Battle Index: N

Battle Index: N

Nachod, battle of, 27 June 1866
Nadzab, battle of, 5 September 1943
Najera, battle of, 1367
Namur, battle of, 1-2 February 1944
Nanomea Atoll, occupation of, 18 August 1943
Narcissus, Operation, 10 July 1943
Narva, battle of, 30 November 1700
Narvik, first battle of, 10 April 1940
Narvik, second battle of, 13 April 1940
Naryx, battle of, 394 BC
Naseby, battle of (14 June 1645)
Nashville, battle of, 15-16 December 1864
Nassau Bay, battle of, 30 June-2 July 1943
Naupactus (Lepanto), 429 BC
Naupactus, siege of, 426 BC
Navas de Membrillo, combat of, 29 December 1811
Naxos, siege of, 499
Naxos, battle of, September 376 BC
Neapolis, siege of, 327-326 BC
Nebi Samwil, battle of, 18-24 November 1917
Nechtansmere, 20 May 685
Neerwinden, battle of, 18 March 1793
Negapatam, battle of, 6 July 1746
Nemea, battle of, 394 BC
Neon, battle of, 354 BC
Neresheim, battle of, 11 August 1796
Neukirchen, combat of, 17 August 1796
Neumarkt, combat of, 23 August 1796
Neumarkt, battle of, 24 April 1809
Neuve-Chapelle, battle of, 10-13 March 1915
Neuwied, battle of, 18 April 1797
Neville's Cross, battle of, 17 October 1346
Nevis, battle of, 19 or 20 May 1667
New Berne, battle of, 14 March 1862
New Britain Campaign (Operation Dexterity), 16 December 1943-9 March 1944
Newburn upon Tyne, battle of, 28 August 1640
Newbury, first battle of, 20 September 1643)
New Hope Church, battle of, 25-28 May 1864
New Madrid, battle of, 13 March 1862
New Market, battle of, 15 May 1864
New Orleans, capture of, 18-29 April 1862
Newtonia, battle of, 30 September 1862
Nicholson’s Nek, battle of, 30 October 1899
Nicopolis, battle of, 47 BC
Nicopolis, battle of, 25 September 1396 (Bulgaria)
Nieuport, siege of, 22-29 October 1793
Nieuport, siege of, 4-18 July 1794
Nile, battle of the, February 47 BC
Nile, battle of the, 1 August 1798
Ninety-Six, siege of, 22 May-19 June 1781
Noemfoor, battle of, 2 July-30 August 1944
Nola, battle of, Summer 89 BC
Nola, siege of, 90-80 BC
Nollendorf, combat of 14 September 1813
Nomae, battle of, 450 BC
Nomentum, battle of, 435 or 426 B.C.
Nonne Bosschen, battle of, 11 November 1914
Norba, siege of, 82 BC
Nordlingen (1), 6 September 1634
Nordlingen, (2), 3 August 1645
Noreia, battle of, 113 BC
Norham, siege of, June-July 1463
Normandy, battle of / Operation Overlord (6 June to 25 August 1944)
Northampton, battle of, 10 July 1460
North Anna River, battle of the, 23-26 May 1864
Notium, battle of, 407 BC
Novara, battle of, 8 April 1500
Novara, battle of, 6 June 1513
Novara, siege of, 5-21 March 1500
Novara, siege of, 3-6 June 1513
Novi, battle of, 15 August 1799
Novi, combat of, 6 November 1799
Noviodunum, siege of, March 52 BC
Novo-Georgievsk, siege of, 10-20 August 1915
Noyon-Montdidier, battle of, 9-13 June 1918
Nukufetu Atoll/ Motolalo Island, occupation of, 27 August 1943


Battle of the Imjin River

The Battle of the Imjin River (Filipino: Labanan sa Ilog Imjin), also known as the Battle of Solma-ri (Korean: 설마리 전투 ) or Battle of Gloster Hill ( 글로스터 고지 전투 ) in South Korea, or as Battle of Xuemali (Chinese: 雪马里战斗 pinyin: Xuě Mǎ Lǐ Zhàn Dòu ) in China, took place 22–25 April 1951 during the Korean War. Troops from the Chinese People's Volunteer Army (PVA) attacked United Nations Command (UN) positions on the lower Imjin River in an attempt to achieve a breakthrough and recapture the South Korean capital Seoul. The attack was part of the Chinese Spring Offensive, the aim of which was to regain the initiative on the battlefield after a series of successful UN counter-offensives in January–March 1951 had allowed UN forces to establish themselves beyond the 38th Parallel at the Kansas Line.

United Nations

  • United Kingdom
  • Belgium
  • Luxembourg
  • Philippines
  • South Korea

The section of the UN line where the battle took place was defended primarily by British forces of the 29th Infantry Brigade, consisting of three British and one Belgian infantry battalions (Belgian United Nations Command) supported by tanks and artillery. Despite facing a greatly numerically superior enemy, the brigade held its general positions for three days. When the units of the 29th Infantry Brigade were ultimately forced to fall back, their actions in the Battle of the Imjin River together with those of other UN forces, for example in the Battle of Kapyong, had blunted the impetus of the PVA offensive and allowed UN forces to retreat to prepared defensive positions north of Seoul, where the PVA were halted.

"Though minor in scale, the battle's ferocity caught the imagination of the world", [16] especially the fate of the 1st Battalion, The Gloucestershire Regiment, which was outnumbered and eventually surrounded by Chinese forces on Hill 235, a feature that became known as Gloster Hill. The stand of the Gloucestershire battalion, together with other actions of the 29th Brigade in the Battle of the Imjin River, has become an important part of British military history and tradition. [17] [18]


Battle Index: N - History

Welcome to historic Germantown!

George Washington and the capital were here in 1793. During the Revolution, the Battle of Germantown was fought up and down the main street, with muskets firing from house windows. The first American Bible was published here, and the first kidnapping in the United States also took place in Germantown. The writer Louisa May Alcott was born here and the painter Gilbert Stuart worked in a small barn in Germantown.

America's history lies in the cobblestones of Germantown Avenue, echoes through the halls of Stenton and Cliveden, and is forever captured in Germantown's historic buildings, homes, and cemeteries. An incredible amount of history took place in the distance of a few miles in this historic town, now part of Philadelphia.

Germantown became a big industrial town in the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. Then in the 1940's and 50's the area's affluent citizens began to leave for the suburbs. Today, Germantown is undoubtedly a very urbanized region, but the historical sites have been very well preserved by the active Historical Society and the National Park Service. Most are open to the public. Explore historic Germantown with this virtual tour.


Your Guide to Exploring New Jersey's Revolutionary War Historic Sites!

Nothing creates an understanding of and excitement for history like standing in the actual locations where historic events occurred.

New Jersey played a central and crucial role in the events of the Revolutionary War. Throughout the state, we are surrounded by links to that history.

George Washington spent more time in New Jersey than anywhere else during the Revolutionary War. Many of the locations where he and the Continental (American) Army marched, encamped, and fought battles are still here to be explored.

Throughout the years of the Revolutionary War (1775-1783), the lives of New Jersey citizens were dramatically affected by the events of the war which went on around them. Some of their houses and buildings are still standing each of these structures has its own story.

This website provides the tools to help you find and understand these locations which played a part in New Jersey's Revolutionary War story. It contains photographs, information, and directions for almost 650 Revolutionary War historic sites located throughout all twenty-one New Jersey counties.

The ultimate field guide to New Jersey's Revolutionary War historic sites!
New Jersey Revolutionary War Sites &bull New Jersey Historic Sites

Website Researched, Written, Photographed and Designed by Al Frazza
This website, its text and photographs are © 2009 - 2021 AL Frazza. All rights reserved.


Battle of Shiloh

The Battle of Shiloh occurred on April 6 and 7, 1862, at Pittsburg Landing on the Tennessee River. Confederate General Albert Sidney Johnston attacked a Union army under the command of General Ulysses S. Grant, hoping to repel the Union advance.

In the previous few months, the Union military had won several victories in Kentucky and Tennessee. Grant and his Army of the Tennessee, numbering approximately forty-thousand men, had captured Confederate Forts Henry and Donelson in February. General Don Carlos Buell, commander of the Army of the Ohio, had secured Nashville, the capital of Tennessee, several weeks earlier. Grant was now located at Pittsburg Landing in southwestern Tennessee. He was waiting for the arrival of the Army of the Ohio's thirty-five thousand men. The combined Union force then would advance against Johnston's nearly forty thousand Confederates.

Johnston hoped to defeat Grant before the two Union armies could combine their numbers. The Confederates initially planned to advance from Corinth, Mississippi, an important railroad junction, against Grant's army on April 3. However, Johnston's men were not in position to attack the Union soldiers until the morning of April 6. Grant did not expect an attack, and was advancing against the Confederates. He believed that Johnston was on the defensive and would not launch an assault. Because of Grant's beliefs, the Union soldiers had prepared only limited defenses.

As the Confederates launched their assault in the early morning hours of April 6, the Union soldiers put up fierce resistance, but they were still driven back toward the Tennessee River. By nightfall, the Confederates had driven the Union back more than a mile from their early morning positions. One of the main reasons that the Union army was not completely defeated was the death of Johnston in the fighting. His second in command, General P.G.T. Beauregard, was an able military commander. However, it was difficult for Beauregard to assume command in the middle of the battle and direct the assault against the Union soldiers.

On the evening of April 6, Union reinforcements arrived. One division of Grant's army had been too far away to participate in the first day of the battle. Several divisions from the Army of the Ohio also arrived. The next morning, the Union soldiers, despite the setback that they had endured the day before, took the offensive. Beauregard's army put up a strong resistance, but it had no reinforcements. Facing the combined strength of two Union armies, the Confederates were forced to retreat from the battlefield. The Union soldiers did not pursue the Confederates.

At the Battle of Shiloh, approximately twenty thousand men were killed or wounded. The casualties were equally divided between the two sides. While Grant did not immediately advance after the battle, he had severely weakened the Confederate force opposing him. The Confederates abandoned Corinth, Mississippi, approximately one month later. The Union took control of this important railroad center.

Grant endured harsh criticism for his conduct at Shiloh. Rumors circulated that Grant was not on the battlefield most of the first day because he was drunk. It was true that Grant was not on the battlefield when the initial attack occurred, but he arrived by 9 a.m. His headquarters was located several miles behind the majority of his troops, but Grant was not drunk. Some historians have argued that he did deserve criticism for not establishing his headquarters closer to his men. He also has been criticized for not ordering his men to prepare adequate defenses, even if he did not expect an attack.

Ohio residents were joyous about the Union victory, but they also were discouraged by rumors that many Ohio regiments fled the battlefield on the first day of the fight. Ohioans also united to assist the soldiers. The state government dispatched several boats of supplies and medicine to Grant's army following the battle. The government also sent doctors and nurses to assist the wounded soldiers.


Contents

Napoleon's invasion of Russia Edit

Napoleon with the French Grande Armée began his invasion of Russia on 24 June 1812 by crossing the Niemen. [9] As his Russian army was outnumbered by far Mikhail Bogdanovich Barclay de Tolly successfully used "delaying operation", defined as an operation in which a force under pressure trades space for time by slowing down the enemy’s momentum and inflicting maximum damage on the enemy without, in principle, becoming decisively engaged, [10] by retreating further eastwards into Russia without giving battle. [11] But the Tsar replaced the unpopular Barclay de Tolly with Kutuzov, who on 18 August took over the army at Tsaryovo-Zaymishche and ordered to prepare for battle. [12] Kutuzov understood that Barclay's decision to retreat had been correct, but the Tsar, the Russian troops and Russia could not accept further retreat. A battle had to occur in order to preserve the morale of the soldiers and the nation. He then ordered not another retreat eastwards but a search for a battle ground eastwards to Gzhatsk (Gagarin) on 30 August, by which time the ratio of French to Russian forces had shrunk from 3:1 to 5:4 thus using Barclay's delaying operation again. [13] The main part of Napoleon's army had entered Russia with 286,000 men [14] but by the time of the battle was reduced mostly through starvation and disease [8]

Kutuzov's army established a defensive line near the village of Borodino. [15] Although the Borodino field was too open and had too few natural obstacles to protect the Russian center and the left flank, it was chosen because it blocked both Smolensk–Moscow roads and because there were simply no better locations. [16] Starting on 3 September, Kutuzov strengthened the line with earthworks, including the Raevski Redoubt in the center-right of the line and three open, arrow-shaped "Bagration flèches" (named after Pyotr Bagration) on the left. [17]

Battle of Shevardino Redoubt Edit

The initial Russian position, which stretched south of the new Smolensk Highway (Napoleon's expected route of advance), was anchored on its left by a pentagonal earthwork redoubt erected on a mound near the village of Shevardino. [18] The Russian generals soon realized that their left wing was too exposed and vulnerable. [19] So the Russian line was moved back from this position, but the Redoubt remained manned, Kutuzov stating that the fortification was manned simply to delay the advance of the French forces. Historian Dmitry Buturlin reports that it was used as an observation point to determine the course of the French advance. Historians Witner and Ratch, and many others, reported it was used as a fortification to threaten the French right flank, despite being beyond effective reach of guns of the period. [18]

The Chief of Staff of the Russian 1st Army, Aleksey Yermolov, related in his memoirs that the Russian left was shifting position when the French Army arrived sooner than expected thus the Battle of Shevardino became a delaying effort to shield the redeployment of the Russian left. The construction of the redoubt and its purpose is disputed by historians to this day. [18]

