★ ★  Rosecrans, William S.

William Starke “Old Rosy” Rosecrans

:us34stars:
Rosecrans.jpg


Born: September 6, 1819

Birthplace: Delaware County, Ohio

Father: Crandall Rosecrans 1794 – 1848

Mother: Jemima Hopkins 1794 – 1861

Wife: Ann Eliza Hegeman 1823 – 1883
(Buried: Mount Olivet Cemetery, Washington, D.C.)​
Married: August 24, 1843 at St. Paul’s Church in New York City, New York

Children:

Rev. Adrian Louis Rosecrans 1849 – 1876​
(Buried: Saint Paul the Apostle Church Vault, Manhattan, New York)​
Sister Mary Louise “Sister St. Charles” Rosecrans 1852 – 1878​
(Buried: Ursuline Cemetery, Saint Martin, Ohio)​
Lily Elizabeth Rosecrans Toole 1854 – 1939​
(Buried: Resurrection Cemetery, Helena, Montana)​
Anna Delores “Anita” Rosecrans 1857 – 1903​
(Buried: Old Saint Mary’s Catholic Cemetery, Helena, Montana)​
Carl Frederic Rosecrans 1860 – 1926​
(Buried: Calvary Cemetery, Los Angeles, California)​
Charlotte Rosecrans 1862 - 1862​

Education:

1842: Graduated from West Point Military Academy – (5th in class)​

Occupation before War:

1842 – 1843: Brevet 2nd Lt. United States Army, Corps of Engineers​
1842 – 1843: Assistant Engineer for Hampton Roads Fortifications​
1843 – 1853: 2nd Lt. United States Army, Corps of Engineers​
1843 – 1844: Assistant Engineering Professor at West Point​
1844 – 1845: Assistant Philosophy Professor at West Point​
1845 – 1846: Assistant Engineering Professor at West Point​
1846 – 1847: Principal Assistant Engineering Professor at West Point​
1847 – 1853: Superintendent Engineer of Repairs at Fort Adams​
1852 – 1853: Superintendent Engineer of Surveys of Taunton River​
1852 – 1853: Superintendent Engineer Repairs on Goat Island​
1853 – 1854: 1st Lt. United States Army, Corps of Engineers​
1853 – 1854: Superintendent Engineer, Washington Navy Yard​
1854: Resigned from United States Army on April 1st
1854 – 1855: Civil Engineer, and Architect, in Cincinnati, Ohio​
1855 – 1857: Superintendent of Coal Company, in Coal River, Virginia​
1856 – 1857: President of Coal River Navigation Company​
1857 – 1861: Manufacturer of Kerosene Oil in Cincinnati, Ohio​

Civil War Career:
Rosecrans 1.png


1861: Volunteer Aide to McClellan for Department of the Ohio​
1861: Colonel, and Chief Engineer in the Union Army​
1861: Colonel of 23rd Ohio Infantry Regiment​
1861: Commander of Camp Chase, Ohio​
1861 – 1867: Brigadier General in United States Army​
1861: Brigade Commander at Battle of Rich Mountain​
1861: Commander of the Union Army, Department of the Ohio​
1861 – 1862: Commander of the Army Department of Western Virginia​
1861: Successful Commander at Battle of Carnifex Ferry​
1862 – 1866: Major General of Union Army, Volunteers​
1862: Division Commander at the Siege of Corinth, Mississippi​
1862: Commander of the Union Army of the Mississippi​
1862: Successful Commander at Battle of Iuka, Mississippi​
1862: Union Army Commander of District of Corinth, Mississippi​
1862: Successful Commander at 2nd Battle of Corinth, Mississippi​
1862 – 1863: Union Army Commander of Army of the Cumberland​
1862 – 1863: Successful Commander at Battle of Stones River, Tennessee​
1863: Union Army Commander Occupation of Bridgeport – Stevenson​
1863: Union Army Commander crossing of Cumberland Mountains​
1863: Unsuccessful Commander at Battle of Chickamuga, Georgia​
1863: Commenced fortifying Chattanooga, Tennessee​
1863 – 1864: Awaiting Orders in Cincinnati, Ohio​
1864: Union Army Commander of Department of the Missouri​
1864 – 1865: Awaiting Orders in Cincinnati, Ohio​
1865: Brevetted Major General, U.S. Army, for Service at Stones River​
1865 – 1867: On Leave of Absence from the United States Army​
1866: Mustered out of the Union Army on January 15th

Occupation after War:
Rosecrans 2.jpg


1861 – 1867: Brigadier General in United States Army​
1865 – 1867: On Leave of Absence from the United States Army​
1867: Resigned from United States Army on March 28th
1868 – 1869: U.S. Minister to the Republic of Mexico​
1869: Declined Democratic Nomination for Governor of Ohio​
1869 – 1881: Civil and Mining Engineer, Railroad Enterprises in Mexico​
1871 – 1881: President of San Jose Mining Company​
1878 – 1881: President of Safety Powder Company in San Francisco​
1881 – 1885: United States Congressman from California​
1883 – 1885: House Chairman of Military Affairs Committee​
1885 – 1893: Register for U.S. Treasury Department​
1889: Brigadier General, U.S. Army on the retired list of officers​

Died: March 10, 1898

Place of Death: Bernardo Beach, California

Cause of Death: Pneumonia

Age at time of Death: 78 years old

Original Burial Place: Rosedale Cemetery, Los Angeles, California

Final Burial Place:
Arlington National Cemetery, Arlington, Virginia
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Sep 15, 2018
Location
South Texas
As a member of the House of Representatives he repeatedly turned down nominations for congress. He was so noted for this that he was known as the "Great Decliner". He was ambassador to Mexico but was removed by President Grant.
 

David Moore

Sergeant Major
Joined
Mar 26, 2014
Location
Washington, DC
The author of this article, written after Rosecrans’ death in 1898, served under him and after the war became a prominent Methodist bishop.
An often overlooked part of Rosecrans’ many achievements was his ability to bridge religious divisions as this article shows.
(There is no connection between Bishop Moore and myself)

2A40B83B-E83B-42C3-9B19-FBFF0D0B34AE.jpeg
 
Last edited:

Luke Freet

First Sergeant
Forum Host
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Location
Palm Coast, Florida
General Rosecrans is one of those divisive figures in the war, partly due to his poor relations with Stanton, Halleck, and Grant. He was certainly frantic under fire, but his organizational skill and his eye for cavalry organization would pave the way for folks like Sherman in 1864.
Of course, this man's combat record is quite hectic to say the least. Nearly every victory he won was in some was fumbled, but he won many victories, from his actions in West Virginia to Second Corinth to Murfreesboro (yes, Grant, that was a victory), and the Tullahoma Campaign. All of these contributed to eventual Union victory, and yet he gets thrown under the bus for Chickamauga (while Grant keeps his command despite failure after failure).
 

David Moore

Sergeant Major
Joined
Mar 26, 2014
Location
Washington, DC
General Rosecrans is one of those divisive figures in the war, partly due to his poor relations with Stanton, Halleck, and Grant. He was certainly frantic under fire, but his organizational skill and his eye for cavalry organization would pave the way for folks like Sherman in 1864.
Of course, this man's combat record is quite hectic to say the least. Nearly every victory he won was in some was fumbled, but he won many victories, from his actions in West Virginia to Second Corinth to Murfreesboro (yes, Grant, that was a victory), and the Tullahoma Campaign. All of these contributed to eventual Union victory, and yet he gets thrown under the bus for Chickamauga (while Grant keeps his command despite failure after failure).
You’re walking into a minefield of vitriol and mere opinion.
There’s a lot on this site about Rosecrans.
More importantly there’s a lot of 21st research and published work on him most of it pretty favorable.
Btw you left out Iuka where the break between Rosecrans and Grant began and Missouri where Grant was able to get rid of Rosecrans for the duration of the war. I’ve no desire to reenter this debate however I recommend people start with Albert Castel’s Victors in Blue for a recent reexamination of the Rosecrans story.
 

jackt62

Captain
Joined
Jul 28, 2015
Location
New York City
It seems unfortunate that Rosecrans' CW record in Virginia, Mississippi and Tennessee, which was at least as good if not better, than most other Union commanders at the time, has been overwhelmed by that one unfortunate day at Chickamauga. If not for the fact that Rosecrans chose to leave the field for Chattanooga and leave Thomas in place to fight a holding action (a decision he felt was appropriate and responsible to reestablish some sort of rear guard), the actual defeat of the AotC at Chickamauga would probably not have tarnished his reputation the way it did. As it were, Rosecrans' was already on the wrong side of Grant, who quickly used that opportunity to relieve Rosecrans.
 

DanSBHawk

Captain
Joined
May 8, 2015
Location
Wisconsin
General Rosecrans is one of those divisive figures in the war, partly due to his poor relations with Stanton, Halleck, and Grant. He was certainly frantic under fire, but his organizational skill and his eye for cavalry organization would pave the way for folks like Sherman in 1864.
Of course, this man's combat record is quite hectic to say the least. Nearly every victory he won was in some fumbled, but he won many victories, from his actions in West Virginia to Second Corinth to Murfreesboro (yes, Grant, that was a victory), and the Tullahoma Campaign. All of these contributed to eventual Union victory, and yet he gets thrown under the bus for Chickamauga (while Grant keeps his command despite failure after failure).
Grant kept his command because of his successes, and because he never let the "failures" become anything more than temporary setbacks. Even the Rosecrans-biased Albert Castel wrote in the above-referenced Victors in Blue, "Foremost among the victors in blue was, of course, Grant. Starting with Forts Henry and Donelson and culminating with Appomattox Court House, he gained most of the decisive federal victories."

