How far could Kearny have risen?

[Hoplite]

A brave, but polarizing and ambitious general, how far could Phil Kearny have risen in the AOP, certainly corps I would think-but what about CIC?

 

[Nathan Stuart]

The one-armed Kearny, despite his disability, possessed an adventurous spirit. He was also a bold and aggressive commander who took personal risks. It was this risk-taking behavior that resulted in him being shot and killed at Chantilly (Sept. 1, 1862) when he rode too close to Confederate lines reconnoitering ahead of his troops.

Private John Haley of the 17th, Maine, wrote the following description of Kearny in his Memoir, 'The Rebel Yell and the Yankee Hurrah' on Oct. 7, 1862:
..."Phil Kearney , a name synonymous with daredeviltry and recklessness beyond equal. He was absolutely fearless and 'longed for the fray'. "...

Thought Kearny was an experienced and capable Brigade and Division commander, who preferred hands-on action in frontline combat leadership. Don't think, though, that the backseat role and responsibilities of Corps (or higher) command would have suited his temperament.

 

[jackt62]

Don't think, though, that the backseat role and responsibilities of Corps (or higher) command would have suited his temperament.

I agree. Kearny was probably too reckless and combat-hungry to perform effectively in high command.

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

Phil Kearny is the Union equivalent of John Bell Hood.

 

[Hoplite]

I agree. Kearny was probably too reckless and combat-hungry to perform effectively in high command.

OK- look at it this way. III Corps after 2nd Manassas- back to DC for garrison, Heintzleman no longer in command.
Kearny would have been senior and that counted for alot in the AOP at that time. When in action again at Fredericksburg- Stoneman of all people was in command, then succeeded by Sickles for Chancellorsville.

So is it far fetched to think that Kearny would have not succeeded to III Corps command?

He did have political connections and was an unabashed self promoter, not to mention rich as all get out!

 

[Belfoured]

OK- look at it this way. III Corps after 2nd Manassas- back to DC for garrison, Heintzleman no longer in command.
Kearny would have been senior and that counted for alot in the AOP at that time. When in action again at Fredericksburg- Stoneman of all people was in command, then succeeded by Sickles for Chancellorsville.

So is it far fetched to think that Kearny would have not succeeded to III Corps command?

He did have political connections and was an unabashed self promoter, not to mention rich as all get out!

What were his "political connections"? He actually was denied a commission from New York because of the "scandalous" issues involving his marriage and divorce, while others like Sickles were able to use their connections. I'm not aware that he had influential sponsors similar to others, such as - for example - division commander Israel Richardson, who had strong ties to Zacharia Chandler and the Michigan GOP.

 

[Jamieva]

Division command was as high as I would have trusted him. He didn't have the command presence or decorum to be a corps commander.

 

[JeffFromSyracuse]

Hennessy speculates in Return to Bull Run that some of Kearney's actions at 2nd Bull Run could have put him in hot water if he had lived.

 

[Hoplite]

What were his "political connections"? He actually was denied a commission from New York because of the "scandalous" issues involving his marriage and divorce, while others like Sickles were able to use their connections. I'm not aware that he had influential sponsors similar to others, such as - for example - division commander Israel Richardson, who had strong ties to Zacharia Chandler and the Michigan GOP.

scandalous issues defines Sickles as well as does no command presence and lack of decorum.
So everyone is saying that despite his seniority- he would have stayed at division level while Sickles or someone else gets III Corps command?
IMHO Unless he is found guilty of a Fitz John Porter action, or he gets fed up and resigns, I just cannot imagine him not succeeding to III Corps Command.

 

[AA484]

Probably corps command. The question was how far could he have risen, not how well he would have done in a higher position.

 

[trice]

I would guess Kearney would have had a shot at a Corps command in the AoP in the coming months if he had lived. Certainly looking at the situation in September of 1863 we can find slots to put him into between then and Gettysburg. I am not sure how well he would have done at that level; certainly the AoP needed some aggressive leaders at the time.

As far as scandal goes, it would be hard to top Sickles, who in 1859 murdered his wife's lover (Phillip Barton Key II, the son of Francis Scott Key) by shooting him in Lafayette Square, across the street from the White House. Sickles then became the first to plead "temporary insanity" in the U. S., with Stanton as one of his attorneys.

 

[AA484]

I would guess Kearney would have had a shot at a Corps command in the AoP in the coming months if he had lived. Certainly looking at the situation in September of 1863 we can find slots to put him into between then and Gettysburg. I am not sure how well he would have done at that level; certainly the AoP needed some aggressive leaders at the time.

As far as scandal goes, it would be hard to top Sickles, who in 1859 murdered his wife's lover (Phillip Barton Key II, the son of Francis Scott Key) by shooting him in Lafayette Square, across the street from the White House. Sickles then became the first to plead "temporary insanity" in the U. S., with Stanton as one of his attorneys.

I imagine he'd have been given III Corps command over Stoneman in late 1862.

 

[jackt62]

OK- look at it this way. III Corps after 2nd Manassas- back to DC for garrison, Heintzleman no longer in command.
Kearny would have been senior and that counted for alot in the AOP at that time. When in action again at Fredericksburg- Stoneman of all people was in command, then succeeded by Sickles for Chancellorsville.

