Today's the 150th anniversary of both the fall of Vicksburg and the Battle of Helena, Arkansas. They are related. The Confederate assault on Helena was an attempt to relieve pressure on Vicksburg, but it came too late, and ended in defeat. The fall of Vicksburg split the Confederacy at the Mississippi River and boosted U.S. Grant's status as a Union commander. Helena was a failed attempt to knock out a Union garrison further up the Mississippi toward Memphis, Tennessee.
At Helena, Arkansas, on July 4, 1863, the Union garrison only had about 4,100 men, including Jeremiah C. France (1840-1865), one of my ancestors serving in the 43rd Indiana Volunteer Infantry Regiment. The Confederates assaulted with just under 8,000 troops. It was a sharp, bloody fight. The entrenched Union troops lost about 249 casualties while the much more exposed attackers lost more than 1,600. The bluecoats had entrenched artillery and a gunboat in the river in place to rake the rebels with shot and shell. Another horrible battle, overshadowed by Gettysburg and Vicksburg. I intend to visit sometime in the next year or so.
Today's Rune: Wholeness.
5 comments:
Small loses compared to Gettysburg, but in the scheme of things in the days before that, a pretty big loss of life.
Isn't that the battle that got Grant shipped further west because his commander was jealous of the press Grant got instead of himself? But Ultimately got grant command of the entire Union Army?
I was just reading about Vicksburg recently. I'm not sure that you could classify Grant as a genius, but he was competent, which was more than one could say about his predecessors.
Erik, I can clearly remember my teacher, Mr. Haugerud, tryin' to learn me about that war!
Warfare is a fascinating subject. Despite the dubious morality of using violence to achieve personal or political aims. It remains that conflict has been used to do just that throughout recorded history.
Your article is very well done, a good read.
Post a Comment