The American Civil War discussion

I'm almost finished with Foote's first volume and I just don't get the guy. During the period where he was training, drilling and outfitting his army I was very impressed with him, but when the time came to march out and face the Confederates he seemed to keep delaying and hemming and hawing...then when he finally made it out onto the field he was constantly crying wolf about the supposedly staggering numbers he was facing (ridiculously overstated from what I can tell.) On top of that he seemed to be horribly unwilling to actually commit and duke it out with his enemies. Am I being too hard on the guy or is this an accurate perception of him? I'm very interested in hearing others' opinions on him.

The way I look at it - he took council of his fears. That is not a good thing for a general.

It also didn't help that his intel people (Pinkerton) was playing to his fears and telling him what he wanted to hear on the enemy's Order of Battle.

You're right, it seems like he was always focused on what he could lose rather than what he could gain. It's such a tricky subject--his troops loved him because he seemed to have their relative safety and interesta in mind, but at the same time his maneuvering was not going to win the war and send them back to their homes. Then you have a man like Grant, who was accused of being a callous butcher but at the same time was the dude that took down Lee and ended the war.

Nate wrote: "You're right, it seems like he was always focused on what he could lose rather than what he could gain. It's such a tricky subject--his troops loved him because he seemed to have their relative saf..."

But have you read how McClellan turned tail at Glendale in the 7 Days Campaign, leaving 7 of his 11 divisions to fight for their lives without a leader? See Stephen W SearsStephen Sears To the Gates of Richmond: Peninsula CampaignTo the Gates of Richmond. And at Harrison's Landing his greatest fear was that Lincoln was going to give his army to John Pope. See his July and August letters to his wife in The Civil War Papers Of George B. Mcclellan: Selected Correspondence, 1860-1865. He was supposed to be evacuating Harrison's Landing so he could rapidly steam his army up to join Pope's Army. Instead he was dragging his feet and plotting to entice Lee into attacking him, totally against his orders from Lincoln and Halleck, while, as he put it, "...they are lamming away at Pope..." Is it any wonder that McClellan delayed sending Franklin's corps to join Pope?

Hi Steven, thanks for the reply. I'll have to check those out! I wasn't familiar with that but about the Seven Days, but it hardly seems out of character for him.

Looking for recommendations for best books on 1864 Overland Campaign. Thanks in advance

Hi David,

There is this new release due out in April that may interest you:

by Joseph Wheelan

Otherwise I would highly recommended the series of books by Gordon C. Rhea:

and and and by Gordon C. Rhea

Thanks, I have been looking at Rhea's series and it is good to know you think highly of it. I am reading Searching for Meade, which is a good book, but my knowledge of the Overland Campaign is spotty at best. I am also in the online Civil War Club that uses John Tiller's Civil War PC games to compete among the members. A fun group and I am currently the XVIth Corp Commander of the Army of the Tennessee (Union). I will check out Wheelan's book immediately

Hi David,

I have a copy of Searching for George Gordon Meade: The Forgotten Victor of Gettysburg by Tom Huntington but I am yet to read it so I will be interested to hear your views on it when you have finished.

by Tom Huntington

Let us know how you go as the XVIth Corp Commander in the Army of the Tennessee!

I am reading on Kindle, but it is more chatty then most histories, but I have really enjoyed his style so far. I have 3 Division commanders I work with as well as Commander of AotT and Chief of Staff.

Here is link to club:
http://www.wargame.ch/wc/acw/

You might take a look at McClellan's War: The Failure of Moderation in the Struggle for the Union
by Ethan Sepp Rafuse. It's certainly one of the few I've ever seen that supports Little Mac. The author strives mightily to present him as a Man of Reason, who wanted to win the war by convincing the South resistance was futile, but not by crushing them on the battlefield as he thought that would simply stiffen their resolve. there's a lot of good material here, although I can't say I buy into it altogether. among other things, he seems to regard the battle at Yorktown as a stroke of genius.

I have pretty strong opinions about McClellan, especially his arrogance, but some of those opinions changed (a little) after reading Faithful Lightning by Allen C. Guelzo.

This book explains that the classic West Point military education taught defensive tactics. McClellan's Peninsular Campaign plan of landing on the James and marching troops up to Richmond for a fairly bloodless win is the example it uses.

I think McClellan's main problem was that he'd never failed at anything.

Grant on the other hand had nothing but failure until the war so when times were good, they were good. If they were bad, they could turn around.

I always thought that Mac had two main problems.

1. He believed the Pinkerton reports

2. He suffered from analysis paralysis.

I agree with Jackieb...they didn't compare Little Mac to Napoleon for nothing. For me I feel he was indifferent to the cause(s) he and those he led were fighting for. He would have preferred to keep things the way they were I believe, and was in this for his own advancement, obvious in running against Lincoln.

And yes Nate, he really had "the slows"!