Winfield Scott Hancock: A Soldier's Life

by David M. Jordan

This compelling biography presents the colorful life of "Hancock the Superb," one of the most important battlefield commanders of the Union forces in the American Civil War. A major figure on the fields of Gettysburg and the Wilderness, Hancock also served in the wars against the Plains Indians, was a controversial commander of New Orleans during Reconstruction, and just missed ascending to the White House in 1880. David M. Jordan recounts his tale with sympathy and verve, and brings Hancock superbly to life for our times.

Genres: Civil War, Biography, History, American History, Nonfiction, American Civil War, War

416 pages, Paperback

First published December 1, 1988

About the author

A longtime Philadelphia baseball fan, David M. Jordan is a retired attorney and the author of nine books on the Civil War, political events, and baseball.

Reviews

[Steven Peterson · Rating 4 out of 5]

At the Battle of Williamsburg, as the Army of Potomac crept up the Peninsula toward Richmond, Virginia, General Winfield Scott Hancock attempted an aggressive flank attack on Confederate positions. At a moment when serious damage could have been wrought against the Confederate forces, a timid Union commander recalled him. Even at that, he was able to deliver one last serious sting to the southern forces. General George McClellan noted that "Hancock was superb yesterday." Hence, the nickname "Hancock the Superb."

This is a serviceable book on this talented Union general. There is not enough detail on the battles in which Hancock was engaged; much of the book is "underdetailed." Nonetheless, one gets a sense of why Hancock was held in such great respect.

The book covers his early years, his time in West Point, his service in the "Old Army" (with the capstone being the lugubrious final meeting after the firing on Fort Sumter among him and future Confederate generals Lewis Armistead and Albert Sidney Johnston in California).

Briefly, he was consigned to a desk job. Soon, however, McClellan got him a brigade command. Then, his service where he earned the sobriquet "The Superb." He did good service at one point at Second Manassas/Bull Run; he served well at Antietam, where he advanced to division command. Then, the dreary battles at Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville where, once more, he served the Union well. After Chancellorsville, he earned command of the Second Corps.

It is at Gettysburg, though, where he may have had the best three days of generalship of almost any commander in the Civil War. He brought order out of chaos at the end of the First Day; he shuffled troops all over the place on the Second Day, providing "Hairsbreadth Harry" narrow escapes (think his ordering of the First Minnesota into a suicidal attack against vastly superior forces to buy a few moments time for reinforcements to get to the scene); his command of the center of the Union line on the Third Day, where he commanded the troops who destroyed the charge by Pickett's, Pettigrew's, and Trimble's attacking forces. He was also seriously injured, and the damage done to him hindered his physical ability throughout the rest of the war.

After a convalescence, he did well at the Wilderness (his flank was rolled up by Longstreet, but he rallied his troops and led them well); he led a massive in depth attack at the Muleshoe at Spotsylvania. Eventually, his Second Corps bled down and he gave up his command in front of Petersburg.

After the war, he served in the South, against the Indians, and had a long career as a general officer. He even ran for President of the United States. This book introduces us to Hancock; I wish that there had been more exploration of his character and more detail in a number of the chapters. But for those who want to learn more about "Hancock the Superb," this is a good starting point.

[Sarah Bierle · Rating 3 out of 5]

An informative biography of the life and times of American Civil War General Winfield Scott Hancock. The book follows Hancock's military and political journeys with a lot of explanation about the various situations. Oftentimes there was more information about other historical characters and their roles in a battlefield or political situation than specific information about Hancock's role; this might be due to a lack of details in the historical record or it may be the focus/style chosen by the author. Personally, I would have liked to hear more about Hancock's family, particularly if they travelled with him to the various post-Civil War headquarters.

Overall, a good and classic military biography of a truly great American soldier.

[Sean Chick · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good but not flashy biography of Hancock. We do not have her personal letters, but there are enough sources that, along with Hancock's extraordinary career, make this book warranted. In particular, I applaud that Hancock's post 1865 career is discussed in more detail than is usual, with much devoted to the 1880 election. That said, I think Jordan's efforts with Warren were better in getting to the heart of the man and this book lacks analysis.

[Bruce · Rating 3 out of 5]

In the presidential election of 1880 the Democrats thought they had the answer to the Republican
campaign tactic of 'waving the bloody shirt'. Or 'vote as you shot' as it applied in the states that
did not come into the Confederacy. Nominate a Democrat who was a Civil War that no one could
question the patriotism of. Their candidate that year was Winfield Scott Hancock, ironically named
after Winfield Scott who was the Whig candidate for president in 1852.

