If you were Gen. Lee

[wilber6150]

Just a quick thought, if you were Gen Lee would you have replaced Stonewall for his actions or inaction during the seven days..I could only imagine of what Jackson would have done to his subordiantes if they carried out his orders, in the same style or sluggishness that he carried out his...Truly he showed signs of brilliance but other times, well not so good...

[paulcalloway]

Re: If you were Gen. Lee

My expertise is in sports medicine and social studies education, I'd have a hard time feeling like I could overrule Lee on that one.

[Rob Weaver]

Re: If you were Gen. Lee

Lee was commanding the largest body of men he had ever commanded in his life up to that time, and just a few days earlier, that army had belonged to another general to boot. I don't think I would want to replace major commanders when I don't really know the force. Jackson was also clearly exhausted and acting like it. He might not have been able to get his troops moving with the speed and precision of the Valley, but given that Lee is having to make major decisions in the face of an outnumbering enemy, Stonewall diminished may be the best he's got. Remember, Lee's record of service for the Confederacy is really unremarkable at this point in the war. Stonewall is not only far more experienced and successful, he's also already a celebrity. The removal of a popular hero could sit poorly not only with the men, but with the War Department and the President, who already has an idea that he knows how to run the war better than anyone else. My conclusion is that Lee doesn't make any substantive command changes with Mac knocking on the door. He simply makes due and will sort the army out later.

[Dale Beasley]

Re: If you were Gen. Lee

Boy, you know.. I am not a Military Historian. But I do know one thing, I have seen at close hand, Generals doing thier work. They have good days and they have bad days. I use to say "Over-There" and I would quote Chamberlan in the movie Gettysburg "There is nothing more dangerous than a General on a battlefield". So to play "what if" is interesting, but you never really know what was going on with Generals Lee and Jackson at the time. But I do know we are still learning from them even today.

(my two bits)

[Tom Ezell]

Re: If you were Gen. Lee

Just a quick thought, if you were Gen Lee would you have replaced Stonewall for his actions or inaction during the seven days..I could only imagine of what Jackson would have done to his subordiantes if they carried out his orders, in the same style or sluggishness that he carried out his...Truly he showed signs of brilliance but other times, well not so good...

I would spend my time much more effectively by convincing some of my compatriots (Pillow, Bragg, Hindman, Holmes, etc.) that the best service they could perform for the Southern Confederacy would be to go sign up and fight for the Yankees.

:wink_smil

[Rough_and_Regular]

Re: If you were Gen. Lee

If i were General Lee, Stonewall Jackson would have been Replaced. It would appear to me that Lee may have feared Jackson because Lee before taking command was a staff officer and has not been in the field and lacked any battlefield Victories such as Jackson had. A great Book to read on this matter is "To the gates of richmond" The peninsula campaign by Stephen Sears. In the book you will see how Jackson failed in the 7 days battle. As a new commander i would have done it but that is another failing of the confederacy was to put a new commander in charge who was at one point was pushing paperwork. They should have started by putting a commander like Longstreet who was there from the start to finish what Johnson started and it is evident that it had it's impact during the battle of Malvern hill when the commanders started the battle that did not follow what Lee ordered and it was not the first time it happened during the 7 days battle. So yes to make a statement Jackson would have been sucking lemons at a fort or put on staff somewhere for his action during the 7 days.

[Chad Teasley]

Re: If you were Gen. Lee

Matthew,

From your post, you seem to be implying that Longstreet would have been a better choice than Lee for promotion to command of the Confederate Army of the Potomac (soon the Army of Northern Virginia) after Johnston's wounding at Seven Pines. Am I correct in the interpretation of your statement? If so, why do you believe that Longstreet would have done a better job?

I'm not in any way being critical of your supposition; I just find it interesting. Would you mind expounding on it a bit?

IMHO, despite the numerous Confederate command and staff significant failures during the Seven Days (not a few of which were the direct fault of Ol' Blue Light, as you accurately pointed out), I believe that overall Lee did a very commendable job in his first attempt at handling a large army. True, Malvern Hill was a tactical disaster, but the ANV thoroughly achieved its primary aim of forcing the AoP away from Richmond. (Although, to be fair, a large part of that success was due to the near-astonishing degree of timidity exhibited by one George McClellan.)

As to why Lee didn't relieve Jackson after his glaring failures in the Seven Days, I suspect it wasn't so much fear or intimidation, as it was that Lee recognized Jackson's brilliant performance in the Shenandoah, and likely considered the Seven Days failure to be an abberration. If such was his belief, I believe Old Jack's later performance probably bore it out as accurate. It is notable that Marse Robert did fire/reassign a number of senior field commanders after the Seven Days, so I suspect he was more than willing to pull that trigger when it needed to be done...But I've never read anything that indicated he considered doing such to Jackson (if anyone else has come across such info, please share it).

