How the West Wasn't Won.

[major bill]

Image credit: www.theamericansurveyor.com

My The Civil War Monitor magazine arrived this week and I have looked through it but not read any of it yet. The issue has Gary W. Gallagher's article How the West Wasn't Won, about Sibley's campaign. Before I read the article I have given a bit of thought to this.

It often appears that Henry Sibley was not assigned an easy task, perhaps even a near impossible task. So my first question; was there a better use for Sibley's men? It appears that Colorado Territory and Southern California was just simple out of reach It appears that after taking Santa Fe that Sibley was at the end of his rope So should have Sibley went on defense and fallen back on his supply base?

More after I read How the West Wasn't Won.

 

[leftyhunter]

My The Civil War Monitor magazine arrived this week and I have looked through it but not read any of it yet. The issue has Gary W. Gallagher's article How the West Wasn't Won, about Sibley's campaign. Before I read the article I have given a bit of thought to this.

It often appears that Henry Sibley was not assigned an easy task, perhaps even a near impossible task. So my first question; was there a better use for Sibley's men? It appears that Colorado Territory and Southern California was just simple out of reach It appears that after taking Santa Fe that Sibley was at the end of his rope So should have Sibley went on defense and fallen back on his supply base?

More after I read How the West Wasn't Won.

I did ask one of our most esteemed posters James Lutzweiler that per his assertion that the main goal of the Confederacy was to seize California and establish a port to facilitate trade with China. How one regiment is supposed to battle their way through the desert and capture California James Lutzweiler would not say.
Not sure what the Confederate leadership was smoking to think that one regiment is going to seize the present day states of New Mexico, Arizona and at least San Bernardino county in Southern California even if said areas had a very low population density?
Leftyhunter

 

[JeffBrooks]

Sibley's New Mexico Campaign has always reminded me a bit of Napoleon's expedition to Egypt. It certainly was full of high drama, but in the end was a ridiculous pipe dream.

 

[Coonewah Creek]

I thought at one time it was only intended to intercept the California gold shipments back east to replenish Lincoln's treasury...

 

[luinrina]

It often appears that Henry Sibley was not assigned an easy task, perhaps even a near impossible task. So my first question; was there a better use for Sibley's men? It appears that Colorado Territory and Southern California was just simple out of reach It appears that after taking Santa Fe that Sibley was at the end of his rope So should have Sibley went on defense and fallen back on his supply base?

He wanted that task and talked Jeff Davis into it. One might say Sibley reaped what he sowed. The men could definitely have been better used elsewhere.

I think one of the bigger mistakes was Sibley moving further north after Valverde and leaving Fort Craig intact and manned. That gave Cranby room to maneuver in Sibley's back and communicate with Fort Union. As I understand it, Sibley was also moving too slowly north to capture the depots in Albuquerque and Santa Fe.

IMO the campaign should never have been undertaken. Or another commander assigned; in one book (just don't remember which) I read that the campaign might have been successful if someone other than Sibley had had the command.

 

[Carronade]

I thought at one time it was only intended to intercept the California gold shipments back east to replenish Lincoln's treasury...

Was gold shipped by land across the continent? That would seem a hazardous undertaking even without an ongoing civil war.

My understanding is that California gold mainly went by sea, although that was not without its dangers either; the loss of the steamer Central America in 1857 was partly responsible for the financial panic of that year.

 

[major bill]

He wanted that task and talked Jeff Davis into it. One might say Sibley reaped what he sowed. The men could definitely have been better used elsewhere.

I think one of the bigger mistakes was Sibley moving further north after Valverde and leaving Fort Craig intact and manned. That gave Cranby room to maneuver in Sibley's back and communicate with Fort Union. As I understand it, Sibley was also moving too slowly north to capture the depots in Albuquerque and Santa Fe.

IMO the campaign should never have been undertaken. Or another commander assigned; in one book (just don't remember which) I read that the campaign might have been successful if someone other than Sibley had had the command.

Did any Confederate general want to take over the job? It does not look like a win win for any general.

 

[leftyhunter]

He wanted that task and talked Jeff Davis into it. One might say Sibley reaped what he sowed. The men could definitely have been better used elsewhere.

I think one of the bigger mistakes was Sibley moving further north after Valverde and leaving Fort Craig intact and manned. That gave Cranby room to maneuver in Sibley's back and communicate with Fort Union. As I understand it, Sibley was also moving too slowly north to capture the depots in Albuquerque and Santa Fe.

