McClellan McClellan at the front

[MikeyB]

Perhaps I am wrong and would welcome correction, but my understanding is that McClellan was seldom on the battle front issuing orders and managing the battle.

Is there anything wrong with this? He was the most important Union general so I can understand the need to ensure his own personal safety. And conversely, when you have other dead army commanders like ASJ or McPherson, perhaps the opposite criticism comes into play - they were in places they shouldn't have been. (This criticism sometimes even gets leveled at less senior officers like John Reynolds.)

But so many other army commanders exposed themselves at the front and were in the thick of things. Certainly Meade and Hooker using examples from the AotP alone.

I don't question Mac's bravery as a soldier. Is it a fair criticism that he was too far to the rear, or wholly appropriate?

 

[repman66]

To be a great battle captain in the era of the set piece battle one has to, when the occasion and events demand it, exert personal influence and will over the critical point to effectuate the desired result.

McCellan never did that and does anyone talk of him as a great battle captain?

There is your answer?


Going deeper, McClellan's actions on the Peninsula, especially during the Seven Days' battles rise to a level which is more than enough to deserve to be relieved from command. He was better during the Maryland campaign.

 

[67th Tigers]

Well, very recently Stotelmyer had a paper out pointing out how untrue this was at Antietam.

Here's a presentation of his findings: