Civil War History - General DiscussionFor Discussions on Civil War Era Personalities, Politics, Issues, Campaigns, Battles, and more. Serious Civil War Discussions Only Please! All other posts will be deleted.
Cool, Don! Are there similar sites for other states?
Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
Don, thanks very much for posting this great map! I'm a bit embarrassed to see this information in a school 25 miles from my home and to which I send money in the form of a son and daughter-in-law! Yes, physically it would have been possible to send men and material from Virginia to Nashville via Knoxville and Chattanooga. The problem was the US Army. One of my Confederate ancestors was captured in a fight at Philadelphia, TN on Oct 23, 1863. The Chattanooga-Greenville was in Union hands at that time. Another ancestor (Union) was on guard duty at Tullahoma in early summer 1864. Rail access to much of TN by the Confederates just wasn't there. My Union ancestors (two of them) were from Sullivan and Johnson Counties in northeast Tennessee. Much Union sentiment and many blue coated troops in that area as well.
Apparently it was the E. Tn & Va. Line that was broken by Burnside on I believe Sept. 3-4, 1863, Longstreets leading elements did not leave until, I believe, Sept. 9, 1863. Whether 1st Corps' departure was delayed by Burnside's movement or was not ready in any case until the 9th is unclear.
As far as I can determine, Longstreet's movement through Atlanta, was because the original line chosen to transport the troops had been captured by Federal forces before the movement could begin.
If the West was reinforced from Lee's Army anyway, then it was obviously better After Chancellorsville, as Longstreet suggested.
A strategic mistake of great consequences, was made and it was Lee who made it.
P.S. What would be the point of Forrest tearing up the tracks between Knoxville and Chattanooga. Supplies to Union forces were not coming through Knoxville, were they? In any case 1i was too late in 1864.
P.S. What would be the point of Forrest tearing up the tracks between Knoxville and Chattanooga. Supplies to Union forces were not coming through Knoxville, were they? In any case 1i was too late in 1864.
After Chickamauga Forrest could not have approached the line between Chattanooga and Knoxville. Too many yanks. Soon after Chickamauga Forrest was relieved of his regiment/s and was in west TN and MS anyway until he was able to regroup and re-recruit when the Escort was formed in early 1864. War was a futile effort at that point and still too much power in place by the blue side.
I fear this thread has veered from it's original topic (Lee the Enigma).
To bring it back a bit:
Here is Lee to Pendleton a day or two before his surrender:
"General, this is no new question with me I have never believed we could, against the gigantic combination for our subjugation, make good, in the long run, our independence, unless foreign powers should, directly or indirectly, assist us. This, I was sure, it was their interest to do, and I hoped they would so regard it. But such considerations really made with me no difference. We had, I was satisfied, sacred principles to maintain and rights to defend, for which we were in duty bound to do our best, even if we perished in the endeavor."
Fine sentiment, but ....
He never thought the South could win without foreign intervention!
So why did he fight on? He says why: "sacred principles" and "rights"
Does he address the question of the losses in killed and wounded in this 'sacred principled' endeavor'? No, he does not. ("made with me no difference")
(And who is called the 'butcher'?)
So Lee is forever glorified (and even admired in the North) for pursuing a folly in which he himself did not believe could be successful (also, see other Lee quotes per secession, slavery, etc.)
Lee was not an enigma, his thoughts, words and deeds are recorded in history as fully and accurately as most of the major players in the Civil War.
Lee consciously patterned his life on that of George Washington, most of his life decisions were based on "what would George Washington have done in this situation"? But Lee saw Washington first and foremost as the exemplar of a Va. Gentleman and patriot, not as the example of a national leader and patriot. Lee saw himself as a Va. patriot Not a Confederate patriot or even, necessiarily, a Southern one.
As I have noted in other posts and threads, Lee Always had one eye on what future history books would say about him and the other eye on what George Washington would have done in similar situations as he found himself.
All Lee really cared about was the safety and integrity of Va., there was very little room for the south or the confederate states of America. If one views his actions through those two prisms, Lee turns out to have been not so baffling after all.
I concur with the previous. Lee explained himself on many occasions. He was a former US Army officer of great renown and considerable accomplishment who just happened to consider his loyalty to Virginia more important. The conscious or subconscious attachment to the memory of Washington or at least the Virginia aristocracy (his Carter ancestors were very important folks) is probably quite accurate. The fact he never crossed the mountains to help out our western theatre (only sent Longstreet whom he didn't care much for anyway) probably speaks to his focus. Admittedly he was busy for a couple of years with Meade and Grant.
__________________ Ancestors in US Army: 13th TN Cav; 10th TN Cav; 3rd NC Inf
Ancestors in CSA Army: 48th VA; 63rd VA, 5th NC Cav; 37th NC
Wife and Grandson's CSA: 15th AL, 51st GA, 41st TN; 36th TN; GA Mil 1197 Dist
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
