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.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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
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.
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.
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..
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.
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.
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.
Paul_D_North_Jr BaltACD Differences I have observed between Northern and Southern railroads - from the viewpoint of the present day. Northern railroads were engineered - they were constructed to minimize grades - they had cuts and fills built to maintain sustained grades. Southern railroads were built upon the lay of the land with very minimal cuts and fills. In the short trains of the day, the undulating of the right of way didn't present any train handling issues - today, those territories are a big problems andling 9000 foot trains. Additionally, when the Southern roads were constructed, they were built to the cheapest possible standards as it was difficult to secure investment capital in the South - most of the money available in the country came from the North. The differences depend on the specific line, and the local geography - some of which is very difficult for anyone (i.e., the Clinchfield's route). Some of the lines which heavy traffic has migrated to today were only branch lines back in the day, and some high-quality main lines have been abandoned (SAL - ACL merger). Interestingly, John 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 much earlier in the century before taking on that challenge. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Edgar_Thomson#Developing_Georgia.27s_railroads - Paul North.
BaltACD Differences I have observed between Northern and Southern railroads - from the viewpoint of the present day. Northern railroads were engineered - they were constructed to minimize grades - they had cuts and fills built to maintain sustained grades. Southern railroads were built upon the lay of the land with very minimal cuts and fills. In the short trains of the day, the undulating of the right of way didn't present any train handling issues - today, those territories are a big problems andling 9000 foot trains. Additionally, when the Southern roads were constructed, they were built to the cheapest possible standards as it was difficult to secure investment capital in the South - most of the money available in the country came from the North.
Northern railroads were engineered - they were constructed to minimize grades - they had cuts and fills built to maintain sustained grades.
Southern railroads were built upon the lay of the land with very minimal cuts and fills. In the short trains of the day, the undulating of the right of way didn't present any train handling issues - today, those territories are a big problems andling 9000 foot trains.
Additionally, when the Southern roads were constructed, they were built to the cheapest possible standards as it was difficult to secure investment capital in the South - most of the money available in the country came from the North.
Interestingly, John 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 much earlier in the century before taking on that challenge. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Edgar_Thomson#Developing_Georgia.27s_railroads
- Paul North.
The Clinchfield wasn't built until the 1890's or very early 20th Century. While engineers may have perfected their craft in the South, the lack of sustained financing on Southern roads prevented them from implementing what would have been their preferred solutions to their problems, therefore they had to implement the cheapest solutions and move the absolute least amount of dirt and construct the fewest and cheapest of bridges.
54light15 Firelock, I totally agree with you. We are having a friendly intelligent discussion here. However, I notice that NOT ONE post has mentioned the crucial role that Buster Keaton played in the dramatic story of the Confederate railroads.
Firelock, I totally agree with you. We are having a friendly intelligent discussion here. However, I notice that NOT ONE post has mentioned the crucial role that Buster Keaton played in the dramatic story of the Confederate railroads.
Well, I can correct that right now. Buster certainly saved the "General", but wrecking that bridge couldn't have helped very much.
On the other hand, he DID get a commission AND the girl!
John WR 54light15 Didn't Lee try to take Gettysburg because there was a warehouse full of boots sitting there? I've heard the Gettysburg boot factory story but I don't know whether or not it is true. Lee saw the whole of the whole of the Shenandoah Valley lay waste by all of the fighting and how it impoverished all of the people living there. He believed that if he could march into the north and bring that kind of terror and destruction to the people they would demand that Lincoln make peace. He had hoped to go to Harrisburg but somehow the battle wound up at Gettysburg. The battle did not turn out as he planned.
54light15 Didn't Lee try to take Gettysburg because there was a warehouse full of boots sitting there?
Lee saw the whole of the whole of the Shenandoah Valley lay waste by all of the fighting and how it impoverished all of the people living there. He believed that if he could march into the north and bring that kind of terror and destruction to the people they would demand that Lincoln make peace. He had hoped to go to Harrisburg but somehow the battle wound up at Gettysburg. The battle did not turn out as he planned.
