Thursday, February 16, 2023

Beauregard and Lee

Friends, forgive me; I had to tweak my blog address once more to conform with my blog's new title and description.  The new blog address is johnhorncivilwarauthor.blogspot.com

Beauregard and Lee

Robert E. Lee, a Virginian, graduated second in the West Point class of 1829.  

Pierre Gustave Toutant "Gus" Beauregard, a Louisianan who as an adult did not use his first name but styled himself "G. T. Beauregard," graduated second in the West Point class of 1838.  

Both served in the United States Army as engineers.  Both served with distinction in the Mexican War.  

Lee distinguished himself as one of the chief aides to his fellow Virginian, Major General Winfield Scott, during the march from Vera Cruz to Mexico City.  Lee's personal reconnaissances contributed to American victories by finding routes of attack undefended by the Mexicans because the terrain appeared impassable.  He fought at Cerro Gordo, Contreras, Cherubusco, and Chapultepec, where he was wounded.  He was breveted major, lieutenant colonel and colonel.


Map of August 18, 1864, by Hampton Newsome, from John Horn, The Siege of Petersburg: The Battles for the Weldon Railroad, August 1864 (Savas Beatie, 2015)

Beauregard served as an engineer on Scott's staff.  He fought at Contreras, Cherubusco and Chapultepec, where he was wounded in two places.  He too carried out reconnaissances.  He also persuaded his superiors to attack the fortress of Chapultepec differently than they had planned.  He was breveted captain and major.

Gus felt slighted, but not with respect to Lee.  Beauregard considered his contributions to victory more significant than those of other officers who received more brevets than he, but not more significant than Lee's contributions.

Both Lee and Beauregard were appointed Superintendent of the U. S. Military Academy at West Point.  

Lee served from 1852 until 1855, when he became lieutenant colonel of the 2nd Cavalry Regiment in Texas.

Around that time Beauregard exhibited dubious judgment in considering a post filibustering in Nicaragua with William Walker, who had taken control of that country.  Fortunately for Gus, Scott talked him out of the enterprise.  Walker was soon forced to resign the presidency of Nicaragua.

Beauregard was appointed Superintendent of the Military Academy on January 23, 1861.  He relinquished the office after five days because the Federal government revoked his orders as soon as Louisiana seceded.

Both Beauregard and Lee numbered among the Confederacy's five first full generals.  Beauregard ranked fifth, Lee third.

Shortly before First Manassas, Lee participated in the rejection of a complicated, highly optimistic plan of the sort that became typical of Beauregard.

Gus met with success first.  He participated in the victory at First Manassas on July 21, 1861.  Lee met with defeat in a campaign in western Virginia.


Map of August 19, 1864, by Hampton Newsome, from John Horn, The Siege of Petersburg; The Battles for the Weldon Railroad, August 1864 (Savas Beatue, 2015)

Beauregard exhibited a quarrelsome nature.  He contended with the Commissary General, the Secretary of War and finally President Davis.  A political liability, he was packed off to serve as second-in-command to General Albert Sidney Johnston.

Beauregard subsequently rose to command the Army of Tennessee after the death of Johnston at the battle of Shiloh.  Lee soon afterward was appointed to command what became the Army of Northern Virginia after the wounding of General Joseph Eggleston Johnston.  

Lee's star was on the rise, Beauregard's on the wane.  Gus was relieved of command of the Army of Tennessee when he clumsily took sick leave after the fall of Corinth, Mississippi.  Davis packed him off to Charleston, South Carolina.

After Chancellorsville, Lee urged Davis to bring Beauregard and most of his troops up to Virginia from the south Atlantic coast.  While Lee raided Pennsylvania, Beauregard would menace Washington, D.C. and lighten the pressure on Lee.  Gus, who had already dispatched 5,000 men to the attempted relief of Vicksburg, thought the departure of more would invite an enemy attack.

In the last month of 1863, Lee recommended that Davis appoint Beauregard commander of the Army of Tennessee.  Beauregard, among many others, suggested Johnston.  Davis, who seems to have really wanted Lee for the post, appointed Johnston. 

The first real friction between Beauregard and Lee developed in May and June 1864.  The two vied for troops and the Davis administration usually backed Lee.  Grant's crossing of the James intensified the friction between the two Confederate generals.  Some hard feelings developed between the two.

