John Pope To Virginia

[tony_gunter]

What was the thought process behind bringing John Pope east? Was it Halleck's idea? How was it pitched and who agreed?

Why wasn't another of the major generals chosen, and how would things have played out differently if another general was chosen?

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

Pope was a reliable Republican with the approval of the Radical Republicans surrounding Lincoln, and he had had success in the West, particularly with his campaign to take Island No. 10. Compared to the Democrats in high command of the AoP, he was considered to be a viable alternative whose politics aligned with the goals of the administration. The Radicals wanted him, and so did Lincoln, so he was brought east and given command of the new Army of Virginia.

That command might have been more successful under the command of another officer. The question is, which one? McDowell? No, he had already failed in army command. Banks? Jackson had already proven him not competent to command an army. Sigel? Yikes--that's a scary thought. Franklin? Too cautious. Burnside? By his own admission, not competent, and also a McClellan loyalist. Hooker? Maybe, since he was a reliable Republican, but too junior at that time.

The other potential candidates were all junior, such as Reynolds, Meade and Kearny (plus Meade was recuperating from his wound during the Seven Days). And Fitz-John Porter, V Corps commander, was a McClellan loyalist who was court-martialed after the Second Bull Run Campaign to send a message to Little Mac.

At that stage of the war, there simply weren't many viable options. There was still too much political deadwood at the top, and the competent officers who came to the forefront of the Union war effort in 1864 and 1865 weren't ready yet or were still too junior.

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

This is an interesting and thought-provoking study of the Army of Virginia. While I don't agree with many of Matsui's conclusions, the book is insightful and should help to flesh out the response to your question.

The First Republican Army: The Army of Virginia and the Radicalization of the Civil War (A Nation Divided: Studies in the Civil War Era): Matsui, John H.: 9780813939278: Amazon.com: Books

The First Republican Army: The Army of Virginia and the Radicalization of the Civil War (A Nation Divided: Studies in the Civil War Era) [Matsui, John H.] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. The First Republican Army: The Army of Virginia and the Radicalization of the Civil War...

www.amazon.com

 

[tony_gunter]

Pope was a reliable Republican with the approval of the Radical Republicans surrounding Lincoln, and he had had success in the West, particularly with his campaign to take Island No. 10. Compared to the Democrats in high command of the AoP, he was considered to be a viable alternative whose politics aligned with the goals of the administration. The Radicals wanted him, and so did Lincoln, so he was brought east and given command of the new Army of Virginia.

That command might have been more successful under the command of another officer. The question is, which one? McDowell? No, he had already failed in army command. Banks? Jackson had already proven him not competent to command an army. Sigel? Yikes--that's a scary thought. Franklin? Too cautious. Burnside? By his own admission, not competent, and also a McClellan loyalist. Hooker? Maybe, since he was a reliable Republican, but too junior at that time.

The other potential candidates were all junior, such as Reynolds, Meade and Kearny (plus Meade was recuperating from his wound during the Seven Days). And Fitz-John Porter, V Corps commander, was a McClellan loyalist who was court-martialed after the Second Bull Run Campaign to send a message to Little Mac.

At that stage of the war, there simply weren't many viable options. There was still too much political deadwood at the top, and the competent officers who came to the forefront of the Union war effort in 1864 and 1865 weren't ready yet or were still too junior.

Oh dear lord, they went looking for a Republican specifically? I guess that answers why they didn't tag Grant, Rosecrans, or Thomas.

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

Oh dear lord, they went looking for a Republican specifically? I guess that answers why they didn't tag Grant, Rosecrans, or Thomas.

Precisely.

 

[breckod]

They had Republicans in Banks and Sigel, but Pope was the relatively rare Republican with a West Point pedigree. Plus, on paper his record up to that point looked good.

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

They had Republicans in Banks and Sigel, but Pope was the relatively rare Republican with a West Point pedigree. Plus, on paper his record up to that point looked good.

Good point. As I said in my original answer, Jackson had already proven Banks incompetent to command an army, so putting him in command of an even larger army was not any sort of an option.