The conflict began on September 5 when Marshal Joachim Murat's French forces met Konovnitzyn's Russians in a massive cavalry clash, the Russians eventually retreating to the Kolorzkoi Cloister when their flank was threatened. Fighting resumed the next day but Konovnitzyn again retreated when Viceroy Eugène de Beauharnais' Fourth Corps arrived, threatening his flank. The Russians withdrew to the Shevardino Redoubt, where a pitched battle ensued. Murat led Nansouty's First Cavalry Corps and Montbrun's Second Cavalry Corps, supported by Compans's Division of Louis Nicolas Davout's First Infantry Corps against the redoubt. Simultaneously, Prince Józef Poniatowski's Polish infantry attacked the position from the south. Fighting was heavy and very fierce, as the Russians refused to retreat until Kutuzov personally ordered them to do so. [19] The French captured the redoubt, at a cost of 4,000–5,000 French and 6,000 Russian casualties. [20] The small redoubt was destroyed and covered by the dead and dying of both sides. [21]

The unexpected French advance from the west and the fall of the Shevardino redoubt threw the Russian formation into disarray. Since the left flank of their defensive position had collapsed, Russian forces withdrew to the east, constructing a makeshift position centered around the village of Utitsa. The left flank of the Russian position was thus ripe for a flanking attack. [22]

A series of reforms to the Russian army had begun in 1802, creating regiments of three battalions, each battalion having four companies. The defeats of Austerlitz, Eylau, and Friedland led to important additional reforms, though continuous fighting in the course of three wars with France, two with Sweden, and two with the Ottoman Empire had not allowed time for these to be fully implemented and absorbed. [23] A divisional system was introduced in 1806, and corps were established in 1812. [23] Prussian influence may be seen in the organizational setup. By the time of Borodino the Russian army had changed greatly from the force which met the French in 1805–07. [ citation needed ]

Russian forces present at the battle included 180 infantry battalions, 164 cavalry squadrons, 20 Cossack regiments, and 55 artillery batteries (637 artillery pieces). In total, the Russians fielded 155,200 troops. [24] There were 10,000 Cossacks as well as 33,000 Russian militiamen in the area who did not participate in the battle. After the battle the militia units were broken up to provide reinforcements to depleted regular infantry battalions. Of the 637 Russian artillery pieces, 300 were held in reserve and many of these were never committed to the battle. [5]

According to historian Alexander Mikaberidze, the French army remained the finest army of its day by a good margin. [25] The fusion of the legacy of the Ancien Régime with the formations of the French revolution and Napoleon's reforms had transformed it into a military machine that had dominated Europe since 1805. Each corps of the French army was in fact its own mini-army capable of independent action. [25]

French forces included 214 battalions of infantry, 317 squadrons of cavalry and 587 artillery pieces totaling 128,000 troops. [1] However, the French Imperial Guard, which consisted of 30 infantry battalions, 27 cavalry squadrons and 109 artillery pieces—a total of 18,500 troops—never committed to action. [24]

Position Edit

According to Carl von Clausewitz, although the Russian left was on marginally higher ground, this was but a superficial matter and did not provide much of a defensive advantage. The positioning of the Russian right was such, that for the French the left seemed an obvious choice. [26] The Russian position at Borodino consisted of a series of disconnected earthworks running in an arc from the Moskva River on the right, along its tributary, the Kolocha (whose steep banks added to the defense), and towards the village of Utitsa on the left. [17] Thick woods interspersed along the Russian left and center (on the French side of the Kolocha) made the deployment and control of French forces difficult, aiding the defenders. The Russian center was defended by the Raevsky Redoubt, a massive open-backed earthwork mounting nineteen 12-pounder cannons which had a clear field of fire all the way to the banks of the Kolocha stream. [ citation needed ]

Kutuzov was very concerned that the French might take the New Smolensk Road around his positions and on to Moscow [26] so placed the more powerful 1st Army under Barclay on the right, in positions which were already strong and virtually unassailable by the French. The 2nd Army under Bagration was expected to hold the left. The fall of Shevardino unanchored the Russian left flank but Kutuzov did nothing to change these initial dispositions despite the repeated pleas of his generals to redeploy their forces. [17]

Thus, when the action began and became a defensive rather than an offensive battle for the Russians, their heavy preponderance in artillery was wasted on a right wing that would never be attacked, while the French artillery did much to help win the battle [17] Colonel Karl Wilhelm von Toll and others would make attempts to cover up their mistakes in this deployment and later attempts by historians would compound the issue. [27] Indeed, Clausewitz also complained about Toll's dispositions being so narrow and deep that needless losses were incurred from artillery fire. The Russian position therefore was just about 8 kilometres (5 mi) long with about 80,000 of the 1st Army on the right and 34,000 of the 2nd Army on the left. [28]

Bagration's flèches Edit

The first area of operations was on the Bagration flèches, as had been predicted by both Barclay de Tolly and Bagration. Napoleon, in command of the French forces, made errors similar to those of his Russian adversary, deploying his forces inefficiently and failing to exploit the weaknesses in the Russian line. Despite Marshal Davout's suggestion of a maneuver to outflank the weak Russian left, the Emperor instead ordered Davout's First Corps to move directly forward into the teeth of the defense, while the flanking maneuver was left to the weak Fifth Corps of Prince Poniatowski. [16]

The initial French attack was aimed at seizing the three Russian positions collectively known as the Bagration flèches, three arrow-head shaped, open-backed earthworks which arced out to the left en échelon in front of the Kolocha stream. These positions helped support the Russian left, which had no terrain advantages. There was much to be desired in the construction of the flèches, one officer noting that the ditches were much too shallow, the embrasures open to the ground, making them easy to enter, and that they were much too wide, exposing infantry inside them. [29] The flèches were supported by artillery from the village of Semyanovskaya, whose elevation dominated the other side of the Kolocha. [17]

The battle began at 06:00 with the opening of the 102-gun French grand battery against the Russian center. [30] Davout sent Compans's Division against the southernmost of the flèches, with Dessaix's Division echeloned out to the left. [16] When Compans exited the woods on the far bank of the Kolocha, he was hit by massed Russian cannon fire both Compans and Dessaix were wounded, but the French continued their assault. [31] Davout, seeing the confusion, personally led the 57th Line Regiment (Le Terrible) forward until he had his horse shot from under him he fell so hard that General Sorbier reported him as dead. General Rapp arrived to replace him, only to find Davout alive and leading the 57th forward again. Rapp then led the 61st Line Regiment forward when he was wounded (for the 22nd time in his career). [ citation needed ]

By 07:30, Davout had gained control of the three flèches. Prince Bagration quickly led a counterattack that threw the French out of the positions, only to have Marshal Michel Ney lead a charge by the 24th Regiment that retook them. [31] Although not enamoured of Barclay, Bagration turned to him for aid, ignoring Kutuzov altogether Barclay, to his credit, responded quickly, sending three guard regiments, eight grenadier battalions, and twenty-four 12-pounder cannon at their best pace to bolster Semyаnovskaya. [31] Colonel Toll and Kutuzov moved the Guard Reserve units forward as early as 09:00 hours. [32]

During the confused fighting, French and Russian units moved forward into impenetrable smoke and were smashed by artillery and musketry fire that was horrendous even by Napoleonic standards. Infantry and cavalrymen had difficulty maneuvering over the heaps of corpses and masses of wounded. Murat advanced with his cavalry around the flèches to attack Bagration's infantry, but was confronted by General Duka's 2nd Cuirassier Division supported by Neverovsky's infantry. [33]

The French carried out seven assaults against the flèches and each time were beaten back in fierce close combat. Bagration in some instances was personally leading counterattacks, and in a final attempt to push the French completely back he got hit in the leg by cannonball splinters somewhere around 11:00 hours. He insisted on staying on the field to observe Duka's decisive cavalry attack. [33]

This counter-punch drove Murat to seek the cover of allied Württemberger infantry. Barclay's reinforcements, however, were sent into the fray only to be torn to pieces by French artillery, leaving Friant's Division in control of the Russian forward position at 11:30. Dust, smoke, confusion, and exhaustion all combined to keep the French commanders on the field (Davout, Ney, and Murat) from comprehending that all the Russians before them had fallen back, were in confusion, and ripe for the taking. [34]

The 2nd Army's command structure fell apart as Bagration was removed from the battlefield and the report of his being hit quickly spread and caused morale collapse. Napoleon, who had been sick with a cold and was too far from the action to really observe what was going on, refused to send his subordinates reinforcements. He was hesitant to release his last reserve, the Imperial Guard, so far from France. [34]

First attacks on the Raevsky redoubt Edit

Prince Eugène de Beauharnais advanced his corps against Borodino, rushing the village and capturing it from the Russian Guard Jägers. [35] However, the advancing columns rapidly lost their cohesion shortly after clearing Borodino, they faced fresh Russian assault columns and retreated back to the village. General Delzons was posted to Borodino to prevent the Russians retaking it. [36]

Morand's division then crossed to the north side of the Semyenovka stream, while the remainder of Eugène's forces traversed three bridges across the Kolocha to the south, placing them on the same side of the stream as the Russians. He then deployed most of his artillery and began to push the Russians back toward the Raevsky redoubt. Broussier and Morand's divisions then advanced together with furious artillery support. The redoubt changed hands as Barclay was forced to personally rally Paskevitch's routed regiment. [37]

Kutuzov ordered Yermolov to take action the general brought forward three horse artillery batteries that began to blast the open-ended redoubt, while the 3rd Battalion of the Ufa Regiment and two Jäger regiments brought up by Barclay rushed in with the bayonet to eliminate Bonami's Brigade. [37] The Russian reinforcements' assault returned the redoubt to Russian control.

Eugène's artillery continued to pound Russian support columns, while Marshals Ney and Davout set up a crossfire with artillery positioned on the Semyonovskaya heights. [38] Barclay countered by moving the Prussian General Eugen over to the right to support Miloradovich in his defense of the redoubt. [39] The French responded to this move by sending forward General Sorbier, commander of the Imperial Guard artillery. Sorbier brought forth 36 artillery pieces from the Imperial Guard Artillery Park and also took command of 49 horse artillery pieces from Nansouty's Ist Cavalry Corps and La Tour Maubourg's IV Cavalry Corps, as well as of Viceroy Eugène's own artillery, opening up a massive artillery barrage. [40]

When Barclay brought up troops against an attacking French brigade, he described it as "a walk into Hell". [38] During the height of the battle, Kutuzov's subordinates were making all of the decisions for him according to Colonel Karl von Clausewitz, famous for his work On War, the Russian commander "seemed to be in a trance." [39] With the death of General Kutaisov, Chief of Artillery, most of the Russian cannon sat useless on the heights to the rear and were never ordered into battle, while the French artillery wreaked havoc on the Russians. [39]

Cossack raid on the northern flank Edit

On the morning of the battle at around 07:30, Don Cossack patrols from Matvei Platov's pulk had discovered a ford across the Kolocha river, on the extreme Russian right (northern) flank. Seeing that the ground in front of them was clear of enemy forces, Platov saw an opportunity to go around the French left flank and into the enemy's rear. He at once sent one of his aides to ask for permission from Kutuzov for such an operation. Platov's aide was lucky enough to encounter Colonel von Toll, an enterprising member of Kutuzov's staff, who suggested that General Uvarov's Ist Cavalry Corps be added to the operation and at once volunteered to present the plan to the commander-in-chief. [19]

Together, they went to see Kutuzov, who nonchalantly gave his permission. There was no clear plan and no objectives had been drawn up, the whole manoeuvre being interpreted by both Kutuzov and Uvarov as a feint. Uvarov and Platov thus set off, having just around 8000 cavalrymen and 12 guns in total, and no infantry support. As Uvarov moved southwest and south and Platov moved west, they eventually arrived in the undefended rear of Viceroy Eugène's IV Corps. This was towards midday, just as the Viceroy was getting his orders to conduct another assault on the Raevski redoubt. [19]

The sudden appearance of masses of enemy cavalry so close to the supply train and the Emperor's headquarters caused panic and consternation, prompting Eugène to immediately cancel his attack and pull back his entire Corps westwards to deal with the alarming situation. Meanwhile, the two Russian cavalry commanders tried to break what French infantry they could find in the vicinity. Having no infantry of their own, the poorly coordinated Russian attacks came to nothing. [19]

Unable to achieve much else, Platov and Uvarov moved back to their own lines and the action was perceived as a failure by both Kutuzov and the Russian General Staff. As it turned out, the action had the utmost importance in the outcome of the battle, as it delayed the attack of the IV Corps on the Raevski redoubt for a critical two hours. During these two hours, the Russians were able to reassess the situation, realize the terrible state of Bagration's 2nd Army and send reinforcements to the front line. Meanwhile, the retreat of Viceroy Eugène's Corps had left Montbrun's II French Cavalry Corps to fill the gap under the most murderous fire, which used up and demoralized these cavalrymen, greatly reducing their combat effectiveness. The delay contradicted a military principle the Emperor had stated many times: "Ground I may recover, time never." [41] The Cossack raid contributed to Napoleon's later decision not to commit his Imperial Guard to battle. [19]

Final attack on Raevsky redoubt Edit

At 14:00, Napoleon renewed the assault against the redoubt, as Broussier's, Morand's, and Gérard's divisions launched a massive frontal attack, with Chastel's light cavalry division on their left and the II Reserve Cavalry Corps on their right [39]

The Russians sent Likhachov's 24th Division into the battle, who fought bravely under Likhachov's motto: "Brothers, behind us is Moscow!" But the French troops approached too close for the cannons to fire, and the cannoneers fought a pitched close-order defence against the attackers. [19] General Caulaincourt ordered Watier's cuirassier division to lead the assault. Barclay saw Eugène's preparations for the assault and attempted to counter it, moving his forces against it. The French artillery, however, began bombarding the assembling force even as it gathered. Caulaincourt led Watier's cuirassiers in an assault on the opening at the back of the redoubt he was killed as the charge was beaten off by fierce Russian musketry. [42]

General Thielmann then led eight Saxon and two Polish cavalry squadrons against the back of the redoubt, while officers and sergeants of his command actually forced their horses through the redoubt's embrasures, sowing confusion amongst the defenders and allowing the French cavalry and infantry to take the position. The battle had all but ended, with both sides so exhausted that only the artillery was still at work. [8] At 15:30, the Raevsky redoubt fell with most of the 24th Division's troops. General Likhachov was captured by the French. [43]

Utitsa Edit

The third area of operations was around the village of Utitsa. The village was at the southern end of the Russian positions and lay along the old Smolensk road. It was rightly perceived as a potential weak point in the defense as a march along the road could turn the entire position at Borodino. Despite such concerns the area was a tangle of rough country thickly covered in heavy brush well suited for deploying light infantry. The forest was dense, the ground marshy, and Russian Jaegers were deployed there in some numbers. Russian General Nikolay Tuchkov had some 23,000 troops but half were untrained Opolchenye (militia) armed only with pikes and axes and not ready for deployment. [44]

Poniatowski had about 10,000 men, all trained and eager to fight, but his first attempt did not go well. It was at once realized the massed troops and artillery could not move through the forest against Jaeger opposition so had to reverse to Yelnya and then move eastward. [44] Tuchkov had deployed his 1st Grenadier Division in line backing it with the 3rd division in battalion columns. Some four regiments were called away to help defend the redoubts that were under attack and another 2 Jaeger regiments were deployed in the Utitsa woods, weakening the position.

The Polish contingent contested control of Utitsa village, capturing it with their first attempt. Tuchkov later ejected the French forces by 08:00. General Jean-Andoche Junot led the Westphalians to join the attack and again captured Utitsa, which was set on fire by the departing Russians. After the village's capture, Russians and Poles continued to skirmish and cannonade for the rest of the day without much progress. The heavy undergrowth greatly hindered Poniatowski's efforts but eventually he came near to cutting off Tuchkov from the rest of the Russian forces. [45] General Barclay sent help in the form of Karl Gustav von Baggovut with Konovnitzyn in support. [45] Any hope of real progress by the Poles was then lost. [46]

Napoleon's refusal to commit the Guard Edit

Towards 15:00, after hours of resistance, the Russian army was in dire straits, but the French forces were exhausted and had neither the necessary stamina nor will to carry out another assault. Both armies were exhausted after the battle and the Russians withdrew from the field the following day. Borodino represented the last Russian effort at stopping the French advance on Moscow, which fell a week later. At this crucial juncture, Murat's chief of staff, General Augustin Daniel Belliard rode straight to the Emperor's Headquarters and, according to General Ségur who wrote an account of the campaign, told him that the Russian line had been breached, that the road to Mozhaysk, behind the Russian line, was visible through the gaping hole the French attack had pierced, that an enormous crowd of runaways and vehicles were hastily retreating, and that a final push would be enough to decide the fate of the Russian army and of the war. Generals Daru, Dumas and Marshal Louis Alexandre Berthier also joined in and told the Emperor that everyone thought the time had come for the Guard to be committed to battle. [ citation needed ]

Given the ferocity of the Russian defense, everyone was aware that such a move would cost the lives of thousands of Guardsmen, but it was thought that the presence of this prestigious unit would bolster the morale of the entire army for a final decisive push. A notable exception was Marshal Bessières, commander of the Guard cavalry, who was one of the very few senior generals to strongly advise against the intervention of the Guard. As the general staff were discussing the matter, General Rapp, a senior aide-de-camp to the Emperor, was being brought from the field of battle, having been wounded in action. [47]

Rapp immediately recommended to the Emperor that the Guard be deployed for action at which the Emperor is said to have retorted: "I will most definitely not I do not want to have it blown up. I am certain of winning the battle without its intervention." [47] Determined not to commit this valuable final reserve so far away from France, Napoleon rejected another such request, this time from Marshal Ney. Instead, he called the commander of the "Young Guard", Marshal Mortier and instructed him to guard the field of battle without moving forward or backward, while at the same time unleashing a massive cannonade with his 400 guns. [48]

Napoleon went forward to see the situation from the former Russian front lines shortly after the redoubts had been taken. The Russians had moved to the next ridge-line in much disarray however, that disarray was not clear to the French, with dust and haze obscuring the Russian dispositions. Kutuzov ordered the Russian Guard to hold the line and so it did. All of the artillery that the French army had was not enough to move it. Those compact squares made good artillery targets and the Russian Guard stood in place from 4 pm to 6 pm unmoving under its fire, resulting in huge casualties. [49] All he could see were masses of troops in the distance and thus nothing more was attempted. Neither the attack, which relied on brute force, nor the refusal to use the Guard to finish the day's work, showed any brilliance on Napoleon's part. [50]

Both the Prussian Staff Officer Karl von Clausewitz, the historian and future author of On War, and Alexander I of Russia noted that the poor positioning of troops in particular had hobbled the defense. Barclay communicated with Kutuzov in order to receive further instructions. According to Ludwig von Wolzogen (in an account dripping with sarcasm), the commander was found a half-hour away on the road to Moscow, encamped with an entourage of young nobles and grandly pronouncing he would drive Napoleon off the next day. [8]

Despite his bluster, Kutuzov knew from dispatches that his army had been too badly hurt to fight a continuing action the following day. He knew exactly what he was doing: by fighting the pitched battle, he could now retreat with the Russian army still intact, lead its recovery, and force the weakened French forces to move even further from their bases of supply. The dénouement became a textbook example of what a hold logistics placed upon an army far from its center of supply. [50] On September 8, the Russian army moved away from the battlefield in twin columns, allowing Napoleon to occupy Moscow and await for five weeks a Russian surrender that would never come. [51]

Kutuzov would proclaim over the course of several days that the Russian Army would fight again before the walls of Moscow. In fact, a site was chosen near Poklonnaya Gora within a few miles of Moscow as a battle site. However, the Russian Army had not received enough reinforcements, and it was too risky to cling to Moscow at all costs. Kutuzov understood that the Russian people never wanted to abandon Moscow, the city which was regarded as Russia's "second capital" however he also believed that the Russian Army did not have enough forces to protect that city. Kutuzov called for a council of war in the afternoon of 13 September at Fili village. In a heated debate that split the council five to four in favour of giving battle, Kutuzov, after listening to each General, endorsed retreat. Thus passed the last chance of battle before Moscow was taken. [19] [52]

Historiography Edit

Estimates of the sizes of opposing forces
made at different times by different historians [53]
Historian French Russian Year
Buturlin 190,000 132,000 1824
Segur 130,000 120,000 1824
Chambray 133,819 130,000 1825
Fain 120,000 133,500 1827
Clausewitz 130,000 120,000 1830s
Mikhailovsky-Danilivsky 160,000 128,000 1839
Bogdanovich 130,000 120,800 1859
Marbot 140,000 160,000 1860
Burton 130,000 120,800 1914
Garniich 130,665 119,300 1956
Tarle 130,000 127,800 1962
Grunward 130,000 120,000 1963
Beskrovny 135,000 126,000 1968
Chandler 156,000 120,800 1966
Thiry 120,000 133,000 1969
Holmes 130,000 120,800 1971
Duffy 133,000 125,000 1972
Tranie 127,000 120,000 1981
Nicolson 128,000 106,000 1985
Troitsky 134,000 154,800 1988
Vasiliev 130,000 155,200 1997
Smith 133,000 120,800 1998
Zemtsov 127,000 154,000 1999
Hourtoulle 115,000 140,000 2000
Bezotosny 135,000 150,000 2004
Roberts [54] 103,000 120,800 2015

It is not unusual for a pivotal battle of this era to be difficult to document. Similar difficulties exist with the Battle of Waterloo or battles of the War of 1812 in North America, while the Battle of Borodino offers its own particular challenges to accuracy. [55] It has been repeatedly subjected to overtly political uses. [56]

Personal accounts of the battle frequently magnified an individual's own role or minimised those of rivals. [57] The politics of the time were complex and complicated by ethnic divisions between native Russian nobility and those having second and third-generation German descent, leading to rivalry for positions in command of the army. Not only does a historian have to deal with the normal problem of a veteran looking back and recalling events as he or she would have liked them to have been, but in some cases outright malice was involved. Nor was this strictly a Russian event, as bickering and sabotage were known amongst the French marshals and their reporting generals. To "lie like a bulletin" was a recognised phrase amongst his troops. [b] [58] [59] It was not just a French affair either, with Kutuzov in particular promoting an early form of misinformation that has continued to this day. [55] Further distortions occurred during the Soviet years, when an adherence to a "formula" was the expectation during the Stalin years and for some time after that. The over-reliance of western histories on the battle and of the campaign on French sources has been noted by later historians. [55]

The views of historians of the outcome of the battle changed with the passage of time and the changing political situations surrounding them. Kutuzov proclaimed a victory both to the army and to Emperor Alexander. While many a general throughout history claimed victory out of defeat (Ramses II of Egypt did so) and in this case, Kutuzov was commander-in-chief of the entire Russian army, and it was an army that, despite the huge losses, considered itself undefeated. Announcing a defeat would have removed Kutuzov from command, and damaged the morale of the proud soldiers. While Alexander was not deceived by the announcement, it gave him the justification needed to allow Kutuzov to march his army off to rebuild the Russian forces and later complete the near utter destruction of the French army. [60] As such, what was said by Kutuzov and those supporting his views was allowed to pass into the histories of the time unchecked. [55]

Histories during the Soviet era raised the battle to a mythic contest with serious political overtones and had Kutuzov as the master tactician on the battlefield, directing every move with the precision of a ballet master directing his troupe. [55] Kutuzov's abilities on the battlefield were, in the eyes of his contemporaries and fellow Russian generals, far more complex and often described in less than flattering terms. Noted author and historian David G. Chandler writing in 1966, echoes the Soviet era Russian histories in more than a few ways, asserting that General Kutuzov remained in control of the battle throughout, ordered counter-moves to Napoleon's tactics personally rather than Bagration and Barclay doing so and put aside personal differences to overcome the dispositional mistakes of the Russian army. Nor is the tent scene played out instead Kutuzov remains with the army. Chandler also has the Russian army in much better shape moving to secondary prepared positions and seriously considering attacking the next day. [61] Later historians Riehn and Mikaberidze have Kutuzov leaving most of the battle to Bagration and Barclay de Tolly, leaving early in the afternoon and relaying orders from his camp 30 minutes from the front. [62]

His dispositions for the battle are described as a clear mistake leaving the right far too strong and the left much too weak. Only the fact that Bagration and Barclay were to cooperate fully saved the Russian army and did much to mitigate the bad positioning. [49] Nothing would be more damning than 300 artillery pieces standing silent on the Russian right. [5]

The fighting involved around 250,000 troops and left at least 68,000 killed and wounded, making Borodino the deadliest day of the Napoleonic Wars and the bloodiest single day in the history of warfare until the First Battle of the Marne in 1914.

The casualties of the battle were staggering: according to French General Staff Inspector P. Denniee, the Grande Armée lost approximately 28,000 soldiers: 6,562 (including 269 officers) were reported as dead, 21,450 as wounded. [63] But according to French historian Aristid Martinien, [64] at least 460 French officers (known by name) were killed in battle. In total, the Grande Armée lost 1,928 officers dead and wounded, including 49 generals. [64] The list of slain included French Generals of Division Auguste-Jean-Gabriel de Caulaincourt, Louis-Pierre Montbrun, Jean Victor Tharreau and Generals of Brigade Claude Antoine Compère, François Auguste Damas, Léonard Jean Aubry Huard de Saint-Aubin, Jean Pierre Lanabère, Charles Stanislas Marion, Louis Auguste Marchand Plauzonne, and Jean Louis Romeuf. [65]

Suffering a wound on the Borodino battlefield was effectively a death sentence, as French forces did not possess enough food for the healthy, much less the sick consequently, equal numbers of wounded soldiers starved to death, died of their injuries, or perished through neglect. [66] The casualties were for a single day of battle, while the Russian figures are for the 5th and the 7th, combined. Using the same accounting method for both armies brings the actual French Army casualty count to 34,000–35,000. [67]

The Russians suffered terrible casualties during the fighting, losing over a third of their army. Some 52,000 Russian troops were reported as dead, wounded or missing, including 1,000 prisoners some 8,000 men were separated from their units and returned over the next few days, bringing the total Russian losses to 44,000. Twenty-two Russian generals were killed or wounded, including Prince Bagration, who died of his wounds on 24 September. [4] Historian Gwynne Dyer compared the carnage at Borodino to "a fully-loaded 747 crashing, with no survivors, every 5 minutes for eight hours." Taken as a one-day battle in the scope of the Napoleonic conflict, this was the bloodiest battle of this series of conflicts with combined casualties between 72,000 and 73,000. The next nearest battle would be Waterloo, at about 55,000 for the day. [68]

In the historiography of this battle, the figures would be deliberately inflated or underplayed by the generals of both sides attempting to lessen the impact the figures would have on public opinion both during aftermath of the battle or, for political reasons, later during the Soviet period. [69]

Attrition warfare Edit

The Battle of Borodino was a victory for Napoleon, as the Russian army retreated to the south of Moscow and the French army occupied Moscow. The next major battle in conventional warfare was the Battle of Tarutino about five weeks later. After "delayed operation" in his attrition warfare Kutuzov used scorched earth strategy by burning Moscow's resources, guerrilla warfare by the Cossacks against any kind of transport and total war by the peasants against foraging. This kind of warfare weakened the French army at its most vulnerable point: logistics, as it was unable to live off the Russian land, which was not populated and cultivated enough, [70] meaning that starvation became the most dangerous enemy long before the cold joined in. [71] The feeding of horses by supply trains was extremely difficult, as a ration for a horse weighs about ten times as much as one for a man. It was tried in vain to feed and water all the horses by foraging expeditions. [72]

