{"title":"Grant’s North Mississippi Campaign, Chickasaw Bayou, and the Bottomlands","authors":"Earl J. Hess","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.22","url":null,"abstract":"Maj. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant’s North Mississippi Campaign (November 1862 until January 1863) planted a powerful Federal army only a few miles north of Vicksburg. The most important Confederate stronghold on the Mississippi River, Vicksburg was the key to control of the valley that split the Confederacy in two. Grant failed to capture it, but he opened a two-hundred-mile stretch of the valley from Memphis to Vicksburg for federal exploitation. From January to the end of April 1863, during the Bottomlands phase of Grant’s campaign, his men confiscated food and animals from the region, collected slaves as laborers and soldiers, and cared for Black women and children. Federal agents worked abandoned plantations with refugee Black labor. Temporarily stymied in capturing Vicksburg, the Federals reaped benefits from the fertile Mississippi Delta land they occupied, broke down the institution of slavery, and made effective Lincoln’s new directions in war policy.","PeriodicalId":121271,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the American Civil War","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121022722","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Texas, Mobile, and Wilson’s Raid","authors":"Earl J. Hess","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.39","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.39","url":null,"abstract":"Civil wars in both the United States and Mexico during the 1850s–1860s fostered the most serious challenge to the Monroe Doctrine in American history. Taking advantage of Mexico’s internal troubles, Emperor Napoleon III of France installed a Hapsburg prince as the new emperor of Mexico. Although invited to intervene by Mexican conservatives, no one liked the prince who remained on the throne only at the point of thirty thousand French Army bayonets. The U.S. government tried to intimidate Napoleon to withdraw his troops by placing a small force in the lower Rio Grande Valley, but it failed to have an effect. Two campaigns closed the war in the West by capturing Mobile, Alabama, and destroying Confederate war industries in Alabama and Georgia before the Federals could shift large numbers of troops to Texas and finally bring an end to the French intervention in Mexico.","PeriodicalId":121271,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the American Civil War","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123000818","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Petersburg, Virginia, June–August 1864","authors":"A. Greene","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.32","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.32","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter discusses the strategic context and operational conduct of the military events around Petersburg, Virginia, between June and August 1864. The Petersburg Campaign involved the principal armies of both the United States and the Confederacy, led, respectively, by Lt. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant and Gen. Robert E. Lee. Grant initiated four major offensives during this period that spanned both sides of the James River, including a massive cavalry raid that coursed through ten Virginia counties. African American troops saw combat in these military actions for the first time in the war’s eastern theater. The campaign greatly impacted the citizens of Petersburg, the Confederacy’s seventh-largest city, and was fought within the preliminaries of the presidential election of 1864. In addition to inflicting tens of thousands of casualties, these martial actions had a profound effect on the civilians, Black and White, who were caught up in the Civil War’s most decisive campaign.","PeriodicalId":121271,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the American Civil War","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125839269","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Maryland CampaignCarnage and Emancipation","authors":"D. Hartwig","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.20","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.20","url":null,"abstract":"The September 1862 Maryland Campaign resulted in three highly significant events: the largest surrender of Union soldiers in the war, at Harpers Ferry on September 15; the bloodiest single day of the war, on September 17 at Antietam; and the Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, issued by President Abraham Lincoln on September 22. Logistics played a prominent role in the conduct of the campaign, limiting the speed of the Union advance across Maryland and causing massive straggling in the Confederate Army from logistical failures. The ferocity of the Battle of Antietam and its massive carnage shocked soldiers of previous campaigns, and the operations of the two armies and resulting fighting dislocated civilians and caused significant damage to property. Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation changed the war from one to preserve the Union to also include the destruction of slavery. Despite the carnage of the campaign, it strengthened rather than diminished the determination of both North and South to continue the war.","PeriodicalId":121271,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the American Civil War","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130858596","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Forts Henry and Donelson","authors":"Jason Phillips","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.9","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter explains the campaign for Forts Henry and Donelson as a contest for vital resources—human, animal, and mineral—that shaped Union and Confederate strategies and outcomes. By combining military, political, and material history, it shows how sailors, soldiers, citizens, and slaves shaped the battles and their aftermath while facing environmental challenges, including frigid weather, muddy roads, and swollen rivers. These conditions mixed with intangible factors, like morale, rumors, emotions, egos, prejudices, loyalties, and culture, to frame how people fought and thought about the campaign. By combining naval and army operations, Adm. Andrew Foote’s ironclad flotilla and Brig. Gen. Ulysses Grant’s army deprived the Confederacy of its richest iron and hog region and accelerated emancipation in the western theater by establishing its first contraband camp at Fort Donelson.","PeriodicalId":121271,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the American Civil War","volume":"143 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124585739","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Union Blockade","authors":"C. Symonds","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.5","url":null,"abstract":"Declaring a blockade of the Confederate coast was the first important strategic decision made by the administration of Pres. Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War. Though it started modestly, before the war was over it absorbed more ships and more naval personnel than all of America’s previous wars combined. By implying a recognition of the Confederacy as a belligerent, Lincoln’s declaration complicated the administration’s foreign policy, and the very size of the undertaking challenged the Union’s shipbuilding capacity. Though it never succeeded in cutting off Southern trade completely, it severely reduced the South’s exports, especially cotton; demonstrated the vulnerability of the South’s coastal defenses; and provided a safety valve for Black refugees. By exposing weaknesses in the Confederate economy, the blockade contributed to an inflationary spiral that depressed civilian morale. In the end, the cumulative impact of the blockade very likely helped shorten the war.","PeriodicalId":121271,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the American Civil War","volume":"87 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129053887","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Battle of Helena, the Little Rock Campaign, and the Capture of Fort Smith, 1863","authors":"Carl H. Moneyhon","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.27","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.27","url":null,"abstract":"The Battle of Helena, the Little Rock Campaign, and the capture of Fort Smith led to Union control over the Arkansas River Valley and most of Arkansas to the north of the river. Militarily this resulted in impeding Confederate operations in Missouri, the establishment of a potential base of operations for Union campaigns in Texas, and easier logistical support for Union forces in Indian Territory. A major result of these movements was the emancipation of thousands of slaves. Politically they brought a restoration of a pro-Union government in Arkansas. The occupation of Little Rock produced renewed economic prosperity and, under the benevolent policies of Union Maj. Gen. Frederick Steele, a return of normal social activity among the civilian population, though producing privation and disruption of gender and age roles in the surrounding countryside.","PeriodicalId":121271,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the American Civil War","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115195585","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Peninsula Campaign and Jackson in the Shenandoah Valley, 1862","authors":"Christopher S. Stowe","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.16","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.16","url":null,"abstract":"The 1862 Peninsula and Shenandoah Valley campaigns were transformative events for those who experienced the escalation of the Civil War in both size and scope. Its battles, the first in Virginia employing mass, people’s armies, marked the emergence of the famed command relationship between Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee and Maj. Gen. Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson. For the Federals, the operations exacerbated differences between Northern radicals and the Union’s principal eastern commander, Maj. Gen. George B. McClellan. Adhering to the early war policy of conciliation in the occupied South, McClellan and other federal officers and soldiers confronted a resistant White population, engendering retaliation from Union troops, while African American slaves flocked to Northern arms for protection and support. This, when coupled with Jackson’s stunning battlefield victories in the Shenandoah Valley and McClellan’s painstaking operational approach upon the Peninsula, frustrated President Abraham Lincoln and sharpened the ongoing debate over federal confiscation policy and emancipation.","PeriodicalId":121271,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the American Civil War","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128591637","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Eastern Kentucky and Northwestern Virginia, 1861–1862","authors":"B. Mcknight","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.8","url":null,"abstract":"From May 1861 through 1862, Appalachian eastern Kentucky and northwestern Virginia stood at the forefront of many decisions by the governments of the United States and the Confederate States. These regions, with their topographical challenges, provided the perfect cover for guerrilla activity. Poor roads and isolated communities holding populaces with divided loyalties encouraged small-unit tactics. The contest for northwestern Virginia grew out of the want of control of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad. Quick and sharp, the war in northwestern Virginia ultimately resulted in the formation of a new Union state. It provided the fields for many important figures who would grow to prominence in the coming war, including Gen. Robert E. Lee and Maj. Gen. George B. McClellan. In eastern Kentucky, the armies competed for the important road connecting the Cumberland Gap to the Bluegrass region. The Battle of Mill Springs settled the question of who would control the region.","PeriodicalId":121271,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the American Civil War","volume":"67 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134298330","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Overland Campaign","authors":"L. Frank, Brooks D. Simpson","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.30","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190903053.013.30","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter recasts the military history of the Overland Campaign in ways that reveal the blurred boundaries between homefront and battlefront. The campaign, which took place in Virginia during spring 1864, began in the Wilderness and ended with Cold Harbor. Lt. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant directed major elements of the U.S. Army in operations against Gen. Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia. The contours of the fighting and its importance were shaped by the constant interaction of free Whites and enslaved African American civilians, men and women, as well as by the national political context in which Lincoln ran for and ultimately won reelection. As part of the campaign’s design, U.S. soldiers invaded homesteads, destroyed the landscapes of towns and farms, looted and foraged what they needed while they destroyed any surplus, and otherwise terrorized civilians by their presence. When the campaign ended, Grant’s forces had pinned Lee against Richmond and Petersburg, eventually leading to the capture of the Confederate capital the following April.","PeriodicalId":121271,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of the American Civil War","volume":"94 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115892292","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}