Civil War History - "What if..." DiscussionsWhat if they had attacked instead of digging in...? What if he was in charge of the army instead...? Did you ever have a "What if..." question, and you weren't sure where to post it? Here's the place to ask these speculative questions!
McClellan was a politician in uniform who had his sights on the White House. He was there so Lincoln could keep the War Democrats sweet.
I agree that he could assemble, train, equip, and supply an army for the field, but could not properly use that army in the field like, say, Grant or Sherman.
__________________ F. S. Powers
Union Ancersor: Pvt Arnuah Norton, 60th Ohio. (G-G-G Grandfather) Died at Salisbury NC, November 3, 1864
Confederate Ancestors: Captain Thomas A. Morrow, 29th Texas Cavalry (G-G-G- Uncle) and 2LT George W. Morrow, 31st Texas Cavalry (G-G-G Grandfather). Both survived the war
A Big softy? hardly, he just saved his anger for his superior officers Stanton and Lincoln, instead of using it to motivate his army to attack the CSA.
"... is too cautious & weak under grave responsibility - personally brave & energetic to a fault, he yet is wanting in moral firmness when pressed by heavy responsibility & is likely to be timid and irresolute in action."
I had never seen this comment before. It truly is ironic.
I believe it is due, in part, to the subjective aspect of any such opinion. However, its inaccuracy may also be due to the fact that--when placed in difficult circumstances--talented individuals possess the potential to actually rise to the occasion. Some people, of course, collapse under pressure and responsibility. Others are empowered by it.
I suspect this has been the experience of soldiers throughout history, up to our own day. While some are terrified and even petrified by fear... others draw upon reservoirs of strength within themselves that they never before knew existed.
__________________ Chaplain Rob Stroud, USAF (Retired) Son of SgtMaj Chuck Stroud, USMC Grandson of Corporal Charles Stroud, USA Great-Grandson of Corporal Chauncey Stroud, Fifth Iowa Volunteer Cavalry
From: 'Sunday Mercury. Writing & Fighting the Civil War (Soldiers Letters from the Battlefront); Edited by William Styple; Belle Grove Publishing (N.J.) 2004 - First Chapter (1861) Introduction by Brian Pohanka:
"It was against this backdrop of faltering morale and organizational disarray (i.e., post-Manassas) that 34-year-old General George Brinton McClellan made his grand entrance on the stage of History. The very image of confidence, dash and military zeal, the 'Young Napoleon' began to bring order out of chaos in the Federal forces at Washington. The editors of the Sunday Mercury echoed the sentiments of the uniformed correspondents, praising McClellan for his enforcement of military discipline at the same time as the General ensured that his troops were "comfortably fed and clothed, and properly provided for." By "encouraging officers and men to feel confidence in one another," McClellan won the trust and devotion of his soldiers, and forged a unique and powerful bond -- one that would continue to incite frequent and often impassioned comment in the pages of the Sunday Mercury." [emphasis added]
Hmmm....another little nugget to add to my 'Generals That Love Too Much' pet theory on McClellan.
All kidding aside, the point of interest to me is not only McClellan's arrival but his arrival at a particularly critical (and potentially vulnerable) time. Reading a series of letters from mostly New York regiments, there's a startling contrast from 'my first day in the army' and marching off to whip those Rebels (to exhilarating military airs, no less) and then arriving on the other side of Manassas...disillusioned, frustrated, and wanting to go home. McClellan is there to pick them up and dust them off after their first significant let-down and disappointment. Seems to me that how this particular incident is handled will either propel the AOP to greater cohesion (amongst the soldiers) or result in strife and discontent. This is, of course, McClellan's forte and one of his true gifts.
Sam - as a side note, I'd seen the quote before. It is, indeed, ironic.
then setting himself up for near disaster at Seven Pines.
Respectfully
Frank,
While McClellan was the man in charge he should not have allowed the failures of his subordinates to go unpunished. The failure at Seven Pines was heaped upon Silas Casey and was so done by the one whom I feel should have been held accountable Samuel P. Heintzelman.
Heintzelman was the left wing commander and the one ultimately responsible for the disposition of the troops in that wing, Casey's division included. Heintzelman was the one responsible for placing the greenest division in the whole army out in front and unsupported on either flank at the twin houses. Heintzelman was advised prior to this battle that Casey's line had been probed twice in the same place on the two days preceeding the battle and that the enemy was massing beyond his pickets. It doesn't take a military genius to figure out what is coming.
Due to the effects of Fatigue, exposure and illness Casey had only approximately 3600 effectives at his position on the Williamsburg road and held for almost four hours against 9000 seasoned Confederates. Heintzelman failed to heed the warning signs and failed to send any support even after the battle had started. Heintzelman had placed Couches division approx. 1/2 mile from the twin houses and yet he sent no reinforcements until it was too late and then it was only two regiments who were both shot up and almost captured before they too fled the field.
There is is whole host of defensive problems encountered by Casey such as his defensive works being flooded and unusable amoung others but for Heintzelman (who was not present at any point during this battle) to continually fire off dispatches (based largely on second and third hand information) to McClellan as fact and pointing fingers at Casey was wrong and used by Heintzelman as a way for him to shift the blame and scapegoat Casey in my opinion.
__________________ Sammy D Chief Cook & Bottle Washer
And this is the study of history, isn't it? Observing and analyzing men. Their causation of and interaction with the progress of a time. Moments of greatness. Pratfalls. All resulting in what we have today. McClellan had his place and contributions. Unfortunately for his ego, he did not personally save the union and the world with his monumental intellect, but he was a part of it. For that, I appreciate him. 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
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
