The Monitor and the Merrimack (1 Viewer)

jazzeum

Four Star General
Joined
Apr 23, 2005
Messages
38,685
Last week on March 9 was the 150th anniversary of the legendary duel on March 9, 1862 between the ironclads, the Monitor and the Merrimack, a battle that changed naval history. The anniversary of this engagement has gone largely unnoticed.

The Monitor and the Merrimack.jpg
The Monitor and the Merrimack (renamed the Virginia), go at it 150 years ago.

This battle has been recently recounted in the Disunion series, the Duel. In addition, Professor Brooks Simpson has written a brief article for the Library of America on the Battle of Hamption Roads.

By now, the story is well known. The Confederates took a sunken freight salvaged from the Gosport Naval Yards in Norfolk, Viriginia, the Merrimack, and turned it into an ironclad, renaming her the CSS Virginia. The U.S. Navy got wind of this and approved a design by John Ericsson.

The South wanted the Virginia to get down the Elilzabeth River into the Chesapeake as soon as possible, to sink the US squadron and disrupt George McClellan's plans offensive up the Virginia penninsula.

On March 8, the Virginia (which had some engineering problems: slow and hard to handle) sailed forth from the mouth of the Elizabeth River and feasted on the Yankee squadron. By the time the Virginia was done two ships were destroyed (the Cumberland and the Congress), three frigates aground (the Minnesota, Roanoke and St. Lawrence) and 400 Union sailors dead. The U.S. Navy would not suffer another defeat on this scale until Pearl Harbor.

Needless to say this caused a crisis in Washington; Lincoln convened a cabinet meeting, with everybody fearing the worst, that the Virginia would head north up as far as New York. The only one to remain calm was the Secretary of the Navy, Gideon Welles, who said that a deep draft vessel like the Viriginia would have trouble travelling far. He then let on that the U.S. Navy had an ironclad. This was the Monitor.

The Monitor, best described as a cheesebox on a raft, had set to sea on March 6, destination: the Chesapeake.

On March 9, as the Virginia was preparing to finish off the Minnesota, out came the Monitor, placing itself between the Minnesota and Virginia. The Monitor opened fire with one of its two guns, the Virginia responded and the battle was on. The ships kept steaming in circles, the Virginia in its large, ungainly arcs, the Monitor in sharper, tighter turns. As a result, the ships closed on each other, and then pulled apart; sometimes they shot at each other at a distance of 100 yards, and sometimes at 15 feet.

The Monitor and the Virginia.jpg
Battle between the Virginia and the Monitor, from an 1871 wood engraving (A.S. Barnes & Co)

After more than three hours, neither side had gained an advantage but each had sustained damage and the commander of the Monitor had been injured. The engagement was broken off.

Both sides claimed victory although it was more likely a draw.

Both ships never sailed again: the Virginia was eventually scuttled and the Monitor was lost in a storm. However, naval history had been made.
 
Last week on March 9 was the 150th anniversary of the legendary duel on March 9, 1862 between the ironclads, the Monitor and the Merrimack, a battle that changed naval history. The anniversary of this engagement has gone largely unnoticed.

View attachment 88251
The Monitor and the Merrimack (renamed the Virginia), go at it 150 years ago.

This battle has been recently recounted in the Disunion series, the Duel. In addition, Professor Brooks Simpson has written a brief article for the Library of America on the Battle of Hamption Roads.

By now, the story is well known. The Confederates took a sunken freight salvaged from the Gosport Naval Yards in Norfolk, Viriginia, the Merrimack, and turned into an ironclad, renaming her the CSS Virginia. The U.S. Navy got wind of this and approved a design by John Ericsson.

The South wanted the Virginia to get down the Elilzabeth River into the Chesapeake as soon as possible, to sink the US squadrono and disrupt George McClellan's plans offensive up the Virginia penninsula.

On March 8, the Virginia (which had some engineering problems: slow and hard to handle) sailed forth from the mouth of the Elizabeth River and feasted on the Yankee squadron. By the time the Virginia was done two ships were destroyed (the Cumberland and the Congress), three frigates aground (the Minnesota, Roanoke and St. Lawrence) and 400 Union sailors dead. The U.S. Navy would not suffer another defeat on this scale until Pearl Harbor.