When Johnston was removed from the command of the Army of Tennessee in July 1864, Beauregard hoped to replace him.  Lee did not recommend Beauregard to Davis as a possible replacement for Johnston.  This does not appear to have arisen from the hard feelings between Gus and Lee, but from the urgency of replacing Johnston; Sherman was at the gates of Atlanta by the time Davis sacked Old Joe.  By that time, the replacement had to come from within the Army of Tennessee.  In any event, Davis would never have appointed Beauregard commander of the Army of Tennessee at this point because the president appears to have been dissatisfied with Beaurgard's performance in May and June if sniping at the Louisianian by Davis' military advisor Gen. Braxton Bragg was any indication.  Bragg complained about Beauregard's abandonment of the Howlett Line opposite Bermuda Hundred in order to concentrate on the defense of Petersburg.

Beauregard did not serve Lee at Petersburg as Gus had served Joe Johnston at First Manassas and Albert Sydney Johnston at Shiloh.  Beauregard had done the planning and fighting at those two battles.  At Petersburg, Gus commanded when Lee was north of the James but reverted to command of his own troops, essentially a corps, in Lee's presence.  Lee, who had written off the Weldon Railroad as indefensible upon arriving in Petersburg in June, refused to join the Davis administration in nit-picking Beauregard for the loss of the railway in August.  Gus actually performed better than Lee in the August fighting around Petersburg, counterattacking with what he had before the Federals could dig in (August 18 and 19) rather than waiting like Lee for set piece engagements while the enemy entrenched (August 21).  Beauregard blamed the Davis administration rather than Lee for not giving Gus command of the Confederate forces gathering around Early's Corps in the lower Shenandoah Valley.


Map of August 21, 1864, by Hampton Newsome, from John Horn, The Siege of Petersburg: The Battles for the Weldon Railroad, August 1864 (Savas Beatie, 2015)

In September Lee encouraged Beauregard to leave Petersburg and take command at Wilmington, North Carolina or Charleston.  In the aftermath of Atlanta's fall, Gus hoped for command of the Army of Tennessee but was given an empty command overseeing that army.  

By February 1865, Lee had become general-in-chief of the Confederate States Army.  Unable to understand how Sherman could advance without orthodox supply lines, Lee became dissatisfied with Beauregard's inability to stop Sherman's advance northward from Savannah.  The general-in-chief removed Beaurgard and replaced him with Johnston, who brought Sherman to battle at Bentonville in March but did not stop his progress north.

After the war Beauregard praised Lee for "great nerve, coolness, & determination--the greater the danger the greater was his presence of mind" and his noble & high toned character."  Gus also criticised Lee, writing that Lee did not have "much Mil[i]t[ar]y foresight or pre-science or great powers of deduction," that he was "not very fertile in resources or expedients," that he was "perhaps a little too cautious in civil as well as Mil[i]t[ar]y matters," and that he was incapable "of much generous friendship."

Lee, probably wisely, took his opinion of Beauregard to the grave except to the extent that it can be inferred from Lee's actions.

The first person to comment on this blog post at my new blog address (johnhorncivilwarauthor.blogspot.com) is entitled to a free copy of my book, The Siege of Petersburg:  The Battles for the Weldon Railroad, August 1864 (Savas Beatie, 2015).  

Monday, January 30, 2023

Watch Out For Timepieces (adapted from my forthcoming book, "Grant Lays Siege to Lee: Petersburg, June 18-July 1, 1864")

Conparing the position of the sun with the results of timepieces on June 22, 1864, when Confederates of Hill's Corps at Petersburg inflicted the first of a pair of humiliations on the crack Federal II Corps, indicates the timepieces may have been slow by up to an hour.  Four guns and more than 1,500 prisoners were captured.

Timepieces say the morning advance of Gibbon's division of II Corps into its forward line facing the Petersburg fortifications took place at 2:00 a.m.  The sun says at least 3:00 a.m.

