Search

The purpose of this research and writing is to examine the military history which transpired in the Shenandoah Valley during the American Civil War. There is a general motivation to discover more about the people who made the decisions that impacted the Valley. Two research questions will be considered. First, why did the Union and Confederate leadership conduct operations in the Shenandoah Valley as they did in the Civil War? Second, how did the conduct of operations in the Shenandoah Valley change during the war for both the North and the South? Readers will encounter what happened in the Shenandoah Valley during the Civil War from the perspective of some of the participants who lived through it. This encounter will be presented from the analysis of both primary and secondary sources. Such sources as collected papers of people including Robert E. Lee and Robert Milroy along with recorded history from units like the 118th Pennsylvania will be included. The Shenandoah Valley campaigns of the Civil War tell the story of two wars. In the beginning, there was the dramatic success of the Confederate army in the Valley in the first half of the war. Subsequently, there was the ultimate, final success of the Union army in the last half of the war. Unfortunately for the Confederacy, the Union success came at the right time and marked the end of the war for the South. This duality of emphasis on the Valley can be seen in two observations. First, the Federal leadership did not understand the importance of the Shenandoah Valley until they did. Second, the Confederate leadership always understood the importance of the Valley. Their problem was they were able to adequately defend it until they could no longer defend it. In the end, the explanation for the ability to access the Valley boiled down to the ability of both the Union and the Confederacy leadership to hold on to it.

Throughout history, most individuals have lived their lives, and then faded into oblivion with little to remember them by. Relatively few receive credit for significantly affecting the course of human history and obtain appropriate remembrance in accounts of the past. For those whose memories endure, due to the unrepeatable nature of past events, history remains vulnerable to the corrupting influence of myths and legends that distort historical realities. Confederate Lieutenant General Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson (1824-1863) serves as a prime example of an historical figure, who, though deserving of his place in history, has been subsequently distorted by biographers and memory. The following discussion largely passes over the general’s already well-analyzed military career, and explores other factors that contributed to his incredible rise in fame to the exalted position of southern hero. Topics include Jackson’s well-documented eccentricities, the manner of his death, the social climate of the post-war South, and his subsequent treatment by early biographers. All will contribute to the answer of the question, “what made Jackson into a legend?”

Throughout history, most individuals have lived their lives, and then faded into oblivion with little to remember them by. Relatively few receive credit for significantly affecting the course of human history and obtain appropriate remembrance in accounts of the past. For those whose memories endure, due to the unrepeatable nature of past events, history remains vulnerable to the corrupting influence of myths and legends that distort historical realities. Confederate Lieutenant General Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson (1824-1863) serves as a prime example of an historical figure, who, though deserving of his place in history, has been subsequently distorted by biographers and memory. The following discussion largely passes over the general’s already well-analyzed military career, and explores other factors that contributed to his incredible rise in fame to the exalted position of southern hero. Topics include Jackson’s well-documented eccentricities, the manner of his death, the social climate of the post-war South, and his subsequent treatment by early biographers. All will contribute to the answer of the question, “what made Jackson into a legend?”

Confederate Lieutenant General Thomas J. Jackson is considered one of the greatest tacticians who ever lived. His Valley Campaign of 1862 is a classic example of the effective use of maneuver warfare. While much has been written about Jackson's tactics, very little attention has been paid to his leadership of the soldiers who executed his tactical plans. The United States Army's recent emphasis on maneuver warfare has stressed the importance of leadership in the conduct of such warfare. This study is an analysis of Jackson's military leadership as he commanded units from brigade to corps level in the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia to determine if he met the requirements of a good leader as those requirements are defined by current US Army doctrine. The study uses current Army doctrine as the basis to judge the effectiveness of Jackson as a leader. It discusses Jackson's background and its effect on the character of his leadership, the leadership that he displayed during the Civil War, and then compares his actions to current doctrine. The study concludes that while some of Jackson's actions deviated significantly from today's doctrinally sound leadership practices, in the aggregate his leadership was congruous with current doctrine and contributed to his success as a field commander.