..anyone up for a thread of American Civil War trivia? We'll just use conventional rules- whoever gets a question correct asks the next question, and don't post the question until your answer has been confirmed. :) The time period is 1861-1865.


Who was the only Civil War officer to be convicted of war crimes? Give his name and the last position in which he served.

Originally posted by Smellincoffee
..anyone up for a thread of American Civil War trivia? We'll just use conventional rules- whoever gets a question correct asks the next question, and don't post the question until your answer has been confirmed. :) The time period is 1861-1865.


Who was the only Civil War officer to be convicted of war crimes? Give his name and the last position in which he served.


It'll be that dude in charge of Andersonville...

Captain Henry Wirz who was the Camp Commander :)

What about events leading up to the war? South Carolina seceded from the Union in December of 1860.

Hey smellincoffee, you near Mobile?

Kitten- absolutely correct. :D

Quasar- good suggestion, and I'm from Selma- right near Montgomery. :)

Who won the final engagement of the war?

(I suppose you have a fifty/fifty shot)

Union considering they did win the war!

edit: isnt it kitten's turn tho?

The Confederates. :D

A skirmish somewhere in Texas, forgot where.

(kitten didn't seem to posting anything so I went ahead)

damn, i forgot appotomax wasnt the end of the war. always give them a day or two before posting a new question. lets let kitten give the next question!

Yep, I believe the last CW battle was somewhere in the west? Could be mistaken.

My question :D


Knew that "Mastermind" quiz book would come in useful for something...


Your specialist subject is the American Civil War :p


Question:

A popular novel by Victor Hugo has been suggested as the origin of a nickname for the Army of Northern Virginia. What was it?

les miserables

Originally posted by pawpaw
les miserables


Correct :)


Your turn to ask the question "pawpaw".

to twist a earlier question ( what was the last battle) what was the first battle? ( after ft sumter, a land battle )

Originally posted by pawpaw
to twist a earlier question ( what was the last battle) what was the first battle? ( after ft sumter, a land battle )

Bull Run, but I have a feeling that was too easy. :(

To be nit picky, Manassas, but I think Bendy is right.

Originally posted by Benderino


Bull Run, but I have a feeling that was too easy. :(

your right--thats not it:D there was a less well known ( understatement) battle 39 days earlier

Originally posted by pawpaw


your right--thats not it:D

You had my hopes up for a second there :)

Define battle. The first major conflict between sizeable, regulars (recognized soldiers, not militia/partisans) was fought on July 21, at Manassas.

Phillipi/Phillipi Races/something similar to this name (:cool: )?

I guess I always focus on the Army of the Potomac, so I usually forget about this one....

Originally posted by wildWolverine
Phillipi/Phillipi Races?

yes, a series of small battles (3) fought in june of 1861 in the new state of west virginia--- the most funny part is the overall union commander was mccellan and he got promoted to command of the army of potomac and the losing southerner was lee who was denied command for a while because of these loses

This is relatively easy, so it has a few parts.

What was the single bloodiest day of the war (and of U.S. history)? Who were the three main commanders involved (below McClellan and Lee) in the fighting? And lastly, what were the casualties (fatal) for the two sides -- separately (to the nearest thousand)?

question bloodest day as part of a 2-3 battle or just a one day battle?

Antietam, Hooker, Sumner, Burnside for the Union, plus A.P. Hill, Jackson, and J.B. Hood for the South.

Casualties:
Union
2,108 dead
10,293 wounded or missing
Confederacy
2,700 dead
9,072 wounded or missing

<Precise numbers make me suspicious that Bendy looked the answer up...> The answer also doesn't exactly match the question ("What day"), but good enough -- Kudos to Bendy.

Answer: Date: September 17th, 1862 (Location: Antietam)
.............Commanders: Hooker, Burnside, Hill
.............Casualties: ~12000(~2000d) Federal, ~11000(~3000d) Confederate



good link: Antietam (http://www.americancivilwar.com/antiet.html)

Pawpaw: part of a 2-3 day engagement. Although I think you'll find the answer a little too late to help... ;)

Originally posted by wildWolverine
<Precise numbers make me suspicious that Bendy looked the answer up...> The answer also doesn't exactly match the question ("What day"), but good enough -- Kudos to Bendy.

