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

Re: Vicksburg, Grant and trapped and shelled Civilians

Expand Messages
  • Doug Newman
    ... to ... allowed ... I recently finished some research concerning Vicksburg and the siege - My sources suggest that based on church funeral and funeral
    Message 1 of 25 , Feb 6, 2008
      --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Williams" <carlw4514@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > Trying to answer this myself without knowing a lot about it, seems
      to
      > be the case that Grant did not offer to let the citizens leave
      > Vicksburg in the siege. The following account from Shotgun's site
      > seems to just assume we knew that. Not much of a hint that it was
      > controversial, although I believe it is the case that Sherman
      allowed
      > Atlanta to evacuate.
      >
      > http://civilwarhome.com/insidevicksburg.htm
      >
      I recently finished some research concerning Vicksburg and the siege -
      My sources suggest that based on church funeral and "funeral home"
      records a total of roughly 12 - one dozen - civilians died as a
      result of the bombardment.

      I was astonished and had thought the total would be much higher. It
      appears that the 19th century bomb shelters - .e.e. caves were very
      effective. It's true conditioners were horrible - one diarist noted
      that Union gunners stopped shelling three times a day to eat - The
      Vicksburg residents cooked and ate at these times. This person also
      notes that there was no time for anything else - such as laundry.
      Union soldiers also complained about the need to bath and longed for
      the day when they could use the river to bath.

      For those people who haven't yet visited Vicksburg, I suggest it's
      well worth the time and money. Reading Grant's Memoirs - at least
      the parts concerning Vicksburg will help with prospective. Like all
      Civil War battlefields, the intervening time - about 145 years takes
      it toll the topography.

      A final note - When in Vicksburg - be sure to check out the Old Court
      House AND Anchuca House (Town home of Joseph Davis - Jeff Davis'
      brother) It's an excellent Bed and Breakfast. Also, if the
      accomodations are too spendy, Anchuca House operates an first rate
      resturant.
    • Carl Williams
      I have to tell you I got my best laugh of the day out of this one!
      Message 2 of 25 , Feb 6, 2008
        I have to tell you I got my best laugh of the day out of this one!


        > > >
        > >Oops! He said "See the Books, not gooks!!
        >
      • Carl Williams
        I m thinking they begged him not to *burn the city*, and that was what made Sherman say what he did.
        Message 3 of 25 , Feb 6, 2008
          I'm thinking they begged him not to *burn the city*, and that was what
          made Sherman say what he did.


          > On the outskirts of Atlanta, Sherman sent word to city officials to
          > begin civilian evacuation of the city. When the mayor of Atlanta and
          > two city council men begged Sherman not to expel Atlanta's populace,
          > he refused:
          >
          > [Sherman said,]"You cannot qualify war in harsher terms than I will.
          > War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it; and those who brought war
          > into our country deserve all the curses and maledictions our people
          > can pour out. ..The only way the people of Atlanta can hope once
          > more to live in peace and quiet at home, is to stop fighting, admit
          > that you cannot have a division of our country, return to the Union,
          > and acknowledge the authority of the national government." (The
          > Whirlwind of War, by Stephen Oates, p. 572)
          > ---
          > I think evicted would be a better term.
          >
        • brainbent
          ... what ... to ... and ... populace, ... will. ... war ... people ... admit ... Union, ... The mayor begged Sherman not to evict the entire remaining civilian
          Message 4 of 25 , Feb 7, 2008
            --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Williams" <carlw4514@...>
            wrote:
            >
            > I'm thinking they begged him not to *burn the city*, and that was
            what
            > made Sherman say what he did.
            >
            >
            > > On the outskirts of Atlanta, Sherman sent word to city officials
            to
            > > begin civilian evacuation of the city. When the mayor of Atlanta
            and
            > > two city council men begged Sherman not to expel Atlanta's
            populace,
            > > he refused:
            > >
            > > [Sherman said,]"You cannot qualify war in harsher terms than I
            will.
            > > War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it; and those who brought
            war
            > > into our country deserve all the curses and maledictions our
            people
            > > can pour out. ..The only way the people of Atlanta can hope once
            > > more to live in peace and quiet at home, is to stop fighting,
            admit
            > > that you cannot have a division of our country, return to the
            Union,
            > > and acknowledge the authority of the national government." (The
            > > Whirlwind of War, by Stephen Oates, p. 572)
            > > ---
            > > I think evicted would be a better term.
            > >
            >
            The mayor begged Sherman not to evict the entire remaining civilian
            population. They were sent down the road with what they could load
            and/or carry.

