017) Sharon D. Marsh

A Forgotten Front: Florida During the Civil War Era (University of Alabama Press, 2018) Seth A. Weitz and Jonathan C. Sheppard

Florida Postal History During the Civil War (Confederate Stamp Alliance, 2018) Deane R. Briggs

Storm Over Key West: the Civil War and the Call of Freedom (Pineapple Press, 2020) Mike Pride

Fort Clinch, Fernandina and the Civil War (History press, 2020) Frank A. Ofeldt

Florida Thunder: The Marion Light Artillery, 1861-1865 (Fulton Books, 2022), Michael Evans.

Key West’s Civil War: “Rather Unsafe for a Southern man to Live here.” (Shotwell Publishing, 2022) John B. Thuersam

Hidden History of Civil War Florida (History Press, 2022) Robert Redd

One Million

    I was kind of looking forward to this day – 1,000,000 hits on Looking for the Confederate War (6:00 pm on July 3, 2023). It was a dream earlier this year when I checked my stats. I thought just maybe I just might get that number by the end of the year. Little did I imagine that it would only take about three or four weeks in the middle of the year – 21,000 hits in that amount of time. Nope, it was not that I had put up some great post that generated a lot of views. Those 21,000 hits came from Singapore. As the youngsters say these days, I got Scraped. I’m quite certain that some AI bot is pulling my information for their cloud (or whatever it is called).

   But I think I am going to celebrate anyway. Maybe one of those students who use one of the chatbots to write their papers will actually read the paper before they turn it in. Maybe a teacher will read the same paper. Maybe, just maybe, I can share a slightly different perspective on a very complicated part of American History.

   I started blogging back in October 2006. It was not called Looking for the Confederate War back then. The title had something to do with North Carolina and the War. I used the format to share what I was working on and information about events in North Carolina dealing with the War. In 2016 (I think), I changed the name to Looking for the Confederate War, and I started to write about much more than just North Carolina. I started to write about the whole South. Of course, I’ve yet to write a detailed, series of long posts on the big events, like Gettysburg, or Chickamauga. No, most of these posts look at little events, things that have slipped by the notice of other scribes. Many of these events are just footnotes in history.

   There have been some favorites. “Sherman burning towns on the March to the Sea;” “Killing Confederates at Fort Gregg”; “Et Tu Dahlgren?: The Plot against Jefferson Davis”; “Confederate Wagon Trains, Teamsters, and Wagoneers”; “Robert E. Lee’s Cooks”; “Who carried Robert E. Lee’s flag”; “Witnesses”, just to name a few. There are some posts I thought would do better, like the one on Southern Lighthouses. Maybe one of these days it will catch someone’s attention.

   I’ve also used the platform to look at bad history as well, such as bad information on flags, and more than once, on the role of the Blalocks in the war. Then there is the post on Tom Dula (Tom Dooley). I drop this one frequently when the image pops up of that Federal soldier that many carelessly use as Dula.

   There have also been book reviews – not enough, considering how many I read, but I have tried to share some of the better books I have read.  

   Fan favorites? “Confederate Soldiers, Christmas, and Eggnog,” (December 2020) has accrued 1,150 hits so far. “Stonewall Jackson’s Lemons” (October 2019), 1,561 hits; “Who Rode with Lee at Appomattox” (September 2018), 1,873 hits; “Stonewall Jackson’s Requiem” (September 2018), 1,972 hits; “Was it really Witcher’s Cavalry?” (June 2017), with 1,977 hits. Many of the posts that came out prior to 2016 have over 3,000 hits. There have even been a few cases where some of these posts have been cited in articles and books.

   Occasionally, I wade into the fray, with posts like “No room for nuance in NPR’s narrative.” That one has 2,703 hits to date. “Why do people think Zeb Vance was in the Klan?” has 2,369 hits.

   So, what happens next? Now that I’ve been “Scraped” do I continue to put out material? Is blogging really worth it anymore? When I started in 2006, blogging was all the craze. There seemed to be scores of CW blogs – Rantings of a Civil War Historian, Old Virginia Blog, USS Monitor Center, CivilWarTime, Mysteries and Conundrums, and others. Now, there are just a handful. I think I will continue, but I’m also looking at new platforms. Maybe a substack, or a podcast. Of course, writing about Confederate history is like swimming upstream. Most months, I get 4,000-5,000 hits. That’s probably why it has taken me all these years to get to 1,000,000 hits. But then again, if I am going to get 25,000 hits a month like last month, that next one million should not take too long.

   By the way, thanks for taking the time to read, comment, and share! At least 970,000 hits came from (mostly) real people. It is really for you that I continue to put out more content.

Grant’s 1864 plan for North Carolina

   We seem to have this idea about the Overland Campaign of 1864. Overall Federal commander U.S. Grant was going to steal a march on Robert E. Lee, getting between Lee and the Confederate capital and forcing Lee to attack. We know, of course, Lee was up to the challenge, catching the Army of the Potomac in the Wilderness and negating the advantage of numbers that Lee had. Grant was stopped in the Wilderness and forced to shift his army once again to the east, where he once again ran into portions of Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia at Spotsylvania Court House. This same scenario would play out for the rest of May and June. What seems to be missing from the conversation is that Grant did not want to march over the same old ground that his predecessors had fought over during the course of the past two years. Instead of moving from the north, like McDowell, Pope, Burnside, and Hooker, or from the east, Like McClellan, Grant wanted to come from the south.

Henry Halleck and U.S. Grant 

   On January 19, 1864, Grant presented his plan for the upcoming spring campaign to Federal General-in-Chief Henry Halleck. Grant wrote: “I would suggest Raleigh North Carolina as the objective point and Suffolk as the starting point. Raleigh once secured I would make New Bern the base of supplies until Wilmington is secured. A moving force of sixty thousand men would probably be required to start on such an expedition. This force would not have to be increased unless Lee should withdraw from his present position. In that case the necessity for so large a force on the Potomac would not exist.”

   “A force moving from Suffolk would destroy first all the roads about Weldon, or even as far north as Hicksford. Once there the most interior line of rail way still left to the enemy, in fact the only one they would have, would be so threatened as to force . . . him to use a large portion of his army in guarding it. This would virtually force an evacuation of Virginia and indirectly East Tennessee. It would throw our Armies into new fields where they could partially live upon the country and would reduce the stores of the enemy. It would cause thousands of North Carolina troops to desert and return to their homes. It would give us possession of many Negroes who are not indirectly aiding the rebellion. It would draw the enemy from Campaigns of their own choosing, and for which they are prepared, to new lines of operations never expected to become necessary. It would effectually blockade Wilmington, the port now of more value to the enemy that all the balance of their sea coast. It would enable operations to commence at once by removing the war to a more southern climate instead of months of inactivity in winter quarters.”[i]

   The plan may not have been Grant’s. It might have come from Lt. Col. Cyrus B. Comstock. In Comstock’s diary is this entry dated January 18, 1864: “Gen. W. F. Smith & I submitted Mem. to Gen. as to landing 60000 men at Norfolk or Newbern & operating against Rail R. south of Richmond & alternately against Raleigh & Wilmington.” Regardless, Grant obviously thought the plan had merit and submitted it to Halleck.[ii]

   It took Halleck a month to reply, writing on February 17, 1864. Halleck did not seem to grasp the finer points of Grant’s proposal. Lee’s army, not Richmond, was to be Grant’s object, although Grant had not mentioned the Confederate capital. He had mentioned cutting off supplies from Wilmington sustaining Lee’s army. The plan had been debated before by military men in Washington, Halleck told Grant, and most plans required more than 60,000 men. Where were the men to come from, Halleck asked. “There is evidently a general public misconception of the strength of our army in Virginia and about Washington,” a misconception Halleck thought wise to perpetuate. Meade’s army numbered 70,000 men, with about 18,000 soldiers in various garrisons around Washington, D.C. “Suppose we were to send thirty thousand men from that army to North Carolina; would not Lee be able to make another invasion of Maryland and Pennsylvania?” Would Grant’s proposal force Lee to come to the aid of North Carolina? Halleck did not think so. “Uncover Washington and the Potomac river, and all the forces which Lee can collect will be moved north, and the popular sentiment will compel the Government to bring back the army in North Carolina to defend Washington, Baltimore, Harrisburg, and Philadelphia.” Halleck did not believe that Lee would exchange Richmond for Raleigh and Wilmington. Halleck then reminded Grant that a large force had been sent against Charleston, and for a year, had achieved no “important results.” Halleck went on to mention other operations in Texas and Alabama. “We have given too much attention to cutting the toe nails of our enemy instead of grasping his throat.” Halleck then goes on to lay out the tried and true Federal strategy in the East. “The overthrow of Lee’s army being the object of operations here.” Grant’s plan was probably mentioned to Lincoln, but the plan of bypassing the Army of Northern Virginia and cutting the railroad in eastern North Carolina was null and void in the eyes of the Lincoln administration. [iii]

   Grant replaced Halleck as General in Chief of the Armies of the United States on March 9, 1864. Grant was named Commanding General and given the rank of Lieutenant General. As commanding general, he could have revisited the idea of a campaign into southeastern Virginia and North Carolina, cutting that all-so important rail line coming out of Wilmington. It is interesting to speculate just how much shorter the war in the east would have been had a foray from New Bern to Goldsboro or Tarboro been approved. To cut and hold the railroad at those places, combined with the actions of Hunter and Sheridan in the Shenandoah Valley, would have pretty much starved out the Army of North Virginia. Of course, Halleck was wrong about clipping the toe nails. It is not until the toe nail at Wilmington is clipped that the situation in Virginia becomes dire.

   For more information, check out Brooks D. Simpson’s essay, “Ulysses S. Grant and the Problem of Command in 1864,” in The Art of Command in the Civil War, Steven Woodsworth, ed.

---

[i] The Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 10: 39-40.

[ii] The Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 10:41n.

[iii] The Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 110-112.