LAND USE HISTORY FOR

CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE

NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

i

LAND USE HISTORY FOR 

CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE 

NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

INTRODUCTION

__________________________________________________________ 

PRE-HISTORY TO THE BATTLE OF CEDAR CREEK

__________________________________________________________ 

POST WAR TO THE GREAT DEPRESSION

__________________________________________________________ 

GREAT DEPRESSION TO THE PRESENT

By Michael Commisso 

Historical Landscape Architect 

With H. Eliot Foulds, Project Manager 

Historical Landscape Architect 

National Park Service, Boston, Massachusetts, August 2007 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

ii 

The Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation promotes the stewardship of 

significant landscapes through research, planning and sustainable preservation 

maintenance. The Center accomplishes its mission in collaboration with a network of 

partners including national parks, universities, government agencies and private 

nonprofit organizations. Techniques and principles of preservation practice are made 

available through training and publications. The Olmsted Center perpetuates the 

tradition of the Olmsted firms and Frederick Law Olmsted’s lifelong commitment to 

people, parks and public spaces. 

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation 

Boston National Historical Park 

Charlestown Navy Yard, Quarters C 

Boston, MA 02129 

www.nps.gov/oclp/ 

Publication Credits: Information in this report may be copied and used with the 

condition that credit is given to the authors and the Olmsted Center for Landscape 

Preservation. This report has been prepared for in-house use and will not be made 

available for sale. Photographs and graphics may not be reproduced for reuse without 

the permission of the owners or repositories noted in the captions. 

Cover Photo: Photograph of Solomon Heater Farmstead. Source: OCLP, 2006. 
TABLE OF CONTENTS

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

LIST OF FIGURES V 

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS IX 

INTRODUCTION 11 

Purpose of this Report 

Project Setting 

Scope of Work and Methodology 

Historical Significance 

Summary of Findings 

 

LAND USE HISTORY 21 

Pre-History to the Battle of Cedar Creek 

 The Civil War and the Valley Landscape 

Shenandoah Valley Landscape Features 

 Land Use 

 Circulation 

 Buildings and Settlement Patterns 

 Views and Vistas 

 Summary Description of the Study Area in 1864 

Post War to the Great Depression 

Shenandoah Valley Landscape Features 

 Land Use 

 Circulation 

 Buildings and Settlement Patterns 

 Views and Vistas 

 Summary Description of the Study Area in 1937 

Great Depression to the Present 

 Shenandoah Valley Landscape Features 

 Land Use 

 Circulation 

 Buildings and Settlement Patterns 

 Views and Vistas 

 Summary Description of the Existing Conditions 

 

LIST OF REPOSITORIES CONSULTED AND OUTCOMES 73

 

REFERENCES 75 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

iv 

 

 
LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES AND DRAWINGS

v

LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES AND DRAWINGS 

LIST OF FIGURES 

 

0.1. A map identifying the geography of the State of Virginia. The 

Shenandoah Valley is contained within the upland valley and ridge 

systems. 

1.0. A map of the study area in 1809 abstracted from Fredrick, Berkeley and 

Jefferson Counties in the State of Virginia. Notable resources shown on 

the map include Strasburg, Middletown, Shenandoah River and 

tributaries and Valley Turnpike. 

1.1. Philip Sheridan’s Official Report of the Property Captured or 

Destroyed during the Valley Campaign of 1864. 

1.2. Changes in Livestock and Major Field Crops in the Valley of Virginia 

between 1860 and 1870. 

1.3. View of Massanutten Mountain, looking south from Route 635. 

Massanutten Mountain provided the Confederate army with views of 

the Union armies’ positions and encampments 

1.4. Photo of Belle Grove Plantation, looking west from the Valley Turnpike 

(Route 11). 

1.5. Sketch of the Battle of Belle Grove or Cedar Creek, October 

19, 1864 by Jed Hotchkiss. 

1.6. Cleared bottomland north of Bowman’s Mill Ford, ca. 1885. 

1.7. Photo of Bowman Mill Ford, looking northwest. Bowman Mill Ford was 

crossed by Kershaw’s Division in the early morning attack on the 

Federal army. 

1.8. View to the southwest across a large field interpreted as having 

contained the encampments of Colonel Rutherford Hayes Second 

Division, VIII Corps. 

1.9. Photo of portion of the VIII Corps earthworks, located on the Whitham 

property. 

1.10. View of the approximate location of the XIX Corps encampment, 

situated along the west side of the Valley Pike (Route 11). 

1.11. James Taylor sketch of the Valley Pike near the Stickley House 

and Mill (ruins). Wharton’s Division passed this area in route to their 

attack on the Federal army. 

1.12. Approximate location where the early mornings skirmishes 

took place between the XIX, VI and elements of the VIII Corps and 

Confederate forces. Belle Grove Plantation is in the background. 

1.13. James Taylor pencil sketch of captured Confederate prisoners 

and equipment in the field to the front of Sheridan’s headquarters at 

Belle Grove. 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

vi 

1.14. Photo of the Solomon Heater House, view looking northwest from the 

Valley Turnpike (Route 11). During the Battle of Cedar Creek, the house 

served as a primary cultural landscape feature. Confederate forces 

moved across the lands east of the house as they moved against Getty’s 

Union troops at Cemetery Hill. 

1.15. Photo of cedar Creek Battlefield, c. 1907. Note: the undulating 

topography and sinkholes. 

1.16. Photo of Stickley Hill. Besides its importance as the location of Ashby’s 

Battery in 1862, Stickley Hill was used by Colonel Thomas Carter during 

the retreat of the Confederacy during the Battle of Cedar Creek. 

1.17. Photo of the Stickley Farmstead, looking northeast. The Stickley 

property was used as a military hospital for Confederate soldiers during 

the battle of Cedar Creek 

1.18. Cedar Creek and Belle Grove study area abstracted from A Map of the 

Most Inhabited Part of Virginia prepared by Joshua Fry and Peter 

Jefferson in 1775. The Valley Turnpike can be seen running through the 

area. 

1.19. Photo of a toll house and gate on the Valley Pike, c.1901. 

1.20. Map abstracted from Map of the State of Virginia by Herman Boye; 

prepared 1825, revised 1859. Principal towns, roads and waterways are 

shown. 

1.21. Photo of a snake rail fence commonly used throughout the Shenandoah 

Valley by the 18th century. 

1.22. New towns in the Shenandoah Valley, 1780-1800. Economic growth 

during the final decades of the eighteenth century produced a wave of 

town establishments, mostly along the historic Valley Turnpike. 

1.23. Photo of the Valley Pike, taken in 1907, “through Cedar Creek 

Battlefield, down near the bridge”. View toward the SW and Strasburg. 

1.24. Photo of macadamized Valley Pike, taken in 1935, just north of 

Middletown, looking north. Near here was the end of Sheridan’s ride 

from Winchester. 

1.25. Map of the Railroads in the Shenandoah Valley in 1872. 

1.26. Section of a construction document for the realignment and resurfacing 

of Route 11 (Valley Turnpike) prior to 1929. The area identified is 

within the vicinity of the Stickley complex. Note: Document oriented 

with north facing up. 

1.27. Section of a construction document for the realignment of Route 11 

(Valley Turnpike) in 1929. The area identified is within the vicinity of 

the Stickley complex. Note: Document oriented with north facing up. 

1.28. Section of a construction document for the realignment of Route 11 

(Valley Turnpike) in 1950. The area identified is within the vicinity of 

the Stickley complex. Note: Document oriented with north facing up. 
LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES AND DRAWINGS

vii

1.29. Photo of the Cedar Creek bridge, date of photo unknown. The bridge 

and its connection with the Valley Turnpike played an important role as 

a major transit route for travelers, merchants, residents and soldiers 

during the Civil War. 

1.30. With the realignment of the Valley Turnpike in 1929, a new bridge 

(shown above) was constructed. The Cedar Creek Bridge, located 

further upstream, was left abandoned. 

1.31. Photo of the Shenandoah Valley and the apple orchards in blossom, c. 

1941. 

1.32. Photo of a farmer planting corn in the Shenandoah Valley, c. 1941. 

Note: Traditional farming practices were still utilized in the 1940s. 

1.33. 1958 aerial photography of the study area showing the realignment of 

Route 11, completed in 1950 and the absence of Interstate 81. 

1.34. View northeast along Route 11 showing commercial development 

(National retail chains and gas stations) in vicinity of Stickley Hill. 

Billboards and commercial development are destroying historic views. 

1.35. Photo of the quarries, adjoining the study area. The quarries contribute 

substantially to the economic vitality of the region and area. However, 

the quarries have grown substantially, adversely affecting viewsheds 

from within the study area. 

LIST OF TABLES 

0.1. Land Use Summary at Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical 

Park 

LIST OF DRAWINGS 

 

0.1. Cedar Creek and Belle Grove NHP, Ownership Map 

1.0. Cedar Creek and Belle Grove, 1864 Period Plan 

1.1. Cedar Creek and Belle Grove, 1937 Period Plan 

1.2. Cedar Creek and Belle Grove, Existing Conditions Plan 

 

 

 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

viii 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

ix

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

The Olmsted Center would like to thank Community Planner, Christopher 

Stubbs and Superintendent, Diann Jacox, staff at Cedar Creek and Belle 

Grove National Historical Park for their assistance and contributions to this 

report. 

Special thanks go to Roland Duhaime and colleagues at the University of 

Rhode Island, for their advice and invaluable technical assistance in the 

development of georeferenced aerial images and historic maps. Thanks are 

also due to Clarence Geier and Kim Tinkham with James Madison University 

and Michael Clarke, planner with Wallace, Roberts and Todd, LLC, for 

providing research information and guidance throughout the project. 

We also appreciate the staff members of the repositories who were helpful 

and informative in providing research assistance. These include, Handley 

Regional Library, Warren County Heritage Society and Carrier Library at 

James Madison University. 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

x 
INTRODUCTION

11

INTRODUCTION 

PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT 

This report provides a brief land use history of the Cedar Creek and Belle Grove 

National Historical Park and is intended to inform the development of the park’s 

General Management Plan. This report will assist in developing long-range plans 

by providing an understanding of landscape significance and integrity, identifying 

areas within the park landscape that reveal its history and where historical 

interpretations would be most effective. In particular, the report documents 

change in the pattern of field and forest, views and vistas, roads and 

transportation corridors and settlement. The presentation of the land use history 

is organized into time periods pertaining to critical events and milestones and is 

illustrated with maps and photographs. 

PROJECT SETTING 

Located within the Shenandoah Valley, the Cedar Creek and Belle Grove 

National Historical Park is nationally significant as a Civil War battlefield 

landscape and antebellum plantation. It illustrates the history of the Shenandoah 

Valley from early settlement through the Civil War and beyond and the battle of 

Cedar Creek and its significance in the conduct of the war in the Shenandoah 

Valley. 

Created in 2002, the National Park boundary includes publicly and privately 

owned land and encompasses approximately 3,500 acres within three counties in 

the northern portion of Virginia (Drawing 0.1). With only eight acres owned by 

the National Park Service, various partners including Belle Grove Inc., Cedar 

Creek Battlefield Foundation, Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation, 

Shenandoah County and the National Trust for Historic Preservation, 

collectively own 1179 acres and protect another 32 acres with conservation 

easements. 

SHENANDOAH VALLEY REGION 

Located within the Valley and Ridge physiographic province, the Shenandoah 

Valley is bounded by the Blue Ridge to the east, the Appalachian and Allegheny 

Plateaus to the west, the Potomac River on the north and the City of Roanoke to 

the south (Figure 0.1). Generally, sandstones compose the ridge tops and 

carbonate rocks, such as limestone, form the valleys.1

 The soils found within the 

Valley are considered fertile and productive for agricultural purposes, being 

weathered from parent limestone, dolomites, sandstones, siltstones and acidic 

shales. 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

12 

A distance of 140 miles, the Shenandoah Valley encompasses two counties in 

West Virginia: Berkeley and Jefferson; and seven counties in Virginia; Frederick, 

Clark, Warren, Shenandoah, Page, Rockingham and Augusta. Berkeley, 

Jefferson, Frederick, Clarke and Warren Counties are referred to as the Lower 

Valley, while the counties south of Strasburg are known as the Upper Valley. 

Topography varies within the Valley, consisting of a series of narrow, elongated, 

forested knobs and ridges created by geological forces over five hundred million 

years ago. A unique feature to the Valley is Massanutten Mountain, a complex 

ridge that extends for roughly fifty miles through the center of the Valley, 

separating it into two smaller valleys. The Shenandoah River is the major water 

source. As a tributary of the Potomac, the Shenandoah and its tributaries drain 

several lateral valleys on the west slope of the Blue Ridge. Flowing in a northerly 

direction, the river is divided by the Massanutten Mountain into the North and 

South Forks. The two branches join just north of Front Royal, flowing 

northward to its confluence with the Potomac at Harpers Ferry.2

 

 

SCOPE OF WORK AND METHODOLOGY 

In order to provide the General Management Plan team with timely information 

related to the cultural landscape, this report relies extensively on secondary 

sources. The report does not provide an in-depth site history, as is typically 

found in a Cultural Landscape Report. It instead provides an overview of the 

landscape’s history illustrated with period plans, documenting the landscape’s 

evolution and general character. 

Through a concise chronological narrative, the following report documents the 

history of the landscape and its most significant landscape characteristics. It is 

organized into three sections corresponding to distinct periods in the 

development of the park landscape. The periods are Pre-History to the Battle of 

Cedar Creek, Post War to the Great Depression and Great Depression to the 

Present. 