IMO the campaign should never have been undertaken. Or another commander assigned; in one book (just don't remember which) I read that the campaign might have been successful if someone other than Sibley had had the command.

It's very difficult to imagine one infantry regiment could March West from Texas and occupy land all the way to San Bernardino county California. From the San Francisco Bay area it would not be difficult to raise a 1k plus Union regiment and sail them to Santa Monica Bay and March them 80 miles to San Bernardino. With horses even quicker.
If Sibley had at least a brigade perhaps Sibley could of temporarily seized the Southwest. Of course the caveat is the logistics involved in marching a brigade from Texas to San Bernardino.
Leftyhunter

 

[luinrina]

If Sibley had at least a brigade

I thought he had a brigade? He had three regiments - 4th, 5th and 7th Texas Mounted Rifles - and I think in Mesilla one or more of the units joined them northwards. I might be mistaken; it's been a while since I last read about the New Mexico Campaign.

In any way, he had too few men to occupy the vast area they would have needed to hold.

 

[major bill]

Sibley failed, but does that make him a poor general? Have historians make a good case against Sibley's abilities?

 

[leftyhunter]

I thought he had a brigade? He had three regiments - 4th, 5th and 7th Texas Mounted Rifles - and I think in Mesilla one or more of the units joined them northwards. I might be mistaken; it's been a while since I last read about the New Mexico Campaign.

In any way, he had too few men to occupy the vast area they would have needed to hold.

I was going by the fact that Sibley had 1,100
men at the battle of Glorieta Pass or at least that's the Wikipedia article number. An ACW regiment is supposed to be 1 k men but that's not always the case . It's possible that Sibley had four severely undermanned regiments but for practical purposes 1,100 men is just a regiment. By Brigade I mean approximately 4k men.
Leftyhunter

 

[leftyhunter]

Sibley failed, but does that make him a poor general? Have historians make a good case against Sibley's abilities?

Sibley was defeated by a force about the same size has his approximately 1k men who were on the defensive. We would have to examine all of Sibley's battles to fairly evaluate him. Some posters have stated he was drunk while in command. If that is true that would definitely effect his evaluation.
Leftyhunter

 

[Tennessee_Mountainman]

I did ask one of our most esteemed posters James Lutzweiler that per his assertion that the main goal of the Confederacy was to seize California and establish a port to facilitate trade with China. How one regiment is supposed to battle their way through the desert and capture California James Lutzweiler would not say.
Not sure what the Confederate leadership was smoking to think that one regiment is going to seize the present day states of New Mexico, Arizona and at least San Bernardino county in Southern California even if said areas had a very low population density?
Leftyhunter

Parts of Colorado and Southern California had strong pro-secessionist sentiment, and many of the recent settlers (miners, laborers, etc.) were from the South. Sibley was hoping to gain recruits along the way of his campaign. A few lines from the Wikipedia article "Colorado in the American Civil War" seems to indicate there was substantial enough pro-secessionist sentiment in Colorado to actually be considered a real threat, and apparently there were hot spots of potential recruits.

"During the late 1850s, many Southerners migrated to the Colorado Territory in search of new opportunities, including working in the newly discovered gold fields. When the War broke out, many returned to the South to defend their homes. However, some remained and formed militia groups in Fairplay, Leadville, Denver and Mace's Hole (present day Beulah). These Confederate Partisan Ranger units operated in the Colorado Territory from 1861 to 1865, raiding supply wagon trains, disrupting communications lines, recruiting volunteers, and skirmishing with Union troops. There were also pockets of strong support for the Confederacy in the mining areas and in the Arkansas River Valley, from Cañon City eastward to Lamar, and Cañon City southward to Trinidad.[2] "

"In 1861, when Confederate General Sibley organized his army to invade New Mexico, he commissioned Captain George Madison to go into Colorado with a two-fold mission: disrupt federal mail and communication lines, and to help organize Confederate recruitment there. At this time, Confederate recruits in Colorado were first sent to a camp in the Pikes Peak area, and then sent to the main Confederate encampment at Mace's Hole. In early 1862, Captain Madison and his men captured mail en route to Ft. Garland. Madison was also actively planning a raid on Ft. Garland. Federal soldiers learned of the encampment at Mace's Hole and broke up the regiment while many of the Confederates were away. The Federals captured forty-four Confederates and took them to Denver.[4] "