            There are several communication between Hood and Sherman on this
            topic.

            Not burn - drive out the civilians.
          • keeno2@aol.com
            In a message dated 2/7/2008 12:58:11 P.M. Central Standard Time, brainbent@yahoo.com writes: Not burn - drive out the civilians. Sherman could be cold. I m
            Message 5 of 25 , Feb 7, 2008
              In a message dated 2/7/2008 12:58:11 P.M. Central Standard Time, brainbent@... writes:
              Not burn - drive out the civilians.
              Sherman could be cold. I'm still wrestling with how much of it was punishment and how much of it was that he simply didn't want civilians mixing with his soldiers. Lots of potential trouble from both sides in that situation.
               
              ken



            • swan_pat_estelle
              ... civilians mixing with his ... Another problem may have been how to feed all of them. Certainly, he didn t intend to maintain the supply line from
              Message 6 of 25 , Feb 7, 2008
                --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, keeno2@... wrote:
                >
                >
                > In a message dated 2/7/2008 12:58:11 P.M. Central Standard Time,
                > brainbent@... writes:
                >
                > Not burn - drive out the civilians.
                >
                >
                >
                > Sherman could be cold. I'm still wrestling with how much of it was
                > punishment and how much of it was that he simply didn't want
                civilians mixing with his
                > soldiers. Lots of potential trouble from both sides in that situation.
                >
                > ken

                Another problem may have been how to feed all of them. Certainly, he
                didn't intend to maintain the supply line from Chattanooga.
                >
                >
                >
                > **************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL
                Music.
                >
                (http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?NCID=aolcmp003000000025
                > 48)
                >
              • hank9174
                from http://www.civilwarhome.com/atlantaevacuation.htm : My real reasons for this step were, we want all the houses of Atlanta for military storage and
                Message 7 of 25 , Feb 7, 2008
                  from http://www.civilwarhome.com/atlantaevacuation.htm :

                  "My real reasons for this step were, we want all the houses of
                  Atlanta for military storage and occupation.

                  We want to contract the lines of defenses so as to diminish the
                  garrison to the limit necessary to defend its narrow and vital parts
                  instead of embracing, as the lines now do, the vast suburbs.

                  This contraction of the lines, with the necessary citadels and
                  redoubts, will make it necessary to destroy the very houses used by
                  families as residences. Atlanta is a fortified town, was stubbornly
                  defended and fairly captured.

                  As captors we have a right to it.

                  The residence here of a poor population would compel us sooner or
                  later to feed them or see them starve under our eyes. The residence
                  here of the families of our enemies would be a temptation and a means
                  to keep up a correspondence dangerous and hurtful to our cause, and a
                  civil population calls for provost guards, and absorbs the attention
                  of officers in listening to everlasting complaints and special
                  grievances that are not military.

                  These are my reasons, and if satisfactory to the Government of the
                  United States it makes no difference whether it pleases General Hood
                  and his people or not."


