The History of the Confederate War, Its Causes and Its Conduct, Volume 1 (of 2): A Narrative and Critical HistoryEggleston, George Cary
History
The History of the Confederate War, Its Causes and Its Conduct, Volume 1 (of 2): A Narrative and Critical History
Eggleston, George Cary
United States -- History -- Civil War, 1861-1865
The fight between the Southern ironclad and the ships it destroyed, and
the contest next day between it and the _Monitor_, have been widely
celebrated in song and story. But the real significance of those
contests lies rather in that to which they gave birth than in that
which in themselves they were.
CHAPTER XXIII
SHILOH
McClellan's advance upon Richmond, in its beginnings at least,
antedated the great conflict at Shiloh. But its crisis did not come
until much later, nor did it in its early progress involve aught that
was of significance in its bearing upon the conduct and outcome of the
war.
It seems proper therefore to discuss Shiloh and other operations in the
Mississippi Valley first, leaving the campaign in Virginia for later
consideration.
The Confederates, before the fall of Fort Donelson and Fort Henry, were
maintaining a line of offensive defense in Kentucky. This line extended
from the Big Sandy in the eastern part of the state to Columbus on the
Mississippi river in the extreme west.
The line was in many respects defective. The Confederate center of
operations was at Bowling Green, while the two ends of the defensive
line lay much farther north than that. The line thus constituted what
in military parlance is known as a reëntering angle. The enemy pushing
into such an angle with forces greater than those that defended it or
even with an inferior force, had easy choice to attack on either side
as he pleased, concentrating at will, while compelling the Confederates
to scatter their forces along the whole of an extensive line by way of
defending all parts of it equally.
It was the original purpose of those who devised this defensive system
to correct the fault by pushing their center forward from Bowling Green
to Paducah on the Ohio river, nearly fifty miles above the mouth of
that stream. Had this been accomplished, it would have made the angle
of defense a salient instead of a reëntering one.
Let us explain the advantage of this for the benefit of the
non-military reader. If the Confederates could have established
themselves at Paducah with their lines trending off to the southeast on
the one side and to the southwest on the other, they, instead of their
enemies, would have had choice of positions in which to concentrate.
Assailed at any point it would have been easy for them to throw all
possible force quickly to the defense of the threatened position.
Grant interfered with all this planning when he moved up the Ohio, and
seized upon Paducah, which was quickly fortified so strongly as to
render the execution of the scheme thereafter impracticable. From that
time forward it was clear that the Confederates must either maintain
their line of defense by means of a vast and dangerously unmanageable
reëntering angle, or they must withdraw from their two advanced wing
points. To do this latter thing would have been to abandon Kentucky
completely, and it was no part of the Confederate program to do that.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account