What do you think?
Rate this book
The Siege of Washington: The Untold Story of the Twelve Days That Shook the Union
On April 14, 1861, following the surrender of Fort Sumter, Washington was "put into the condition of a siege," declared Abraham Lincoln. Located sixty miles south of the Mason-Dixon Line, the nation's capital was surrounded by the slave states of Maryland and Virginia. With no fortifications and only a handful of trained soldiers, Washington was an ideal target for the Confederacy. The South echoed with cries of "On to Washington!" and Jefferson Davis's wife sent out cards inviting her friends to a reception at the White House on May 1. Lincoln issued an emergency proclamation on April 15, calling for 75,000 troops to suppress the rebellion and protect the capital. One question now transfixed the whose forces would reach Washington first-Northern defenders or Southern attackers? For 12 days, the city's fate hung in the balance. Washington was entirely isolated from the North-without trains, telegraph, or mail. Sandbags were stacked around major landmarks, and the unfinished Capitol was transformed into a barracks, with volunteer troops camping out in the House and Senate chambers. Meanwhile, Maryland secessionists blocked the passage of Union reinforcements trying to reach Washington, and a rumored force of 20,000 Confederate soldiers lay in wait just across the Potomac River. Drawing on firsthand accounts, The Siege of Washington tells this story from the perspective of leading officials, residents trapped inside the city, Confederates plotting to seize it, and Union troops racing to save it, capturing with brilliance and immediacy the precarious first days of the Civil War.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published March 1, 2011
51 people are currently reading
497 people want to read
About the author
John Lockwood
18 booksJohn Lockwood writes frequently about the history of the nation's capital and works for the National Park Service in Washington, D. C. He was born and raised in Washington, D. C.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews
January 25, 2023
A siege is a relatively formal tactic, in military terms – one that is as set, as prescribed in its movements, as a minuet. The army of one side surrounds a strategically important site of the other side – a castle, a fort, a city – and cuts said site off from the rest of the world, with the goal of compelling their enemy to surrender said site. There were sieges during the American Civil War – at Vicksburg, Mississippi, in 1863, and at Petersburg, Virginia, in 1864-65. To that list, authors John and Charles Lockwood would add what they describe as a siege of Washington, D.C., at the war’s very beginning in April of 1861.
In The Siege of Washington, the Lockwoods focus on the period from Monday, April 15, to Thursday, April 25. Fort Sumter had surrendered to the Confederates on April 13, and perhaps it is for that reason that the Lockwoods refer to the period covered by their book as Twelve Days That Shook the Union. Several tumultuous events that affected the safety and security of the nation’s capital occurred during those days. Most notably, the commonwealth of Virginia voted on April 17 to secede from the Union, pushing the borders of the Confederacy right up to the south bank of the Potomac River, just a bridge’s length away from Washington, D.C. Comparably alarming was a riot in Baltimore two days later, on April 19, when a pro-secession mob attacked soldiers of the 6th Massachusetts Regiment who were on their way to defend the capital. Four soldiers and twelve rioters were killed.
For a time, it seemed as though the state of Maryland, which borders Washington on the north, might follow Virginia out of the Union. Had that happened, Washington, D.C., would have been in a situation like that of West Berlin during the Soviet blockade of that city in 1948-49 – cut off from the rest of the country, isolated in hostile territory, with the only difference being that Washington, unlike West Berlin, could not be relieved by an airlift. Small wonder that President Lincoln and his aides, during those tense days of April 1861, felt besieged. Small wonder that, on April 24, a frustrated President Lincoln said to the battered soldiers of the 6th Massachusetts, “I don’t believe there is any North! The Seventh [New York] is a myth! Rhode Island is not known in our geography any longer! You are the only Northern realities.”
The Siege of Washington emphasizes the depth of division in Washington on the eve of war; it was a city where unionists and secessionists crossed paths on a daily basis, and tension was omnipresent. “Colonel Stone, inspector general of the District of Columbia Militia, had estimated that at least one-third of Washington’s residents supported the South. Others were less charitable in their estimates. ‘The population of the city was largely and bitterly opposed to the administration,’ remembered General Gates. ‘The city of Richmond, itself, could hardly have been more hostile’” (p. 51).
The Lockwoods proceed from an in-depth knowledge of the city (John Lockwood is a National Park Service ranger who works in Washington), and they bring to the book a gift for telling detail. As a native Washingtonian, I thought about this attention to detail when reading the Lockwoods’ account of the elite 7th New York Regiment’s last visit to Washington before the Civil War. “In 1860, the Seventh New York went to Washington, at the invitation of Congress, for the February 22 unveiling of Clark Mills’s dramatic bronze equestrian statue of George Washington in the middle of Washington Circle.
At the dedication, President Buchanan praised the Seventh New York men for their ‘military precision’ and ‘stout, hardy, noble, and defiant look’ and then concluded that ‘in the day and hour of battle you would not be mere parade soldiers, but that you would be in its very front’” (p. 126). Perhaps that passage stood out for me because I recently drove through Washington Circle, on my way to see my brother and sister-in-law at their home in Washington’s West End. I found that the Lockwoods grounded their observations regarding Civil War Washington in elements of the city that can be seen and appreciated today.
At the same time, I sometimes found myself questioning the very premise of the book. While reading The Siege of Washington, I kept asking myself: Was it really a siege? Certainly President Lincoln and his administration felt besieged, and understandably so. But many of the conclusions drawn in the book, including claims made by major participants, involve things that never actually happened.
It is true that Maryland authorities ordered the destruction of railroad bridges connecting Baltimore and points north with Washington, forcing Union troops to steam south along Chesapeake Bay. But when those Union soldiers were making their way west from Annapolis toward Annapolis Junction, a railroad link from which they could entrain for Washington, and when they crept through the Maryland countryside, nervously expecting to be assaulted by secessionist Maryland militia, they encountered – nothing. While some noisy Baltimore secessionists had some ugly things to say, as when one Wilson C. Carr said of Union volunteers that Southern secessionists would “exterminate and sweep them from the earth” (p. 100), nothing of the kind actually happened. The Lockwoods underestimate the extent of Unionism in Maryland, a state that, when all was said and done, did not secede from the Union.