Beginning with a brief overview of the park’s historical context, each section is 

divided into two subsections. The first subsection, Shenandoah Valley 

Landscape Features, describes landscape characteristics and features prevalent in 

the Shenandoah Valley region during each period. Landscape characteristics and 

features include land use, circulation, buildings and settlement patterns and 

views and vistas. Through an analysis of landscape characteristics and features, 

the second subsection, Summary Description of the Study Area, documents the 

character of the landscape within the boundary of the park. 
INTRODUCTION

13

For the purpose of this report, the term “study area” will refer to the area 

contained within the legislated boundary of the park. 

NATIONAL REGISTER SIGNIFICANCE 

Cedar Creek Battlefield and Belle Grove was designated a National Historical 

Landmark on August 11, 1969, encompassing 900 acres. Cedar Creek Battlefield 

is significant as the site of the last decisive conflict in the Shenandoah Valley 

during the Civil War. Belle Grove Plantation, one of the first manor houses built 

in the Valley, served as the headquarters of Union General Philip Sheridan. The 

period of significance extends from 1797, the year Belle Grove was constructed, 

to 1864 the year of the Battle of Cedar Creek. In addition to the property’s 

National Historic Landmark designation, Belle Grove, individually listed in the 

National Register in 1973, derives significance in the areas of architecture and 

history. The National Register Information System Database also indicates 

additional significance for association with James Madison. 

A special resource study was prepared in response to the requirements of the 

Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District and Commission Act of 

1996 (P.L. 104-333). The study area encompassed 22,000 acres. The legislation 

required the National Park Service to determine whether the District or 

components thereof met the criteria for designation as a unit of the National Park 

System. As a result of this special resource study, Cedar Creek and Belle Grove 

National Historical Park was authorized on December 19th, 2002. The park is 

located within the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historical District 

and is managed by the National Park Service, in partnership with several nonprofit and municipal entities. 

Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park commemorates the 

nationally significant Civil War landscape and Belle Grove Plantation. In 

addition to its military significance, previously established by the National 

Historic Landmark designation, the park includes well preserved cultural and 

natural features from early settlements and examples of the historic agricultural 

practices and its associated community that once defined the northern 

Shenandoah Valley.3

The existing National Register of Historic Places documentation recognizes 

military and architectural significance. Additional potential areas of significance 

include early settlement, agricultural practices, archeology, and ethnography. 

Further significance may include James Madison’s association with Belle Grove 

and early settler Jost Hite’s role in the development of the area.
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

14 

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 

 

Since the eighteenth century until the mid-twentieth century when the Interstate 

Highway System was superimposed upon the Shenandoah Valley, the rural and 

agricultural character of the landscape was a tangible product of early settlement 

within the Valley. These landscape patterns were organized according to the 

availability of natural resources such as fertile soils, water for drinking and 

powering mills and local industries. Patterns of field and forest were especially 

durable. During this period of time, the largest portions of woodland occupied 

the steep topography to the south and east of the study area, with tillage and 

grazing lands found on the more gentle ground to the north. Landowners sited 

buildings and structures in clusters supporting individual farms, or within the 

well-defined boundaries of small towns and villages. For much of the centurieslong period, movement between farms and villages was organized by the Valley 

Pike, later known as U.S. 11. This central artery has long served as the main route 

through the study area, with secondary local roads branching from it. Greatly 

shaped by the natural systems and topography, the historic landscape character 

remained rural and agricultural, where most residents lived as well as worked 

until after World War II. 

With the exception of landscape changes brought on by the construction of 

Interstate 81 (I-81), Interstate 66 (I-66) and more recent residential, industrial 

and commercial developments, Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical 

Park overall retains a high level integrity. Within the study area, many eighteenth 

and nineteenth century natural and cultural resources remain intact, especially in 

the area of the park south and east of I-81. Its rural character remains preserved 

and the topography and landscape patterns that evoke early settlement and the 

Civil War are present to help visitors understand the physical development of the 

Valley region, as well as the strategic role of the landscape in the unfolding of the 

historic battle. 

While extensive highway development in the early 1970s and more recent 

residential development have altered topographic features, such as Hupp’s Hill, 

the majority of natural and human manipulated topography associated with the 

park’s significance has remained undisturbed. These features which include, 

Pout’s Hill, Three Top Mountain (Signal Knob), Stickley Hill, Thoburn’s Run, 

Stony Hill and the XIX and VIII (Thoburn’s) earthworks, were not only 

significant to the military outcome of the Battle at Cedar Creek, but they also 

influenced early settlement patterns. 

As a result of natural and cultural factors, the mosaic of wooded and open land 

has regularly shifted within the Shenandoah Valley and the study area. However, 
INTRODUCTION

15

despite shifting land uses, the majority of the southern portion of the study area 

has remained forested throughout its documented history, while the northern 

portion has remained relatively open. As shown in Table 0.1, with the exception 

of orchards, the various land uses within the park have remained relatively 

consistent since the mid-nineteenth century. The column, “Other,” includes 

cemeteries, circulation and buildings. Although topography contributes to the 

location of settlements, the large number residential and commercial buildings 

west of I-81 may be attributed to the vast amounts of open land. 

LANDUSE SUMMARY AT CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NHP 

Forest Field/Agricultural Orchard Other 

1864 38% 58% 3% 1% 

1937 36% 50% 13% 1% 

2002 40% 55% 2% 3% 

Overall, most roads and buildings found within the study area in the eighteenth 

and nineteenth centuries are present today. In areas where roads have been 

abandoned, historic traces remain. However, additional corridors and buildings 

have been introduced to the area within the last 60 years. Roads have branched 

out from the Valley Turnpike (U.S. 11) and I-81 has divided the area in half. 

While there are some scatterings of new buildings within the park boundaries, 

the majority of residential, commercial, and industrial development is occurring 

outside the park boundary near the Town of Strasburg, Middletown and the I-81 

and U.S. 11 interchange. With the increase in development within and adjoining 

the study area, the historic character of the landscape is rapidly changing. 

Besides development pressures, mining has greatly increased in recent years. 

Quarrying may have been important to settlement and development during the 

historic period, but the increased activity at an industrial scale along the northern 

portion of the study area has the potential to destroy resources significant to the 

park, as well as historic views. 

While many of the features contributing to the character and significance of the 

study area remain intact, threats to the rural character of the landscape are 

foreseeable. According to the Shenandoah, Warren and Frederick counties 

zoning maps, the majority of the land within the boundaries of the study area is 

zoned for conservation or agriculture. However, there are many areas outside 

the boundaries that are zoned for industrial, commercial and residential uses. 

Zoning for agriculture and conservation within the study area will encourage the 

perpetuation of rural landscape character, but the areas zoned industrial, 

commercial and residential beyond the park’s boundary will negatively impact 

Table 0.1: Land Use Summary at Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park. 

Percentages were abstracted from Drawings 1.0-1.2 using GIS software. Source: OCLP 

2007. 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

16 

viewsheds and ultimately lead to the widening of rural roads in order to increase 

their capacity. 

I-81 and I-66 play a significant role in linking the Shenandoah Valley with the 

Washington Metropolitan area. In order to serve the growing traffic volumes, the 

Virginia Department of Transportation has determined that I-81 will require 

expansion. As a result of the pending highway widening, over 200 residential 

structures and commercial businesses may be displaced in Shenandoah and 

Warren counties.4

To mitigate additional impacts to the study area, park partners will need to work 

collaboratively and creatively with private land owners and the Virginia 

Department of Transportation to preserve and protect natural and historic 

resources. 

Additional opportunities for collaborative landscape preservation exist 

throughout the park area, however preservation opportunities are especially rich 

east of I- 81. Here isolated between the highway and the Shenandoah River, the 

landscape retains a great deal of integrity. Preservation efforts have initially 

begun in the southern portion of the study area with the acquisition of 

conservation easements by various partners. 

ENDNOTES FOR LAND USE HISTORY INTRODUCTION 

1

 Charles B. Hunt, Natural Regions of the United States and Canada (San 

Francisco (CA: W.H.Freeman and Company, 1967) 260. 

2

 William G. Thomas III, "The Chesapeake Bay," Southern Spaces, April 16, 2004, 

http://southernspaces.org/contents/2004/thomas/2b.htm. 

3

 Congress, House, Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park Act, 107Th 

Cong., Public Law 107-373 (Dec. 19, 2002): 16 USC 410iii. 

4

 Clarence R. Geier, et al. An Overview and Assessment of Archaeological Resources 

and Landscapes within Lands Managed by Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National 

Historical Park: Volume One (Harrisonburg, VA: Department of Sociology and 

Anthropology, James Madison University, 2006) 179-186. 
 LAND USE HISTORY

17 

Figure 0.1: A map identifying the geography of the State of Virginia. The Shenandoah Valley is contained within the upland valley and 

ridge systems. Source: Kuennecke, Bernd, An Atlas of Virginia: 17th, 18th, and Early 19th Centuries. (Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt, 1989)
18

LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK
Frederick County Shenandoah

Co

unty

Freder ci k County

Warren County

S

eh nandoah River

I-66

Middletown

Cedar Creek

55 I-81

11

Land Use History Plan

Cedar Creek and Belle 

Grove National Historical 

Park

Frederick, Warren, and Shenandoah 

Counties, Virginia 

Ownership Map

Drawing 0.1

National Park Service

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation

http://www.nps.gov/oclp/

SOURCES

1. 2002 Aerial Photography, Virginia

2. National Park Service

NOTES

Locations and scale of features are 

approximate. Plan drawn using ArcMap GIS 

9.1 and Adobe Indesign 3.0 by Mike Commisso, 

January 2007.

LEGEND 0 .375 .75

Miles

Railroads

CountyLines

ParkBoundary

Water

Quarry

Road

BuildingsandStructures

NationalParkService

PartnerPreserved

Private

Norfolk Southern Railway

CSX Railroad

Strasburg

LAND USE HISTORY

 21 

LAND USE HISTORY 

PRE-HISTORY TO THE BATTLE OF CEDAR CREEK 

Indigenous peoples developing from the nomadic hunters of the 8000 B.C PaleoIndian Period occupied Virginia’s landscape for more than a thousand years 

before the arrival of Europeans. By the early seventeenth century, English 

settlements began appearing in Virginia’s coastal Tidewater region, the first being 

Jamestown in 1607. Conflicts with Europeans and introduced diseases, 

eventually led to the disappearance or relocation of Native Americans in 

Virginia.1

 

The Virginia government encouraged settlement beyond the reach of the tides 

after 1690 in an effort to secure land against French encroachment and Native 

Americans in the mountains west and north. Once considered part of the 

Virginia backcountry, the first settlements near the study area of this report were 

located within the northern Shenandoah Valley near the Opequon Creek during 

the 1730s. Utilizing the sites and travel corridors previously chosen by Native 

Americans, a mix of ethnic and national groups settled the Valley. English 

settlers comprised only a fraction of settlement, which was predominately ScotsIrish and German origin.2

 

Historian Warren Hofstra, author of The Planting of New Virginia-Settlement and 

Landscape in the Shenandoah Valley, describes the character of the Scots-Irish 

and German immigrants: 

They came from diversified small-farm economies in Europe, and they 

migrated as families. In the New World their desire for a competence in 

landholding combined with modest means to generate communities of 

yeoman freeholders who took up and developed middling-sized tracts of 

land. They created socially and economically integrated settlements 

with dense networks of kinship, trade, and religious affiliation....This 

same group had also adopted measures encouraging white servant 

immigration and restricting the importation of black slaves, assuming 

that its new population of small farmers would depend on family, not 

slave, labor on the frontier.3

By the late 1730s, westward settlement led to the creation of Frederick and 

Augusta counties.4

 Shenandoah and Warren counties, originally part of 

Frederick County, were formed in 1772 and 1836, respectively. 

Eventually, relations with North American colonists and the British crown 

deteriorated, leading to the American Revolution in 1775. The war provoked 

economic, political, and social change. Although slavery continued to be 

supported by law in Virginia, the U.S. Congress prohibited the importation of 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

 22 

slaves beginning in 1807. This change minimally impacted the Shenandoah 

Valley as slavery was not as prevalent.5

Improvements to the state’s transportation networks allowed many Virginia 

counties and towns to prosper during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth 

centuries (Figure 1.0). As a result of improved roads, the subsistence farms of the 

Shenandoah Valley were able to transport cash crops to regional markets. Towns 

became centers for commerce and the number of gristmills increased. However, 

the economic stability of the state and Valley region would eventually weaken as 

Midwestern agricultural in the Ohio River Valley began to thrive.6

 

Throughout the nineteenth century, slavery continued to be at the forefront of 

controversy eventually leading to civil war. Over 123 battles would be fought on 

Virginia soil, and the aftermath resulted in landscape devastation. The 

Shenandoah Valley, considered the breadbasket of the Confederacy, was made 

into a wasteland.7

THE CIVIL WAR AND SHENANDOAH VALLEY LANDSCAPE 

In determining the significance of a cultural landscape, characteristics and 

associated features including, natural systems and features, land use, circulation, 

topography, vegetation, buildings and structures, and small-scale features are 

analyzed and evaluated. Commanding officers, prior to battle also analyze the 

landscape according to similar characteristics, commonly referred to by its 

modern acronym of KOCOA, which stands for key terrain, observation, cover 

and concealment, obstacles and avenues of approach: 

 Key terrain: Features, such as high ground, which must be 

controlled in order to achieve military success. 