Answer: Date: September 17th, 1862 (Location: Antietam)
.............Commanders: Hooker, Burnside, Hill
.............Casualties: ~1200 Federal, ~11000 Confederate

good link: Antietam (http://www.americancivilwar.com/antiet.html)

Pawpaw: part of a 2-3 day engagement. Although I think you'll find the answer a little too late to help... ;)

Oh, sorry, I have this game called Civil War Generals 2 and it comes with a reference thing. But I knew the commanders and the battle, I just didn't know the exact numbers.

My question?

Name all of Grants victories from the Battle of Fort Henry to Vicksburg. Even the tiny ones, but nothing needed after Vicksburg.

Grant's victories:

Fort Henry
Fort Donelson
Shiloh
Corinth (Fall 1862; Halleck was in charge in May).
Post Of Arkansas (Sherman, but he was Grant's subordinate).
Bruinsburg
Raymond
Jackson
Champion's Hill
Big Black River
Surrender of Vicksburg.

Close. You didn't need the Port of Arkansas one, but that's ok. There's at least one more that comes around the time of Raymond.

Port Gibson.

Yep, your question.

When I posted this a few days ago, I was a bit disapointed at the utter lack of replies..guess weekends are slow! :lol: Maybe I can catch one of these questions between classes. :D

During the winter 1862-1863, Adm. Porter was able to cause
a bit of consternation amongst the Confederates along the
Mississippi below Vicksburg (including causing them to scuttle a captured Union gunboat), for the staggering sum of $8.61.
What did he do?

Ooooh, I know this. Didn't he make a bunch of "fake" boats and they scared the Rebs so much that they ran away? He made them out of cheap materials, like wood and such.

Originally posted by Benderino
Ooooh, I know this. Didn't he make a bunch of "fake" boats and they scared the Rebs so much that they ran away? He made them out of cheap materials, like wood and such.

Actually it was only one boat, a fake gunboat. Confederate
gunners were for some reason unable to hit it, and decided
it was unsinkable. A pot of burning pitch was used to make it
look like there was an engine.


Your question

Originally posted by Serutan


Actually it was only one boat, a fake gunboat. Confederate
gunners were for some reason unable to hit it, and decided
it was unsinkable. A pot of burning pitch was used to make it
look like there was an engine.


Your question

that's right, it was only one, but a big one. I remember the smoke, that was great.

Ummm....

Continuing with the Grant theme, who was the main Southern cavalry commander who disrupted Grants attempts by cutting off supplies and capturing men?

Hint: Not N.B.F.

john h. morgan

Nope. At least not the main guy I was thinking of. Try again. :)

As a person who knows very little about the American Civil War, I'm going to take a wild guess and say Jeb Stuart. (I'm not even sure if he was cavalry, but I know he fought for the south)

john s. mosby

Earl Van Dorn. His raid on Holly Springs in December 1862
forced Grant to abandon his overland march on Vicksburg,
and insured Sherman's defeat at Chickasaw Bluffs.

Originally posted by Serutan
Earl Van Dorn. His raid on Holly Springs in December 1862
forced Grant to abandon his overland march on Vicksburg,
and insured Sherman's defeat at Chickasaw Bluffs.

That's the answer I was looking for. Van Dorn's actions in Southern Tennessee and Northern Mississippi caused many severe logistical problems for Grant. Your Q.

I probably shouldn't have answered that one, seeing as I had posted the previous quesion, so I will throw the floor open to a new questioner.

in nov. and dec. of 1861 the british empire shipped 14000 troops to canada and sent the new ironclads warrior and black prince to america---why

Seems I remember a US History lecture on this...the British were scared of a possible US invasion of Canada , so they moved troops to reinforce the border. I guess they expected the US to be land-hungry after their quick one-month victory over the CSA.


Edit: typo- Cannada- :lol:

no:( , the british reasons were very hippacritical

They were afraid that the Canadians would be influenced by the secessionist South, and attempt to declare their own independence?

I know Canada gained self government in 1840, but weren't they declared a British dominion in 1867?

