Hancock the Superb, Where Does He Rank?

Didn't Grant say Hancock was the best commander who didn't hold a sepaerate command?

Grant: "Hancock stands the most conspicuous figure of all the general officers who did not exercise a separate command. He commanded a corps longer than any other one, and his name was never mentioned as having committed in battle a blunder for which he was responsible. His genial disposition made him friends and his personal courage and his presence with his command in the thickest of the fight won for him the confidence of troops serving under him. No matter how hard the fight 2nd corps always felt that their commander was looking after them."
 
I could not agree more. However he met his match in the Wilderness. Even he admitted it. He was superb in his current health and limitations. Longsteet derailed him for sure.

If Hancock had been able to sit a horse for an extended time, he might have been able to see the path that led to his flank. It's an interesting what-if.

Ryan
 
There is an interesting story around Hancock's wounding at Gettysburg. It was a nail that was removed from his groin. Since the saddle he used had no nails, at least like this it led to "the confederates were firing nails". Turns out he was on an aides horse who used a saddle with nails.
 
There is an interesting story around Hancock's wounding at Gettysburg. It was a nail that was removed from his groin. Since the saddle he used had no nails, at least like this it led to "the confederates were firing nails". Turns out he was on an aides horse who used a saddle with nails.

Supposedly, he remarked that the Confederates must be desperate to fire such ammunition after prying the nail from his thigh.

Ryan
 
I was trying to look for times Hancock presented some differing opinions. Fredericksburg he had his disagreements with Burnside as noted. I also found out that Hancock was critical of Meade for not following up Pickett's Charge saying "that our lines should have advanced immediately and I believe we should have won a great victory." Some talked about replacing Meade with Hancock due to Meade's supposed lack of aggression during the Mine Run campaign. Basically the opinion was that Hancock would have attacked Lee's fortifications at Mine Run while Meade chose not too.
 
Last edited:
Hancock the Superb, Where Does He Rank?

"He has been called the greatest general of the war, save only Grant and Sherman, though obviously partisans of Thomas and Sheridan and a handful of others might dispute that opinion."
Winfield Scott Hancock
by David Jordan

View attachment 153518


Hancock was without a doubt one of the ablest commanders of the war. At Williamsburg, he helped turn the tide of the battle earning himself the nickname "the superb". At Fredericksburg, he cautioned Burnside and predicted the impending disaster. Gettysburg was his finest moment, his efforts at Cemetary Hill and during Pickett's charge did more to win the battle than perhaps any other man. During the Overland campaign, his Corps proved the most capable in the army of the Potomac pushing back Confederate forces at both the Wilderness and Spotsylvania. In his final actions of the war, Hancock suffered a rare defeat at Ream's Station, less to due with Hancock's generalship and more to do with the attritioned state of his corps, but redeemed himself at the engagement of Boydton Plank Road. I view Hancock as one of the most skilled tacticans of the war but he wasn't on par with Grant, Sherman, McClellan or Lee at the strategic or operational level.

Curious as to opinions on Winfield Scott Hancock and where you think he ranks as a general. Where does he rank among his fellow Union generals and his Confederate adversaries? Would any of you be bold enough to list him as the third best general of the war? How do you see him matching up against the likes of Thomas, Reynolds, Meade, Hooker, Sheridan, McPherson or Cleburne, Hood, Hardee, A.P. Hill, Jackson, Longstreet?
In my deck of "Generals of the Civil War" playing cards, he ranks 3♠.
(I know, scandalous. Outranked by everyone except Pope! No wonder I never win with these cards....)
 
Inside thigh. Not sure which inside. Going off what else Hancock said, he was wounded south of the copse just north of where the wall doglegs east. This is where the U.S. Regular Army monument is today. The official records say he was wrong but i have go with him.

It was his right thigh.

According to Colonel Francis Randall of the 13th Vermont, Hancock was wounded while directing Randall, possibly in moving to flank Kemper's line as it passed by. That puts him further south than the modern Regulars Monument but rather almost directly across from the intersection of Hancock and Pleasonton Aves.

Ryan
 
Don't know why Grant let a p***ant like Sheridan get rid of him.
Thanks! I screwed that up. Sheridan still ain't nothing but a p***ant!

