Civil War History - The South & Western TheatersCheck this forum for all South and Western Theater Questions. Included are the Western, Pacific, Trans-Mississippi, & Lower Seaboard and Gulf Approach Theaters.
general D.C.Buell - for saving Grant`s army at Shiloh
general G.Thomas - for everything
general Hooker - everyone are looking on him through his actions at Chancellorsville, but he was a very good corps commander what he has proved at Chattanooga
general A.P.Stewart - probably the best corps commander of AoT
general J.B.Hood - everyone judge him for his actions during Franklin-Nashville, but he did pretty well at Atlanta in contrast to J.E.Johnston aka "I`ll retreat instead".
I am not saying they were great or something (except G.Thomas ), but they deserve much more credit then they were given comparing to many other overrated officers.
__________________
Nico, Maréchal d'Empire
Last edited by Nico_Davout : 01-30-2008 at 07:02 AM.
general J.B.Hood - everyone judge him for his actions during Franklin-Nashville, but he did pretty well at Atlanta in contrast to J.E.Johnston aka "I`ll retreat instead".
Can't let this one pass, Nico. Hood very nearly destroyed his army in and around Atlanta. He succeeded in doing that at Nashville. Johnston's constant retreating gave up territory but preserved a fighting force that might well have kept Sherman away from his famous/infamous march.
Quote:
general D.C.Buell - for saving Grant`s army at Shiloh
Nor this one. Buell got a few regiments across the river when the first day's fighting had all but ceased. The next morning his troops were undoubtedly helpful, but I haven't been convinced that Grant's couldn't have run Beauregard back to Corinth on their own.
Good to see you back.
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
Nor this one. Buell got a few regiments across the river when the first day's fighting had all but ceased. The next morning his troops were undoubtedly helpful, but I haven't been convinced that Grant's couldn't have run Beauregard back to Corinth on their own.
I think Buell's biggest contribution at Shiloh was the fact that knowing he was enroute forced the CS advance and attack. Although PGT's plan was falling apart and he wanted to call off the attack. ASJ had no choice given the fact waiting to attack could have allowed Grant and Buell to consolidate.
Although PGT's plan was falling apart and he wanted to call off the attack. ASJ had no choice given the fact waiting to attack could have allowed Grant and Buell to consolidate.
Very much agree. Thanks for adding to the post.
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
Can't let this one pass, Nico. Hood very nearly destroyed his army in and around Atlanta.
Hood, during his fights around Atlanta lost approximatly the same numer of troops as J.E.J. did during his retreat, but no one have ever said that J.E.J. "very nearly destroyed his army during retreat to Atlanta". Why is that ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ole
Buell got a few regiments across the river when the first day's fighting had all but ceased. The next morning his troops were undoubtedly helpful, but I haven't been convinced that Grant's couldn't have run Beauregard back to Corinth on their own.
Today we know that CS army was in bad condition on evening the 6th. However Grant did not know that. What he knew was that rebel has surprised and beat him on the 6th. Without Buell he could/would probably withdrawn. The message to Buell can give doubts if Grant would try to run Bo to Corinth alone:
"HEADQUARTERS DISTRICT OF WEST TENNESSEE,
Pittsburg, April 6, 1862.
COMMANDING OFFICER ADVANCE FORCES (BUELL'S ARMY),
Near Pittsburg:
The attack on my forces has been very spirited from early this morning. The appearance of fresh troops in the field now would have a powerful effect, both by inspiring our men and disheartening the enemy. If you will get upon the field, leaving all your baggage on the east bank of the river, it will be more to our advantage, and possibly save the day to us. The rebel forces are estimated at over 100,000 men. My headquarters will be in the log building on the top of the hill, where you will be furnished a staff officer to guide you to your place on the field.
I'm going to vote for a very unlikely character: George B. McClellan. It's true he wasn't successful at his primary mission, destruction of Lee's army and capture of Richmond. He was not a successful general. But he is certainly underrated. McClellan never pulled a Fredericksburg, a Chancellorsville or a Second Bull Run. He avoided battle, dug in, went on the defensive, etc. but he didn't throws his men against lines of entrenched rifles and artillery to no end.
McClellan is sometimes credited with being a great organizer. Well, he organized maybe, but compared to Lee's organization of the ANV, he doesn't compare well.
I'm going to vote for a very unlikely character: George B. McClellan. It's true he wasn't successful at his primary mission, destruction of Lee's army and capture of Richmond. He was not a successful general. But he is certainly underrated. McClellan never pulled a Fredericksburg, a Chancellorsville or a Second Bull Run. He avoided battle, dug in, went on the defensive, etc. but he didn't throws his men against lines of entrenched rifles and artillery to no end.
Well Matt, I guess you are a prime candidate for the McClellen Society.
I clicked over to the society. I'm not really a joiner, but kudos to people willing to take a truely unpopular view. Dimitri Rostov over at Civil War Bookshelf is another pro McClellan man. He's a little unhinged as well(don't get him started on James McPherson), but interesting. Ethan Rafuse had something nice to say about McClellan in the latest North and South Magazine about his use, or lack of use of cavalry. I didn't find it very convincing, but he knows more than me.
I don't really think McClellan was good at fighting. I mean, if he was given the endless amount of time, men and materials he demanded, I don't think he would have eventually turned up a victory(unlike someone like Montgomery in WWII). He was very conservative around slavery too. But he was too smart to make some of the more egregious blunders his replacements did.
I'm also not a big fan of Rosecrans but when it comes to stability and real strategic planning and ability I think he should be held beside Thomas... who I think was a very underrated General.
Lil Mac was a superb QM, a job he was very good at that he should have stayed with.
Hooker a good corps commander no more.
Burnside a good Brigade commander no more.
Hood, anything more than a Brigade and the man was out of his league. His actions at Atlanta were inexcusable and his actions afterward destroyed his army. His only success at all where when he managed to get Sherman chasing him through North Georgia when he was gobbling up isolated garrisons.
If any one underated CS commander I can think of it would be Bowen, who died before he could acheive higher command.
But then again there are quite a few who we would look at as underrated.
__________________
Shane Christen
American Legion Post 352
SUVCW Camp Abernethy# 48
Lifetime NRA member
3rd MN VI
For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow. Eccl 1:18
I think Logan was never given a fair shake especially not receiving a corps command after the Atlanta Campaign. There were also a number of division and brigade commanders in the 17th Corps that were overlooked, Blair, Legget to name a couple.
__________________
'If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed,
if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed.'
Mark Twain
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
), but they deserve much more credit then they were given comparing to many other overrated officers.
Linear Mode
