In September 1864, Union Brig. Gen. Alvan Gillem planned a raid from his base in East Tennessee, and he requested the assistance of Brevet Maj. Gen. Stephen Burbridge, commanding District of Kentucky. Burbridge thwarted Gillem’s plan by requesting permission from Union Army Chief of Staff General Henry Halleck to launch an expedition toward Saltville from Kentucky while Gillem threatened the area from the southeast. Although Burbridge would be repulsed in his attempt to strip the Confederacy of its much needed salt, Gen. George Stoneman would be successful just a few months later in December. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Col. Brisbin reported moving 400 of the 5th USCC into action, a number that Mosgrove later noted as participating in the fight during that day. That evening, Gen. Dibrell told Mosgrove that his men had fought 2500 Yankees during the battle, and had taken down 200 of those men. After dark, Captain Guerrant and Mosgrove also met up with Gen. Robertson, who claimed that his men had, “killed nearly all the negroes.” His claim was inaccurate of course, but with scores of colored troops strewn across the field on the Confederate right, he may have initially thought that the entire 5th had indeed been nearly wiped out. At the close of the evening, the 4th Kentucky relieved Trimble’s battalion of guarding the ford between the Confederate and Union camps.

 

 

 

Evidence of the Federal retreat was seen all along the route toward Laurel Gap. Captain Gaithright eventually caught up with some of the African-American troops near Laurel Gap. Late in the afternoon, Captain Gaithright also spotted the rear of the Federal column crossing Clinch Mountain. By dusk, Colonel George Diamond with the 10th Kentucky cavalry attacked the Federal rear while crossing the Clinch River. Duke wrote that he and Gen. Cosby did overtake Burbridge at Hayter’s Gap; however, mistakes in reconnaissance and other tactical errors allowed the Union escape. Thus, by noon the following day, it became obvious that Gen. Williams had been unable to head off the Union retreat, due to their head start. The pursuit therefore ended and the first battle for Saltville was over.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Brig. Gen. Felix H. Robertson
• 3rd Confederate Cavalry (fragment)
• 6th Confederate Cavalry (fragment)
• 8th Confederate Cavalry (one battalion)
• 10th Confederate Cavalry
• 5th Georgia Cavalry (fragment)
• Champ Ferguson's Independent Kentucky and Tennessee Cavalry

Casualties: Cavalry, unlike the Kentucky mounted units which fought while dismounted at Saltville, were expected to ride and fight, so to equip even the best crack-shot cavalrymen with muskets was a suicidal endeavor — and the Union command during the Battle of Saltville knew it. In fairness to the Union Army, it had equipped all its cavalry units with carbines by 1864, but the 5th was not an organized unit until Oct. 24, 1864. The commander of the 5th, Col. Brisbin, never complained about using the recruits with Enfields, but with enthusiasm he ordered them forward into battle. 

 

While the raw and inappropriately armed 5th U.S. Colored Cavalry, would be ordered to fight while dismounted, they charged headlong into strong Confederate works, then fired their single-shot P53 Enfield muskets, and unable to reload they were mowed down by the experienced foe similar to a sharp sickle slicing through grass.

 

(Right) Union units and casualties suffered at Battle of Saltville. This casualty report was compiled by the division's chief surgeon, and it concurs with casualty reports submitted by Brevet Maj. Gen. Burbridge himself.

 

The 5th US Colored Cavalry lost 28% of the force it fielded and it suffered 33% of the total Union casualties at Saltville.

 

In his after battle reports on Oct. 7 and 10, 1864, Gen. Burbridge stated his losses at 350. Confederate casualties were stated "as fewer than 100." On Oct. 4, Surgeon James G. Hatchitt, Chief Surgeon, First Division, District of Kentucky, submitted his casualty report for the respective units involved in the fight at Saltville. Although Hatchitt stated that the report was not complete because surgeons were still in the field with the wounded, the numbers would only change as surgeons marked and moved any wounded who died to the killed category. Hatchitt shows 348 total casualties, with 54 killed, 190 wounded, and 104 missing. His casualty report includes 112 losses for the 5th U.S. Colored Cavalry: 22 killed, 37 wounded, and 53 missing. Colonel James S. Brisbin, commanding 5th USCC, wrote in his report, Oct. 20, 1864, that "Out of the 400 engaged 114 men and 4 officers fell killed or wounded." Brisbin had actually included missing-in-action, wounded, and killed in a simple total for his report, but Hatchitt, who oversaw attending surgeons in the field, presented categorical losses for the unit.