Pyrrhic victory Edit

Some scholars and contemporaries described Borodino as a Pyrrhic victory. [73] [74] [75] [76] [77] Russian historian Oleg Sokolov posits that Borodino constituted a Pyrrhic victory for the French, which would ultimately cost Napoleon the war and his crown, although at the time none of this was apparent to either side. Sokolov adds that the decision to not commit the Guard saved the Russians from an Austerlitz-style defeat and quotes Marshal Laurent de Gouvion Saint-Cyr, one of Napoleon's finest strategists, who analyzed the battle and concluded that an intervention of the Guard would have torn the Russian army to pieces and allowed Napoleon to safely follow his plans to take winter quarters in Moscow and resume his successful campaign in spring or offer the Tsar acceptable peace terms. [47] Digby Smith calls Borodino 'a draw' but believes that posterity proved Napoleon right in his decision to not commit the Guard so far away from his homeland. [78] According to Christopher Duffy, the battle of Borodino could be seen as a new Battle of Torgau, in which both of the sides sustained terrible losses but neither could achieve their tactical goals, and the battle itself did not have a clear result, [79] [80] although both sides claimed the battle as their own victory. [81]

However, in what had become a war of attrition, the battle was just one more source of losses to the French when they were losing two men to one. Both the French and the Russians suffered terribly but the Russians had reserve troops, and a clear logistical advantage. The French Army supplies came over a long road lined with hostile forces. According to Riehn, so long as the Russian Army existed the French continued to lose. [31]

This victory of Napoleon was not decisive, but it allowed the French emperor to occupy Moscow to await a surrender that would never come. The capture of Moscow proved a Pyrrhic victory, since the Russians had no intention of negotiating with Napoleon for peace. Historian Riehn notes that the Borodino victory allowed Napoleon to move on to Moscow, where—even allowing for the arrival of reinforcements—the French Army only possessed a maximum of 95,000 men, who would be ill-equipped to win a battle due to a lack of supplies and ammunition. [82] The main part of the Grande Armée suffered more than 90,000 casualties by the time of the Moscow retreat, see Minard's map typhus, dysentery, starvation and hypothermia ensured that only about 10,000 men of the main force returned across the Russian border alive. Furthermore, although the Russian army suffered heavy casualties in the battle, it regrouped by the time of Napoleon's retreat from Moscow it soon began to interfere with the French withdrawal and made it a catastrophe. [83]


Contents

In about 1774, the Potawatomi and the Ottawa Native American tribes formed a joint village near the future Battle Creek, Michigan. [9]

One local legend says Battle Creek was named for a minor encounter on March 14, 1824, between a federal government land survey party led by Colonel John Mullett and two Potawatomi Indians, who had approached the survey camp asking for food. They were hungry because the Army was late in delivering the supplies promised them by the treaty of 1821. After a protracted discussion, the Native Americans allegedly tried to steal food. One of the surveyors grabbed his rifle and shot one of the Potawatomi, seriously wounding him. Following the encounter, the surveyors retreated to Detroit. [10]

Surveyors would not return to the area until June 1825, after Governor Lewis Cass had settled the issues with the Native Americans. Early white settlers called the nearby stream the Battle Creek River, and the town took its name from that. [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]

Native Americans had called the river Waupakisco, to which some attribute a folk etymology. By this account, the name Waupakisco or Waupokisco was a reference to an earlier battle fought between Native American tribes before the arrival of white settlers. However, Virgil J. Vogel establishes that this native term had "nothing to do with blood or battle". [11] [16]

Following removal of the Potawatomi to a reservation, the first permanent white settlements in Battle Creek Township began about 1831. Migration had increased to Michigan from New York and New England following the completion of the Erie Canal in New York in 1824. Most settlers chose to locate on the Goguac prairie, which was fertile and easily cultivated. A post office was opened in Battle Creek in 1832 under Postmaster Pollodore Hudson. [17] The first school was taught in a small log house about 1833 or 1834. Asa Langley built the first sawmill in 1837. A brick manufacturing plant, called the oldest enterprise in the township, was established in 1840 by Simon Carr and operated until 1903. The township was established by act of the legislature in 1839. [18]

In the antebellum era, the city was a major stop on the Underground Railroad, used by fugitive slaves to escape to freedom in Michigan and Canada. It was the chosen home of noted abolitionist Sojourner Truth after her escape from slavery. [19]

Battle Creek figured prominently in the early history of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. It was the site of a Protestant church founding convention in 1863. The denomination's first hospital, college, and publishing office would also be constructed in the city. When the hospital and publishing office burned down in 1902, the church elected to decentralize, and most of its institutions were relocated. The first Adventist church (rebuilt in the 1920s) is still in operation.

World Heavyweight Champion Jack Johnson was once arrested here for marrying his White wife and transporting her across state lines. [20]

The city was noted for its focus on health reform during the late 1800s and early 1900s. The Battle Creek Sanitarium was founded by Dr. John Harvey Kellogg. In addition to some of his sometimes bizarre treatments that were featured in the movie The Road to Wellville, Kellogg also funded organizations that promoted eugenics theories at the core of their philosophical agenda, which was seen as a natural complement to euthenics. [21] The Race Betterment Foundation was one of these organizations. He also supported the "separate but equal" philosophy and invited Booker T. Washington to speak at the Battle Creek Sanitarium in order to raise money. Washington was the author of the speech "The Atlanta Compromise", which solidified his position of being an accommodationist while providing a mechanism for southern Whites (and their sympathizers), to fund his school (the Tuskegee Institute).

W. K. Kellogg had worked for his brother in a variety of capacities at the B.C. Sanitarium. Tired of living in the shadow of his brother John Harvey Kellogg, he struck out on his own, going to the boom-towns surrounding the oilfields in Oklahoma as a broom salesman. Having failed, he returned to work as an assistant to his brother. While working at the sanitariums' laboratory, W.K. spilled liquefied cornmeal on a heating device that cooked the product and rendered it to flakes. He tasted the flakes and added milk to them. He was able to get his brother to allow him to give some of the product to some of the patients at the sanitarium, and the patients' demand for the product exceeded his expectations to the point that W.K made the decision to leave the sanitarium. Along with some investors, he built a factory to satisfy the demand for his "corn flakes".

It was during this time of going their separate ways for good that Dr. John Harvey Kellogg sued his brother for copyright infringement. The U.S. Supreme court ruled in W.K. Kellogg's favor, due to the greater sales and public prolife of W.K. Kellogg's company.

Inspired by Kellogg's innovation, C. W. Post invented Grape-Nuts and founded his own cereal company in the town. Battle Creek has been nicknamed "the Cereal City."

In the turbulent 1960s, Battle Creek was not immune to the racial issues of the day. Dr. Martin Luther King spoke here, as did Sen. Hubert Humphrey, President L.B. Johnson, and Heavyweight Champion of the world Muhammad Ali. African Americans were subjected to "stop and frisk" procedures while walking, and housing covenants were in full force. No Blacks worked in the school systems, and only a few Blacks held mid-level manager posts in the local corporate sector. The Federal government sector was better at the Federal Center, and less so at the local Veterans' Administration Hospital.

The Black Recondos, a group formed from the local young adult council of the NAACP, forced the local board of education to hire Black teachers and administrative personnel, under the threat of removing every black student from their public schools. They also forced the chief of police to allow Black Recondos to intervene in arrests and gave them the authority to take black law breakers into their custody instead of the local police. This caused the second strike of a police force in U.S. history. The officers were fired and the strike was ended.

According to the United States Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 43.73 square miles (113.26 km 2 ), of which 42.61 square miles (110.36 km 2 ) is land and 1.12 square miles (2.90 km 2 ) is water, [22] making Battle Creek the third largest city in Michigan by area, and one of only three incorporated municipalities in the state over 40 sq mi (100 km 2 ) in size.

  • Approximately 60% of the city's land is developed. Of the undeveloped land, 38% is zoned agricultural, 26% is zoned general industrial, 17.5% is zoned residential, 16% is the Fort Custer Army National Guard Base/Industrial Park, and 2.5% is zone commercial. [23]
  • After Battle Creek Township merged into the city of Battle Creek in 1983, the city's declining population rose by nearly 18,000 new residents, but the city continues to decline in population. Prior to the merge, the city measured 18.6 square miles (48.17 km 2 ).
  • Battle Creek is variously considered to be part of Western Michigan or Southern Michigan.

Climate Edit

Climate data for Battle Creek, Michigan
Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Year
Record high °F (°C) 68
(20)
68
(20)
82
(28)
90
(32)
95
(35)
100
(38)
104
(40)
103
(39)
99
(37)
90
(32)
80
(27)
66
(19)
104
(40)
Average high °F (°C) 31
(−1)
33
(1)
43
(6)
58
(14)
70
(21)
80
(27)
85
(29)
82
(28)
75
(24)
62
(17)
46
(8)
34
(1)
58
(15)
Average low °F (°C) 17
(−8)
17
(−8)
25
(−4)
36
(2)
47
(8)
57
(14)
61
(16)
59
(15)
52
(11)
42
(6)
31
(−1)
21
(−6)
39
(4)
Record low °F (°C) −19
(−28)
−24
(−31)
−11
(−24)
10
(−12)
24
(−4)
35
(2)
42
(6)
39
(4)
28
(−2)
18
(−8)
−6
(−21)
−16
(−27)
−24
(−31)
Average precipitation inches (mm) 2.1
(53)
2.1
(53)
2.4
(61)
2.8
(71)
3.6
(91)
4.0
(100)
2.9
(74)
3.0
(76)
3.2
(81)
2.9
(74)
2.5
(64)
2.1
(53)
33.4
(850)
Source: Weatherbase [24]

Nearby municipalities Edit

Historical population
Census Pop.
1840993
18501,064 7.2%
18603,509 229.8%
18705,838 66.4%
18807,063 21.0%
189013,197 86.8%
190018,563 40.7%
191025,267 36.1%
192036,164 43.1%
193045,573 26.0%
194043,453 −4.7%
195048,666 12.0%
196044,169 −9.2%
197038,931 −11.9%
198035,724 −8.2%
199053,540 49.9%
200053,364 −0.3%
201052,347 −1.9%
2019 (est.)51,093 [6] −2.4%
U.S. Decennial Census [25]

In 1982, at the insistence of the Kellogg Company, the city annexed Battle Creek Township, nearly doubling the city's population. Kellogg's even went so far as to threaten moving their headquarters if the annexation failed to occur. [26]

2010 census Edit

As of the census [5] of 2010, there were 52,347 people, 21,118 households, and 12,898 families residing in the city. The population density was 1,228.5 inhabitants per square mile (474.3/km 2 ). There were 24,277 housing units at an average density of 569.7 per square mile (220.0/km 2 ). The racial makeup of the city was 71.7% White, 18.2% African American, 0.7% Native American, 2.4% Asian, 2.7% from other races, and 4.3% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino people of any race were 6.7% of the population.

There were 21,118 households, of which 33.6% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 37.1% were married couples living together, 18.5% had a female householder with no husband present, 5.5% had a male householder with no wife present, and 38.9% were non-families. 32.6% of all households were made up of individuals, and 12.1% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.41 and the average family size was 3.04.

The median age in the city was 36.3 years. 26.1% of residents were under the age of 18 9% were between the ages of 18 and 24 25.9% were from 25 to 44 25.5% were from 45 to 64 and 13.4% were 65 years of age or older. The gender makeup of the city was 47.9% male and 52.1% female.

As of April 2013, Battle Creek has the fifth largest Japanese national population in the State of Michigan, 358 people. [27]

2000 census Edit

As of the census [7] of 2000, there were 53,364 people, 21,348 households, and 13,363 families residing in the city. The population density was 1,246.0 per square mile (481.1/km 2 ). There were 23,525 housing units at an average density of 549.3 per square mile (212.1/km 2 ). The racial makeup of the city was 74.65% White, 17.80% Black or African American, 1.94% Asian, 0.77% Native American, 0.01% Pacific Islander, 2.11% from other races, and 2.72% from two or more races. 4.64% of the population were Hispanic or Latino of any race.

There were 21,348 households, out of which 32.3% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 41.9% were married couples living together, 16.1% had a female householder with no husband present, and 37.4% were non-families. 31.6% of all households were made up of individuals, and 12.1% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.43 and the average family size was 3.04.

In the city, the population was spread out, with 27.2% under the age of 18, 8.7% from 18 to 24, 29.5% from 25 to 44, 21.0% from 45 to 64, and 13.5% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 35 years. For every 100 females, there were 91.9 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 87.2 males.

The median income for a household in the city was $35,491, and the median income for a family was $43,564. Males had a median income of $36,838 versus $26,429 for females. The per capita income for the city was $18,424. About 10.7% of families and 14.4% of the population were below the poverty line, including 17.5% of those under age 18 and 11.8% of those age 65 or over.

The City of Battle Creek has a commission-manager form of government. Cities that follow this plan of government have an elected commission (or council) that appoints a professionally trained and experienced manager to administer the day-to-day operations of the city and to make recommendations to the city commission. Battle Creek also appoints a City Attorney, who provides legal counsel to the city manager and City Commission.

The City Commission makes all policy decisions, including review, revision, and final approval of the annual budget, which is proposed annually by the City Manager. The City Manager serves as an "at-will" employee and they work under an employment contract with the commission. All other city employees, except for the City Attorney's staff, are under the supervision of the City Manager.

There are five ward commissioners. Residents cast votes for a ward representative, who must live within the area they are representing, as well as for four at-large commissioners. These candidates may live anywhere in the city. All commissioners serve two-year terms and all terms begin and end at the same election.