Over the Trent incident, I think, since it looked for a time
like there would be war. Fortunately, cooler heads prevailed.

yes the trent offair, in nov 1861 a union warship stopped a british merchant ship and removed 2 southern officals on there way to europe. the british very pissed off.

the reasons for them being mad that they gave are funny--a british ship was bordered without permission at sea ( i quess they forgot about the napoleanic wars and the war of 1812,40 years earlier were they bordered thousands of ships and impressed seamen )

the second reason was the union blockade was killing british merchants and they said it was illegal (once again they forgot the 22 year blockade they impossed on europe 1793-1815 earlier and the one they would imposs 50 years later in 1914)

do as i say, not as i do:D

Originally posted by pawpaw
yes the trent offair, in nov 1861 a union warship stopped a british merchant ship and removed 2 southern officals on there way to europe. the british very pissed off.

the reasons for them being mad that they gave are funny--a british ship was bordered without permission at sea ( i quess they forgot about the napoleanic wars and the war of 1812,40 years earlier were they bordered thousands of ships and impressed seamen )

the second reason was the union blockade was killing british merchants and they said it was illegal (once again they forgot the 22 year blockade they impossed on europe 1793-1815 earlier and the one they would imposs 50 years later in 1914)

do as i say, not as i do:D


The British were EXTREMELY careful not to do anything that would mean that they would be unable to setup a blockade in future. In fact this can be seen when the Union intercepted British merchantmen carrying weapons to Mexico on the grounds that those arms would be transferred from Mexico to the Confederacy. The British simply made a note of this precidence and when in WW1 the Americans tried to send arms to Holland that would (presumably) have gone to Germany they invoked this precident and intercepted the American merchantmen and prevented delievery of the arms to Holland.

I'm pretty certain that for the Trent there was no legal precidence for the seizure of foreign diplomats and the Union backed down. Not to mention that without Britain at that time the Union would become extremely short of saltpetre (that they were trying to buy in from British India).

Had Unionists such as Seward not been so jingoistic towards Britain then the spectre of European intervention would have been non-existant for there were plenty of reasons why Britain wouldn't be that keen on supporting the Confederacy.

Originally posted by kittenOFchaos





I'm pretty certain that for the Trent there was no legal precidence for the seizure of foreign diplomats and the Union backed down.


the captain acted without orders and the union had no chose to back down-they were having a tough enough time with the south, how would they fight the british too



Had Unionists such as Seward not been so jingoistic towards Britain then the spectre of European intervention would have been non-existant for there were plenty of reasons why Britain wouldn't be that keen on supporting the Confederacy.



the british were very anti-slavery, while the merchants wanted cheap goods and southern markets the govt. and people did not like the south very well

Originally posted by kittenOFchaos


I'm pretty certain that for the Trent there was no legal precidence for the seizure of foreign diplomats and the Union backed down. Not to mention that without Britain at that time the Union would become extremely short of saltpetre (that they were trying to buy in from British India).

Had Unionists such as Seward not been so jingoistic towards Britain then the spectre of European intervention would have been non-existant for there were plenty of reasons why Britain wouldn't be that keen on supporting the Confederacy.

Part of the problem with the Trent was the Captain Wilkes had not followed proper procedure; he should have brought the ship into a port where there was a prize court (I am fuzzy on the exact details of this...). In any event, of course, Prince Albert helped broker the deal where the Americans released the ship (and Slidell and Mason), and were given the face saving out of claiming that Wilkes had acted without orders.

The saltpeter was definitely a factor, too, even that aspect is not real well known over here.



Anyway, to the next question:

What did General Sherman present to President Lincoln for Christmas 1864?

Originally posted by Serutan



What did General Sherman present to President Lincoln for Christmas 1864?

EASY!

Atlanta....oh wait, or Savannah, Georgia.

Originally posted by Benderino


EASY!

Atlanta....oh wait, or Savannah, Georgia.

You have to choose one or the other.

Let's see, Atlanta he captured right before the election. Now, if the election was in November, then that wouldn't be for Christmas, however, I've often heard of Sherman giving Lincoln as a gift Atlanta. But, again, I think that was for the election...so I'll go with Savannah.

I'll go w/ Atlanta, just to cover all the bases

Savannah it is. Your question, Benderino.

Hmmm, I don't have much time, so I will cede the question to someone else. Whoever wants it can have it. Be my guest.

I'll take it, if no one minds?