Map by Hal Jespersen

Captain John R. Breitenbach of the 106th Pennsylvania in O'Brien's brigade of Gibbon's division said the 106th moved into the advanced breastworks constructed during the night of June 21-22 “at early dawn.” OR 40, 1:386.  Corporal Daniel Bond of the 1st Minnesota Battalion in Pierce's brigade of Gibbon's division wrote, “About daylight four pieces of artillery were brought up and took position on the left of our battalion and between it and the third [O'Brien's] brigade,”  Daniel Bond Diary and Memoir, Newberry Library, Chicago, IL, June 22, 1864, 234.  Early dawn could not have been before 2:59 a.m., the beginning of astronomical twilight, the darkest phase of twilight; daylight could have been as late as from 4:22 a.m., civil twilight, until sunrise at 4:53 a.m.  timeanddate.com/sun/@4778642? month=6&year =1864; odysseymagazine.com/astronomical-twilight/  

Timepieces say the last counterattack of Gibbon's division took place at 7:00 p.m.  The sun says around 8:00 p.m.

Map by Hal Jespersen

Brigadier General William Mahone of Hill's Corps at “7:20 p.m.” reported that by then he had fought off the two Federal counterattacks and that Wilcox's division had arrived behind him.  OR 51, 2:1026.  Major General Cadmus Marcellus Wilcox of Hill's Corps says his division reached Mahone “after sundown.”  Wilcox Report, Lee Headquarters Papers.  Sundown was at 7:37 p.m.  timeanddate.com/sun/@4778642month+6&year=1864  Private T. V. Methvin in Wright's Georgia Brigade of Mahone's division begins his account of the second Federal counterattack, “We held them until eight o’clock that night, but just after the sun went down we got orders for four men from each company to go to the front and locate the enemy.”  T. V. Methvin, “In the Wilderness Campaign,” Confederate Veteran (CV) 23:455.  Corps commander Lieutenant General Ambrose Powell Hill says the second Federal counterattack occurred “at dark.”  OR 51, 2:1026.  By “dark,” he probably meant the beginning of nautical twilight, during which it is too dark to see objects in the distance easily, but one can still see the horizon and trees in the distance due to the remaining brightness in the night sky.  odysseymagazine.com/astronomical-twilight/  Nautical twilight began at 8.08 p.m.  timeanddate.com/sun/@4778642month +6&year=1864  Corporal John J. Sherman of Gibbon's division indicates the attack ended before dark, recalling, “As soon as it became dark the brigade commenced to fall back.”  Letter, John J. Sherman to “Dear Mother,” June 24, 1864, Eighth New York Heavy Artillery Collection, Genesee County History Department, Batavia, NY.  By “dark,” he probably meant the end of nautical twilight and the beginning of astronomical twilight, when there are no traces of glow and light in the sky.  odysseymagazine .com/astronomical-twilight/  Astronomical twilight began at 8:46 p.m.  timeanddate .com/sun/@ 4778642month+6&year=1864  The aforesaid sources thus suggest that the second Federal counterattack went in about 8:00 p.m.

During the middle of the day, the sun was not near enough the horizon to provide much of a check at all on timepieces.


Saturday, December 17, 2022

Crater Road Detour for December 26 Tour of Petersburg Battlefields

There's construction on Crater Road and this detour will be necessary to negotiate it on my December 26 tour of the three Petersburg battlefields of the Crater (July 30, 1864), Jerusalem Plank Road (June 21, 1864) and Globe Tavern (August 18-21, 1864).  George Fickett has volunteered to lead us through this maze.

Map courtesy of George Fickett

Saturday, December 10, 2022

Yes, There Will Be a Free Tour of Three Petersburg Battlefields December 26, 2022

On December 26, 2022, I'll lead a free tour of three Petersburg battlefields.  The tour will start from the parking lot outside the main visitor center at 10:00 a.m. that day.  The park will be open.  Maps should be available at the visitor center.  My hat will identify me.

John Horn

We'll go first to the Crater, the nearest battlefield.  I'll focus on the role in this bloody fight (July 30, 1864) of the 12th Virginia Infantry, the Petersburg Regiment.  I depicted that role in The Petersburg Regiment in the Civil War:  A History of the 12th Virginia Infantry from John Brown's Hanging to Appomattox, 1859-1865 (Savas Beatie, 2019), which won the 2019 Army Historical Foundation Distinguished Writing Award for Unit History.  Both sides called for no quarter in that battle.