Nonetheless, The Siege of Washington conveys the tense and suspenseful atmosphere that prevailed in the nation’s capital during those tense days before large numbers of Union soldiers arrived at Union Station and made Washington secure. I bought my copy of the book at Bridge Street Books, a West End bookstore, just across Rock Creek from Georgetown, and I recommend Bridge Street for its very fine selection of books on Washington, D.C., history and culture. For Washingtonians and others who are interested in the federal city’s Civil War history, The Siege of Washington provides an effective and interesting read.
In The Siege of Washington, the Lockwoods focus on the period from Monday, April 15, to Thursday, April 25. Fort Sumter had surrendered to the Confederates on April 13, and perhaps it is for that reason that the Lockwoods refer to the period covered by their book as Twelve Days That Shook the Union. Several tumultuous events that affected the safety and security of the nation’s capital occurred during those days. Most notably, the commonwealth of Virginia voted on April 17 to secede from the Union, pushing the borders of the Confederacy right up to the south bank of the Potomac River, just a bridge’s length away from Washington, D.C. Comparably alarming was a riot in Baltimore two days later, on April 19, when a pro-secession mob attacked soldiers of the 6th Massachusetts Regiment who were on their way to defend the capital. Four soldiers and twelve rioters were killed.
For a time, it seemed as though the state of Maryland, which borders Washington on the north, might follow Virginia out of the Union. Had that happened, Washington, D.C., would have been in a situation like that of West Berlin during the Soviet blockade of that city in 1948-49 – cut off from the rest of the country, isolated in hostile territory, with the only difference being that Washington, unlike West Berlin, could not be relieved by an airlift. Small wonder that President Lincoln and his aides, during those tense days of April 1861, felt besieged. Small wonder that, on April 24, a frustrated President Lincoln said to the battered soldiers of the 6th Massachusetts, “I don’t believe there is any North! The Seventh [New York] is a myth! Rhode Island is not known in our geography any longer! You are the only Northern realities.”
The Siege of Washington emphasizes the depth of division in Washington on the eve of war; it was a city where unionists and secessionists crossed paths on a daily basis, and tension was omnipresent. “Colonel Stone, inspector general of the District of Columbia Militia, had estimated that at least one-third of Washington’s residents supported the South. Others were less charitable in their estimates. ‘The population of the city was largely and bitterly opposed to the administration,’ remembered General Gates. ‘The city of Richmond, itself, could hardly have been more hostile’” (p. 51).
The Lockwoods proceed from an in-depth knowledge of the city (John Lockwood is a National Park Service ranger who works in Washington), and they bring to the book a gift for telling detail. As a native Washingtonian, I thought about this attention to detail when reading the Lockwoods’ account of the elite 7th New York Regiment’s last visit to Washington before the Civil War. “In 1860, the Seventh New York went to Washington, at the invitation of Congress, for the February 22 unveiling of Clark Mills’s dramatic bronze equestrian statue of George Washington in the middle of Washington Circle.
At the dedication, President Buchanan praised the Seventh New York men for their ‘military precision’ and ‘stout, hardy, noble, and defiant look’ and then concluded that ‘in the day and hour of battle you would not be mere parade soldiers, but that you would be in its very front’” (p. 126). Perhaps that passage stood out for me because I recently drove through Washington Circle, on my way to see my brother and sister-in-law at their home in Washington’s West End. I found that the Lockwoods grounded their observations regarding Civil War Washington in elements of the city that can be seen and appreciated today.
At the same time, I sometimes found myself questioning the very premise of the book. While reading The Siege of Washington, I kept asking myself: Was it really a siege? Certainly President Lincoln and his administration felt besieged, and understandably so. But many of the conclusions drawn in the book, including claims made by major participants, involve things that never actually happened.
It is true that Maryland authorities ordered the destruction of railroad bridges connecting Baltimore and points north with Washington, forcing Union troops to steam south along Chesapeake Bay. But when those Union soldiers were making their way west from Annapolis toward Annapolis Junction, a railroad link from which they could entrain for Washington, and when they crept through the Maryland countryside, nervously expecting to be assaulted by secessionist Maryland militia, they encountered – nothing. While some noisy Baltimore secessionists had some ugly things to say, as when one Wilson C. Carr said of Union volunteers that Southern secessionists would “exterminate and sweep them from the earth” (p. 100), nothing of the kind actually happened. The Lockwoods underestimate the extent of Unionism in Maryland, a state that, when all was said and done, did not secede from the Union.
Nonetheless, The Siege of Washington conveys the tense and suspenseful atmosphere that prevailed in the nation’s capital during those tense days before large numbers of Union soldiers arrived at Union Station and made Washington secure. I bought my copy of the book at Bridge Street Books, a West End bookstore, just across Rock Creek from Georgetown, and I recommend Bridge Street for its very fine selection of books on Washington, D.C., history and culture. For Washingtonians and others who are interested in the federal city’s Civil War history, The Siege of Washington provides an effective and interesting read.
March 11, 2023
THE SIEGE OF WASHINGTON: The Untold Story of the Twelve Days that Shook the Union is a very cleverly constructed book (chock full of photos) centered on the 12 days in the early phase of the Civil War in which, the nation's capital, Washington DC, was open to a possible seizure by the Confederacy.