Before November 2020, the commission held a special meeting to decide which commissioners served as the mayor and vice mayor for the next year. In March 2020, Battle Creek residents voted on a proposal that would change how the city selects its mayor position. This proposal (which passed) amended the city charter to allow residents to directly vote for the mayor. Residents will be able to vote for the mayor starting in the November 2020 general election. [28] The mayor presides over the commission meetings and appoints commissioners and residents to special committees. He may also form special committees to explore community challenges or potential policies. The vice mayor stands in if the mayor is unavailable. [29]

The city levies an income tax of 1 percent on residents and 0.5 percent on nonresidents. [30]


Contents

Texas lies at the juncture of two major cultural spheres of Pre-Columbian North America, the Southwestern and the Plains areas. The area now covered by Texas was occupied by three major indigenous cultures, which had reached their developmental peak before the arrival of European explorers and are known from archaeology. These are: [7]

  • the Pueblo from the upper Rio Grande region, centered west of Texas
  • the Mound Builders of the Mississippi culture which spread throughout the Mississippi Valley and its tributaries the Caddo nation are considered among its descendants
  • the civilizations of Mesoamerica, centered south of Texas. The influence of Teotihuacan in northern Mexico peaked around AD 500 and declined over the 8th to 10th centuries.

The Paleo-Indians who lived in Texas between 9200 – 6000 BC may have links to Clovis and Folsom cultures these nomadic people hunted mammoths and bison latifrons [8] using atlatls. They extracted Alibates flint from quarries in the panhandle region.

Beginning during the 4th millennium BC, the population of Texas increased despite a changing climate and the extinction of giant mammals. Many pictograms from this era, drawn on the walls of caves or on rocks, are visible in the state, including at Hueco Tanks [9] and Seminole Canyon.

Native Americans in East Texas began to settle in villages shortly after 500 BC, farming and building the first burial mounds. They were influenced by the Mississippian culture, which had major sites throughout the Mississippi basin. [8] In the Trans-Pecos area, populations were influenced by Mogollon culture.

From the 8th century, the bow and arrow appeared in the region, [8] manufacture of pottery developed, and Native Americans increasingly depended on bison for survival. Obsidian objects found in various Texan sites attest of trade with cultures in present-day Mexico and the Rocky Mountains, as the material is not found locally.

As of the colonial period, Texas was largely divided between 6 culture groups. The Caddoan peoples occupied the area surrounding the entire length of the Red River, and at the time of initial contact with Europeans they formed four collective confederacies known as the Natchitoches, the Hasinai, the Wichita & the Kadohadocho (Caddo). Along the Gulf Coast region were the Atakapa tribes. [10] Southward from the Atakapa, along the Gulf Coast to the Rio Grande river, at least one Coahuiltecan tribe (a culture group primarily from Northeast Mexico) was located. The Puebloan peoples, [11] situated largely between the Rio Grande & Peco rivers were part of an extensive civilization of tribes that lived in what are now the states of Texas, New Mexico, Colorado & Utah. While the northernmost Puebloan groups faced a cultural collapse due to a drought, many of the southern tribes survive to the present. North of the Pueblos were the Apachean tribes who although commonly referred to as a single nation, were actually a culture group. [12] Finally, north of the Apacheans, in the northern current-day Texas Panhandle region, were the Comanches. [13]

Native Americans determined the fate of European explorers and settlers depending on whether a tribe was kind or warlike. [14] Friendly tribes taught newcomers how to grow indigenous crops, prepare foods, and hunting methods for the wild game. Warlike tribes made life difficult and dangerous for explorers and settlers through their attacks and resistance to European conquest. [15] Many Native Americans died of new infectious diseases, which caused high fatalities and disrupted their cultures in the early years of colonization.

Three federally recognized Native American tribes reside in present-day Texas: the Alabama-Coushatta Tribes of Texas, the Kickapoo Traditional Tribe of Texas, and the Ysleta Del Sur Pueblo of Texas. [ citation needed ] A remnant of the Choctaw tribe in East Texas still lives in the Mt. Tabor Community near Overton, Texas. [ citation needed ]

The first European to see Texas was Alonso Álvarez de Pineda, who led an expedition for the governor of Jamaica, Francisco de Garay, in 1520. While searching for a passage between the Gulf of Mexico and Asia, [16] Álvarez de Pineda created the first map of the northern Gulf Coast. [17] This map is the earliest recorded document of Texas history. [17]

Between 1528 and 1535, four survivors of the Narváez expedition, including Álvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca and Estevanico, spent six and a half years in Texas as slaves and traders among various native groups. Cabeza de Vaca was the first European to explore the interior of Texas.

Although Álvarez de Pineda had claimed the area that is now Texas for Spain, the area was essentially ignored for over 160 years. Its initial settlement by Europeans occurred by accident. In April 1682, French nobleman René-Robert Cavelier, Sieur de La Salle had claimed the entire Mississippi River Valley for France. [18] The following year, he convinced King Louis XIV to establish a colony near the Mississippi, essentially splitting Spanish Florida from New Spain. [19] [20]

La Salle's colonization expedition left France on July 24, 1684 and soon lost one of its supply ships to Spanish privateers. [21] A combination of inaccurate maps, La Salle's previous miscalculation of the latitude of the mouth of the Mississippi River, and overcorrecting for the Gulf currents led the ships to be unable to find the Mississippi. [22] Instead, they landed at Matagorda Bay in early 1685, 400 miles (644 km) west of the Mississippi. [22] In February, the colonists constructed Fort Saint Louis. [20]

After the fort was constructed, one of the ships returned to France, and the other two were soon destroyed in storms, stranding the settlers. La Salle and his men searched overland for the Mississippi River, traveling as far west as the Rio Grande [20] and as far east as the Trinity River. [23] Disease and hardship laid waste to the colony, and by early January 1687, fewer than 45 people remained. That month, a third expedition launched a final attempt to find the Mississippi. The expedition experienced much infighting, and La Salle was ambushed and killed somewhere in East Texas. [24]

The Spanish learned of the French colony in late 1685. Feeling that the French colony was a threat to Spanish mines and shipping routes, King Carlos II's Council of war recommended the removal of "this thorn which has been thrust into the heart of America. The greater the delay the greater the difficulty of attainment." [20] Having no idea where to find La Salle, the Spanish launched ten expeditions—both land and sea—over the next three years. The last expedition discovered a French deserter living in Southern Texas with the Coahuiltecans. [25]

The Frenchman guided the Spanish to the French fort in late April 1689. [26] The fort and the five crude houses surrounding it were in ruins. [27] Several months before, the Karankawa had become angry that the French had taken their canoes without payment and had attacked the settlement [26] sparing only four children. [24]

Establishment of Spanish colony Edit

News of the destruction of the French fort "created instant optimism and quickened religious fervor" in Mexico City. [28] Spain had learned a great deal about the geography of Texas during the many expeditions in search of Fort Saint Louis. [25] In March 1690, Alonso De León led an expedition to establish a mission in East Texas. [29] Mission San Francisco de los Tejas was completed near the Hasinai village of Nabedaches in late May, and its first mass was celebrated on June 1. [29] [30]

On January 23, 1691, Spain appointed the first governor of Texas, General Domingo Terán de los Ríos. [31] On his visit to Mission San Francisco in August, he discovered that the priests had established a second mission nearby, but were having little luck converting the natives to Christianity. The Indians regularly stole the mission cattle and horses and showed little respect to the priests. [32] When Terán left Texas later that year, most of the missionaries chose to return with him, leaving only three religious people and nine soldiers at the missions. [33] The group also left behind a smallpox epidemic. [30] The angry Caddo threatened the remaining Spaniards, who soon abandoned the fledgling missions and returned to Coahuila. For the next 20 years, Spain again ignored Texas. [34]

After a failed attempt to convince Spanish authorities to reestablish missions in Texas, in 1711 Franciscan missionary Francisco Hidalgo approached the French governor of Louisiana for help. [35] The French governor sent representatives to meet with Hidalgo. This concerned Spanish authorities, who ordered the reoccupation of Texas as a buffer between New Spain and French settlements in Louisiana. [36] In 1716, four missions and a presidio were established in East Texas. Accompanying the soldiers were the first recorded female settlers in Spanish Texas. [37]

The new missions were over 400 miles (644 km) from the nearest Spanish settlement, San Juan Bautista. [38] Martín de Alarcón, who had been appointed governor of Texas in late 1716, wished to establish a way station between the settlements along the Rio Grande and the new missions in East Texas. [39] Alarcón led a group of 72 people, including 10 families, into Texas in April 1718, where they settled along the San Antonio River. Within the next week, the settlers built mission San Antonio de Valero and a presidio, and chartered the municipality of San Antonio de Béxar, now San Antonio, Texas. [40]

The following year, the War of the Quadruple Alliance pitted Spain against France, which immediately moved to take over Spanish interests in North America. [41] In June 1719, seven Frenchmen from Natchitoches took control of the mission San Miguel de los Adaes from its sole defender, who did not know that the countries were at war. The French soldiers explained that 100 additional soldiers were coming, and the Spanish colonists, missionaries, and remaining soldiers fled to San Antonio. [42]

The new governor of Coahuila and Texas, the Marquis de San Miguel de Aguayo, drove the French from Los Adaes without firing a shot. He then ordered the building of a new Spanish fort Nuestra Señora del Pilar de Los Adaes, located near present-day Robeline, Louisiana, only 12 mi (19 km) from Natchitoches. The new fort became the first capital of Texas, and was guarded by six cannons and 100 soldiers. [43] The six East Texas missions were reopened, [44] and an additional mission and presidio were established at Matagorda Bay on the former site of Fort Saint Louis. [45] [46]

Difficulties with the Native Americans Edit

In the late 1720s, the viceroy of New Spain closed the presidio in East Texas and reduced the size of the garrisons at the remaining presidios, [47] leaving only 144 soldiers in the entire province. With no soldiers to protect them, the East Texas missions relocated to San Antonio. [48]

Although the missionaries had been unable to convert the Hasinai tribe of East Texas, they did become friendly with the natives. The Hasinai were bitter enemies of the Lipan Apache, who transferred their enmity to Spain and began raiding San Antonio and other Spanish areas. [49] [50] A temporary peace was finally negotiated with the Apache in 1749, [51] and at the request of the Indians a mission was established along the San Saba River northwest of San Antonio. [52] The Apaches shunned the mission, but the fact that Spaniards now appeared to be friends of the Apache angered the Apache enemies, primarily the Comanche, Tonkawa, and Hasinai tribes, who promptly destroyed the mission. [53]

In 1762, France finally relinquished their claim to Texas by ceding all of Louisiana west of the Mississippi River to Spain as part of the treaty to end the Seven Years' War. [54] Spain saw no need to continue to maintain settlements near French outposts and ordered the closure of Los Adaes, making San Antonio the new provincial capital. [55] The residents of Los Adaes were relocated in 1773. After several attempts to settle in other parts of the province, the residents returned to East Texas without authorization and founded Nacogdoches. [56]

The Comanche agreed to a peace treaty in 1785. [57] The Comanche were willing to fight the enemies of their new friends, and soon attacked the Karankawa. Over the next several years the Comanche killed many of the Karankawa in the area and drove the others into Mexico. [58]

In January 1790, the Comanche also helped the Spanish fight a large battle against the Mescalero and Lipan Apaches at Soledad Creek west of San Antonio. The Apaches were resoundingly defeated and the majority of the raids stopped. [59] By the end of the 18th century only a small number of the remaining hunting and gathering tribes within Texas had not been Christianized. In 1793, mission San Antonio de Valero was secularized, and the following year the four remaining missions at San Antonio were partially secularized. [60]

Encroachment Edit

In 1799, Spain gave Louisiana back to France in exchange for the promise of a throne in central Italy. Although the agreement was signed on October 1, 1800, it did not go into effect until 1802. The following year, Napoleon sold Louisiana to the United States. The original agreement between Spain and France had not explicitly specified the borders of Louisiana, and the descriptions in the documents were ambiguous and contradictory. [61] The United States insisted that its purchase also included most of West Florida and all of Texas. [61]

Thomas Jefferson claimed that Louisiana stretched west to the Rocky Mountains and included the entire watershed of the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers and their tributaries, and that the southern border was the Rio Grande. Spain maintained that Louisiana extended only as far as Natchitoches, and that it did not include the Illinois Territory. [62] Texas was again considered a buffer province, this time between New Spain and the United States. [63] The disagreement would continue until the signing of the 1819 Adams–Onís Treaty, at which point Spain gave Florida to the United States in return for undisputed control of Texas. [64]

During much of the dispute with the United States, governance of New Spain was in question. In 1808, Napoleon forced the Spanish king to abdicate the throne and appointed Joseph Bonaparte as the new monarch. [65] A shadow government operated out of Cadiz during Joseph's reign. [66] Revolutionaries within Mexico and the United States unsuccessfully combined to declare Texas and Mexico independent. [67]

Spanish troops reacted harshly, looting the province and executing any Tejanos accused of having Republican tendencies. By 1820 fewer than 2,000 Hispanic citizens remained in Texas. [64] The situation did not normalize until 1821, when Agustin de Iturbide launched a drive for Mexican Independence. Texas became a part of the newly independent nation without a shot being fired, ending the period of Spanish Texas. [68]

Spanish legacy Edit

Spanish control of Texas was followed by Mexican control of Texas, and it can be difficult to separate the Spanish and Mexican influences on the future state. The most obvious legacy is that of the language every major river in modern Texas, including the Red River, which was baptized by the Spaniards as Colorado de Texas, has a Spanish or Anglicized name, as do 42 of the state's 254 counties. Numerous towns also bear Spanish names. [69]

An additional obvious legacy is that of Roman Catholicism. At the end of Spain's reign over Texas, virtually all inhabitants practiced the Catholic religion, and it is still practiced in Texas by a large number of people. [70] The Spanish missions built in San Antonio to convert Indians to Catholicism have been restored and are a National Historic Landmark. [71]

