Summary Of The General Who Marched Through Hell

851 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Civil war overview paper

During the civil war there were few opportunities greater to watch genius of war time procedures and tactics than of the accounts of a particular northern Union General, William Techumseh Sherman. Marked by the examples of great victory and tactical intelligence his legacy the Shiloh counterattack and the “March to the sea” campaigns were most regarded. Because of his implementation of total warfare during his campaigns, Sherman played a large role in the victory of the Union. In the two text I chose for this essay the General is regarded in two very different aspects, in “The General Who Marched Through Hell” by Earl Shenick Miers, General Sherman’s mental state and struggles are vividly pointed out. (Miers 1951) While in “Sherman’s March” …show more content…

In Earl Shenick Miers book “The General Who Marched Through Hell” he described Sherman’s rise to infamy and fame, by outlining some of the most iconic times during the Civil War. During Sherman’s march to Georgia the Battle of Shiloh also known as the Battle of Pittsburg Landing, the Battle of Shiloh took place from April 6 to April 7, 1862, and was one of the major early engagements of the American Civil War (1861-65). The battle began when the Confederates launched a surprise attack on Union forces under General Ulysses S. Grant (1822-85) in southwestern Tennessee. After initial successes, the Confederates were unable to hold their positions and were forced back, resulting in a Union victory. Both sides suffered heavy losses, with more than 23,000 total casualties, and the level of violence shocked North and South alike. Miers chapter on Shiloh describes a General torn on insanity on the verge of suicide. This is a pivotal bit of information to study while …show more content…

Sherman’s march through Georgia and the Carolinas. While the same information is covered in each of the text the perception and points taken away from the information are drastically different. Burke writes about Sherman as a military genius and profound leader, unlike the Miers book. In both texts you see a remarkable story of the events and people that made these battles what they are, on the other hand the Davis book displays the same victories the light in which the leader is cast is vastly skewed. Davis describes Sherman’s army as great as that of Julius Caesar, not of a mad man on the loose with all out control. The decisiveness shown by Sherman is what solidified a union victory, not his uncanny ability to be viewed as insane. The March to the Sea was no off-the-cuff reaction by Sherman to finding himself in Atlanta in September 1864 and knowing he could not remain there. He had for a long time hated the idea of having to kill and maim Confederates, many of whom had been pre-war friends. He wanted his army to win the war and thus preserve the Union, but he also wanted to curtail the battlefield slaughter. He sought to utilize destructive war to convince Confederate citizens in their deepest psyche both that they could not win the war and that their government could not protect them from Federal forces. He wanted to convey that southerners controlled their own fate through a

Show More
Related

  • Battle Of Gettysburg

    1489 Words  | 3 Pages

    From July 1st to July 3rd, 1863, the most famous and most important Civil War Battle took place in the small town of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. The Confederates under Robert E. Lee advanced on the Union in hopes of taking the major city of Philadelphia, Baltimore, or even Washington D.C. Union commander General George Meade was sent to make sure none of this would happen. General Robert E. Lee was determined to invade the North and win a victory important for southern morale, leads his army toward Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, where he hopes to destroy railroad bridges linking east with west. He is unaware that a large union force headed by General Meade is headed in the same direction.

    Read More

  • The Battle of Gettysburg Analysis

    1961 Words  | 4 Pages

    It is far easier for us in the present than it was for those at Gettysburg, to look back and determine the path that the leaders should have taken. As students, studying battles such as this, we have the advantage of hindsight, knowing the outcome. Nonetheless, we can still learn valuable lessons from it. To do so, this analysis will explore some of the decisions of the leaders at Gettysburg, and how they were affected by the operational variables. This essay will scrutinize some of the leaders at Gettysburg, and the impact of their actions. The outcome of this analysis will show that what was true in 1863 is still true today. While many variables are vital to a successful army on the battlefield, none should be neglected. Each variable discussed in this examination will prove to be important, but the information battle will be paramount in the battle of Gettysburg.

    Read More

  • Principles of Maneuver, Offensive and Surprise

    981 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Valley Campaign of the Shenandoah Valley of 23 March to 9 June 1862 saw the rise of the Confederate Major General (MG) Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson. The Shenandoah Valley campaign allowed for MG Jackson to incorporate the principles of maneuver, offensive and surprise operations (US Army Center of Military History, 2012) through the use of his cavalry and foot soldiers.

    Read More

  • General Sherman Mission Command

    901 Words  | 2 Pages

    At the end of his “March to the Sea”, MG William T. Sherman led Union forces from Georgia to the north through the Carolinas to unite with LTG Ulysses S. Grant in Virginia. By doing so, he believed he would be able to cut Confederate forces General Robert E. Lee’s supply lines. In February 1865, MG Sherman captured Columbia, the state capital of South Carolina. The commander of Confederate forces was LTG Wade Hampton who led the force under the command of General P.G.T Beauregard. MG Sherman succeeded in defeating Confederate on the basis of the principles of mission command.