Map by Hampton Newsome

Next, we'll drive down Crater Road to Flank Road, turn right and follow Birdsong Road to its junction with the old Johnson Road, where Brig. Gen. Rufus Clay "Aunt Nancy" Barringer and his North Carolina Brigade of Cavalry ambushed and defeated Brig. Gen. Francis Channing Barlow's Red Club Division of II Corps, one of the toughest divisions in the United States Army on June 21, 1864, the first day of the battle of Jerusalem Plank Road.  I've written of that fight in my virtually completed Grant Besieges Lee at Petersburg:  The Battle of Jerusalem Plank Road and the Wilson-Kautz Raid, June 20-July 1, 1864.  The Petersburg Regiment became involved in the battle on June 22 and June 23 as the Federal attempt to invest Petersburg from Jerusalem Plank Road to the Appomattox River above the City went from one disaster to another. 

Map of Birney's Advance, June 21, 1864, by Hal Jespersen

The battle of Globe Tavern took place in the same area August 18-21, 1864.  We'll discuss that battle, which I covered in The Siege of Petersburg:  The Battles for the Weldon Railroad, August 1864 (Savas Beatie, 2015) (sesquicentennial edition originally published as The Destruction of the Weldon Railroad (H. E. Howard, Inc., 1991).  The focus will be on the Petersburg Regiment, which on August 19 narrowly avoided on the calamity which befell Hagood's brigade on August 21.



Map by Hampton Newsome

Afterward we'll head back to the visitor center where anyone who wants to buy a book should be able to do so.  I'll hang around to inscribe books and answer questions before I return to Richmond for dinner with relatives.



Map by Hampton Newsome

Friday, November 25, 2022

Free Tour of Petersburg Battlefields December 26, 2022?

Would anyone be interested in a free tour of the Petersburg battlefields on the morning of December 26, 2022?  I'll conduct such a tour if there's sufficient interest.

I've written a few books on the siege and I plan to be in Richmond then.

My books include The Petersburg Campaign (1993); The Battles for the Weldon Railroad, August 1864 (2015); and The Petersburg Regiment (2019).  The last won the 2019 Army Historical Foundation Distinguished Writing Award for Unit History.

The working title of my nearly finished current project is Grant's Siege of Lee at Petersburg:  The Battle of Jerusalem Plank Road and the Wilson-Kautz Raid.

My idea is to begin in the main vistor center parking lot of Petersburg National Battlefield Park, proceed to the Crater battlefield (July 30, 1864), then down Crater Road to Birdsong Road and take up the route of Barlow's division to its ambush at the hands of Barringer's cavalry brigade on the Jerusalem Plank Road battlefield (June 21-24, 1864) , and wind up on the Globe Tavern battlefield (August 18-21, 1864 at the monument to Hagood's South Carolina Brigade at Stop One of the Petersburg National Battlefield Western Front Auto Tour on the west side of Halifax Road south of Flank Road.  We would then return to the visitor center so nobody gets lost and I could inscribe any book anyone wants to purchase there.

Those interested in the proposed tour should contact me by email (johnedwardhorn@gmail.com), facebook, or my blog at petersburgcampaign.blogspot.com.


I hope you all had a Happy Thanksgiving!

John Horn



Saturday, November 19, 2022

More on the Possibility of Beauregard as Commander of the Army of Tennessee in 1864

On December 3, 1863, Gen. Robert E. Lee recommended that President Jefferson F. Davis appoint Gen. P. G. T. Beauregard commander of the Army of Tennessee.  OR 29, 2:859.  Lieutenant General James Longstreet, Lt. Gen. Leonidas Polk, former Army of Tennessee chief of staff Brig. Gen. William W. Mackall and  Beauregard himself urged, and the general public demanded, however, Gen. Joseph E. Johnston's appointment.  "To these appeals Davis, much against his inclination, yielded and appointed Johnston to the command of the army."  Elsworth Eliot, Jr., West Point in the Confederacy, 184.  (Davis's inclination seems to have been General Lee, who appears to have talked the president out of it.  OR 29, 2:861.)  On December 8, the Richmond Whig advocated the appointment of either Beauregard or Johnston.  When Johnston was appointed, Beauregard congratulated him.  Eliot, West Point in the Confederacy, 184.   