                  HankC
                  http://civilwarmissouri.blogspot.com/

                  --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "swan_pat_estelle" <pbswan@...>
                  wrote:
                  >
                  > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, keeno2@ wrote:
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > In a message dated 2/7/2008 12:58:11 P.M. Central Standard Time,
                  > > brainbent@ writes:
                  > >
                  > > Not burn - drive out the civilians.
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Sherman could be cold. I'm still wrestling with how much of it
                  was
                  > > punishment and how much of it was that he simply didn't want
                  > civilians mixing with his
                  > > soldiers. Lots of potential trouble from both sides in that
                  situation.
                  > >
                  > > ken
                  >
                  > Another problem may have been how to feed all of them. Certainly,
                  he
                  > didn't intend to maintain the supply line from Chattanooga.
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > **************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL
                  > Music.
                  > >
                  > (http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?
                  NCID=aolcmp003000000025
                  > > 48)
                  > >
                  >
                • keeno2@aol.com
                  In a message dated 2/7/2008 3:57:13 P.M. Central Standard Time, pbswan@bellsouth.net writes: Another problem may have been how to feed all of them.
                  Message 8 of 25 , Feb 7, 2008
                    In a message dated 2/7/2008 3:57:13 P.M. Central Standard Time, pbswan@... writes:
                    Another problem may have been how to feed all of them.  Certainly, he didn't intend to maintain the supply line from Chattanooga.
                    Excellent point. I didn't think of that! Let them consume Hood's rations. Thanks.
                     
                    ken



                  • brainbent
                    ... Certainly, he didn t ... rations. ... Music. ... NCID=aolcmp003000000025 ... Hood went in the opposite direction, he wasn t going to feed them either. It
                    Message 9 of 25 , Feb 8, 2008
                      --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, keeno2@... wrote:
                      >
                      >
                      > In a message dated 2/7/2008 3:57:13 P.M. Central Standard Time,
                      > pbswan@... writes:
                      >
                      > Another problem may have been how to feed all of them.
                      Certainly, he didn't
                      > intend to maintain the supply line from Chattanooga.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Excellent point. I didn't think of that! Let them consume Hood's
                      rations.
                      > Thanks.
                      >
                      > ken
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > **************Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on AOL
                      Music.
                      > (http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?
                      NCID=aolcmp003000000025
                      > 48)
                      >

                      Hood went in the opposite direction, he wasn't going to feed them
                      either.

                      It was more psychological than logistical.

                      All out war being waged on the South, including civilians.
                    • Carl Williams
                      ... in two different situations, that s for sure. I guess the way Atlanta was different was that the battle for it was over, any siege was over, and the
                      Message 10 of 25 , Feb 9, 2008
                        >
                        > Hood went in the opposite direction, he wasn't going to feed them
                        > either.
                        >
                        > It was more psychological than logistical.
                        >
                        > All out war being waged on the South, including civilians.
                        >

                        in two different situations, that's for sure.

                        I guess the way Atlanta was different was that the battle for it was
                        over, any siege was over, and the civilians suffered a *forced*
                        relocation in addition to Sherman burning the city.
                      • keeno2@aol.com
                        In a message dated 2/9/2008 5:54:43 A.M. Central Standard Time, carlw4514@yahoo.com writes: and the civilians suffered a *forced* relocation in addition to
                        Message 11 of 25 , Feb 9, 2008
                          In a message dated 2/9/2008 5:54:43 A.M. Central Standard Time, carlw4514@... writes:
                          and the civilians suffered a *forced* relocation in addition to Sherman burning the city.
                          Sherman did not "burn" Atlanta. What he burned was anything of military value that Hood didn't burn or blow up. Some of that spread to civilian areas. In total, I've read, Sherman's men were responsible for burning 30 percent of the city. That's a goodly chunk, bur it hardly equates to "burning the city."



                        • Carl Williams
                          OK, well, a point worth making. Sherman burned a chunk of Atlanta might be how I should say it from now on. Is forced relocation accurate? Presumably these
                          Message 12 of 25 , Feb 9, 2008
                            OK, well, a point worth making. 'Sherman burned a chunk of Atlanta'
                            might be how I should say it from now on.

