The loss of BG Zollicoffer; a major blow to the Confederates?

major bill said:

may have deprived the Confederacy of a fine general.

Click to expand...

Rhea Cole said:

The astute Mary Chestnut pointedly compared Lincoln's removal of officers who failed to perform vs Davis' refusal to fire obvious incompetents.

Click to expand...

Stryker65 said:

I never realized that ! But very true!

Click to expand...

major bill said:

Felix Kirt Zollicoffer had seen active military service during the Second Seminole War but was not trained at a military school. He was mostly known as a newspaperman and politician.

Zollicoffer was the Adjutant General of Tennessee which lead him to be become an early Confederate Civil War general. His untimely death at the Battle of Spring Mills may have deprived the Confederacy of a fine general.

He was on the agressive side early in the War, but was not overly sucessful. We will never know if he could have done turned his tactical skills. He had not attended West Point so probably would not have obtained senior rank. Still his administrative skills learned as Adjutant General may gave served him well as a major general.

Click to expand...

East Tennessee Roots said:

Zollicoffer worked hard at getting along with area Unionists when he could. Kirby Smith quickly changed all that and made committed Unionists out of people who were, at best, neutral.

Click to expand...

Nathan Stuart said:

Felix Zollicoffer, as a political general with little military experience and possibly limited leadership abilities, may have been overly criticized by many.

As a recently appointed B-G, he was assigned to district command in the East Tennessee region in July '61.

But the criticisms of Zollicoffer in this role might have been somewhat unfair. According to Thomas Connelly in 'Army of the Heartland' (pp. 86-87), Zollicoffer was assigned to command the longest section of Johnston's line, with a small force comprising many men that were either inadequately armed or completely unarmed. The terrain in East Tennessee that he controlled was also rugged and inhospitable (having poor food production, a large number of inhabitants with pro-Union sentiments and the worst roads and lines of communications).

At the battle of Mill Springs (Jan. 19, '62), it was the recently arrived M-G George Crittenden (who took over command) that ordered the unwise Confederate attack there (that apparently Zollicoffer opposed), and resulted in the death of Zollicoffer.

At the time of his death, Zollicoffer remained untested and unknown, as a field commander. Thought at best, Zollicoffer's loss might have been a minor blow, but not a major blow, to the Confederacy.

Click to expand...

Nathan Stuart said:

Felix Zollicoffer, as a political general with little military experience and possibly limited leadership abilities, may have been overly criticized by many.

As a recently appointed B-G, he was assigned to district command in the East Tennessee region in July '61.

But the criticisms of Zollicoffer in this role might have been somewhat unfair. According to Thomas Connelly in 'Army of the Heartland' (pp. 86-87), Zollicoffer was assigned to command the longest section of Johnston's line, with a small force comprising many men that were either inadequately armed or completely unarmed. The terrain in East Tennessee that he controlled was also rugged and inhospitable (having poor food production, a large number of inhabitants with pro-Union sentiments and the worst roads and lines of communications).

At the battle of Mill Springs (Jan. 19, '62), it was the recently arrived M-G George Crittenden (who took over command) that ordered the unwise Confederate attack there (that apparently Zollicoffer opposed), and resulted in the death of Zollicoffer.

At the time of his death, Zollicoffer remained untested and unknown, as a field commander. Thought at best, Zollicoffer's loss might have been a minor blow, but not a major blow, to the Confederacy.

Click to expand...

Nathan Stuart said:

Felix Zollicoffer, as a political general with little military experience and possibly limited leadership abilities, may have been overly criticized by many.

As a recently appointed B-G, he was assigned to district command in the East Tennessee region in July '61.

But the criticisms of Zollicoffer in this role might have been somewhat unfair. According to Thomas Connelly in 'Army of the Heartland' (pp. 86-87), Zollicoffer was assigned to command the longest section of Johnston's line, with a small force comprising many men that were either inadequately armed or completely unarmed. The terrain in East Tennessee that he controlled was also rugged and inhospitable (having poor food production, a large number of inhabitants with pro-Union sentiments and the worst roads and lines of communications).

At the battle of Mill Springs (Jan. 19, '62), it was the recently arrived M-G George Crittenden (who took over command) that ordered the unwise Confederate attack there (that apparently Zollicoffer opposed), and resulted in the death of Zollicoffer.

At the time of his death, Zollicoffer remained untested and unknown, as a field commander. Thought at best, Zollicoffer's loss might have been a minor blow, but not a major blow, to the Confederacy.

Click to expand...

Sheltowee said:

I kind of believe- had he survived, and learned from his mistakes- he would have performed fine.

Click to expand...

Nathan Stuart said:

Maybe Zollicoffer was a better strategist than a combat leader in the field. Thomas Connelly seemed to think so (@ p. 87).

Thought your point made is highly relevant here - analyzing field leaders in terms of their capacity to learn from their mistakes, to improve oneself.

Also got the impression that many expected too much from Zollicoffer, a bit like for Johnston, but on a less grand scale.

Click to expand...

Rhea Cole said:

It is, of course, impossible to know how Zollicofer would have would have progressed with experience. What we do know is that it is highly unlikely that he would have had "considerable influence " as posed in the question.

The ossified command structure of CSA forces was not open to talent. The same cohort of individuals held all of the senior positions throughout the war.

Exhibit "A" is Bentonville. Even at the last hurrah the same old cast of characters that had never defeated Sherman's army group did what they always did. All over Tennessee families were thrown into mourning just for a show of old men's bravado.

The astute Mary Chestnut pointedly compared Lincoln's removal of officers who failed to perform vs Davis' refusal to fire obvious incompetents. Even the most inept general officer of the war, Commissary General Lucius Bellinger Northrop continued his Homer Simpson like mismanagement until the eminent fall of Richmond.

Lucius Northrop (U.S. National Park Service)

www.nps.gov

At a time when 50 was considered old age, the CSA's command structure resembles the residents of an old folk's home. Their Union counterparts were 10 to 15 years younger than they were. There is no reason to believe that a man of Zollicofer's natural talent would have effected the CSA's war in any significant way. He was not an old army crony & that was that.

Note: It is worth noting the prewar zero sum military culture. Septuagenarians & even octogenarians held onto to senior positions until death did they part. Men of exceptional talent like Lee only achieved field rank of major & above at retirement age.

Davis et al were only doing what came naturally to them. Age, not talent determined who received senior ( in both senses of the word ) command in the CSA.

Click to expand...

13 IL Cav & 64 GA Inf said:

In some cases it was not age, but friendship with Jefferson Davis that was the determining factor.

Click to expand...