Not to mention, the other guy's steamboat sank, while his stayed afloat! Wait a minute, that wasn't the civil war!
I must say, though that I have never heard of slaves being used for any purpose except on plantations. This is totally new to me. If they worked on the railroads, I would imagine that they worked in whatever industry that the Confederacy had.
There were black workers at the Tredegar Iron Works in Richmond. Not when the war began, but as the intensity of operations picked up black workers were added. Whether they were free or slaves I'm not sure. The white workers weren't too happy about it and initially refused to train the black men in the various manufacturing processes until General Anderson, the owner of the works told them flat out "you train those people, and train them well, or you're gonna find yourself carrying a musket in Lee's army!"
Problem solved.
BaltACDDifferences I have observed between Northern and Southern railroads - from the viewpoint of the present day.
No doubt that is true today. It was perhaps less true in 1860.
I think this reflects the different purposes of northern and southern railroads. In the north it became apparent relatively early on that trunk lines, which is to say lines that connected port cities with Chicago, were the way to go. In the south railroads were built to haul agricultural products from an inland point to a navigable water way.
Granger roads also tended to be more lightly built than eastern roads. They also tended to follow the lay of the land but on the prairie that was not much of a problem.
zugmannere's a good reason (or at least part of it) for that "somehow":
You're right, Zugmann. It certainly is a good reason for why the Confederates never reached Harrisburg..
Paul_D_North_JrJohn Edgar Thomson - the guy who engineered Horseshoe Curve and ran the PRR for about 20 years during that time frame - spent about 10 years in Georgia practicing and perfecting his skills
As I understand it Atlanta is the first railroad city. It has access to no natural waterway at all and all of its transportation lines were originally rail lines.
54light15I must say, though that I have never heard of slaves being used for any purpose except on plantations. This is totally new to me.
John Henry was a slave owned by a Mrs. B. B. Wright. He was sent to work on the Richmond, Fredricksburg and Potomac. He escaped in 1862.
From what I recall having been told when I was in graduate school in Decatur, Georgia, Atlanta came in to being because the Decatur city fathers did not want the Western & Atlantic Railroad to be built in Decatur. The charter called for the zero milepost to be at some point east of the Chattahoochee River, so the milepost was put into the ground at a point six miles west of Decatur, and the point was named "Terminus." Terminus was later named "Marthasville," after the governor's daughter, and later named "Atlanta."
Johnny
DeggestyAtlanta came in to being because the Decatur city fathers did not want the Western & Atlantic Railroad to be built in Decatur.
Today Atlanta does not seem worse off because of the decision. Although I suppose being burnt by General Sherman was a disadvantage.
John WR DeggestyAtlanta came in to being because the Decatur city fathers did not want the Western & Atlantic Railroad to be built in Decatur. Today Atlanta does not seem worse off because of the decision. Although I suppose being burnt by General Sherman was a disadvantage.
Actually, perverse as the thought of it is, Sherman destroying almost every thing was a advantage - they could start over with state of the art technology and products. Part of the advantages European and Japanese manufacturers grew out of the fact that their pre-war factories and equipment were mostly destroyed and they had to start over with the best technologies available after the war. US pre-war factories and equipment were worn out from the efforts necessary to win the war
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACDActually, perverse as the thought of it is, Sherman destroying almost every thing was a advantage
You have to be right. The Civil War is a division point in U S railroad history. The Civil War made the need for connectivity and a standard gauge and even standard time zones more apparent. They didn't come over night but they did come.
Also, please remember what General Sherman did when he marched from Tenessee to Savannah and then north. He destroyed every piece of railroad infrastructure he could find. That did not help the south either. But by that time they had for intension purposes lost the war already. Vicksburg had fallen cutting the south in two. General Lee had lost at Gettysburg and could only fight a defensive war which just delayed the inevitable.
gsrrmanAlso, please remember what General Sherman did when he marched from Tenessee to Savannah and then north. He destroyed every piece of railroad infrastructure he could find.
He did that and more too. He pursued a scorched earth policy so the south would know the "hard hand of war." It took the south a hundred years to recover from the destruction.
As interesting as this thread has been, totally overlooked in the discussion on gauge and advantages of routes and fantasy games, there stands the fact that the Civil War was by far the bloodiest war in American history.
"For 110 years, the numbers stood as gospel: 618,222 men died in the Civil War, 360,222 from the North and 258,000 from the South — by far the greatest toll of any war in American history. But new research shows that the numbers were far too low.
By combing through newly digitized census data from the 19th century, J. David Hacker, a demographic historian from Binghamton University in New York, has recalculated the death toll and increased it by more than 20 percent — to 750,000." http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/science/civil-war-toll-up-by-20-percent-in-new-estimate.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
The total wounded was ~400,000.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
But how is that POSSIBLY relative to a thread on Confederate Railroads?
DISCLAIMER, as I believe a mistaken opinion is rumbling around some of the halls at Kalmbach: I do not advocate chattel slavery, or in any way want to leave the impression that it is or was OK in any respect, or that discussing counterfactual history implies that I am making light of the suffering of any group of people, or insulting any group who may have memory of those times. One of my ancestors was the first Union officer killed in the War -- admittedly, before 'emancipation' became a key war aim, but still scarcely a memory that raises endorsement of the institution peculiar to the South that was such an incentive for political secession...
RME
schlimmJ. David Hacker, a demographic historian from Binghamton University in New York, has recalculated the death toll and increased it by more than 20 percent — to 750,000."
How, Overmod asks, can this information possibly be relevant to Confederate railroads?
I think it can be relevant although I don't have the facts that I would like to have. Railroads were able to move armies, much larger armies, to a theatre of war to face each other. With more men fighting more would be wounded or killed. Of course there were other reasons too. A big reason was longer range and more accurate weapons. But railroads did play there part.
General Sherman clearly believed railroads were important during the war. That is why he took such pains to destroy them.
John WRHow, Overmod asks, can this information possibly be relevant to Confederate railroads?
Relevant? More relevant than a discussion of fantasy games and fiction with 1860 armies using AK 47's. the death toll was real; arguing about pretend history is not.
To what extent did the use of railroads in the U. S. Civil war effect military planners of the Franco Prussian War and World War 1?
Victrola1 To what extent did the use of railroads in the U. S. Civil war effect military planners of the Franco Prussian War and World War 1?
IIRC, the U.S. Civil War was the first war in which railroads played a strategic role in transporting troops and supplies. Moltke, the mastermind behind Prussian military plans, quickly integrated railroads into his plans and urged the Prussian government to nationalize the private railroad systems, long before the Franco Prussian War (beginning 1848).
The efficient employment of railroads was certainly one of the factors resulting in Germany winning that war.
At the outset of the Franco-Prussian War, 462,000 German soldiers concentrated flawlessly on the French frontier while only 270,000 French soldiers could be moved to face them, the French army having lost (or mislaid) 100,000 stragglers before a shot was fired through poor planning and administration.This was partly due to the peacetime organisations of the armies. Each Prussian Korps was based within a Kreis (literally "circle") around the chief city in an area. Reservists rarely lived more than a day's travel from their regiment's depot. By contrast, French regiments generally served far from their depots, which in turn were not in the areas of France from which their soldiers were drawn. Reservists often faced several days' journey to report to their depots, and then another long journey to join their regiments. Large numbers of reservists choked railway stations, vainly seeking rations and orders.
The effect of these differences was accentuated by the pre-war preparations. The Prussian General Staff had drawn up minutely detailed mobilization plans using the railway system, which in turn had been partly laid out in response to recommendations of a Railway Section within the General Staff. The French railway system, with multiple competing companies, had developed purely from commercial pressures and many journeys to the front in Alsace and Lorraine involved long diversions and frequent changes between trains. Furthermore, no system had been put in place for military control of the railways, and officers simply commandeered trains as they saw fit. Sidings and marshalling yards became choked with loaded wagons, with nobody responsible for unloading them or directing them to the correct destination.