Between the surrender of Fort Sumter in South Carolina to Confederate forces under the command of General Pierre G.T. Beauregard on April 13, 1861 and April 25, 1861, the fate of Washington DC hung on a very slender thread. On the former date, the city was lightly defended by a small force numbering less than a thousand men, of soldiers and a local militia whose loyalty was highly questionable. For Washington DC, sandwiched as it was between Maryland and Virginia (both slave states with pro-secessionists), was very much a Southern city. President Lincoln would issue a call to the states for 75,000 troops for 90 days' service to help defend the Union. Virginia would soon cast its lot with the Confederacy while Maryland's hold to the Union became shaky. Lincoln knew he had to keep Maryland in the Union if Washington was to be kept secure. Maryland was also necessary because if Washington's military force were to be reinforced, troops from the North would have to pass through Baltimore in order to reach the city. (Baltimore was a vital link on the railway connecting Washington DC with the North and West.)
This was a thoroughly delightful book to read from which I learned so much about an aspect of the Civil War that has been seldom told. So it was that "[b]y April 26, the siege was lifted , and defenders were flooding into Washington. 'The whole North is on the move,' was how Lucius Chittenden described the scene. The threat of Southern attack had ebbed, and would subside further as each new regiment disembarked at Annapolis, rode the repaired feeder line to Annapolis Junction, and caught the train from there to the capital. The Eighth Massachusetts arrived by that route that day, and the off-duty Seventh New Yorkers 'rushed out and cheered them' as their train pulled into the B&O [Baltimore & Ohio] Depot.' "
Between the surrender of Fort Sumter in South Carolina to Confederate forces under the command of General Pierre G.T. Beauregard on April 13, 1861 and April 25, 1861, the fate of Washington DC hung on a very slender thread. On the former date, the city was lightly defended by a small force numbering less than a thousand men, of soldiers and a local militia whose loyalty was highly questionable. For Washington DC, sandwiched as it was between Maryland and Virginia (both slave states with pro-secessionists), was very much a Southern city. President Lincoln would issue a call to the states for 75,000 troops for 90 days' service to help defend the Union. Virginia would soon cast its lot with the Confederacy while Maryland's hold to the Union became shaky. Lincoln knew he had to keep Maryland in the Union if Washington was to be kept secure. Maryland was also necessary because if Washington's military force were to be reinforced, troops from the North would have to pass through Baltimore in order to reach the city. (Baltimore was a vital link on the railway connecting Washington DC with the North and West.)
This was a thoroughly delightful book to read from which I learned so much about an aspect of the Civil War that has been seldom told. So it was that "[b]y April 26, the siege was lifted , and defenders were flooding into Washington. 'The whole North is on the move,' was how Lucius Chittenden described the scene. The threat of Southern attack had ebbed, and would subside further as each new regiment disembarked at Annapolis, rode the repaired feeder line to Annapolis Junction, and caught the train from there to the capital. The Eighth Massachusetts arrived by that route that day, and the off-duty Seventh New Yorkers 'rushed out and cheered them' as their train pulled into the B&O [Baltimore & Ohio] Depot.' "
July 18, 2011
I had high hopes for this book. I thought... oooh an unknown chapter of the Civil War. Well it is unknown because it is really insignificant. Each of the 12 days of the siege of Washington, which took place following the fall of Ft Sumter, gets a chapter. The down side is that the chapter has what occurred that day, which might not be much, plus back story and filler that ruins the story. I think this is a case of what should be a long article filled with fluff and filler to make it a 200+ page book.
It is well written and interesting if you can focus in on the important story, and ignore the fluff.
It is well written and interesting if you can focus in on the important story, and ignore the fluff.
July 21, 2016
This is a well documented historical analysis of the first two weeks of the American Civil War concentrating for the most part on the building up the defenses for Washington, D.C. It is a good read for the Civil War buff and is easy to read and follow events.
September 24, 2020
I read this book now b/c my 2020 reading goal has been to clear out unread books that I have owned for a long time. This one was downloaded on my Kindle in 2012!
We all know that the fall of Fort Sumter in April, 1861, was the beginning of the American Civil War, and that the first major skirmish was not fought until July, at Bull Run Creek. What about the early days right after the fall of Sumter? Virginia had not seceded yet and Maryland was a hotbed I’d sesesh feelings—as was Washington DC itself, which we all tend to forget. After the fall of Sumter on April 13th, Washington was filled w/ secessionists and government officials did not know what government functionaries and even military men could be trusted. General Winfield Scott hastily formed some volunteer defenders for
The city, including clerks at the Treasury Dept, whose building was chosen as the center for the defense of the city.
Lincoln issued an order for state militias to mobilize 75,000 men for 90 days. A few militia regiments were ready to answer the call. Three regiments left immediately for Washington. The 6th Massachusetts encountered rioters in Baltimore and many members were injured in the anti-federal riots in that city. The 8th Massachusetts and 7th New York—composed of elites from New York City, including Robert Gould Shaw of “Glory” game—had quite a trek in reaching Washington; it took them a week to get there, b/c Maryland secessionists tore up railroad tracks and downed telegraph lines. Washington was cut off from the North by these actions. Groceries
Became scarce; no news came through; and no reinforcing troops arrived. The two units had a TERRIBLE time getting from Annapolis to Washington, having to re-lay railroads tracks as they proceeded. Imagine the joy in Washington when the two regents arrived along w/ restored telegraph function!
I never really knew about the tense 10 days in DC and the terrible things that happened to terrify Washington citizens: sedition and secession; Virginia leaving the Union along w/ many federal officials and leading military men including Representatives and Senators—like Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee; the Union blowing up its Harper’s Ferry arsenal to keep it from falling to the Confederacy; the loss of the Norfolk Naval yards; and other important sites in northern Virginia. What a terrible time for the nation!
This was a difficult book to read on the Kindle: it’s just too difficult to go
Back-and forth to the copious notes; the photographs aren’t as sharp; the pagination and paragraph divisions are fairly non-existent; and my Kindle pet peeve, you really have no idea how much further you have to read. The notes started at 72%! The chapters are quite long in this book as well, but that’s not the fault of the Kindle format.