If Rosecrans could have kept his ego in check, and been a decent subordinate to Grant, Halleck, Stanton, and Lincoln, he would have finished out the war leading the Army of the Cumberland, at the very least.

As the reporter Henry Villard wrote, Rosecrans thought he knew better than his superiors how to conduct the war, and he continually spoke poorly of his superiors to the reporters he attempted to cultivate. When the military and political leadership begins to doubt a subordinate's ability to follow orders, and frustrated with continual resistance and excuses, then that subordinate's days are numbered. Regardless of how intelligent and talented the subordinate may be. Rosecrans created his own problems.
 

Irishtom29

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Location
Kent, Washington
General Rosecrans is one of those divisive figures in the war, partly due to his poor relations with Stanton, Halleck, and Grant. He was certainly frantic under fire, but his organizational skill and his eye for cavalry organization would pave the way for folks like Sherman in 1864.
Of course, this man's combat record is quite hectic to say the least. Nearly every victory he won was in some was fumbled, but he won many victories, from his actions in West Virginia to Second Corinth to Murfreesboro (yes, Grant, that was a victory), and the Tullahoma Campaign. All of these contributed to eventual Union victory, and yet he gets thrown under the bus for Chickamauga (while Grant keeps his command despite failure after failure).

Chickamauga was a disaster and the only time a major Federal western army was driven from field; Grant never commanded such a defeat. And then Grant was tasked with pulling the Chattanooga chestnuts from the fire. And replaced Rosecrans with Thomas, who did a pretty good job, doncha think?
 

Luke Freet

First Sergeant
Forum Host
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Location
Palm Coast, Florida
Chickamauga was a disaster and the only time a major Federal western army was driven from field; Grant never commanded such a defeat. And then Grant was tasked with pulling the Chattanooga chestnuts from the fire. And replaced Rosecrans with Thomas, who did a pretty good job, doncha think?
Grant inherited Rosecrans' plans for Chattanooga, particularly Baldy Smith's Cracker Line; it just happened that Grant was given the opportunity to implement it.
And you say Chickamauga was a "disaster": It was a bloody battle, one which Rosecrans poorly handled. But in the grand scheme of things, nothing changed strategically. The Union army successfully retreated and regrouped in Chattanooga, and there's really no way the Confederates could actually take the city back from the Union. Yeah, the Army of the Cumberland was demoralized, but they were still on equal terms in relative numbers and had the benefit of fortifications. Chickamauga was a battle for Chattanooga; the Confederates lost.
 

Luke Freet

First Sergeant
Forum Host
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Location
Palm Coast, Florida
You’re walking into a minefield of vitriol and mere opinion.
There’s a lot on this site about Rosecrans.
More importantly there’s a lot of 21st research and published work on him most of it pretty favorable.
Btw you left out Iuka where the break between Rosecrans and Grant began and Missouri where Grant was able to get rid of Rosecrans for the duration of the war. I’ve no desire to reenter this debate however I recommend people start with Albert Castel’s Victors in Blue for a recent reexamination of the Rosecrans story.
I'll check out Castel. I know I stand by "Decision in the West" for the most part, despite a bit too much excusal for Joe Johnston's handling of the campaign.
 

David Moore

Sergeant Major
Joined
Mar 26, 2014
Location
Washington, DC
Chickamauga was a disaster and the only time a major Federal western army was driven from field; Grant never commanded such a defeat. And then Grant was tasked with pulling the Chattanooga chestnuts from the fire. And replaced Rosecrans with Thomas, who did a pretty good job, doncha think
I'll check out Castel. I know I stand by "Decision in the West" for the most part, despite a bit too much excusal for Joe Johnston's handling of the campaign.
“Victors” is very readable and is a summation of his thoughts after a lifetime of Civil War scholarship. He would have written a biography of Rosecrans had he come upon the more complex story of Rosecrans’ career earlier in life. Interesting also that he said a biographer of Rosecrans would need to be “brave.”
 

tony_gunter

Corporal
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Location
Mississippi
General Rosecrans is one of those divisive figures in the war, partly due to his poor relations with Stanton, Halleck, and Grant. He was certainly frantic under fire, but his organizational skill and his eye for cavalry organization would pave the way for folks like Sherman in 1864.
Of course, this man's combat record is quite hectic to say the least. Nearly every victory he won was in some was fumbled, but he won many victories, from his actions in West Virginia to Second Corinth to Murfreesboro (yes, Grant, that was a victory), and the Tullahoma Campaign. All of these contributed to eventual Union victory, and yet he gets thrown under the bus for Chickamauga (while Grant keeps his command despite failure after failure).
Judging by your attribution of Rosecrans successes, I’m curious to know what failures you’re attributing to Grant 😃

Neither had really been defeated on the field of battle prior to Chickamauga.
 
Top