Sir MadogFurthermore, no system had been put in place for military control of the railways, and officers simply commandeered trains as they saw fit. Sidings and marshalling yards became choked with loaded wagons, with nobody responsible for unloading them or directing them to the correct destination.
Dr. Frankendiesel aka Scott Running BearSpace Mouse for president!15 year veteran fire fighterCollector of Apple //e'sRunning Bear EnterprisesHistory Channel Club life member.beatus homo qui invenit sapientiam
Sir MadogMoltke, the mastermind behind Prussian military plans, quickly integrated railroads into his plans and urged the Prussian government to nationalize the private railroad systems, long before the Franco Prussian War (beginning 1848).
Thanks for this fascinating insight about railroads and military plans in Europe in the mid 19th century, Ulrich.
Here in the US many in our national government saw the importance of railroads to national defense during the mid 19th century. That had no impact on eastern railroads as far as I know but by the 1840's there were people advocating western transcontinental railroads for that purpose. However, the political issue of slavery prevented any real action on transcontinental railroads.
What strikes me is that as early as 1848 Moltke and, I assume, other Prussians, saw the implications of railroads on classical Napoleanic war theory. Americans, north and south, seemed to have missed the train there.
Certainly, von Moltke was no fool. He'd lived through the Napoleonic Wars (not as a veteran, he was too young, but he remembered) and had seen how Napoleon had played absolute hell with the Prussian Army, which in Frederick the Great's time had been considered the best in Europe, if not the world. After Fredericks death the army stagnated and didn't grow and learn with the times. Von Moltke wasn't going to let that happen again, hence his looking at new technologies like railroads and breech-loading firearms, and new military organizations like the Great General Staff that made mobilisations quick and efficient.
Von Moltke's greatest contribution? Probably the saying "No plan survives five minutes contact with the enemy!" Which means you'd better be flexible Jack, and don't stop thinking.
PS: Overmod, was your ancestor Colonel Elmer Ellsworth, by any chance?
Prussia financed private railways starting in 1850: Königlich-Westfälische Eisenbahn-Gesellschaft (Royal Westphalian Railway Company) and the Preußische Ostbahn (Prussian Eastern Railway). In 1875 it funded two more important new railways: Preußsische Nordbahn (Prussian Northern Railway) and the Marienfelde–Zossen–Jüterbog Military Railway. Prussia nationalized the railways within Prussia only in 1880, but the separate companies were independently managed. Not until 1920 were all the railways in Germany (primarily the royal railways of Bavaria, Baden, Wuertemberg, and Saxony) nationalized into one company, Reichseisenbah, later Deutsche Reichsbahn. The Königlich Preußischen Eisenbahn-Verwaltung (KPEV) was a myth as a result of painting errors in Cologne.
Moltke became fascinated by railroads and he was one of the first directors of the Hamburg-Berlin railway. In 1843 published an article What Considerations should determine the Choice of the Course of Railways?
schlimmMoltke became fascinated by railroads and he was one of the first directors of the Hamburg-Berlin railway. In 1843 published an article What Considerations should determine the Choice of the Course of Railways?
In the US, of course, things were rather different at the time. Although people were talking about secession in the 1840's little thought was given to government sponsorship of north south railways. The one notable exception was Stephen Douglas. He sponsored legislation in the 1850's to provide land grants for a north south transcontinental railroad and the bill passed. The Mobile and Ohio and the Illinois Central were built and connected with a car float at the Ohio River. Douglas also introduced the Kansas Nebraska Act and forced it though the Congress. His intent was to organize the Kansas Territory in order to build an east west transcontinental railroad. The unintended consequence was Bleeding Kansas, a local war between pro slavery and free soil groups. No railroad would get built until after the Civil War but on October 16, 1854 an unknown man spoke in Peoria against Nebraska, as the act was called. That speech was the first step on the road to the Whitehouse for Abe Lincoln.
Firelock76was your ancestor Colonel Elmer Ellsworth, by any chance?
Indeed.
(Don't be fooled by sources that quote his name as "Elmer E. Ellsworth"; his name is Ephraim Elmer Ellsworth, and how it got turned around might be as interesting as how the Faust legend and printing got conflated... but doesn't change what his family named him...)
BTW, his approach to discipline was perhaps the strongest reason why 'suave' entered the language as a term implying stylishness and panache. The word only acquired desultory connotation later in its history...
Another great blow to the confederate railroads was Grierson's rail on Newton's Station, Mississippi In April and May 1863. He rode from southern Tenessee 600 miles to Baton Rouge, Louisiana with 1700 cavalry destroying all railroad infrastructure and supplies that he found. This included passenger, freight trains and supplies at Newton;s Station, Mississippi on his way south.
gsrrmanAnother great blow to the confederate railroads was Grierson's rail on Newton's Station, Mississippi In April and May 1863.
General John C. Pemberton had been given orders to defend Vicksburg at all costs. He understood his orders to mean he should not leave Vicksburg and sent relatively few men outside the city. This left Grant free to maraud all over the countryside. Jackson, MS was an important rail junction. Grant's men destroyed it and the rail line that supplied Vicksburg. Fortress Vicksburg became prison Vicksburg and the people were reduced to eating rats.
In July, when Pemberton surrendered, Grant wired Lincoln "The Father of Waters rolls unvexed to the sea."
Some interesting bits of Vicksburg trivia for everyone: Vicksbug MS was NOT a secessionist stronghold, not by any means. As a river port Vicksburgers knew scession was going to be bad for business in one way or another. Just how bad they had NO idea. Ironic how a non-secession town was left holding the bag in the worst possible way.
Vicksburg surrendered on July 4, 1863. Vicksburgers wouldn't celebrate Independance Day again until 1945.
Certainly John Pemberton wasn't the brightest star in the Confederate firmament. A very good artillery commander, he was promoted beyond his abilities. After the Vicksburg surrender and his exchange he reverted to the rank of colonel and finished the war as an artilleryman.
Firelock76Vicksbug MS was NOT a secessionist stronghold, not by any means.
I didn't intend to comment on the political views of Vicksburg's people but rather to the fact that the city sits on a high bluff overlooking the Mississippi River and commands control of the river beneath it. Fairly early on in the war the Union won control of all of the Mississippi except for the part that rolled by Vicksburg. The Vicksburg and Jackson Railroad brought cotton to the city where it was loaded on steam boats for the journey down to New Orleans. It was the most important port city in the state of Mississippi.
In 1860 well over a million bales of cotton were shipped through the Port of Vicksburg. The African slaves working in the cotton fields in Vicksburg's hinterland created an extremely prosperous city. Vicksburg's business community rightly saw that the war would destroy their prosperity and opposed secession as long as they could but when Mississippi voted to secede they saw the writing on the wall.
John, certainly I realize you didn't mean to comment on Vicksburg's politics, I just added what I did just for everyone's enjoyment and the sheer irony of the situation. Of course Vicksburg was a VERY strategic site at the time and was going to be a target of Union forces sooner or later.
A really sad fact is a number of years after the war the Mississippi changed it's course and no longer flows past Vicksburg at all, Vicksburg's an inland town now.
Not only does "Ol' Man River" just keep rollin' along, he doesn't give two hoots about the affairs of man.
One of the other posters mention the Grierson Raid. A fun fact is the 1959 film "The Horse Soldiers" starring John Wayne and William Holden is based on the raid. The filmaker, John Ford, shot a lot of the film on location in the South, and the Jefferson Military Academy featured in the film is the actual school itself. Howver, a lot of the film is fictionalized and a bit of a disappointment, to me at least. It would have been better if the actual story was told.
Firelock76 A really sad fact is a number of years after the war the Mississippi changed it's course and no longer flows past Vicksburg at all, Vicksburg's an inland town now.
When did the river change its course? In the middle 70's I was living in New Orleans and went on a camping trip. We stopped in Vicksburg and I recall walking down a cliff road to the river.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.