"The "Reynolds Gang", a group of Southern Sympathizers, operated in South Park in 1864. Their objective was to rob the gold mines in the area to help finance the Confederate Government. However, their goal was never accomplished and the members were eventually captured. While the captured southern sympathizers were being taken to Fort Lyon, the first stop on their way to Denver for a military trial, they attempted their escape. A gunfight ensued and three of the prisoners were killed. However, two managed to steal horses in the confusion and escaped to the New Mexico Territory.[5] "

 

[leftyhunter]

Parts of Colorado and Southern California had strong pro-secessionist sentiment, and many of the recent settlers (miners, laborers, etc.) were from the South. Sibley was hoping to gain recruits along the way of his campaign. A few lines from the Wikipedia article "Colorado in the American Civil War" seems to indicate there was substantial enough pro-secessionist sentiment in Colorado to actually be considered a real threat, and apparently there were hot spots of potential recruits.

"During the late 1850s, many Southerners migrated to the Colorado Territory in search of new opportunities, including working in the newly discovered gold fields. When the War broke out, many returned to the South to defend their homes. However, some remained and formed militia groups in Fairplay, Leadville, Denver and Mace's Hole (present day Beulah). These Confederate Partisan Ranger units operated in the Colorado Territory from 1861 to 1865, raiding supply wagon trains, disrupting communications lines, recruiting volunteers, and skirmishing with Union troops. There were also pockets of strong support for the Confederacy in the mining areas and in the Arkansas River Valley, from Cañon City eastward to Lamar, and Cañon City southward to Trinidad.[2] "

"In 1861, when Confederate General Sibley organized his army to invade New Mexico, he commissioned Captain George Madison to go into Colorado with a two-fold mission: disrupt federal mail and communication lines, and to help organize Confederate recruitment there. At this time, Confederate recruits in Colorado were first sent to a camp in the Pikes Peak area, and then sent to the main Confederate encampment at Mace's Hole. In early 1862, Captain Madison and his men captured mail en route to Ft. Garland. Madison was also actively planning a raid on Ft. Garland. Federal soldiers learned of the encampment at Mace's Hole and broke up the regiment while many of the Confederates were away. The Federals captured forty-four Confederates and took them to Denver.[4] "

"The "Reynolds Gang", a group of Southern Sympathizers, operated in South Park in 1864. Their objective was to rob the gold mines in the area to help finance the Confederate Government. However, their goal was never accomplished and the members were eventually captured. While the captured southern sympathizers were being taken to Fort Lyon, the first stop on their way to Denver for a military trial, they attempted their escape. A gunfight ensued and three of the prisoners were killed. However, two managed to steal horses in the confusion and escaped to the New Mexico Territory.[5] "

The Confederacy just couldn't get enough bodies from the West to really do serious damage to the Union. I can cite an article later that the only California Militia group that defected to the Confederacy was the Los Angeles Mounted Rifles from Los Angeles County that sent 80 men to the Confederacy and escorted General Sidney Johnston from Downtown Los Angeles to Texas.
Colorado Territory sent at least two regiments of Union Cavalry out of state so the Confederate guerrillas in Colorado were apparently more of a nuisance then a threat.
Sibley would not be the only Confederate general guilty of overestimating support for the Confederacy.
Leftyhunter

 

[NH Civil War Gal]

Parts of Colorado and Southern California had strong pro-secessionist sentiment, and many of the recent settlers (miners, laborers, etc.) were from the South. Sibley was hoping to gain recruits along the way of his campaign. A few lines from the Wikipedia article "Colorado in the American Civil War" seems to indicate there was substantial enough pro-secessionist sentiment in Colorado to actually be considered a real threat, and apparently there were hot spots of potential recruits.

"During the late 1850s, many Southerners migrated to the Colorado Territory in search of new opportunities, including working in the newly discovered gold fields. When the War broke out, many returned to the South to defend their homes. However, some remained and formed militia groups in Fairplay, Leadville, Denver and Mace's Hole (present day Beulah). These Confederate Partisan Ranger units operated in the Colorado Territory from 1861 to 1865, raiding supply wagon trains, disrupting communications lines, recruiting volunteers, and skirmishing with Union troops. There were also pockets of strong support for the Confederacy in the mining areas and in the Arkansas River Valley, from Cañon City eastward to Lamar, and Cañon City southward to Trinidad.[2] "