I’m glad I read the book b/c it definitely drew a picture of the anxiety and trepidation in Washington DC during the 10 days between the fall of Fort Sumter and the arrival into town of the long-awaited 7th New York and 8th Massachusetts regiments. It also makes so clear that NO ONE had ANY idea of what horrors awaited in the next four years., but the reader knows and hopes, like Lincoln, that cooler heads would avoid bloodshed. They didn’t.
We all know that the fall of Fort Sumter in April, 1861, was the beginning of the American Civil War, and that the first major skirmish was not fought until July, at Bull Run Creek. What about the early days right after the fall of Sumter? Virginia had not seceded yet and Maryland was a hotbed I’d sesesh feelings—as was Washington DC itself, which we all tend to forget. After the fall of Sumter on April 13th, Washington was filled w/ secessionists and government officials did not know what government functionaries and even military men could be trusted. General Winfield Scott hastily formed some volunteer defenders for
The city, including clerks at the Treasury Dept, whose building was chosen as the center for the defense of the city.
Lincoln issued an order for state militias to mobilize 75,000 men for 90 days. A few militia regiments were ready to answer the call. Three regiments left immediately for Washington. The 6th Massachusetts encountered rioters in Baltimore and many members were injured in the anti-federal riots in that city. The 8th Massachusetts and 7th New York—composed of elites from New York City, including Robert Gould Shaw of “Glory” game—had quite a trek in reaching Washington; it took them a week to get there, b/c Maryland secessionists tore up railroad tracks and downed telegraph lines. Washington was cut off from the North by these actions. Groceries
Became scarce; no news came through; and no reinforcing troops arrived. The two units had a TERRIBLE time getting from Annapolis to Washington, having to re-lay railroads tracks as they proceeded. Imagine the joy in Washington when the two regents arrived along w/ restored telegraph function!
I never really knew about the tense 10 days in DC and the terrible things that happened to terrify Washington citizens: sedition and secession; Virginia leaving the Union along w/ many federal officials and leading military men including Representatives and Senators—like Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee; the Union blowing up its Harper’s Ferry arsenal to keep it from falling to the Confederacy; the loss of the Norfolk Naval yards; and other important sites in northern Virginia. What a terrible time for the nation!
This was a difficult book to read on the Kindle: it’s just too difficult to go
Back-and forth to the copious notes; the photographs aren’t as sharp; the pagination and paragraph divisions are fairly non-existent; and my Kindle pet peeve, you really have no idea how much further you have to read. The notes started at 72%! The chapters are quite long in this book as well, but that’s not the fault of the Kindle format.
I’m glad I read the book b/c it definitely drew a picture of the anxiety and trepidation in Washington DC during the 10 days between the fall of Fort Sumter and the arrival into town of the long-awaited 7th New York and 8th Massachusetts regiments. It also makes so clear that NO ONE had ANY idea of what horrors awaited in the next four years., but the reader knows and hopes, like Lincoln, that cooler heads would avoid bloodshed. They didn’t.
May 20, 2024
This is historical writing at its very best. This is a little-known (to me) episode about the precarious state of the nation's capitol during the first month of the Civil War. The author writes a history that is compelling and dramatic, filled with scholarly research, illuminating anecdotes, and observations of contemporaries. The nation's capitol was an easy target for the Confederacy and its capture would have been an enormous defeat for the North. Leaders in the South debated the merit of taking the capitol city, while Lincoln desperately needed reinforcements for a city so poorly protected. While the South deliberated, Lincoln and his cabinet were able to pour thousands of troops into the city, despite the vicious and violent objection of the city of Baltimore. The story is a race for time, of opportunities missed, of obstacles overcome, and the determination to win.
September 24, 2023
This nifty little book chronicles the early days of the Civil War, specifically the month of April 1861. We learn of the uncertainty about the security of Washington DC during this time and the measures Lincoln was willing to take to secure the city. Throughout the book are sprinkled brief vignettes from eyewitnesses in DC who actually lived through the events described. A very good effort.
December 13, 2015
Most accounts of the crisis leading up to the start of the Civil War typically end with the bombardment of Fort Sumter on April 12, 1861, an event that is generally regarded as the first shots of the conflict. Yet this conclusion ignores the equally dramatic aftermath of the bombardment. With war now a certainty, the Lincoln administration scrambled to prepare by issuing a call for troops. Yet as they did so the very structure of government was crumbling around them, as Southerners in the military and the federal bureaucracy resigned. Indeed the capital itself was vulnerable to a possible Confederate attack. This extraordinary period is the subject of John and Charles Lockwood's book, which chronicles the twelve-day period from the fall of Fort Sumter on April 13 until the arrival of reinforcements on April 25, a span of time when the government's survival seemed in question
The authors begin with a broad portrait of the situation facing Lincoln and his cabinet in the wake of the fort's surrender. The attack on the fort had united the North, yet the start of hostilities also exposed Washington's vulnerability, one enhanced by the secessionist sympathies of many in the population. As the commanding general Winfield Scott planned for the city's defense, fears of a Confederate assault prompted many citizens to flee. The nearby states of New York, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts quickly dispatched militia units to Washington, yet secessionist mobs in Baltimore and sabotage of the rails hindered their deployment. The immediate crisis ended only with the arrival of the Seventh regiment of the New York militia, which both bolstered the defenses and symbolized the reestablishment of the city's links to the rest of the Union.
The Lockwoods have provided a readable account of the panic that gripped Washington in the aftermath of Fort Sumter's fall. While ultimately demonstrating the overblown nature of the fears of attack, they nonetheless convey well the uncertainty that existed and the anxieties it fueled. As historians of Washington, their description of the city is particularly strong, providing a vivid study of what was still in many ways a sleepy Southern town with grandiose aspirations. This book is highly recommended to anyone seeking a snapshot of the nation's capital as it dealt with many of the first challenges of the war that had come.