Which Confederate raider was the single most costly for Union shipping? Since this is sort of easy, please also list her captain, who she was sunk by (the name of the ship), and where her remains are today.

the alabama under capt. semmes, sunk by the kearsarge. the remains were found off the french coast-still there as far as i know

All correct. :) Too easy?

on oct 7 1861 the last group seceded and joined the south-who was it

By group, do you mean state? If so, Texas?

no it wasn't a state per say--and 4 states seceded after texas did

Arkanas, Tennensse, North Carloina and Virigna all left the union after Fort Sumter so i think this the group pawpaw wants?

no:( , someone seceded from the union and joined the confederacy after all the southern states did-so its not a southern state:)

are looking for a person?

not a person, a group of people (thousands) but it wasn't a state, its hard to state it clearly without giving it away, this group had territory,a govt. and actually seceded from the union and provided troops to the confederacy

The Cherokee Nation.

:goodjob: yes, your question

What were the two occurances during the Civil War which involved Wilmer McLean.

Hint: He was neither a soldier nor a politican.

First: Part of the first battle of Bull Run (1861)was fought on
his farm.
Deciding that this would not be a good place to be during
a war, he move far away to the peace and quiet of a
western Virginia villiage, Appomattox Court House.

Second: He couldn't win for losing. Lee surrendered to Grant
in Mr. Mclean's parlor on April 9,1865. The house
was all but stripped by souvenier seekers.

I believe the book In my Father's House is based on his family's adventures during the civil war.

You're absolutely right, Serutan.

Give us the next question.

In Pawpaw's question, he mention that Britain sent troops to
Canada in 1861. Another European power sent a military force
to English speaking North America during the Civil War. Who?

France?

Originally posted by PolishAssassin
France?

No. France did of course plant a puppet government in Mexico
backed by French troops, but Mexico isn't an English speaking country.

I seem to remember reading about Prussian and Austrian visitors to the Army of Virginia, if that's what you're looking for.

Originally posted by Smellincoffee
I seem to remember reading about Prussian and Austrian visitors to the Army of Virginia, if that's what you're looking for.

just about all the major "powers" had observors in both hq's

No, I don't mean observers. By "military force" I mean a substantial number of soldiers, or a fleet, or some combination of the two.

Please note that I never said it saw action.

Originally posted by Serutan
No, I don't mean observers. By "military force" I mean a substantial number of soldiers, or a fleet, or some combination of the two.

Please note that I never said it saw action.

i know, my answer was an observation ,not a answer

Originally posted by pawpaw


i know, my answer was an observation ,not a answer

I know :) But smellincoffee seemed to put that forth as an answer, so I wanted to clarify.

EDIT You wouldn't trying to sneak a pun in there, would you?
:D

Hint: This country enacted a similar sort of Abolition sometime
during the years the American Civil War was fought.

OK the answer is : Russia.

The Russian Baltic fleet was sent to New York to spend the
winter of 1862-63.

Anyone feel free to jump in with a new question.

On November 25th, 1864, several people- not Union citizens- were arrested in NYC. Who were they, and what were they doing?

Originally posted by Serutan


The Russian Baltic fleet was sent to New York to spend the
winter of 1862-63.


sertan, do you have a link or book on that, never heard of it, sounds interesting

Is the question terribly difficult? I did choose a rather obsecure fact to ask about..

Actually, I think I know, but I'm not eligible to answer this one.

confederates and copperheaeds planned to burn down some major Northern cities but the copperheads pulled out so the confedrates tried to burn down NYC

Yep! Your question. :)

never was any good at asking questions so you can for me

Just a point of information: the Federal government did not recognize the legality of secession. Therfore, Confederates were still citizens of the United States...

...mmm, good point. But the Confederates themselves didn't. But I just asked the past two questions, so it's up for grabs. You want to take it, Wolverine?

Thanks, coffee! Who stated, "We are all aware of the fragile state of the Union. When secession comes, and I believe it will, the horsemen of apocalypse will be unleashed, and I don't see how we can fully escape its ravages."?

That sounds Lincolnesque, but I think I'll guess Robert E Lee.

J

Think a little farther west.

Originally posted by wildWolverine
Think a little farther west.

I personally think it sounds Shermanesque. Therefore,

W. T. Sherman.

Bringham Young

Kudos to Iceman. Your q.

I pass my turn.

Of which battle did one soldier write "There has never been such fighting I reckon in the history of war" ?

Shiloh?

J

Originally posted by onejayhawk
Shiloh?

J

Sorry, no.

Fredricksburg

Originally posted by wildWolverine
Fredricksburg

Right state, but later.

