A Question About Hancock

[Andy Cardinal]

I just finished reading Defeating Lee: A History of the Second Corps Army of the Potomac by Lawrence A. Kreiser, Jr. In it, Kreiser made a statement I had not heard before:

"In one of his few military weaknesses, Hancock had little ability to read the terrain. According to Francis Walker, the then assistant adjutant general of the Second Corps, it was not in Hancock to "know instinctively" the lay of the land beyond the next bend." [Kindle location 1976]

He cites Walker's history of the 2nd CorpsI was curious if anyone had run across this criticism before?

 

[Bee]

I touch on it in this thread:

https://civilwartalk.com/threads/wi...-superb-after-gettysburg.140371/#post-1690477

 

[Andy Cardinal]

I touch on it in this thread:

https://civilwartalk.com/threads/wi...-superb-after-gettysburg.140371/#post-1690477

Thanks Bee, I didn't remember that particular post.

 

[Bee]

Thanks Bee, I didn't remember that particular post.

Understandable, as it was not about secession, black Confederates, or slavery causing the war

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

I think the followup question would be whether he was good with terrain and reconnoitering before his wound.

 

[Andy Cardinal]

I found the passage in Walker's history of the Second Corps (pp. 533-534):

"Finally, it must, in fairness, be confessed that topographical insight was not one of Hancock's strong points. On a field of battle over which he could cast his rapid and searching glamce, no man surpassed -- few soldiers, living or dead, ever equalled -- the commander of the Second Corps in the promptitude and directness with which he made appropriate dispositions, whether for attack or for defence, however sharp and sudden the emergency. Even in a region which his eye could not scan, but of which a good map was available, Hancock's well-trained and well-stored mind rarely failed to suggest the proper means of meeting the moves of the enemy or of pursuing his own initiative. But of that faculty of topographical insight, one peculiar form of genius which enables some men, even in a strange country, to know instinctively the direction of roafd, "the lay of the land," the course of streams, the trend of ranges -- all upon indications so slight and subtle as to escape the observation of men ordinarily gifted -- of this rare, but, in a commander or staff officer, most useful faculty Hancock had possessed little."

 

[rpkennedy]

I think that it's a fair critique. Hancock seemed to be more concerned about how he could get at the enemy rather than the minutiae of the topography.

Of course, he did agree that Gettysburg was very good ground to fight a battle.

Ryan

 

[Andy Cardinal]

That's what surprised me about the comment, although to fair everybody has some weaknesses.

Also, I suppose the strength of the position at Gettysburg was so obvious that even Howard recognized it.

 

[infomanpa]

Didn't Meade, headquartered at Taneytown on July 1, specifically direct Hancock to ride ahead to Gettysburg and then report back to him, to confirm that the location was good? It would seem that Meade had great confidence in Hancock's ability to evaluate the land.

 

[rpkennedy]

Didn't Meade, headquartered at Taneytown on July 1, specifically direct Hancock to ride ahead to Gettysburg and then report back to him, to confirm that the location was good? It would seem that Meade had great confidence in Hancock's ability to evaluate the land.

I think it's more accurate to say that Meade trusted Hancock's judgment more than Howard's. Plus he trusted Hancock to determine if the situation could be salvaged there after Reynolds' death.

Ryan