View single post by BHR62
 Posted: Fri Jan 20th, 2012 08:26 pm
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 

Joined: Sun Dec 12th, 2010
Location: Indiana USA
Posts: 242

  back to top

csamillerp wrote: you just said what ive been thinking. Vicksburg alone does not give the confederacy control of the miss. it may mildly hamper union transports and gunboats while passing but did it have enough value to sacrafice 29,000 confederates that could have been used for other things? the confederacy couldnt have had any hope of controlling the miss at that time so why diligently hold it?

Vicksburg was a huge thorn to Union control of the Mississippi.  Its location was where the river curves making ships slow down.  The first time the navy tried to sail past it they were turned away by the heavy fire from Vicksburg batteries.  Grant tried to fix the problem by digging a canal around it.  But soldiers and freed slaves were dropping like flies from disease.   He had no choice but to take Vicksburg out. 

I think Vicksburg meant a lot to the Confederacy.  Was it worth sacrificing a 29,000 man army....very hard call.  I understand why they did it....but like you said they could have used those troops elsewhere.   Or they might have felt that Vicksburg was impregnable and Grant would beat his army to death assaulting it.

 Close Window