Civil War History - The Eastern TheaterDiscuss any and all battles, movements, and events occuring in the Eastern Theater here! This includes any actions in tha area east of the Appalachian Mountains in the vicinity of the river capitals of Richmond and Washington D.C.
Sean: The idea that Lincoln saved Grant's bacon is exaggerated. Lincoln, like Stanton, was very upset over the losses at Shiloh and reacting to the resounding chorus of criticism from the newspapers, he had Stanton wire Halleck April 23 asking if there was any truth to drinking or neglect. Halleck true to his practice of sticking up for West Pointers plus having Sherman (who Halleck had always mentored) talking in one ear, dismissed the accusations and reported, "the conduct of the battle and all the details meet his entire approval." And, of course, later it was Halleck's behind the scenes machinations that would outwit McClernand's grab for power in the Vicksburg campaign.
Even the "I can't spare this man," quote has come under recent fire. "With the benefit of hindsight, people would later say that Abraham Lincoln stood behind Grant at this critical juncture. 'I can't spare this man; he fights,' he reportedly told Alexander McClure, a Pennsylvania politician. But a cursory investigation of McClure's account of this conversation reveals it is a creative exercise bearing at best a tangential relationship to fact." {<u>Ulysses S. Grant</u> by Brooks Simpson page 136] It should be noted, however, that Dr. David Herbert Donald does include the quote in his book <u>Lincoln.</u>
Now back to Shiloh. Can you point out specifically of how Grant failed on the field once the battle began? The prebattle situation is another topic altogether. IMO once the battle commenced Grant demonstrated extraordinary tactical talent by issuing rapid fire orders and dispatches that held the first day in check and led to the second day win.
By the way Buell was dilatory in getting there. In short he was ****ed late, but for now I will not go there. This is a Joe Johnston thread, remember?
Here's another thing to think about regarding Joe Johnston. According to Gary Gallagher, Johnston's passive defensive strategy resulted in the same attrition rate as Lee's aggressive offensive strategy. "During his retreat up the Peninsula in the spring of 1862, for example, a young Georgian complained that 'General Joseph Johnston, from whom we were led to expect so much, has done little else than evacuate, until the very mention of the word sickens me . . ."
One of the complaints was that Johnston left vast stretches of territory exposed and in essence handed it over to the Union troops by default, but gained only meager long term results. Manpower also was sacrificed. During his retreat to Atlanta the CSA lost 10,000 to Sherman's 11,000. Yet, Johnston gained nothing except time delay.
I'm not saying that Hood did any better with his pitbull attacks that gained nothing more substantial than a poodle gnawing at Uncle Billy's leg would have achieved. In fact what Hood did was just lose more quickly than Johnston.
The big question remains. What exactly would Johnston have achieved if he had not been removed? Could he have held Atlanta? And remember Atlanta, as a producer and supplier to the war effort, was essential. I doubt it. I doubt he would have tried. I think that Johnston would have continued to retreat in the hope that he could find the perfect set of circumstances to turn and fight and he wouldn't have found it.
I am referring to the pre-battle conditions. He was held somewhat accountable for that. Like I said, a commander does not take command the day the battle begins. He and Sherman are up for much debate on the pre-battle conditions. If they had been more pro-active with the intelligence the Confederate attack might have ground to a halt before even starting.
As for Grants hearing, "At Sackett's Harbor he would flee Julia and his new son rather than endure the regimental band as it played each evening in front of their quarters." If you had heard that band play you would have fled also!!!! Julia was trying to be kind!!! Grant was simply being a "Man of Action"!!!
If only Lee would have known "Music" was his weakness!! He might have sent Longstreet on a ride around the Wilderness with a Corps of musical soldiers singing show-tunes. Heck, he might have surrendered the entire force or fled to Washington.
We might want to remember, re. Grant's being indifferent to shellfire, that, in CW times, leadership was often by example. Senior officers walking around erect while under fire to inspire the troops was not uncommon. Grant was like many other officers in that respect.
On Johnston's Atlanta campaign: I believe Johnston was trying, not really to defeat Sherman, but to delay any success by Sherman until after the election of 1864 in the North. The Confederacy held great hope that Lincoln would be defeated, and that McClellan would have negotiated a peace with the South.
Sean, regarding Lee sending brass bands to make Grant flee to Washington... what likely would have happened was that Grant would have sent the sharpshooters in to pick them off toot by toot. He couldn't do that to guys in his own army... his name wasn't Forrest.
In trying to swing this thread, back to Johnston, from a greatness of Grant thread, which I don't buy. I would have to list Johnston certainly as good, maybe not great. I was reading, in Shermans book, about the problem he was having with Johnston, at Atlanta. Johnston, was moving his forces around, to where if Sherman attacked, he would be going into well defended entrenched positions. Then, they got hold of a newspaper, stating that Johnston, was being replaced by Hood. After talking to his other officers, that knew Hood, how happy they were, for that change, and orders were given to all the union troops, to be prepared for an attack, which would be on open ground, which Sherman wanted. Sure enough, that's what Hood did, and suffered a sound defeat for it. That, does make Johnston, look pretty good.
When taking the measure of a commander, it is profitable to consider the estimation of those who faced him. Both Grant and Sherman consider Johnston to be first rate. Thus spoke those in a position to know of what they speak. It is historians of a much later time (mid 20th century)(besides of course one Jeff Davis) who have had opportunity to examine the war from many sides and points of view who have postulated differently. But what of it- every commander made errors, every commander had problems with which he had difficulty or was unable to overcome. So it is with Johnston, we can see through history his errors, but we do so through the luxury of time and scholarship and many resources,(and no one shooting at us!). In other words, with many of the advantages unavailable to the commander in the field in real time- all the more valid the opinion of a commander's opposite number.
And again, as to Hood's unfortunate elevation to command in place of Johnston, the reaction of his peers in the opposing army tell the whole story. Not only were Sherman, Thomas, Schofield and the army before Atlanta delighted, relieved too was Grant bogged down at Petersburg upon receiving the good news from Sherman by wire. Grant's objective before Lee and his incomparable veterans was to get them into the open where the Eastern armies' numbers would tell. Of course, he had to settle for locking Lee into his trenches about the James and Appomattox, which ultimately proved to be effective. But effective due to Johnston no longer being in charge to keep Sherman and his buddies out of Atlanta. And that because the Army of Tennessee was coming out finally into the open- and that right into the teeth of the Yankee strength. A sad story- one which Johnston would not have allowed to happen.
__________________ 'It is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who has given us the freedom to demonstrate. It is the soldier, who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag'
I believe that after his wounding at the seven days battle, Johnston was never really givin a chance at a real command. When he had command of the armies of the west they were already in shambles. What did he have at Vicksburg? 30,000 men yes, but some had not even been trained at that point, some were new recruits, and they faced an army that was vastly supperior. Johnston was always meant to lead the armies of Virginia, and had he been restored his previous command the outcome of the civil war may have differed
He was certainly one of the CSA's most capable generals and heads and shoulders above Bragg. But he was never popular w/ Davis, whihc is what one needed to make it to the top in the CS Armies.
__________________ Few take the trouble to understand or to view the American scene with perspective. And we Americans love to find ourselves guilty of something. However, it is never I who am guilty, but those other Americans, the past or present government or the other political party. Americans almost never find other countries guilty. It is always ourselves or our fancied influence in other countries. Louis L'amour
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