 

Jefferson F. Davis

           Library of Congress 

Choosing a commander of the Army of Tennessee was difficult enough for Davis once Lt. Gen. William J. Hardee declined to take command in late 1863.  Replacing Johnston once his unacceptable performance became intolerable during the 1864 Atlanta Campaign may well have been just as difficult.

Richard M. McMurry goes into this more thoroughly in Atlanta 1864 than Albert E. Castel in Decision in the West.  Dissatisfaction with Johnston's performance began to voice itself as early as May.  On June 24, Johnston's friend Senator Louis Wigfall visited Johnston and informed him that Davis was considering replacing him with Lt. Gen.  John Bell Hood.  

By this time, Beauregard had demonstrated his superiority to Johnston by defeating Butler at Second Drewry's Bluff (May 16) and Grant at Second Petersburg (June 15-18).  One might naturally ask why Davis was not considering Beauregard as well as Hood.  When Johnston was removed in July 1864, Beauregard hoped to take command of the Army of Tennessee.  T. Harry Williams, P. G. T. Beauregard, Napoleon in Gray, 239.  

There are at least two reasons why Davis did not consider Beauregard as a replacement for Johnston.

First, Davis appears to have been dissatisfied with Beaurgard's performance in May and June if sniping at the Louisianian by Davis' military advisor Gen. Braxton Bragg was any indication.  Bragg complained about Beauregard's abandonment of the Howlett Line opposite Bermuda Hundred in order to concentrate on the defense of Petersburg.

Second, Hood was with the Army of Tennessee while Beauregard was hundreds of miles and several days away; Hood could step into Johnston's shoes much more easily than the Louisianian.  Davis did not remove Johnston until July 17.  At that point, only Hardee and Hood were under consideration to replace Johnston.  The Federals were at the gates of Atlanta.  Beauregard could not have arrived in time to take command before action had to be taken against them.  Lee thought the pressing circumstances required the appoitment of someone with the Army of Tennessee such as Hood or Hardee and Lee seems to have leaned toward Hardee.  Lee did not mention Beauregard in recommending a replacement for Johnston.  Castel, Decision in the West, 353.

Beauregard and his partisans were disappointed when command of the Army of Tennessee was given to Hood.  It's hard to imagine that Beauregard or Lee would not have defended Atlanta more effectively than Hood.  Beauregard and Lee reacted immediately to movements against their flanks (June 21-23, August 18-21).  Hood neglected to block the Federals till they were within a mile of his last railroad, forcing him to attack them in entrenchments.


Wednesday, October 12, 2022

The Choice of a Commander for the Army of Tennessee at the Beginning of the 1864 Campaign

The student of the siege of Petersburg does not need to know as much about 1864's Atlanta Campaign as about that year's Shenandoah Campaign; the latter was far more intimately related to the siege.  As far as the Atlanta Campaign is concerned, it is necessary to know that as Grant's second offensive collapsed near June's end, the general-in-chief determined to restricct Federal efforts to Georgia and Virginia and informed Sherman that he needed no longer worry about the Army of Tennessee detaching forces to Lee.  By August, with Grant's army stalled in front of Richmond and Sherman's progressing toward Atlanta's last railroad, the general-in-chief worried lest he be ordered to raise the siege of Petersburg in order to deal with matters elsewhere.  OR 40, 2:193-194.  Grant thought that lifting the siege would permit the foe to concentrate against and defeat Sherman.  Ibid.  As long as the general-in-chief kept the pressure on Lee in Virginia, any Confederate reinforcement of the Army of Tennessee would have to come from elsewhere.

Still, the student of the siege of Petersburg can contribute more than that to the understanding of 1864's Atlanta Campaign.  The contribution will be to the big picture, rather than to the minute details.  The first issue on which the student of the Petersburg siege can shed light is on the choice of a commander of the Army of Tennessee before beginning of the campaign of 1864.

Currently, the two major books on the Atlanta Campaign are Albert Castel's Decision in the West:  The Atlanta Campaign of 1864 and Richard M. McMurry's Atlanta 1864:  Last Chance for the Confederacy.  

