Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

46945Re: Envelopment

Expand Messages
  • william
    Jan 22, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      It is my understanding that a successful flank attack would overlap the enemy's line and thus put troops in his rear if he doesn't fall back quickly enough. There is at least one school of thought that believes that Hooker's move from Rossville threatening the confederate left flank (and rear) coupled with Thomas' frontal assault is what caused Stewart's precipitous retreat along with the rest of Bragg's army.


      --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, Patricia Swan <pbswan@...> wrote:
      >
      > All:
      > I thought that "envelopment" meant going around the flank(s) to get
      > behind the enemy, not just attacking on the flank(s). If this is a
      > correct definition, then Grant's plans at Chattanooga would seem to be
      > flank attacks, not envelopments. Sherman was to get up on Missionary
      > Ridge at the north end and "roll up" Bragg's army from that point.
      > Hooker was to do likewise at the south end. Thomas was to hold the
      > middle. As it turned out, Thomas' troops broke through the middle,
      > aided by a somewhat late attack on the Confederate left flank by
      > Hooker. Sherman was stopped by Cleburne's troops and did not "roll up"
      > Bragg's army from his right flank. Thus, Grant's plans for attacks on
      > Bragg's flanks were not very successful, while Thomas's troops did more
      > than their planned part. It seems, therefore, that this battle was not
      > a good example of attacks on the flank(s) and certainly not an envelopment.
      >
    • Show all 15 messages in this topic