 Obstacles: Features, such as swamps and ravines, which protect 

the defender and/or impede the attacker; 

 Cover and concealment: Areas where elements of an army may 

be placed without detection or fear of direct or indirect fire, 

such as woods, buildings and man-made fortifications, even tall 

grass or crop land; 

 Observation: Viewshed areas, such as high ground or buildings 

providing vantage points for observation of enemy movements; 

 Avenues of approach and retreat: Landscape features such as 

roads, lanes, and areas that allow effective movement of troops 

during assaults or retreat.8

Although not referred to by this twentieth century acronym during the Civil War, 

these basic principles of analyzing the terrain were used by military officers 

during the Battle of Cedar Creek. 
LAND USE HISTORY

 23 

The natural, man-made and topographic features of the Shenandoah Valley were 

significant to the outcome of the battle. The rolling topography, including Pout’s 

Hill, Stickley Hill, Hupp’s Hill and Three Top Mountain, also referred to as 

Signal Knob, allowed military leaders to survey and observe the surroundings and 

plan strategy. The existing road network, including the Valley Turnpike, 

provided an efficient means of transporting soldiers up and down the Valley. 

While Cedar Creek and the Shenandoah River formed a natural defensive wall 

with steep ravines and slopes, the fords and bridges that were originally built for 

agricultural and residential needs of the communities served as crossing points 

for both armies. As a result, fords influenced the location of defensive 

earthworks. The forested areas within the Shenandoah Valley provided an area 

of concealment, and the presence of open farmlands supported the large number 

of troops, allowing them to gather for battle. Many of the buildings and 

structures within the Valley were used as war time housing, headquarters, or field 

hospitals. Wood fences were occasionally disassembled to build shelters and 

crude defenses.9

 

The following brief account of the events leading to the Battle of Cedar Creek, 

the battle itself, and its conclusion, is presented to highlight the role of the 

landscape in the battle. Staff Rides: A Self-Guided Tour of the Battle of Cedar 

Creek, by Joseph Whitehorne, provides detailed information on troop positions 

and movements during the battle. It can be found at http://www.army.mil/cmhpg/books/staff-rides/cedarcreek/ccfm.htm . 

The Valley Campaign and Prelude to Battle 

In addition to the Shenandoah Valley’s natural alignment from southwest to 

northeast, the Valley Pike road provided a perfect Confederate avenue of 

approach to Federal positions, as well as a large food supply for southern 

soldiers. It was imperative for Federal forces to gain control of the Valley.10

As early as March 18, 1862, battles were fought in the Shenandoah Valley, with 

some occurring within the future boundaries of the study area. Under the 

leadership of Thomas Jonathon “Stonewall” Jackson, and later General Jubal 

Early, the Confederates dominated the Shenandoah Valley early in the war. 

However, Confederate power eventually weakened when Union General, 

Ulysses S. Grant, consolidated Federal forces in the Valley from Maryland, West 

Virginia, and northern Virginia and placed General Philip H. Sheridan in 

command. According to Michael Mahon’s, The Shenandoah Valley 1861-1865, 

instructions to Sheridan from Grant were as follows: 

In pushing [south] up the Shenandoah Valley...it is desirable that 

nothing should be left to invite the enemy to return. Take all provisions, 

forage and stock wanted for the use of your command. Such as cannot 

be consumed, destroy...If the war is to last another year, we want the 

Shenandoah Valley to remain a barren waste.11 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

 24 

For over a month, small skirmishes would be fought between both armies. 

However, Early’s forces experienced a significant loss at the Third Battle of 

Winchester on September 19, 1864. Forced to retreat, Early was pushed back as 

far as Harrisonburg, with Federal forces following in pursuit. Assuming that 

Early and the Confederate soldiers were no longer a threat, General Sheridan 

ended his pursuit and withdrew northward, down the Valley, destroying all 

railroads, canals, mills, homes and crops (Figure 1.1). “The burning,” as it was 

later known, extended as far south as Staunton. Sheridan later reported on the 

destruction, commenting: 

...In moving back to this point, the whole country from the Blue Ridge 

to the North Mountain has been made entirely unattainable for a rebel 

army. I have destroyed over 2,000 barns filled with wheat and hay and 

farming implements; over seventy mills filled with flour and wheat; have 

driven in front of the army over 4,000 head of stock, and have killed and 

issued...to the troops not less than 3,000 sheep. This destruction 

embraces the Luray Valley and the Little Fort Valley as well as the Main 

Valley.12 

After days of destruction, the Federal army came to rest in positions on the north 

bank of Cedar Creek on October 10, 1864. On October 13, while on Hupp’s Hill, 

Jubal Early and the Confederate army opened fire on the Federals, causing many 

Union casualties. After intense fighting, Early pulled back to Fisher’s Hill, but 

continued to utilize Hupp’s Hill as an observation point to survey Federal activity 

near Belle Grove Plantation.13

Hupp’s Hill and a Signal Station on the top of Massanutten, or Three Top, 

Mountain provided excellent opportunities for General Early to observe the 

Union camps and positions situated along Cedar Creek and Belle Grove (Figure 

1.3). In preparation for a future attack, Early realized that the majority of 

Sheridan’s troops were stationed along the western edge of the Valley, due to the 

rough terrain located on the east. Early directed Confederate forces to attack the 

weak eastern flank of the General’s army and raid Belle Grove in order to capture 

Sheridan who, unbeknownst to them, had left for Washington (Figure 1.4). 

On October 18, 1864, General Early formulated a three-pronged attack. The left 

column, under General Wharton, traveled to Hupp’s Hill to wait for attacks that 

would soon follow east of Cedar Creek. The middle column, under General 

Kershaw, was sent northeast from Strasburg across Pout’s Hill to the Bowman’s 

Mill ford. The right column, under General Gordon, traveled east across the 

Shenandoah River via the Manassas Railroad bridge south of Strasburg to a small 

trail on the northern side of the Massanutten Mountain. Gordon’s army 

followed the trail and eventually moved into position at Bowman’s and 

McInturff’s fords. Pout’s Hill concealed the movement of Confederate forces 

from Union soldiers.14 
LAND USE HISTORY

 25 

The Battle of Cedar Creek (Figure 1.5) 

At 5:00 am on October 19, 1864, General Early’s forces simultaneously attacked 

the Federal army. The middle column crossed Bowman’s Mill ford and attacked 

the high ground south of the Valley Turnpike and Thoburn’s Run containing 

Union trenches dug into the crest of a ridge facing Bowman’s Mill ford, due east 

of Hupp’s Hill (Figures 1.6 and 1.7). Following the attack, they surprised a small 

Union encampment positioned north of Thoburn’s Run, at the crest of another 

ridge, close to the Valley Pike (Figure 1.8). The locations of the earthwork and 

encampment, as labeled on Drawing 1.0, were strategically placed to provide 

points to observe Confederate movement along Harmony Hall ford, Bowman 

Mill ford, and the Valley Pike (Figure 1.9). However, as these positions were 

raided by Confederate forces, the steep topography became an obstacle, making 

it difficult for the Federal soldiers to escape. As a result, there were many Union 

casualties at the onset of the battle. 

As the middle column attacked the Union army positioned near Thoburn’s Run, 

the right column crossed McInturff’s and Bowman’s fords, approached 

northward on Long Meadow Lane and attacked a second Union camp, located in 

an open area east of the Valley Pike, approximately in the same location where 

Interstate 81 currently crosses over County Route 840. 

Advancing from the west, past the Stickley House and Mill to the Cedar Creek 

Bridge (Figure 1.10), General Early and the left column eventually joined with the 

two other Confederate forces and surrounded a third Union camp on high 

ground west of the Valley Pike (Figure 1.11). With assistance from other troops, 

stationed in multiple areas around Meadow Brook and the Red Hills, the Union 

army regrouped to defend against Confederate attacks. Bordering the heavily 

wooded western edge of the large Union camp, an extensive line of earthworks 

were constructed on high bluffs overlooking possible avenues of approach 

including, the Valley Pike, Hite Road, Cedar Creek Bridge and Hottle’s ford. 

Along the southern edge, positions were formed without entrenchments, parallel 

to the Valley Pike. As quoted in The Guns of Cedar Creek by Thomas Lewis, the 

following observation, although not completely accurate as noted in brackets by 

Clarence Geier, was made by a Confederate officer of the earthworks 

constructed at the Union encampment: 

The enemy’s breastworks were built of strong timbers with earth thrown 

against them with a deep trench on the inside, being deeper from the 

bottom of the trench to the top of the works than the height of the 

soldiers when standing. Thus a step of three or four feet was built for the 

troops to stand on and fire. The breastworks wound in and out with the 

creek, some places jutting out almost to the very brink; at others, several 

hundred yards in the rear, a level piece of bottom land intervening. This 

ridge and plateau were some fifty feet or more above the level of the 

creek and gave elegant position for batteries. In front of this breastwork, 

and from forty to fifty feet in breadth, was an abatis constructed of pine 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

 26 

trees, the needles stripped, the limbs cut and pointed five to ten feet from 

the trunks. These were packed and stacked side by side on top of each 

other, being almost impossible for a single man even to pick his way 

through, and next to impossible for a line of battle to cross over. All 

along the entire length of the fortifications were built great redoubts or 

earthworks in the form of squares [none were identified by survey], the 

earth being of sufficient thickness to turn any of our canon balls, while 

all around was a ditch from twelve to fifteen feet deep-only one opening 

in the rear large enough to admit the teams drawing the batteries [this 

may actually refer to the presence of a series of deep sinkholes lying 

behind the earthworks near the south end]. Field pieces were posted at 

each angle, the infantry, when needed, filled the space between...This I 

believe was one of the most completely fortified positions by nature, as 

well as by hand, of any line occupied during the war.15

Although, earthworks were designed to enhance artillery and military control, 

the natural slopes and limestone sinkholes found north of the Valley Pike were 

also used as defensive features. 

By 7:30 am, the Confederate forces had driven the Federal forces to positions 

centered near Belle Grove (Figures 1.12 and 1.13). As the battle ensued, the 

Federal army deployed into three divisions. Located along the northern edge of 

Valley Pike, in areas near the Solomon Heater House and Meadow Brook, the 

first and second divisions held this key terrain for hours before retreating a mile 

northwest of Middletown (Figures 1.14 and 1.15) . The second division, having 

been forced northward to a partially wooded hillcrest that served as the 

Middletown cemetery, single handedly fought against the onslaught of 

Confederate forces, before withdrawing to newly established Union lines beyond 

Middletown.16 Theodore Mahr, author of The Battle of Cedar Creek, provides the 

following description of the fighting at Cemetery Hill and supplies an excellent 

example of how the landscape and its features are critical to warfare: 

Although Getty’s plans for hitting the Rebel flank had been frustrated, 

his retrograde movement to Cemetery Hill proved to be a blessing in 

disguise. The hill was semi-circular in shape with steep, rugged wooded 

slopes bordering Meadow Brook on the southeastern side next of 

Middletown, and a long, coverless approach across marsh ground 

directly to the south. Curving back to the north, the crest of the hill was 

covered with thick woods and overlooked the broad, open valley of 

Middle Marsh Run. At the summit of the hill near the southwestern 

crest lay the Middletown cemetery. From this location the Federals 

could command the Valley Pike, which passed through Middletown a 

half mille to the east. Therein lay the second advantage for Getty now 

found himself in precisely the right position to form the nucleus of a line 

of battle facing southwest while at the same time controlling the Pike... 

As Getty’s Yankees assumed their position along the top of the hill, they 

hurriedly prepared to receive an attack. Some of the troops...began to 

erect crude breastworks of logs and rails. A portion of the Vermont 

brigade found the remnants of a low stone wall running along the right 

of their line and used it to gain some needed protection.17

With the return of General Sheridan from Winchester, the morale of the Union 

soldiers was lifted and the lines were combined and rebuilt. Now facing each 
LAND USE HISTORY

 27 

other, perpendicular to the Valley Pike, Sheridan and the Federal forces engaged 

in a counterattack against the Confederate forces of Gordon, Kershaw and 

Ramseur. With assistance from Custer’s Federal cavalry, the Confederate forces 

weakened and eventually withdrew southward in the direction of Stickley and 

Hupp’s Hills (Figure 1.16). 

As it was for the Union soldiers early in the battle, the ravines, marshy grounds, 

and steep walls of Cedar Creek became barriers and obstacles to the retreating 

Confederate forces. With the Stickley house now serving as a hospital, the 

Confederate forces attempted to fight back, but Early eventually lost control as 

his forces dissolved in an effort to escape the Federal pursuit. Reforming at 

Fisher’s Hill, Jubal Early and the Confederate army retreated southward before 

dawn the next day, ending Confederate military control of the Shenandoah 

Valley (Figure 1.17).18 

SHENANDOAH VALLEY LANDSCAPE FEATURES 

Land use 

Prior to European settlement, the Shenandoah Valley consisted of forests, 

thickets, bottomland meadows and clearings caused by natural and cultural 

factors. As described in early accounts of the Shenandoah Valley, oaks and 

hickories comprised the majority of the forest and the more fertile soils, and 

pines and conifers were found scattered throughout in barren sandy soils.19 

 

During various stages of forest succession in the Valley, the forest understory, 

meadows and clearings produced thickets. Based on traveler accounts, 

thickets consisted of grape vines, ivy, laurel, briars and various perennials. 

During his exploration across the Blue Ridge near Chester Gap and north 

along Opequon Creek, John Bartram observed and named beautiful flowers 

including, Jacea, Gratiola, Dracocephalon, Chrysanthemums, and asters.20 

While there is uncertainty to their origins, bottomland meadows and clearings 

found within the Valley may have been created by Native Americans, soil 

compaction by eastern woodland buffalo, elk and other herd animals attracted to 

salt springs, periodic flooding, accidental fire or severe storms. An early 

eighteenth century traveler’s account drew a similar conclusion: 

The whole country is a perfect forest, except where the woods are 

cleared for plantations, and old fields, and where have been formerly 

Indian towns, and poisoned fields and meadows, where the timber has 

been burnt down in fire-hunting or otherwise; and about the creeks and 

rivers are large rank morasses or marshes, and up the country are poor 

savannahs.21

These openings in the forest were of great value to Native Americans and 

European settlers, who used them to locate dwellings, grow crops and raise 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

 28 

livestock. Native Americans typically grew corn, beans and squash, while ScotsIrish and German settlers grew wheat, rye, barley, oats, corn, flax, hemp and 

tobacco.22 Wheat and rye, the principal bread grains of the early settlers, were 

sown in the fall and harvested in the early summer. Corn was grown in the spring 

for pigs and used for making cornbread and corncakes. Barley, oats, flax, hemp, 

and tobacco were planted in the spring and harvested in late summer. Barley was 

used for beer and ale, flax for linen production, and oats were for the horses. 

Because tobacco functioned as an export and means of currency in the early 

colonial economy, attempts were made to grow it in the valley as early as 1740. 

However, tobacco cultivation was not favored within the agrarian cultures of 

German and Irish immigrants. As a result, it scarcely penetrated the Shenandoah 

Valley.23 

Hemp initially provided the motivation for the increasing market development. 

Military need for cordage created the demand for hemp and the first commercial 

opportunity for farmers. However, after 1760, with an increase in foreign 

demand and higher prices to offset the considerable transportation costs, wheat 

began to carry valley farmers to a new level of surplus production. By 1800, the 

Shenandoah Valley was the leading wheat producing region in Virginia.24 

Although the emphasis in agricultural production evolved over time from a 

locally contained agricultural economy to a regionally based market, grain and 

livestock farming remained an integral component of the landscape throughout 

the nineteenth century. 

Forest land was essential to building and hunting, however many settlers viewed 

these lands as a hindrance to agriculture. By the end of the 18th century, onethird or more of the forested areas had been cleared for agricultural purposes. In 

1796, Isaac Weld observed: 

The neighborhood of Winchester it is so thickly settled, and 

consequently so much cleared, that wood is now beginning to be 

thought valuable; the farmers are obliged frequently to send ten or 

fifteen miles even for their fence rails. It is only, however, in this 

particular neighborhood that the country is so much improved; in other 

places there are immense tracts of woodlands still remaining, and in 

general the hills are all left uncleared.25

 

As settlements grew within the Valley, marshes were drained for agricultural 

purposes, eventually resulting in natural wet meadows reverting to woodland. As 

these land uses shifted, the landscape of the Shenandoah Valley remained a 

mosaic of open and wooded land. 

Circulation 

Previously used by Native Americans as a migratory route and hunting grounds, 

the major northeast-southwest route through the Shenandoah Valley, known as 
LAND USE HISTORY

 29 

the “Great Wagon Road,” became a major transportation corridor for European 

settlers. Because of its importance, many settlements were developed along the 

former Native American trail (Figure 1.18). On March 3, 1834, the Valley 

Turnpike Company was incorporated by the Virginia General Assembly, 

authorizing the construction of a new turnpike from Winchester to 

Harrisonburg, a distance of sixty-eight miles. The turnpike, funded by privatepublic investment, was surfaced with crushed stone macadam pavement and 

eventually merged with a similar road from Harrisonburg to Staunton to 

comprise the “Valley Pike.” Eventually spanning a distance of ninety-three miles, 

stockholders of the Valley Pike charged tolls for its maintenance (Figure 1.19). 

During the Civil War, the road was instrumental in transporting artillery and 

soldiers through the Valley. Evidence of its importance is evident by the great 

number of battlefields located along its length. 

From its beginnings, the Valley Turnpike served as the spine for transportation 

within the Shenandoah Valley. Eventually, roads would branch out from it to 

form a network of transportation corridors, connecting settlements with 

individual farms, industries and crossroads leading to major cities (Figure 1.20). 

In Virginia, most railroads built before the Civil War were located east of the Blue 

Ridge Mountains and designed to connect the Piedmont to the tidewater cities of 

eastern Virginia. Early railroads built in the Valley included the Baltimore and 

Ohio Railroad (B&O) connection built in 1834 to Harpers Ferry and the 

Winchester and Potomac Railroad connection from Winchester to the B&O in 

Harpers Ferry in 1836. The Manassas Gap Railroad, which figured in the Civil 

War, was built in 1854. The majority of the Shenandoah Valley remained 

underserved by railroads until after the Civil War. As the sole authority issuing 

railroad charters in the state, the Virginia General Assembly was reluctant to have 

Shenandoah Valley products shipped via the B&O to northern markets. 

Merchants in Alexandria and Richmond benefited from Shenandoah Valley 

agriculture and were able to deter construction of a transportation system that 

would compete with their economic interests. Eastern Virginia continued to be 

politically dominant, and its elected leaders were able to restrict the expansion of 

economic outlets for Shenandoah Valley products until after the Civil War.26

Building and Settlement Patterns 

Prior to early colonial settlement, the Shenandoah Valley had been occupied by 

various native groups, including the Shawnee, the Susquehannocks, numerous 

eastern Siouan groups, Catawba’s, Cherokees, the various members of the Six 

Nations, the Delaware, and the Creeks. Used as a central topographic corridor 

for travel, migration, hunting and planting, Native Americans habitation was 

apparent throughout the valley from the landscape features found there by 

European settlers. These features included old fields, mounds, graves and fire-
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

 30 

cleared forests. Following Native American precedents, European settlers 

located their dwellings within open areas near rivers and streams, occupying 

terraces adjoining the flood plains.In several instances, Europeans located their 

settlements on abandoned Native American sites.27 

 

Typical dwellings built in the Shenandoah Valley by early Scots-Irish and 

German settlers were rectangular and relatively small log structures with small 

adjoining fields containing gardens and crops. The bottomlands were cleared for 

use as meadows and fences were built to protect crops from free ranging 

livestock.28 Early fence types were mainly post and rail, but the snake fence 

which consisted of a zigzag of interlocking wood rails, was commonly used 

throughout the Shenandoah Valley by the end of the eighteenth century (Figure 

1.21). Eventually, log structures were replaced by limestone and wood frame 

structures. 

As commodities were produced, processing occurred simultaneously through the 

development of milling operations. In 1738, there were at least 34 gristmills 

within the Shenandoah Valley and by 1775 there were at least 100 mills located 

on waterways, with the majority found along the Shenandoah River.29 

Trade and commerce eventually spurred the development of a town and country 

landscape within the Shenandoah Valley. Unlike tobacco economies, grain 

economies required specialists involved with processing, storing, or transporting 

flour. These specialists, along with merchants, clustered in backcountry towns, 

including Winchester. By 1800, approximately twenty-seven towns would exist 

within the Shenandoah Valley, creating the distinctive landscape of enclosed 

farms and market towns (Figure 1.22).30 

Views and Vistas 

During the Civil War, views and vistas were important to military strategy. In 

preparation of a future attack on Union soldiers, confederate General Clement A. 

Evans made this observation in a letter to his wife while atop Three Top 

Mountain: 

What a splendid sight was before me...The vision was limited by the 

Blue ridge on the right, the Alleghanies on the left and before you it 

melted far off into a hazy horizon....So elevated is the position that the 

valley presented the appearance of a vast level plain, the highest hills 

scarcely undertaking [sic] its surface. The Valley pike, like a white 

ribbon lay along the center, the country roads looked like foot paths, the 

woods like parks and the field like little gardens with nice fences 

dividing....The interest of the scene was of course heightened by the full 

view presented of the enemy’s camp. Nearly every tent was visible. We 

were able to locate precisely his cavalry, his artillery, his infantry and his 

wagon train. We could see precisely where he had run his line of 

entrenchments and where they stopped. Even the house where Sheridan 

made his headquarters was pointed out. There all was with the roads 

leading to it, the place where he could be bet [sic] attacked and how the 
LAND USE HISTORY

 31 

lines could move, how far to go and what to do, - just like a large map. I 

believe that we can literly [sic] route them if we attack their left flank. 

Tonight we will probably move...”31

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA IN 1864 

Based on Gillespie’s Battlefields of Fisher’s Hill and Cedar Creek and Hotchkiss’ 

The Battle of Belle Grove or Cedar Creek maps, approximately thirty-eight percent 

of the study area was forested, with the majority of woodlands found within the 

southern portion of the study area. The majority of the landscape encompassed 

by the legislated boundary of the Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National 

Historical Park was agricultural at the end of 1864, encompassing fifty-eight 

percent of the total acreage with orchards consisting of approximately three 

percent. 

A network of roads connected residential, industrial and agricultural land uses. 

The Valley Pike physically divided the landscape into two halves. The road 

served as the major north-south transportation corridor for early settlers, as well 

as soldiers during the Civil War. Dispersed along the turnpike, was Belle Grove 

plantation, the Solomon Heater farm and the Daniel Stickley farm and mill. 

Middletown appears to the north and Strasburg, with the Manassas Gap 

Railroad, is located to the south, along the Shenandoah River. Although not 

within the study area, the Manassas Gap Railroad played a pivotal role during the 

Civil War by providing an avenue of approach for both Confederate and Union 

armies (Drawing 1.0). 

South of the Valley Pike, roads physically connecting settlements and mills 

included Long Meadow Lane, Bowman Road and Hite Road. Settlements found 

in the area included the J.A. Baldwin farm, McInturf farm (Hottle house), Long 

Meadow, Widow Bowman farm, Harmony Hall, C.I. Hite (Whitham) house and 

Bowman’s Mill.32 Adjoining these settlement clusters were open areas that 

produced grains and supported livestock. To the north of the Valley Pike, a 

network of roads which included, Belle Grove Lane, Hite Road, Old Forge Road, 

and Miller Lane connected the Miller, Ridenour, and Hottle farmsteads and mills 

to the surrounding settlements (Drawing 1.0).33

The location for historic farmsteads and settlements within the legislated park 

boundary was directly related to their close proximity to the Shenandoah River 

and its tributaries, including Cedar Creek and Meadow Brook. Many of the 

larger dwellings were constructed of limestone, which implies the existence of 

quarries or natural outcroppings. While documentation has not been found to 

indicate the local presence of industrial quarries in 1864, small quarry pits have 

been identified at Belle Grove Plantation (Drawing 1.0). 

 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

 32 

Small family cemeteries existed on the C.I. Hite (Whitham), Harmony Hall, Long 

Meadow, and Belle Grove properties. In addition, there were two cemeteries 

within the study area in 1864. The Middletown cemetery, referred to as Mt. 

Carmel, was located in the northeast section of the park and occupied key 

terrain, instrumental in the successful Union counterattack. An unidentified 

cemetery was located on Belle Grove/Long Meadow Lane. Although both 

cemeteries were used to bury Civil War soldiers, the unidentified cemetery may 

have been used solely for this purpose (Drawing 1.0). 

Throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, spectacular views of the 

Blue Ridge Mountains, Massanutten Mountain, Appalachian and Allegheny 

Plateaus, Hupps Hill, Pouts Hill, Stony Hill, and Stickley Hill could be obtained 

from within the boundaries of the study area. During the Civil War, views to and 

from these areas were critical in providing vantage points for observation of 

enemy movement. 
LAND USE HISTORY

 33 

POST WAR TO THE GREAT DEPRESSION 

Having been the scene of so much fighting, there was widespread devastation 

throughout the Virginia landscape. Although Sheridan’s methodical burnings are 

credited with the destruction of the Shenandoah Valley, the Valley was already 

experiencing problems by 1862. “The country is almost destitute of every kind of 

forage or subsistence, for it has been full of armies for a long time,” observed 

Jedediah Hotchkiss, the Confederate army’s topographic engineer, while from an 

encampment at Bunker Hill, 12 miles north of Winchester.34 

With exception to an increase in wheat production, livestock raising and major 

field crop production in the Valley decreased between 1860 and 1870 (Figure 

1.2)35. However, Virginia and the Shenandoah Valley eventually recovered, 

embracing economic development and technological advances that were 

revolutionizing everyday life. Although Virginia remained predominately 

agricultural, increasing numbers of Virginians became employed by others in 

tobacco factories, coal mines, and textile, flour, and lumber mills.36

By the late 1870s, tourism was becoming increasingly important to the state, as 

well as to the Shenandoah Valley. Due to growing prosperity, wealthy persons 

built dwellings as seasonal homes. Summer hotels and spas were visited by those 

seeking fresh air and outdoor recreation. During the early twentieth century, 

Virginia leaders sought the establishment of a national park to attract tourists. In 

1926, Congress accepted the donation of lands acquired by the Commonwealth 

of Virginia and authorized the establishment of Shenandoah National Park in 

1935.37

Despite economic growth and technological innovations, the state digressed 

when confronted with political and social change. During Reconstruction, 

African Americans made some social and economic progress. However, with the 

return of sovereignty to local officials after 1876, almost all gains were lost. State 

laws sanctioned a lower, subservient class and enforced rigid racial segregation.38 

SHENANDOAH VALLEY LANDSCAPE FEATURES 

Land use 

Though grain and livestock production recovered, Shenandoah Valley farmers 

could hardly begin to compete with large farms in the Midwest and the Plains 

states. With the introduction of the refrigerator car in 1887, distant fruit growing 

regions were now able to compete in local markets closer to major cities. By the 

early twentieth century, there was a phenomenal rise in fruit production in the 

Shenandoah Valley, with apples replacing wheat as the primary cash crop. 

