The Battle of Bull Run: The End of Illusions
Both North and South expected victory to be glorious and quick, but the first major battle signaled the long and deadly war to come
- By Ernest B. Furgurson
- Smithsonian magazine, July-August 2011, Subscribe
(Page 6 of 6)
Jefferson Davis arrived at Manassas after the contest was decided and set off celebrations in Richmond with a message saying, “We have won a glorious though dear-bought victory. Night closed on the enemy in full flight and closely pursued.” His speeches en route back, plus rumors from the front, made it sound as if he had gotten there just in time to turn the tide of battle. “We have broken the back bone of invasion and utterly broken the spirit of the North,” the Richmond Examiner exulted. “Henceforward we will have hectoring, bluster and threat; but we shall never get such a chance at them again on the field.” Some of Beauregard’s soldiers, feeling the same way, headed home.
A more realistic South Carolina official said the triumph was exciting “a fool’s paradise of conceit” about how one Rebel could lick any number of Yankees. Among Union troops, he told diarist Mary Boykin Chesnut, the rout would “wake every inch of their manhood. It was the very fillip they needed.”
Most of the North woke up Monday morning to read that the Union had won: news dispatches filed when McDowell’s troops were driving the Confederates back had gone out from Washington, and War Department censors temporarily blocked later accounts. Lincoln, first buoyed and then struck hard by reports from the front, had stayed awake all Sunday night. When the truth came, his cabinet met in emergency session. Secretary of War Simon Cameron put Baltimore on alert and ordered all organized militia regiments to Washington. Generals and politicians competed in finger-pointing. Although McDowell with his green troops had very nearly won at Bull Run, after such a disaster he clearly had to go. To replace him, Lincoln summoned a 34-year-old Maj. Gen. George B. McClellan, who had won a series of minor clashes in western Virginia.
After days of alarm among citizens and public drunkenness among many of the Union’s disheartened soldiers, calm returned and the North looked ahead. Few there could agree at first with the anonymous Atlantic Monthly correspondent who wrote that “Bull Run was in no sense a disaster...we not only deserved it, but needed it....Far from being disheartened by it, it should give us new confidence in our cause.” But no one could doubt the gravity of the situation, that “God has given us work to do not only for ourselves, but for coming generations of men.” Thus all the North could join in vowing that “to gain that end, no sacrifice can be too precious or too costly.” Not until the following spring would McClellan take the rebuilt Army of the Potomac again into Virginia, and not for another three springs would the immensity of that sacrifice be realized.
Ernest B. Furgurson has written four books on the Civil War, most recently Freedom Rising. He lives in Washington, D.C.
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.







Comments (11)
This may be an interesting article, but I must admit I couldn't get past the caption under the photo on the first page. "Scores of high-spirited civilians carried picnic baskets and champagne to the battlefield to watch what would turn out to be the first major land ..." Surely experts at the Smithsonian are aware that no spectators or picnickers made it onto the battlefield. The closest they came was to disembark on the high point of Centreville, VA where they could see the smoke from the guns and some of the troop movements. I hope that the rest of the article does not carry similar myths that are being perpetuated through the years. Also, as to the naming of the battlefield.~~ In all official papers it is referred to as Bull Run or in some cases, Bulls Run. Decades later, a group of Manassas citizens bought up the land, and offer it to the National Park Service. They had several conditions attached to the donation, which included--the Park must be referred to as Manassas National Battlefield Park, and a statue of Stonewall Jackson had to be erected on the battlefield. So it was not named Manassas because they won the battle, but because the donation of the land dictated the name. I just want to set the record straight on the above points because today is the anniversary of the day, 151 years ago, that my young ancestor, Cornelius Sullivan, lost his life somewhere in the vicinity of the Stone House. RIP to him and all of those brave men who fought and lost their lives on that battlefield.