Needless to say this caused a crisis in Washington; Lincoln convened a cabinet meeting, with everybody fearing the worst, that the Virginia would head north up as far as New York. The only one to remain calm was the Secretary of the Navy, Gideon Welles, who said that a deep draft vessel like the Viriginia would have trouble travelling far. He then let on that the U.S. Navy had an ironclad. This was the Monitor.

The Monitor, best described as a cheesebox on a raft, had set to sea on March 6, destination: the Chesapeake.

On March 9, as the Virginia was preparing to finish off the Minnesota, out came the Monitor, placing itself between the Minnesota and Virginia. The Monitor opened fire with one of its two guns, the Virginia responded and the battle was on. The ships kept steaming in circles, the Virginia in its large, ungainly arcs, the Monitor in sharper, tighter turns. As a result, the ships closed on each other, and then pulled apart; sometimes they shot at each other at a distance of 100 yards, and sometimes at 15 feet.

After more than three hours, neither side had gained an advantage but each had sustained damage and the commander of the Monitor had been injured. The engagement was broken off.

Both sides claimed victory although it was more likely a draw.

Both ships never sailed again: the Virginia was eventually scuttled and the Monitor was lost in a storm. However, naval history had been made.

Excellent post Brad, very interesting, had no idea the anniversary had just passed. Thanks for posting this.

Rob
 
Pleasure Rob. I remember reading a lot about it as a kid and I too was not aware that the anniversary had passed until I saw an article about it this week. It's a fascinating engagement in many fascinating battles during the Civil War.

Brad
 
Brad, was just looking at the service career of John Lorimer Worden, commander of the Monitor who was partially blinded during the Battle but went onto command another Ironclad later in the war. One can only imagine the shock waves that went through the Royal Navy when news of this clash reached these shores, suddenly everything was different!.

Rob
 
Yes, you can well imagine, especially because Britain has the finest Navy. Probably some heads rolled!
 
Probably went unnoticed because of misidentification. Every southener knows it was the battle between the Monitor and the CSS Virginia.:rolleyes2:^&grin -- Al
 
Probably went unnoticed because of misidentification. Every southener knows it was the battle between the Monitor and the CSS Virginia.:rolleyes2:^&grin -- Al

"Bad Luck" to rename a vessel.


Except for Capt. Semmes the CS Navy could wade ashore from any problems. :wink2:
 
Ever see Shep Paine's monitor interior diorama?


Monitor%20with%20smoke%201.JPG
 
Does anyone know if the facial reconstructions of two of the "Monitor's" sailors have been posted anywhere? Their remains were found in the turret, forensics experts did a tremendous amount of work narrowing down their IDs, but I didn't see a follow-up to the news article which promised to show their faces. DNA work was done, but no living descendants' matches had yet been found. "Fascinating," as Mr. Spock would say.
 
One can only imagine the shock waves that went through the Royal Navy when news of this clash reached these shores, suddenly everything was different!. Rob

Don't forget that both the British and French either had an armored ship in service or soon would. The idea was up and coming. The battle at Hampton Roads is the first time that armored ships fought each other.


There are endless "what ifs" about that battle, such as what would have happened if the CSS Virginia had steel shot for their guns or what if the USS Monitor had been allowed to use the full powder loads for its guns, etc, etc.

Still a naval milestone. It is interesting how the outnumbered side will look at technical innovation to even the odds. The South tried the iron-armored ship, the submersible, naval and land mines, etc.

Gary B.
 
Don't forget that both the British and French either had an armored ship in service or soon would. The idea was up and coming. The battle at Hampton Roads is the first time that armored ships fought each other.


There are endless "what ifs" about that battle, such as what would have happened if the CSS Virginia had steel shot for their guns or what if the USS Monitor had been allowed to use the full powder loads for its guns, etc, etc.

Still a naval milestone. It is interesting how the outnumbered side will look at technical innovation to even the odds. The South tried the iron-armored ship, the submersible, naval and land mines, etc.

Gary B.

You are spot on Gary. I visited the Mariner's Musuem in Newport News, VA last yr. Home to the raised turret, guns and engine of the Monitor. There were models and displays of earlier RN armored ships. This was an evolving, not revolutionary, technology. THe Koreans had armored ships at least 100 yrs earlier. Chris
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top