I looked into Sheridan's and Hancock's relationship. They served together during the First and Second Battle of Deep Bottom. Hancock and Sheridan were sent to threaten Richmond draw off manpower from Petersburg, Shockingly :D, Hancock and Sheridan did not get along. Hancock regarded Sheridan as too "ambitious."
 
I looked into Sheridan's and Hancock's relationship. They served together during the First and Second Battle of Deep Bottom. Hancock and Sheridan were sent to threaten Richmond draw off manpower from Petersburg, Shockingly :D, Hancock and Sheridan did not get along. Hancock regarded Sheridan as too "ambitious."
Probably because Grant ordered them to do a job! :giggle:
 
It was his right thigh.

According to Colonel Francis Randall of the 13th Vermont, Hancock was wounded while directing Randall, possibly in moving to flank Kemper's line as it passed by. That puts him further south than the modern Regulars Monument but rather almost directly across from the intersection of Hancock and Pleasonton Aves.

Ryan
i thought so but i wasn't sure. it would seem Winfield would have been riding north, south of the copse.
 
Was Hancock ever considered for AotP commander, such as instead of Meade before Gettysburg?
Army rumor had it that just prior to Gettysburg many thought Hancock would be the new commander. In the 2cd Corps further rumor had it that Hancock thought so himself and drove his corps hard when he was passed over. To be fair all corps drove hard for Gettysburg and the 2cd Corps isolated as corps could be only knew two things, they were drove hard and everyone thought Winfield would be the new army commander.
On the political side Meade is a much more attractive candidate. Born in Spain and a Catholic he really can't run against Lincoln if he, Meade, is successful against Lee.
Promoting Hancock leads to a new question: Who gets command of the 2cd Corps? David Birney was a darling of the abolitionists and politically attractive to Lincoln for this reason. John Gibbon was the better fighter.
 
There is an interesting story around Hancock's wounding at Gettysburg. It was a nail that was removed from his groin. Since the saddle he used had no nails, at least like this it led to "the confederates were firing nails". Turns out he was on an aides horse who used a saddle with nails.
When my Mom was a young squirt, her dad kept the kids in front of the horse to pick up nails and shrapnel so the horses wouldn't step on them. It may have been somewhere around Mt. Meridian where Hunter came through. Old cut nails did dastardly deeds on the ones that were in front of the charge. I think the US army had something like it called "Bumble Bee" in Viet Nam that used cut nails.
 
When my Mom was a young squirt, her dad kept the kids in front of the horse to pick up nails and shrapnel so the horses wouldn't step on them. It may have been somewhere around Mt. Meridian where Hunter came through. Old cut nails did dastardly deeds on the ones that were in front of the charge. I think the US army had something like it called "Bumble Bee" in Viet Nam that used cut nails.
bee hive round :thumbsup:
 
Army rumor had it that just prior to Gettysburg many thought Hancock would be the new commander. In the 2cd Corps further rumor had it that Hancock thought so himself and drove his corps hard when he was passed over. To be fair all corps drove hard for Gettysburg and the 2cd Corps isolated as corps could be only knew two things, they were drove hard and everyone thought Winfield would be the new army commander.
On the political side Meade is a much more attractive candidate. Born in Spain and a Catholic he really can't run against Lincoln if he, Meade, is successful against Lee.
Promoting Hancock leads to a new question: Who gets command of the 2cd Corps? David Birney was a darling of the abolitionists and politically attractive to Lincoln for this reason. John Gibbon was the better fighter.

Was Hancock ever considered for AotP commander, such as instead of Meade before Gettysburg?

I do think Hancock would have been a better choice then Meade. Hancock was the better all around leader in my opinion and had a better chance of destroying Lee's army. One issue I do see is seniority, the AoP corps commanders might have been angered if Hancock was chosen. He only commanded a division at Chancellorsville and didn't have much experience with high level command. We can look to the argument over seniority on the 1st day of Gettysburg between Howard and Hancock as an example.

Hancock, like Meade, would also have to face off against Hooker and his friends Sickles, Butterfield, Doubleday. Hooker had an okay relationship with Meade pre Gettysburg but he always hated Hancock. Hooker saw Hancock as McClellan's golden boy, at Williamsburg McClellan overly praised Hancock when Hooker did most of the fighting. So Hooker will probably pull out all the stops to discredit Hancock and get his command back. I doubt it would work but it would be annoying.
 
Back
Top