According to an article taken from the report of the sixteenth annual session of 

the Virginia State Horticultural Society, The Outlook for Fruit Growing in Virginia
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

 34 

by S.W. Fletcher, the rush of enthusiasm in apple production often led many 

individuals to plant in unfavorable locations or in unsuitable soils: 

Large orchards have been planted on soils that have not been proved 

adapted to apples. Orchards have been planted on low-lying lands 

where the blossoms will be cut off by frost. In the Valley of Virginia 

hundreds of acres of apples have been planted on soils that should never 

be used for anything but farm crops like corn, wheat and grass. I have 

heard some enthusiastic fruit growers predict that the whole 

Shenandoah Valley will soon be one vast orchard. I hope not. It is for 

the best interest of any section that its agriculture be diversified. The 

heavy clay soils of the Valley, especially those lying low, are naturally 

better adapted for wheat, corn, and grass, than for fruit. The ridges, with 

shale and gravel limestone soils, and good air drainage, are excellent for 

fruit, but poorer for general farm crops. It is wise economy, therefore, to 

plant fruit only on the ridges and uplands, and to keep the valley lands in 

farm crops. I hope the time will never come when more than five per 

cent of the arable land of the Valley is in orchard.39

 

As a result of the increase in apple production, many facilities were developed to 

support apple production and processing. Other factories included, tanneries, 

furniture making shops, foundries, hatcheries, textile mills, meat packaging 

houses, limekilns and bottling establishments. 

While fruit production was the most profitable, many farmers had supplementary 

work that did not compete with the fruit crop. Live stock farming, which 

included dairying, poultry and hog raising, was the most preferred because of the 

manure it brought.40 John Wayland’s, A Bird’s Eye View of the Shenandoah Valley, 

provides the following observation: 

Within the last decade or two the poultry business of the Shenandoah 

Valley has reached marvelous proportions. Nearly every farm 

supplements its income and more than often doubles it with poultry and 

eggs. Some of the largest poultry and egg shipping houses in the United 

States are to be found in the Shenandoah Valley. Dairy farming and the 

breeding of fine cattle, horses, hogs, and sheep have tremendous 

development in recent years.41

In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the mineral resources of the 

Valley were increasingly sought after and developed. Mining for iron ore, 

manganese, brownstone, sandstone, china clay, tin ore, limestone, and shale 

became an important industry to the Shenandoah Valley, resulting in the 

development of many industrial quarries. According to Thomas Bruce, author of 

Southwest Virginia and Shenandoah Valley: 

...In days gone by, before the many mineral resources were developed at 

all, there were charcoal furnaces about...and now new furnaces are 

being constructed in many places in the Valley to use these deposits of 

iron ore, and at no place that we know of can limestone for fluxing be 

gotten so cheaply as in the valley.42 
LAND USE HISTORY

 35 

Circulation 

In 1918, the Valley Turnpike was incorporated into the first state highway system. 

Designated initially as State Route 3, and later changed to U.S. 11 in 1926, the 

road remained the regional north-south thoroughfare throughout the midtwentieth century. Besides its numerous name changes, physical modifications to 

U.S. 11 occurred throughout twentieth century. Initially an earthen path, the 

road would eventually be widened and paved with crushed stone and later 

resurfaced with macadam (Figures 1.23 and 1.24). 

 

During Reconstruction, charters were obtained to build additional railroad lines 

through the entire length of the valley. This allowed for the formation of two 

companies, the Valley Railroad and the Shenandoah Valley Railroad. While both 

were competitors, both companies shared a similar vision, “constructing a 

railroad system that would assist communities in their recovery from the 

economic and financial devastation of the Civil War.”43 With limited monetary 

resources, the two companies sought assistance from outside resources. The 

B&O Railroad, which leased the Winchester and Strasburg Railroad, sponsored 

the Valley Railroad and the Pennsylvania Railroad sponsored the Shenandoah 

Valley Railroad. The B&O and Pennsylvania systems, which were generally 

oriented in an east-west direction, had begun to expand their systems in the 

Northeast and Midwest and desired to expand into the South. In 1880, the 

Shenandoah Valley Railroad was completed from Hagerstown, Maryland to 

Waynesboro, Virginia. By 1890, the railroad system would fall under the new 

ownership of Norfolk and Western Railway (N&W). By 1883, the Valley 

Railroad was completed from Staunton, Virginia to Lexington, Virginia. The 

Valley railroad was constructed on the west flank of the Massanutten Mountain, 

while the Shenandoah Valley Railroad was located along the east side (Figure 

1.25).44 

Building and Settlement Patterns 

There was a tremendous building boom in Virginia and the Valley during the late 

nineteenth century. In addition to new construction, older structures were often 

enlarged and renovated using modern building techniques and styles. New 

communities were also formed as a consequence of more advanced 

transportation systems and the development of the automobile.45

Views and Vistas 

Views available from the mountains and undulating topography were retained 

throughout the late nineteenthand early twentieth centuries, providing excellent 

opportunities to capture the sights of the Shenandoah Valley. The Scenic and 

Historical Guide to the Shenandoah Valley: A Handbook of Useful Information for 

Tourists and Students, by John Wayland, provides an insight on views in 1923: 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

 36 

At certain places in the Valley, by reason of elevation and outlook, the 

observer enjoys unusual advantages for extended view. From the hills 

along Cedar Creek, on the old battlefield, the outlook in every direction 

is magnificent.46

 

However, by the late 1930s, residential and commercial growth in the valley 

began to adversely impact the viewsheds within the valley.

SUMMARY: DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA IN 1937 

Based on 1937 aerial photography, thirty-six percent of the study area consisted 

of forested land. Along the uplands, south of the Valley Turnpike, these areas 

became fragmented from extensive clearing for agriculture and pasture use. 

Fields surrounding many previously identified settlements were enlarged and 

apple orchards and other plantations appeared throughout the study area. Fields 

encompassed fifty percent of the study area, while thirteen percent consisted of 

orchards (Drawing 1.1). 

The Valley Turnpike became U.S. 11 in 1926 and was realigned and widened in 

1929 (Figures 1.26-1.28). As a result of the realignment, the former Cedar Creek 

Bridge was abandoned and a new bridge was constructed down stream (Figures 

1.29 and 1.30). U.S. 11 continued to be the major north-south transportation 

corridor in 1937. Roads were abandoned south of U.S. 11. The majority of the 

transportation network was paved and improved (Drawing 1.1). 

In 1867, the Winchester to Strasburg railroad line was constructed north of U.S. 

11. The rail line eventually became part of the Baltimore and Ohio railroad 

network. Its location contributed to the establishment of the “Meadow Mills” 

community and the adjacent limestone quarries. Although early records indicate 

the presence of small-scale quarries in the early twentieth century (i.e. Conner 

Lime Kiln), quarry activity didn’t begin on an industrial scale until the after the 

1930s. By 1937, quarries accounted for ten acres of land outside of the study area 

boundaries (Drawing 1.1). 

Besides the small family cemeteries, Mt. Carmel cemetery remained as the only 

cemetery within the study area in 1937. Between 1864 and 1937, the cemetery 

grew larger in size. 

The northern portion of the study area experienced more growth by 1937. As 

Middletown grew, development occurred along U.S. 11 and secondary roads 

leading to Middletown. Along the southern portion of study area, development 

was limited to a few isolated areas. While individual properties within the study 

remained in existence, a majority changed ownership by 1937 (Drawing 1.1). 

Although residential and commercial development started to negatively impact 

viewshed areas in the valley by the late 1930s, uninterrupted views of the Blue 
LAND USE HISTORY

 37 

Ridge Mountains, Massanutten Mountain, Appalachian and Allegheny Plateaus 

and other notable features could still be observed from within the study area in 

1937. 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

 38 

THE GREAT DEPRESSION TO THE PRESENT 

As a result of World War II, shipbuilding, munitions manufacturing and 

administrative services, contributed to economic prosperity in Virginia and the 

Shenandoah Valley in the 1940s. As agricultural production became more 

mechanized, the retail and service sector industries flourished. 

Since the mid-1930s, increased development pressure has dramatically affected 

the agricultural output of Virginia and the Shenandoah Valley. Tourism 

continues to provide the economic stimulus to Virginia, generating billions of 

dollars per year. 

Within the civil rights movements, African Americans and women achieved 

significant victories politically and socially. Eventually, desegregation allowed 

African Americans greater access to public accommodations, including schools, 

restaurants, theatres and public transportation. The passage of the Civil Rights 

Act in 1964, eleven years after the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of 

Education, began the lengthy process of eliminating discrimination. It was a 

difficult process. Warren County public schools closed for several years as part 

of Virginia’s Massive Resistance program rather than to integrate, and progress 

on securing better employment opportunities was almost glacial. 

Based on the proliferation of automobiles following the end of World War II, the 

construction of the interstate highway system and decline of the railroads, the 

Virginia and Shenandoah Valley landscape has significantly changed. In previous 

periods, towns and villages were created because of their close proximity to 

transportation routes and natural resources, and development was compact. 

However, since the 1950s, large communities continued to develop near 

highways, but correspondingly elaborate systems of support facilities are 

established with them. As a result of the sprawl created by these transportation 

and support facilities, the historic resources and the natural environment in 

Virginia have become threatened.47 

SHENANDOAH VALLEY LANDSCAPE FEATURES 

Land use 

Agricultural production within the Shenandoah Valley started to diminish by the 

late 1940s. As documented in photographs taken by Marion Post Wolcott in the 

1940s, traditional farming practices were still employed and the rural character of 

the Valley remained evident (Figures 1.31 and 1.32).

48. While apple production 

continued as the major cash crop in the 1930s, the cultivation of vineyards and 

cattle-raising has currently become the predominant agricultural land use. 

The increase in suburban developments and limestone mining in the midtwentieth and early twenty- first centuries has led to detrimental impacts to the 
LAND USE HISTORY

 39 

Shenandoah Valley. These impacts which include reduced viewsheds and open 

space, increased traffic congestion, decreased air quality and water pollution, 

have resulted in piecemeal losses to the Valley’s natural beauty and rural and 

agricultural character. 

 

Building and Settlement Patterns 

As a result of substantial growth and the construction of the Interstate Highway 

System, the number of people moving to the Shenandoah Valley from the 

Washington Metropolitan area, Eastern Panhandle and Potomac Highlands of 

West Virginia and Western Maryland has significantly increased.49 Unlike 

traditional neighborhoods surrounding urban centers, development occurring in 

the Valley is typical of suburban sprawl. These areas are characterized by strip 

malls, fast food chains and large tracts of land devoted to low density, single 

family use with large expanses of green space. Isolated from the city, these areas 

are highly dependent on automobiles. 

Growth continues to occur in Middletown and Strasburg. Since the 1930s, 

population growth has occurred within the study area, specifically along the U.S. 

11 corridor and Hite Mill Road areas. 

Circulation 

The development of a nationwide system of “super” highways was first 

considered in 1938, but it wasn’t until 1956, under the Eisenhower 

administration, that the system was implemented. The following description 

from the Virginia Department of Transportation’s publication A History of Roads 

in Virginia-The Most Convenient Ways, provides an explanation of the new 

interstate system that would eventually span over 42,000 miles: 

 

Construction of this modern road network...involves many problems 

and radical changes in thought. Under the new program, interstate 

highways will be insulated from marginal traffic generated by motels, 

service stations, other types of businesses and dwellings. Traffic entering 

and leaving these highways will do so at designated points. Cross 

movements of traffic, with which we are so familiar, will be 

eliminated...The benefits of controlled-access construction are 

numerous. A modern, controlled-access road transforms, in many ways, 

the area through which it passes. Land values increase. This type of 

road promotes safety, saves travel time, reduces the strain on drivers and 

aids the economic development of the area. Controlled-access 

standards also protect the states investment in its highways.50 

In 1957, the construction of Interstate 81 and ensuing interstates, including 

Interstate 66, began. Although Interstate 81 was not complete in its entirety in 

Virginia until 1987, it passed through the entire Shenandoah Valley by 1971. 

In 1950, U.S. 11 was further realigned and continued to serve as the major 

transportation route until the late 1960s (Figure 1.33). Evidence of the frequent 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

 40 

realignments of U.S. 11 can be seen in the vicinity of the Stickley complex. In 

addition to its widening, the sharp curves in the road were straightened to 

support the increased traffic volumes and speeds (Figures 1.26-1.28). However, 

as a result of the interstate system, the U.S. 11 subsequently became a secondary 

transportation route. 

In the 1950s as investment was made in interstate trucking, the Baltimore and 

Ohio Railroad (B&O) faced financial hardship. In 1964, the Chesapeake and 

Ohio Railroad (C&O) took legal control over the B&O. However, it wasn’t until 

1987 that the B&O and C&O merged. A few months later the C&O itself was 

merged into the present CSX railroad system. 