The Wilderness?

Earthpig

Very close.

Battle of Petersburg, V.A.

Cold Harbour

Y'all have it bracketed quite nicely. When I said "very close"
to the Wilderness, I meant it literally.

That would mean Spotsylvania.

J

Originally posted by onejayhawk
That would mean Spotsylvania.

J

Yes. Specifically about the Mule Shoe engagement of May 12th.
At the time it was written, it was accurate; the highest volume of small arms fire up to that time occurred while the armies fought virtually at point blank range. They even had to stop occaisionally and move bodies out of the way so they could keep fighting.

Your question, onejayhawk.

I'll make this easy. In what battle is the "Bee's Nest" famous.

J

Originally posted by onejayhawk
In what battle is the "Bee's Nest" famous.
J

do you mean the hornest nest maybe? shiloh

My bad. You are right of course. So named because of the sound of rifle balls cutting through the brush. I thought the last quote might have arisen at this location.

J

PS How in H___ did Grant pull this one out after that disaster on day 1? McLellan would have headed for tall timber and left the valley to the Confederates.

Originally posted by onejayhawk


PS How in H___ did Grant pull this one out after that disaster on day 1? McLellan would have headed for tall timber and left the valley to the Confederates.

He was damn good. With the fresh reinforcements and the will to win, Grant pushed through and routed the Southern enemy. He knew manpower was his advantage, and used it accordingly.

Grant didnt have a manpower advantage in this fight til the end. He hunkered down at a manpower disadvantage.

It's all well and good to asy he dug in and waited for reinforcements, but after the way he was cut up the first day, and the way he appeared outnumbered, most generals would have written it off as lost and retreated. As it was Shiloh almost broke the whole theater along with Vicksburg.

J

I know, I think we agree. What I meant to say was once the reinforcements came Grant had the manpower needed. But you are right, he was an excellent commander (I've been to Shiloh, and it is really quite marvelous).

its my question but i can't think of one-so first come, first serve

What was General U.S. Grant's real first name?

Hint: It does not start with a U.

Ulysses Simpson Grant. It sdoes start with a U.

J

He was born Hiram Ulysses Grant.

I don't know why he changed it, but I heard once that he did because he didn't like that his initials spelled HUG.

I don't know if that is true or not, but Hiram is his real first name.

Originally posted by Junzi Nicuzn
He was born Hiram Ulysses Grant.

I don't know why he changed it, but I heard once that he did because he didn't like that his initials spelled HUG.

I don't know if that is true or not, but Hiram is his real first name.

Grant himself didn't do it. Someone in the registrar's office at West Point did it. Grant decided to live with it. Quite possibly for the reason mentioned above.

Well, I'm not exactly a connoisseur on the ACW, so if I'm right someone else can take the question

What was the Queen of the West?

A united states ram

Yes...and no.

First used by the North and then by the South, Queen of the West (hereinafter Queen) was one of the Ellet rams.

For years the civil engineer Charles Ellet had urged ramming enemy ships with purpose built ships. After the appearance of CSS Virginia (aka Merrimac), Ellet was commissioned by the U.S. Army to build or convert several such vessels in Cincinnati. Within 40 days he had converted 9 steamers into rams at a cost of less than $300,000. One of these was the Queen, a river freight boat known for her speed.

The ram fleet's initiation came at Memphis, 6 June 1862. Using the Queen as a flagship, Ellet scattered the Confederate boats and captured the city, but was mortally wounded.

With the fleet under the command of Ellet's younger brother, Lt Col Alfred Ellet, the Queen suffered her first embarrassment near Vicksburg, 15 July 1862, when the ironclad CSS Arkansas appeared on the Yazoo River and put the Queen to flight. On 22 July the Queen attacked Arkansas at Vicksburg and was so badly damaged that she had to be sent to St. Louis for repairs.

On 2 Feb 1863 the ram was back in service and ran past Vicksburg. So active was the Queen that Ellet was able to report on 11 Feb that she had destroyed four Confederate steamers and more than $200,000 in Confederate property. Three days later she ran around near Gordon's Landing on the Red River and was captured, a development blamed on the disloyalty of her pilot. The Southerners quickly repaired her and, on 24 Feb, she aided in the capture of her sister ram Indianola.