The authors begin with a broad portrait of the situation facing Lincoln and his cabinet in the wake of the fort's surrender. The attack on the fort had united the North, yet the start of hostilities also exposed Washington's vulnerability, one enhanced by the secessionist sympathies of many in the population. As the commanding general Winfield Scott planned for the city's defense, fears of a Confederate assault prompted many citizens to flee. The nearby states of New York, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts quickly dispatched militia units to Washington, yet secessionist mobs in Baltimore and sabotage of the rails hindered their deployment. The immediate crisis ended only with the arrival of the Seventh regiment of the New York militia, which both bolstered the defenses and symbolized the reestablishment of the city's links to the rest of the Union.
The Lockwoods have provided a readable account of the panic that gripped Washington in the aftermath of Fort Sumter's fall. While ultimately demonstrating the overblown nature of the fears of attack, they nonetheless convey well the uncertainty that existed and the anxieties it fueled. As historians of Washington, their description of the city is particularly strong, providing a vivid study of what was still in many ways a sleepy Southern town with grandiose aspirations. This book is highly recommended to anyone seeking a snapshot of the nation's capital as it dealt with many of the first challenges of the war that had come.
January 9, 2017
*Book received through the Amazon Vine Program*
The Civil War started 150 years ago. And on this anniversary year, publishers are launching quite a few books about it. "The Siege of Washington" should definitely be one of those new Civil War books that you should buy or put on your To-Read list. It's certainly not a book that's full of dry fact after fact. John Lockwood and Charles Lockwood take the reader through 12 Days after the fall of Fort Sumter. They tell the story in a way that while reading it, I could finish the events in my head.
The authors do good job balancing all the different things that were happening in that time. They focus on Lincoln and his Cabinet as they figure out how many troops to send to Washington and how to get them there. Another big focus is on the troops themselves. The authors use real letters that the soldiers wrote home to give the story a very human side. The stories of the Union soldiers trying to get through Baltimore and Confederate riots can be downright heartbreaking to read. It's hard to read what some people did just because they didn't like the Union soldiers. In addition to using letters and diaries from soldiers, they also use the same methods from Lincoln's secretaries, Nicolay and Hay, that tell you how life was like in those early scary days in Washington.
History buffs, especially those interested in the Civil War era, will definitely be interested in reading this. But honestly, I don't think you have to be a history buff to get into "The Siege of Washington". It's a fast-paced book that you can easily get immersed into that time period.
The Civil War started 150 years ago. And on this anniversary year, publishers are launching quite a few books about it. "The Siege of Washington" should definitely be one of those new Civil War books that you should buy or put on your To-Read list. It's certainly not a book that's full of dry fact after fact. John Lockwood and Charles Lockwood take the reader through 12 Days after the fall of Fort Sumter. They tell the story in a way that while reading it, I could finish the events in my head.
The authors do good job balancing all the different things that were happening in that time. They focus on Lincoln and his Cabinet as they figure out how many troops to send to Washington and how to get them there. Another big focus is on the troops themselves. The authors use real letters that the soldiers wrote home to give the story a very human side. The stories of the Union soldiers trying to get through Baltimore and Confederate riots can be downright heartbreaking to read. It's hard to read what some people did just because they didn't like the Union soldiers. In addition to using letters and diaries from soldiers, they also use the same methods from Lincoln's secretaries, Nicolay and Hay, that tell you how life was like in those early scary days in Washington.
History buffs, especially those interested in the Civil War era, will definitely be interested in reading this. But honestly, I don't think you have to be a history buff to get into "The Siege of Washington". It's a fast-paced book that you can easily get immersed into that time period.
September 22, 2015
This is a really interesting and well written book about a bit of history that I did not know much about - the dangerous vulnerability of the city of Washington during one week following the fall of
Fort Sumpter, with virtually no army to protect it from what should probably been a devastating invasion by Confederate forces. The protection of the White House by troops led by the very interesting James Lane of Kansas is quite interesting. The treachery of the citizens of Baltimore and Maryland may explain a lot about the subsequent unpleasantness to come from that state and city. I did not know the energy, understanding, and highly competent actions of old General Winfield Scott and the important role he played in creating the protection of the city as fast as possible. Just lots of good story especially well written. I will want to read other works by the Lockwood brothers who have been life long Washington residents and written other apparently good books on the topic.
Fort Sumpter, with virtually no army to protect it from what should probably been a devastating invasion by Confederate forces. The protection of the White House by troops led by the very interesting James Lane of Kansas is quite interesting. The treachery of the citizens of Baltimore and Maryland may explain a lot about the subsequent unpleasantness to come from that state and city. I did not know the energy, understanding, and highly competent actions of old General Winfield Scott and the important role he played in creating the protection of the city as fast as possible. Just lots of good story especially well written. I will want to read other works by the Lockwood brothers who have been life long Washington residents and written other apparently good books on the topic.
February 27, 2013
It was somewhat interesting, but it was a challenge getting through it. I enjoyed learning more about that time period but I felt like they wanted the reader to think the South was so close to attacking, when in reality, it was never even close. It wasn't a bad read, just kind of boring I guess. Glad I read it and learned about that time period, but was sure glad to finish!
March 4, 2012
Good book. Interesting premise that could have changed the entire course of the civil war. Why didn't the confederacy attack Washington when they had a chance?
September 3, 2012
Held some promise but just not interesting enough. And jumped around a lo, not organized in coherent manner. Overall not worth it.
August 14, 2019
Rising tensions, threats and isolation caused some perilous days for Washington City, as the Union’s capital was called in the 19th century. This book grabs the atmosphere in the city, including the nervousness at the White House and among the newly appointed army officials. There was no national army yet, for national security president Lincoln depended on cooperation from volunteer militias from northern states. The first days were very chaotic due to lack of preparation (also on the rebels side), late arrival of militias, failure of communication, and an inexperienced government all but ready for war, let alone defense of an isolated city surroundgeluid by secessionist states. These are the ingredients of a fascinating and thrilling story of the American Civil War’s early days. Larger crises and bloodshed were looming on the horizon...