    Read More

  • Analysis: The Killer Angels

    1235 Words  | 3 Pages

    “Their differing perceptions of the nature of war form the backbone of the difficult relationship between these two men.” Lee, an older soldier, values much of an offensive warfare approach, while Longstreet values a defensive warfare approach. Both men consistently argue about the best option for the Confederacy. However, “no matter how much he might disagree, Longstreet defers to Lee’s decisions.” In an argument as to who was right, none of the developed tactics provide clear evidence as to what was going to work, especially with a military of lesser men, considering the war in 1863. Although General Lee’s tactics did not work during the Battle of Gettysburg, there is no evidence that General Longstreet’s defensive strategy would have worked significantly better. Therefore, neither of the generals exceeded the other when it comes to military strategies, which rather debunks Shaara’s depiction of Longstreet’s advanced knowledge of modern warfare. Despite of the importance of the Battle of Gettysburg, often marked as the turning point of the war, General Longstreet should not obey an order that results in a significant loss of men that would be extremely difficult to replace at this time. Already limited by the amount of men still able to fight, pushing additional forces in an open battle would just nearly deplete the confederate soldiers completely, and

    Read More

  • Failure of Mission Command by General McClellan

    2308 Words  | 5 Pages

    The Battle of Antietam could have been a devastating and fatal blow to the Confederate Army if Gen. McClellan acted decisively, took calculated risks, and veered away from his cautious approach to war. There are many instances leading up to the battle and during the battle in which he lacks the necessary offensive initiative to effectively cripple and ultimately win the war. This paper is intended to articulate the failure of Mission Command by GEN McClellan by pointing out how he failed to understand, visualize, describe and direct the battlefield to his benefit.

    Read More

  • Why the North Won the American Civil War

    1271 Words  | 3 Pages

    Union officer William Tecumseh Sherman observed to a Southern friend that, "In all history, no nation of mere agriculturists ever made successful war against a nation of mechanics. . . .You are bound to fail." While Sherman's statement proved to be correct, its flaw is in its assumption of a decided victory for the North and failure to account for the long years of difficult fighting it took the Union to secure victory. Unquestionably, the war was won and lost on the battlefield, but there were many factors that swayed the war effort in favor of the North and impeded the South's ability to stage a successful campaign.

    Read More

  • Analysis of For Cause and Comrades

    546 Words  | 2 Pages

    The book ‘For Cause and Comrades’ is a journey to comprehend why the soldiers in the Civil War fought, why they fought so passionately, and why they fought for the long period of time. Men were pulling guns against other men who they had known their whole lives. McPherson’s main source of evidence was the many letters from the soldiers writing to home. One of the many significant influences was how the men fought to prove their masculinity and courage. To fight would prove they were a man to their community and country. Fighting also had to do with a duty to their family. Ideology was also a major motivating factor; each side thought they were fighting for their liberty. The soldier’s reputations were created and demolished on the battlefield, where men who showed the most courage were the most honored. Religion also played an important role because the second Great Awakening had just occurred. Their religion caused the men who thought of themselves as saved to be fearless of death, “Religion was the only thing that kept this soldier going; even in the trenches…” (McPherson, p. 76) R...

    Read More

  • What They Fought For by James McPherson's

    558 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Union Army was able to match the intensity of the Confederacy, with the similar practice of dedication until death and patriotism, but for different reasons. The Union soldiers’s lifestyles and families did not surround the war to the extent of the Confederates; yet, their heritage and prosperity relied heavily on it. Union soldiers had to save what their ancestors fought for, democracy. “Our (Union soldiers) Fathers made this country, we, their children are to save it” (McPherson, 29). These soldiers understood that a depleted group of countries rather than one unified one could not flourish; “it is essential that but one Government shall exercise authority from the Gulf of Mexico to Canada, and from the Atlantic to the Pacific” (Ledger, 1861).

    Read More

  • Ulysses S. Grant

    1117 Words  | 3 Pages

    At the outbreak of the American Civil War, Grant was appointed colonel, and soon afterward brigadier general, of the Illinois Volunteers, and in September 1861 he seized Paducah, Kentucky. After an indecisive raid on Belmont, Missouri, he gained fame when in February 1862, in conjunction with the navy; he succeeded in reducing Forts Henry and Donelson, Tennessee, forcing General Simon B. Buckner to accept unconditional surrender. The Confederates surprised Grant at Shiloh, but he held his ground and then moved on to Corinth. In 1863 he established his reputation as a strategist in the brilliant campaign against Vicksburg, Mississippi, which took place on July 4. After being appointed commander in the West, he defeated Braxton Bragg at Chattanooga. Grant's victories made him so prominent that he was promoted to the rank of lieutenant general and in February 1864 was given command of all Union armies.

