My C.S.A Question for the year.

You know...Just so I can say I filled my quota for the year.;)

In any case, how come Savannah, Georgia is never considered as a possible capital for the C.S.A?

Now, I know the Confederate States never had the intention of ever establishing a Federal District for the national capital, but it would seem like a border city like Savannah would be a much better choice then any of the bigger Cities completely surrounded/dominated by their respective States.

Still, the only flaw I see with Savannah is the fact that it's open to invasions by sea, but if you ignore that...

Thoughts? Opinions?
 
You know...Just so I can say I filled my quota for the year.;)

In any case, how come Savannah, Georgia is never considered as a possible capital for the C.S.A?

Now, I know the Confederate States never had the intention of ever establishing a Federal District for the national capital, but it would seem like a border city like Savannah would be a much better choice then any of the bigger Cities completely surrounded/dominated by their respective States.

Still, the only flaw I see with Savannah is the fact that it's open to invasions by sea, but if you ignore that...

Thoughts? Opinions?

1) Too small...this was one of the reasons why Montgomery was not kept as the capital, too. Richmond was, IIRC, the second largest city in the Confederacy after New Orleans.

2) No major industries other than shipping. Richmond had Tredegar and was close to the rife-making machinery seized from Harper's Ferry.

3) Too close to the coast, making it vulnerable to capture. If you want a site analogous to Washington DC in that it was on the border between two States, then Augusta, Georgia would have been a better choice as it was much farther inland.
 
Last edited:
How about Atlanta? Of course, this would be dominated by Georgia, but so was Richmond by Virginia.
 
Putting the capital in Richmond was also a bone toss to Virginia for joining the Confederacy I believe.
 
Top