December 27, 2017
I've always been a DC fanatic since I was a kid. Once I started reading the beginning and going towards the middle, my mind and pulse would race to see if the Confederacy or the Union volunteers would get their first. Years ago, I read an article from "America's Civil War" magazine regarding the secessionists in Baltimore attacking the volunteers as they attempted to march through Baltimore into Washington. The authors really did their homework in researching this book. However, like ten or fifteen percent of the book is dedicated to the bibliography but it's still a great read for the Civil War enthusiasts out there.
February 11, 2025
Yearning for more of the story after reading Erik Larson's book, The Demon of Unrest, my daughter recommended this book as one that would continue my education about the period of Civil War.
John Lockwood took on the days between the surrender of Fort Sumter and the reinforcement for Washington D.C. by Northern troops. The sabotage within this story hampered the North as the insurrectionists/rebels destroyed train lines and cut telegraph lines. The insurrectionists/rebels stole the US government property.
I appreciated the humanization of the story as John Lockwood quoted extensively fr0m the soldiers' letters. These letters captured the encouraging response to the call up.
John Lockwood took on the days between the surrender of Fort Sumter and the reinforcement for Washington D.C. by Northern troops. The sabotage within this story hampered the North as the insurrectionists/rebels destroyed train lines and cut telegraph lines. The insurrectionists/rebels stole the US government property.
I appreciated the humanization of the story as John Lockwood quoted extensively fr0m the soldiers' letters. These letters captured the encouraging response to the call up.
December 15, 2017
An engaging, well-written and comprehensive history of the aftermath of Fort Sumter and how it played out in Washington D.C. Lockwood stresses the psychological element of the crisis and how nobody could understand why the Confederates wouldn’t attack before US reinforcements arrived.
Lockwood describes all of the political factors and indecision that prevented the Confederates from seizing the capital, and the tension and near panic in the city itself. He does a good job describing the mood of all the players.
A fast-paced, readable work, although it can get a bit repetitive.
Lockwood describes all of the political factors and indecision that prevented the Confederates from seizing the capital, and the tension and near panic in the city itself. He does a good job describing the mood of all the players.
A fast-paced, readable work, although it can get a bit repetitive.
August 15, 2017
Great book!
Very exciting. It reads like a contemporary thriller. I consider myself a civil war buff and I learned quite a few things here I did not know before. It really was a very close call.
Very exciting. It reads like a contemporary thriller. I consider myself a civil war buff and I learned quite a few things here I did not know before. It really was a very close call.
August 19, 2019
I learned some new things. Crazy how unprecedented and uncertain that time was in American history, and how tenuous the security of Washington City (D.C.) was during those weeks. Probably not recommended unless you are more familiar with the overall course of the Civil War.
January 1, 2019
Very interesting read
I would have loved more period maps. Interesting period of history. I was not aware of the details of April 1961.
I would have loved more period maps. Interesting period of history. I was not aware of the details of April 1961.
September 12, 2024
A good historical account of DC in the opening days to the civil war.
Many little known facts, correspondence (cited) and other tidbits of US history sprinkled in.
An enjoyable read.
Many little known facts, correspondence (cited) and other tidbits of US history sprinkled in.
An enjoyable read.
June 7, 2022
Dewey 973.731
April 6, 2011
On April 12, 1861, Confederate forces fired on Fort Sumpter in the Charleston, South Carolina harbor. The next day, Major Robert Anderson surrendered the fort to Confederate General Beauregard. Thus, began America’s Civil War.
During the years leading up to the firing on Fort Sumter, Southern sympathizer Secretary of War John Floyd had posted the majority of Union troops west of the Mississippi while Secretary of the Navy Isaac Toucey, another Southern sympathizer, had ordered most of the US navy to set sail for the West Indies nearly all the rest of the US ships were dry docked behind Confederate lines in Norfolk, Virginia.
The new Union President, Abraham Lincoln, on April 15th, issued a call for 75,000 troops to be raised by Union states to suppress the rebellion and defend Washington. There was much speculation about who would reach the Capitol first - Federal or Confederate troops.
With Washington left essentially undefended, there were only 1500 US troops in the city, Confederate President Jefferson Davis vowed he’d be living in the White House by May 1st. Mrs. Davis even sent out invitations to her friends living in the North to join her at the White House on May 1st for tea. It was rumored that there 20,000 Confederate troops within striking distance of the Capitol.
With Federal troops deployed in the west and the navy sailing for the West Indies, Washington, DC was left vulnerable. It was an easy target for the taking. For 12 days, Washington was cut off from the North and reinforcements.
Strangely, though, despite calls for “On to Washington” sounding across the South, there was no attempt by the South to take the US capitol.
Lockwood explains why Washington was not attacked in “The Siege of Washington.” Subtitled “The Untold Story of the Twelve Days that Shook the Union,’ Lockwood unlocks the mystery behind the South’s failure to take Washington. There has been speculation that had the South acted, the Civil War would have ended with the fall of Washington and the bloodbath that was the Civil War would have been averted. Instead, the first battle of the Civil War took place two months later at Bull Run.
We all know the outcome of this drama. Nevertheless, Lockwood sheds new light on the story of the beginning of the Civil War. For instance, while Lee didn’t resign his commission in the US Army until April 20th, he felt it was more important to shore up Virginia’s defenses rather than take Washington.
This is an easy to read and compelling story of 12 days that changed the face of American history.
During the years leading up to the firing on Fort Sumter, Southern sympathizer Secretary of War John Floyd had posted the majority of Union troops west of the Mississippi while Secretary of the Navy Isaac Toucey, another Southern sympathizer, had ordered most of the US navy to set sail for the West Indies nearly all the rest of the US ships were dry docked behind Confederate lines in Norfolk, Virginia.
The new Union President, Abraham Lincoln, on April 15th, issued a call for 75,000 troops to be raised by Union states to suppress the rebellion and defend Washington. There was much speculation about who would reach the Capitol first - Federal or Confederate troops.
