Halleck's biggest contribution.

wausaubob

Colonel
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Location
Denver, CO
He most likely taught Grant about Grant's own weaknesses. Grant's staff was weak. And Grant's communication with HQs had to get better, even if it was going to a steady stream of BS.
Halleck also introduced Grant to Sherman an his OC treatment of troop movement, and McPherson whose advancement was seen as a good sign by all the young up coming west pointers.
Halleck did not know much about strategy and operations, but he did not a lot about bureaucracy and communications.
 

NedBaldwin

Major
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Location
California
IMHO...
Halleck's biggest contribution was as regional commander during Nov 61 - July 62
He sorted out the chaotic mess left by Fremont and directed, coordinated, and supported 4 synchronous movements [Buell, Grant, Pope, Curtis] involving extended logistics and cooperation with the Navy that drove the confederates from Kentucky, most of Tennessee, Missouri and Northern Arkansas, securing key strategic cities of Nashville, Columbus, Memphis, Corinth, and Helena.
 

wausaubob

Colonel
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Location
Denver, CO
Buell and Pope were gone soon enough. And Halleck pumped up Pope more than he deserved. Halleck kept Curtis involved which proved to be a good choice. I don't think Curtis needed much help from Halleck, as he did well when Halleck was in Washington.
Grant and Curtis served with success throughout the war. And I don't think that they were exceptional as to Halleck's judgement. He was wrong about Pope, but Halleck was right about several other up and coming officers.
Halleck was probably right about Grant in April of 1862. Grant was not quite ready. But by April-June of 1863 Grant was ready.
 

OpnCoronet

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Halleck's greatest contribution to Union Victory, was as a superb Desk Jockey.

He took on the onerous duty as Grant's de facto Chief of Staff in the War Dept, so that Grant could concentrate most of his energies in the field, in riding herd the AoP and keeping Meade 'up to snuff'. There is more to it than that of course, but, IMO, that is it in a nutshell
 

NedBaldwin

Major
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Location
California
Buell and Pope were gone soon enough. And Halleck pumped up Pope more than he deserved. Halleck kept Curtis involved which proved to be a good choice. I don't think Curtis needed much help from Halleck, as he did well when Halleck was in Washington. ...
Halleck did not appreciate that Curtis took leave in the fall of 1862 to attend a railroad conference.
And without Halleck as buffer, Curtis clashed with the politicians of Missouri leading Lincoln to make the comment "as I could not remove Gov. Gamble I had to remove Gen. Curtis". Curtis was replaced with Scofield and sidelined to Kansas. So his in the year after Halleck left the west was a downward slide, though not as rapid as Buell.

He did re-emerge late in the war to stop Price's Missouri raid at the battle of Westport.
 
Top