From “Revisiting Lincoln: A Flawed Giant” by Sherman Hart (2010)
Why do we erase President Lincoln from our national consciousness? While not the most polished of presidents, he was still able to successfully prosecute the '61 Rebellion and lead a fractious coalition of Radical Republicans, Moderates, and War Democrats. Despite this, he is mocked as an uneducated yokel, a man who divided the nation before he reconciled it, and as a politician who was unable to achieve his most fundamental goals. In part, this mediocre portrayal is due to opinions of him in his own time, when he was mocked for his appearance and denigrated by Democrats and his more elitist rivals in the Republican party. But Lincoln is not simply dismissed as bad, but forgotten altogether in the popular mind, part of the string of nonentities between Van Buren and Mann, despite facing far greater challenges than any of the other one term presidents.
We excise Lincoln from our history because the ‘61 Rebellion is, itself, a blot on our national consciousness. Who wants to remember a brief war that accomplished nothing; a war that the Republicans won but at the cost of losing their principles; a war that would lay the foundations for a later civil war? For all of Lincoln’s skill at the time, in failing to end slavery he planted the seeds for a later national disaster. If we forget him, we still cannot forget the consequences of his actions.
Chapter 1: The Butler Did It
"I am now convinced that the crimes of this guilty land shall never be purged but with blood"
-John Brown
"I am now convinced that the crimes of this guilty land shall never be purged but with blood"
-John Brown
From “Autobiography and Personal Reminiscences of Brigadier General Benj. F. Butler” by Ben Butler (1892)
On the 16th of May, my commission as major-general was signed, and I was permitted to come to Washington to receive it and qualify under it. But before I got it I felt my duty to call under General Scott.
He received me curtly enough, and as I stood at “attention” after I made my salute, without asking me to be seated, he broke upon me with words of angry vituperation and accusation of all sorts of wrong-doing about going into Baltimore, and of the great risk I had run. He said that I had thwarted his intention of taking it without shedding a drop of blood, and that I could be entrusted with nothing in the army again.
I waited, standing before him, - I hope not like a whipped cur, - until my patience, of which I have not too large a stock, was exhausted. I felt perfectly independent, because I had at that time come to the conclusion myself, and what was more, with the advice of my wife, to quit the army and quietly go home and attend to my profession and my family. I turned upon the old general and “gave him as good as he sent,” in language not violent but distinct[1], and swore my absolute refusal to command at Fortress Monroe.
From “Revisiting Lincoln: A Flawed Giant” by Sherman Hart (2010)
In the aftermath of Gen. Butler’s resignation, Lincoln needed to find other ways to pacify Democrats, and quickly. The administration intensified it’s courting of Rep. John A. Logan, an Illinois Democrat who had tremendous influence in the “Egypt” region of his home state. Logan had so far been silent about the issue of military action, and Lincoln and the administration wanted to co opt him rather than have him take an unfriendly stance. With some political pressure, and more importantly, the dangling of the Major-General position before him, Logan made his pro-Union views public[2], after a short correspondence with President Lincoln. As a consequence, Logan became the third most senior Major-General of Volunteers, after Nathaniel Banks and John A. Dix. The new Major-General was put in command of the Department of the West, replacing General Harney, who had begun to anger War Democrats and Republicans in Missouri with his attempts to negotiate with Confederate forces.
May 24th, 1861. Fortress Monroe, Virginia
General Wool[3] sat at his desk, pondering. Three slaves had just come to Ft. Monroe, hoping for refuge of some kind. He had sent them packing of course - one had to uphold the Fugitive Slave Act, if you still considered Virginia part of the U.S. - but the slaves had given him military information. Gen. Magruder had started fortifications around Big Bethel and Little Bethel, seeking to strengthen his impotent force. Wool wasn’t about to give him the time to do that. The peninsula was a dagger; one that pointed straight at Richmond. Wool didn’t intend to let the opportunity before him slip away.
May 30th 1861. Washington D.C.
Colonel Elmer Ellsworth sat slouched in the White House chair, toying idly with a bullet hole in his uniform. Lincoln smiled. “You’ve got yourself a scar of war there, young man.”
“Not much of war right now. I reckon there wasn’t more than a handful of Terrett’s [4] men still in Alexandria when we got to it. We hastened them out pretty quickly. All the halloing in the papers, you’d think we’d captured Jeff Davis himself.”
“Well, ‘Sumter Avenged’ and all that. Bloodless battles like this tend to make men think wars are easy. I’m not well versed in military matters, but at least I know it’s better to be winning than losing. For now.”
“Oh come off it, sir. You can’t honestly think it’ll take more than one good battle to whip ‘em, do you?”
“I’ll wait until we have Richmond before I declare victory, rather than be over proud. But I do hope that we now have Gen. Bonham[5] in a vise. ”
From “ The Steedman Administration: A History” by Richard Seill (1895)
As part of the overall plan, Col. Steedman’s regiment was directed to go east along the railroad, to meet up with Col. Kelley at Grafton, as a precursor to a larger Union movement. The seizure of Grafton was now compounded by the possession of more of the Baltimore & Ohio, and by McClellan’s actions he now had a well-organized force of around 3000 in Grafton, which was placed under the command of Gen. Thomas Morris. Organized against them was only 800 poorly trained and supplied recruits, all that Porterfield had to defend western Virginia. Gen. Lee’s inability to allocate forces, apparent throughout the '61 Rebellion, hamstrung Porterfield’s command.
In the face of such obvious weakness, Morris and Kelley decided on a plan of attack. Porterfield’s forces were located 17 miles to the south in Philippi, a small pro-secessionist town. Despite the inexperienced nature of their men, the plan was impressively complex- Morris would split up his forces and try a double envelopment of the Confederates in the town. Both Union columns arrived before sunrise on June 3rd, after a night of marching. All that remained to be seen was whether the soldiers could carry out the maneuver.
June 3rd 1861, Philippi, Virginia
This seemed too easy. Private Ambrose Bierce shrugged. Oh well. If the Confederates had made a boneheaded mistake, more power to them. All he knew was, his unit had marched to the edge of the town and seen tents just standing there. The rebels somehow hadn’t even put up pickets, or a guard, or, well, anything. And then there was a pistol shot[6] and the Union soldiers charged. Startled Confederates bounded out of the tents, running every which way in the rain. It was pandemonium, both sides devoid of training, or really any military instinct. And then the Confederates got away, some part of the double envelopment having miscarried. Faster than Bierce would have thought possible, the small Confederate command scurried through the underbrush, losing their pursuers in the tangled landscape. After chasing them briefly, Bierce stopped, panting from the exertion. He turned to a soldier standing next to him. “We’ve just won the war, haven’t we?”
From “Common Misconceptions of the '61 Rebellion[7]” by Thomas Gorman (1943)
Question. Was the '61 Rebellion actually a war, as some revisionist histories today now claim?
Answer. No, and for a variety of reasons. Most importantly; it is important to remember than a majority of southerners, (and a large minority of “Confederates”) opposed secession. Most southerners were actually hijacked by a small minority of Fire Eaters who seized the state conventions. There was at no point a Confederate nation which truly derived popular support. The quick collapse of the national government and armies helps illustrate this. Slavery, and slave owners themselves, do not deserve the blame inaccurately ascribed to them for the '61 Rebellion.
From “The ‘61 Rebellion in Virginia” by J.J. Buckner (1975)
After the Union commanders had so admirably acquitted themselves at Philippi, Confederates realized something had to change in northwestern Virginia. General Beauregard, commanding the defenses at Norfolk[8] seemed just the man. It was going to be one Napoleonic general versus another, a contest of wills between two of the most flamboyant, argumentative, generals of the war. It was also to be one of the only theaters of the war to have a Confederate victory. Perhaps if Beauregard had remained at the Peninsula, or been sent to command at Manassas, he might have demonstrated his skill there. As it was, he was to be wasted in skirmishes in the foothills of western Virginia, while General Bonham and his undisciplined army were charged with the defense of Richmond, a task which they were unprepared for.
[1] Up to now is all from Ben Butler’s OTL biography, astonishingly. The only change is that he goes slightly farther in his diatribe against Winfield Scott, promising to never take the Ft. Monroe position. In OTL it took Cameron, Chase, and Lincoln all working in concert to change his mind, in the ATL, with refusing the position being a matter of “honor” they are unable to persuade him.
[2]Logan waited a little longer in OTL, but he had already been changing his position. He’s an excellent candidate for getting the commission because he fills precisely the role that Lincoln wanted to fill in OTL with Butler- a reluctant War Democrat won over to the administration. As to why he takes the Department of the West, it’s where Lincoln was having trouble at this point, and there aren’t any other major commands that an Illinois general would logically go to, with the Department of Ohio being under McClellan’s command.
[3] Butler isn’t commanding here, obviously, so John E. Wool is moved down from the Department of the East to replace Butler like he did in August in OTL.
[4]George H. Terrett commanded the small amount of Confederate forces in Alexandria, Virginia. In OTL, Reigart Bolivar Lowry (a sailor) came on land to demand Terrett’s surrender, and Terrett withdrew without a fight, despite the Gen. Sandford on land having nothing to do with this. In the ATL, Lowry is butterflied out of doing this, and the soldiers on both sides take a few potshots at each other, becoming the “first battle of the war”. In OTL, the landing is only notable for Elmer Ellsworth being the first famous soldier to be killed in the war; he was a close friend of the Lincoln family, and was viewed as a martyr in the north.
[5] Beaureagard wasn’t in command of Virginia forces at this point, in OTL he was appointed a few days later. It’s actually Milledge Luke Bonham (who only commanded for a short time period OTL).
[6]The whole lack of pickets is OTL. Like in OTL, the intended signal to attack was a pistol shot.
[7]Not my real viewpoint, but this is given to present an essentially “mainstream” interpretation of the '61 Rebellion in TTL.
[8]IN OTL, Beauregard was originally intended to command at Norfolk (with his knowledge of coastal defense) and by chance Davis decided to reassign him to the more active Manassas front, believing that he was more of a fighting general. ITTL, Beauregard doesn’t get the first lucky appointment but Davis thinks of him later for W. Virginia, rather than sending Garnett.
Last edited: