answersLogoWhite

0

That is an interesting question since there was no battle of Richmond. Richmond was evacuated after the Union's successful siege of nearby Petersburg and fell without a fight.

I'm sure my ancestor who was killed there, Thomas P. Walston, would disagree with you. There were 2 battles at Richmond. One in Kentucky, one in Virginia. Richmond, Kentucky sat on a important supply route. That line had been cut as Grant's Army pushed south. The Fereral force was to drive Walker's Texans from Richmond. It was the 2nd largest battle in Kentucky & one of the most decisive & complete Confederate victories.

There was a much larger Battle of Richmond,KY than most people know about. Your ancestor had a lot of company. 257 Union troops were KIA and 1,076 WIA, with another 117 dying of their wounds for a total of 374 dead. The Confederates lost 138 KIA and 472 WIA, with another 117 dying of their wounds for a total of 255 Confederate dead. That's 395 KIA, 629 total dead, and over 1,548 wounded, 1,943 killed and wounded. A lot of carnage for a battle that was never fought. Roughly 15,000 troops fought in it, on August 29-30, 1862, where 7,500 green Union troops were virtually annihilated by a Confederate force of approx. the same strength. The Federal Army of Kentucky ceased to exist, losing 1,333 killed and wounded and over 4,303 captured, not counting the Union wounded troops that were captured, a total of 5,636 out of 7,500. 75.1% casualties, the highest ever suffered by the US Army. And the battle had nothing to do with Grant's army, as he was in command hundreds of miles to the west in Mississippi. It was a result of the invasion of Kentucky by Gen.E.Kirby Smith's Confederate Army in East Tennessee. After Gen.Smith's victory, the most complete rout of the War, he linked up with Gen. Braxton Bragg's Army of the Mississippi that had also invaded KY. But in the end, their victory was wasted by Bragg's loss of nerve after the tactical victory that could not be followed up on, due to the larger Federal force nearby, following the Battle of Perryville, KY on October 8, 1862. I have a book coming out this spring on it. I would suggest that people actually research a subject and be certain of the answer before trying to inform others. No offense, Sir.

Hey all you arguers, you never actually answered the question! What was the result?
User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago

Still curious? Ask our experts.

Chat with our AI personalities

DevinDevin
I've poured enough drinks to know that people don't always want advice—they just want to talk.
Chat with Devin
EzraEzra
Faith is not about having all the answers, but learning to ask the right questions.
Chat with Ezra
JordanJordan
Looking for a career mentor? I've seen my fair share of shake-ups.
Chat with Jordan
More answers

Taking Richmond meant capturing the seat of power in the Confederacy. The North took possession of a base of ammunition, weapons, supplies, and manpower for the Rebel Army This was the capital of the Confederacy and being so, a prized victory for the Union.

User Avatar

Wiki User

10y ago
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: Why was it important to the north to take Richmond?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp