Stonewall That Bubble Reputation

[7thWisconsin]

This morning I was comparing and contrasting Thomas J. (Stonewall) Jackson, and Oliver Otis (no catchy nickname) Howard in my head. Both attained the similar rank of Corps commander in their respective armies. Both encountered early battlefield success and later disappointing performance (looking at 7 Days for you, Old Jack, and Gettysburg, of course, for Howard). Both were noticably bereft of a sense of humor. One went on to a long and successful military career, if not distinguished; the other, of course, died tragically. Both were men of deep Chistian faith, which for Jackson became part of his myth, yet for Howard was a source of ridicule even in his own time in command. Jackson was and is revered while Howard has been relegated to obscurity. Is it really because of that elusive intangible ¨charisma?¨ Jackson had it. Howard did not. Or am I just seeing serendipitous similarities?

 

[James N.]

Personally, I've always thought Howard one of the "humbugs" (to use period terminology) and biggest jerks (my own!) of the war. Of course, his being a fervid abolitionist doesn't gain him any points with me, but his military skills - which I deem the most important aspects - seem totally lacking. You've mentioned Gettysburg, but it was at Chancellorsville where he did the most damage and for which I believe he should've been cashiered. Hooker had specifically told him to watch out for his flank, and he totally failed in that responsibility. I seem to recall that he also commanded the disastrous assault on Pat Cleburne's position at Pickett's Mill where once again he totally failed to conduct an adequate reconnaissance beforehand.

 

[7thWisconsin]

I forgot all about Pickett's Mill! Yeah, you'd expect better performance from a lieutenant than that! Who was Howard friends with that he could keep messing up like that? Didn't Howard lose the only cannon lost to the the Indians when he was commanding against the Nez Perce?