I was just reading a book on Lee, and it was interesting to find out that after he took command, during the Seven days campaign, most of his best fighting generals sucked. Jackson was always tardy, and Longstreet, along with Magruder, D.H. Hill, and others either disobeyed,or misinterpreted attack orders leading to heavier casualties. So what would have happened if Lee had sacked them, who would he get to replace them?
What if Lee sacked his generals in 1862?
- Thread starter rob2001
- Start date
nbcman
Donor
Fastest way is to click on the Report (post) and indicate that the thread is in the wrong forum. Then any moderator can react to the reported post.
ACW ends with Union victory maybe a little faster maybe a little slower than OTL.
Query was not Jefferson Davis Commander in chief of the treasonous rebels?
Query was not Jefferson Davis Commander in chief of the treasonous rebels?
The South loses faster, Lee had capable corps commanders, particularly Longstreet. The problem wasn't his corps commanders but Jeff Davis and the fact Lee is/was overrated. My guess is that the book was written by a "Lee Worshiper" who can't admit that "Marble Bob" was responsible for most of his army's mistakes.
Also, a lot of the deadwood in the CSA military was there because they had strong political connexions. Lee probably didn't have the legal power to fire them, and he surely didn't have the political power to do so.
My guess is that if he tries, he's the one who's fired, and some political general is placed at the top.
My guess is that if he tries, he's the one who's fired, and some political general is placed at the top.
Three things:
1) He probably winds up with worse that what he's got
2) If he fires them, they'll become vocal critics within the CSA and will likely wind up in command elsewhere
3) He'll enhance the politics associated with military command in the CSA and probably get a lot more unwelcome advice/direction from Jeff Davis
Note: If multiple, skilled people repeatedly misinterpret your orders, the problem may well be you and the orders you give in vague or equivocal terms.
StephenColbert27
Banned
Worse people. Longstreet, Jackson, et cetera were not perfect by any means, but they were usually competent and occasionally brilliant. Furthermore, there just weren't anyone better for Lee to replace them with. Overall the Army of Northern Virginia hit its peak in late 62 and early 63 in terms of top-to-bottom competence as far as the officer corps was concerned. After that they began to suffer heavy casualties, and there just weren't that many good officers to replace them. Their nemesis, the Army of the Potomac, had the opposite problem. They hit their nadir during the same period, before the cream began rising to the top with men like Meade, Hancock, Gibbon, and others.
Well, some of them Lee did "fire", in a way, by convincing the War Department to reassign them to the Trans-Mississippi; Magruder and Holmes are the most notable examples. But Lee's options in 1862 for corps and division commanders is pretty limited. I suppose he could have grabbed some of the Confederate commanders in the West, but none of them really stood out at this point of the war. He possibly could have asked for Beauregard to be assigned as a subordinate; Lee did respect Beauregard's abilities as a commander. But that would have been an awkward situation, given Beauregard's rank, former position as army commander, and vanity.