Views and Vistas 

The views and vistas associated with the Shenandoah Valley are significant as 

they played a key role in its developmental history and the Civil War. However, 

within the last ten years, the construction of billboards, retail strip development, 

excessive quarrying and reforestation have diminished many sites and the 

significant views associated with them (Figures 1.34 and 1.35).51

SUMMARY: DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS 

Based on 2002 aerial photography, the study area remains rural in character, 

however, an increase in the scale of transportation corridors and development 

has changed the landscape. In 2002, forest lands consisted of approximately 

forty percent of the study area. Fields occupy fifty-five percent and orchards 

total approximately two percent of the total acreage of the study area. Although 

open fields encompass a greater percentage of acreage within the study area since 

1937, agricultural production has decreased substantially. As a result, there has 

been in an increase in forest succession. Apple production, vineyards serving 

local wineries and raising livestock comprise the major agricultural production 

within the study area. Since 1937, quarries have grown substantially, consisting 

of approximately 415 acres (Drawing 1.2). 52

Located east of U.S. 11, Interstate 81 has become the major transportation 

corridor and underlying agent of suburbanization within and adjoining the study 

area. Although new development is more dispersed within the park boundaries, 

outside of the boundaries, the increased population growth from the expansion 

of the Baltimore-Washington metropolitan area, has affected the areas near the 

Town of Strasburg, Middletown and I-81 and U.S. 11 interchange. This 

development has the potential to adversely affect the historic rural character of 

the landscape (Drawing 1.2).53

With the exception to the development pressures occurring from Strasburg into 

the lower southeast portion of the study area, the primary growth south of Route 

81 are widely scattered and found along Long Meadow Road, and Bowman Mill 
LAND USE HISTORY

 41 

Road. Realizing the importance in protecting the natural and cultural resources 

within Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park, preservation 

efforts by various park partners have initially begun in the southern portion of 

the park with the acquisition and establishment of conservation easements. 

Excellent views can still be obtained from within the study area. However, 

residential, commercial and industrial development outside the boundaries of the 

study area, have negatively impacted views to Hupps Hill, Stickley Hill and the 

Appalachian and Allegheny Plateaus. 

.

ENDNOTES FOR LAND USE HISTORY 

1 Contact and Conflict the Story of Virginia. The Virginia Historical Society. 

20 Sep 2006. <http://www.vahistorical.org/sva2003/new-southerners.htm>- 

2

 Warren R Hofstra, The Planting of New Virginia: Settlement and landscape in 

Shenandoah Valley (Baltimore, MD, The John Hopkins University Press: 2004) 7

3

 Ibid, 82-83. 

4

 Becoming Virginians-The Story of Virginia. The Virginia Historical Society. 

20 Sep 2006. <http://www.vahistorical.org/sva2003/new-southerners.htm> 

5

 Clement Eaton, History of the Old South (New York: The Macmillan Company, 

1967) 110-111. 

6

 Clarence Geier, et al., An Overview and Assessment of Archaeological Resources and 

Landscapes within Lands Managed by Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical 

Park. Volume I: Park History, Previous Research, Cultural Resources and Significant 

Historic Military and Domestic Themes, Threat to Resource, with Recommendations for 

Resource Management and Interpretation. (VA: James Madison University, 2006) p.123 

7

 Civil War Sites Advisory Commission, Civil War Sites Advisory Commission 

Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefields (U.S. Department of the Interior: 

National Park Service, 1993) 

8

 National Park Service, General Management Plan, Gettysburg National Military Park 

(United States Department of the Interior: June 1999) 45-47.

9

 Ibid, p.102-104. 

10 Joseph Whitehorne, Staff Rides: A Self-Guided Tour of the Battle of Cedar Creek, 

Center of Military History, United States Army, http://www.army.mil/cmhpg/books/staff-rides/cedarcreek/ccfm.htm (1992). 

11 Bruce Catton, Grant Takes Command: 1863-1865 (MA: Little, Brown and Co., 1968) 

342-343; quoted by Michael Mahon, The Shenandoah Valley 1861-1865: The 

Destruction of the Granary of the Confederacy (Stackpole Books, Mechanicsburg, P.A., 

2001) 114. 

 12 J.E. Norris, ed.,History of the Lower Shenandoah Valley Counties of Frederick, 

 Berkeley, Jefferson and Clarke, (Chicago: A. Warner and Co., 1890) 551. 

13 Joseph Whitehorne, Staff Rides: A Self-Guided Tour of the Battle of Cedar Creek, 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

 42 

Center of Military History, United States Army, http://www.army.mil/cmhpg/books/staff-rides/cedarcreek/ccfm.htm (1992). 

14 Clarence Geier and Phoebe Harding, An Overview and Assessment of 

Archaeological Resources and Landscapes within the Legislated Cedar Creek-Belle Grove 

National Historical Park. Volume II: The Cultural Resources Part I: Archaeological Sites 

and Cultural Features ( James Madison University, Virginia, 2006) p.34 

15 Captain D. Augustus Dickert (1864); quoted by Thomas Lewis, The Guns of Cedar 

Creek (New York: Bantam, Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, 1991), 179-180; 

Lewis’s quote of Dickert appears in Clarence Geier and Phoebe Harding, An 

Overview and Assessment of Archaeological Resources and Landscapes within the 

Legislated Cedar Creek-Belle Grove National Historical Park. Volume II: The 

Cultural Resources Part I: Archaeological Sites and Cultural Features ( James Madison 

University, Virginia, 2006) p.157.

16 Joseph Whitehorne, Staff Rides: A Self-Guided Tour of the Battle of Cedar Creek, 

Center of Military History, United States Army, http://www.army.mil/cmhpg/books/staff-rides/cedarcreek/ccfm.htm (1992). 

17 Theodore C. Mahr, The Battle of Cedar Creek, (Lynchburg, VA:H.E. Howard, 1992) 

233. 

18 Joseph Whitehorne, Staff Rides: A Self-Guided Tour of the Battle of Cedar Creek, 

Center of Military History, United States Army, http://www.army.mil/cmhpg/books/staff-rides/cedarcreek/ccfm.htm (1992). 

19 Warren R Hofstra, The Planting of New Virginia: Settlement and landscape in 

Shenandoah Valley, (Baltimore, MD, The John Hopkins University Press: 2004) 

p.125 

20 Robert D. Mitchell, European Settlement and Land-Cover Change: The 

Shenandoah Valley of Virginia During the 18th Century, (National Geographic 

Society, Grant #4381-90, 1993) 37. 

21 Hugh Jones, The Present State of Virginia, (Chapel Hill: University of North 

Carolina Press for the Virginia Historical Society, 1956): 74; quoted in Robert D. 

Mitchell, European Settlement and Land-Cover Change: The Shenandoah Valley of 

Virginia During the 18th Century, (National Geographic Society, Grant #4381-90, 

1993) 26. 

22 1850 United State Census. 

23 Robert D. Mitchell, Commercialism and Frontier: Perspectives on the Early 

Shenandoah Valley, (Virginia: University of Virginia, 1977) 137-139.

24 Warren R. Hofstra, “ Land Policy and Settlement in the Northern Shenandoah 

Valley.” In Appalachian: Frontiers Settlement, Society and Development in the PreIndustrial Era, ed. Robert D. Mitchell, (Kentucky: University of Kentucky, 1991) 117. 

25 Isaac Weld, Travels through the States of North America, 2 vols. (London: G. 

Robinson, 1784; New York: Johnson Reprint, 1968), 1:231, quoted in Robert D. 

Mitchell, European Settlement and Land-Cover Change: The Shenandoah Valley of 
LAND USE HISTORY

 43 

Virginia During the 18th Century, (National Geographic Society, Grant #4381-90, 

1993) 45-46. 

26 Ed, King, “Getting them up the Grade the Norfolk and Western Way”, Trains 

Magazine, April 2004, p.67 

27 Warren R Hofstra, The Planting of New Virginia: Settlement and landscape in 

Shenandoah Valley, (The John Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, Maryland, 2004) 

20-25. 

28 Ibid, p.38-39. 

29 Robert D. Mitchell, Commercialism and Frontier: Perspectives on the Early 

Shenandoah Valley, (Virginia: University of Virginia, 1977) 145. 

30 Warren R Hofstra, The Planting of New Virginia: Settlement and landscape in 

Shenandoah Valley, (The John Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, Maryland, 2004) 

285-288. 

31 Edward Stackpole, Sheridan on the Shenandoah, 2nd Edition (PA: Stackpole Books, 

1991) 285-286; quoted in Clarence Geier, et. al., An Overview and Assessment of 

Archaeological Resources and Landscapes within Lands Managed by Cedar Creek and 

Belle Grove National Historical Park. Volume I: Park History, Previous Research, 

Cultural Resources and Significant Historic Military and Domestic Themes, Threat to 

Resource, with Recommendations for Resource Management and Interpretation. (VA: 

James Madison University, 2006) p.97 

32 Clarence Geier, et. al., An Overview and Assessment of Archaeological Resources 

and Landscapes within the Legislated Cedar Creek-Belle Grove National Historical Park. 

Volume II: The Cultural Resources Part I: Archaeological Sites and Cultural Features 

(VA: James Madison University, 2006) p.31-47 

33Ibid, p. 151 and 316. 

34 Jedediah Hotchkiss, Jedediah Hotchkiss to Nelson Hotchkiss, September 28, 1862; 

quoted in Michael Mahon, The Shenandoah Valley 1861-1865: The Destruction of the 

Granary of the Confederacy (Stackpole Books, Mechanicsburg, P.A., 2001) 70. 

35 U.S. Census Office, Eighth Census: Agriculture of the United States (Washington, D.C: 

1864) 154-165; U.S Census Office, Ninth Census: Productions of Agriculture 

(Washington, D.C: 1872) 266-273. 

36 Becoming New Southerners-The Story of Virginia, The Virginia Historical 

Society. 20 Sep 2006. <http://www.vahistorical.org/sva2003/new-southerners.htm> 

37 History and Culture. Shenandoah National Park (U.S Department of the Interior: 

National Park Service) 

38 Ibid 

39 S.W. Fletcher, “The Outlook for Fruit Growing in Virginia,” The Report of the 

Sixteenth Annual Session of the Virginia State Horticultural Society (January 10th and 

11th, 1912) 12. 

40 Ibid, 7. 

41 John Wayland, A Bird’s Eye View of the Shenandoah Valley, (Staunton, VA: McClure 

Company, 1924) 11. 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

 44 

42 Thomas Bruce, Southwest Virginia and Shenandoah Valley,(Richmond: J.L. Hill 

Publishing Company, 1891) 203. 

43 John R. Hildebrand, Iron Horses in the Valley: The Valley and Shenandoah Valley 

Railroads, 1866-1882 (Shippensburg, PA: Burd Street Press, 2001)3-7. 

44Ibid, 7-13. 

45 A History of Roads in Virginia-The Most Convenient Ways (Virginia Department of 

Transportation, 2006) http://www.vdot.virginia.gov 

46 John Wayland, Scenic and Historical Guide to the Shenandoah Valley: A Handbook of 

Useful Information for Tourists and Students (Dayton, VA: Joseph K. Ruebush 

Company, 1923). 

47 Shenandoah County, Shenandoah County Comprehensive Plan (Woodstock, VA: 

 2003). 

48 Telephone interview with Patrick Farris. September 26, 2006 

49 Ibid 

50 A History of Roads in Virginia-The Most Convenient Ways (Virginia Department of 

 Transportation, 2006) http://www.vdot.virginia.gov 

51Geier, Clarence and Kimberly Tinkham, An Overview and Assessment of 

Archaeological Resources and Landscapes within Lands Managed by Cedar Creek and 

Belle Grove National Historical Park. Volume III: Cultural and Viewscapes (Virginia: 

James Madison University, 2006).p13. 

52 Frederick County, Frederick County Comprehensive Plan (Winchester, 2003). 

53 Ibid 
 LAND USE HISTORY

45 

Figure 1.0: A map of the project area in 1809 abstracted from Frederick, Berkeley and Jefferson Counties in the State of Virginia. Notable 

resources shown on the map include; Strasburg, Middletown, Shenandoah River and tributaries, and Valley Turnpike. Note: “Limestone 

Land” annotated west of the study area. Source: Handley Regional Library Archives.
46

LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

Figure 1.1: Philip Sheridan’s Official Report of the Property Captured or Destroyed during the Valley Campaign of 1864. Source: Michael 

Mahon, The Shenandoah Valley 1861-1865. (Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 1999).

CHANGES IN LIVESTOCK AND MAJOR FIELD CROPS, 

VALLEY OF VIRGINIA, 1860-1870 

Abstracted from the Eighth and Nine Census 

1860 1870 CHANGE 

LIVESTOCK

Horses 36,566 31,152 -5,414 

Milk Cows 28, 709 27,112 -1,597 

Other Cattle 62,112 46,964 -15, 148 

Swine 147,890 80,468 -67,422 

Sheep 71,648 50,336 -21,312 

FIELD CROPS

Bushels of Wheat 1,955, 910 2,148,600 192,690 

Bushels of Corn 3,160, 633 1,512,116 -1,648,517 

Bushels of Oats 797,526 822,144 24,618 

Bushels of Rye 229,174 149,684 -79,490 

Bushels of Buckwheat 22,173 3,583 -18,590 

Note: Valley of Virginia is defined as the region of western Virginia including the following counties: 

Frederick, Clarke, Shenandoah, Warren, Page, Rockingham, Augusta, Rockbridge, and Botetourt. 

Figure 1.2: Changes in Livestock and Major Field Crops in the Valley of Virginia between 1860 and 1870. Source: Kenneth E. Koons 

and Warren R. Hofstra, ed., After the Backcountry: Rural Life in the Great Valley of Virginia 1800-1900 (Knoxville, TN: The University of 

Tennessee Press, 2000) 9.
 LAND USE HISTORY

47 

Figure 1.4: Photo of Belle Grove Plantation, looking west from the Valley Turnpike (U.S. 11). Belle Grove served as the headquarters of 

Philip Sheridan during the Battle of Cedar Creek. Source: OCLP, 2006.

