The Shenandoah Campaign ...

[Tricia]

I just thought I'd start a thread--perhaps one day to become a subject heading (hint, Diane)--dedicated to GAC (and the Army of the Shenandoah's)'s actions in the valley of The Daughter of the Stars. As I mentioned in an earlier thread, Steve Alexander--made what later turned out to be a mistake--wore a Custer shirt whilst visiting Winchester. Though I have never seen the area, even I knew that was not a good idea! But he does have a knack for telling a great story. I laughed and laughed.

Using that tale as a starting point for the discussion, emotions obviously still run high in the area that was once considered the "Breadbasket of the Confederacy." Certainly GAC either cemented his stellar reputation or added to his notoriety whilst acting on Sheridan's orders (important note). Why? How?

Neither side was particularly angelic. As a note to Custer stated: General Custer: Measure for Measure.

And I am trying to remember whether it was Grant or Sheridan who came up with that scorched earth policy. If one could bring the Shenandoah to its knees--figuratively salting the earth--it could unhinge the Confederacy. It wasn't very long--needless to say--between its surrender/occupation and the fall of Lee ...

Just startin' a discussion. Have at it?
--t.

[markland]

ricemclean said:

I just thought I'd start a thread--perhaps one day to become a subject heading (hint, Diane)--dedicated to GAC (and the Army of the Shenandoah's)'s actions in the valley of The Daughter of the Stars. As I mentioned in an earlier thread, Steve Alexander--made what later turned out to be a mistake--wore a Custer shirt whilst visiting Winchester. Though I have never seen the area, even I knew that was not a good idea! But he does have a knack for telling a great story. I laughed and laughed.

Using that tale as a starting point for the discussion, emotions obviously still run high in the area that was once considered the "Breadbasket of the Confederacy." Certainly GAC gained either a stellar reputation or notoreity whilst acting on Sheridan's orders. Why? How?

Neither side was particulary angelic. As a note to Custer stated: General Custer: Measure for Measure.

And I am trying to remember whether it was Grant or Sheridan who offered a scorched earth policy. If one could bring the Shenandoah to its knees, it could unhinge the Confederacy. It wasn't very long--needless to say--between its surrender/occupation and the fall of Lee ...

Just startin' a discussion. Have at it?
--t.

Trish, that actually may be a good topic for "the board whose name shall not be mentioned" as Eric Wittenberg is over there and he is, to put it mildly, well-versed in GAC's Civil War days.

Plus he writes a darned good book.

Billy

[Tricia]

Billy--

I do know of his expertise on the subject and I read his blog every so often. But I really approach that entire board with considerable hesitation. Though I am certain we can start some stimulating conversations over yonder, I don't want to see a thread turn into an intefadeh or Pilgrimage to Sainted Custer ...

As I have stated, Agendas and Ivory Towers--especially those that for some damn reason lead to modern politics in the unbalanced mind of the most notorious of Itty Bitty Neocons--will get me nowhere but angry. And I do hate to see the level of censorship already on display by a board that purports "to seek the truth."

--t.

[ericwittenberg]

And, I am, in fact, here, too.

I have no dog in the big fight and see no reason not to participate in both forums.

Billy, when you see this, could you please drop me a line?

Eric

[gocav76]

Eric, Nice to see you on the forum. One of my ancestors served under William Lowther "Mudwall" Jackson . Was William Lowther Jackson the real "Mudwall'? Also how well do you rate his skills during the 1864 Shenandoah Campaign.

[Tricia]

Eric, glad to see you aboard here! It was Billy who thought I should start the thread over yonder ... good to see you giving us a chance. Enjoy yourself. Speaking for myself, I may be mighty opinionated and better known for my Custer fiction, but I am a serious student of history.

That noted, is my writerly approach to Mosby's impact--the kind of bane of GAC's even post-ACE existance and that clingy, cloying annoyance that comes with his lack of success against--upon the Boy General too far off the mark? I do not want to commit the dreaded and feared inaccurate author intrusion.

Tanks. You join Billy in the Tricia "tool" box.

[ericwittenberg]

Tricia,

Thanks. I posted some statistics over there concerning the losses in the MCB at Trevilian Station that I think you might find interesting. I hope you will go and have a look at them.

As for me, as I said, I have no dog in the big fight, and hence see no reason why I can't participate in the discussions on both sites.

To answer your question: There's no doubt at all that Mosby held Custer responsible for the execution of his men--even though it was Torbert and Merritt, and not Custer--which is why Mosby selected members of the 5th Michigan for retaliation after the Berryville raid. Custer, in turn, had a lot of frustration in dealing with Mosby, simply as a consequence of the unorthodox tactics used by Mosby. As the US Army has learned in places like Mosul, it's difficult to fight an enemy that won't come out and fight the way you're used to fighting.

Mosby was a gnat, IMHO. Yes, he gave a lot of people a lot of annoyance, and he caused the Union to devote resources to swapping him, but ultimately, he was like a gnat buzzing around: annoying, you hate them, but ultimately, they don't hurt much of anything.

I hope that helps.

Eric

[ericwittenberg]

Gocav76,

Thank you for the warm greeting. Much obliged.

There were two different Confederate officers dubbed Mudwall, and your boy is one of them. It's hard to say which was the "true" Mudwall, as neither were very good in the big scheme of things.

To answer your question, I tend to cut Mudwall Jackson, Lunsford Lomax, and the rest of the Valley cavalry a little bit of break during the '64 Valley Campaign. Those poor guys were not properly equipped to perform the duty demanded of them, and Early's criticism was, I think, misdirected. They had neither the weaponry (two-band Enfields, no sabers, no breech loaders, no pistols) nor the training to work effectively against what was becoming one of the finest mounted forces in the history of the world.

I often wonder, though, how different things would have been had William Edmonson "Grumble" Jones not been killed at Piedmont on June 5, 1864. Jones was a real pro, and he got along reasonably well with Early. Jones would have commanded that division, not Lomax, and I can guarantee you that those troops would have been a lot more disciplined. They still would have faced the same weaponry challenges, but they would have been more disciplined and probably a little more effective as a consequence.

I hope that helps.

Eric

[gocav76]

Eric, Thanks very much for the reply. I have a question. The Battle of Rutherford's Farm july 20 1864. Richard Armstrong in "19th and 20th Virginia Cavalry" mentions that Jackson's cavalry made a"vigorous charge on Averell that allowed Ramseur time to rally his men." He quotes Private M.P.H. Potts,20th Va Cavalry: Ramseur's men always respected our brigade. When we would ride by, they would take off their caps and say " That is Jackson's brigade, they saved us at Winchester." Page 60 Did Jackson's brigade save Ramseur that day? I've never read it anywhere else. Thanks, Larry

[ericwittenberg]

gocav,

I believe that the answer is yes, they did.

My good friend Scott Patchan published a fabulous book last year that addresses the period between the skirmish at Fort Stevens and Third Winchester that I was fortunate enough to review while still in the manuscript phase. It's called Shenandoah Summer: the 1864 Valley Campaign, and was published by the University of Nebraska Press. It's really an excellent book, and I commend it to you. Scott covers this action in the book, so you will probably want to check it out.

Eric

[gocav76]

Eric, Echol's Brigade (later known as Patton's) seemed to have a lot of experience facing off against the Federal cavalry. At New Market it was Echol's brigade that smashed Gen. Julius Stahel cavalry. At 3rd Winchester they held off the bulk of the Federal cavalry on the Confederate left flank for most of the day. And at Cedar Creek the brigade held almost to the last against the bulk of the Federal cavalry. Do you think Early realized they had the most experience against mounted cavalry? Of Early's Valley Army did Echol's brigade have the best track record in handling the Federal cavalry?

[ericwittenberg]

Larry,

The answer is that they did as well as anyone could have. However, over the long haul, I tend to think that Imboden's guys were probably a little better only by virtue of their magnificent performance during the retreat from Gettysburg.

I'm sure Early knew of Echols' men's performance. I can't help but wonder how well that division would have done against Sheridan's guys had old Grumble still been around....

Eric

[gocav76]

Eric, It seems that most of the confederate infantry that had operated in Western Virginia had more experience fighting Federal cavalry. White Sulpher Springs and Droop Mountain come to mind. I see where there is a new book out about the Jones-Imboden raid in West Virginia in 1863. Not mush has been written on that raid. I always liked Grumble Jones-I guess Jeb Stuart didn't. I have always thought the Stonewall and Stuart friendship was of two opposites attract. While Stuart and Longstreet didn't get along very well at all.

[ericwittenberg]

Larry,

Jones and Stuart absolutely despised each other. Jones used to refer to Stuart as a young whippersnapper or a pettifogging lawyer (did you know Stuart was a licensed attorney?), and Stuart often returned the sentiment.

Eric

[ericwittenberg]

Tricia,

I thought you might like to know that my writing partner, J.D. Petruzzi, and I have decided to tackle Cedar Creek when we finish our current project, which is Early's 1864 raid on Washington, including the Battle of Monocacy, the battle at Fort Stevens, and the Johnson-Gilmor Raid.

We intend to do a detailed tactical study of Cedark Creek that includes a driving tour of the battlefield.

There's only one thing that could stop us, and that's if my friend Scott Patchan decides to do Cedar Creek on a book scale, which he has hinted he's considering. If Scott decides to tackle Cedar Creek with a book-length study, JD and I will gladly step aside and let Scott handle it, as he will do a great job of it.

Eric