                            Is "forced relocation" accurate? Presumably these citizens didnt just
                            watch from the sidelines and then just march back in?

                            --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, keeno2@... wrote:

                            >
                            >
                            > Sherman did not "burn" Atlanta. What he burned was anything of
                            military
                            > value that Hood didn't burn or blow up. Some of that spread to
                            civilian areas. In
                            > total, I've read, Sherman's men were responsible for burning 30
                            percent of
                            > the city. That's a goodly chunk, bur it hardly equates to "burning
                            the city."
                          • keeno2@aol.com
                            In a message dated 2/9/2008 11:07:07 A.M. Central Standard Time, carlw4514@yahoo.com writes: Is forced relocation accurate? Presumably these citizens didnt
                            Message 13 of 25 , Feb 9, 2008
                              In a message dated 2/9/2008 11:07:07 A.M. Central Standard Time, carlw4514@... writes:
                              Is "forced relocation" accurate? Presumably these citizens didnt just watch from the sidelines and then just march back in?

                              Someone said "eviction." I thought that was accurate. Apparently, when Sherman left, Atlantans did go back.



                            • Ricky Washburn
                              If sherman only burnt 30% of Atlanta, and thats not burning the city, then maybe the case of Meridian MS. might be an example of burning a city, with only 3
                              Message 14 of 25 , Feb 9, 2008
                                If sherman only burnt 30% of Atlanta, and thats not burning the city, then maybe the case of Meridian MS. might be an example of burning a city, with only 3 houses left in the city.


                                ____________________________________________________________________________________
                                Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
                                http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
                              • keeno2@aol.com
                                In a message dated 2/9/2008 11:59:24 A.M. Central Standard Time, rwwiv@yahoo.com writes: If sherman only burnt 30% of Atlanta, and thats not burning the city,
                                Message 15 of 25 , Feb 9, 2008
                                  In a message dated 2/9/2008 11:59:24 A.M. Central Standard Time, rwwiv@... writes:
                                  If sherman only burnt 30% of Atlanta, and thats not burning the city, then maybe the case of Meridian MS. might be an example of burning a city, with only 3 houses left in the city.
                                  Good example. THAT's burning a city .... well, a town .... OK, a cluster of homes. Your point?
                                   
                                  ken



                                • David Wall
                                  Which brings up a question: did Sherman leave a garrison at Atlanta? If so were they ordered to keep civilians out? I guess that was two questions. To:
                                  Message 16 of 25 , Feb 9, 2008
                                    Which brings up a question: did Sherman leave a garrison at Atlanta? If so were they ordered to keep civilians out? I guess that was two questions.




                                    To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
                                    From: keeno2@...
                                    Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2008 12:37:25 -0500
                                    Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Re: Vicksburg, Grant and trapped and shelled Civilians

                                    In a message dated 2/9/2008 11:07:07 A.M. Central Standard Time, carlw4514@yahoo. com writes:
                                    Is "forced relocation" accurate? Presumably these citizens didnt just watch from the sidelines and then just march back in?

                                    Someone said "eviction." I thought that was accurate. Apparently, when Sherman left, Atlantans did go back.




                                  • NPeters102@aol.com
                                    In a message dated 2/9/2008 11:09:06 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, keeno2@aol.com writes: Sherman did not burn Atlanta. What he burned was anything of
                                    Message 17 of 25 , Feb 9, 2008
                                      In a message dated 2/9/2008 11:09:06 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, keeno2@... writes:
                                      Sherman did not "burn" Atlanta. What he burned was anything of military value that Hood didn't burn or blow up. Some of that spread to civilian areas. In total, I've read, Sherman's men were responsible for burning 30 percent of the city. That's a goodly chunk, bur it hardly equates to "burning the city."
                                       
                                      And some of the fires were started by the Confederates.
                                       
                                      Respectfully,

                                      Mike Peters
                                      npeters102@...