    Read More

  • Why The North Won The Civil War Analysis

    1274 Words  | 3 Pages

    A successful army requires discipline, but Confederate soldiers refused to concede authority to anyone they did not vote for, at least in the beginning. Confederate soldiers were also prone to shirking duties they deemed menial, and some even left the army without dismissal if they believed they had served long enough. In the uppermost chain of political command, Jefferson Davis proved deficient in quelling the media outlets which railed against his decisions at nearly every turn. Davis gave deference to the right of free speech no matter how damaging it was. Donald then uses these points to highlight the Union Army and Lincoln administration’s successes. The North had the advantage of numerous immigrant conscripts who were used to being ordered around, so the pecking order was easily established from the beginning. In the political realm, Abraham Lincoln did not let Constitutional rights obstruct his goals; Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and threw defamatory journalists into prison. The Union thus had the unity it needed to achieve victory in the face of the South’s

    Read More

  • A Stillness at Appomattox

    1344 Words  | 3 Pages

    “All up and down the lines the men blinked at one another, unable to realize that the hour they had waited for so long was actually at hand. There was a truce…” Bruce Catton’s Pulitzer prize winning book A Stillness at Appomattox chronicles the final year of the American Civil War. This book taught me a lot more about the Civil War than I ever learned through the public school system. Bruce Catton brought to life the real day to day life of the soldiers and the generals who led them into battle.

    Read More

  • Civil War and The South's Loss

    1824 Words  | 4 Pages

    “Why did the North win the Civil War?” is only half of a question by itself, for the other half is “Why did the South lose the Civil War?” To this day historians have tried to put their finger on the exact reason for the South losing the war. Some historians blame the head of the confederacy Jefferson Davis; however others believe that it was the shear numbers of the Union (North). The advantages and disadvantages are abundant on either sides of the argument, but the most dominate arguments on why the South lost the war would be the fact that state’s rights prevented unification of the South, Jefferson Davis' poor leadership and his failure to work together with his generals, the South failed to gain the recognition of the European nations, North's superior resources made the outcome inevitable, and moral of the South towards the end of the war.

    Read More

  • Book Analysis of Stephen W. Sears’ Landscape Turned Red

    963 Words  | 2 Pages

    Stephen W. Sears’ Landscape Turned Red is an account of political and military plans. Especially General Robert E. Lee’s Maryland Campaign as well as the Battle of Antietam. Sears frames his work around the pending support of Great Britain and France to the Confederate cause due to cotton. Landscape Turned Red covers the battle of Antietam. It offers a vivid account of both armies, the soldiers and officers, and the bloody campaign. It analyzes the impact of Antietam on the Civil War as a whole. Sears' use of diaries, dispatches, and letters recreate the Battle of Antietam. You experience the battle not only from its leaders but also by its soldiers, both Union and Confederate. Sears attempts to examine the tactical moves of both Lee and General George McClellan. He also talks about the foolish decisions that troubled both the Federal and Confederate forces. Sears' use of traits, political pursuits, and tactical preferences, explain the thoughts of many. Some of these include President Lincoln, General Halleck and General McClellan, and their subordinates. Stephen Ward Sears is an American historian specializing in the American Civil War. He is a graduate of Oberlin College and an attendant to a journalism seminar at Radcliffe-Harvard. As an author he has concentrated on the military history of the American Civil War. Such as the battles and leaders of the Army of the Potomac. He was an editor for the Educational Department at American Heritage Publishing Company. American Heritage Publishing two of his ten books.

    Read More

  • Summary and Analysis for Shiloh by Shelby Foote

    1391 Words  | 3 Pages

    The novel, “Shiloh” by Shelby Foote is a fictional recreation of the bloody battle. The story begins with the soldiers of the Confederate Army heading towards Pittsburg Landing. The men are marching in terrible conditions. It is pouring down rain and they are dragging their tired legs through the mud. The troops come to a halt so the commanders can talk to General Johnston. General Johnston says the only way they might have a chance is if they plan a surprise attack. As the sergeants hand the men their guns, they are told to check the powder in case it got wet in the rain. A group of soldiers test their guns out on a deer running close by. At the same time the shots were fired, the sun came out and the soldiers started to scream and cheer. These noises combined were more than enough to alert the Union soldiers of the Confederates advance. Palmer remembers what his life was like before going to war. He attended the Louisiana State Military Academy when the Confederacy seceded from the Union. One of his professors predicted the south did not have a chance of winning the war. That night Palmer dreams of holding Sherman at gunpoint making him admit that he was wrong. Prior to the battle, the commanders create a battle plan. Palmer is assigned a part in this process. When the plan fails, Palmer learns that planning a battle is more difficult than it seems because the commanders on the ground face challenges that do not exist on paper.

    Read More

More about Summary Of The General Who Marched Through Hell

Open Document