Civil War History - General DiscussionFor Discussions on Civil War Era Personalities, Politics, Issues, Campaigns, Battles, and more. Serious Civil War Discussions Only Please! All other posts will be deleted.
Just a short response for now on the comment on Jackson's performance at the 7 Days' Battle. Jackson was exhausted after a forced march. Jackson was neither given good maps nor competent guides to direct him to his position on the battlefield. Little wonder his performance was sub-par.
All true -- but I'm not sure Jackson should be forgiven because of them.
As to the maps, they didn't exist to be given to Jackson -- or any other Confederate commander. Although the Peninsula was the longest continuously settled part of the original 13 colonies, maps of the area were laughable when the Civil War started. As part of the preparations for McClellan's campaign, the US Topographical Engineers prepared a series of maps based on the best available information -- and when they landed discovered they were badly inaccurate, missing little things like rivers. Their resources were at least as good as the Confederates were. The best maps available in June of 1862 were all in Union hands, because the Topographical Engineers were mapping everything in detail as they advanced, and experimenting with photographic techniques to get those maps into the hands of the forward commanders as quickly as possible.
As to guides, there was no central assignment of such. Throughout the war, this was a purely local commander task. Jackson might have been limited to men from his own command, or gathered civilians as he proceded, but that would simply have normal practice for a commander in that time and place.
Jackson certainly should have been exhausted, given the journey he went on and his lack of sleep. But at the meeting to determine the details of the attack, Jackson was the one who specified when he would be in position. He had the furthest to go, and so all movements were based on his. If he made a mistake and promised what was not possible, that's understandable -- but still his error.
Regards,
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
I'm not an authority on Sheridan so I can't make a fair comparison between the two. I dont like Sheridan but thats more through my own views as a sort of Confederate sympathiser than anything else.
As far Jackson goes I think he was cirtainly one of the most gifted, if excentric, Generals of the time. While he was alive the Confederacy, in the east, rarely suffered a loss and after he died they rarely gained a victory. He died when he was at the height of his career, when he was the most respected and feared, from Union perspectives, General in the Confederate Forces.
I actually consider Jackson Valley campaign to be the most impressive campaign of the whole war, not Grant's Vicksburg campaign. His poor performance at the 7 Days' battle seems to be an isolated incident for him as he, to my knowledge, didn't perform that poorly again.
I'm not an authority on Sheridan so I can't make a fair comparison between the two. I dont like Sheridan but thats more through my own views as a sort of Confederate sympathiser than anything else.
As far Jackson goes I think he was cirtainly one of the most gifted, if excentric, Generals of the time. While he was alive the Confederacy, in the east, rarely suffered a loss and after he died they rarely gained a victory. He died when he was at the height of his career, when he was the most respected and feared, from Union perspectives, General in the Confederate Forces.
I actually consider Jackson Valley campaign to be the most impressive campaign of the whole war, not Grant's Vicksburg campaign. His poor performance at the 7 Days' battle seems to be an isolated incident for him as he, to my knowledge, didn't perform that poorly again.
I just want to bring up a point about Jackson's Valley campaign. The point is: can anyone off the top of their head remember one generals' name he defeated during this campaign. I give you a moment to think about it.
Times up!! Like, I thought no one can name any so we can see Jackson was not going against any top flight generals.
One note: Sheridan's Valley campaign reconquered the Shenandoah valley and his opponent was CS Gen. Early. I must say Sheridan's opponent has more name recognition then Jackson's opponents.
I just want to bring up a point about Jackson's Valley campaign. The point is: can anyone off the top of their head remember one generals' name he defeated during this campaign. I give you a moment to think about it.
Times up!! Like, I thought no one can name any so we can see Jackson was not going against any top flight generals.
One note: Sheridan's Valley campaign reconquered the Shenandoah valley and his opponent was CS Gen. Early. I must say Sheridan's opponent has more name recognition then Jackson's opponents.
I'm pretty sure that McDowell was one of the Union generals in the Valley campaign and I know that Nathaniel P. Banks was defeated by Jackson in that campaign.
And in actuality Sheridan almost lost his Valley campaign at the batlle of Cedar Creek when Early's forces suprised Sheridans forces and routed two thirds of the Union army. If his troops were not exhausted and hungry Early would have been able to defeat Sheridan then.
Of course the reson Early's troops were exhausted and hungry was Sheridan's actions in his Valley Campaign leading up to this battle so Sheridan can still be praised for that.
I'm pretty sure that McDowell was one of the Union generals in the Valley campaign and I know that Nathaniel P. Banks was defeated by Jackson in that campaign.
And in actuality Sheridan almost lost his Valley campaign at the batlle of Cedar Creek when Early's forces suprised Sheridans forces and routed two thirds of the Union army. If his troops were not exhausted and hungry Early would have been able to defeat Sheridan then.
Of course the reson Early's troops were exhausted and hungry was Sheridan's actions in his Valley Campaign leading up to this battle so Sheridan can still be praised for that.
