Charleston was a major port - one of the richest in the country."
Certainly rich in terms of self-promotion, but tiny compared to New Orleans, Baltimore or St. Louis.
Along the Southern coast Charleston compared to Richmond & Mobile.
Yes, it was bigger than Norfolk, Wilmington, Savanah, Jacksonville & Pensacola, but those all also connected to the railroad grid and could easily serve if Charleston was, ahem, temporarily indisposed.
FLT-bird: "Ever been there? There are some very swanky old houses.
That place had a lot of money.
It was a major port in terms of value."
Sure, but not indispensable either economically or militarily.
When Charleston was blockaded or attacked the Confederacy got along because there were plenty of alternatives.
And that's my only point here.
Indeed, if we can return to those Michigan & Ohio forts occupied by the Brits after 1783, we could easily argue they were more important economically & militarily to President Washington in the 1790s than was Fort Sumter to Jefferson Davis in the 1860s.
Those British forts resulted in what has been called:
- "It was 'the most decisive defeat in the history of the American military.'[2]
It was the largest victory ever won by American Indians.[3]"
Those British forts controlled the whole of the Northwest Territory (aka "The Blue Wall", aka "Trump Country") and prevented western migration for over a decade.
By contrast Charleston controlled nothing, prevented nothing and was easily bypassed whenever the need arose.
