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

Re: Thomas (was Davis & Johnston)

Expand Messages
  • ironbrigade_24th_mich
    In order to save Vicksburg, any general in charge of the Rebs would have had to have beaten Grant at Champions Hill. The difference if Thomas had been in
    Message 1 of 41 , Jul 3, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      In order to save Vicksburg, any general in charge of the Rebs would
      have had to have beaten Grant at Champions Hill. The difference if
      Thomas had been in command is that he probably would not have opened
      with an offensive against Grant. The difference in manpower was not
      that great to where if he defended instead of attacked, it might have
      evened the numbers up considerably.
      Once the Rebs are driven back into Vicksburg, it's all over. I don't
      think it matters who is in command. One thing to remember is that
      Grant did not face Pemberton with his whole force. He could have
      used the troops under Sherman if he had needed them.
      --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "William H Keene"
      <wh_keene@y...> wrote:
      > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Dave Smith" <dmsmith001@y...>
      > wrote:
      > > My first thought was how a Grant or Sherman would have handled
      > > Vicksburg as a Confederate commander - but then, I thought ...
      > >
      > > How would George Thomas have done?
      > >
      > > Dave
      >
      > I think it comes back to a question of how Thomas would have
      handled
      > JEJ's orders and the resulting encounter at Champion Hill.
      >
      > -Will
    • GnrlJEJohnston@aol.com
      ... Following Atlanta, Logan took leave to do some politicing in order for supporting Lincoln s election coming up in November. He had finished that and was
      Message 41 of 41 , Jul 11, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        In a message dated 7/10/2003 8:51:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, slippymississippi@... writes:

        > Is there any evidence that Sherman had beef with Logan? Political
        > general or not, he was one of the most effective division commanders
        > under Grant during the Vicksburg campaign. It's hard to
        > imagine
        > Sherman would relish the loss of a good general.

        Following Atlanta, Logan took leave to do some politicing in order for supporting Lincoln's election coming up in November. He had finished that and was on his way back when Grant sent him the wire to proceed to Nashville and take over command from Thomas. After that order was rescinded, Logan went back and joined Sherman. If Sherman had a beef with Logan so much and did not respect his ability, why did he have Logan appointed the final commander of the Army of the Tennessee. Granted, a year earlier, he had Howard replace McPherson rather than Logan, but not only was Howard a WP graduate, he outranked Logan. I do not think anything personal was involved in Sherman's decision making in this case.

        JEJ
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.