You made me go look up the names and wow! no surprise. I see no top flight generals among them. Here is a list of generals:
Nathaniel Banks, John C, Fremont(Famous but not as a military wiz), Robert Milroy, Ge. Schenck, Gen. Shields, and so on to a list of non-notables.
Yes, Jackson Valley campaign tried up some 80,000 union troops led by less then stellar cast of Generals.
At Cedar Creek was kind of like Shiloh the confederates surprise the union force but in the end Sheridan(like Grant) shows up and routes the confederate forces. Sheridan's victory ended Early's military career in the confederate army.
You made me go look up the names and wow! no surprise. I see no top flight generals among them. Here is a list of generals:
Nathaniel Banks, John C, Fremont(Famous but not as a military wiz), Robert Milroy, Ge. Schenck, Gen. Shields, and so on to a list of non-notables.
Yes, Jackson Valley campaign tried up some 80,000 union troops led by less then stellar cast of Generals.
At Cedar Creek was kind of like Shiloh the confederates surprise the union force but in the end Sheridan(like Grant) shows up and routes the confederate forces. Sheridan's victory ended Early's military career in the confederate army.
Cedar Creek is different from Shiloh in that Grant at Shiloh faced a Confederate army that was well fed and well rested while Sheridan faced an army that was exhausted and hungry. What's more Early's army at Cedar Creek broke ranks to raid the abandonned Union camp to find food. In fact if Early had chosen to continue the presure after his initial sucess Sheridan's army would have been broken. The same cannot be said of the Confederates at Shiloh.
It was not imposible for Early to crush Sheridan's army in that battle but he chose not to persue the routed troops and by doing so allowed Sheridan to rally and attack his army when they were unorganised.
So I would say that, overall, Early lost battle more than Sheridan won it.
Cedar Creek is different from Shiloh in that Grant at Shiloh faced a Confederate army that was well fed and well rested while Sheridan faced an army that was exhausted and hungry. What's more Early's army at Cedar Creek broke ranks to raid the abandonned Union camp to find food. In fact if Early had chosen to continue the presure after his initial sucess Sheridan's army would have been broken. The same cannot be said of the Confederates at Shiloh.
It was not imposible for Early to crush Sheridan's army in that battle but he chose not to persue the routed troops and by doing so allowed Sheridan to rally and attack his army when they were unorganised.
So I would say that, overall, Early lost battle more than Sheridan won it.
For the most part I agree Early lost the battle more then Sheridan won it. At Shiloh, the confederate troops were hungry as well and stop the raid the union camps for food and other things.
Like at Shiloh, a divisions holds a ridge long enough for the route union forces to Rally, behind Sheridan(like Grant & Sherman) and route those mangy rebels.
I just want to bring up a point about Jackson's Valley campaign. The point is: can anyone off the top of their head remember one generals' name he defeated during this campaign. I give you a moment to think about it.
Banks, McDowell, Frémont, Shields, Milroy, Ord
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5fish
Times up!! Like, I thought no one can name any so we can see Jackson was not going against any top flight generals.
One note: Sheridan's Valley campaign reconquered the Shenandoah valley and his opponent was CS Gen. Early. I must say Sheridan's opponent has more name recognition then Jackson's opponents.
Jackson's force of about 17,000 defeated three cooperating Union forces, a combined force of over 60,000, and kept 50,000 troops from being sent to McClellan.
There's a very good reason why it's still studied by military officers today. It was a brilliant campaign.
I'm not an authority on Sheridan so I can't make a fair comparison between the two. I dont like Sheridan but thats more through my own views as a sort of Confederate sympathiser than anything else.
I'm not a big Sheridan fancier, either. I think I would have hated being in his command -- but he was a tough fighter and an aggressive commander who rarely seemed discouraged (well, really only at Chickamauga, for a brief moment).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nytram01
As far Jackson goes I think he was cirtainly one of the most gifted, if excentric, Generals of the time. While he was alive the Confederacy, in the east, rarely suffered a loss and after he died they rarely gained a victory. He died when he was at the height of his career, when he was the most respected and feared, from Union perspectives, General in the Confederate Forces.
I actually consider Jackson Valley campaign to be the most impressive campaign of the whole war, not Grant's Vicksburg campaign. His poor performance at the 7 Days' battle seems to be an isolated incident for him as he, to my knowledge, didn't perform that poorly again.
I live about 45 minutes from West Point, and for all the times I can recall going to the West Point Museum, there was always a special exhibit to Jackson's Valley Campaign. It really is an amazing piece of work.
Regards,
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
There's a very good reason why it's still studied by military officers today. It was a brilliant campaign.
Regards,
Cash
The list of non-notables of generals shows that Jackson went against a B-list of generals. Banks was sent to New Orleans a back water of the war, Mcdowell end up in CA. Fremiont was sent home never to get a command again, Shield's resigns, Milroy survived tell the end of the war.
The point is Jackson campaign was impressive and accomplished it's goal but shows the union had a whole bunch of B-rated leaders to start the war with.
Notice at the beginning of the war the confederate Generals became household names but by the end of the war it was the union Generals becoming household names. Winners get the headlines!
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
