LINCOLN & UNION COMMANDERS

[Billy Yank]

Precisely. It was just the sort of thing to be constantly nagging, constantly a nuisance and never far from your conscious mind.

I wonder if Hancock ever considered a regimen of laudanum drops?

 

[Elennsar]

Definitely not Hancock's style. He was a lead from the front kind of guy and he was a fighter.

"There are times when the life of a corps commander does not count."

I can only imagine how being unable to live up to that after Gettysburg cost him emotionally, above and beyond the wound messing with his head on its own.

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

"There are times when the life of a corps commander does not count."

I can only imagine how being unable to live up to that after Gettysburg cost him emotionally, above and beyond the wound messing with his head on its own.

I'm sure it ate at him. The Hancock of the Overland Campaign was definitely not the Hancock of Gettysburg.

 

[ole]

I've read where "leg" is a polite euphemism for the damage done. That's believable when you consider the location of the pommel.

 

[tmh10]

I've read where "leg" is a polite euphemism for the damage done. That's believable when you consider the location of the pommel.

I did read an account that implyed the wound was also into the groin area and as noted never healed compleatly even after operations after the war.

 

[Elennsar]

I did read an account that implyed the wound was also into the groin area and as noted never healed compleatly even after operations after the war.

Do you recall where (the account was)?

 

[tmh10]

Do you recall where (the account was)?

I am trying to remember, Elennsar, as I was looking for my copy of Reminiscences of Winfield Scott Hancock by Almira Russle Hancock. It may be in there. That is a good read for Hancock fans, but could be not everybody's cup of tea.

 

[Elennsar]

I am trying to remember, Elennsar, as I was looking for my copy of Reminiscences of Winfield Scott Hancock by Almira Russle Hancock. It may be in there. That is a good read for Hancock fans, but could be not everybody's cup of tea.

If you find it, please pass it on, but no pressure.

Just interested in hearing more - the idea of it being a wound to the "leg" would explain the unrelenting misery element even better than if it was to a limb.

 

[jgoodguy]

Do you recall where (the account was)?

Virginia and the end of the war

Hancock suffered from the effects of his Gettysburg wound for the rest of the war.[2]
Eicher, John H., and David J. Eicher. Civil War High Commands., pp. 277–78

Winfield Scott Hancock Biography - American Civil War Home

On the second and third days of the battle Hancock directed the Union center until wounded by a nail and by wood fragments-possibly from his saddle driven into his thigh by enemy fire. A long recovery followed during which he performed some recruiting duty.
Returning in time for the Overland Campaign, he fought well at the Wilderness and was brevetted major general in the regular army for his crashing through the Confederate salient at Spotsylvania. At Cold Harbor his troops were slaughtered in a futile assault ordered by Grant. Arriving on the Petersburg front, he deferred command to the corps commander on the field-because of a lack of knowledge of the situation-who failed to launch a final assault, which could very well have ended the war 10 months earlier.
Shortly afterwards Hancock's old wound broke open and he had to leave the army for a time. Returning, he was humiliated by the defeat at Reams' Station and in November was forced to give up field command; he began recruiting the lst Veteran Volunteer Corps.

I found this thread also.
Hancock Wound? | American Civil War Forums

Major General Winfield Scott Hancock
eHistory.com - Medicine

A wound suffered at Gettysburg hindered the rest of famed Second Corps General Hancock's Civil War career. Born on Valentine's Day, 1824, Hancock graduated from West Point in 1844 and served in the Mexican War. He was wounded slightly in the knee at Churubusco and was suffering from chills and fever during the battle of Chapultepec. Hancock was wounded while sitting on his horse on July 3 at Gettysburg. The bullet entered his right thigh and lodged, carrying in some foreign material. An improvised tourniquet staunched the bleeding. The wound remained a constant problem for Hancock until a surgeon, Dr. Louis Read, was able to find the bullet and remove it. In June of 1864, the wound reopened and bone fragments extruded from it. Hancock gave up command on June 17, but returned to command on the 27th. He gave up command of the Second Corps in November 1864. Hancock died on Feb. 9, 1886 in New York. The book Hancock at Gettysburg by A.M. Gambone gives much detail about General Hancock's wounding.

 

[tmh10]

If you find it, please pass it on, but no pressure.

Just interested in hearing more - the idea of it being a wound to the "leg" would explain the unrelenting misery element even better than if it was to a limb.

I will be sure to do that, but I read so many books sometimes I can't remember where I learned a certain piece of inormation. I found Almira's book and am looking for what was printed on that subject at this time.

 

[jgoodguy]

I will be sure to do that, but I read so many books sometimes I can't remember where I learned a certain piece of inormation. I found Almira's book and am looking for what was printed on that subject at this time.

I read it in several books and online refs myself. I've posted some online refs I found.

 

[Mike Serpa]

wikipedia mentions a tourniquet was used. This makes me think leg means leg. The topmost parts of the legs are part of the groin.