 

Captain Guerrant also discussed the incident in his diary. He noted that he heard the continuous sound of rifle fire which meant the death of, “many a poor negro who was unfortunate enough not to be killed yesterday.” He wrote that his men did not take any Negro prisoners, and that great numbers of the African-American soldiers were killed. However, he did not specify any number of soldiers killed. According to first hand accounts from soldiers of both armies, although no exact count was given, the total number of black soldiers murdered was less than 50.  

 

On October 3rd, Mosgrove wrote that Colonel Hanson of the Federal army was lying wounded in a field hospital, having been shot by a minie ball; he was drunk and swearing at the hospital staff. This same hospital is where Mosgrove writes that while surgeon William H. Gardner was tending the Federal wounded, three armed Confederate soldiers stormed into the hospital and fatally wounded five African-American soldiers. Mosgrove claims to have witnessed a great deal of slaughtering of members of the USCC on the fields, primarily by two Tennessee brigades under the command of Gen. Robertson and Colonel Dibrell. However, Mosgrove never specifies the total number of black soldiers killed during the massacre.

 

This battle involved fighting in and around Saltville and also was a running fight while the Union force was retreating. With the exception of two cavalry regiments, 11th Michigan and 12th Ohio, the Union army consisted of Kentucky mounted units. The battle included Confederate regulars, reserves, militia, and even guerrillas, which complicated an exact casualty count, too. The Confederate strength varied during the battle because of the types of units, such as guerrilla units, which would strike the Union army in and around Saltville and then vacate the area, only to reappear and unleash subsequent blows. While units were engaged, Confederate troops were still arriving from neighboring East Tennessee.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

His following statement in the Official Records was false. We held the works for hours, said Burbridge, but I withdrew the command in excellent order and spirits, and nearly all the wounded colored soldiers were brought off the mountain. If that was the case, then the more than 200 wounded and missing left on the field, many African-Americans, would not have fallen into the hands of an angry enemy that would later be accused of murdering many of them.

 

 

 

 

 

Avery Island, off the Louisiana coast, gave the Confederacy a huge supply of rock salt until the Union captured it. However, Confederates never realized that similar structures to the rock salt mine were all along the Louisiana and Texas coasts of the Gulf of Mexico, and therefore salt could have been more easily attained if they had but realized it.

Recommended Reading: Saltville (VA) (Images of America), by Jeffrey C. Weaver (Author), The Museum of the Middle Appalachians (Author): Description: Saltville, Virginia, lies on the banks of the North Fork of the Holston River on the border between Smyth and Washington Counties. Its history began very long ago; in fact, archeological evidence suggests extensive human habitation there for more than 14,000 years. Saltville was named because it was a source of salt,-and by the end of the 18th century, a thriving industry was born. During the Civil War, Saltville attained considerable importance to the Confederate government as a supply of salt. Continued below…

A large Confederate army garrison was maintained there, and extensive fortifications were constructed. After the Civil War, the town led the way in industrialization of the South. Flip through the pages of Images of America: Saltville to learn why Saltville is one of the most historic places in the world. About the Author: The Museum of the Middle Appalachians, located on Palmer Avenue in Saltville, was established by the Saltville Foundation in the 1990s. It has become the repository for fossils, artifacts, and photographs of the region. Author Jeffrey C. Weaver holds degrees in American history from Appalachian State University, and after serving in the U.S. Army for several years, he worked as a contracting officer for the U.S. Department of Energy. He is currently the manager of the Chilhowie Public Library.

