How Do You Rate Sheridan's Performance in 1864?

Rate Sheridan's 1864 Performance on a Scale of 1 to 10.

  • 10 - The best!

    Votes: 1 7.7%
  • 9

    Votes: 1 7.7%
  • 8

    Votes: 2 15.4%
  • 7

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 6

    Votes: 1 7.7%
  • 5

    Votes: 2 15.4%
  • 4

    Votes: 1 7.7%
  • 3

    Votes: 2 15.4%
  • 2

    Votes: 2 15.4%
  • 1 - The worst!

    Votes: 1 7.7%

  • Total voters
    13

JeffBrooks

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Location
Hutto, TX
On a scale from 1 to 10, with 1 being the worst and 10 being the best, how you do you rate Phil Sheridan's performance in 1864 as the commander of the Cavalry Corps of the Army of the Potomac and as the commander of the Union forces fighting Jubal Early in the Shenandoah Valley?
 
Bumped.

As I mentioned in another thread, when I first started reading about Sheridan when I was a boy, I was generally given the impression that Sheridan was a great general, part of a "triumvirate" along with Grant and Sherman that won the war for the North. As I have delved more deeply into the campaigns of 1864, this idea has fallen apart. As the commander of the cavalry of the Army of the Potomac, he basically dropped the ball completely when it came to scouting and reconnaissance and completely botched clearing the roads for the advance from the Wilderness to Spotsylvania. He won the Battle of Yellow Tavern, with odds of three-to-one in his favor, but he certainly can't claim personal credit for the killing of Jeb Stuart (which belongs to Private Huff). And his raid really didn't accomplish much of any importance. Later on, Wade Hampton and Fitzhugh Lee trounced him at Trevilian Station.

As commander of the Union forces in the Shenandoah Valley, Sheridan had about 40,000 men against Early's 15,000. Yet he still nearly botched the Third Battle of Winchester through the simple mistake of funneling most of his army through a single defile. He failed to pursue Early after both Third Winchester and Fisher's Hill. He underestimated Early so much that his army was surprised and nearly routed at Cedar Creek.

I give Sheridan high marks for his ability to inspire men in the field, but I can't really consider him that good a general.
 
Sheridan was, IMO, not really a cavalryman and did not think like one to any great extent. He was really an infantryman, with a lust for battle(and Glory). Horses were to be used to get at the enemy faster(than on foot) drive into them and keep driving until they broke.
I think, he was the instrument by which Lee was run down and brought to bay at Appomattox, effectively ending the War. I am not sure that there was anyone else in the AoP at that time, who could have driven his men so relentlessly and fast, to have done it, except Grant, and he was busy keeping his other commanders to the chase.
Probably the best that can be said about him is that he was a Warrior.
 
The man got the job done in the Shanandoah Valley. That said, he didn't have to tangle with Stonewall Jackson while doing so. But he deserves high marks for turning Cedar Creek into a victory when Early just about had them beat.
 

Learn About Us
About CivilWarTalk
Contact the Webmaster
Meet the Staff
Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
Register
Browse Forums
View Today's Discussions
Search the Forum
Get Help
FAQ
Student Guide
Forum Rules & Etiquette
Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top