Embattled Capital: A Guide to Richmond During the Civil War

by Robert M. Dunkerly and Doug Crenshaw

SOPO’s Take: Embattled Capital is a concise reference work on Richmond, Virginia during the Civil War utilizing the Emerging Civil War series format to which Savas Beatie fans have become accustomed.  Chapters include, but are not limited to:

• Battles and battlefields surrounding Richmond, including dates of engagements as well as current sites at Richmond National Battlefield Park. In addition to Petersburg campaign related sites, there are many from the 1862 battles as well as the Bermuda Hundred Campaign.
• Local military units, including paragraph length descriptions of each
• Defenses of Richmond includes a NICE map of the entire set of defenses around Richmond and Petersburg
• Hospitals, including Chimborazo, and period images of many
• Prisons, including Libby and Belle Isle
• Cemeteries, including Hollywood Cemetery
• Landmarks
• Museums and Historic Sites

Book Summary/Review:

BTC Siege of Petersburg Book Notes:

BTC Siege of Petersburg Book Sources:

Publisher Info:

About the Book

“On To Richmond!” cried editors for the New York Tribune in the spring of 1861. Thereafter, that call became the rallying cry for the North’s eastern armies as they marched, maneuvered, and fought their way toward the capital of the Confederacy.

Just 100 miles from Washington, DC, Richmond served as a symbol of the rebellion itself.

Richmond was home to the Confederate Congress, cabinet, president, and military leadership. And it housed not only the Confederate government but also some of the Confederacy’s most important industry and infrastructure. The city was filled with prisons, hospitals, factories, training camps, and government offices.

Through four years of war, armies battled at its doorsteps—and even penetrated its defenses.

Civilians felt the impact of war in many ways: food shortages, rising inflation, a bread riot, industrial accidents, and eventually, military occupation. To this day, the war’s legacy remains deeply written into the city and its history.

Embattled Capital: A Guide to Richmond During the Civil War by historians Doug Crenshaw and Robert M. Dunkerly tells the story of the Confederate capital before, during, and after the Civil War. This guidebook includes a comprehensive list of places to visit: the battlefields around the city, museums, historic sites, monuments, cemeteries, historical preservation groups, and more.

Paperback Edition

• Buy the Paperback Edition

ISBN: 978-1-61121-491-8

Publisher: Savas Beatie

Release Date: 2021

Pages: 178 pages

The Siege of Petersburg Online Pages Which Mention This Book:

• Embattled Capital: A Guide to Richmond During the Civil War by Dunkerly and Crenshaw

¹

Source:

SOPO Editor’s Note: Captain William H. Parker served with the Confederate James River Squadron during the Siege of Petersburg.  Their role was to protect Richmond from attack by the Union Navy.  Parker wrote about his service in the United States and Confederate navies in the book Recollections of a Naval Officer, 1841-1865, published in 1883.  This excerpt is taken from pages 336-338 of that book, and describes two small actions from the Confederate perspective on June 19 and 21, 1864.  I’m publishing this excerpt to show you the Confederate perspective because I will be releasing reports from the Union side from the Naval Official Records, Volume 10, in the coming weeks.

Captain William H. Parker, CSS Richmond, Describes Two Actions on the James River Near Trent’s Reach, June 19 and 21, 1864

Commander William H. Parker was in command of ironclad CSS Richmond on June 19 and 21, 1864.

About this time [mid-June 1864] I [Captain William H. Parker of the Richmond] accompanied Commodore [John K.] Mitchell several times to General Beauregard’s headquarters. The commodore was in constant communication with the general; but I am unable to say what their plans were.¹ On the 19th of June [1864] our squadron² got underweigh from the anchorage at Chapin’s Bluff and proceeded down the river. At 2 P. M. we anchored off upper Howlet[t]s, which I suppose is in an air line two miles from lower Howlet[t]s; but by the river much farther.³ A reference to the map will show that the James river pursues a very circuitous course between City Point and Richmond. It is indicated by the names, such as Curl’s Neck, Turkey Bend, Dutch Gap, &c. In some cases a distance by land of a mile requires eight or ten to accomplish by water. From our anchorage at upper Howlets [Howlett’s Farm] nothing could be seen of the monitors in Trent’s reach—in fact we were anchored under a bluff on the right bank of the river.⁴ General [Benjamin F.] Butler had erected a tower of wood at Trent’s reach perhaps 120 feet high, as a post of observation. It gave him a very good one. Our artillery officers were prevented from trying to destroy it by the scarcity of ammunition. We could see the top of this tower from our anchorage, and of course the masts of our gunboats were visible from it, but not the hulls.⁵

This map depicts the Union monitors in Trent’s Reach shelling Howlett’s Farm and accidentally causing casualties in the Confederate James River Squadron, which was anchored nearby on June 19, 1864.

We had been at anchor an hour or two not expecting a movement of any kind—indeed I was sitting in an arm-chair on the shield of the Richmond reading—when a shell was fired from one of the monitors in our direction. It exploded just at the river bank and scattered the pieces about the forward deck of the Virginia, wounding three men. Whilst we were wondering at this, another shell came and exploded just after it had passed over us, and again another. As we could not return the fire, and there was no necessity to remain and be made a target of, we got underweigh and went back to Chapin’s Bluff.⁶ As the guns had to be pointed by directions from those in the tower I have mentioned, I thought this the most remarkable shooting I had ever seen or heard of; but happening to mention this circumstance after the war to a naval officer present at the time on board one of the monitors he informed me that they were not shooting at us at all. He said that some officials had come from Washington on a visit, and they wishing to see a large gun fired, the monitors had obliged them. In those days they were not particular as to where they fired, and the result was as I have mentioned. A curious incident certainly, but the facts were precisely as I have stated them.

The authorities in Richmond now became very anxious that the navy should make some demonstration on the river in order to relieve the great pressure on the army. Commodore Mitchell held a council of war; and it was decided to attack the monitors lying in Trent’s reach, at long range, in connection with the heavy guns we had by this time mounted at Howlets.⁷ Our vessels could not go fairly up to the obstructions and face the monitors, for we knew that the Richmond and Fredericksburg could not stand the 15-inch shot. We thought then that the Virginia could, but were afterward undeceived.

The Confederates unmasked Battery Dantzler at the western end of Trent’s Reach on June 21, 1864, setting off a wild engagement against the Union monitors that also included a mostly inaccurate crossfire from the Confederate James River Squadron to the north.

On the 21st of June [1864] the vessels got underweigh, and stood down. The Fredericksburg was to take a station in a bend in the river, about two miles (in an air line) from the monitors, and the Virginia and Richmond, with the gunboats, were to anchor on the north side of Dutch gap, about a mile and a half above them. In getting underweigh my vessel, the Richmond, parted a wheel-rope and it got wound up round the shaft and disabled her. We got a gunboat to tow us down, but did not get to the Virginia until the afternoon. We only fired a few shots. The whole affair, however, was a fiasco. We could not see the monitors, and they could not see us. They were not hit once during the day by us, and the reports speak of the firing of our vessels as extremely wild. How could it be otherwise under the circumstances? The battery at Howlet’s struck the monitors but once.⁸ The fact is we were wrong in yielding to the clamor of the army to “do something.” We knew that we could do nothing with the monitors at long range, even if we could see to hit them; we knew equally well that we could not stand the effect of their guns at close quarters. We might have gotten our gunboats through the obstructions, and made a dash at them with torpedoes; but it must be remembered that the enemy had a battery on shore to cover the obstructions. Our army anticipated a great naval engagement that day, and we were expected to accomplish wonders. The soldiers wore all on the lookout; they looked to see us run over the obstructions like smoke, and destroy the monitors in no time. The result being so much of a disappointment to them, we were much ridiculed. The whole affair was a mortification to us of the navy. From this time until the close of the summer campaign we remained below Chapin’s Bluff, shelling the batteries put up by the enemy on the left bank of the river occasionally; and assisting the army so far as we could.⁹

Source/Notes:

Engagement of Federal fleet with Confederate ironclads and shore batteries at Howlett’s, June 21, 1864.

[Telegram.]

Flagship Malvern,
Farrar’s Island, June 21, 1864—11 p. m.
(Via Fort Monroe, 4: 30 p. m., 22d. Received 6: 45 p. m.)

Acting Rear Admiral Samuel P. Lee submitted this report from his flagship USS Malvern on the night of June 21, 1864, mere hours after the Action at Howlett’s Bluff had ended.

About noon enemy opened fire from Howlett’s Battery and from his ironclads and gunboats, which were concealed from view above Dutch Gap.

Saugus’s deck, before turret, was injured by one X-inch shot. A number of 1-inch iron plates required immediately to protect weak and cover wounded places; also spare screws for XV-inch guns. The enemy seems determined to control this part of the river.

Instead of withdrawing the Tecumseh, it is necessary to largely increase the ironclad force here.

S[amuel]. P. Lee,
Acting Rear-Admiral.

