Mayor marks 152nd anniversary of the Battle of Fredericksburg - TTG

This article appeared in the Fredericksburg Free-Lance Star, my local paper, on 15 December.  Inspired by Mr. Polk’s excellent essay on the history of the Russian people, I’ve decided to take a break from laying tile and post the article. Mayor Greenlaw may have a fine appreciation for history, but I don’t think this appreciation extends to most Americans. That’s a shame.

--------------------------------------- 

“History surrounds and speaks to us,” Mayor Mary Katherine Greenlaw told a small crowd gathered at the Kirkland Memorial on Sunken Road, where a ceremony Sunday marked the 152nd anniversary of the Battle of Fredericksburg. She went on to relate a story about a pair of her ancestors involved in the tumultuous times of the Civil War. One was a tailor who bucked the consensus in Fredericksburg by voting against secession. The other was a banker who had bought a family of slaves at the auction block site on the corner of William and Charles streets. Both of her ancestors were considered good men, Greenlaw said, but they held very different positions in a time when the country was fractured by the war. One ancestor was vilified for taking a courageous stand, Greenlaw said. The other bought a family on a corner, something that was routine at the time.

The U.S. is a “remembering” country, she added, but said we also tend to forget the uglier aspects of our history. Yet, she said, good can still be found when considering stories like those about her ancestors, as well as that of Sgt. Richard Rowland Kirkland. In these stories, she said, we see the challenges of the times and find humanity in the ugliness of war. (Free-Lance Star)

--------------------------------------- 

Since becoming a Virginian, I’ve been fascinated by the 1862 Battle of Fredericksburg. The actions at the sunken road and the fate of the Irish Brigade are well known, but I am most impressed by the battle that occurred a few miles south of Marye’s Heights. Here at Prospect, Hill General Jackson fought a close run defensive battle and emerged victorious. IMO Jackson was brilliant in taking advantage of the terrain and mitigating his enemy’s strengths. He controlled the action from start to finish and that’s no small feat for a defender. I think his only major fault was failing to impart his full plan for the defensive battle to his subordinates. If I'm not mistaken, that was something he was prone to do. A major part of this battlefield was acquired by the Civil War Battlefield Trust in 2009. Listen to historian Frank O’Reilly describe the events and their significance of this battle at Slaughter Pen Farm.

TTG

Comments

[BabelFish]

Conjecture: I have considered one of Lee's strongest talents was recognizing the ultimate size of unit that one any one of his generals was fit to effectively command. I think he he did that ,O'Steen's brilliantly with Jackson.

[turcopolier]

Babelfish

"O'Steen?" Who is that? IMO Lee played the hand he had been dealt. If you read "Lee's Lieutenants" you will see that his "stock" of really capable leaders declined throughout the war as losses whittled away at it. At the same time he inhibited the development of many new leaders in senior positions by clinging to allegiances to; family (Fitz Lee), the WPPA (Wickham, Rosser,. etc) and former regular officers of the US Army (French, etc.) He was abetted in this tendency by Samuel Cooper the Adjutant General and Jeff Davis himself. The Irish Brigade had had its ass kicked at Sharpsburg a few months before and was at a quarter of its original strength. the next year they had their ass kicked again at Gettysburg. pl

[BabelFish]

Pat, bleeping auto-correct on that one! No idea where that came from.

[Tigershark]

Col.,

WPPA?

[Haralambos]

Col. and others,
Thank you for this. I watched O'Reilly's piece and followed up with reading on the Irish Brigade. I was unaware of the extent of their losses over the course of this battle and the war. In addition, I was unaware of the number of foreign officers involved in this battle. I well recall the centennial commemorations (I was about 10 when they began) and was first confronted with the extent of carnage in some of the battles as firepower escalated with grapeshot and the various new weaponry available.

I encourage everyone to donate to the http://www.civilwar.org/aboutus/ this holiday season in lieu of one or two unneeded or unwanted gifts.

[Fred]

TTG,

Thanks for the post. It's always nice to read a little history and home town news at the same time.

[William Fitzgerald]

Pat Lang,

I must disagree about R.E. Lee and the development of new officers in the A.of N.Va.
There was no staff college or other officer training schools in the CSA. The development of leadership was pretty much trial and error and luck. According to Freeman, the best predictor of competence was professional schooling at WP and the several state military academies. Professions such as railroad management, the law, and plantation ownership were also possible predictors. I don't rule out family and other societal relationships, which were important in that pre-bureaucratic time.

Merry Christmas to all!

WPFIII

[turcopolier]

William Fitzgerald

It was understandable that the Confederate Army, in which Lee was only one of several significant decision makers, should have begun with Freeman's criteria but as the war progressed, casualties mounted and incompetence was revealed there were many opportunities to develop and advance senior officers who were not part of the WP/RA/FFV crowd. In some cases that happened, John Gordon, Nathan Forrest, Wade Hampton and Billy Mahone were all examples of good personnel decisions, but on the other hand there is the example of Thomas Munford who was never promoted to BG although he several times commanded a brigade and a division with success. And then there is the matter of BG Raleigh Colston who was relieved of command after Chancellorsville because he disagreed with several foolish orders on the part of Stuart as acting 2nd Corps commander. Stonewall, on his death bed, objected mightily to this relief which seems to have been largely based on Colston's status as an outsider. Clausewitz is correct in saying that peace time service and staff colleges are poor substitutes for the learning experience of real war. The confederates seem to me to have had a a hard time rising above their cliquishness. Their insistence on promoting people like Rosser and Fitz Lee, when better men were available was absurd. pl

[William Fitzgerald]

Pat Lang,

I take your point about the cliques. The cavalry seems to have been particularly that way. Perhaps because of Stuart and his group of insiders? Wade Hampton may have been the best cavalryman in the war but had to wait in the wings. The war was the ultimate leadership school but, given the casualties among colonels and brigadier generals, not very efficient.

WPFIII

[turcopolier]

William

No, a very efficient school, but the cliques did not let it function. Munford was particularly unacceptable to the Lees since he thought of them as jumped up middle class parvenus. pl