On Thanksgiving Day, 1864, Nov. 26, Major General Winfield Scott Hancock resigned from command of the Second Corps of the Army of the Potomac. It was Gen. McClellan who first called Hancock “superb” for the way he commanded his brigade in the Battle of Willamsburg, VA in May, 1862. In September, during the Battle of Antietam, Hancock took command of the First Division of the Second Corps when Maj. Gen. Israel B. Richardson fell mortally wounded near Bloody Lane. Hancock commanded the during the futile assaults at Fredericksburg (December, 1862) and was wounded, though not seriously. He was again wounded at Chancellorsville (May, 1863) while his division covered Maj. Gen. Joseph Hooker’s withdrawal. Maj. Gen. Darius N. Couch, then in command of the Second Corps, resigned from the Army of the Potomac in protest of Hooker’s ineptitude and Hancock assumed command of the Second Corps.

During PIckett’s Charge on July 3, 1863, Gen. Hancock was seriously wounded in the upper right thigh. The wound took a long time to heal, and he did not return to command of the corps until the following spring. The rigors of the Overland Campaign took a heavy toll on Hancock. It was very difficult for him mount a horse and ride in the field of battle. After taking a medical leave, returning to command, and seeing his corps needlessly wasted at Reams Station, and unsupported during the fight at the Boydton Plank Road, he believed the time had come for him to step aside. Gen. Grant wrote of Hancock in his memoirs, “No matter how hard the fight, the Second Corps always felt that their commander was looking after them.”

Hancock’s successor was Maj. Gen. Andrew A. Humphreys, at 54 an older man by Civil War standards. Humphreys had served as McClellan’s chief topographical engineer. His engineering sill was used in planning the defensive ring of forts around Washington. Humphreys was promoted to brigadier general of volunteers in April, 1862 and in September he was given command of the Third Division of the Fifth Corps of the Army of the Potomac. Humphreys earned the reputation as one who led from the front. During the Battle of Fredericksburg, he led his division on horseback from the front to within 50 yards of the Sunken Road, closer to the Confederate line than any other assault. Five of his seven staff were shot from their mounts, and two horses were shot from under him, but he emerged from the battle unscathed.

After the Battle of Chancellorsville, Humphreys was transferred to the Third Corps (under Maj. Gen. Daniel Sickles) to command the Second Division. Just prior to the Battle of Gettysburg (July 1-3, 1863), when Maj. Gen. George Meade was placed in command of the army, Meade asked Humphreys to be his chief of staff. Humphreys declined, preferring to remain in field command. However, on July 2, Sickles, without orders, advanced the Third Corps  about half a mile in front of the rest of the Union line along Cemetery ridge. Humphreys division was the most exposed along Emmitsburg Road. Confederate assaults that afternoon virtually destroyed the division at the Peach Orchard, and what was left of Humphrey’s command fell back to Cemetery Ridge.

A few days after the battle, Humphreys was promoted to major general of volunteers and accepted Meade’s offer to be his chief of staff. Humphreys served in this capacity over fourteen months until he was called upon to take command of the Second Corps. Maj. Gen. Andrew A. Humphreys would command the corps for the remainder of the war.

My previous two posts dealt with the unsuccessful attempt by combined Federal forces to take control of the last two supply routes into Petersburg, the Boydton Plank Road and the South Side Railroad. Union troops outnumbered their Confederate opponents by a wide margin in nearly all of the battles during the siege, so why was it so difficult for them to be victorious and bring an end to the war?

Throughout the Civil War, the army that fought from behind prepared defenses usually defeated the attacking army, even if the attackers outnumbers the defenders. Some earthworks were hastily constructed, such as the Union position along Cemetery Ridge at Gettysburg. A low rock wall served as a base upon which the soldiers heaped earth dug out from behind the wall. This both added height to the protecting wall and provided them with a shallow trench in which to kneel.

But at Petersburg, the entrenchments were far stronger and much more complex. Mountains of earth were moved. Forests of trees were cut down and the timber added to the fortifications. Deep trenches protected the men from sharpshooters’ bullets and bombproof shelters provided protection from artillery shells. To give you a better understanding of the difficulty of taking a portion of these entrenchments by direct assault, the photos below show various features of the siege lines.

This photo is from Civil War Journeys. The line of earthworks in the background is certainly the main line. Notice the torn up railroad bed going across the middle of the photo. The pile of brush in front of the crude barricade in the foreground is called abatis. I could be wrong, but it appears the enemy would attack from the left, and this barricade position would be used if any forced their way into the railroad cut. Notice also the piles on things that look like barrels near the upper right.

This is another photo from Civil War Journeys. This is what we normally refer to as breastworks. An earthen trench with a log wall for protection. Earth was often piled against the outside of the works. Sometimes, the topmost log was raised a few inches so that the soldiers could fire their weapons through the gap.

This is a portion of the Union works known as Fort Sedgwick. The photo is from the U. S. Corps of Engineers Digital Library. Notice the use of pointed sticks (chevaux de frise). The works were also built with arcs and angles to funnel approaching enemies into areas of concentrated fire. Notice also the neat lines of those barrel-looking things along the top of the works in the background.

Those things that look like barrels are called gabions (yes, another French term.) They were widely used in the Petersburg works because gabions could be easily made from what they had on hand, lots of small tree branches. A great article on the construction and use of gabions can be found on the To the Sound of the Guns blog.

I hope you found this information helpful. As always, if you have any questions or comments, please submit them and I will happily answer.