On 14 April 1863 the Queen was attacked by three Federal vessels on the Atchafalaya River and destroyed.

Source: Patricia L. Faust, ed. Historical Times Illustrated Encyclopedia of the Civil War. New York: Harper Perennial, 1991.

so basically as i dont ever ask questions and i kind of got that wrong (not too good on the naval side) i uess anyone can take the next question

Although Grant is credited with capturing Fort Henry, whose force actually did all the work?

"Unconditional Surrender" Grant! ;)

footes gunboats

Right, pawpaw. The fort was knocked out by the gunboats, partially becuase it was so badly situated it had been flooded out.
The Confederates surrendered before Grant's men could get in position.

i travaled 600 miles in 16 days with 20,000 confederates chasing me, letting grant get a foot hold near vicksburg in their absense, who am i?

Sherman? Didn't he lead them away from the bluffs to the north of the city?

That would Grierson's cavalry raid. They went all the way to Red Stick(in Fench, Baton Rouge) from LaGrange Tenn. As important as the high, or dry, ground, were the flotillas of supplies pushed past the guns during the confusion.

Staying with Vicksburg, where did Grant originally intend to mass his troops, and why did he change the location to Bruinsburg?

J

PS I looked up Grierson's report. It makes some interesting reading. Report. (http://www.swcivilwar.com/GriersonRaidReport.html)

yes its grierson

Originally posted by onejayhawk

Staying with Vicksburg, where did Grant originally intend to mass his troops, and why did he change the location to Bruinsburg?



The original landing was to be Grand Gulf. But the Confederate position there was at least as strong as at Vicksburg, so a landing would have been suicidal. Therefore Porter once again ran his fleet past the batteries, the army marched downstream, and they crossed at Bruinsburg on the advice of a captured slave.

Serutan the man. I though that slave part might be obscure. Your question..uh...What is the correct form of address to an arachneid?

J

double post

Originally posted by onejayhawk
..uh...What is the correct form of address to an arachneid?

J

Depends. When speaking, "Your Cobwebness". For mail, it would be name, street, web #, city, (state),(country), postal code.

As to the question:

The soldiers in the Union army were allowed to do something in the fall of 1864 that American soldiers had not been able to do before. What was it?

Got me. Shop at the PX?

J

vote in the election

Correct, pawpaw! Your question.

THAT was a quess, all i saw 1864 and thought election. give me a few to come up with a question:)

i was a wealthy planter and a state senator. i fought from the beginning to end of the war. i rose to command all the cavalry in my army. i was a governor and senator after the war. who was i?

Can we ask which side of the war he fought on?

wealthy planter? southerner

Lee ?

NO

Originally posted by pawpaw
NO

Sorry :o it was just a wild wild guess !

Originally posted by LouLong


Sorry :o it was just a wild wild guess !

no need to be sorry:)

big hint--- his first command was a legion, not a battalion, regiment,ect....

Never know, there were Union planters that joined the Confederacy. ;) Or maybe a southern planter who supported the Union. ;)

Nathan Bedford Forrest? Though I don't recall him ever being a politican before the war.

If it's who I think it is, he's from South Carolina.

Originally posted by Serutan
If it's who I think it is, he's from South Carolina.


and if you said that you would be heading in the right direction;)

Wade Hampton

:goodjob: , your question

What Union general commanded the XX Corps?

benjamin Butler?

Hooker?

Alponse Williams?

EDITED:

Henry Slocum. IIRC the XXth Corps was formed after the Battle of Atlanta, when Howard (XI Corps) was promoted to command of the Army of the Tenessee, and Joe Hooker resigned.

well as its been two days since anybody asks a question so ill give ya one

According to the offical records how many union soldiers where aged 10 or under?

Originally posted by Ancient Grudge


According to the offical records how many union soldiers where aged 10 or under?

offical records? none( i know there were drummers and such, but were they offically part of there regiments

your go pawpaw :)

that was right--pure quess

o.k. who were the kill-cavalry and why were they called that?

Originally posted by pawpaw
that was right--pure quess

o.k. who were the kill-cavalry and why were they called that?

"Kill Cavalry" was the nickname of Union cavalry commander
Judson Kilpatrick, who was not known for being tender with the
lives of his men, or for fastidious care of his horses. When Sherman asked for Kilpatrick for his march through Georgia
and the Carolinas, he remarked "Kilpatrick is one hell of a damned fool, and that's just the kind of man I want to lead my cavalry on this march".

