Re: Pemberton's Problems
- --- In civilwarwest@y..., "wh_keene" <wh_keene@y...> wrote:
> As I see it, Pemberton had 2 basic tragic flaws in the spring of1863.
>Loring (and his subordinate Lloyd Tilghman) didn't like Pemberton.
> 1) A problem of command
> He didn't seem to be well like, respected, etc. by his fellow
> commanders. As a result he had trouble working with his division
> commanders and had trouble getting support from other departments.
That said, Loring quarelled with lots of people, including Stonewall
Jackson in that theaterthatshallnotbementioned.
Actually, as a departmental administrator, he (Pemberton) fared
pretty well, earning the praise of Governor Pettus of Mississippi.
Confronted with an invading army, however ...
But Pemberton's other subordinates, with the exception of Bowen, were
no great shakes. Dabney Maury (for a while), Carter Stevenson, John
Forney, Martin L. Smith - not exactly a "who's who" of Confederate
>All the way up to and after the landing. Pemberton almost had to go
> 2) A problem of intelligence
> His information gathering and analysis were poor relative to the
> force strength and movements of Grant. Much of this is due to the
> success of Grant in confusing him with Grierson's raid and
> Sherman's final feint up the Yazoo. This is also partially due to
> the lack of cavalry at Pemberton's disposal, itself a result of
> item 1 above and his reaction to Grierson. And is is partially a
> result of the information he was being fed by his subordinates
> (again related to
> problem 1). If I recall correctly, Stevenson was convinced at
> first that Sherman's feint was the real thing and that the activity
> around Bruinsburg/Port Gibson was the feint.
and get Stevenson's troops himself, his subordinate was so reluctant.
Villa Hills, KY