The Savannah Campaign was one of the many battles waged by Major General William Tecumseh Sherman in his total war concept to destroy and devastate the Confederacy’s support. With the destruction of the rail and commercial center at Atlanta, General Sherman set his sights on Savannah with an intent to further cripple the state and ensure Union victory. In order to accomplish this task, there was one obstacle that his forces must overcome. This obstacle was Fort McAllister, a massive earthwork whose sole purpose was to defend the southern area of Savannah from coastal attacks by Federal forces. The purpose of this information paper is to provide a general summary of Fort McAllister’s history and purpose and the importance of its strategic location in the Savannah Campaign. Additionally, the six warfighting functions will be analyzed surrounding Fort McAllister’s garrison unit led by Major Anderson and the assault from Brigadier General Hazen’s infantry units.
The terrain surrounding the Savannah region mostly consists of swamps and marshlands. Rivers flow east into the ocean, creating a variety of entrances to for coastal endeavors. The concept for Fort McAllister derived from the increasing threat of war spreading across the land. The overall coast of Georgia was considered impractical to defend, and the protection of the Atlantic and Gulf Railroad was critical for rapid mobilization and movement of forces to any threat. With Savannah being located near several water approaches, a strong defense network would be absolute in denying the Union from utilizing the sea for attack approaches. Earlier during the American Revolution the British captured the city with ease due to the lack of such emplacements (consider for foot note inst...
... middle of paper ...
...ly as possible. Intelligence of the fort’s defenses and abilities received from Sherman’s scouts allowed the General to conduct his mission planning to take Genesis Point. Both his and Major Anderson’s mission command were efficiently in both the areas of offense and defense operations. Despite only lasting 15 minutes against Sherman’s forces, Anderson’s garrison was stubborn to the end and would not surrender without a fight.
The significance of this battle showcased the importance of good decision-making as well as bad decision-making. General Sherman practicing good mission command enabled a quick defeat of the Savannah region by quickly taking over Fort McAllister; whereas General Hardee’s bad decision to abandon Fort McAllister to keep the Savannah line augmented would cost not just the fort itself but the city of Savannah as it feel back under Union control.
COL Prescott’s role in the Battle of Bunker Hill, or more correctly know as the Battle of Breed’s Hill, is a great example of how to properly execute mission command. An overview from The Cowpens Staff Ride and Battlefield Tour (Moncure) reveals a number of operation and strategic objectives that the American militia had to consider. In this instance, COL Prescott takes charge of 1200 men with instructions to defend against incoming British forces that were seeking to occupy the surrounding hills during the Siege of Boston campaign. COL Prescott utilized a variety of steps in the operations process that contributed to his expert utilization of mission command over his forces. Through various sources from published works by experts on the subject, COL Prescott’s mission command demonstrates its effectiveness in his understanding of the situation against the British, his visualization to create an end state for t...
As students, studying battles such as this, we have the advantage of hindsight, knowing the outcome. Nonetheless, we can still learn valuable lessons from it. To do so, this analysis will explore some of the decisions of the leaders at Gettysburg, and how they were affected by the operational variables. This essay will scrutinize some of the leaders at Gettysburg, and the impact of their actions. The outcome of this analysis will show that what was true in 1863 is still true today.
General Richard Sherman’s march to the sea has just finished. After successful capturing Atlanta, Georgia, General Sherman directed his Union army to Savannah, Georgia. Along the way, northerners wreaked havoc on Southern cotton mills and destroy train tracks while completely uprooting 20 percent of Georgian plantations. This effectively halted the Confederate’s means of transportation and economic structure subsequently w...
Rickard, J. (2006, May 1). American Civil War: The Shenandoah Valley. Military History Encyclopedia on the Web. Retrieved March 25, 2012, from http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/wars_american_civil_war04_shenandoah.html
Bonner, Michael Brem and Peter McCord. "Reassessment of the Union Blockade's Effectiveness in the Civil War." The North Carolina Historical Review (2011): 375-395.
The Battle of Antietam could have been a devastating and fatal blow to the Confederate Army if Gen. McClellan acted decisively, took calculated risks, and veered away from his cautious approach to war. There are many instances leading up to the battle and during the battle in which he lacks the necessary offensive initiative to effectively cripple and ultimately win the war. This paper is intended to articulate the failure of Mission Command by GEN McClellan by pointing out how he failed to understand, visualize, describe and direct the battlefield to his benefit.