Figure 1.3.: View of Massanutten Mountain, looking south from Route 635. Massanutten Mountain provided the Confederate army with 

views of Union positions and encampments. Source: OCLP, 2006.
48

LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

Figure 1.5: Sketch of the Battle of Belle Grove or Cedar Creek, October 19, 1864 by Jed Hotchkiss. Shown on the map are the positions 

and movements of Confederate and Federal forces during the Battle of Cedar Creek. Source: The Atlas to Accompany the Official Records 

of the United States and Confederate Armies: Map 82-9.
 LAND USE HISTORY

49 

Figure 1.7: Photo of Bowman Mill Ford, looking northwest. Bowman Mill Ford was crossed by Kershaw’s Division in the early morning 

attack on the Federal army. Source: OCLP, 2006. 

Figure 1.6: Cleared bottomland north of Bowman’s Mill Ford, ca. 1885. Note the open fields and the wood board fencing. Source: 

Clarence Geier, et. al. An Overview and Assessment of Archaeological Resources and Landscapes within the Legislated Cedar Creek-Belle 

Grove NHP. Volume II: The Cultural Resources (James Madison University, Virginia 2006) p.51.
50

LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

Figure 1.9: Photo of portion of the VIII Corps earthworks, located on the Whitham property. These earthworks were strategically located 

as an observation point for troop movement across Harmony Hall Ford. Source:Clarence Geier, 2005.

Figure 1.8: View to the southwest across a large field interpreted as having contained the encampments of Colonel Rutherford Hayes 

Second Division, VIII Corps. Source: Clarence Geier, 2005. 
 LAND USE HISTORY

51 

Figure 1.10: James Taylor sketch of the Valley Pike near the Stickley House and Mill (ruins). Wharton’s Division passed this area in route 

to their attack on the Federal army. Source: James E. Taylor Sketchbook.

Figure 1.11: View of the approximate location of the XIX Corps encampment, situated along the west side of the Valley Pike (U.S. 11). 

Source: OCLP, 2006.
52

LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

Figure 1.13: James Taylor pencil sketch of captured Confederate prisoners and equipment in the field to the front of Sheridan’s 

headquarters at Belle Grove (Allen 1983: 159). 

Figure 1.12: Approximate location where the early mornings skirmishes took place between the XIX, VI and elements of the VIII Corps 

and Confederate forces. Belle Grove Plantation is in the background. Source: OCLP, 2006.
 LAND USE HISTORY

53 

Figure 1.15: Photo of cedar Creek Battlefield, c. 1907. Note the undulating topography and open character of the battlefield. Source: W.E. 

Huntsberry, NY: A.C. Bosselman and Company, 1907. Handley Library Collection.

Figure 1.14: Photo of the Solomon Heater House, view looking northwest from the Valley Turnpike (U.S.11). During the Battle of Cedar 

Creek, the house served as a primary cultural landscape feature. Confederate forces moved across the lands east of the house as they 

moved against Getty’s Union troops at Cemetery Hill. Source: OCLP, 2006.
54

LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

Figure 1.17: Photo of the Stickley Farmstead, looking northeast. The Stickley property was used as a military hospital for Confederate 

soldiers during the battle of Cedar Creek. Source: OCLP, 2006.

Figure 1.16: Photo of Stickley Hill. Besides its importance as the location of Ashby’s Battery in 1862, Stickley Hill was used by Colonel 

Thomas Carter during the retreat of the Confederacy during the Battle of Cedar Creek. Source: OCLP, 2006.
 LAND USE HISTORY

55 

Figure 1.18: Cedar Creek and Belle Grove project area abstracted from A Map of the Most Inhabited Part of Virginia prepared by Joshua 

Fry and Peter Jefferson in 1775. The Great Wagon Road can be seen running through the area. Source: Geier, Clarence R. Phoebe Harding. 

An Overview and Assessment of Cultural Resources and Landscapes Within the Legislated Cedar Creek-Belle Grove National Historical 

Park: Volume II: The Cultural Resources; Part I: Archaeological Sites and Cultural Features. 
56

LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

Figure 1.19. Photo of a toll house and gate on the Valley Pike, c.1901. Note the proximity of the toll house to the road. Source: Albert 

Bowen Collection 197-6WFCHS, Handley Library.
 LAND USE HISTORY

57 

Figure 1.20: Map abstracted from Map of the State of Virginia by Herman Boye; prepared 1825, revised 1859. Principal towns, roads, 

railroads and waterways are shown. Source: Geier, Clarence R. Phoebe Harding. An Overview and Assessment of Cultural Resources 

and Landscapes Within the Legislated Cedar Creek-Belle Grove National Historical Park: Volume II: The Cultural Resources; Part I: 

Archaeological Sites and Cultural Features.
58

LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

Figure 1.21: Photo of a snake rail fence commonly used throughout the Shenandoah Valley by the 18th century. Note the open quality of 

the landscape. Source: William Henry Jackson, Strasburg, Virginia (MI: Detroit Publishing Company, c.1892).
 LAND USE HISTORY

59 

Figure 1.22: New towns in the Shenandoah Valley, 1780-1800. Economic growth during the final decades of the eighteenth century 

produced a wave of town establishments, mostly along the historic Valley Turnpike. Source: Warren R Hofstra, The Planting of New 

Virginia: Settlement and landscape in Shenandoah Valley, (The John Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, Maryland, 2004) 286.
60

LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

Figure 1.24: Photo of macadamized Valley Pike, taken in 1935, just north of Middletown, looking north. Noticeably different from the 

Valley Pike in 1907, the road has been resurfaced, widened and lined with stone walls. Near here was the end of Sheridan’s ride from 

Winchester. Source: Handley Library, John Walter Wayland Papers (26.269 WFCHS)

Figure 1.23: Photo of the Valley Pike, taken in 1907, “through Cedar Creek Battlefield, down near the bridge”. View toward the SW and 

Strasburg. Besides the open quality of the landscape, telegraph poles and wire fencing are shown in the photo. The Valley Pike is paved 

with crushed stone. Source: Handley Library, John Walter Wayland Papers (26.273 WFCHS)
 LAND USE HISTORY

61 

Figure 1.25: Map of the Railroads in the Shenandoah Valley in 1872. Source: Hilderbrand, John. Iron Horses in the Valley: The Valley and 

Shenandoah Valley Railroads, 1866-1882. Shippensburg, PA: Bird Street Press, 2001. 
62

LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

Figure 1.26: Section of a construction document for the realignment and resurfacing of U.S. 11 11 (Valley Turnpike) prior to 1929. The area 

identified is within the vicinity of the Stickley complex. Note: Document oriented with north facing up. Source: Virginia Department of 

Transportation Plan and Profile of Proposed State Highway Rte. 11 in Frederick, Warren, and Shenandoah Counties (Pre-1929). 

Figure 1.27: Section of a construction document for the realignment of U.S. 11 (Valley Turnpike) in 1929. The area identified is within the 

vicinity of the Stickley complex. The sharp curve, shown in Figure 1.25, was straightened as a result of the road realignment. In addition, 

the Cedar Creek Bridge is abandoned. Note: Document oriented with north facing up. Source: Virginia Department of Transportation 

Plan and Profile of Proposed State Highway Rte. 11 in Frederick, Warren, and Shenandoah Counties (1929). 

Figure 1.28: Section of a construction document for the realignment of U.S. 11 (Valley Turnpike) in 1950. The area identified is within the 

vicinity of the Stickley complex. As a result of the increased traffic volumes and inadequacy associated with the 1929 bridge, the divided 

highway was constructed in 1950. Note: Document oriented with north facing up. Source: Virginia Department of Transportation Plan 

and Profile of Proposed State Highway Rte. 11 in Frederick, Warren, and Shenandoah Counties (1950). 
 LAND USE HISTORY

63 

Figure 1.30: With the realignment of the Valley Turnpike (U.S. 11) in 1929, a new bridge (shown above) was constructed. The Cedar Creek 

bridge, located further upstream to the right, was left abandoned. Source: OCLP, 2006.

Figure 1.29: Photo of the Cedar Creek bridge, date of photo unknown. The bridge and its connection with the Valley Turnpike played an 

important role as a major transit route for travelers, merchants, residents and soldiers during the Civil War. Source: Handley Library.
64

LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

Figure 1.32: Photo of a farmer planting corn in the Shenandoah Valley , c. 1941. Note: Traditional farming practices were still utilized in 

the 1940s. Source: Marion Post Wolcott (Library of Congress, 1941).

Figure 1.31: Photo of the Shenandoah Valley and the apple orchards in blossom, c. 1941. Source: Marion Post Wolcott (Library of 

Congress, 1941).
 LAND USE HISTORY

65 

Figure 1.33: 1958 aerial photography of the project area showing the realignment of U.S. 11, completed in 1950, and the absence of 

Interstate 81. Source: USDA FSA Aerial Photography Field Office. 
66

LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

Figure 1.34: View northeast along U.S. 11 showing commercial development (National retail chains and gas stations) in vicinity of Stickley 

Hill. Billboards, sized to be visible from Interstate Highways, and commercial development are destroying historic views. Source: Clarence 

Geier, 2005. 

Figure 1.35: Photo of the quarries, adjoining the study area. The quarries contribute substantially to the economic vitality of the region 

and area. However, the quarries have grown substantially, adversely affecting viewsheds from within the study area and giving 

industrial qualities to the formerly agricultural character of the landscape. Source: OCLP, 2006.
Land Use History Plan

Cedar Creek and Belle 

Grove National Historical 

Park

Frederick, Warren, and Shenandoah 

Counties, Virginia 

1864 Period Plan

Drawing 1.0

National Park Service

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation

http://www.nps.gov/oclp/

SOURCES

1. Gillespie, Bvt.Lt. Col.G.I. Battlefields of 

Fisher’s Hill and Cedar Creek. In Davis, Kirkley 

and Perry 1891-1895, Map XCIX.2. Gillespie 

produced in 1873.

2. Hotchkiss, Jed. The Battle of Belle Grove 

or Cedar Creek, October 19th, 1864. In Davis, 

Kirkley and Perry 1891-1895, Map LXXXII.9, 

Washington, DC.

NOTES

Locations and scale of features are 

approximate. Plan drawn using ArcMap GIS 

9.1 and Adobe Indesign 3.0 by Mike Commisso, 

January 2007.

LEGEND

0 .375 .75

Miles

Railroads

County Lines

Park Boundary

Water

Road

Buildings and Structures

Cemetery

Forest

Field

Orchard and Plantation

Frederick County

Frederick County

Warren County

Miller Lane

Miller Mill

Old Forge Road

Middletown

Middletown 

Cemetery

Hottles Mill Road

Shenandoah County

VI Corps 

Camp

Meadow Brook

Heater House

Belle Grove 

Plantation

Hite Road

Ridenour 

Farm

Red Hill

Stony Hill

Belle Grove Lane

XIX Corps Camp XIX Earthworks

XIX Earthworks Hite/Hottles Mill

Unidentified Cemetery

VIII Corps 

Camp

Valley Pike

Stickley Hill

Cedar Creek Bridge

Stickley House

and Mill 

A. Stickley 

House

Hupps Hill

Shenandoah River

Cedar Creek

Long Meadow

Bowman’s Ford

McInturf’s Ford McInturf Farm

Massanutten 

Mountain

Pouts Hill

J.A. Baldwin 

Farm

Bowman’s

Mill Ford

Bowman 

Mill

George Bowman Fort

(Harmony Hall)

Harmony Hall 

Ford C.I. Hite 

 Farm

Mt. Pleasant

Widow Bowman 

House

Thoburns 

Earthworks

Thoburns 

Run

Long Meadow Lane

Manassas Ga

p Rail

road

Strasburg

Bowman Mill Rd.

Hite Rd

Land Use History Plan

Cedar Creek and Belle 

Grove National Historical 

Park

Frederick, Warren, and Shenandoah 

Counties, Virginia 

1937 Period Plan

Drawing 1.1

National Park Service

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation

http://www.nps.gov/oclp/

SOURCES

1. 1937 Aerial Photography, Virginia

NOTES

Locations and scale of features are 

approximate. Plan drawn using ArcMap GIS 

9.1 and Adobe Indesign 3.0 by Mike Commisso, 

January 2007.

LEGEND

0 .375 .75

Miles

Railroads

County Lines

Park Boundary

Water

Quarry

Road

Buildings and Structures

Cemetery

Forest

Field

Orchard and Plantation

Frederick County

Frederick County

Warren County

Miller Lane

Miller Mill (ruin)

Old Forge Road

Middletown

Middletown/Mt. 

