ROBERT E. LEE-THE MOST OVERRATED GENERAL- GEORGE H. THOMAS- THE MOST UNDERRATED GENERAL

 

The most overrated and underrated Civil War generals were both from Virginia and born in the early 1800's. Robert E. Lee was born in 1807 and George H. Thomas was born in 1816. Both died of strokes in 1870. In my view Robert E. Lee is the most overrated Civil War general and George H. Thomas is the most underrated Civil War general. I know there are many Lee worshipers out there that will violently disagree with me but I think the facts bear me out. Both Lee and Thomas were United States military officers with distinguished military records when the Civil War began on April 12, 1861. Both attended West Point and both served with distinction in the Mexican War. Lee was trained as an engineer and Thomas was trained in the artillery and cavalry. Both were faced with the same dificult decision. Does loyalty to my state trump loyalty to the United States of America? Lee chose to serve Virginia and Thomas chose to remain loyal to the U.S. government. Thomas's decision was probably somewhat influenced by the fact that his wife was from Troy New York but his decision came at a huge cost. It caused permanent estrangement from his Virginia family. They disowned him and his sisters turned his picture toward the wall never speaking to him or of him again. 

By the time of the Civil War weapons technology had outpaced military weaponry of the Napoleonic era. During Napoleon's era muskets were smoothbore with an effective range of fifty yards. By the time of the Civil War muskets were rifled with an effective range of three hundred yards and a person could be killed from a thousand yards away. Seventy-five percent of battlefield casualties were caused by the rifled musket. The remaining twenty-five percent were caused by artillery ammunition consisting of solid shot, spherical case shrapnel exploding shells, regular exploding shells of various shapes and sizes and canister shot. Bayonets were rarely used in combat during the Civil War because most soldiers could not get close enough to their enemy in order to use them because of long range weapons. 

In Napoleons day artillery could be used as an offensive weapon due to the short range of the smoothbore musket. An army could unlimber it's artillery one hundred yards away from an enemy's battle line without fear of their artillery crews being picked off. They could then blast holes in an infantry line while their cavalry galloped through these holes creating havoc in the rear. In Napoleon's day and the Civil War you could only hit what you could see with the naked eye. Long range artillery using coordinates to aim from way off in the rear of an army didn't come along until the twentieth century.  By the time of the Civil War artillery became a defensive weapon designed to defend a position from attack. This is because artillerymen could be shot at much longer ranges with rifled muskets. In addition with rifled artillery, artillery batteries could be destroyed by counter battery fire at much longer ranges. 

In Napoleon's day soldiers lined up shoulder to shoulder. There was method to this madness. Since soldiers could only fire one shot before reloading their attack was more deadly if they fired by volley simultaneously. Being separated from your enemy by only fifty yards or less after firing the volley an opposing infantry line could rush into the chaos created by the volley and  finish their enemy off with a bayonet charge. Many troops would run rather than face a bayonet.  It had a severe psychological effect upon soldiers.

Napoleon day tactics were being taught to Civil War soldiers by Dennis Hart Mahon, the father of Alfred Mahon who wrote the highly influential book, The Influence Of Sea Power On History 1660 to 1805. This was an afterthought though because the primary purpose of West Point was to educate Army  civil engineers. About 75% of the schools focus was dedicated to civil engineering up to the 1850's. Weapons technology had nullified the effectiveness of Napoleonic tactics. Soldiers could no longer hope to take a position by frontal attack barring unusual circumstances. They would be stopped by longer range weapons long before they could hope of getting close enough to the enemy to use the bayonet or close hand to hand fighting. Army commanders needed to adjust their tactics to reflect the technological advances in weaponry. It was almost the equivalent of massing troops for frontal assaults in WW1 against machine gun nests. 

To be successful in the Civil War it was necessary for a commander to seek out good defensible ground such as elevated or high ground. They could then fortify the position with whatever cover was available such as log barricades, abati, stone walls and trenches. Then they could compel their enemy to attack in order to dislodge them. The attacker was at a great disadvantage. Stonewall Jackson was a master at this. He always said that he had seen positions that he could not take in a frontal attack but never one he could not hold. The name of the game was to flank or go around stiff resistance and compel your enemy to attack you. 