Hancock was born in Montgomery Township just north of Philadelphia and was pleased to call Norristown,Pa his home town the rest of his life. Maybe the name inspired him to a military career
and he got an appointment to West Point and graduated in 1844. Just in time for the Mexican War
where he saw action with Winfield Scott at Contreras and Churubusco and was wounded in the knee
there.

He had trouble getting into action and it is active combat where promotions are to be won. Otherwise it's a slow grind up the army ladder. He got slated for the quartermaster corps and it
was in that service he served in a number of desultory peace time assignments.

But it was fighters needed and fighter they got in Hancock who got combat assignments and served
in the Army of the Potomac eventually becoming a corps commander under a sorry string of Union
generals in charge. It was at Gettysburg that his reputation was secured when at Cemetery Ridge
despite a painful wound in the thigh, Hancock held on to the position and faced Pickett's Charge.
Thereafter he was known as Hancock the Superb.

For some reason Hancock rubbed the new general in chief Ulysses Grant the wrong way. I'm thinking it was politics as Grant decided it was the new Republican Party where he belonged. Hancock was not about politics in war time, but everyone knew where his political loyalty was.

His post war career was nothing terribly distinguished. He didn't distinguish himself during any of
the Indian campaigns he was in. For a brief time he was military governor of the division that
consisted of Louisiana and Texas. He took particular care to the aid and comfort of the former
rebels and didn't do much of anything for the newly freed slaves.

He was given a post in the military district of the mid-Atlantic states with headquarters on Governor's Island. As New York was in no danger of invasion at that time. Hancock led a leisurely
life, got his name in the society pages, and made good contacts with Democratic movers and shakers. He was also in no way getting an opportunity for further military exploits.

But after getting some votes at Democratic conventions in 1868 and 1876 Hancock with William
English as Vice President was nominated in 1880. He faced another Union general James A. Garfield as the Republican candidate.

Two things won a close one for Garfield. Reconstruction was over and the solid Democratic South
came into existence. Democrats for the next 80 years generally started with a set number of states
in the Electoral College. A few swing states in the north usually decided elections among them New York, Ohio, Indiana, New Jersey. Hancock's state of Pennsylvania was reliably Republican
back then. But it was thought he'd have a chance there.

The GOP spent hard in those states and the results showed on Election Day. Hancock also made a
faux pas concerning the eternal tariff question when he said it was a local issue. He was both
trying to sidestep it and was also saying that each state had its concerns that tariffs on a product
be low or high on the duty schedule. GOP newspapers had a field day with it.

Garfield beat Hancock by a small margin in the popular vote and in the Electoral College. Hancock
who had taken leave of absence to run for president went back to his Governor's Island command
where he stayed until he died in 1886. Author Jordan says it was untreated diabetes which might
have been better diagnosed today.

No reason in my opinion to think Hancock would have been an outstanding president. I'm sure he
would have served honorably in the office. Of his military valor, he was one of the best.

[Schoppie · Rating 4 out of 5]

David M. Jordan's biography of Winfield Scott Hancock is, in a word, superb! - a fitting tribute to the general who earned the sobriquet "Hancock the Superb."

Winfield Scott Hancock was among the finest corps commanders in the Union Army, during the Civil War, and one of the few in the Army of the Potomac who managed to serve in that capacity for a period of years, rather than for a few campaigns. Hancock was not only a good soldier, but he was also an honest public servant during the so-called Gilded Age. Jordan's biography thoroughly covers Hancock's Civil War service, but it balances that service with Hancock's other accomplishments, including the Post-Civil War service on the Plains, Reconstruction duty in the South, his presidential campaigns, and his command of the Division of the Atlantic.

Jordan highlights Hancock's character, his honesty, strict adherence to laws, regulations, and order, and his reliability in the completion of any given assignment. Current elected officials would do well to read this biography and attempt to emulate this fine statesman and public servant.

[Tim Armstrong · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have to admit I am a bit disappointed in this one. I was looking forward to reading a biography on Winfield Scott Hancock and learning more about the man. He looms large in the history of the Army of the Potomac but very little has been written about him.

This biography seems to hold Hancock at arms length. The book is about his life, but a large portion of the book is about events that Hancock was involved in and not his personal involvement in those events. I was hoping we would get more stories about Hancock's thoughts, feelings and actions. Just generally more about the man. This bio is basically a long greatest hits of his life, with small anecdotes about Hancock splashed in. The Civil War portion of the book seemed to fly by and the post-Civil War portion of the book was overly long and detailed in my opinion. Sure Hancock had political aspirations, but the most interesting part of his life was his Civil War service and I found that the detail was lacking.