Carmel Cemetery

Hottles Mill Road

Shenandoah County

Meadow Brook

Heater House

Belle Grove 

Plantation

Hite Road

Meadow Mills 

Community

Red Hill

Stony Hill

Belle Grove Lane

Hite/Hottles 

Mill (Site)

Stickley Hill

Cedar Creek Bridge

Stickley House

and Mill (ruin)

Hupps Hill

Shenandoah River

Cedar Creek

Long Meadow

Bowman’s Ford

McInturf’s Ford McInturf House

Massanutten 

Mountain

Pouts Hill

J.A. Baldwin 

(Keister)Farm

Bowman’s

Mill Ford

Bowman 

Mill Site

George Bowman Fort

(Harmony Hall)

C.I. Hite 

(Whitham)

 Farm

Thoburns 

Thoburns Earthworks

Run

Long Meadow Lane

Southern Railway

B&O Railroad

Valley Turnpike (Route 11)

XIX Corps Earthworks

11

Strasburg

Frederick County

Frederick County Warren County

Miller Lane (CR 634)

Miller Mill (ruin)

Middletown

Middletown/Mt. Carmel Cemetery

Hottles Mill Road (CR 625)

Shenandoah County

Meadow Brook

Heater House

Belle Grove Plantation

Hite Road (CR624)

Meadow Mills Community

Red Hill

Stony Hill

Hite/Hottles Mill (Site)

Stickley Hill

Stickley Houseand Mill (ruin)

Hupps Hill

Cedar Creek

Mc

Bowman’sMill Ford

Bowman 

George Bowman Mill SiteFort (Harmony Hall)

C.I. Hite (Whitham) Farm

Thoburns Earthworks

Thoburns Run

Long Meadow Ln (CR611)

B&O Railroad

Valley Turnpike (Route 11)

Old Forge Rd.(CR627)

XIX Earthworks

XIX Corp Earthworks

Interstate 81

CR 611

CR 635

I-66

I-81

11

Strasburg

LIST OF REPOSITORIES CONSULTED AND OUTCOMES

 73 

LIST OF REPOSITORIES CONSULTED AND OUTCOMES 

 

FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA 

Belle Grove Plantation, Middletown, VA.

Belle Grove Plantation provides information directly related to the Plantation, 

including maps, photos, and miscellaneous files. The majority maps and photos 

that were available at the Plantation were also found at Handley Library. 

Frederick County, Winchester, VA.

Has useful website for obtaining a brief history of Frederick County and an 

electronic version of their Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Department 

provided up-to-date GIS land use data. 

Handley Regional Library, Winchester, VA.

The Stewart Bell Jr. Archives room has many useful information related 

Winchester and Frederick and Clarke counties. The majority of the information 

collected for the land use history for Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National 

Historical Park came from the archival collection at the library. The collection 

included the John Wayland Papers, maps, photographs, books, reports, and 

newspaper clippings. 

Winchester-Frederick County Historical Society, Winchester, VA

Telephone Inquiry. The Historical Society has no information directly related to 

Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park. Their collections are 

housed at Handley Library. 

SHENANDOAH COUNTY, VIRGINIA 

Shenandoah County, Woodstock, Virginia.

Has useful website for obtaining a brief history of Shenandoah County and an 

electronic version of their Comprehensive Plan. The Planning and Zoning 

Department provided up-to-date GIS land use data and the Parks and Recreation 

Department had an electronic version of the Keister Tract Master Plan, 

completed by EDAW and View Engineering. 

Shenandoah County Historical Society, Edinburg, VA.

Telephone inquiry. The Historical Society does not have much information for 

public access and no information related to Shenandoah Valley and Cedar Creek 

and Belle Grove National Historical Park. 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

 74 

Strasburg Heritage Association, Strasburg, VA

Telephone inquiry. The Association has no information related to the area of 

study. 

Strasburg Museum, Strasburg, VA

Telephone inquiry. The museum has no information related to Cedar CreekBelle Grove National Park. 

WARREN COUNTY, VIRGINIA 

Warren County Heritage Society, Front Royal, VA.

The Heritage Society provides useful information related to Front Royal and 

Warren County; however had very little information related to Cedar Creek and 

Belle Grove National Historical Park. Patrick Farris, Executive Director of the 

Heritage Society, was extremely knowledgeable on all aspects of local and 

regional history and offered helpful suggestions. 

Warren County, Front Royal, VA.

Has useful website for obtaining a brief history of Warren County and an 

electronic version of their Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Department 

provided up-to-date GIS land use data. 

OTHER 

Boston Public Library- Copley Branch, Boston, Massachusetts.

Has most published sources on the State of Virginia, but limited unique 

information on the Shenandoah Valley. 

Carrier Library-James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA.

The special collections have many invaluable materials related to the Shenandoah 

Valley, specifically the report, European Settlement and Land-Cover Change: The 

Shenandoah Valley of Virginia During the 18th Century by Robert Mitchell, 

Edward Connor, and Warren Hofstra. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY

 75 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

 

BOOKS AND PUBLISHED SOURCES 

Bruce, Thomas. Southwest Virginia and Shenandoah Valley. Richmond: J.L. Hill 

Publishing Company, 1891. 

 

Civil War Sites Advisory Commission. Civil War Sites Advisory Commission 

Report on the Nation’s Civil War Battlefield. U.S. Department of the 

Interior: National Park Service, 1993. 

Clement, Eaton. History of the Old South. New York: The MacMillan 

Company, 1967. 

Hildebrand, John R. Iron Horses in the Valley: The Valley and Shenandoah 

 Valley Railroads, 1866-1882. Shippensburg, PA: Burd Street Press, 

 2001. 

Hofstra, Warren R. “Land Policy and Settlement in the Northern Shenandoah 

Valley.” In Appalachian: Frontiers Settlement, Society and Development 

in the Pre-Industrial Era, ed. Robert D. Mitchell. Kentucky: University 

of Kentucky, 1991. 

Hofstra, Warren R. The Planting of New Virginia: Settlement and Landscape in 

 the Shenandoah Valley. Baltimore, MD: The John Hopkins University 

 Press, 2004. 

Hunt, Charles B. Natural Regions of the United States and Canada. San Francisco, 

CA: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1967. 

Kercheval, Samuel. A History of the Valley of Virginia. Strasburg, VA: 

 Shenandoah Publishing House, 1925. 

King, Ed. “Getting them up the Grade the Norfolk and Western Way,” Trains 

Magazine. April 2004. 

Koons, Kenneth E. and Warren R. Hofstra, ed. After the Backcountry: Rural Life 

in the Great Valley of Virginia 1800-1900. Knoxville, TN: The University 

of Tennessee Press. 2000. 

Kuennecke, Berd. An Atlas of Virginia: 17th, 18th and Early 19th Centuries. 

Dubuque, Iowa: Kendell/Hunt, 1989. 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

 76 

Mahon, Michael. The Shenandoah Valley 1861-1865. Mechanicsburg, P.A: 

 Stackpole Books, 1999. 

Mahr, Theodore C. The Battle of Cedar Creek. Lynchburg, VA: H.E. Howard, 

 1992. 

Mitchell, Robert D. Commercialism and Frontier: Perspectives on the Early 

 Shenandoah Valley. Virginia: The University of Virginia, 1977. 

National Park Service. General Management Plan, Gettysburg National Military 

Park. Washington, D.C: U.S. Department of the Interior, 1999. 

Norris, J. E, ed. History of the Lower Shenandoah Valley Counties of Frederick, 

 Berkeley, Jefferson and Clarke. Chicago: A. Warner and Co., 1890. 

Nowak, Lisa and Eliot Foulds. Cultural Landscape for Booker T. Washington 

National Monument. Boston, MA: Olmsted Center for Landscape 

Preservation-National Park Service, 14. 

Wayland, John. Scenic and Historical Guide to the Shenandoah Valley: A 

 Handbook of Useful Information for Tourists and Students. Dayton, 

 Virginia: Joseph K. Ruebush Company, 1923. 

Wayland, John. A Bird’s Eye View of the Shenandoah Valley. Staunton, VA: 

McClure Company, 1924. 

REPORTS AND UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS 

EDAW and View Engineering. Keister Tract Master Plan. Prepared for 

 Shenandoah County Parks and Recreation, 2005. 

Fletcher, S.W. “The Outlook for Fruit Growing in Virginia.” The Report of the 

 Sixteenth Annual Session of the Virginia State Horticultural Society. 

 (1912): 6-12. 

Geier, Clarence R., and Phoebe Harding. An Overview and Assessment of 

 Cultural Resources and Landscapes within the Legislated Cedar Creek-

 Belle Grove NHP: Volume II: The Cultural Resources. Part I: 

 Archeological Sites and Cultural Features. Department of Sociology and 

 Anthropology, James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, 2006. 

Geier, Clarence R., and Phoebe Harding. (Draft) An Overview and Assessment 

 of Cultural Resources and Landscapes within the Legislated Cedar 
BIBLIOGRAPHY

 77 

 Creek-Belle Grove NHP: Volume I. Department of Sociology and 

 Anthropology, James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, 2006. 

Mitchell, Robert D., et al. European Settlement and Land-Cover Change: The 

 Shenandoah Valley of Virginia during the 18th Century. National 

 Geographic Society Grant #4381-90 (1991-1992), June 1993. 

Oudemool, Lisa, et al. Cultural Landscape Report: Saratoga Battlefield-Volume 1: 

Site History, Existing Conditions, and Analysis. National Park Service, 

Olmsted Center for Landscape Preservation, Boston, Massachusetts, 

2002. 

 

MAPS, PLANS, AND DRAWINGS 

 Boye, Herman. Map of the State of Virginia prepared in 1825 and revised 

 in 1859 by L.v. Buchholtz. 

Davis, Maj. George B., Leslie J. Perry and Joseph Kirkley. Atlas to Accompany the 

Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies. Washington, DC: 

Government Printing Office, 1891-1895.

Gillespie, Bvt. Lt. Col. G. L. Map of the Battlefield of Cedar Creek, Va. Fought on 

Oct. 19th,1864 and the Cavalry Fight of Tom’s Brook fought on Oct. 9, 

1864. Bvt. Lt. Col. G. L. Gillespie: Map LXIX.3. 1866.

 

Gillespie, Bvt. Lt. Col. G. L. The Battle of Belle Grove or Cedar Creek, Oct. 19, 

1864. Map LXXXII.1864 

Fry, Joshua and Peter Jefferson. A Map of the Most Inhabited Part of 

Virginia.1776. 

Hotchkiss, Jed. Pencil sketch for The Battle of Belle Grove or Cedar Creek, Oct. 19, 

1864. http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/collections/maps/hotchkiss/ 

Hotchkiss, Jed. The Battle of Belle Grove or Cedar Creek, Oct. 19, 1864. 

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/collections/maps/hotchkiss/ 

Jackson, William Henry. Strasburg, Shenandoah Valley. Detroit Publishing 

Company, DET 4a32833. c. 1892. 

Lake, D. J. & Co. An Atlas of Shenandoah and Page Counties, Virginia. F. 

Bourquin, Philadelphia, Pa (reprinted by Samuel, Irene and Samuel, Jr. 

Koontz, Good Printers, Harrisonburg, VA) 1885. 
LAND USE HISTORY FOR CEDAR CREEK AND BELLE GROVE NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

 78 

Lathrop, J. M. and A. W. Dayton. An Atlas of Frederick County, Virginia. Lake & 

Co., Philadelphia, Pa (reprinted in 1997 by GP Hammond Publishing 

Co., Strasburg, VA). 

Taylor, James E. Sketchbook: With Sheridan Up the Valley in 1864. The Western 

Reserve Historical Society, Cleveland, OH.1864. 

Virginia Department of Transportation. Plan and Profile of Proposed State 

Highway Rte. 33 in Shenandoah County. 1930. 

Virginia Department of Transportation. Plan and Profile of Proposed State 

Highway Rte. 33 in Frederick, Warren, and Shenandoah County. 1929. 

Virginia Department of Transportation. Plan and Profile of Proposed State 

Highway Rte. 33 in Frederick County. 1931. 

 

Virginia Department of Transportation. Plan and Profile of Proposed State 

Highway Rte. 11 in Shenandoah County. 1935. 

Virginia Department of Transportation. Plan and Profile of Proposed State 

Highway Rte. 11 in Frederick, Warren and Shenandoah County. 1950. 

Virginia Department of Transportation. Plan and Profile of Proposed State 

Highway Rte. 11 in Shenandoah County. 1967. 

Virginia Department of Transportation. Plan and Profile of Proposed State 

Highway Rte. 11 in Frederick County. 1955. 

Virginia Department of Transportation. Plan and Profile of Proposed State 

Highway Rte. 81 in Shenandoah County. 1965. 

Virginia Department of Transportation. Plan and Profile of Proposed State 

Highway Rte. 81 in Frederick County. 1965. 

 Wolcott, Marion Post. Planting corn in the Fertile Farmlands of the Valley. 

Library of Congress, #8cl2066. 1941. 

 

 Wolcott, Marion Post. Apple Orchards in Blossom in the spring in the Fertile 

Shenandoah Valley. Library of Congress, #2000038076. 1941. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY

 79 

WEB SOURCES 

Maptech. Historic USGS topographic maps. 2006. 

http://www.historical.maptech.com/

Library of Congress American Memory. The Hotchkiss Map Collection. 13 April 

2007. http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/index.html 

The Virginia Historical Society. Contact and Conflict the Story of Virginia. 20 

Sept 2006. http://www.vahistorical.org/sva2003/new-southerners.htm.

Thomas III, William G. "The Chesapeake Bay," Southern Spaces. 2004.

http://southernspaces.org/contents/2004/thomas/2b.htm. 

Virginia Department of Transportation. A History of Roads in Virginia-The Most 

Convenient Ways. 2006. <http://www.vdot.virginia.gov> 

Whitehorne, Joseph W.A. Staff Rides: A Self-Guided Tour of the Battle of Cedar 

 Creek. Center of Military History, United States Army. 1992. 

http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/staff-rides/cedarcreek/ccfm.htm. 

OLMSTED CENTER FOR LANDSCAPE PRESERVATION

email: FRLA_olmsted_center@nps.gov

web: www.nps.gov/oclp/