Castel says that after Gen. Braxton Bragg resigned and senior corps commander Lt. Gen. William J. Hardee declined command, Davis was left with only three choices for a commander of the Army of Tennessee:  Gen. Robert E. Lee, Gen. Joseph E. Johnston (upper left, courtesy of National Archives), and Gen. P. G. T. Beauregard (right, courtesy of National Archives).  No one could replace Lee as commander of the Army of Northern Virginia, Castel explains that appointment of Beauregard would admit that his relief as commander of the Army of Tennessee in 1862 had been a mistake, and that left Johnston.  Davis detested both Beauregard and Johnston, and they detested Davis.  Castel, Decision in the West, 28-29.  Castel's explanation of Johnston's appointment is probably right.

McMurry considers insurmountable the problems Davis would have faced selecting a commander of a subordinate rank rather than a full general.  Like Castel, McMurry believes the practical choice boiled down to Beauregard or Johnston,  McMurry attempts to justify Davis's choice of Johnston because of Johnston's seniority, his extensive experience in command of a large army, his personal bravery, his modest administrative ability, and his popularity.  McMurry, Atlanta 1864, 6-9.  Johnston was indeed senior to Beauregard, but the latter also had commanded a large army (after Gen. Albert Sidney Johnston's death), was personally brave, had administrative ability, and was popular.

Siege of Jackson, Mississippi, July 9-17, 1863

The Official Atlas of the Civil War, Plate XLIV, 2

Furthermore, since Johnston's initial victory at First Manassas/First Bull Run, where Beauregard assisted him, Johnston had succeeded neither on offense or on defense.  Beauregard and Johnston had both launched unsuccessful attacks, Beauregard at Shiloh (assisting Albert Sidney Johnston) and Joe Johnston at Fair Oaks/Seven Pines.  Johnston had failed to defend Jackson and Vicksburg, Mississippi, and Beauregard had failed to defend Corinth, Mississippi, but Beauregard had successfully defended Charleston, South Carolina.  Maybe President Davis thought that the results at Charleston would have been the same if Joe Johnston and Beauregard had changed places, but the successful defense of Charleston against a powerful Federal fleet and substantial land forces might have at least suggested what the campaign of 1864 would confirm:  Beauregard was a better general than Johnston, much better.

In May 1864, while Joe Johnston was revealing his incompetence by failing to defend Snake Creek Gap against Sherman, Beauregard was successfully attacking Butler at Second Drewry's Bluff (May 16) and driving him back into Bermuda Hundred.  In June 1864, while Johnston continued to retreat before Sherman, Beauregard brilliantly defended Petersburg against Grant's first thrust toward the Cockade City (June 15-18).  Beauregard's record in May and June 1864 was not perfect--his plan for a counteroffensive on June 24 was faulty--but his record was far better than Joe Johnston's.


  Second Battle of Drewry's Bluff, May 16, 1864

Battles and Leaders of the American Civil War, Vol. 3, p. 198

Does all this mean that Davis made the wrong decision choosing Johnston instead of Beauregard to command the Army of Tennessee at the beginning of the 1864 campaign?

Only if a 1-1 defense record since First Manassas/First Bull Run outweighed a 0-2 defense record, and then, because of Beauregard's previous dismissal from command of the Army of Tennessee, any error was hardly glaring.

More interestingly, even if selection of Beauregard had benefitted the Army of Tennessee, any such benefit would likely have come at the expense of Petersburg and Richmond.

With Beauregard in charge of the Army of Tennessee, Johnston would have had to take Beauregard's place in the east.  Bragg could not trade places with Johnston to take Beauregard's place in the east because Johnston serving as Davis's personal advisor is unthinkable; the two men loathed one another.  General Samuel Cooper, the ranking Confederate general, was strictly an administrator.

Does anyone imagine Johnston successfully attacking Butler and driving him away from Richmond and back into Bermuda Hundred?  Does anyone imagine Johnston successfully defending Petersburg against Grant?  Selection of Beauregard to command the Army of Tennessee at the beginning of the 1864 campaign might well have cost the Confederacy Richmond as early as May.

Davis needed three good generals for the campaign of 1864, but he had only two at that rank.