James Dabney McCabe Jr.
The Maryland regiments in the Confederate army have adopted the title of
“The Maryland Line,” which was so heroically sustained by their patriot
sires of the first Revolution, and which the deeds of Marylanders at
Manassas, show that the patriot Marylanders of this second Revolution are
worthy to bear.
By old Potomac’s rushing tide,
Our bayonets are gleaming;
And o’er the bounding waters wide
We gaze, while tears are streaming.
The distant hills of Maryland
Rise sadly up before us–
And tyrant bands have chained our laud,
Our mother proud that bore us.
Our proud old mother’s queenly head
Is bowed in subjugation;
With her children’s blood her soil is red,
And fiends in exultation
Taunt her with shame as they bind her chains,
While her heart is torn with anguish;
Old mother, on famed Manassas’ plains
Our vengeance did not languish.
We thought of your wrongs as on we rushed,
‘Mid shot and shell appalling;
We heard your voice as it upward gush’d,
From the Maryland life-blood falling.
No pity we knew! Did they mercy show
When they bound the mother that bore us?
But we scattered death ‘mid the dastard foe
Till they, shrieking, fled before us.
We mourn for our brothers brave that fell
On that field so stern and gory;
But their spirits rose with our triumph yell
To the heavenly realms of glory.
And their bodies rest on the hard-won field–
By their love so true and tender,
We’ll keep the prize they would not yield,
We’ll die, but we’ll not surrender.
© by owner. provided at no charge for educational purposes
You may find this and other poems here.
Analysis (AI Assisted)
This poem is built around divided loyalty and inherited identity, and it treats both as things that demand action rather than reflection. From the opening lines, the speakers are positioned on the edge of home, close enough to see Maryland’s hills but unable to return to them. That physical separation mirrors the political one the poem insists on: Maryland is imagined as a captive mother, while her sons fight under another banner in her name. The poem never questions this framing. It accepts it fully and pushes it hard.
The image of the Potomac is important. It is not just a river but a boundary between belonging and exile. The speakers stand armed, looking across water that separates them from their home, and the presence of tears alongside bayonets sets the emotional tone. Grief and violence are paired from the start. The poem wants the reader to see those two things as compatible, even mutually reinforcing.
Maryland itself is personified as a proud mother brought low. Her “queenly head” bowed and her land stained with her children’s blood is not subtle imagery, but it is effective within the poem’s aims. The mother figure allows the poem to convert political grievance into personal outrage. What might otherwise be described as occupation or control becomes an assault on family honor. Once that move is made, violence is presented as not only justified but required.
The references to Manassas function as proof rather than memory. The battle is not explored in detail; it is invoked as evidence that Marylanders fighting for the Confederacy have already paid in blood and proven their worth. The poem draws a straight line from Revolutionary War ancestors to Civil War soldiers, treating both conflicts as the same struggle repeated. There is no room here for ambiguity about cause or consequence. History is simplified into inheritance, and inheritance becomes obligation.
When the poem turns to combat, its language hardens. Pity is explicitly rejected. The speakers insist they showed no mercy because none was shown to their “mother.” This is one of the clearest moral statements in the poem, and it reveals how the poem understands justice: not as restraint, but as repayment. Violence is framed as an answer, not a tragedy, and death inflicted on the enemy is described with approval rather than regret.
The fallen comrades are mourned, but even this grief is quickly folded back into resolve. Their spirits rise in triumph, their bodies sanctify the ground, and their deaths become another reason to continue fighting. Loss is acknowledged, but it is never allowed to weaken commitment. Instead, it is used to harden it. The poem does not dwell on individual lives so much as what those lives represent.
The final lines make the poem’s position unmistakable. Holding territory and refusing surrender matter more than survival. The promise to die rather than yield is presented as the ultimate proof of loyalty, both to Maryland and to the cause the poem assumes speaks for her. The poem ends where it began, with identity tied to land and blood, and with violence treated as the only meaningful response to dishonor.
As a war poem, this piece is less interested in the costs of fighting than in justifying it. It works as a statement of belief rather than an exploration of experience. Its strength lies in how clearly it expresses the mindset of exile, grievance, and inherited duty. Its limitations lie in that same clarity. There is no doubt, no hesitation, and no space for questioning what this loyalty demands or destroys.