"In 1861, when Confederate General Sibley organized his army to invade New Mexico, he commissioned Captain George Madison to go into Colorado with a two-fold mission: disrupt federal mail and communication lines, and to help organize Confederate recruitment there. At this time, Confederate recruits in Colorado were first sent to a camp in the Pikes Peak area, and then sent to the main Confederate encampment at Mace's Hole. In early 1862, Captain Madison and his men captured mail en route to Ft. Garland. Madison was also actively planning a raid on Ft. Garland. Federal soldiers learned of the encampment at Mace's Hole and broke up the regiment while many of the Confederates were away. The Federals captured forty-four Confederates and took them to Denver.[4] "

"The "Reynolds Gang", a group of Southern Sympathizers, operated in South Park in 1864. Their objective was to rob the gold mines in the area to help finance the Confederate Government. However, their goal was never accomplished and the members were eventually captured. While the captured southern sympathizers were being taken to Fort Lyon, the first stop on their way to Denver for a military trial, they attempted their escape. A gunfight ensued and three of the prisoners were killed. However, two managed to steal horses in the confusion and escaped to the New Mexico Territory.[5] "

Totally get this but how does this play out with the many Northerners that went west for gold? Did they form Unionist groups against the Southerners? I ask because New England was literally depleted and it wasn't until the 1970s that for the northern part of Vermont, NH, and the western/northern part of Mass. did population even begin to equal what it was before the gold rush. I can just remember the many deserted and falling down farm houses and old Colonial houses in New England in the '60s and when that started to turn around.

 

[leftyhunter]

Totally get this but how does this play out with the many Northerners that went west for gold? Did they form Unionist groups against the Southerners? I ask because New England was literally depleted and it wasn't until the 1970s that for the northern part of Vermont, NH, and the western/northern part of Mass. did population even begin to equal what it was before the gold rush. I can just remember the many deserted and falling down farm houses and old Colonial houses in New England in the '60s and when that started to turn around.

I am not aware of any Unionist vs Confederate violence in the Southwest although apparently there was a bit here and there . Dyer's Compendium does list regiments from all the states and territories and both the territory that became the states of New Mexico and Colorado definitely supplied Union regiments. The 2nd Colorado which saw extensive combat service in Missouri both conventional and counterinsurgency supposedly had soldiers from multiple states including Southern states.
Leftyhunter

 

[7th Mississippi Infantry]

I enjoying reading about the lesser known history of the Trans-Mississippi theatre.

The 2nd Colorado which saw extensive combat service in Missouri both conventional and counterinsurgency

I didn't realize that either !

 

[Tailor Pete]

One must recognize that the harsh climate and unrelenting terrain was the true enemy of BOTH sides of the conflict. Having more than 1000+- troops would have been a huge strain on issued supplies and foraging abilities.

Thus was the complexion of Federal and Confederate armies in the Southwest. They were able bodied troops who were certainly capable of waging important battles, but they were outnumbered by their surrounding environment.

 

[Tennessee_Mountainman]

Totally get this but how does this play out with the many Northerners that went west for gold? Did they form Unionist groups against the Southerners? I ask because New England was literally depleted and it wasn't until the 1970s that for the northern part of Vermont, NH, and the western/northern part of Mass. did population even begin to equal what it was before the gold rush. I can just remember the many deserted and falling down farm houses and old Colonial houses in New England in the '60s and when that started to turn around.

There were plenty of Northerners that migrated as well. IIRC, there were a disproportionate amount of Southerners who migrated to the west before the war because the economic situation in the southeast was more desperate. You essentially had a feudal-like system in the Southern slave states were you had a small pool of slave owners who controlled most of the wealth, and a very large pool of poverty-stricken laborers and farmers. In the North, it was much more like how our economy is today, you have a lower class, but you also have a middle class and upper class. So there weren't as many "push factors" as to why you should risk everything to go out to a place you know little about, if your economic conditions were good enough. I don't think there are statistics we can look at as to what region each settler was from, but if I had to guess, roughly half and half. Keep in mind a good portion of the Southerners moving out west weren't pro-secessionist.

 

[leftyhunter]

One must recognize that the harsh climate and unrelenting terrain was the true enemy of BOTH sides of the conflict. Having more than 1000+- troops would have been a huge strain on issued supplies and foraging abilities.

Thus was the complexion of Federal and Confederate armies in the Southwest. They were able bodied troops who were certainly capable of waging important battles, but they were outnumbered by their surrounding environment.

Yet we have James Lutzweiler who wrote a thread claiming that seizing California not protection of slavery was the main reason for the Civil War. When I asked him how the Confederate Army would overcome it's severe logistical issues my friend James Lutzweiler told me that by reading De Bows Magazine the answer would be apparent. Not sure how a magazine article solves logistical issues.
Leftyhunter