Yes, Randy, while the sequence is accurate,  I did somehow  type in the wrong month.  (I hate it when I do that!)   Thanks for calling it to my attention.

  The battle between the iron-sides began on Sunday, MARCH 9, 1862.
     It's obvious the Confederate Navy did more damage to the Yankee fleet than the other way around --on Saturday, March 8, the Virginia wrecked havoc on the wooden ships of the Yankee fleet-- and  clear which navy had more success in those few days in March, 1862,  even though it can seem that it was  the Virginia who left the scene first.

    From official Confederate Reports, submitted to CSA Navy Secr by Lieutenant Catesby Jones, who took over when Fleet Officer Buchanan was injured during battle the previous day, wrote in part:

    "At daylight on the 9th we saw that the Minnesota was still ashore, and that there was an iron battery near her. At 8[o'clock] we ran down to engage them (having previously sent the killed and wounded out of the ship), firing at the Minnesota and occasionally at the iron battery. The pilots did not place us as near as they expected. The great length and draught of the ship rendered it exceedingly difficult to work her. We ran ashore about a mile from the frigate, and were backing fifteen minutes before we got off. We continued to fire at the Minnesota, and blew up a steamer alongside of her, and we also engaged the Monitor, and sometimes at very close quarters. We once succeeded in running into her, and twice silenced her fire. The pilots declaring that we could get no nearer the Minnesota, and believing her to be entirely disabled, and the Monitor having run into shoal water, which prevented our doing her any further injury, we ceased firing at 12 [o'clock] and proceeded to
 Norfolk. . . ."




  But in discussing the Virginia (Merrimac) vs. Monitor, I'm more than  a bit off-subject, which really is your question regarding the accuracy of Civil War history.  My genealogy research over the last 15 years has included  considerable research about the Civil War and specific battles (the one at Hampton Roads between the Yankee fleet and the CSS Virginia being one), and I can honestly say, the only really prejudiced accounts I've come across were written within the first few years of the events,  when passions were still strong.   Passions and prejudices have no place in writing or researching history.   As the g.granddaughter of a Virginian who fled to Mexico with General Jubal Early rather than surrender; and also the g.granddaughter of another Virginian who died in a "...dirty Yankee prison...", I try to keep this in mind.

   Joanne



Randy Cabell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
          Hi Joanne,
  Thanks for the background.  But I think you either have your M-months mixed up, or my poster is wrong.  I just checked it again and it says that the FIRST battle of ironclads was March 9, 1862.

  It appears that one result of the battle was that the Monitor was so badly damaged, that authorities did not want to risk it in another battle; hence, the Virginia apparently had its way with the wooden ships.  While stretching such an historical even to the the boxing ring is a stetch, if a fighter cannot/will not come out of his corner for another round, then the one who does is declared the winner.

  Randy






---------------------------------
 Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html