                                    • Ronald black
                                      No, Sherman did not leave a garrison at Atlanta. Thats the point. He cut his ties with the federal forces in Tennessee, no supply lines, no body could
                                      Message 18 of 25 , Feb 9, 2008
                                        No, Sherman did not leave a garrison at Atlanta.  Thats the point.  He cut his ties with the federal forces in Tennessee, no supply lines, no body could contact him until he got to Savannah.  They did not know where he was.  Hood's campaign after the fall of Atlanra, against Sherman's line of communications between Chattanooga and Atlanta helped Sherman in making his decision to abandon Atlanta.  Another example of how Hood was destroying the western confederate army.  
                                        Ron  
                                         
                                        -- Original Message -----
                                        Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2008 2:27 PM
                                        Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] Re: Vicksburg, Grant and trapped and shelled Civilians

                                        Which brings up a question: did Sherman leave a garrison at Atlanta? If so were they ordered to keep civilians out? I guess that was two questions.




                                        To: civilwarwest@ yahoogroups. com
                                        From: keeno2@...
                                        Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2008 12:37:25 -0500
                                        Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Re: Vicksburg, Grant and trapped and shelled Civilians

                                        In a message dated 2/9/2008 11:07:07 A.M. Central Standard Time, carlw4514@yahoo. com writes:
                                        Is "forced relocation" accurate? Presumably these citizens didnt just watch from the sidelines and then just march back in?

                                        Someone said "eviction." I thought that was accurate. Apparently, when Sherman left, Atlantans did go back.





                                        No virus found in this incoming message.
                                        Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                                        Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.21/1267 - Release Date: 2/8/2008 8:12 PM
                                      • brainbent
                                        Actually, Sherman did persue Hood for a while before giving up and heading to Savannah. He detached Schofield and the Army of the Ohio to assist Thomas in
                                        Message 19 of 25 , Feb 11, 2008
                                          Actually, Sherman did persue Hood for a while before giving up and
                                          heading to Savannah.

                                          He detached Schofield and the Army of the Ohio to assist Thomas in
                                          dealing with Hood, while he took what was considered the best of his
                                          fighting force to deal with the boys and old men of the Georgia
                                          State Guard.




                                          --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Ronald black" <rblack0981@...>
                                          wrote:
                                          >
                                          > No, Sherman did not leave a garrison at Atlanta. Thats the
                                          point. He cut his ties with the federal forces in Tennessee, no
                                          supply lines, no body could contact him until he got to Savannah.
                                          They did not know where he was. Hood's campaign after the fall of
                                          Atlanra, against Sherman's line of communications between
                                          Chattanooga and Atlanta helped Sherman in making his decision to
                                          abandon Atlanta. Another example of how Hood was destroying the
                                          western confederate army.
                                          > Ron
                                          >
                                          > -- Original Message -----
                                          > From: David Wall
                                          > To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
                                          > Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2008 2:27 PM
                                          > Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] Re: Vicksburg, Grant and trapped and
                                          shelled Civilians
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > Which brings up a question: did Sherman leave a garrison at
                                          Atlanta? If so were they ordered to keep civilians out? I guess that
                                          was two questions.
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > -------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          ---------
                                          > To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
                                          > From: keeno2@...
                                          > Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2008 12:37:25 -0500
                                          > Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Re: Vicksburg, Grant and trapped
                                          and shelled Civilians
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > In a message dated 2/9/2008 11:07:07 A.M. Central Standard
                                          Time, carlw4514@... writes:
                                          > Is "forced relocation" accurate? Presumably these citizens
                                          didnt just watch from the sidelines and then just march back in?
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > Someone said "eviction." I thought that was accurate.
                                          Apparently, when Sherman left, Atlantans did go back.
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > -------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          ---------
                                          > Who's never won? Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on
                                          AOL Music.
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > -------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          -----------
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > No virus found in this incoming message.
                                          > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                                          > Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.21/1267 - Release
                                          Date: 2/8/2008 8:12 PM
                                          >
                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.