Originally posted by Serutan

When Sherman asked for Kilpatrick for his march through Georgia
and the Carolinas, he remarked "Kilpatrick is one hell of a damned fool, and that's just the kind of man I want to lead my cavalry on this march".

same quote i read when looking up this question:goodjob:

Which less than stellar Union general was dubbed "Comissary" by the Confederates?

Hint: The nickname was given by Stonewall Jackson's men.

Nathaniel Banks

Given the nickname "Comissary Banks" because of the large amount of stores he abandoned to be scooped up by Jackson's men.

Your question, sir.

What is the inscription on the monument to the dead of the Confederate States Army,
Arlington National Cemetery, Washington, D.C?

It's from the Bible. The passage in Isaiah about beating swords into plowshares and spears to pruning hooks.

Personally i thought it was:

Not for fame or reward,
Not for place or for rank,
Not lured by ambition,
Or goaded by necessity,
But in Simple
Obedience to Duty
As they understood it,
These men suffered all,
Sacrificed all,
Dared all--and died.

Though I might bump this with a question:

After the war, what reason did Joe Hooker give for his retreat at Chancellorsville?

I'm tempted to look it up but I'll just guess.

He was losing too badly because Lee and Jackson split up and was beating him.

Personal cowardice? I know he regretted the battle the rest of his life.

J

Wasn't by any chance his enforced sobriety for that campaign after Lincoln expressed worries over his heavy drinking?

An answer does not seem to be forthcoming, so I will pose a new question.

At Gettysburg day 2, Lee ordered an attack en echelon. Longstreet was to attack Little Roundtop as the third wave. He was late getting in position. Why?

Trafic jams on the roads leading into the battlefield caused delays in their arrival. He also wished to recon the area to the right of the round tops to see how plausible an outflanking march would be. The attacks on the to tops was further delayed because Sickles, commanding the Union forces in the area had deployed too far forward and forced Longstreet to fight for the land between the round tops and his start point.

no.

All true, but not the correct answer to the question.

J

:confused:

Well if they're not the answers, I've no idea what it is :(

*goes back to re-read the gettysburg books he has* :confused:

I'll give it to you. The thing I was looking for was the countermarch. Since the recon was made on foot at night, Longstreet did not know that Little Round Top had full view of his march route. He had to double back and proceed behind another ridge to get to position. Then of course he encountered Sickles at the Peach Orchard. By the time he fought past that and the rocks at Devil's Den, he had insufficient force to take the heights, in part because of Chamberlain's famous stand.

Had Lee allowed him the flexibility to bypass the Devil's Den, he could have put a regiment behind the Federal line. Lee insisted that Longstreet not venture too far to the south, so he felt bound to go through Sickles, not around him.

Also interesting is that, while he was to have been the last force attacking, he was two hours late beginning, and was first to attack by three hours. Ewell was to attack at dawn, but did not attack til late afternoon, and Early did not attack at all.

J

Ewell and Early really screwed up for most of that battle, though the criticism they were hit with over Cemetary Hill on day 1 was a little unfair. I think I recall that longstreet also got some flak from Lee supporters in the aftermath of the war (read those that don't believe lee could have done anything wrong, so blame anyone and everyone else for the loss of Gettysburg) for not attacking earlier. Stuart also took the blame for not being there to recon the far right of the Rebel line leaving Lee blind, but that ignores some of the problems Stuart faced as well.

Never heard of the countermarch though, then again over than really brief books on the overall war, my main Gettysburg book deals with July 1st in it's entirety, which would explain why I had no idea huh? :D

Originally posted by onejayhawk
Personal cowardice? I know he regretted the battle the rest of his life.

J

He had lost faith in Joe Hooker. :D

Thanks for going ahead without me. After this many days without a response I had stopped looking for the thread.

PrivateHudson, your question please.

J

Who once said of the confederacy that should it fall "died at West Point" will be it's epitath? :)

Robert Toombs?

Aye, your turn

Which Union general finally occupied Unionist East Tennessee?

Since I'm not going to be able to get back until Monday,
the answer to the question was Ambrose Burnside.

The floor is open for a new question.

Oh shoot, I knew that! I should check this thread more often, I suppose.

In the Battle of the Wilderness, who commanded the VI Corps in the Army of the Potomac?

