Hardee is probably the best choice, but he had passed on army command after Bragg. Davis wasn't about to ask him again. Beauregard, hated only second to Johnston by Davis, never going to happen. Walthall, no. Stewart and Lee are both junior to Hood. Cheatham, no, but should have been given corps command instead of Lee. Cleburne (oh the myth lives on) was a division commander with no corps command experience. How is he going to run the army, especially with Sherman 10 miles from Atlanta? So Davis is left with Hood. I think I once described him as the best of a bad lot.
Richard Taylor would have been a sound choice, but I didn't see him on the list.
Cleburne (oh the myth lives on) was a division commander with no corps command experience. How is he going to run the army, especially with Sherman 10 miles from Atlanta?
And then on the other hand how many of the Generals eithier side that commanded or went on to command armies ever commanded more than an oversized Regimental formation before the war, much less a division or corps sized element?
IMO, for the job demanded, if JEJ had to be replaced, Hood was the logical choice.
IF, the preservation and care of the AoT was to be the primary forcus of a new Army Commander, then Lee's choice of Hardee , is hard to fault. Keeping in mind that Hardee was, essentially, Johnston, writ a bit smaller.
The General (who actually had a chance at the promotion) best qualified to shadow Sherman and keep his Army out of any real trouble, until the end of the war? The vote probably, goes to Hardee.
If the Army is to be used boldly (to dare greatly, to achieve great rewards) i.e. to revitalize the war in the West, first by trying, at least, to save Atlanta and then strike a strategic blow that has a chance of disrupting the Union war efforts in the west. The sensitiveness of the Union War Dept, (thru Lincoln) to the safety of Tn would have made that state the logical choice for such a blow. Then Cleburne, Forrest and Hood had the necessary boldness, but lack of any iparticular army command experience or skills (or Corps Command, for that matter) by Cleburne or Forrest leaves Hood by default.
The fact that Hood failed, in the end, is Not proof that Forrest Or Cleburne would have succeeded.
Not all West Pointers were successful in high command -corps and above.
Few non-West Pointers ever reached corps command.
By 1864, the Confederate well was running dry for commanders.
Plus, the Confederacy was losing the war overall. And by 1864, there were serious logistic problems in the Confederate states.
By 1864, the Confederate well was running dry for commanders.
Plus, the Confederacy was losing the war overall.
Nonsense.
The early part of 1864 saw a resurgence of Confederate fortunes- Banks' total defeat in the Red River Campaign. Grant and Sherman's bloody quagmires in Virginia and Georgia.
__________________ POWER & MONEY
"Your New-York bankers and merchants are shrewd people, but I never gave them credit for so much sagacity as when they took the Government Loan. It was not merely patriotism, it was a high stroke of policy. It has saved the Government, and what they will regard as equally important, saved them from a great financial disaster."
The early part of 1864 saw a resurgence of Confederate fortunes- Banks' total defeat in the Red River Campaign. Grant and Sherman's bloody quagmires in Virginia and Georgia.
Quite a stretch to use these as examples of a resurgence of Confederate fortunes. Sherman pushes Johnston back to Atlanta and is virtually unopposed in his march, Grant is pushing Lee into a Petersburg investment, Hood is committing suicide and the ninny Banks gets blocked on his way to Shreveport by Trans-Mississippi troops that in no way threaten to help Lee or Johnston or Hood.
I'd be interested in what you consider a resurgence?
ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
As I have said in other threads, it would depend upon what Richmond wanted from the AoT. A make-do attempt to reinvigorate the war in the West or a planned campaign to save as many confederate lives for the inevitable post-war rebuilding of the south?
For the first Hood would be my choice. People let Hood's resulting failure blind them to the fact that Hood came closer to success than many assume. The AoT completely out maneuvered Schofield and was spared complete destruction at Spring Hill, only by luck. Schofield's command was the projected solid battle trained core of Thomas' army still assmebling in Nashville. If Schofield had been destroyed, there would have been no Franklin and the hard driving Hood would have been at Nashville before Thomas had completely assembled the rest of his army, minus Schofield.
If tacitly accepting inevitable defeat and keeping the army out of harms way until the war was over, then Johnston should have been retained or some other mild mannered unaggressive general; Hardee, possibly?
I wouldn't replace JEJ at that moment at all. But if he was to be replaced, the best choice would be Hardee. Not a brilliant officer, and he wouldn't probably do nothing daring and audacious, but many a life would be saved. He was also most experienced genl.
If Hood was to succeed after Johnston, Gen. Hardee should have been sent somewhere else, because it is not very wise to place an officer under the command of someone whom he previously outranked.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
