Lee vs Alexander?

[bamaman]

Pick your favorite Civil War general or any CW general and compare them to any general in any war world wide prior to 1865. How were they better,? Leadership Tactics. Inspirationa? Bravery? Your personal opinion. Have fun with this.

 

[RedRover]

This reminds me of a cable tv show, I think on the "history" channel, that pitted Napoleon against Washington... and had them sword fighting.... Washington hands down winner!

But I'll have at it.
I've always been interested in Turner Ashby... although he was only a commissioned general for a brief period before his death in action... he had essentially commanded a brigade worth of cavalry companies for some time...(Ashby's Cavalry) As Chaplain Avirrett noted:

Jackson, however, acclaimed Ashby as a matchless "Partisan" commander, perhaps something on the level of Marion or Sumter in the Revolution...

General Taylor's whole statement: viz. Ashby may have matched the chivalrous gallantry of a Murat, but had no inclination to match it with regular discipline:

I think Ashby's command matches Sumter in the Revolution in many ways... Sumter's corps was not disciplined in a regular way either. However, of Sumter, his opponents noted:

General Sumter:

 

[bamaman]

By no

This reminds me of a cable tv show, I think on the "history" channel, that pitted Napoleon against Washington... and had them sword fighting.... Washington hands down winner!

But I'll have at it.
I've always been interested in Turner Ashby... although he was only a commissioned general for a brief period before his death in action... he had essentially commanded a brigade worth of cavalry companies for some time...(Ashby's Cavalry) As Chaplain Avirrett noted:

View attachment 482027
View attachment 482028

View attachment 482029

Jackson, however, acclaimed Ashby as a matchless "Partisan" commander, perhaps something on the level of Marion or Sumter in the Revolution...

View attachment 482033

General Taylor's whole statement: viz. Ashby may have matched the chivalrous gallantry of a Murat, but had no inclination to match it with regular discipline:

View attachment 482032

I think Ashby's command matches Sumter in the Revolution in many ways... Sumter's corps was not disciplined in a regular way either. However, of Sumter, his opponents noted:

View attachment 482034


General Sumter:
View attachment 482035

How about 2 great Calvary generals JE,B Stuart vs Genkis Khan?

 

[Cavalier]

I have wondered how Stuart would have done against the great French cavalry generals of Napoleon's army, Kellerman, or Montbrun among several of the others. Boney had some pretty impressive cavalry generals and I believe they spent a much larger portion of their lives at war than JEB did.

Or von Seydlitz and Zeiten from Frederick the Great's army.

As much as I admire Stuart's military abilities I think he would have a tough time going up against some of these guys.

John

 

[breckod]

In general (ha), I don't think you can reasonably compare generals from widely different eras, as the very practice and expectations of what generalship is are wildly different.

 

[bamaman]

In general (ha), I don't think you can reasonably compare generals from widely different eras, as the very practice and expectations of what generalship is are wildly different.

Of course, that's why I said that this was a fun thread. Napoleon fighting on the flat land of Europe is way different from fighting in the Wilderness against Lee

 

[Pat Answer]

Well, as long we're having fun:

Lee - Hannibal, Grant - Patton, Stuart - Rommel, Longstreet - Wellington, Meade - Sir William Howe...

 

[Tennessee Union Gal]

Longstreet vs. The Beau? Wellington, Wellington, Wellington. I just finished a novel in which Wellington featured largely and I'm a big fan.

 

[Cavalier]

@TennesseeUnionGal I believe you have a lot of company. I'm under the impression that the Duke was quite a ladies man. Maybe it was the nose?

John

 

[Library Lady]

I'd like to see a book comparing Jackson and Rommel. I keep trying to imagine what Jackson could have done with mechanized infantry and tanks.

 

[Pat Answer]

He would "mystify, mislead, and surprise," I believe.

 

[Library Lady]

Another book I'd like to see is a comparison of the CSS Alabama and the Kriegsmarine's Graf Spee. The commerce raiders are so interesting even though they don't really seem to have a decisive impact on the outcome of their respective wars. If I remember correctly, no one was killed on the merchantmen captured/sunk by both the Alabama and the Graf Spee. And they both had issues with being in a neutral port, that is, diplomatic games were played, before they were sunk.

 

[Doc_Ralph]

Well, as long we're having fun:

Lee - Hannibal, Grant - Patton, Stuart - Rommel, Longstreet - Wellington, Meade - Sir William Howe...

Stonewall Jackson vs. Hannibal Barca

 

[Pat Answer]

Stonewall Jackson vs. Hannibal Barca

In Italy or in the Shenandoah Valley?

 

[Doc_Ralph]

In Italy or in the Shenandoah Valley?

The Valley I think…

 

[Pat Answer]

Home field advantage… but then both sides must use ancient era weaponry.

 

[McClellandidnothingwrong]

Of course, that's why I said that this was a fun thread. Napoleon fighting on the flat land of Europe is way different from fighting in the Wilderness against Lee

at least Napoleon is line warfare in the age of gunpowder, completely different from ancient wars with a few thousand men where you were expected to lead from the front and personally kill 20 men.

 

[bamaman]

In Italy or in the Shenandoah Valley?

Can Hannibal use his elephants?

 

[Doc_Ralph]

Home field advantage… but then both sides must use ancient era weaponry.

Agreed…Jackson's boys can do it all foot/cavalry and ballistica (slingers). They know all the passes that would put the Cathigians at a disadvantage unless they employed Native American as scouts. The ground would be good for both to outmaneuver each other. Hard to say who would win. Hannibal was full of tricks. Blood bath with ancient weapons.

 

[JerryD]

Patton v. Jackson. Just sayin'