With Washington left essentially undefended, there were only 1500 US troops in the city, Confederate President Jefferson Davis vowed he’d be living in the White House by May 1st. Mrs. Davis even sent out invitations to her friends living in the North to join her at the White House on May 1st for tea. It was rumored that there 20,000 Confederate troops within striking distance of the Capitol.
With Federal troops deployed in the west and the navy sailing for the West Indies, Washington, DC was left vulnerable. It was an easy target for the taking. For 12 days, Washington was cut off from the North and reinforcements.
Strangely, though, despite calls for “On to Washington” sounding across the South, there was no attempt by the South to take the US capitol.
Lockwood explains why Washington was not attacked in “The Siege of Washington.” Subtitled “The Untold Story of the Twelve Days that Shook the Union,’ Lockwood unlocks the mystery behind the South’s failure to take Washington. There has been speculation that had the South acted, the Civil War would have ended with the fall of Washington and the bloodbath that was the Civil War would have been averted. Instead, the first battle of the Civil War took place two months later at Bull Run.
We all know the outcome of this drama. Nevertheless, Lockwood sheds new light on the story of the beginning of the Civil War. For instance, while Lee didn’t resign his commission in the US Army until April 20th, he felt it was more important to shore up Virginia’s defenses rather than take Washington.
This is an easy to read and compelling story of 12 days that changed the face of American history.
December 24, 2012
At Ft. Sumpter, the confederacy began in April 1861. In a few days, the South captured weapons at Harper's Ferry and could have attacked Washington's Norwood Naval Yard. Lincoln called up 50000 volunteer troops but the nation really had no standing army. Each state would call up their military militias or create them. Often a wealthy man would offer to be become a officer and people would. volunteer for that regiment. The militias were long in coming from the North to Washington. Pro-slavery groups were every where and delayed travel and fought them. New York City which had considerable business with the South actually considered seceeding with it. With the attack on Ft. Sumpter, the anger of Northerners became more intense and drown out many pro-slavery protests. Militias moved on towards Washington and officers in the military chose their sides. General Scott chose the union, on April 20th, when Virginia seceeded, General Lee chose his country, Virginia. Maryland had sentiment to chose the South and Union troops met with fighting In Baltimore. They felt that the South would sweep in to save the day. In the meantime, the suffered food and goods shortages as the North refused to sell to them. Washington was very alone but many residents refused to leave including the President and his family. Both Free Blacks and slaves in Washington were trapped. The Compromise of 1850 had made selling slaves there illegal but if slaves moved North, they were still subject to the Fugitive Slave Act and Free Blacks feared being captured and made slaves. After 12 long days, the militias of the North arrived to fortify Washington and prevent Maryland from seceeding. Why did the South not strike faster? Just as the North lacked soldiers, the South did too and a lack of weapons. Each state was to control their own militia and there was reluctance to share. When Lee took control of Virginia militias, he felt it was better to prepare the new regiments for battle and felt that the troops were woefully unable to take control of such an important city and keep Shaw there from being lost to looting ect. A very interesting book about a small yet momental piece of Civil War history.
April 9, 2012
This was a very interesting window into a little known piece of our national history. It was from a pro-union insider's perspective. The Confederates are viewed as extremists and the unionists are considered patriots. The old canard that the victors write the history books proves true here. I enjoyed reading it immensely even though it slowed down toward the end and seemed to drag. However, the majority of the book was very interesting with tremendous detail.
This is the story of what happened in the District of Columbia in the days immediately following the fall of Ft. Sumpter. Most people expected the South to march into DC and take over the seat of government. Once General Robert E. Lee took command of the Army of Northern Virginia, he ordered a defensive-only posture. He never considered seizing the union government. Rather, he saw in the conflict the desire for free association and State Sovereignty. As he correctly foresaw, if the Union won out, the States would only be united by force. No longer would there be a free association of states. At this point in time, the Federal Government effectively became a National Government having crushed the 10th amendment and any attempt by the states to leave the union. Yes, slavery was a key issue in the dispute between the states, but this should not mask the states vs union dynamic that was irrevocably altered through this conflict. Lincoln clearly chose to use authority he did not have in order to force states to do thing they did not want to do and the balance of power tipped toward the new nationalized government structure.
This is the story of what happened in the District of Columbia in the days immediately following the fall of Ft. Sumpter. Most people expected the South to march into DC and take over the seat of government. Once General Robert E. Lee took command of the Army of Northern Virginia, he ordered a defensive-only posture. He never considered seizing the union government. Rather, he saw in the conflict the desire for free association and State Sovereignty. As he correctly foresaw, if the Union won out, the States would only be united by force. No longer would there be a free association of states. At this point in time, the Federal Government effectively became a National Government having crushed the 10th amendment and any attempt by the states to leave the union. Yes, slavery was a key issue in the dispute between the states, but this should not mask the states vs union dynamic that was irrevocably altered through this conflict. Lincoln clearly chose to use authority he did not have in order to force states to do thing they did not want to do and the balance of power tipped toward the new nationalized government structure.
December 5, 2014
Published in time for the sesquicentennial of the Civil War's start, this may be the first book about this story: the isolation and near-capture of Washington. Some books have touched on it -- Lincoln's aides' memoirs, Gore Vidal's novel "Lincoln", Mary Alice Will's "The Confederate Blockade of Washington, D.C." (indeed, the rebels would be blocking sea traffic on the lower Potomac for some months to come). This book, however, focuses on the 12 days in which Washington had almost no Federal soldiers, with rebel militias forming in Virginia and Maryland.
Indeed, the threat from Maryland comes to light in this book. Mobs in Baltimore attacking Union regiments trying to get to Washington, Maryland militias tearing up the railroads and cutting the telegraph to the North, Maryland politicians corresponding with the new rebel government and seeking arms and reinforcement. Even when the threat eased, we still understand more about Lincoln's decision to suspend habeas corpus along the re-established rail lines: it was that or bombard Baltimore, we're told.
