Should Have Been Relieved - Corps or Division Commanders

… Burnside: He had shown promise at 1st Bull Run, in the Carolinas, and at Antietam. Thus, I'd have him removed from command and transfered to a different department (this was historical, but eventually he regained command of IX Corps and took and held Knoxville, for which many thought he redeemed himself)

Actually, Burnside was probably typical of his later reputation throughout his career. At Bull Run after finally driving away Nathan "Shanks" Evans pitiful handful (reinforced by Barnard Bee) in the opening action on Matthews' Hill, he took his brigade completely out of the battle, supposedly looking for ammunition resupply, and never returned! It is generally thought that his success in North Carolina was likely due to his subordinate John Foster. He possibly made Antietam only a drawn battle instead of the success it should have been through petulantly dragging his feet instead of attacking vigorously as ordered by McClellan, the subject of several recent threads here. Of course Fredericksburg was a major disaster for both the army and the nation, as was the Mud March a minor but important one. In 1864 following his return to the East his performances were still lacking at the Wilderness and Spotsylvania. But the final straw, his mismanagement of another bright but typically lost opportunity came at The Crater, which finally put an end to Burnside's incompetency. His greatest contributions to the cause seem to have been in his heavy-handed draconian handling of the civilian populations of occupied areas and the controversial arrest of Copperhead leader Clement Vallandigham.
 
Warren: He should have never been promoted up from a staff officer to army command. Reading up on the Overland Campaign, he constantly proved himself the weaklink of the army. Maybe give him a brigade or division command before promoting him so quickly.

Warren was a brigade commander during the Peninsula Campaign and at Second Manassas, Antietam, and Chancellorsville - although he saw no combat at the latter two. He went to corps command out of necessity after Gettysburg became so many experienced corps and division commanders were killed or wounded.

Whether he should have stayed in corps command in 1864 is another matter. He wasn't terrible in late 1863, but wasn't great either, and Meade liked him. Probably he should have gone to division command, with Gibbon or Humphreys in corps command instead.
 
I agree with the op's choices however the order of seniority has to come into play , Promotion was a very ridged you could upset a lot of high ranking officers and politicians by simply leapfrogging the command structure the Army of the Tennessee was rife with it and it caused a lot of bitter empathy between high ranking officers so in effect sometimes Army commanders hands are tied.

You also have to take into consideration that none of these men had any experience of a War of this scale , Granted many served in the Mexican War but the sheer size of the ACW would have been a completely different beast.

Many high ranking generals were political such as Sickles , Polk , Banks they didn't get the job through ability and this to can cause a lot of discord amongst high command , However some of the west point graduates didn't shower themselves in Glory either.

19 Century war was more about what ifs and luck than anything else and some of the generals if they had had the rub of green wouldn't be on the ops list now.
 
Heth to me is a misnomer in this. He was a competent commander. People blow his performance out of proportion at Gettysburg, given he had no clue he would face major resistance, as Stuart had taken the cavalry on one of his wild rides.
If there were any names I'd kick from the list, it'd be thus:
Burnside: He had shown promise at 1st Bull Run, in the Carolinas, and at Antietam. Thus, I'd have him removed from command and transfered to a different department (this was historical, but eventually he regained command of IX Corps and took and held Knoxville, for which many thought he redeemed himself)
Warren: He should have never been promoted up from a staff officer to army command. Reading up on the Overland Campaign, he constantly proved himself the weaklink of the army. Maybe give him a brigade or division command before promoting him so quickly.
Howard: Utterly inept. Failed at Chancellorsville, Gettysburg, and Picketts Mill, where his Corps faced a single confederate division, still moving into place, lacking earthworks, and yet he failed to organize a proper assault due to incompetence from one division commander, and scorn from another who felt slighted for Howard's actions at Chancellorsville. He was despised by his men for his puritanical nature. Maybe give him an administrative position.
Joe Johnston: Whenever the pivotal moment to stand and fight came, he'd order a retreat. He did this on the Pennisula, he did this in Mississippi, and he did this in Georgia, costing the Confederacy dearly.
had heth and lee known what was going on in the area better,[ missing jeb stuart] heth probably wouldn't have ventured into town to get shoes. and maybe Gettysburg might never have happened had lee known what the aop wsa doing more accurately
 
also earl van dorn, thought wayyyy too much of himself and cared not for support. as in elkhorn tavern/pea ridge. lost at Corinth. actually did nothing but waste men, supplies and time trying to further himself at the expense of others. wound up being shot by his lovers husband! nuff said!
 
Back
Top