Meade had top command, and Hancock was 2nd Corps. Sedgwick?

J

Yep, Sedgwick is correct. You go.

Lucky Guess. My home county was named after his family IIRC.

After what battle were the Union troops likened to a "rainsoaked mob", and where was the Army in this condition?

J

Battle of Bull Run/First Manassas, and they were returning to Washington?

Fredericksburg on the march to outflank Lee where Burnside got "stuck in the mud"?

Coffee the man.

After the rout at Bull Run Creek, they fled back to DC, where the papers savaged them further.

Your Question.

What did the soldiers of the 12th Alabama (Rode's brigage) call themselves, and what was the main reason for this?

Feel free to use the 'net- I learned this when playing Sid Meier's Antietam!

No question for three days, so I'll pose one. Todays date, 7 November, is of critical importance to the entire Civil War. What happened?

J

PS Hint. This is off the battlefield.

The answer to mine was Coffee Rangers- they were from Coffee County, AL.

Having received reports that Confederate troops were in the area, Capt. Hiram E. Barstow, Union commander at Clark's Mill, sent a detachment toward Gainesville and he led another southeastward. Barstow's men ran into a Confederate force, skirmished with them and drove them back. His column then fell back to Clark's Mill where he learned that another Confederate force was coming from the northeast. Unlimbering artillery to command both approach roads, Barstow was soon engaged in a five-hour fight with the enemy. Under a white flag, the Confederates demanded a surrender, and the Union, given their numerical inferiority, accepted. The Confederates paroled the Union troops and departed after burning the blockhouse at Clark's Mill. Clark's Mill helped the Confederates to maintain a toehold in southwest Missouri.

Result(s): Confederate victory

Location: Douglas County

Campaign: Operations North of Boston Mountains (1862)

Date(s): November 7, 1862

Principal Commanders: Capt. Hiram E. Barstow [US]; Col. John Q. Burbridge and Col. Colton Greene [CS]

Forces Engaged: Detachments of 10th Illinois Cavalry and State Militia (approx. 100 men) [US]; cavalry brigade (approx. 1,000 men) [CS]

Estimated Casualties: Total unknown (US 113; CS unknown)



Am I right?

No. Off the battlefield. And significantly more important.

J

11/7/1864: Lincoln is re-elected.

Close enough I'll give it to you. It was the date of his first election in 1860.

J

What were the two diversions that greatly aided Grant
in getting his army safely on the east side of the Mississippi
below Vicksburg?

The famous Grierson cavalry raid discussed earlier in the thread would be one. I guess you mean the change in crossing points from Grand Gulf to Bruisburg for the other.

J

Originally posted by onejayhawk
The famous Grierson cavalry raid discussed earlier in the thread would be one. I guess you mean the change in crossing points from Grand Gulf to Bruisburg for the other.

J

Half right. I don't look on the Grand Gulf thing as a diversion,
rather a change of plans. There was another outright diversion
undertaken.

Then you must mean Sherman's attack. I think of that more as a feint, but its all I can think of.

J

Originally posted by onejayhawk
Then you must mean Sherman's attack. I think of that more as a feint, but its all I can think of.

J

To me, feint and diversion are the same thing... But Sherman's
fake attack on Haynes Bluff is what I was looking for. Your question.

BTW, as to why I don't count Grand Gulf: it wasn't a feint; Grant really intended to cross there, but found the defenses too strong, so he had
to recast his plans.

In retrospect, you have a sound point. Sherman was completely detached from Grant's troops, so his actions were in no way part of the main army, hence diversion. Had he been on an extended flank, I might have had a quibble.

Anyway, its late so I'll try something off the top of the head. GA Custer is widley imfamous for being the youngest General. What Pennsylvania native, who was a colonel in Civil War action, was the 2nd youngest.

Hint, he moved west after the war and got rich, but not mining gold.

J

I thought Custer was famous for being an idiot and getting wiped out by the Sioux in the 1870s.

Originally posted by hbdragon88
I thought Custer was famous for being an idiot and getting wiped out by the Sioux in the 1870s. That too. Its something of a cutionary tale. Custer certainly LOOKED like a fine example of soldiering, and he was personally quite corageous. It was his lust for glory that was his undoing.

Hint 2. He founded a major Railroad, which made his fortune.

J