So is it far fetched to think that Kearny would have not succeeded to III Corps command?

He did have political connections and was an unabashed self promoter, not to mention rich as all get out!

Let's make a distinction between how far Kearny could have risen, and whether he should have risen to whatever that level was. In that regard, it is certainly possible that Kearny could have advanced to command of III Corps in the period between 2nd Manassas and Gettysburg. There is no reason to think that folks like Stoneman and Sickles were far superior choices to command that corps within that period. I'm not well versed in any political connections he might have had, but his wealth and social notoriety would probably not have counted for much either way. He was a proven battlefield commander, and his past criticism of McClellan would probably have stood him in good stead with the radical Republicans. The question of whether or not Kearny would have made an effective corps commander is another matter. I'm wondering how he would have interacted with Meade at Gettysburg.

 

[Hoplite]

Let's make a distinction between how far Kearny could have risen, and whether he should have risen to whatever that level was. In that regard, it is certainly possible that Kearny could have advanced to command of III Corps in the period between 2nd Manassas and Gettysburg. There is no reason to think that folks like Stoneman and Sickles were far superior choices to command that corps within that period. I'm not well versed in any political connections he might have had, but his wealth and social notoriety would probably not have counted for much either way. He was a proven battlefield commander, and his past criticism of McClellan would probably have stood him in good stead with the radical Republicans. The question of whether or not Kearny would have made an effective corps commander is another matter. I'm wondering how he would have interacted with Meade at Gettysburg.

And he was vehemently anti-McClellan in the corps that was the poster child for anti- McClellanites!
He also disliked Hooker, so what role that would have played out in him taking over III Corps is something to think about.

 

[trice]

Kearney's rank as a brigadier dates from May 17, 1861
Sickles' rank as a brigadier dates from September 3, 1861
Stoneman's rank as a brigadier dates from August 13, 1861

Sickles was on leave for 2nd Bull Run and Chantilly. He was at Washington with III Corps during Antietam.
Stoneman was in the cavalry.
Kearney died at Chantilly.

Kearney, senior in rank to both men, most likely would have been appointed to command of III Corps when Heintzelman left in October of 1862. Assuming he had survived Chantilly, of course.

 

[Belfoured]

scandalous issues defines Sickles as well as does no command presence and lack of decorum.
So everyone is saying that despite his seniority- he would have stayed at division level while Sickles or someone else gets III Corps command?
IMHO Unless he is found guilty of a Fitz John Porter action, or he gets fed up and resigns, I just cannot imagine him not succeeding to III Corps Command.

That wasn't my point. Whether Sickles merited his connections or not, he had them. Kearny didn't have enough to get the commission from his home state. You said he had "political connections" - not me - and I was trying to find out what those were.

 

[Belfoured]

Kearney's rank as a brigadier dates from May 17, 1861
Sickles' rank as a brigadier dates from September 3, 1861
Stoneman's rank as a brigadier dates from August 13, 1861

Sickles was on leave for 2nd Bull Run and Chantilly. He was at Washington with III Corps during Antietam.
Stoneman was in the cavalry.
Kearney died at Chantilly.

Kearney, senior in rank to both men, most likely would have been appointed to command of III Corps when Heintzelman left in October of 1862. Assuming he had survived Chantilly, of course.

Of course, there could have been other candidates in a hypothetical. For example, Israel B. Richardson was a capable division commander who - unlike Kearney - did have strong political connections and also dated as a Brigadier from May 1861. Yeah - he was MW at Antietam but if we can keep Phil alive past Chantilly we can keep Old Dick alive past Antietam.

 

[Belfoured]

I would guess Kearney would have had a shot at a Corps command in the AoP in the coming months if he had lived. Certainly looking at the situation in September of 1863 we can find slots to put him into between then and Gettysburg. I am not sure how well he would have done at that level; certainly the AoP needed some aggressive leaders at the time.

As far as scandal goes, it would be hard to top Sickles, who in 1859 murdered his wife's lover (Phillip Barton Key II, the son of Francis Scott Key) by shooting him in Lafayette Square, across the street from the White House. Sickles then became the first to plead "temporary insanity" in the U. S., with Stanton as one of his attorneys.

True, but my point was only that Sickles had the "political connections" to overcome scandal that Kearney did not have. The OP said he had "political connections". That's news to me, but I'm certainly open to evidence that I may be unaware of. Not getting a commission from your home state suggests that there weren't a whole lot of folks willing to make a call.

 

[CanadianCanuck]

While there is a genuinely excellent and enjoyable story from a few years ago which does tell of Kearny rising to command the Army of the Potomac, I personally think Kearny was a division commander, and any higher may have earned him the Peter principle. His dashing and personal charisma were well seen in history, but I do think that based on his often personal attitudes for command, he was probably going to fail past the division level.

 

[GwilymT]

A brave, but polarizing and ambitious general, how far could Phil Kearny have risen in the AOP, certainly corps I would think-but what about CIC?

What do you think could have gone differently to precipitate his rise? He ended up where he did, is there a "what if" you are proposing?