Bragg The Official Braxton Bragg Defense Thread

I have read, but cant remember where, that Braggs decision at Ft. Fisher was due to the exposure to Union fire that the reinforcements would have to get through to get to the fort. That area isn't that wide, may have been a bit different in 1864, not sure, but with the union armada and troops, it would have been tough. I know Whiting was not happy at all with Bragg.

That is what I like about this forum! You are correct. The union had around 45,000 and Bragg had around 35,000. I don't know why I had feel the urge to defend Braxton Bragg. There were a lot of egos and clichés in the Army of Tennessee. Only a dynamic charismatic man could have brought everyone together. Bragg was far from it.
 
Winning builds confidence and unity. AOT, always found a way to lose. AOT had other problems, supply issues etc.

Bragg was a good Tactician, but couldn’t execute. You have to be able to explain or identify an objective and get people to perform. Sometimes, you have to do it yourself.

He was hampered by Polk. Huge mistake of Davis to keep him. Polk was well liked, but he and Bragg would never get along. Davis has Responsibility for some of this. He should of replaced Bragg, sent Johnson to do so, let Johnson wiggle out of it.

Fort Fisher was late in the game. However, no evidence Bragg helped any.
 
Though Johnston did organize the counter attack at Fair Oaks. He correctly recognized that Keyes Corps was isolated with its flanks in the air and moved to take advantage of it. Had Longstreet and Huger not gotten their routes confused they would have likely destroyed Keyes Corps. Would Johnston not have attempted more such attacks if opportunities presented themselves?
The problem is that Johnston's vague, verbal orders for an overly-complicated attack were partly to blame for the resulting mess at Fair Oaks, exacerbated by the results of the torrential downpour on the preceding evening and Longstreet and Huger deciding to debate seniority at a crucial point. Johnston did nothing outside Vicksburg in May-June 1863.
 
He was hampered by Polk. Huge mistake of Davis to keep him. Polk was well liked, but he and Bragg would never get along. Davis has Responsibility for some of this. He should of replaced Bragg, sent Johnson to do so, let Johnson wiggle out of it.
I see what you're getting at, but the thing is, Davis was fine with replacing Bragg after Murfreesboro. Johnston turned down the appointment, and Bragg remained in command.
 
However, I am talking opinions and speculation. Chattanooga did happen and can be claimed the worst performance of the war.

Out of curiosity what do you or anyone else view as Bragg main issues at Chattanoga? Was Chattanoga winnable under other circumstances?
 
I think Bragg is beaten like a dog by too many people, who don’t realize that he faced more scrutiny and pressure than Lee did, and instead of compliant subordinates, he faced a clique that grew to dislike him, and at times bordered on insubordination.

He drilled the AOT, instilled in it discipline, and most importantly, he was human like you and me.

I read Hess’s book and it made me have a new found like for Bragg.
 
I think Bragg is beaten like a dog by too many people, who don’t realize that he faced more scrutiny and pressure than Lee did, and instead of compliant subordinates, he faced a clique that grew to dislike him, and at times bordered on insubordination.

He drilled the AOT, instilled in it discipline, and most importantly, he was human like you and me.

I read Hess’s book and it made me have a new found like for Bragg.
Yes, Hess's book does much to paint a more objective view of Bragg. It seems that the reputation of Bragg, like McClellan, has been tarnished in good part by personality quirks (different for both of course), and the lack of overall success that these commanders had. But a detailed consideration of their actual military skills would paint a much more balanced picture than the one-sided view that is commonly held.
 
Yes, Hess's book does much to paint a more objective view of Bragg. It seems that the reputation of Bragg, like McClellan, has been tarnished in good part by personality quirks (different for both of course), and the lack of overall success that these commanders had. But a detailed consideration of their actual military skills would paint a much more balanced picture than the one-sided view that is commonly held.
I’d like to read a book like Hess’s about McClellan; do you recommend any?
 
I’d like to read a book like Hess’s about McClellan; do you recommend any?
"McClellan's War: The Failure of Moderation in the Struggle for the Union" by Ethan Rafuse gives a more balanced picture of McClellan and in particular, provides an analysis of the forces that governed his military and political views.
 
Fittingly, I'm currently reading the relatively recent and very interesting Six Armies In Tennessee - The Chickamauga-Chattanooga Campaign and so far (up through the first battle) it's highly complimentary to Bragg, pointing out the many factors that combined to confound or thwart his otherwise sound conduct of the campaign. From the obtuseness of Polk and D. H. Hill; the incomprehensible incompetence of Hindman; Longstreet's openly angling to replace him; and almost everyone else's failure to appreciate the truly Pyrrhic nature of the "victory" it's easier to understand the veritable mountain of difficulties he faced. There's also a lot of usually overlooked or neglected detail about the extreme difficulty Bragg had supplying his forces in the wilderness of North Georgia and East Tennessee.
 
Back
Top