American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

Got to wade in here...

First, to defend ASJ, though the performance leading up to his death at Shiloh was certainly lackluster, he also showed signs of having the same basic fighting instincts as Lee and Jackson. It is simply unfair to rate the man on the basis of that campaign. There is every reason to believe that he might well have proven his worth had he lived - he would certainly have been no worse than those who ultimately followed him.

Second, on the issue of capturing Little Round Top, there is no reason to believe that Meade would have committed his reserve to recapturing it without firm intelligence concerning what force was on his left. (For all he knows, Pickett is following on the heels of Hood and McLaws) Rather than counteraccacking, Meade would probably have used his reserve as a covering force to try to extricate his flanked army in order to withdraw back towards Pipe Creek.

Third, I would think Stirling Price would deserve at least an honorable mention - for stubborness if nothing else. Or how about Stand Watie?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by LT. Col Shannon</i>
It is simply unfair to rate the man on the basis of that campaign. There is every reason to believe that he might well have proven his worth had he lived - he would certainly have been no worse than those who ultimately followed him.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

On what else should we rate him? On the exaggerated expections of the Southern public just because he looked the part? So did Little Mac. Oh yes, he likely wouldn't have been worse ... but whence the idea that he would have been better?

I'll go along with giving Price more credit than he usually gets.

Gen. Walter, USA
AoS / War College

Anybody ever heard of a Texas general named Stovepipe Johnson? He
got his nickname by running Yankees out of town with a stovepipe mounted on wagon wheels. He was blinded in a raid in Kentucky but
went on to found Marble Falls, Texas, after the war. For the Yankees,
I always thought A J Smith was underrated. He saved Banks at Pleasant Hill and defeated Forrest at Tupelo. He also helped crowd Price out
of Missouri during the Fall 1864 invasion. Sherman thought highly of
him.

MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA

Add my two cents worth[:D]

To the not really unknown but unpromoted catagory I would put Gen. Cleburne. He should have commanded the Army of Tennessee.

To the underutilized catagory I would put Gen. Forest. He should have been given command of at least all cavalry in the West if not an army.

To the has potential but hadn't really showed it I would put Gen. A. S. Johnston. While performing poorly coordinating a large number of troops he might have been like Lee and learned from it. Plus he was the only western commander that Davis would have trusted to command.

For the would have looked a lot better if he got shot category I would put Gen. McClellan preferrably at the Battle of Antietam (early at the battle). The Union might have won, for sure they couldn't lose, and he would look like he planned it.

For the category of most over rated CSA general, I will give it to Longstreet. At Seven Pines he should have been court marshaled and shot. At Second Manassas only luck and Pope turned his delaying into success. At Gettysburg in spite of Shaara presenting him as the wise forward thinker, his foot dragging did more to lose the battle and create they huge casualty lists than any other action on the field.

Oddly Lee considered McClellan the best union commander.

As to Little Round Top being critical terrain in the Battle of Gettysburg, I would say only in combination with the lower end of Cemetery Ridge. Unless you hold the Wheatfield and area around Plum Run the position is easily turned by a force attacking from the North. The critical communication line for the Union was the Baltimore Pike so troops in Devil's Den and on the Round Tops wouldn't force a retreat but they would be a good jumping off point for taking Cemetery Ridge.

BG. Kennon Whitehead
Chatham Grays
III Corps, AoM (CSA)

No surprise from me here. I will go with Gen. St. John Richardson Liddell. Fought hard when in command, fought with Jeff Davis for Bragg, and led the CSA field forces at the last majopr battler of the Civil War, Ft. Blakely at Mobile Alabama. Didn't stop fighting after the war either and was shot dead on a river boat as a result of a family fued that started well before the Civil War.

Lt. Gen. Don Adams
5th Texas "Lone Star" Cavalry Brigade
I/III ANV
http://www.rootsandsaddles.com/index.htm

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">On what else should we rate him? On the exaggerated expections of the Southern public just because he looked the part? So did Little Mac. Oh yes, he likely wouldn't have been worse ... but whence the idea that he would have been better?

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Dierk,

I'm not saying he would have proven to be better. I'm just saying it is a bit harsh to judge him too critically based on his performance in less than a year of war. Lee didn't perform all that well when working in the difficult terrain of West Virignia when working with inferior subordinates. Johnston had a more difficult challange before him than did Lee or Jackson. Granted, Shiloh should have been a Confederate victory, and might well have ultimately resulted in the South winning the war (with Grant and Sherman both eliminated from future advancement, and the Union forced back into Kentucky.). I have just always thought that Johnston was probably a better general than his performance at Shiloh would lead one to believe and, given more competent subordinates like Clebourne and Forrest, might have eventually became the Lee of the west.