Re: Champion Hill;
> Johnston was north of Jackson with 6,000 men. Pemberton was atit was an indication of the breakdown in command that 41,000 werent
> Edwards Station with 23,000 men, marching towards the federal corps
> of McPherson and McClernand, maybe 36,000 men, plus Blair's division,
> another 5,000 men.
*somehow* facing 29,000 ... the kind of odds that could have meant the
attacker fails. Yes, this gets away from the question as posed, I'm
just throwing the comment in.
> > A better commander could have moved north of the RR in time?so much for that, then.
> North of the railroad = abandon Vicksburg, because McClernand would
> have been in Edwards by the time Pemberton's mobile force could have
> Which makes it all the more significant to me that McPherson managedwas it a case of skillfully suckering Gregg or just getting lucky that
> to sucker Gregg into attacking, when he was actually supposed to
> withdraw behind the fortifications at Jackson, while McPherson was
> originally supposed to operate against Jackson independently.
> McPherson, without any seige artillery, would have been facing a
> force of 7,000 men, supported by heavy artillery, behind
> fortifications. And the Confederate reinforcements would have
> steadily trickled in over the next few days, raising the force
> available for the defense of Jackson to around 12,000 - 13,000
Gregg would assess the situation wrong? If it was skill, then there is
huge irony that McPherson often gets portrayed as a poor performer in
- You mention how Sherman and Grant worked together to prevent the movement of troops between theaters, and many have spoken of how great this plan was, but in reality it did not matter that much. Think about it, the ONLY major battle of the entire war which was influenced by the movement of troops from one major army to another was Chickamauga! Even then most of Longstreets men were late to the party!With only one viable route for the transportation of troops between the two armies, and it was almost worn out by this time, I don't see how any major movement of troops between the two armies was possible, so the "Cooperation" between Grant and Sherman really did not effect the outcome of the conflict.Steve Hall - Commander
Lt. Col. William Luffman Camp #938
Sons of Confederate Veterans
Chatsworth, Georgia----- Original Message -----From: David WallCc: bonnikorn@...Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2007 8:41 PMSubject: Re: [civilwarwest] Re: Champion Hill;
I am not sure what you mean by Cohesion on the east side of the river.
Grant's army certainly acted in concert, except for McClernand at Champion
Hill. But even he did O.K.
Now by east side of the river, you mean the entire area from the Mississippi
to the East Coast, I just don't know enough to comment.
But Grant's movement down the Louisiana border to Bruinsberg to Jackson to
Vicksburg was like a "Ballet for Three Division's". Wow, I've got to use
that phrase again!
Same goes for Sherman on his way from Chattanoga to Atlanta. Except he
conducted a "Ballet for Three Army's". Grant and Sherman actually
co-ordinated their activities so that the Confederates could not transfer
troops from one theater to the other.
edkiniry, who took part in those ballets. No...he did not wear tights. He
shod horses and shot
>Reply-To: civilwarwest@ yahoogroups. com
>To: civilwarwest@ yahoogroups. com
>Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Re: Champion Hill;
>Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 21:34:02 EDT
>Nothing particularly unusual about the lack of cohesion Trans-Mississippi.
>It was barely evident on the east side of the river. In both armies.
>*********** ********* ********* ********* Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL
>http://discover. aol.com/memed/ aolcom30tour