9
   

SOUTH WINS CIVIL WAR

 
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Jun, 2009 06:00 am
@Setanta,
I read Mcphersons Tried by War, which was a treatise on Lincoln as the Commander in Chief. (A topic that, for the most part , had been given only passing attention except maybe by Catton whose works always claimed that Lincoln loved to "meddle" in the war).
Lincolns meddling , according to McPherson, was a "learning curve" for a student startegist and tactician. He learned from his mistakes , (as in the case of Mclellean) no matter how long it took him to get it.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Jun, 2009 06:08 am
@farmerman,
Your "Christmas present" figure is the best description of Sherman's contribution. Certainly the defeat of Hood's army outside Atlanta and Hood's decision to burn military stores rather than allow them to fall into Federal hands helped in that it made the "peace platform" of McClellan and the Democrats seem a more dubious proposition, in that it helped to create the impression that the South was on the ropes. Any intelligent voter, though, should have known the South was on the ropes after the defeat at Gettysburg and the capture of Vicksburg the following day in July, 1863.

Sherman's "march to the sea" campaign, his boast that he would "make Georgia howl" and his vindictive destruction in South Carolina occurred after the election. In fact, from a purely military point of view, Sherman abdicated his responsibilities when he decided to march on Savannah rather than to pursue Hood and the Army of Tennessee. As matters stood in November, 1864, Meade's army, directly confronted the Army of Northern Virginia in its lines at Petersburg and Richmond, and Sherman was opposed to the Army of Tennessee south of Atlanta. Their respective tasks were to destroy the armies each of them faced. Sherman abdicated that responsibility with his relatively, militarily useless march to Savannah and his revenge march through South Carolina. The Army of Tennessee escaped to fight another day, and George Thomas in Nashville was left to face Hood, who rather quickly responded to the freedom Sherman's departure accorded him to attempt to "re-invade" Tennessee and acquire new supplies and new recruits. In the Trans-Mississippi, A. J. Smith was trying to run down the remnants of Sterling Price's Missouri State Guard, and the shattered fragments of Texas, Arkansas and Louisiana units which had attached themselves to Price. Price's "threat" was so minimal that when a genuine threat arose as Hood crossed the Tennessee River, Smith was sent to reinforce Thomas, whose Army of the Cumberland had been stripped of its best troops and nearly all of its transport animals by Sherman prior to his march into Georgia. Schofield held up Hood at Franklin, and Thomas assembled the forces necessary to defend Nashville. After stupid, useless frontal assaults on a nearly impregnable position at Franklin, Hood slowly gathered his bleeding, battered army on the heights south of the city. He had rather deftly forced the retreat of Federal forces on the Tennessee River by simply masking the position, and then crossing farther up river. Possessed by some inexplicable idiocy, he threw his troops headlong at Schofield's position at Franklin on the Harpeth River, rather than executing the move as he had on the Tennessee, which would have forced Schofield's retreat, and perhaps even have left Thomas unable to defend Nashville.

But Thomas was just about the best general officer in the Federal army in that war, and he had assembled every man, horse and mule he could strip out of Tennessee and Kentucky, and reinforced by Schofield (who had retreated in good order) and A. J. Smith, he finally had an even larger army than Hood. He held off his attack until he could assemble sufficient horses and mules, even using his precious draft animals, because he fully intended to destroy Hood's army. A typical mid-South ice storm forced him to hold off his attack for three days, and Grant had actually drafted a telegram relieving him of command, but which the senior telegrapher at the War Department had quietly refused to send. When the weather cleared, Thomas attacked, and his infantry reserves, mounted on the horses and mules he had scraped together, pursued the remnants of Hood's army until they were scattered and no effective formations remained. Hood's outright casualties were about 6000, or about 20%--but the battle started on December 15, and Thomas' forces pursued Hood until the rump of the Army of Tennessee recrossed Tennessee River on Christmas day. The destruction might have been more complete and the casualties higher had N. B. Forrest not fought desperate rear-guard actions to delay the pursuit.

Hood resigned in January, 1865, and was never given another command. Grant (who didn't like him) continued to ignore the contribution of the Virginian, George Thomas, who had accomplished what Sherman should have done and failed to do. The remnants of the Army of Tennessee, of which at most 10,000 survived the Nashville campaign, filtered over the mountains to join Joe Johnston's army facing Sherman in South Carolina. This fragment of the Army of Tennessee was the core around which Johnston built up his army to confront Sherman, but it was scattered forever in the aftermath of the battle of Bentonville, North Carolina in March, 1865.

Sherman's march to the sea and the path of destruction he cut through the Carolinas had great dramatic appeal, but the real yoeman's work was done the the little armies in Tennessee under Thomas' command--the Army of the Cumberland, the Army of the Ohio and Smith's XIV Corps--while Sherman played for the headlines.

FM will want to read up on Andrew Jackson Smith, who defeated Sterling Price, the boogie man of the Trans-Mississippi and who defeated N. B. Forrest at Tupelo (Forrest being the Great Satan of the western theater). Smith was born in Bucks County, Pennsylvania.

I doubt that anyone will ever be able to convince me that Sherman served any real useful purpose--and certainly not crucial purpose--after he marched away from Atlanta.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Jun, 2009 06:21 am
@farmerman,
It must never be forgotten that for whatever hagiography Lincoln's memory has enjoyed, he was a consummate politician, one the best in our history. Tennessee and Louisiana had been re-admitted to the Union, based on legislation which required that only 10% of adult white males who had never taken up arms against the United States could petition for readmission. That, of course, gave Lincoln the electoral votes of Louisiana and Tennessee. The unionists of eastern Tennessee were real fire eaters, and the siege and successful defense of Knoxville was one of the great PR stories of the war. Note that Lincoln's running mate in the '64 election was Andrew Johnson. J0hnson as a Senator from Tennessee had never resigned, and had supported Lincoln throughout the war. West Virginia, Kansas and Nevada had been entered into the Union since 1860, as well. In all of the other states, the elections was very close, in a half-dozen Lincoln won by less than 5%. But he absolutely buried McClellan in the Electoral College. He only beat McClellan by fewer than a half-million votes, but he beat him ten-to-one in the electoral college.

I do have one quibble, though. Schofield's successful defense at Franklin, and Thomas' destruction of the Army of Tennessee had taken place after the election.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Jun, 2009 06:33 am
I find Catton's quibble rather odd. (I've not read Catton since the centennial days, when civil war books so proliferated that one tripped over them just walking down the street.) Commanders in Chief have the job of "meddling" in wars. Apart from that, the "meddling" of Jefferson Davis did the United
States far more good than it can be alleged that Lincoln's "meddling" did any harm.

I believe it is Foote who repeatedly noted that Lincoln was constantly looking for someone who "understands the numbers." That man was Grant, although i personally feel that Thomas would have been a better choice. Grant always complained that Thomas had "the slows," an accusation he would make after stripping away Thomas' best troops and just about all of his transport animals--something he did more than once. Thomas would have delayed and delayed and delayed until everything was just right, and then he'd have fallen on Lee and Hood like a ton of bricks. Grant was on the point of firing Thomas before the battle of Nashville, but when Thomas unleashed his army, they not only handed Hood a bitter defeat, they pursued his army for ten days after the opening attack. Freeman in his books on Lee and Lee's lieutenants frequently notes that armies were as disorganized in victory as they were in defeat, and he is correct to the extent that few armies before the second world war have been able successfully to pursue and destroy a defeated foe. Thomas did exactly that after Nashville.

But Lincoln's obsession about understanding the numbers was no mystery to Grant, and he pursued (or caused Meade to pursue) Lee's army after each defeat which the Army of Northern Virginia handed to the Army of the Potomac. People never seem to understand this sort of thing, but the soldiers loved it. Soldiers will forgive a commander many things, but never timidity. And soldiers love a winner--being tactically defeated doesn't mean much to them if they are chasing an enemy who consistently runs away.

I have read figures roughly on the order of Grant suffering 105,000 casualties from the Wilderness to Petersburg, and Lee suffering 25,000. The difference comes in that Grant got 115,000 reinforcements, and Lee got only 15,000. Those were the "numbers" about which Lincoln was obsessed.
0 Replies
 
Loveablebob
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Jun, 2009 12:38 pm
@Setanta,
I'm Backkkkkkkkkkkk!!!!!!!!!!!!

When I hear people talk about Sherman's March To The Sea they make it sound like he just went down a country road to the sea. He actually cut a path 60 miles wide, burning and destoying everything as he went. Then I never hear about other people all over the south burying valuables to keep them from being looted by the Union Army. Bob
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, EVERYONE! - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/03/2020 at 02:49:28