Therefore, neither of the generals exceeded the other when it comes to military strategies, which rather debunks Shaara’s depiction of Longstreet’s advanced knowledge of modern warfare. Despite of the importance of the Battle of Gettysburg, often marked as the turning point of the war, General Longstreet should not obey an order that results in a significant loss of men that would be extremely difficult to replace at this time. Already limited by the amount of men still able to fight, pushing additional forces in an open battle would just nearly deplete the confederate soldiers completely. Since this battle was one that went on until a majority of ones sided were depleted, the south should have played it safe against the Unions nearly surplus supply of
Major Anderson thought that the people of Charleston were about t attempt to seize Fort Sumter. He would not stand for this, so since he was commander of all the defenses of the harbor, and without any orders to disagree with him, he said that he could occupy any one of his choice. Since he was being watched he only told his plan to three or four officers that he knew that he could trust. He first removed the women and children with a supply of provisions. They were sent to Fort Johnson on Dec. 26 in vessels. The firing of tree guns at Moultrie was to be the signal for them to be conveyed to Sumter. In the evening the garrison went to Sumter. The people of Charleston knew that the women and children were at Fort Johnson and thought that Anderson would take his troops there. (www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/battlefort-sumter.html)
The Battle of Cold Harbor in spring of 1864 was one of General Ulysses S. Grant’s worst offensive defeats during the Civil War. Grant failed to describe his mission command to his subordinate, direct his units to correct movement, understand his operational environment, and lead his army with a coordinated plan. Grant had a stronger, bigger, and better-equipped army than his enemy, but his failure in the mission command process led to fatal mistakes before and during the battle. Due to failed leadership, the Union preparation for this war was so poor that it suffered nearly 7,000 casualties in under an hour, making it one of the most brutal confrontations of the Civil War.
Most of the sources of conflict were placed on land claims. General James Oglethorpe, while in command, made several attempts to seize Spanish territory. Most proved to be unsuccessful because of the use of numerous commanders and varied armed forces which resulted in ineffectiveness spoiling his advantage of surprise (Doc B). Commanders even failed when attempts were made to attack using the combination of land with sea due to the inability to coordinate the two forces (Doc B). Inevitably, despite England’s good defense planning when making Georgia a buffer colony, in the end the constant battle over land with enemies and defiant colonists led to the defensive
Additionally, the first attack at Fort Sumter was poorly organized and was expected by the North. Lincoln had wanted to attack, but waited so as to retain the sympathies of any Northern moderates. The South's attack played into what he wanted.
The Battle of Antietam on September 17th, 1862 was the single, most bloodiest day in American History, where more than 23,000 men became casualties of war. General George Brinton McClellan’s inability to use Mission Command, as a warfighting function was a key reason this battle did not end the American Civil War. An analysis of General McClellan’s Mission Command operational process will show how his personality, bias, and fear were detrimental to the outcome of the Battle of Antietam.
The Civil War consisted of many legendary battles over the soil of the United and Confederate States of America, which will be retold for generations in history books. Although these land battles were indeed great, the concept of this paper will be the Naval warfare of the Civil War, paying certain attention to the battle between the Monitor and the Merrimac.
This marked the only chance Georgia had at becoming a free state, away from the tight grasps of the British, because they had the help of the French’s navy, superior weapons, and higher manpower. The Siege of Savannah was fought by the British on one side and the French troops and American Patriots on the other side. It was a Franco-American effort against the British, and the French played a major role in the war with General d’Estaing as one of their major generals, but his and the Patriots’ preparations and what went wrong in the battle made it a loss, which led to a chain of events that affected the entire war.
Stephen W. Sears’ Landscape Turned Red is an account of political and military plans. Especially General Robert E. Lee’s Maryland Campaign as well as the Battle of Antietam. Sears frames his work around the pending support of Great Britain and France to the Confederate cause due to cotton. Landscape Turned Red covers the battle of Antietam. It offers a vivid account of both armies, the soldiers and officers, and the bloody campaign. It analyzes the impact of Antietam on the Civil War as a whole. Sears' use of diaries, dispatches, and letters recreate the Battle of Antietam. You experience the battle not only from its leaders but also by its soldiers, both Union and Confederate. Sears attempts to examine the tactical moves of both Lee and General George McClellan. He also talks about the foolish decisions that troubled both the Federal and Confederate forces. Sears' use of traits, political pursuits, and tactical preferences, explain the thoughts of many. Some of these include President Lincoln, General Halleck and General McClellan, and their subordinates. Stephen Ward Sears is an American historian specializing in the American Civil War. He is a graduate of Oberlin College and an attendant to a journalism seminar at Radcliffe-Harvard. As an author he has concentrated on the military history of the American Civil War. Such as the battles and leaders of the Army of the Potomac. He was an editor for the Educational Department at American Heritage Publishing Company. American Heritage Publishing two of his ten books.