Should Anderson attempted to hold out longer?

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

major bill

Colonel
Forum Host
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
16,195
Should have Major Anderson attempted to hold on to Fort Sumter a few days longer? Perhaps he should have forced the South Carolina to land on the island and take the garrison by force.
 

major bill

Colonel
Forum Host
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
16,195
Officers are expected to not surrender while they still have the means to resist. It comes down to if Major Anderson had exhausted all reasonable means to resist.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

major bill

Colonel
Forum Host
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
16,195
Today officers and men take on oath not to surrender. This oath must be weighed against a unreasonable lose of live once the reasonable mean to resist had been exhausted. I am not sure what the officers and men during the Civil War swear to.
 

gary

Captain
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
6,464
"To prevent the unnecessary effusion of blood." That term was used a lot back in the 18-19th Century.

Anderson did a more credible job than some of our "generals" of the War of 1812.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

20thncarolina

Sergeant
Joined
Jan 13, 2011
Messages
514
Location
New Mexico
I think it is possible that he still held out hope for a solution other than all out war. By holding out for a time, and then surrendering before anyone got killed, each side could claim they'd given it their best. Hopefully, the politicians might be shocked into action by the actual exchange of fire.
 

John Winn

Captain
Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
6,638
Location
State of Jefferson
He had held out as long as feasible and had obviously lost and wasn't going to get any assistance. They were out of food, were likely running out of ammunition, and there'd been a major fire. Continued resistance would have been pointless and futile. He made his statement if you will.
 

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,519
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
He had held out as long as feasible and had obviously lost and wasn't going to get any assistance. They were out of food, were likely running out of ammunition, and there'd been a major fire. Continued resistance would have been pointless and futile. He made his statement if you will.
I have heard that defending to the last man and last round can be done by evacuating everyone except one poor private with one round and have him discharge that round and run for it.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,519
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
Wasn't the magazine about to explode?
http://www.historynet.com/battle-of-fort-sumter
As night fell, Anderson stopped firing and the Confederates reduced their fire but resumed it the next morning. April 13, the barracks again caught fire and threatened the ammunition store, in spite of the rainy day. At about 1 p.m. the flagstaff was shot away and the flag was raised on the ramparts on a makeshift staff. On seeing the flag shot away, Louis Wigfall—aide to Beauregard, fire-eater, and former U.S. senator—rowed out to Fort Sumter on his own initiative, without the knowledge or approval of Beauregard, amid the continuing barrage to see if Anderson was attempting to surrender. Although initially told that Anderson was not surrendering, Wigfall was able to negotiate a surrender. At 1:30 p.m., the flag was replaced with a white sheet. On seeing the flag of surrender, Beauregard ceased firing and sent his envoys to the fort, where they learned of Wigfall’s unofficial mission. After further negotiation, the same terms were eventually agreed to: surrender would occur April 14 at noon.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Irishtom29

Sergeant Major
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
1,756
Location
Comancheria
It was no Cuidad Rodrigo or Badajoz, that's for sure; European officers usually held a fortress until things were much more dire. On the other hand Anderson was offered a very good deal, at least as good a one as an officer could expect if he waited until he was breached and an assault was ready to go. What he did was reasonable.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

jgoodguy

Banished Forever
-:- A Mime -:-
is a terrible thing...
Don’t feed the Mime
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,519
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
IMO, the confrontation in Charleston harbor was as much political as military. Both sides had made their point and were about to suffer the consequences.
I'd say almost all political. The sovereignty of 2 nations , the political fortunes of 2 presidents and the fate of ways of life at stake.
 

major bill

Colonel
Forum Host
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
16,195
If most of Anderson's command had been killed, would it have made any difference to either side? I am not sure it would have. However if Anderson would have fought to the very end, then the Confedercy would have probably ended up with a hand full of prisoners and perhaps wounded prisoners. This could have work in the favor of the Confedercy or in favor of the Union.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top