Unfortunately this was a lesson that Robert E. Lee never seemed to learn. He wasted men that he could not afford to lose in fruitless frontal attacks. Such as Mechanicsville, Malvern Hill, Chancellorsville on the day after Stonewall Jackson's wounding, the 2nd and 3rd day at Gettysburg and Fort Stedman at Petersburg. Lee had shown that he was a master at defensive fighting such as at Fredericksburg, Cold Harbor and Petersburg. This is where his training as an engineer worked to his benefit. Yet he chose the offensive defensive strategy rather than a defensive strategy that could have won the war for the South. Not that that was the desired outcome. Instead Lee favored a strategy that destroyed his army. The Republican's had to win the war. All the Democrat Confederacy had to do was force a tie or deadlock that would destroy the political career of Abraham Lincoln. Even with the South's flawed strategy that almost happened. If not for Sherman's capture of Atlanta and Sheridan's destruction of the Shenandoah Valley in the late Summer of 1864 just before the presidential election in November there is a great possibility that Lincoln would have been defeated by the Peace Democrats. Even Lincoln believed in the Summer of 1864 that he would lose.

Grant was called a butcher during the Civil War and counting his overall casualties from three separate military theaters they were not as high as Lee's overall casualty count. With Lee's one losing army he lost 209,000 men in killed, wounded, missing, and captured. Grant's three winning armies in different theaters lost 154,000 men in killed, wounded, missing and captured. Fifty-five thousand fewer casualties than Lee. In the battles fought between Lee and Grant Lee lost 121,000 men to Grant's 94,000. Lee suffered 20% casualties to Grant's 18%. Grant, during the entire war commanded 621,912 soldiers to Lee's 598,178 soldiers. Lee had a casualty count of  20.2 % to Grant's 15.1 %.  Grant even had fewer casualty percentages than Braxton Bragg at 19.5%, John Bell Hood at 19.2% and PGT Beauregard at 16.1%. Grant definitely was not a butcher. Although the Seven Days battles outside Richmond in 1862 was a strategic victory for Lee, tactically it was a disaster. He only won one of seven battles in that campaign and lost 20,000 casualties as opposed to McClellan's 16,000. If Lee had been up against a commander like Ulysses S. Grant or George H. Thomas it would not have ended well for Lee. I don't think that he would have been held in very high esteem today. 

Robert E. Lee was too focused on Virginia. In my view the Civil War was won in the Western theater. Much of the winning Civil War strategy was accomplished in the West. General Winfield Scott's Anaconda Plan was supposed to squeeze the life out of the Confederacy. A Naval blockade would shut down trade on the East coast and the Gulf of America. In addition the Mississippi river would be controlled by the Union blocking Confederate river trade and cut off men, food and supplies from the Confederate states west of the Mississippi river. Rivers in the west ran north to south which made them highways for an invading army into the deep South such as the Cumberland and Tennessee Rivers. Rivers east of the Appalachian mountains ran east to west and they were barriers to an invading army. 

 Then there was the Nashville-Chattanooga Corridor. The capture of Nashville was pivotal to opening up this path to victory. Nashville became the primary headquarters, supply center, a major railroad hub that intersected the Louisville & Nashville railroad, the Nashville and Chattanooga Railroad and the Nashville and Decatur Railroad. It also became it's chief medical center in the Western theater. Nashville became the staging area for the eventual capture of Murfreesboro, Chattanooga, which was the gateway to the deep South. The capture of Atlanta which insured the re-election of Abraham Lincoln in 1864. Then Sherman's March to the Sea and the capture of Savannah Georgia. This was the springboard for Sherman's march through the Carolina's and into Lee's rear in Virginia. Or at least that was the eventual plan but Lee surrendered before the plan could be fully implemented. 