Posted by Jan Cunard on July 21,2012 | 05:17 PM
civil war rocks
Posted by jasmine on May 24,2012 | 06:08 PM
During the War’s centennial, writers perpetrated errors. As the sesquicentennial begins, this article repeats two. Such mistakes ill serve readers with only limited knowledge of the War. Bull Run was popular during the centennial when most referred to Monitor vs. Merrimac (omitting the "k," which the Navy Historian notes is an error) instead of Monitor vs. Virginia. Smithsonian should help the centennial’s more glaring errors fade, not perpetuate them to 2061. Use proper names for events. Bull Run may have been popular in 1961 because it was easy to spell & for editors it can wrap to the next line. It fit in the title box on the first page of your magazine, whereas Manassas wouldn't. The National Park Service calls the battles First & Second Manassas. http://www.nps.gov/mana/index.htm The accepted convention is victors name battles. The South won, so its name for this battle wins. The author & Smithsonian are in Washington, DC, & should know the name of a site within 30 miles. Your magazine’s sketch of Stonewall Jackson in gray uniform with plumed hat & Confederate Battle Flag (CBF) reflects 2 errors. Artist Henry Ogden was only five in 1861, so he couldn’t have made his sketch during this battle. is closer to the truth what Jackson wore: a pre-1861 blue uniform & hat. The author should have stated that Gen. Beauregard & Johnston approved the CBF later because of confusion between the 1st National & US flags during 1st Manassas. The caption could have noted both errors.
Posted by Michael Shumaker on August 4,2011 | 11:55 AM
I just finished reading Ernest B. Furgurson’s summary of the first Battle of Bull Run (Manassas). I felt compelled to read it and found it interesting. But, I am haunted by a lingering question: What is there in the American Psyche (including my own) that makes us want to read about war battles? So many deaths, incapacitating injuries, orphans, widows, PTSD! Is this desire(liking?)found in all world cultures? Now that would be an article worthy of the “Smithsonian”.
Posted by Martin Sanden on August 3,2011 | 03:19 PM
Reply to Dan Fischer from Ernest Furgurson, writer of "The End of Illusions" --
Among the many Southern remarks about taking Washington was the Richmond Examiner's April 26 assertion that "Washington should be the capital of the Southern Confederacy....If we attack her we shall meet with little opposition and much aid from her citizens." General Scott took such threats seriously: "They are closing their coils around us," he said, and fortified the Capitol, City Hall and the Treasury building. General Beauregard himself wrote of urging the concentration of Confederate forces "so that the moment McDowell should be sufficiently far detached from Washington, I would be enabled to to move rapidly round his more convenient flank upon his rear and his communications, and attack him in reverse, or get between his forces, then separated, thus cutting off his retreat upon Arlington in the event of his defeat, and insuring as an immediate consequence the crushing of Patterson, the liberation of Maryland, and the capture of Washington."
Posted by Reader Services on July 13,2011 | 05:10 PM
I had always been taught that the 'capitol' of a state or nation is spelled with an 'o,' not an 'a,' 'capital' being reserved to describe fiduciary matters. Mr. Furgurson and the Editors seem to have let that one go.
Posted by Joseph Salata on July 11,2011 | 11:50 AM
well written and balanced. familiar with battle area since my son lives in Centreville Va. Sam Croot
Posted by sam croot on July 8,2011 | 04:17 PM
It sure would be nice if The Smithsonian Magazine would show many more photos, and in good quality resolution, so that we can better enjoy the articles.
Posted by Ike Cabase on July 6,2011 | 05:47 PM
The article "End of Illusions" had as a headliner "Confederates thought they would quickly capture Washington D.C.". That is completely untrue.
In fact Jefferson Davis proclaimed many times that was not the Confederacy's intention. After Lincoln called for 400,000 troops to punish the Confederacy, and the Northern newspapers blaring "On to Richmond, on to Richmond" and the Yankees invaded Virginia, Gen Beauregard did say that if the North penetrated too deeply that he could move in behind tham and capture Washington, but this was miliary defensive move and not a strategit objective, and not the obejective of th Confederate Executive Branch.
The article is obviously too biased to be a credible documentation of history, as was the previous month's Civil War article.
Posted by Dan Fischer on June 28,2011 | 01:12 PM
If you want to zoom in on over 230 Civil War Battle locations in an interactive Google Map that enable you to zoom in on the actual battlefields and forts in both satellite and terrain mode. It comes complete with links to Wikipedia descriptions and battle maps of each battle location, National Archive photos, and battle animations from CivilWarAnimated, then check out the Civil War Google Map at MyReadingMapped:
http://myreadingmapped.blogspot.com/2011/03/interactive-map-of-geoffery-wards-book.html
This interactive map can also supply directions, hotel and other points-of-interest information.
Posted by PragmaticStatistic on June 26,2011 | 07:51 PM
Can anyone tell me what the two very tall structures in the rear of the ruined Manassas railroad station are? The picture is on page 62 of the July-August Smithsonian Magazine. It is also viewable in the 'View More Photos' frame, button #10.
Posted by Larry Dykas on June 25,2011 | 09:21 PM