I like history, especially American history. It's always been a preference to study the Revolutionary War era more than anything else, undoubtedly more than the Civil War. Maybe this is a subconscious thing, where I want to love the ideals of the revolution and the founding and the adoption of the Constitution instead of spending time focusing on secession and slavery and a horribly bloody war. But the Civil War is fascinating for those reasons exactly and I've been learning more about it since moving to the east coast, somewhat by accident due to proximity. We are relatively close to Gettysburg and Antietam, two of the biggest and most important battles and have visited each a few times. Monocacy, a considerably more minor battle, was fought in Frederick and we drive by regularly. We still need to go to Manassas/Bull Run, which is only about an hour away. If you have never been to any of these battlefields, they are set up very well to visit. All (at least where we've gone) have roads so you can do 'driving tours' around the battlefield. If you want to splurge, pick up an audio guide so you have a narrator. Even if not, the visitors centers usually have a movie to watch and ranger talks to explain the events of the battle, then you can grab a map and go check it out. Visiting these battlefields have given me snippets of information, but I've struggled to connect them as I don't remember the overall course of the war from school.
I've bought a couple of books and just haven't gotten to them yet.
Old pics from Gettysburg. (1) Pennsylvania State Memorial, largest on the battlefield, which includes a (2) bronze plaque of the Gettysburg Address. (3) Monument to the Minnesota 1st.
Now Danielle and I started watching 'The Civil War' by Ken Burns, aired originally on PBS. It's on Netflix, though apparently only until Feb 22. It's a nine episode (60-90 min each) documentary that goes through the war beginning to end. This is good length to get a fairly comprehensive look at the war. It's a high quality doc, though clearly a little older being from 1990, and it's full of very recognizable voices from narrator David McCullough, to Sam Waterson doing Lincoln, Morgan Freeman doing Frederick Douglass, and more. I get a kick out of Jason Robards doing Grant. The actors read from journals, letters, or other writings of the day. These sources are from major players like Lincoln and Lee, and also soldiers and others from all backgrounds. There wasn't video, but it was after the invention of the camera so we get to see all kinds of pictures. Between the primary sources read by actors, the plethora of images, and interviews with historians, we learn a lot. Then after each episode I have the Battle Hymn in my head.
We're through four episodes and the action centers around Lincoln in DC trying to hold the Union together, in addition to the eastern (with McClellan and Lee) and western (with Grant) theaters of the war. Episode three went through Antietam in 1862, resulting directly in the Emancipation Proclamation. It was at this point the war went from being about the Union to being about slavery, at least in terms of Lincoln's justification and how it was viewed by foreign powers. Episode four showed another string of Confederate victories leading to a bold plan to strike north to Pennsylvania. Gettysburg will be soon.
One thing I like is how this documentary shows the history of the Confederacy, with the reasons for the war and why they were fighting. By no means is this a southern propaganda film, but there's much more sympathy (is that the right word?) for their side then I think there'd be if this was made today. It goes through the original reasons for succession following Lincoln winning the Presidency and while a lot of this did revolve around slavery, it was also about the states trying to maintain independence from the Federal government. We hear from southern soldiers who were more fighting for their home than fighting for some slaveholders they didn't know. Many of these guys saw themselves as the heirs to the Revolution, only 80 years prior. History, certainly including the Civil War, is nuanced and complicated. And I think this doc is doing a great job showing that.
At this point I have two big takeaways.
1. Holy cow McClellan was a gutless wuss (alternate title to this post)
George McClellan was the preeminent Union general at the beginning of the war. He was brought in to build DC fortifications, improve the army, and go after the Confederates. He thought absurdly highly of himself. After taking over his responsibilities, McClellan sat around DC far longer than the President wanted. He did during this time built up the army's strength, organization, and morale considerably, to his credit. But he feuded with everyone around him, kept his superiors in the dark about his plans, and repeatedly overestimated the numbers of the opposing armies. The Confederates near DC eventually left without McClellan ever attacking, a sign that going forward he would only ever let Lincoln down. He eventually sailed with his gigantic Army of the Potomac down to southern Virginia in an attempt to take Richmond, the Confederate capital. Even though he had a vastly superior force, he refused to attack the city and continued to ask Washington for more soldiers. Robert E. Lee, by this time the head of the Army of Northern Virginia, repeatedly attacked the larger Union army instead, driving them away from the city and wrecking McClellan's nerve. Lee knew how McClellan would react and took advantage. Lincoln replaced him, though it turned out to be temporary. After a second defeat at Bull Run, McClellan regained control. At Antietam (1862), the bloodiest single day of the war and in American history, though McClellan initiated the battle he once again did not take advantage of his superior numbers. He could've committed to Burnside in crossing the creek and pursued the Confederate army once Lee left the battlefield. He did not. It was the last time McClellan commanded a Union army. Lincoln then met with him in person, once again urging him to pursue, and on refusal removed him for good. Interestingly, Antietam, though in reality a stalemate, was still considered a Union victory because they held the field and resulted in the Emancipation Proclamation being declared.
Sadly for the Union, and Lincoln, the subsequent commanders did not fare much better. The Union suffered several horrible defeats into the next year, including at Chancellorsville (1863) where they were once again beaten by a more aggressive and daring General Lee. Watching this documentary, it's clear that at the outset of the war, the Union had the men and resources while the South had the cause and the military leadership. Of course the Union's advantages never changed. They just eventually put someone capable in charge.
2. I can't believe they still attempted bayonet charges
Wars are always fought with the tactics of the previous war, at least until the armies learn to adapt. In previous wars (the Revolution, 1812, and the Mexican-American) they still lined up, fired, and proceeded with bayonet charges. I'm absolutely shocked how long these tactics continued in the Civil War. It's a large reason why casualties were so high. The United States had not fought a war of this scale ever and were now fighting with vastly improved firearm technology. Everyone was getting killed by bullets, not by bayonets. The battle of Fredericksburg (1862) is a great example, where the Union army repeatedly tried frontal charges on a defended position and were absolutely butchered. The documentary said that one particular wall saw 14(!) failed charges. Unsurprisingly the battle was Union disaster.
As a followup, it's crazy how many men could die with the army always surviving. I think this more than anything was due the sheer size of the two armies involved in the eastern theater. This is very different from the Revolution where the much smaller armies could or would be defeated and captured in their entirety.
Looking forward to wrapping this documentary up before it departs Netflix. :(
Comentarios