Battle of Bentonville

The Battle of Bentonville, fought March 19-21, 1865, was the last full-scale action of the Civil War in which a Confederate army was able to mount a tactical offensive. This major battle, the largest ever fought in North Carolina, was the only significant attempt to defeat the large Union army of Gen. William T. Sherman during its march through the Carolinas in the spring of 1865.

The Battle:

The year 1864 ended with Sherman's grand army in possession of Savannah, Georgia, following its infamous "March to the Sea" from Atlanta to the coast. The fall of Atlanta had virtually assured the re-election of U.S. President Abraham Lincoln that November, and the tide of war further shifted in favor of the Union. Ulysses S. Grant, general-in-chief of all Federal armies, now wanted Sherman's army to unite with the Army of the Potomac, under Grant's personal supervision in Virginia. Grant wanted Sherman's men ferried by sea to the Virginia fighting front, where the combined Federal forces might deal a fatal blow to Gen. Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia. The Confederacy's principal Eastern army, on the wane after four hard years of keeping the Federals at bay, was still in position between Grant and the Confederate capital at Richmond.
But William T. Sherman had other ideas, and proposed a bold strike into the very heart of the Confederacy with 60,000 men—a march northward through the Carolinas.

Sherman's army advanced on February 1, 1865, meeting little resistance as it marched northward. General P. G. T. Beauregard did in fact divide his Confederate forces to safeguard Charleston to the east, and Augusta, Georgia to the west. This unfortunate arrangement allowed Sherman's minions to pass through the heart of South Carolina virtually unopposed, cutting a wide swath of destruction as they advanced. With the city of Columbia and much of the South Carolina countryside in ruins, only North Carolina lay between Sherman's army and a junction with U. S. Grant's army in Virginia. To make matters worse for the Southern war effort, the Army of Tennessee and other Confederate forces in the Carolinas were widely scattered. With Robert E. Lee's army bogged down against Grant in the trenches of Petersburg, and Sherman's force swiftly approaching from the south, it was a dire time for the Confederacy.
As general-in-chief of all Southern armies, Lee questioned General Beauregard's ability to oppose the Federals. As the Union juggernaut continued northward, Lee appealed to the Confederate War Department for a replacement, explaining that he knew of no officer who had so much "the confidence of the army and people" as Gen. Joseph E. Johnston. Lee's choice for the command was not a popular one with Confederate president Jefferson Davis, who deemed Joe Johnston a personal enemy.

In one of the great personality clashes of the Civil War, the troubled relationship between Davis and Johnston came to a head in mid-July 1864, during the Atlanta Campaign. Furious with Johnston for retreating before Sherman in Georgia instead of engaging him in a decisive battle, Davis promptly removed "Old Joe" from command of the Army of Tennessee. But the Confederate president counted few options as Sherman approached North Carolina, and with Lee's earnest request Davis gave in and reluctantly allowed the general-in-chief to call upon Johnston for his services.


<BLOCKQUOTE> </BLOCKQUOTE>

Johston nearly had the battle. He crushed the Union flank but they had to slow down to redress the lines. By the time they could launch an attack, it was too late. The Union troops had gotten reinforcments.

Isn't that always the way? Sherman had more luck than brains...

Actually, Johnston's attacked were not well cooordinated. The union counterattack could have succeeded if Sherman had agreed to support it. See any good book on April 1865 or the battle of Bentonville.

An entire corps crumbled before Johnstons' attack and a whole flank caved in. It wasn't until after the intial success that things began to break down for the confederates.

Where are you getting a whole corps caved in? Bradley, The Battle of Bentonville, p. 179 "given the decisive repulse of Miles Brigade, the ASSAULT can only be regarded as a Union failure. But, ...Bragg asked for reinforcements and Johnson sent McLaws. However, " if McLaws' divison had attacked 2 hours earlier, [it} ould have routed Slocum's whole wing." In other words, their were plenty of union troops NOT ROUTED.

Also the Confederates had initial success at (among other defeats) at Shiloh, 7 Pines, Murfreeesboro, Gettysburg, & Ft. Steadman, and none produced a victory.

Reb, we're IBG and I are talking about the initial Confederate attack, the one that started the battle. The Confederate troops succeeded in overlapping and smashing through the Union flank. However, delays cost the South the victory; Federal reinforcements saved the day, and Johnston was denied this chance for a vital win.

One division collapsed, Carlin's. Morgan stayed put. See Foote, Bradley, The Road to Bennett Place, etc.

There is big difference between a division and a corps.
Apparently you have no sources since you won't quote any.

Civil War Battles documentary series states that it was a whole corps that was thrown back.

http://www.nps.gov/history/hps/abpp/battles/nc020.htm states that the whole XIV Corps was crushed. This is from the National Park Service.

http://www.mycivilwar.com/battles/650319.htm again, states that a whole Corps was crushed.

Perhaps crushed, not rout, is the better word here. But, all three scources state that it was a CORPS, not just a DIVISION, that was thrown back.

Crushed is not thrown back, and one division was still fighting pretty much on place--again, try some detailed histories. Some brief discriptions of Gettysburg talk about Pickett's charge as if everyone who went in was a Virginian.

Besides, if everything was so successful, why was McLaws moved rather than following up the success? If the Yanks were cleared out, then Johnson wasted a whole division rather than use it--not a winning formula.

You know what CW generals were like. Unable to take advantage at all.

Precisely my point, they weren't as successful as the Park summary says.

BTW, I once heard an official presentation at Fredericksburg National Park which stated that if Meade had been supported, his breakthrough would have won the battle for the North!

Rebel thunder wrote:

BTW, I once heard an official presentation at Fredericksburg National Park which stated that if Meade had been supported, his breakthrough would have won the battle for the North!

Yep, heard that before. Makes you wonder why anyone would try to pawn off stories of such a crucial event in history... But, the winners write the histories.

This reminds me, I think it was Military History I was reading a short while ago, and they had stories on major military disasters in history... In the story regarding Fredericksburg, it was stated that Meade was in command of the wing of the AOP assaulting Jackson's positions, when he was actually a division commander. I understand some of these errors get past the editors, but I can't believe anyone who's done any research on Fredericksburg at all would write such a thing.

Anyway, about Bentonville, Foote states that two Union divisions from different corps (approx. the size of an army corps) were separately thrown back during the battle, one being decisively routed for a very short time. But I'll be the first to agree that this battle, as most CW engagements, was poorly managed, and perhaps seriously bungled.

Yes, Foote states that, but also shows how that did not mean the The Confederates were in a position to win until Yankee reinforcements arrived.

General Stuart wrote:

Rebel thunder wrote:

BTW, I once heard an official presentation at Fredericksburg National Park which stated that if Meade had been supported, his breakthrough would have won the battle for the North!

Yep, heard that before. Makes you wonder why anyone would try to pawn off stories of such a crucial event in history... But, the winners write the histories.

This reminds me, I think it was Military History I was reading a short while ago, and they had stories on major military disasters in history... In the story regarding Fredericksburg, it was stated that Meade was in command of the wing of the AOP assaulting Jackson's positions, when he was actually a division commander. I understand some of these errors get past the editors, but I can't believe anyone who's done any research on Fredericksburg at all would write such a thing.

Yeah, especially since it was Franklin that led the wing, not Meade. But, back to Bentonville, allowances must be made, since this is Johnston that led the battle for the cons, and this was only the second time in the war when he had made an offensive battle.

Agreed, guys.