Hancock's wounding at Gettysburg and the subsequent pain and suffering he endured during the latter half of the Civil War was a continuing plot line, though it was abruptly dropped after Hancock leaves the Army of the Potomac and is never again brought up. I would have liked to learn more about his recovery and how the wound affected his life after the war. This is just one example of important facts relevant to Hancock's life being brushed over or dropped altogether.

I was happy to read more about Hancock's life, but I was left ultimately wanting by this book. Hancock deserves a great modern biographical treatment, but I am afraid this wasn't it.

[Dennis Phillips · Rating 4 out of 5]

David Jordan has put together a book that is both informative and very easy to read. In fact, I would call it a real page turner.

It is very hard to paint a picture of Hancock's contribution to a battle without getting the reader lost in detail or simply putting them to sleep. Jordan walks that fine line as well as most and better than many but he does fall a little short of giving us enough detail. Just a little bit more information on some of these battles would have made this a far better book. Still, if one must fall to one side of that fine line or the other Jordan picked the right side to land on.

The lack of detail by itself did not cost this book a star and in spite of this problem I would probably awarded Jordan five stars if he had not repeated the old myth that Harry Heath was on his way to Gettysburg looking for shoes. A man who could turn out this superb book should have known better.

[Richard Slater · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent biography of my hometown hero, Winfield Scott Hancock. The opening chapter features a moving description of his funeral, as his body is carried over streets that I played on as a boy.

The author has done very thorough research, and the book is very readable.

I do, however, take some issue in the fact that Mr. Jordan often acts as an apologist for Hancock. He manages to shift the blame to others in Hancock's command, or those just outside his orbit if Hancock should slip. This is just my opinion. Otherwise, I love this book.

[Jim Benton · Rating 3 out of 5]

Hancock was a leader. He was not a strategist. He always led according to the directions of his superiors. Whenever he had independent command, as in Louisiana or the Dakotas he came to grief. Lastly, he was that duck billed platypus of 19th century politics, a war Democrat. Jordan does a good job of describing Hancock the Superb, not so good with Hancock the presidential wanna be

[Mike · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not superb.

[Pat · Rating 5 out of 5]

An enjoyable biography, a good summary of the Civil War and the history of the US before and after the war, surrounding the life of Hancock and the Army of the Potomac.

[Brian · Rating 4 out of 5]

Winfield Scott Hancock is a academic biography of the acclaimed Civil War General known as Hancock the superb. His performance arguably turned the tide at Gettysburg and while never given the chance of being a strategic commander like Halleck or Grant he performed admirably in each task he was given and was well liked by his mend. As head of the 2nd Corps of the Potomac he fought well and led his men to victory time and time again. Arguably one of the most winning union Generals of the Civil War he was often passed by for promotion due his political party affiliations while other political generals were promoted above him.
His tempered approach to reconstruction would mark him as an enemy of Grant and he would be sent to far flung outposts as a result. He never quite achieved the rank he probably deserved but did end his career as the general in charge of the Atlantic defense serving his whole life in the military. He would have one run (and several times in the primaries of the time) as a Democratic Presidential Candidate but was not an adept politician and could not with the race.
Overall it is a dry book focused on the military campaigns but does give a good look at his life. For those really interested in military history or the Civil War this will be enjoyable but probably not for your average casual reader.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a well-written full biography of Winfield Scott Hancock. Having read Jordan's book on Gouverneur Kemble Warren, I knew this biography would also be well-written.

That being said, it was not as interesting as the Biography on Warren. But, it detailed Hancock's life before, during and after the Civil War.

Part of the problem with this biography are issues inherent in Hancock's career and the available information. General Hancock was a great general, but he never was given the chance to exercise independent command, so we will never know if he could have led an independent army or how he'd compare to others who tried like Burnside, Hooker, McClellan, etc.

The other problem that hurts this biography is it is hard to accept the source of the information entirely as Mrs. Hancock burned all of the original letters after writing her biography of Hancock, so there is little criticism other than criticism of his official military record.

All-in-all, I'm happy that a well-written biography has been written about General Hancock, who was a constant and reliable commander in the Army of the Potomac and deserves recognition for his service.

[Jonathan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Perhaps the AOTP's best corps commander. Gettysburg 3 was his day of glory, although the wound he suffered there hampered his performance in the 1864 overland campaign.

[Winston Valentine · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good book just wish more information on actually battle details and his role in the battle