Anyway, I'd be interested in your perspective of Longstreet's potential for army command success as opposed to Lee's.

Thanks!

[GrumpyDave]

Re: If you were Gen. Lee

"If in," is about speculation. I prefer history. "Just what we don't need is another "what if " book about Gettysburg." - Gary Gallagher.

What if Stonewall Jacksons horse only had three legs? Would the imbalance cause by the resulting tripod, have caused the Tarheels to miss him at Chancellorville?

History is much beter that "what if's" any time.

[Rob Weaver]

Re: If you were Gen. Lee

Date of rank is an important feature to remember when talking about generals. You can't just replace someone as if they were football players. Officers were touchy about date of rank. Look at how carefully everyone in the Confederacy handled Johnston. Does Longstreet rank Jackson?

[GrumpyDave]

Re: If you were Gen. Lee

Before or after Jackson was killed?

Longstreet - Lieutenant-general with date of rank on June 17, 1861
Jackson - He was commissioned brigadier-general June 17, 1861
Both were promoted to Major General on October of 61 also on the same day.
Creates a quandry, doesn't it?

Or in the US army?

Longstreet graduated in 1842
Jackson graduated in 1846

No "what if's" just history.

Please name one "First Team" Federal General the Jackson ever beat. He ruled the Valley, where incompetent Federal Generals were sent to to be out of the way. He almost got beat by one at 2nd Manassas. He got whipped at Antetiam by Mac's subordinates. And the same on the Peninsula. And, he got himself killed by his own men, trying to figure out what another Federal incompetent was doing. IMHO, Jackson's myth is bigger than the actual history. He was lucky, more than once. And like Custer, the law of averages caught up with him.

[Dale Beasley]

Re: If you were Gen. Lee

Gentlemen, and those of you from Texas,

I may be missing the crux of this thread, but war is an art. General Lee was a Staff Officer prior to the war, but he was not always. Lee knew how to build an army and that is what he did. Each General, Longstreet and Jackson offered Lee the ability to move an army and see it work. We would be very naive to believe that Longstreet and Jackson just saluted and said “Three bags full”…they did not.

Lee’s ability to build and army is still in development today, just look at the BCT’s that are working now in Iraq.

Like I said, War is an Art, to bad it is painted with blood.

[wilber6150]

Re: If you were Gen. Lee

HI ALL,
thanks to all those that have replied to this thread, my main thought in creating this thread was just wondering if Jackson had a sub-ordinate who acted the way that he did, would he have any second thoughts in having him charged as a coward and replaced..Seems to me that Gen Lee gave him a lot more slack and overlooked more poor performance than Jackson would ever have taken from one of his junior officers..

[john duffer]

Re: If you were Gen. Lee

One thing to note is that most anyone on this board knows much more about Jackson's performance than Lee did on day 8 of the Seven Days. By the time Marse Robert might have realized this, Jackson had long since erased any smear. A common critisism in books of the "LEE CONSIDERED" type is that Lee was too forgiving and should have been much firmer in replacing officers that performed poorly. Freeman's "LEE'S LIEUTENANTS" mentions something to the effect that people seem to think of Lee having some enormous reserve of capable men in the wings ready to step up and it just wasn't so. There was often no reason to think another would do better, if as well, and even replacing a clearly incompetent officer was sometimes a complicated legal & political battle.

Longstreet hardly covered himself with glory at Fair Oaks / Seven Pines. He was lucky to come out as well as he did.

[Charles Heath]

Re: If you were Gen. Lee

Will, look up Jackson's relationship with A.P. Hill for a good read.

[Rob Weaver]

Re: If you were Gen. Lee

Please name one "First Team" Federal General the Jackson ever beat. He ruled the Valley, where incompetent Federal Generals were sent to to be out of the way...

War may be an art, but it's not a tournament. Every battle isn't a matchup between equals. Part of Jackson's success in the Valley is definitely due to his ability to outmaneuver his less-than-stellar opponents. But is it possible to name other Confederate generals at that same time who would have been bludgeoned by those same incompetents? Can you see, for instance, "Shanks" Evans promoted to an independent command in the Valley, and the chaos that would ensue? Remember, the same Jackson who did so well in the spring of 62 nearly got undone by Old Man Winter trying to take Romney.
We have the advantage of looking at a general's entire career like sports statistics, already accomplished. Last season, so to speak. It's hard, if not really impossible, to divorce yourself from what you know, and the vacuum of the present, and get back to the decision as it was made at the time, with all the political ramifications, and so forth.