 

Shenandoah Valley and the American Civil War

Recommended Reading: Saltville Massacre (Civil War Campaigns and Commanders). Description: In October 1864, in the mountains of southwest Virginia, one of the most brutal acts of the Civil War occurs. Brig. Gen. Stephen Burbridge launches a raid to capture Saltville. Included among his forces is the 5th U.S. Colored Cavalry. Repeated Federal attacks are repulsed by Confederate forces under the command of Gen. John S. Williams. Continued below…

As the sun begins to set, Burbridge pulls his troops from the field, leaving many wounded. In the morning, Confederate troops, including a company of ruffians under the command of Captain Champ Ferguson, advance over the battleground seeking out and killing the wounded black soldiers. What starts as a small but intense mountain battle degenerates into a no-quarter, racial massacre. A detailed account from eyewitness reports of the most blatant battlefield atrocity of the war.

 

Recommended Reading: Lee's Endangered Left: The Civil War In Western Virginia, Spring Of 1864. From Kirkus Reviews: A competent, well-executed addition to the ever-growing horde of Civil War literature, by Duncan (History/Georgetown University). The author reconsiders Union General Ulysses S. Grants attempts to destroy the Confederates, led by General Robert E. Lee, at their traditional stronghold in western Virginia and his efforts to threaten Lynchburg during the spring and summer of 1864. Continued below…

The writing here is crisp; refreshingly, our chronicler pays sharp attention to the effects of the campaign on civilians as the Union army penetrated beyond its supply lines and came to live off the countryside in one of the Confederacy’s richest agricultural regions, bringing home the harsh realities of war to civilians. The campaign swung back and forth, with Northern victories at Cloyd's Mountain and New River Bridge and Confederate routs at New Market, followed by a Union failure to seize Lynchburg. Though the campaign proved costly to the South, overall the Unions hope to capture the Shenandoah Valley foundered and the Confederates then went on to threaten Washington, D.C. Duncan sensitively employs a wide variety of sources, military and civilian, to add to the coherence of his account. Still, the books scope remains narrow, focusing on a not terribly glamorous period in the wars history; then, too, wed do well to have the volume trimmed by a third. Duncan’s contention that the Unions severity in dealing with civilian populations was directly reciprocated when the Confederates took Chambersburg, Penn., creating a chain of vengeance that culminated when Sherman marched through the South, is insightfully argued, offering a fresh analysis to the historical debate. Casual readers of the Civil War genre (and many die-hard buffs, as well) may want to leave this superbly researched yet ultimately too specialized study for the historians to ponder. Includes 20 photographs.

 

Recommended Reading: Stonewall in the Valley: Thomas J. Stonewall Jackson's Shenandoah Valley Campaign, Spring 1862. Description: The Valley Campaign conducted by Maj. Gen. Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson has long fascinated those interested in the American Civil War as well as general students of military history, all of whom still question exactly what Jackson did in the Shenandoah in 1862 and how he did it. Since Robert G. Tanner answered many questions in the first edition of Stonewall in the Valley in 1976, he has continued to research the campaign. This edition offers new insights on the most significant moments of Stonewall's Shenandoah triumph. Continued below…

About the Author: Robert G. Tanner is a graduate of the Virginia Military Institute. Tanner is a native of Southern California, he now lives and practices law in Atlanta, Georgia. He has studied and lectured on the Shenandoah Valley Campaign for more than twenty-five years.

 

Recommended Reading: Shenandoah 1862: Stonewall Jackson's Valley Campaign, by Peter Cozzens (Civil War America) (Hardcover). Description: In the spring of 1862, Federal troops under the command of General George B. McClellan launched what was to be a coordinated, two-pronged attack on Richmond in the hope of taking the Confederate capital and bringing a quick end to the Civil War. The Confederate high command tasked Stonewall Jackson with diverting critical Union resources from this drive, a mission Jackson fulfilled by repeatedly defeating much larger enemy forces. His victories elevated him to near iconic status in both the North and the South and signaled a long war ahead. One of the most intriguing and storied episodes of the Civil War, the Valley Campaign has heretofore only been related from the Confederate point of view. Continued below…

With Shenandoah 1862, Peter Cozzens dramatically and conclusively corrects this shortcoming, giving equal attention to both Union and Confederate perspectives. Based on a multitude of primary sources, Cozzens's groundbreaking work offers new interpretations of the campaign and the reasons for Jackson's success. Cozzens also demonstrates instances in which the mythology that has come to shroud the campaign has masked errors on Jackson's part. In addition, Shenandoah 1862 provides the first detailed appraisal of Union leadership in the Valley Campaign, with some surprising conclusions. Moving seamlessly between tactical details and analysis of strategic significance, Cozzens presents the first balanced, comprehensive account of a campaign that has long been romanticized but never fully understood. Includes 13 illustrations and 13 maps. About the Author: Peter Cozzens is an independent scholar and Foreign Service officer with the U.S. Department of State. He is author or editor of nine highly acclaimed Civil War books, including The Darkest Days of the War: The Battles of Iuka and Corinth (from the University of North Carolina Press).