The authors' research has been thorough, judging by the footnotes, which are rich with first-hand accounts from those uncertain days as well as archive and memoir material from later decades. It's a good lesson on how uncertain the times can be when the writer is living in them, rather than putting it down as settled history, later.
An important contribution to Civil War history, and indispensable for those interested in the period.
Indeed, the threat from Maryland comes to light in this book. Mobs in Baltimore attacking Union regiments trying to get to Washington, Maryland militias tearing up the railroads and cutting the telegraph to the North, Maryland politicians corresponding with the new rebel government and seeking arms and reinforcement. Even when the threat eased, we still understand more about Lincoln's decision to suspend habeas corpus along the re-established rail lines: it was that or bombard Baltimore, we're told.
The authors' research has been thorough, judging by the footnotes, which are rich with first-hand accounts from those uncertain days as well as archive and memoir material from later decades. It's a good lesson on how uncertain the times can be when the writer is living in them, rather than putting it down as settled history, later.
An important contribution to Civil War history, and indispensable for those interested in the period.
August 20, 2011
The Lockwoods have taken a small slice of American Civil War history and crafted an intriguing and detailed account of the first few days of that war. Little has been previously written about a very unsettled time, when Ft. Sumter was taken by rebel forces and no one knew when Virginia, and possibly Maryland, would secede.
Through careful research, the authors paint a picture of Washington, D.C., at a time when there was a strong possiblity that the nation's capital would fall to the Southern slave states. Cut off from the North, with the city of Baltimore sympathetic to the South, the unprepared armed forces had to cobble together a defense built from clerks, untrained militia and unarmed volunteers.
All in all, it's a fascinating look at a critical period in U.S. history. My only quibble with the book has nothing to do with authors, but everything to to do with their pubisher.
The book is replete with typographical errors that demonstrate a lack of line-editing. Often, a word was missing from a sentence, making it difficult to interpret the author's meaning. Books are an expensive luxury these days. Shouldn't they at least be well made?
Through careful research, the authors paint a picture of Washington, D.C., at a time when there was a strong possiblity that the nation's capital would fall to the Southern slave states. Cut off from the North, with the city of Baltimore sympathetic to the South, the unprepared armed forces had to cobble together a defense built from clerks, untrained militia and unarmed volunteers.
All in all, it's a fascinating look at a critical period in U.S. history. My only quibble with the book has nothing to do with authors, but everything to to do with their pubisher.
The book is replete with typographical errors that demonstrate a lack of line-editing. Often, a word was missing from a sentence, making it difficult to interpret the author's meaning. Books are an expensive luxury these days. Shouldn't they at least be well made?
August 8, 2011
This is a great take on what the beginning of the Civil War was like in Washington, DC. Essentially after Fort Sumter and as Virginia seceded, lots of people in Washington were afraid that the Confederates would attack Washington, which was largely undefended. Most of the federal army was out west, and militias in the Northern states took a long time to arrive. The lovely people of Baltimore, adhering to Maryland's slave state categorization, did their best to stop the progress of trainloads of troops heading south, killing several troops, sabotaging rail lines and telegraph lines, and generally being awful. So DC tried to raise a home guard to protect the White House, Treasury, and other inhabitants. The extra star gets taken off because the authors wait until the end to detail how Jefferson Davis and other Confederate leaders didn't want to, and weren't able to attack DC, despite the urgings of some lieutenants and private citizens.
I most enjoyed it for the historical picture of DC, which was fun and informative.
I most enjoyed it for the historical picture of DC, which was fun and informative.
February 11, 2013
"The untold story" The reason the story isn't really talked about is because, ultimately, nothing happened. However, the potential for disaster was great. And during this crisis, the Union and Confederacy were very engrossed in what was going on. If you were living in DC, this was your life during those two weeks. The fact that the fate of our nations capital was undetermined for that length of time, and most people don't know the story, makes this book an interesting find.
The story itself progresses on a day by day basis, and is told almost exclusively from the viewpoint of Washington DC. Meaning, the viewer is somewhat kept in the dark as to what the confederacy was doing this time. Until the very end of the book at least. As most people with a basic understanding of the Civil War knows, the South never took over the capital, and there was never a battle for control of the capital. So I don't think it's a spoiler to say that the South never attacked. But for two weeks, the Union believed that an attack was forthcoming, and that's what makes the story interesting.
The story itself progresses on a day by day basis, and is told almost exclusively from the viewpoint of Washington DC. Meaning, the viewer is somewhat kept in the dark as to what the confederacy was doing this time. Until the very end of the book at least. As most people with a basic understanding of the Civil War knows, the South never took over the capital, and there was never a battle for control of the capital. So I don't think it's a spoiler to say that the South never attacked. But for two weeks, the Union believed that an attack was forthcoming, and that's what makes the story interesting.
September 22, 2015
It's April, 1861. Half the country is in revolt. The military and civilian branches of the Federal government are both riddled with fools and traitors. The capital is lightly defended, and surrounded by rebels. There are thousands of loyal troops collected in the North, but to get to Washington they somehow must pass through disloyal Maryland.
This book is the story of the days between Fort Sumter and the opening of a reliable communication link from DC to the North. We all know that the story ends with the capital still in Union hands, without a major battle. Even so, the book is a well-paced, exciting read.
The authors are Washington natives, and are careful to give you locations in the city where the events take place. I enjoyed this, but if you don't know DC, it might not mean as much to you.
(First read, Nov 2011)
This book is the story of the days between Fort Sumter and the opening of a reliable communication link from DC to the North. We all know that the story ends with the capital still in Union hands, without a major battle. Even so, the book is a well-paced, exciting read.
The authors are Washington natives, and are careful to give you locations in the city where the events take place. I enjoyed this, but if you don't know DC, it might not mean as much to you.
(First read, Nov 2011)
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews