Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

46885Re: [civilwarwest] Retreat and Fall Back

Expand Messages
  • keeno2@aol.com
    Dec 23, 2010
    • 0 Attachment

      Grant was not forced to fall back under pressure. He could have continued toward Vicksburg. He was not retreating from great loss of force or because he feared the enemy. He wanted to capture Vicksburg under his terms.

      Mostly  agree. The Rebs only indirectly forced the fall-back. He couldn't very well continue to Vicksburg without the empty, Holly Springs life-line.
      Schofield made a strategic withdrawal from Franklin. He just wanted to get to Nashville and didn't want another pointless fight there. Much the same as Lee did at Sharpsburg.
      Thomas drove the rebs from Nancy to the crossing at Mill Springs. (They were retreating.) He gave up the chace when the Rebs got across the river. Granted, he might have been more excited about destroying the Rebs, but I'm sure he had his reasons to regroup.

      -----Original Message-----
      From: William Nolan <sixtxcavrgtcsa@...>
      To: civilwarwest <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Tue, Dec 21, 2010 11:14 pm
      Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Retreat and Fall Back

      Neither term applies to Grant in January of 1865. He had lost two supply lines and had to regroup until he could resupply. In turn he told his forces to forage. A trick they learned and used for the rest of the War, much to the sorrow of the South.

      Grant was not forced to fall back under pressure. He could have continued toward Vicksburg. He was not retreating from great loss of force or because he feared the enemy. He wanted to capture Vicksburg under his terms.

      Though I would have preferred that Pemberton had moved north at that time, he was not ready or able. Van Dorn's Cavalry action was a measure that worked and was very successful, but which History has lost because the South lost the War.  The question might be, How many Union Soldiers died because the war was prolonged, and how close did the South come to winning had the war ended because of the continued loss of Union Soldiers? 

      From The Texas Cavalry Brigade under Van Dorn.

      From: Bob Huddleston <huddleston.r@...>
      To: Civil War West <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Tue, December 21, 2010 9:31:53 PM
      Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Retreat and Fall Back

      Having done some reading in sources ranging from an 1868 campaign
      biography of USG to Brooks Simpson, it does appear that Grant never
      retreated, especially after the Holly Springs raid..... :>)

      So I am willing to stipulate that Pap Thomas did not retreat after Mill
      Springs. He did fall back, make a strategic withdrawal, etc. What he did
      not do was pursue the Rebels. Double :>)

      Take care,


      Judy and Bob Huddleston
      10643 Sperry Street
      Northglenn, CO  80234-3612

      “There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were generals
      fighting it, and, of the two groups, the historians are the more
      belligerent.” David Donald, “Refighting the Civil War,” Lincoln
      Reconsidered (New York, 1956), 82.

      On 12/21/2010 2:13 PM, keeno2@... wrote:
      > Agreed that it's semantics, Patricia. One might fall back to
      > consolidate. One might run like a rabbit and call it a strategic withdrawal.
      > In my limited memory, the Holly Springs episode was the only time Grant
      > ever "retreated."
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: Patricia Swan <pbswan@...>
      > To: civilwarwest <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
      > Sent: Mon, Dec 20, 2010 2:50 pm
      > Subject: [civilwarwest] Retreat and Fall Back
      > It may all be a matter of semantics, but it seems to me that this being
      > the anniversary of Confederate General Earl Van Dorn's raid on Grant's
      > supply base at Holly Springs, it might be a timely illustration.  After
      > the raid, Grant could no longer sustain his troops, his supplies at
      > Holly Springs having been largely destroyed and the railroad down to
      > Mississippi having been disrupted.  One could say, and some do write,
      > that Grant retreated. Others say that he was "forced to fall back" to
      > Tennessee.  Do these terms apply equally well to what Grant did, or is
      > one or the other more apt?
      > ------------------------------------
      > Yahoo! Groups Links


      Yahoo! Groups Links

      <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

      <*> Your email settings:
          Individual Email | Traditional

      <*> To change settings online go to:
          (Yahoo! ID required)

      <*> To change settings via email:

      <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

      <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

    • Show all 30 messages in this topic