 

Recommended Reading: Shenandoah Summer: The 1864 Valley Campaign. Description: Jubal A. Early’s disastrous battles in the Shenandoah Valley ultimately resulted in his ignominious dismissal. But Early’s lesser-known summer campaign of 1864, between his raid on Washington and Phil Sheridan’s renowned fall campaign, had a significant impact on the political and military landscape of the time. By focusing on military tactics and battle history in uncovering the facts and events of these little-understood battles, Scott C. Patchan offers a new perspective on Early’s contributions to the Confederate war effort—and to Union battle plans and politicking. Patchan details the previously unexplored battles at Rutherford’s Farm and Kernstown (a pinnacle of Confederate operations in the Shenandoah Valley) and examines the campaign’s influence on President Lincoln’s reelection efforts. Continued below…

He also provides insights into the personalities, careers, and roles in Shenandoah of Confederate General John C. Breckinridge, Union general George Crook, and Union colonel James A. Mulligan, with his “fighting Irish” brigade from Chicago. Finally, Patchan reconsiders the ever-colorful and controversial Early himself, whose importance in the Confederate military pantheon this book at last makes clear. About the Author: Scott C. Patchan, a Civil War battlefield guide and historian, is the author of Forgotten Fury: The Battle of Piedmont, Virginia, and a consultant and contributing writer for Shenandoah, 1862.

Review

"The author's descriptions of the battles are very detailed, full or regimental level actions, and individual incidents. He bases the accounts on commendable research in manuscript collections, newspapers, published memoirs and regimental histories, and secondary works. The words of the participants, quoted often by the author, give the narrative an immediacy. . . . A very creditable account of a neglected period."-Jeffry D. Wert, Civil War News (Jeffry D. Wert Civil War News 20070914)

"[Shenandoah Summer] contains excellent diagrams and maps of every battle and is recommended reading for those who have a passion for books on the Civil War."-Waterline (Waterline 20070831)

"The narrative is interesting and readable, with chapters of a digestible length covering many of the battles of the campaign."-Curled Up With a Good Book (Curled Up With a Good Book 20060815)

"Shenandoah Summer provides readers with detailed combat action, colorful character portrayals, and sound strategic analysis. Patchan''s book succeeds in reminding readers that there is still plenty to write about when it comes to the American Civil War."-John Deppen, Blue & Grey Magazine (John Deppen Blue & Grey Magazine 20060508)

"Scott C. Patchan has solidified his position as the leading authority of the 1864 Shenandoah Valley Campaign with his outstanding campaign study, Shenandoah Summer. Mr. Patchan not only unearths this vital portion of the campaign, he has brought it back to life with a crisp and suspenseful narrative. His impeccable scholarship, confident analyses, spellbinding battle scenes, and wonderful character portraits will captivate even the most demanding readers. Shenandoah Summer is a must read for the Civil War aficionado as well as for students and scholars of American military history."-Gary Ecelbarger, author of "We Are in for It!": The First Battle of Kernstown, March 23, 1862 (Gary Ecelbarger 20060903)

"Scott Patchan has given us a definitive account of the 1864 Valley Campaign. In clear prose and vivid detail, he weaves a spellbinding narrative that bristles with detail but never loses sight of the big picture. This is a campaign narrative of the first order."-Gordon C. Rhea, author of The Battle of the Wilderness: May 5-6, 1864 (Gordon C. Rhea )

"[Scott Patchan] is a `boots-on-the-ground' historian, who works not just in archives but also in the sun and the rain and tall grass. Patchan's mastery of the topography and the battlefields of the Valley is what sets him apart and, together with his deep research, gives his analysis of the campaign an unimpeachable authority."-William J. Miller, author of Mapping for Stonewall and Great Maps of the Civil War (William J. Miller)