On July 3, Hancock continued in his position on Cemetery Ridge and thus bore the brunt of Pickett's Charge.[38] During the massive Confederate artillery bombardment that preceded the infantry assault, Hancock was prominent on horseback in reviewing and encouraging his troops. When one of his subordinates protested, "General, the corps commander ought not to risk his life that way," Hancock is said to have replied, "There are times when a corps commander's life does not count."[39] During the infantry assault, his old friend, now Brig. Gen.Lewis A. Armistead, leading a brigade in Maj. Gen.George Pickett's division, was wounded and died two days later. Hancock could not meet with his friend because he had just been wounded himself, a severe wound caused by a bullet striking the pommel of his saddle, entering his inner right thigh along with wood fragments and a large bent nail.[40] Helped from his horse by aides, and with a tourniquet applied to stanch the bleeding, he removed the saddle nail himself and, mistaking its source, remarked wryly, "They must be hard up for ammunition when they throw such shot as that."[41] News of Armistead's mortal wounding was brought to Hancock by a member of his staff, Captain Henry H. Bingham. Despite his pain, Hancock refused evacuation to the rear until the battle was resolved. He had been an inspiration for his troops throughout the three-day battle. Hancock later received the thanks of the U.S. Congress for "... his gallant, meritorious and conspicuous share in that great and decisive victory."[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winfield_Scott_Hancock

 

[tmh10]

In Almira's book they say the wound was 8 inches into the thigh, and only found the minie ball with a long probe. They also say they didn't cut out the ball untill two months after the battle, and he was not able to ride a horse for a year after the extraction. He was trying to find a special bandage from New York to cover the wound when he went to the Wilderness but could not find one. He left the ambulance to ride the line but stated it was pure agony.

 

[JohnnnyReb]

This picture looks like it was badly photoshopped. So I am assuming that back then someone cut out these images and overlayed them onto this background by hand then printed the image. It just makes me think, hey, this is early form of Photoshopping something. LOL

 

[Mark F. Jenkins]

You think that's bad; consider this!

Expired Image Removed

Firstly, this "storming" of Fort Donelson never happened; secondly, look how they've stuck a photo of Grant's head onto a painted body!

 

[Lincoln65]

Makes you wonder why Hancock didn't claim disability (earlier). Fear of being seen as a mere coward? Overruled by his superiors?

Whatever it was, it's a crying shame - Hancock in all his glory in the Overland Campaign would be just what the Army of the Potomac needed.



I'd definitely put Ol' Brains over BOTH Hooker and Little Phil, but if one has to stay, let's keep Hooker. At least he improved something in the Army of the Potomac.

IMHO, Halleck should be put over Hooker, but not Sheridan.

 

[Elennsar]

IMHO, Halleck should be put over Hooker, but not Sheridan.

What in Sheridan's Charlie Brown-esque record (if with more lying and insubordination) as commander of the Army of the Potomac's cavalry merits being put in here?

If we're need a cavalryman, there's always Buford - or if you want someone who survived the war, David Gregg.

 

[Lincoln65]

What in Sheridan's Charlie Brown-esque record (if with more lying and insubordination) as commander of the Army of the Potomac's cavalry merits being put in here?

If we're need a cavalryman, there's always Buford - or if you want someone who survived the war, David Gregg.

I think Sheridan's campaign in the Valley is deserving of praise, far more than Hooker's campaign at Chancellorsville or Halleck's performance at his Washington desk job. Hooker re energized the Army of the Potomac after the disasters of Fredericksburg and the Mud March, and that was no small feat, but it was nowhere near enough to salvage his reputation. One of the main reasons I dislike Hooker, is that, for all his bluster, when push came to shove, he (like McClellan) lost his nerve. Years after the war, when asked what went wrong he told the truth (I'm paraphrasing): "I just lost confidence in Joe Hooker". I personally believe that Hooker still could have won Chancesllorsville on the second day if he had had the tenacity and grit of Grant.

 

[Elennsar]

Sheridan's campaign in the Valley would be more praiseworthy were it as decisive as the resources at his disposal permitted. And it does not mitigate his malicious dishonesty - even towards claiming credit from someone who was supposedly his friend (Crook).

As for Hooker: Certainly. But reenergizing the Army of the Potomac and organizing the cavalry into a corps instead of its previous dispersal left a positive legacy for his more able successor.

 

[Lincoln65]

Sheridan's campaign in the Valley would be more praiseworthy were it as decisive as the resources at his disposal permitted. And it does not mitigate his malicious dishonesty - even towards claiming credit from someone who was supposedly his friend (Crook).

As for Hooker: Certainly. But reenergizing the Army of the Potomac and organizing the cavalry into a corps instead of its previous dispersal left a positive legacy for his more able successor.

I'm unfamiliar with the Gen. Crook story, could you please explain it?