JSylvester
Private
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2021
Cedar Creek: "One of the most daring and brilliant attacks recorded in history"?
In the following I would like to present for discussion an assessment of Jubal Early's attack at Cedar Creek, taken from Jeffry D. Wert's "From Winchester to Cedar Creek - The Shenandoah Campaign of 1864".
Personally, I consider both the planning, based mainly on Gordon, and the execution up to the "fatal stop" to be incomparably brilliant given the circumstances and the material available. The only fault, in my view, is that Early subsequently overstimulated his hand. Here are some thoughts from my perspective:
-For the 19th century, I know of no battle whose strategic planning involved a successful night march of an entire army corps along a trail that was in part only passable in single file and yet was not discovered.
-The same applies to the three successive attacks by Gordon, Kershaw and Wharton, which were so perfectly timed that enemy forces that were in the process of reorganisation were crushed again before their completion.
-Such drastic differences in numbers make it almost miraculous that even one of the attacks was crowned with success, let alone all three. According to his own statements (which are in any case accepted as valid with regard to the loss calculations) Early had the following division strengths (effectices) involved in the battle:
Gordon: 1,700 (three brigades)
Pegram: 1,200 (three brigades)
Ramseur: 2,100 (four brigades)
Kershaw: 2,700 (four brigades)
Wharton: 1,100 (three brigades)
Rosser: 1,200 (three brigades)
= 8,800 infantry, 1,200 cavalry
-Simm's Brigade from Kershaw's Division, for example, had just 520 men and yet the men managed to overrun Thoburn's Division head-on, subsequently capturing a battery, turning the guns and thus helping to route Emory's Corps. From today's perspective, something like that seems almost surreal. The same applies to Wharton, who with 1,100 men in three brigades, one of which was led by a captain, crossed Cedar Creek before Grover's eyes and broke through his lines.
-The quality of the Confederate troops was clearly below average. Every unit was far below target strength and commanded by officers of lower rank. Many of the men, for example Simms' Georgians, were replacements and not veterans. The morale of the troops should have been at rock bottom after the defeats at Winchester and Fisher's Hill, Tom's Brook and "The Burning". Nevertheless, they brought Sheridan's better equipped, well fed and highly motivated troops to the brink of a crushing defeat.
What is your opinion?
In the following I would like to present for discussion an assessment of Jubal Early's attack at Cedar Creek, taken from Jeffry D. Wert's "From Winchester to Cedar Creek - The Shenandoah Campaign of 1864".
Personally, I consider both the planning, based mainly on Gordon, and the execution up to the "fatal stop" to be incomparably brilliant given the circumstances and the material available. The only fault, in my view, is that Early subsequently overstimulated his hand. Here are some thoughts from my perspective:
-For the 19th century, I know of no battle whose strategic planning involved a successful night march of an entire army corps along a trail that was in part only passable in single file and yet was not discovered.
-The same applies to the three successive attacks by Gordon, Kershaw and Wharton, which were so perfectly timed that enemy forces that were in the process of reorganisation were crushed again before their completion.
-Such drastic differences in numbers make it almost miraculous that even one of the attacks was crowned with success, let alone all three. According to his own statements (which are in any case accepted as valid with regard to the loss calculations) Early had the following division strengths (effectices) involved in the battle:
Gordon: 1,700 (three brigades)
Pegram: 1,200 (three brigades)
Ramseur: 2,100 (four brigades)
Kershaw: 2,700 (four brigades)
Wharton: 1,100 (three brigades)
Rosser: 1,200 (three brigades)
= 8,800 infantry, 1,200 cavalry
-Simm's Brigade from Kershaw's Division, for example, had just 520 men and yet the men managed to overrun Thoburn's Division head-on, subsequently capturing a battery, turning the guns and thus helping to route Emory's Corps. From today's perspective, something like that seems almost surreal. The same applies to Wharton, who with 1,100 men in three brigades, one of which was led by a captain, crossed Cedar Creek before Grover's eyes and broke through his lines.
-The quality of the Confederate troops was clearly below average. Every unit was far below target strength and commanded by officers of lower rank. Many of the men, for example Simms' Georgians, were replacements and not veterans. The morale of the troops should have been at rock bottom after the defeats at Winchester and Fisher's Hill, Tom's Brook and "The Burning". Nevertheless, they brought Sheridan's better equipped, well fed and highly motivated troops to the brink of a crushing defeat.
What is your opinion?