*Union calvary commander Major General John Buford.
John WR 54light15Didn't Lee try to take Gettysburg because there was a warehouse full of boots sitting there? I've heard the Gettysburg boot factory story but I don't know whether or not it is true. Lee saw the whole of the whole of the Shenandoah Valley lay waste by all of the fighting and how it impoverished all of the people living there. He believed that if he could march into the north and bring that kind of terror and destruction to the people they would demand that Lincoln make peace. He had hoped to go to Harrisburg but somehow the battle wound up at Gettysburg. The battle did not turn out as he planned.
54light15Didn't Lee try to take Gettysburg because there was a warehouse full of boots sitting there?
I've heard the Gettysburg boot factory story but I don't know whether or not it is true.
Emphasis mine - zug.
Here's a good reason (or at least part of it) for that "somehow":
http://www.pacivilwartrails.com/stories/tales/burning-the-wrightsville-bridge
From what I have read, Gordon's brigade then went up to Gettysburg to join other forces.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
Differences I have observed between Northern and Southern railroads - from the viewpoint of the present day.
OvermodYes, but that doesn't count, any more than using slaves for roadbuilding or putting up buildings. I'm talking about skilled participation in trades and machinery operation ... the equivalent of whast was being done for wages in the New England mill world.
I agree that the south was an agricultural society and wanted to stay that way rather than industrialize as the north did. But in the north, including New England, there were people who built the railroads and who ran the railroads just as there were in the south. It seems to me that should count for something.
OvermodThere are much better targets out there than this one, Mr. Wimberly. See to those first. We're having civil, informed discussion in this one.
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
He apparently didn't like the discussion specifically concerning slavery and removed all of those posts.
John WRThere is one aspect of industrialization that the south did embrace with slaves: Railroads.
Yes, but that doesn't count, any more than using slaves for roadbuilding or putting up buildings. I'm talking about skilled participation in trades and machinery operation ... the equivalent of whast was being done for wages in the New England mill world.
(By extension, this would have taken care of the reading-and-writing issue, and of most if not all the threat of servile insurrection that seems to have dominated so much of the South's paranoid attention in this era. Teach the slaves the same kind of 'mind control' used in regular education to keep the proletariat in its place, and direct any rebellion to the kind of time-honored outlets that ordinary government police actions and connivance can smash...
BTW: This IS a discussion of Confederate railroads, just not purely historical. No difference beteen this and a 'did we scrap steam too soon' thread, or any other discussion of industrial alternate history,like the ways interurbans might not have kicked off this mortal coil if evil old GM/NCL had not done its wicked un-American work, or that bad old Judge had succeeded in getting rid of the Red Cars as part of his nefarious takeover of ToonTown.
There are much better targets out there than this one, Mr. Wimberly. See to those first. We're having civil, informed discussion in this one.
Overmodwhat if the South had embraced industrialization with slaves.
Overmod,
There is one aspect of industrialization that the south did embrace with slaves: Railroads. Planters rented their slaves to railroad companies who used then to build the road. When a road passed a plantation often the planter would take back stock in the road as the rent for his slaves. Also, some railroads brought and owned slaves. I've read of slaves being used as brakemen and firemen and I imagine they were used for other purposes too.
Victrola1 Did the Confederate government order much manufactured railroad equipment from foreign suppliers to support its armies?
Victrola,
Thomas Boaz in Guns for Cotton gives a list of the supplies Britain had shipped to the CSA and which were found in warehouses in Wilmington, North Carolina at the end of the war. One of the items on the list is railroad rails. So the CSA did order railroad equipment from foreign suppliers along with a great many other things. The rails were bought on credit and paid for with cotton bonds.
John
jeffrey-wimberly OK, you all have been getting off topic here. Time to get back to the Confederate Railroad.
OK, you all have been getting off topic here. Time to get back to the Confederate Railroad.
Aw, c'mon man, we're having fun here! No-one's been offended to my knowledge.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.