Miracle That D.C Was Never Invaded-South Had Chances

muzzleloader · #1 08-02-2007, 05:24 AM

There were so many times that the Rebs had the opportunity to invade DC and take it over. This link is one of them but not probably as sure as if Lee had gone around Gettysburg and attacked from a more advantageous position.
http://www.historynet.com/magazines/...s/8250902.html

custersluck13 · #2 08-02-2007, 05:59 AM

Muzzleloader

Liked the article. On one hand, desperate times call for desperate measures and a Jackson surely would have done it differently, but it seems the question comes down to the real strength of Union forces around Ft Stevens. On the other hand, it seems only a more clear cut option in hindsight. I gotta think if Early really thought he had a chance, he would have pushed it. Seems Ramsuer thought so as well. Perhaps we can get some better informed opinions on this! (well, actually, Ive no doubt about that possibilty!!LOL!)...custersluck

gary · #3 08-02-2007, 09:01 AM

Thank you muzzleloader. Having read Worthington, I knew about that battle and visited Monocacy once. It's very pristine and now they have a new visitors' center. Fort Stevens I haven't visited as outside of Walter Reed is rought (so I've been told).

Capt Coxetter · #4 08-02-2007, 10:49 PM

I was talking about that topic just a few days ago! I'm heading out for the weekend but will send you a quote from an English journalist's account that makes this point.

Capt. Coxetter

ole · #5 08-02-2007, 11:56 PM

Don't think there was ever much of a chance of taking Washington -- the rebs just didn't have much stamina behind their muscle.

Interesting topic, though. Should be good for several pages of discussion.

ole

gary · #6 08-03-2007, 09:04 AM

Good point Ole. That's why Monocacy was called the battle that saved Washington. Small in comparison to other battles in 1864, it took the steam out of Early's army and slowed it down sufficiently for the VI Corps to arrive. Even if Early had captured the capitol, the VI Corps would have pushed him right back.

An interesting scenario is a landing upriver from Washington ala Inchon. Early's escape would have been cut off and his entire II Corps captured.

J_Man0507 · #7 08-03-2007, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gary

Good point Ole. That's why Monocacy was called the battle that saved Washington. Small in comparison to other battles in 1864, it took the steam out of Early's army and slowed it down sufficiently for the VI Corps to arrive. Even if Early had captured the capitol, the VI Corps would have pushed him right back.

An interesting scenario is a landing upriver from Washington ala Inchon. Early's escape would have been cut off and his entire II Corps captured.

Have to agree with you there gary. If Early had gotten past Ft. Stevens and made it into the capital, it would have degenerated into street fighting, and I think that Early would have been pushed out or captured rather quickly. They would have had little chance of capturing Lincoln, because they were ready to evacuate him if they needed to. I think this probably ran through Early's head as he sat outside the gates of DC.

As for an upriver landing, probably wouldn't have been possible, because DC is positioned at the furthest point navigable to big ships on the Potomac. However, if they had landed in, say, Annapolis, they may have been able to cut Early off. If they wanted to come from upriver, they might have been able to cut him off from behind if they had crossed up near Frederick. I think that they let a good chance go by not capturing Early, though I don't know how feasible it would have been. Have to look at that and see if they could have done that.

custersluck13 · #8 08-03-2007, 02:18 PM

Seems to me, Lee was probably looking for the diversion...which he got, to relieve pressure on the Richmond front, and anything else would have been a plus...now if Early had lost his corps in some of the situations discussed here, that may have had the opposite effect and ended the war earlier. Very risky proposition, but I think it was worth the gamble.

whitworth · #9 08-03-2007, 04:53 PM

Early did a good job by getting to Washington, D.C., but he had no tangible chance of capturing the city surrounded by some of the finest artillery defensive positions in the world.

If Fort Stevens was imperiled, what was Abraham Lincoln doing at Fort Stevens, and not on some boat in the Potomac River?

And Early was not about to do a "Pickett's Charge" against heavily protected artillery.

J_Man0507 · #10 08-03-2007, 07:02 PM

Fort Stevens was never in any real danger IMHO. There was some sharp fighting around the fortifications, but they were fairly imposing and crowned with lots of artillery, keeping Early at bay. Lincoln had never been this close to the fighting and the capital had never been in such danger, not even after the battles at Manassas or Antietam. However, with the Confederates closer than ever to DC, they had to take the precaution that the rebels might take the city, especially with the defenses stripped of many of their troops. I think Lincoln showing up at the works to see the battle was more of a morale booster if anything. I am sure that most of us know the story of a bullet hitting a man near Lincoln and an officer telling him to "get down" in some rather more colorful terms. But we can compare having a boat ready to evacuate Lincoln with the presidents of modern times; they have a special plane ready to take him out if there is ever a threat deeming it necessary.