The Spanish introduced European livestock, including cattle, horses, and mules, to Texas as early as the 1690s. [72] These herds grazed heavily on the native grasses, allowing mesquite, which was native to the lower Texas coast, to spread inland. Spanish farmers also introduced tilling and irrigation to the land, further changing the landscape. [73]

Texas eventually adopted much of the Anglo-American legal system, but some Spanish legal practices were retained, including homestead exemption, community property, and adoption. [74]

From the 1750s to the 1850s, the Comanche were the dominant group in the Southwest, and the domain they ruled was known as Comancheria. Confronted with Spanish, Mexican, and American outposts on their periphery in New Mexico, Texas, and Coahuila and Nueva Vizcaya in northern Mexico, the Comanche worked to increase their own safety, prosperity and power. [75] The population in 1810–1830 was 7,000 to 8,000. [76]

The Comanche used their military power to obtain supplies and labor from the Americans, Mexicans, and Indians through thievery, looting and killing, tribute, and kidnappings. There was much violence committed by and against Comanche, before and after the European settlement of Texas. Although they made a living partially through raiding and violence, along with hunting/gathering, especially buffalo hunting, the Comanche empire also supported a commercial network with long-distance trade. Dealing with subordinate Indians, the Comanche spread their language and culture across the region. In terms of governance, the Comanche were nearly independent but allied bands with a loosely hierarchical social organization within bands. [77]

Their empire collapsed when their camps and villages were repeatedly decimated by epidemics of smallpox and cholera in the late 1840s, and in bloody conflict with settlers, the Texas Rangers, and the U.S. Army. The population plunged from 20,000 to just a few thousand by the 1870s. The Comanche were no longer able to deal with the U.S. Army, which took over control of the region after the Mexican–American War ended in 1848. [75] The long-term imprint of the Comanche on the Indian and Hispanic culture has been demonstrated by scholars such as Daniel J. Gelo [78] and Curtis Marez. [79]

In 1821, the Mexican War for Independence severed the control that Spain had exercised on its North American territories, and the new country of Mexico was formed from much of the lands that had comprised New Spain, including Spanish Texas. [80] The 1824 Constitution of Mexico joined Texas with Coahuila to form the state of Coahuila y Tejas. [81] The Congress did allow Texas the option of forming its own state "as soon as it feels capable of doing so." [82]

The same year, Mexico enacted the General Colonization Law, which enabled all heads of household, regardless of race or immigrant status, to claim land in Mexico. [83] Mexico had neither manpower nor funds to protect settlers from near-constant Comanche raids and it hoped that getting more settlers into the area could control the raids. The government liberalized its immigration policies, allowing for settlers from the United States to immigrate to Texas. [84]

The German settlement in Mexico goes back to the times they settled Texas when it was under Spanish rule, but the first permanent settlement of Germans was at Industry, in Austin County, established by Friedrich Ernst and Charles Fordtran in the early 1830s, then under Mexican rule. Ernst wrote a letter to a friend in his native Oldenburg, which was published in the newspaper there. His description of Texas was so influential in attracting German immigrants to that area that he is remembered as "the Father of German Immigration to Texas." Many Germans, especially Roman Catholics who sided with Mexico, left Texas for the rest of present-day Mexico after the U.S. defeated Mexico in the Mexican–American War in 1848. A few Mexican Irish communities existed in Mexican Texas until the Texas Revolution. Many Irish then sided with Catholic Mexico against Protestant pro-U.S. elements. [85]

The first empresarial grant had been made under Spanish control to Moses Austin. The grant was passed to his son Stephen F. Austin, whose settlers, known as the Old Three Hundred, settled along the Brazos River in 1822. [86] The grant was later ratified by the Mexican government. [87] Twenty-three other empresarios brought settlers to the state, the majority from the United States of America. [88]

Starting in 1821, and in spite of growing Mexican limitations on slavery, U.S. immigrants brought an increasing number of slaves into Texas. By 1825, 69 slave owners owned 443 slaves. [89] Mexico granted Texas a one-year exemption from the national edict of 1829 outlawing slavery, but Mexican president Anastasio Bustamante ordered that all slaves be freed in 1830. [90] [91] To circumvent the law, the colonists converted their slaves into indentured servants "for life." [92] By 1836 there were 5,000 enslaved African Americans in Texas. [93]

Bustamante outlawed the immigration of United States citizens to Texas in 1830. [91] Several new presidios were established in the region to monitor immigration and customs practices. [94] The new laws also called for the enforcement of customs duties, angering both native Mexican citizens (Tejanos) and Anglos. [95] In 1832, a group of men led a revolt against customs enforcement in Anahuac. These Anahuac Disturbances coincided with a revolt in Mexico against the current president. [96] Texans sided with the federalists against the current government and after the Battle of Nacogdoches, drove all Mexican soldiers out of East Texas. [97]

Texans took advantage of the lack of oversight to agitate for more political freedom, resulting in the Convention of 1832. Among other issues, the convention demanded that U.S. citizens be allowed to immigrate into Texas, and requested independent statehood for the area. [98] [99] The following year, Texians reiterated their demands at the Convention of 1833. After presenting their petition, courier Stephen F. Austin was jailed for the next two years in Mexico City on suspicion of treason. [100] Although Mexico implemented several measures to appease the colonists, [101] President Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna's measures to transform Mexico from a federalist to a centralist state provided an excuse for the Texan colonists to revolt. [102]

Texas Revolution Edit

The vague unrest erupted into armed conflict on October 2, 1835 at the Battle of Gonzales, when Texans repelled a Mexican attempt to retake a small cannon. [103] [104] This launched the Texas Revolution, and over the next three months, the Texian Army successfully defeated all Mexican troops in the region. [105]

On March 2, 1836, Texans signed the Texas Declaration of Independence at Washington-on-the-Brazos, effectively creating the Republic of Texas. The revolt was justified as necessary to protect basic rights and because Mexico had annulled the federal pact. The majority of the colonists were from the United States they said that Mexico had invited them to move to the country, but they were determined "to enjoy" the republican institutions to which they were accustomed in their native land. [106]

Many of the Texas settlers believed the war to be over and left the army after the initial string of victories. [107] The remaining troops were largely recently arrived adventurers from the United States according to historian Alwyn Barr, the numerous American volunteers "contributed to the Mexican view that Texan opposition stemmed from outside influences." [108] The Mexican congress responded to this perceived threat by authorizing the execution of any foreigner found fighting in Texas they did not want prisoners of war. [109]

As early as October 27, Mexican president Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna had been preparing to quell the unrest in Texas. [110] In early 1836, Santa Anna personally led a 6,000-man force toward Texas. His force was large but ill-trained. [111] Santa Anna led the bulk of the troops to San Antonio de Bexar to besiege the Alamo Mission, while General Jose de Urrea led the remaining troops up the coast of Texas. [112] Urrea's forces soon defeated all the Texian resistance along the coast, culminating in the Goliad Massacre, where they executed 300 Texian prisoners of war. [113] After a thirteen-day siege, Santa Anna's forces overwhelmed the nearly 200 Texians defending the Alamo, and killed the prisoners. "Remember the Alamo! Remember Goliad!" became a battle cry of the Texas Revolution. [114]

News of the defeats sparked the Runaway Scrape, where much of the population of Texas and the Texas provisional government fled east, away from the approaching Mexican army. [115] Many settlers rejoined the Texian army, then commanded by General Sam Houston. After several weeks of maneuvering, on April 21, 1836, the Texian Army attacked Santa Anna's forces near the present-day city of Houston at the Battle of San Jacinto. [116] They captured Santa Anna and forced him to sign the Treaties of Velasco, ending the war. [5] [117] [118]

The 1st Congress of the Republic of Texas convened in October 1836 at Columbia (now West Columbia). It overturned the Mexican prohibition of slavery and outlawed the emancipation of slaves, although slaveholders were allowed to free their slaves outside the Republic if they desired. Free Blacks were specifically forbidden to live in the Republic. Stephen F. Austin, known as the Father of Texas, died December 27, 1836, after serving two months as Secretary of State for the new Republic. In 1836, five sites served as temporary capitals of Texas (Washington-on-the-Brazos, Harrisburg, Galveston, Velasco and Columbia) before President Sam Houston moved the capital to Houston in 1837. In 1839, the capital was moved to the new town of Austin by the next president, Mirabeau B. Lamar.

Internal politics of the Republic were based on the conflict between two factions. The nationalist faction, led by Mirabeau B. Lamar, advocated the continued independence of Texas, the expulsion of the Native Americans, and the expansion of Texas to the Pacific Ocean. Their opponents, led by Sam Houston, advocated the annexation of Texas to the United States and peaceful co-existence with Native Americans.

Although Texas governed itself, Mexico refused to recognize its independence. [119] On March 5, 1842, a Mexican force of over 500 men, led by Ráfael Vásquez, invaded Texas for the first time since the revolution. They soon headed back to the Rio Grande after briefly occupying San Antonio. 1,400 Mexican troops, led by the French mercenary general Adrian Woll launched a second attack and captured San Antonio on September 11, 1842. A Texas militia retaliated at the Battle of Salado Creek. However, on September 18, this militia was defeated by Mexican soldiers and Texas Cherokee Indians during the Dawson Massacre. [120] The Mexican army would later retreat from the city of San Antonio.

Mexico's attacks on Texas intensified the conflict between the political factions in an incident known as the Texas Archive War in 1842. To "protect" the Texas national archives, President Sam Houston ordered them out of Austin. Austin residents, suspicious of the president's motives because of his avowed disdain of the capital, forced the archives back to Austin at gunpoint. The Texas Congress admonished Houston for the incident, and the incident would solidify Austin as Texas's seat of government for the Republic and the future state. [121]

On February 28, 1845, the U.S. Congress narrowly passed a bill that authorized the United States to annex the Republic of Texas if it so voted. The legislation set the date for annexation for December 29 of the same year. On October 13 of the same year, a majority of voters in Texas approved a proposed constitution that specifically endorsed slavery and the slave trade. This constitution was later accepted by the U.S. Congress, making Texas a U.S. state on the same day annexation took effect (therefore bypassing a territorial phase).

The Mexican government had long warned that annexation would mean war with the United States. When Texas joined the U.S., the Mexican government broke diplomatic relations with the United States. The United States now assumed the claims of Texas when it claimed all land north of the Rio Grande. In June 1845, President James K. Polk sent General Zachary Taylor to Texas, and by October, 3,500 Americans were on the Nueces River, prepared to defend Texas from a Mexican invasion. On November 10, 1845, [122] Polk ordered General Taylor and his forces south to the Rio Grande, into disputed territory that Mexicans claimed as their own. Mexico claimed the Nueces River—about 150 miles (240 km) north of the Rio Grande—as its border with Texas.

On April 25, 1846, a 2,000-strong Mexican cavalry detachment attacked a 70-man U.S. patrol that had been sent into the contested territory north of the Rio Grande and south of the Nueces River. The Mexican cavalry routed the patrol, killing 16 U.S. soldiers in what later became known as the Thornton Affair. Both nations declared war. In the ensuing Mexican–American War, there were no more battles fought in Texas, but it became a major staging point for the American invasion of northern Mexico.

One of the primary motivations for annexation was the Texas government's huge debts. The United States agreed to assume many of these upon annexation. However, the former Republic never fully paid off its debt until the Compromise of 1850. In return for $10 million, a large portion of Texas-claimed territory, now parts of Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Wyoming, was ceded to the Federal government.

Migration Edit

Intensified migration to Texas after statehood raised the population to about 150,000. Societies such as the Texas Emigration and Land Company now pledged to settle colonists who would agree to constitute a militia for defense against the Indians in return they would receive a grant of 320 acres of choice land. Most of the newcomers continued to migrate from the states of the lower South slavery was granted legal protection by the Texas constitution of 1845. The Texas population by 1860 was quite diverse, with large elements of European whites (from the American South), African Americans (mostly slaves brought from the east), Tejanos (Hispanics with Spanish heritage), and about 20,000 recent German immigrants. [123]

The new state grew rapidly as migrants poured into the fertile cotton lands of east Texas. [124] With their investments in cotton lands and slaves, Texas planters established cotton plantations in the eastern districts. The central area of the state was developed more by subsistence farmers who seldom owned slaves. [125]

Texas in its Wild West days attracted men who could shoot straight and possessed the zest for adventure, "for masculine renown, patriotic service, martial glory and meaningful deaths." [126]

German immigration Edit

The Germans were the largest group immigrating directly from Europe. [127] According to the Handbook of Texas :

The Germans who settled Texas were diverse in many ways. They included peasant farmers and intellectuals Protestants, Catholics, Jews, and atheists Prussians, Saxons, Hessians, and Alsatians abolitionists and slaveholders farmers and townsfolk frugal, honest folk and ax murderers. They differed in dialect, customs, and physical features. A majority had been farmers in Germany, and most arrived seeking economic opportunities. A few dissident intellectuals fleeing the 1848 revolutions in Germany sought political freedom, but few, save perhaps the Wends, went for religious freedom. The German settlements in Texas reflected their diversity. Even in the confined area of the Hill Country, each valley offered a different kind of German. The Llano valley had stern, teetotaling German Methodists, who renounced dancing and fraternal organizations the Pedernales valley had fun-loving, hardworking Lutherans and Catholics who enjoyed drinking and dancing and the Guadalupe valley had atheist Germans descended from intellectual political refugees. The scattered German ethnic islands were also diverse. These small enclaves included Lindsay in Cooke County, largely Westphalian Catholic Waka in Ochiltree County, Midwestern Mennonite Hurnville in Clay County, Russian German Baptist and Lockett in Wilbarger County, Wendish Lutheran. [128]

Czech immigration Edit

The first Czech immigrants started their journey to Texas on August 19, 1851, headed by Jozef Šilar. Attracted to the rich farmland of Central Texas, Czechs settled in the counties of Austin, Fayette, Lavaca, and Washington. The Czech-American communities are characterized by a strong sense of community, and social clubs were a dominant aspect of Czech-American life in Texas. By 1865, the Czech population numbered 700 by 1940 there were more than 60,000 Czech-Americans in Texas. [129]

In the summer of 1860, a slave panic erupted in North and East Texas amid rumors of arson by slaves and abolitionists. Called the "Texas Troubles", between 30 and 100 blacks and whites were lynched by vigilantes. The events were used to arouse support for secession. [130]

As an essential part of the southern cotton industry, farmers depended on slave labor to do the massive amount of field work. In 1860, 30% of the total state population of 604,215 were enslaved. [131] In the statewide election on the secession ordinance, Texans voted to secede from the Union by a vote of 46,129 to 14,697 (a 76% majority). The Secession Convention immediately organized a government, replacing Sam Houston when he refused to take an oath of allegiance to the Confederacy.

Texas declared its secession from the United States on February 1, 1861, and joined the Confederate States of America on March 2, 1861. With few battles in its territory, Texas was mainly a "supply state" for the Confederate forces until mid-1863, when the Union capture of the Mississippi River made large movements of men, horses or cattle impossible. Texas regiments fought in every major battle throughout the war. The last battle of the Civil War, the Battle of Palmito Ranch, was fought in Texas on May 12, 1865. The 2nd Texas Cavalry Battalion (U.S.) (one of only two from the state) took part.

Unionism Edit

Support for the Confederacy was perhaps weakest in Texas Elliott estimates that only a third of the white men in early 1861 supported the Confederacy. Many unionists supported the Confederacy after the war began, but many others clung to their unionism throughout the war, especially in the northern counties, the German districts, and the Mexican areas. Local officials harassed unionists and engaged in large-scale massacres against unionists and Germans. In Cooke County, 150 suspected unionists were arrested 25 were lynched without trial and 40 more were hanged after a summary trial. Draft resistance was widespread, especially among Texans of German or Mexican descent many of the latter went to Mexico. Potential draftees went into hiding, Confederate officials hunted them down, and many were shot. [132] On August 1, 1862 Confederate troops executed 34 pro-Union German Texans in the "Nueces Massacre" of civilians.

Historiography Edit

During the 20th century, national historiographical trends influenced the scholarship on the Civil War in Texas. Beginning in the 1950s, historians focused on military campaigns in Texas and other areas of the Southwest, a region previously neglected. Since the 1970s, scholars have shifted their attention to South Texas, exploring how its relations with Mexico and Mexican Americans affected both Confederate and Union Civil War military operations. Also since the 1970s, the "New Social History" has stimulated research in war-related social, economic, and political changes. This historiographical trend is related to a growing interest in local and regional history. [133]

Reconstruction Edit

When news of the Emancipation Proclamation arrived in Galveston on June 19, 1865, freed slaves rejoiced, creating the celebration of Juneteenth. The State had suffered little during the war, but trade and finance had been disrupted. Angry returning veterans seized state property, and Texas went through a period of extensive violence and disorder. Most outrages took place in northern Texas outlaws based in the Indian Territory plundered and murdered without distinction of party. [134]

President Andrew Johnson appointed Union General A. J. Hamilton as provisional governor on June 17, 1865. Hamilton had been a prominent politician before the war. He granted amnesty to ex-Confederates if they promised to support the Union in the future, appointing some to office. On March 30, 1870, although Texas did not meet all the requirements, Congress restored Texas to the Union.

Many free blacks were able to become businessmen and leaders. Through the young Republican Party, blacks rapidly gained political power. Indeed, blacks comprised 90% of the Texas Republican Party during the 1880s. [135] Norris Wright Cuney, an African American from Galveston, rose to the chairmanship of the Texas Republican Party and even the national committeeman. [136]

Democrats regain control after Reconstruction Edit

Like other Southern states, by the late 1870s white Democrats regained control of the state legislature. They passed a new constitution in 1876 that segregated schools and established a poll tax to support them, but it was not originally required for voting. [137]

Within the Republican Party the Lily-white movement emerged, a movement to wrest control of the party by whites and eliminate black influence altogether. The movement had its origins in Texas but spread across the nation. This in addition to wider efforts to restrict the influence of non-whites rapidly reversed the fortunes of the black population. [138]

Racial violence continued by whites against blacks as they enforced white supremacy. Despite this, freedmen pursued education, organized new churches and fraternal organizations, and entered politics, winning local offices. By the 1890s, more than 100,000 blacks were voting in state elections. [139] In 1896 and 1898, Republican Robert B. Hawley was elected to Congress from the state by a plurality, when most white voters split between the Democratic and Populist parties. Democrats were determined to end competition by Republicans and Populists, and reviewed what other Southern states were doing to disenfranchise blacks and poor whites. Mississippi's new constitution of 1890 had survived a Supreme Court case, although in practice it was highly discriminatory against freedmen.

Land use politics Edit

Much of Texas politics of the remainder of the 19th century centered on land use. Guided by the federal Morill Act, Texas sold public lands to gain funds to invest in higher education. In 1876, the Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas opened, and seven years later the University of Texas at Austin began conducting classes. [140]

New land use policies drafted during the administration of Governor John Ireland enabled individuals to accumulate land, leading to the formation of large cattle ranches. Many ranchers ran barbed wire around public lands, to protect their access to water and free grazing. This caused several range wars. [141] Governor Lawrence Sullivan Ross guided the Texas Legislature to reform the land use policies. [142]

The coming of the railroads in the 1880s ended the famous cattle drives and allowed ranchers to market their cattle after a short drive, and farmers move their cotton to market cheaply. They made Dallas and other cities the centers of commercial activity. [143] Ft. Worth became the gateway to the west, via the Fort Worth and Denver Railway. [144] However the passenger trains were often the targets of armed gangs. [145]

Governor Lawrence Sullivan Ross had to personally intervene to resolve the Jaybird-Woodpecker War (1888-1889) among factions of Democrats in Fort Bend County at bottom, it was a racial conflict. The majority population was black by a large margin, and had been electing county officers for 20 years. But, the white elite Democrats wanted their own people in power. Conflict became violent and the Jaybirds ordered several blacks out of town. Tensions increased and a total of seven people were killed. In the fall of 1889, the Democratic Party created "white-only pre-primary elections," which in practice were the only competitive contests in the county, and thus disenfranchised the blacks. This situation lasted until the US Supreme Court ruling in Terry v. Adams (1953) declared it unconstitutional [146] in the last of the white primary cases. [147]

Under Jim Hogg, the state turned its attention toward corporations violating the state monopoly laws. In 1894, Texas filed a lawsuit against John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company and its Texas subsidiary, the Waters-Pierce Oil Company of Missouri. Hogg and his attorney-general argued that the companies were engaged in rebates, price fixing, consolidation, and other tactics prohibited by the state's 1889 antitrust act. The investigation resulted in a number of indictments, including one for Rockefeller. Hogg requested that Rockefeller be extradited from New York, but the New York governor refused, as Rockefeller had not fled from Texas. Rockefeller was never tried, but other employees of the company were found guilty. [148]

Galveston, the fourth-largest city in Texas and then the major port, was destroyed by a hurricane with 100 mph (160 km/h) winds on September 8, 1900. The storm created a 20 ft (6.1 m) storm surge when it hit the island, 6–9 ft (1.8–2.7 m) higher than any previously recorded flood. Water covered the entire island, killing between 6,000 and 8,000 people, destroying 3,500 homes as well as the railroad causeway and wagon bridge that connected the island to the mainland. [149] To help rebuild their city, citizens implemented a reformed government featuring a five-man city commission. Galveston was the first city to implement a city commission government, and its plan was adopted by 500 other small cities across the United States. [150]

In the aftermath of the Galveston disaster, action proceeded on building the Houston Ship Channel to create a more protected inland port. Houston quickly grew once the Channel was completed, and rapidly became the primary port in Texas. Railroads were constructed in a radial pattern to link Houston with other major cities such as Dallas-Fort Worth, San Antonio, and Austin.

By 1900, the Dallas population reached 38,000 as banking and insurance became major activities in the increasingly white-collar city, which was now the world's leading cotton center. It was also the world's center of harness making and leather goods. Businessmen took control of civic affairs with little municipal patronage, there was only a small role for the Democratic Party to play. The predominantly black Republican Party was essentially closed out of politics by the disenfranchisement in 1901 of most blacks through imposition of a poll tax (see below).

Disenfranchisement Edit

Determined to control politics in the state, reduce competition from Republicans and Populists, and close blacks out of politics, in 1901 the Democrat-dominated state legislature passed a poll tax as a requirement for voting. Given the economic difficulties of the times, the poll tax caused participation by African Americans, poor whites, and Mexican Americans to drop sharply, effectively disenfranchising more than one-third of the population of the state. [151] [152]

By the early 20th century, the Democratic Party in Texas started using a "white primary." Restricting the Democratic primary to white voters was another way of closing minorities out of politics, as the primary was the only competitive contest for office in the one-party state. By 1906, the number of black voters had dropped from more than 100,000 in the 1890s to 5,000. The state also passed a law for white primaries. [139] In 1896, 86.6% of all voters in Texas voted in the presidential election following disenfranchisement, voter turnout in 1904 was 29.2% and in 1920 was 21.6%. [153]

When the Supreme Court ruled in 1923 that white primaries established by political parties were unconstitutional, in 1927 the Texas state legislature passed a bill that authorized political parties to establish their internal practices. The Democratic Party reinstated the white primary. That law survived until 1944 before another Supreme Court case ruled that it was unconstitutional. After 1944, the NAACP and other organizations worked to register black voters and participation increased. But the major disenfranchisement continued until passage in the mid-1960s of civil rights legislation, including the Voting Rights Act of 1965, to provide for federal oversight in areas in which historically minorities did not vote in expected numbers based on population. [152]

Dallas growth Edit

Texans in 1909 marked an icon of progress with the construction of the first skyscraper west of the Mississippi. [154] The 190-foot steel-frame skyscraper was the 14-story Praetorian Building, housing the Praetorian Insurance Company. Dallas became the regional headquarters of the Federal Reserve in 1914, strengthening its dominance of Texas banking. The city had reached 260,000 population by 1929 when the effects of the Stock Market Crash hit Texas, causing a sharp drop in the prices of oil, cotton and cattle growth came to a standstill.

Oil Edit

On the morning of January 10, 1901, Anthony F. Lucas, an experienced mining engineer, drilled the first major oil well at Spindletop, a small hill south of Beaumont, Texas. The East Texas Oil Field, discovered on October 5, 1930, is located in east central part of the state, and is the largest and most prolific oil reservoir in the contiguous United States. Other oil fields were later discovered in West Texas and under the Gulf of Mexico. The resulting Texas Oil Boom permanently transformed the economy of Texas, and led to its most significant economic expansion after the Civil War.

Great Depression Edit

The economy, which had experienced significant recovery since the Civil War, was dealt a double blow by the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl. After the Stock Market Crash of 1929, the economy suffered significant reversals. Thousands of city workers became unemployed, many of whom depended on federal relief programs such as FERA, WPA and CCC. Thousands of unemployed Mexican citizens received one-way bus tickets to their home villages in Mexico. [155]

Farmers and ranchers were especially hard hit, as prices for cotton and livestock fell sharply. Beginning in 1934 and lasting until 1939, the Dust Bowl, an ecological disaster of severe wind and drought, caused an exodus from Texas and the surrounding plains, in which over 500,000 Americans were homeless, hungry and jobless. [156] Thousands left the region forever to seek economic opportunities in California. For the majority of farmers who remained, the New Deal's Agricultural Adjustment Act was a crash program started in 1933 that in two weeks signed up cotton growers, even as agents and committeemen faced poor roads, bureaucratic delays, inadequate supplies, balking mules, and language barriers. It brought recovery by the mid-1930s, raising cotton prices by controls on how much farmers could plant. [157]

World War II Edit

World War II had a dramatic effect on Texas, as federal money poured in to build military bases, munitions factories, POW detention camps and Army hospitals 750,000 young men left for service the cities exploded with new industry the colleges took on new roles and hundreds of thousands of poor farmers left for much better-paying war jobs, never to return to agriculture. [158] [159] Texas needed more farm workers. The Bracero Program brought in 117,000 Mexicans to work temporarily. [160]

Existing military bases in Texas were expanded and numerous new training bases were built: Texas World War II Army Airfields Brooke Army Medical Center, Camp Mabry, Corpus Christi Army Depot, Fort Bliss, Fort Hood, Fort Sam Houston, Ingleside Army Depot, Red River Army Depot, especially for aviation training. The good flying weather made the state a favorite location for Air Force training bases. In the largest aviation training program in the world, 200,000 graduated from programs at 40 Texas airfields, including 45,000 pilots, 12,000 bombardiers, 12,000 navigators, and thousands of aerial gunners, photographers, and mechanics. [161] Fred Allison in a study of Majors Field, the Army Air Forces Basic Flying School, at Greenville during 1942–45, shows that the base—like most military bases in rural Texas—invigorated the local economy, but also changed the cultural climate of the conservative Christian town, especially around unprecedented freedom regarding alcohol, dating and dancing, and race relations. [162]

The Lone Star Army Ammunition Plant and the Longhorn Army Ammunition Plant were built as part of the WWII buildup. Hundreds of thousands of American (and some allied) soldiers, sailors and airmen trained in the state. All sectors of the economy boomed as the homefront prospered.

During WWII, Texas became home to as many as 78,982 enemy prisoners, mainly Germans it held 15% of the total POWs in the United States. There were fourteen prisoner-of-war camps in the state. The men in the camps were put to work to supplement the local farm labor lost to the war. [163] [164] Though contemporary War Department officials claimed that government attempts at denazification of the prisoners were highly successful, Nazi influence upon prisons in individual camps was common for the duration of the POW program. [165] Walker examined Nazi activities in Texas POW camps during 1943–45 and found that the military authorities had failed to eradicate the influence of Nazi leaders. [165]

Previously a largely rural area, East Texas became more urban as workers were recruited for the oil, shipbuilding, and aircraft industries. East Texans made many contributions to the war effort, both at home and in the armed forces. High schools had patriotic programs as well, but so many teachers and older students left for the military or for defense jobs that budgets were cut, programs dropped, and the curriculum had to be scaled down. Hospitals reported a shortage of supplies and medical personnel, as many doctors and most of the younger nurses joined the services. [166]

Harmon General Hospital, one of the Army's largest, opened in Longview in November 1942 with 157 hospital buildings and a capacity of 2,939 beds. The facility was designed for the treatment of soldiers with central nervous system syphilis, psychiatric disorders, tropical illnesses, and dermatological diseases. At the end of the war, the facility was adapted for use as the campus of LeTourneau University. [167]

Baylor University, like most schools, was successful in the multiple missions of aiding national defense, recruiting soldiers, and keeping the institution operational while the war continued. [168] Texas Tech University likewise had many roles in the war the most famous was the War Training Service Pre-Flight program during 1943–44. It prepared Air Force pilots for full-fledged military aviation training. The efforts of Clent Breedove and M. F. Dagley, private contractors for the Civilian Pilot Training Program at the university site since 1939, with Harold Humphries as chief pilot, brought an economic boost to Lubbock. 3,750 cadets received classroom instruction and flying time. [169] From February 1943 to January 1944, more than 2,000 women completed training at the Women's Army Auxiliary Corps Branch Number One, Army Administration School, at Stephen F. Austin State Teacher's College in Nacogdoches.

Nowhere were the wartime effects greater than in Houston, which in 1940 was a city of 400,000 population dependent on shipping and oil. The war dramatically expanded the city's economic base, thanks to massive federal spending. Energetic entrepreneurs, most notably George Brown, James Elkins and James Abercrombie, landed hundreds of millions of dollars in federal wartime investment in technologically complex facilities. Houston oil companies moved from being refiners and became sophisticated producers of petrochemicals. Especially important were synthetic rubber and high octane fuel, which retained their importance after the war. The war moved the natural gas industry from a minor factor to a major energy source Houston became a major hub when a local firm purchased the federally-financed Inch pipelines. Other major growth industries included steel, munitions, and shipbuilding.

Tens of thousands of new migrants streamed in from rural areas, straining the city's housing supply and the city's ability to provide local transit and schools. For the first time, high-paying jobs went to large numbers of women, blacks and Hispanics. The city's African-American community, emboldened by their newfound prosperity, increased its agitation for civil rights they backed and funded the legal case of Smith v. Allwright (1944), in which the Supreme Court ruled against the latest version of the white primary in support of voting rights. [170]

Throughout East Texas, black family growth and dissolution came more rapidly than in peacetime blacks were more mobile as an adjustment to employment opportunities. There was a more rapid shift to factory labor, higher economic returns, and a willingness of whites to tolerate the change in black economic status so long as the traditional "Jim Crow" social relations were maintained. [171]

1950s Texas drought Edit

Beginning in 1949, Texas was hit with a devastating drought that extended until 1957. Rainfall decreased 30 to 50 percent, while temperatures rose, killing crops, livestock, and triggering a rise of dust storms. As a result, the number of Texas farms and ranches declined by nearly 100,000, and Texas experienced a period of mass urbanization as the rural population moved to the city to rebuild their livelihoods. The state's rural population declined from more than a third of the population to a quarter. [172] As a result, the Texas Water Development Board was created in 1957, and the state began a period of building a diverse system of water conservation plans. This included increasing access to groundwater, and creating lakes by damming rivers. [173]

JFK assassination Edit

On Friday, November 22, 1963, in Dallas, Texas, at 12:30 pm Central Standard Time (18:30 UTC), Lee Harvey Oswald shot and killed President John F. Kennedy. The Texas Governor, John B. Connally, was also shot but survived. The episode caused a national outrage focused on right wing elements in Dallas that had long been hostile to Kennedy. [174] For a half-century and more the people of Dallas still struggle with being branded as having some responsibility. The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza, located where the assassin is believed to have fired the shots, has become a historic tourist site. [175]

Higher education Edit

During World War II the main universities like University of Texas and Texas A&M University gained a new national role. The wartime financing of university research, curricular change, campus trainee programs, and postwar veteran enrollments changed the tenor and allowed Texas schools to gain national stature. [176]

From 1950 through the 1960s, Texas modernized and dramatically expanded its system of higher education. Under the leadership of Governor Connally, the state produced a long-range plan for higher education, a more rational distribution of resources, and a central state apparatus that managed state institutions with greater efficiency. Because of these changes, Texas universities received federal funds for research and development during the John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson administrations. [177]

Economic and demographic change Edit

Beginning around the mid-20th century, Texas began to transform from a rural and agricultural state to one that was urban and industrialized. [178] The state's population grew quickly during this period, with large levels of migration from outside the state. [178] As a part of the Sun Belt Texas experienced strong economic growth, particularly during the 1970s and early 1980s. [178] Texas's economy diversified, lessening its reliance on the petroleum industry. [178] By 1990, Hispanics overtook blacks to become the largest minority group in the state. [178]

Shift to the Republican Party Edit

Prior to the mid-20th century Texas was essentially a one-party state, and the Democratic primary was viewed as "the real election". The Democratic Party had conservative and liberal factions, which became more pronounced after the New Deal. [179] Additionally, several factions of the party briefly split during the 1930s and 40s. [179]

The state's conservative white voters began to support Republican presidential candidates by the mid-20th century. After this period, they supported Republicans for local and state offices as well, and most whites became Republican Party members. [180] The party also attracted some minorities, but many have continued to vote for Democratic candidates. The shift to the Republican Party is much-attributed to the fact that the Democratic Party became increasingly liberal during the 20th century, and thus increasingly out-of-touch with the average Texas voter. [181] As Texas was always a conservative state, voters switched to the GOP, which now more closely reflected their beliefs. [181] [182] Commentators have also attributed the shift to Republican political consultant Karl Rove, who managed numerous political campaigns in Texas in the 1980s and 90s. [182] Other stated reasons included court-ordered redistricting and the demographic shift in relation to the Sun Belt that favored the Republican Party and conservatism. [178]

The 2003 Texas redistricting of Congressional districts led by Republican Tom DeLay, was called by the New York Times "an extreme case of partisan gerrymandering". [183] A group of Democratic legislators, the "Texas Eleven", fled the state in a quorum-busting effort to prevent the legislature from acting, but was unsuccessful. [184] The state had already redistricted following the 2000 census. Despite these efforts, the legislature passed a map heavily in favor of Republicans, based on 2000 data and ignoring the estimated nearly one million new residents in the state since that date. Career attorneys and analysts at the Department of Justice objected to the plan as diluting the votes of African American and Hispanic voters, but political appointees overrode them and approved it. [183] Legal challenges to the redistricting reached the national Supreme Court in the case League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry (2006), but the court ruled in favor of the state (and Republicans). [185]

In the 2014 Texas elections, the Tea Party movement made large gains, with numerous Tea Party favorites being elected into office, including Dan Patrick as lieutenant governor, [186] [187] Ken Paxton as attorney general, [186] [188] in addition to numerous other candidates [188] including conservative Republican Greg Abbott as governor. [189]


Battle Index: N - History

M assachusetts Colony was a hotbed of sedition in the spring of 1775. Preparations for conflict with the Royal authority had been underway throughout the winter with the production of arms and munitions, the training of militia (including the minutemen), and the organization of defenses. In April, General Thomas Gage, military governor of Massachusetts decided to counter these moves by sending a force out of Boston to confiscate weapons stored in the village of Concord and capture patriot leaders Samuel Adams and John Hancock reported to be staying in the village of Lexington.

Paul Revere's Ride
The atmosphere was tense, word of General Gage's intentions spread through Boston prompting the patriots to set up a messaging system to alert the countryside of any advance of British troops. Paul Revere arranged for a signal to be sent by lantern from the steeple of North Church - one if by land, two if by sea. On the night of April 18, 1775 the lantern's alarm sent Revere, William Dawes and other riders on the road to spread the news. The messengers cried out the alarm, awakening every house, warning of the British column making its way towards Lexington. In the rider's wake there erupted the peeling of church bells, the beating of drums and the roar of gun shots - all announcing the danger and calling the local militias to action.

In the predawn light of April 19, the beating drums and peeling bells summoned between 50 and 70 militiamen to the town green at Lexington. As they lined up in battle formation the distant sound of marching feet and shouted orders alerted them of the Redcoats' approach. Soon the British column emerged through the morning fog and the confrontation that would launch a nation began.

"Lay down your arms, you damned rebels. "

Twenty-three-year-old Sylvanus Wood was one of the Lexington militia who answered the call that spring morning. Several years after the event he committed his recollection to paper in an affidavit sworn before a Justice of the Peace which was first published in 1858:

When I arrived there, I inquired of Captain Parker, the commander of the Lexington company, what was the news. Parker told me he did not know what to believe, for a man had come up about half an hour before and informed him that the British troops were not on the road. But while we were talking, a messenger came up and told the captain that the British troops were within half a mile. Parker immediately turned to his drummer, William Diman, and ordered him to beat to arms, which was done. Captain Parker then asked me if I would parade with his company. I told him I would. Parker then asked me if the young man with me would parade. I spoke to Douglass, and he said he would follow the captain and me.

By this time many of the company had gathered around the captain at the hearing of the drum, where we stood, which was about half way between the meetinghouse and Buckman's tavern. Parker says to his men, 'Every man of you, who is equipped, follow me and those of you who are not equipped, go into the meeting-house and furnish yourselves from the magazine, and immediately join the company.' Parker led those of us who were equipped to the north end of Lexington Common, near the Bedford Road, and formed us in single file. I was stationed about in the centre of the company. While we were standing, I left my place and went from one end of the company to the other and counted every man who was paraded, and the whole number was thirty-eight, and no more.

Confrontation at Lexington Green
Just as I had finished and got back to my place, I perceived the British troops had arrived on the spot between the meeting-house and Bucknian's, near where Captain Parker stood when he first led off his men. The British troops immediately wheeled so as to cut off those who had gone into the meeting-house. The British troops approached us rapidly in platoons, with a general officer on horseback at their head. The officer came up to within about two rods of the centre of the company, where I stood, the first platoon being about three rods distant. They there halted. The officer then swung his sword, and said, 'Lay down your arms, you damned rebels, or you are all dead men. Fire!' Some guns were fired by the British at us from the first platoon, but no person was killed or hurt, being probably charged only with powder.

Just at this time, Captain Parker ordered every man to take care of himself. The company immediately dispersed and while the company was dispersing and leaping over the wall, the second platoon of the British fired and killed some of our men. There was not a gun fired by anv of Captain Parker's company, within my knowledge. I was so situated that I must have known it, had any thing of the kind taken place before a total dispersion of our company. I have been intimately acquainted with the inhabitants of Lexington, and particularly with those of Captain Parker's company, and, with one exception, I have never heard any of them say or pretend that there was any firing at the British from Parker's company, or any individual in it until within a year or two. One member of the company told me, many years since, that, after Parker's company had dispersed, and he was at some distance, he gave them 'the guts of his gun.'"

References:
Commager, Henry Steele, Morris Richard B. The Spirit of 'Seventy-Six vol I (1958) Fischer, David, Paul Revere's Ride (1994).


Battletech

Not listed in MAME yet.

Battletech © 1996 Virtual World Entertainment.

Every moment counts as you control a thirty-foot tall, 75 ton walking tank, blasting your way to victory. You're the pilot of a BattleMech competing against seven other players in the 31st century. Each 'Mech is equipped with tons of ammo, cannons, lasers and missiles. When seated in the TeslaTM System cockpit for your BattleTech game, you will be amazed. The main screen is a window, your view from your giant 'Mech. Five surrounding monitors display your 'Mech's systems. A secondary radar screen helps you hunt down your opponents. The throttle, foot pedals and military-style joystick help you pilot this massive fighting machine. The depth of the BattleTech game is unparalleled in location based entertainment. As your skills progress in the game, you discover more advanced systems and controls. You are responsible for the 'Mech's wear and tear. You control the coolant levels, ammunition and generators.

VR POD 2.5 and 3.0 hardware

Type of interface : POD based -Window on the world-
Physical posture : Sit Down
Motion of the platform : No
Controls : In both cockpits, the throttle control is on the left arm rest of the seat and a joystick is on the right hand arm rest. There are two screens, mounted one above the other. The top screen is about 19" and is the main display screen, which displays the 'world' as seen right out the front of the BattleMech. The bottom screen is 13'' and is referred to as the secondary display screen, showing a radar screen and damage indicators. The cockpit also has around 100 buttons and switches of various kinds. In two banks on either side of the cockpit are the weapon controls. There are 24 weapon controls, which determine which of the three joystick mounted triggers fires which weapons. Each LED weapon display indicates the ready state of each weapon, and, in the case of expendable weapons, how many rounds remain. The joystick controls the direction of the mech as well as the elevation of the crosshairs. The throttle controls the forward speed of the mech, and has a toggle for reverse.
Computer platform : Custom system based on Amiga computer
Type of display : 2 screens
Tracking : None
Size of the unit : Eight feet long and five feet tall.
Unit description : Stand alone POD

Graphical information :
Texture mapping capability : No

Players : 8
Controls : 2-way throttle, 8-way joystick
Buttons : 3 => [A] Move backward / forward, [B] Laser, [C] Missile

This game was also released at the Tesla System hardware.

Game's picture.
Game's screenshots.


Watch the video: BATTLE OF THE INDEX - Koji je najbolji index sendvič u Novom Sadu?