Hon. Gideon Welles,
Secretary of Navy.¹

Source:

¹

Comments on the Map “Action at Howlett’s Bluff, June 21, 1864”

I started with a base map found between pages 632 and 633 (and still represented as folded together at Google Books!) of Volume 11 of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebellion. Luckily, a passable but still slightly folded version of the map is available online at the University of North Texas Libraries site, allowing me to snip out the relevant portion at a good resolution. I removed Battery Wood and Battery Brooke on the Confederate side because they were not operational until October 1864.  I also removed Battery Sawyer on the Union side because it was not completed and operational until about a week after this small affair.  In addition, Battery Semmes is located in the wrong place on the Official Records map, and I had to shift the name further north to the James.  See this map as just one source I found which places Battery Semmes on the James River near Howlett’s Farm.  I placed the ships on this map based on the reports found in , pages 176-193, and also an account of this fight found on pages 336 to 338 of William H. Parker’s Recollections of a Naval Officer. Parker was in command of the Richmond, but she was fouled on a chain and had to be towed toward the fighting.  At best she got in one or two shots as things ended.  I chose not to represent her on the map as she was not involved for most of the engagement. Note that this fight happened because the newly armed Howlett House Battery, or Battery Dantzler, was unmasked just before noon.  This activity caused the Federal monitors to begin firing, and a general engagement ensued.  After Battery Dantzler became active, the Union monitors spent their time around the bend from Trent’s Reach nearer Dutch Gap. They would stay just out of sight of the new battery rather than constantly engage and expend ammunition. Federal forts were strengthened along the south bank of the James and were used to engage Battery Dantzler going forward. The Confederate work permanently changed the dynamic of power in Trent’s Reach for the rest of the Siege. I am extremely grateful to Bruce Terrell and Taft Kiser for their assistance in helping me find the location of the “ferry”, which turned out to be near the Graveyard.  The Fredericksburg was reported to be near “the ferry” and also “downriver from upper Howlett’s.” Their help gave me the one additional piece of information needed to more accurately place this Confederate ironclad.

Source:

¹

Comments on the Map “Union Monitors Shell the Howlett’s Farm Area, June 19, 1864”

I started with a base map found between pages 632 and 633 (and still represented as folded together at Google Books!) of Volume 11 of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebellion. Luckily, a passable but still slightly folded version of the map is available online at the University of North Texas Libraries site, allowing me to snip out the relevant portion at a good resolution. I removed Battery Wood and Battery Brooke on the Confederate side because they were not operational until October 864.  I also removed Battery Sawyer on the Union side because it was not completed and operational until about a week after this small affair.  In addition, Battery Semmes is located in the wrong place on the Official Records map, and I had to shift the name further north to the James.  See this map as just one source I found which places Battery Semmes on the James River near Howlett’s Farm.  The linked map places the Union monitors in Trent’s Reach at about 1800 to 2400 yards from Battery Semmes, and by extension the Confederate James River Squadron nearby, on the afternoon of June 19, 1864. Also keep in mind that the Howlett House Battery, later called Battery Dantzler, was not QUITE operational on June 19.  So even though you see Battery Dantzler on the western end of Trent’s Reach, know that this battery played no role in this small affair.  That battery would play a LARGE role in an action two days later, on June 21, 1864, as soon as its guns were placed.

Source:

In the upcoming weeks I’ll be posting numerous items pertaining to the little known June 21, 1864 Action at Howlett’s Bluff.  These include Union and Confederate reports and telegrams from Volume 10 of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebellion, a look at June 19-21, 1864 through the eyes of Lieutenant William H. Parker, captain of the CSS Richmond, one of the Confederate ironclads involved in these events, and several original maps I created to help readers understand the action.

A closeup pulled from a map in Volume 11 of the Naval Official Records shows the larger area being contested by the opposing navies.  Trent’s Reach, just left of center at the bottom of the map, was no man’s land during most of the Siege of Petersburg. Events on June 21, 1864 in Trent’s Reach made it so.

As the Petersburg Campaign became static in mid-June 1864 naval affairs grew heated and changed the dynamic at Trent’s Reach for the rest of the campaign.  Obstructions had been placed in Trent’s Reach (see the map above) just as the Siege of Petersburg kicked off.  Ulyssses S. Grant had essentially ordered it done.  The goal was to stop the Confederate James River Squadron, including ironclad rams Virginia II, Richmond, and Fredericksburg from coming down the James River from Richmond (north of the top left corner of the map) to wreak havoc on Union supplies at Bermuda Hundred (pictured at the lower left edge of the map) as well as City Point (just off the lower right map edge to the south).