In my view the war in the Eastern Theater was fought primarily for political objectives. Richmond, the capital of of the Confederacy, was 108 miles south of Washington D.C. the capital of the United States. Most of the battles fought in the Eastern theater occurred between Richmond and Washington with the exception of the battles involving the Antietam and Gettysburg campaigns. One can argue that these campaign objectives were not only to influence Britain and France into forming an alliance with the Confederacy but to take the pressure off of Richmond. The Antietam campaign was also intended to help the Northern Democrats win back Congress during the 1862 midterm elections in November with a Confederate victory. Lee knew that he faced a more favorable outcome facing a Democrat Congress rather than a Republican Congress. 

First, Montgomery Alabama was the original capital of the Confederacy. Strategically it made more sense having Montgomery as the capital than Richmond. Montgomery was deep in the heart of the Confederacy and would have been much harder for an invading army to capture. Due to the fact that Virginia was the most populated Confederate state and had more media a political decision was made to move the capital from Montgomery to Richmond. Much blood and treasure was spent protecting Richmond and Washington. I would remind the reader that the Patriot Army lost it's capital of Philadelphia to the British in the American Revolution. Washington D.C. was captured and burned by the British in the War of 1812. Nevertheless the American's won both wars. 

Although Lee was not given supreme command of all Confederate armies until late in the war he never developed a grand strategy for winning the war like Grant and Lincoln. He was too focused on Virginia. Lee was always against reinforcing threatened areas in the west when Pemberton needed reinforcements at Vicksburg and when Bragg's army was being threatened in Middle Tennessee. Middle Tennessee was a breadbasket for the Confederacy because it was such a ferile region. That food for the most part was set aside for Lee's army and denied to western armies. 

 George Henry Thomas was a very mild mannered, honorable, humble and meek man. He was well known for his imperturbable nature even under heavy fire. Witnesses said that when things were the hottest he might stroke and pull at his beard but he was very calm under stress. In my view Thomas might have been the greatest soldier produced by the Civil War on either side. Stonewall Jackson, Nathan Bedford Forrest and Ulysses S. Grant are the only ones who comes close in my view. It was because of Thomas's character and personality that he is not as well known as the others that I have mentioned. For example, Thomas was given Grant's Army of the Tennessee during the Corinth campaign after Grant was surprised at Shiloh. Grant's career was on the line. This created an awkward situation between Grant and Thomas that lasted until the end of the Civil War. Grant was biased and treated Thomas unfairly after he later became his commander due to no fault of General Thomas. 

General Thomas was better than Grant in the sense that he would never have allowed himself to be surprised in the way that Grant had been surprised at Shiloh. Thomas believed in thoroughly preparing his troops for battle. Grant respected Thomas but might have been jealous of him. He tried to portray Thomas as being too slow and cautious. Thomas's caution was unlike that of Bragg or McClellan. His thorough preparation for battle was mistaken for caution and indecisiveness. Once he was prepared he hit you like a sledgehammer and you were going down. In the only two actions that he was in full command of Union forces he completely demolished the Confederate Army at Mill Springs Kentucky and at Nashville. Thomas had the opportunity to be an army commander right before the battle of Perryville Kentucky. In the Fall of 1862 the Lincoln administration was unhappy with Union General Don Carlos Buell's generalship up against Braxton Bragg who was invading Kentucky. Buell's cautious nature was similar to McClellan's. The Lincoln administration offered Buell's Army of the Ohio to General Thomas but because of his honorable character he felt Buell deserved the chance to defeat Bragg since he had a plan in place to do so. Buell was like McClellan in the East who had allowed Lee to escape back into Virginia after Antietam without destroying his army. Buell did the same thing by allowing Bragg to escape back into Tennessee after the battle of Perryville. 

By turning down this opportunity his superiors believed that Thomas was reluctant to take on the responsibility of high command which was not the case. By the time Thomas got another chance to command the Army of the Cumberland, which was formerly the Army of the Ohio, he would be under the overall command of Grant. After the Kentucky campaign general William Starke Rosecrans was placed in command of the Army of the Cumberland over Thomas. If Thomas had been placed in command instead of Rosecrans at this time there is no telling how different the history of the Civil War would have played out. I do not believe Thomas would have ever been defeated and he would have fulfilled every goal given him by the Lincoln administration. Possibly even overshadowing Grant as a commander. As it was Thomas saved the Union Army at Stones River by setting up a nearly impregnable final defense line along the Nashville Pike. He saved the Union Army once again after Rosecrans and half his army was driven from the field along with one of Grant's favorite generals Phillip Sheridan at Chickamauga. Thomas fought off the whole Confederate Army on Snodgrass Hill until nightfall when he pulled off a successful withdrawal into the safe environs of Chattanooga. This is where Thomas earned the title of the Rock of Chickamauga. 

After the disaster at Chickamauga the Union Army was under siege in Chattanooga. By this time, because of his brilliant victory at Vicksburg Grant was placed in command of all Western armies. He relieved Rosecrans and wisely replaced him with Thomas. It was Thomas's troops who stormed Missionary Ridge and won the battle of Chattanooga on November 25, 1863. Grant wanted Sherman to have the glory for winning the battle but he was stopped by Confederate General Patrick Cleburne. Grant then ordered Thomas to take the rifle pits at the base of Missionary Ridge but to go no farther. This placed Thomas troops in an impossible position since they were exposed to Confederate fire from above. Without orders Thomas's men scaled the heights winning the battle in an incredible charge that took them straight up the side of a steep mountain. The Confederate army fled and did not stop until it reached Dalton Georgia. As a result of this victory along with Grant's previous successes Lincoln promoted him to command all Union armies and he was given the rank of Lieutenant General. The highest rank given in those days and the rank held by George Washington. 

During the Atlanta campaign Thomas performed admirably and smashed a Confederate attack at the battle of Peachtree Creek in Atlanta. When Hood began his Tennessee campaign in the hopes of luring Sherman away from the deep South after the fall of Atlanta Sherman sent Thomas to Nashville without his army which remained with Sherman. Thomas had to form a whole new army and a cavalry force from scratch. He had less than a month to form a new army. To form a cavalry force he had to confiscate virtually every horse in the Nashville area including horses from a traveling circus. Thomas dispatched a force under General Schofield to slow down the Confederate Army of Tennessee commanded by John Bell Hood. This action culminated in the bloody battle of Franklin on November 30, 1864. 

 On December 1st Schofield's army joined up with Thomas in Nashville giving Thomas an effective fighting force of 55,000 men. Hood set up his lines south of the city hoping to lure Thomas into attacking him since the Nashville defensive works were virtually impregnable. Thomas was prepared to attack in early December but was stopped by a severe ice storm. Grant began pestering him from his siege lines around Petersburg Virginia not taking into account that man nor beast was able to attack in those conditions. Grant decided to relieve Thomas with General John Logan and then decided to go to to Nashville himself. Before Grant or Logan could get there Thomas smashed Hood on December 15th after the weather improved and virtually destroyed the remaining Confederate army on December 16, 1864. Thomas would have destroyed Hood's army completely if not for the brilliant rearguard protection of Nathan Bedford Forrest. The Army of Tennessee was no longer an effective fighting force after Nashville. 

It is hard to compare Thomas to people such as Lee, Grant, and others because he did not command as large of an army as they commanded. It is like trying to compare a baseball player in the Negro League like Satchell Page to someone in the white major leagues of the time. Since it didn't happen we can only speculate. Thomas, however; would have never been surprised in battle like Grant was at Shiloh or Rosecran's was at Stones River. His thorough preparation for battle was mistaken as too much caution similar to a McClellan or a Bragg. On the other hand I don't think it would have taken Thomas six months to prepare for the Tullahoma campaign after Stones River like it took Rosecrans to prepare. The fact that Thomas was able to plan an execute an attack at Nashville with an army that had been created from scratch in less than a month is evidence for my argument. Thomas was never defeated in battle and I believe he would have been the hero of the war if given the opportunity. If Lee had faced Thomas in the Eastern theater early in the war he would not have achieved the level of fame that he did. Lee would have been even more obscure than Thomas is now.