Prior to June 21, 1864, Union monitors were able to steam into Trent’s Reach, right up to the obstructions in the James.  That all quickly changed when, on the morning of June 21, the Confederates unmasked a hidden battery they had built just northwest of the Howlett House on the James.  It had a perfect view down the entire stretch of Trent’s Reach.  Four Union monitors, the Tecumseh, Saugus, Canonicus, and the double turreted behemoth Onondaga all fired deliberately at this new battery from the eastern end of Trent’s Reach.  The Howlett Battery answered back, as did the Confederate James River Squadron, posted a few bends upriver. The lead Union monitor Tecumseh managed a few hits on the new Confederate work, dismounting a 7-inch Rifle near the end of the engagement.  Battery Howlett, in turn, bounced a shot off of the deck and turret of USS Saugus, second in line, causing some minor damage to the ship but major damage to the Union Navy’s psyche.

A view looking generally east down the James River at Trent’s Reach from Battery Howlett, newly unmasked on June 21, 1864.  Note the obstructions in the mid-distance across the river, as well as Union monitors in the left distance. The scene must have looked much like this on June 21, 1864 during the Action at Howlett’s Bluff. (October 22, 1864 London Illustrated News)

After an engagement which lasted from 11:30 am until nearly 6:30 pm, the situation had been permanently changed.  Union Acting Rear Admiral Samuel P. Lee, the commander of the North Atlantic Blockading Squadron, could no longer keep his monitors on the eastern edge of Trent’s Reach.  Battery Howlett commanded this stretch of the James River now.  Lee could not keep expending ammunition at the rate needed to silence the new Confederate threat.  Instead, he asked Major General Benjamin Butler to emplace heavy land artillery on the southeastern edges of Trent’s reach to keep the Howlett Battery in check.  And the Union warships patrolling the James stopped coming into Trent’s Reach, preferring to stay hidden behind the southeastern portion of Farrar’s Island, and only to be used if the Confederate ironclads were actively coming down the river to attack.  They would eventually do so during the January 1865 Battle of Trent’s Reach.

I hope this short introduction whets your appetite for a deeper dive into this little engagement in the coming weeks.  Stay tuned!

[Report of Acting Master William B. Sheldon, U. S. Navy, commanding U. S. S. Shokokon, of cooperative engagements in Pamunkey River, June 21, 1864, including Summary of Shokokon‘s Movements from May 28 to June 23, 1864]

[Subenclosure C]

U. S. S. SHOKOKON,
Cumberland, Va., June 21, 1864. 

Civilian Steamer Eliza Hancox was fired into by Confederate Cavalry on June 21, 1864, causing USS Shokokon to respond. (James Bard Painting)

Sir: I would respectfully submit the following report: This morning, 8:30 a.m., just after a thick fog had cleared away, the transport steamer Eliza Hancox passed up. When abreast of Cumberland Point, 1 mile above where this vessel was lying, she was fired on by a party of rebels, who were concealed on the bank of the river. I immediately opened fire with our forward battery, and slipped the chain, steamed up to the point where the fire proceeded from, the most of our shell exploding near and among them. They soon fell back under cover of the woods out of sight. Shelled the woods, but could not get any reply. Kept in the position near the point until 12 o’clock m. I learned from a man whom I called down to the beach that the enemy were a party of dismounted cavalry, numbering about 150; that they had fallen back toward New Kent Court-House. He reported that they had some wounded, but could not tell whether there were any killed. I also learned from him that they dismounted about a mile back and came down to the river during the fog. Nothing more has been seen or heard from them up to this, 6 p. m. Enclosed I will send report of ammunition expended.

Respectfully, your obedient servant,

W[illiam]. B. Sheldon,
Acting Master, Commanding.

Lieutenant-Commander Cha[rle]s. A. Babcock,
Senior Officer, Commanding U. S. S. Morse, White House, Va.

Expenditure of ammunition, U. S. S. Shokokon, June 21, 1864.

Rounds.

5-second 30-pound Parrott shell……………………………………………………………..5

10-second 30-pound Parrott shell……………………………………………………………5

5-second 30-pound Parrott case shot………………………………………………………1

24-pounder shrapnel………………………………………………………………………………5

24-pounder canister……………………………………………………………………………….1

Total……………………………………………………………………………………………………..17

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

S[amuel]. P. Crafts,
Executive Officer.

[Subenclosure D.]

U. S. S. Shokokon,
Off Yorktown, June 24, 1864.

Sir. In obedience to orders from Acting Rear-Admiral S. P. Lee, May 28, 1864, to report to you at Yorktown, or wherever you might be, I reported to you at White House, May 31, 5 o’clock a. m.; was ordered by you to proceed down the Pamunkey and take position off Cumberland, to protect the transports passing up and down. In compliance with your orders, I took position where I could command Cumberland Point and an old earthwork formerly held by the enemy, on the right bank of the river. Nothing occurred of note until the 6th of June, when a small force of the One hundred and seventy-ninth New York Volunteers came down to occupy the heights. I gave all assistance they required in landing and getting their stores ashore. Everything remained quiet until the morning of the 21st instant, when a party of about 150 rebel cavalry (dismounted) came down to Cumberland Point— during a thick fog—and fired from the bank of the river at one of the transports passing that point—details as per report of that day. On the evening of the 22d the force occupying the heights evacuated and passed down the river. I rendered them all assistance possible in getting on board the transport.

On the 23d instant, 2:45 p. m., was ordered by you to proceed down the river in company with the other gunboats, arriving off Yorktown at 11:15 p. m., June 23, 1864.

Respectfully, your obedient servant,

W[illiam]. B. Sheldon,
Acting Master, Commanding.

Lieutenant-Commander Cha[rle]s. A. Babcook,
Senior Officer, Commanding U. S. S. Morse, Off Yorktown, Va.¹

Source:

BACK TO JOHN A. MAYERS LETTERS PAGE

Happy New Year to You All

Camp 99th Reg[imen]t. Penn[sylvani]a Vet[eran]. Vol[enteer]s
Left of Petersburg Va
December 25th 1864

Dear Sister [Rose],

John A. Mayers, the author of this touching Christmas letter home. (Courtesy of Rachael Parker. Used with permission. Do not reproduce.)

As I have nothing to occupy my mind, I sit down to write you a few lines to let you know how I have spent the Christmas today. This morning Jacob¹ and his chum came over to see me, and spent the Christmas with me. We had some whiskey and we made some hot punch of it. I cooked some dinner for them which consisted of coffee, bread and butter fried beef steak, and fried potatoes, which composed the entire meal, although we enjoyed it as much as anybody else would turkey and other fancy stuffs. We had a talk over old times and our adventures and escapes and one thing with another. Jacob started home again about five o clock this evening, with the promise of seeing me again in the course of a few days. I was over seeing him a few days ago and staid [stayed] with him all night returning next morning. I hope you enjoyed a happy Christmas at home, and I do sincerely wish you may also enjoy a very happy New Year.

Georgie and Julia Mayer , younger siblings of John. (Courtesy of Rachael Parker. Used with permission. Do not reproduce.)

Dear Rosy I want you to give me an account of the time you had on Christmas at home, and how Georgie and Julia² got along and how your Christmas tree looked if you had one. I am very sorry I haven’t some kind of gift to send you but I sincerely hope, the next Christmas, if we live, will be a happy one, and that we may all be seated at home around a great big turkey gobbler.³

Dear Rosy our Lieutenant is soon going home on a furlough and he will stop at the house if he comes home, he says he will make up a big box himself and send it to me, he will know what to send. Him and me, are living together in one house, and mess together. As soon as he returns from home he will try and get me a furlough also, then I hope I will have the pleasure of meeting you all safe and well.

Dear Rosy I have never received them photographs which Peter Thompson sent, nor any of his letters. I should very much like to see one of his photographs. If you have two I wish you would be so kind as to send me one of them. I can return it to you again if you wish. Enclosed you will find a photograph of a young lady, I want you to put it in one of Jacobs albums. He told me to send it and tell you to put it in an album.

Dear Rosy let me know if you received the last two letters I sent, in which I wanted you to send me a pair of good gloves. As I haven’t got any, do not delay in sending them as soon as possible, and also a handkerchief, which I stand greatly in need of. Last Friday [December 23, 1864] we had a deserter shot in our division, he deserted to the Johns and was caught while deserting.⁴ I suppose you have herd the good news from Sherman’s Army and from Thomas they are doing things up well down south, I think this war will not last much longer, at least the fighting will not last much longer.⁵ I think I have said about all I know at present, so I will bring this letter to a close, by giving my love to father and mother, Georgie and Julia, and a good share to yourself.

From your loving son & brother

John A Mayers⁶,⁷

Jacob sends his love to you all!

Enclosed you will find a song about me and Jacob

Happy New Year to you all you all [sic]

*****

Images of the Letter

Source/Notes: