Little Macpoleon
George McClellan was born to an affluent Philadelphia family in the year of 1826, as shared by the New World Encyclopedia (2014 par. 3). At age 20, military academy graduation placed McClellan in the U.S. Army of Engineers as second lieutenant. His early combat encounters lived in the Mexican-American War and furthered McClellan to and past first lieutenant to Captain (Pagles 28-29). With wartime aside, McClellan’s work included surveillance of bodies of water, railroads and foreign defense systems (Abraham Lincoln’s Classroom). At the start of the Civil War, McClellan drove the Ohio Army to West Virginia as their Major General. Two battles in and McClellan was a regular hero. In August of 1861, McClellan followed President Lincoln’s instruct to design and lead the Potomac Army as Commander and then as General in Chief (New World Encyclopedia 2014). After McClellan failed to impress with expected action towards Richmond, his position was returned to Army Commander (Pagles 39-42).
In May of 1862 McClellan leisurely led his men towards the Virginia Peninsula, neglecting pursuit of
…show more content…
the Union’s enemy (Abraham Lincoln’s Classroom). The Seven Days Battles followed, where McClellan stood absent from duty (Pagles 60). September of 1962 delivered McClellan and newly formed troops to Maryland where the Union marched into the victorious yet bloodstained Battle of Antietam. McClellan was again seen to have exhibited poor action and judgement in his post and was thereby dismissed (Pagles 63-64). No further military orders came and in 1864 McClellan ran against Abraham Lincoln for President (Holmes County Farmer 1864). After his loss against Lincoln, McClellan revisited railroad Presidency, served as New Jersey’s Governor, traveled and wrote about his career and life (Abraham Lincoln’s Classroom). He’d had two children with his wife, Ellen Marcy and at the age of 58 died and remains to this day buried in Trenton, New Jersey (New World Encyclopedia 2014). George McClellan’s pilgrimage of life displays intrigue in the form of remarkability as well as disorder. McClellan was a very handy man with a wide variety of occupational experience. He owned strengths and skills in line with engineers as he took on construction projects, surveyed land, and had immense involvement with the up and coming railroad system as hopes headed towards a transcontinental network (Abraham Lincoln’s Classroom). The American Promise states that between 1815 and 1840 the transportation system held wild growth, affecting such things as the spread of news and commerce reformation (Cohen et al. 275-277). McClellan’s involvement and influence clearly lived beyond his present moment. In 1854 the Secretary of War assigned McClellan to gather defense stability intel on the town of Santo Domingo. The data McClellan gathered on this region in the Dominican Republic was not found valuable until many years later in 1870 when the United States sought annexation of the region (New World Encyclopedia 2014). McClellan’s time in the military lends a view of both his accomplishment and dysfunction, as does much of what is seen with this General.
In the military, McClellan stood with the Union against the Confederates though he simultaneously kept desire and faith in the institutions of slavery. The skillful McClellan was revealed in his ability to form and mold an army into an organized, equipped and spirited group of men (New World Encyclopedia 2014). This pre-battle competency failed to extend further to the command of the Union Army while in the field. The Fall of 1862 observed McClellan’s stubborn refusal to move the Army of the Potomac across the Potomac River, and towards Virginia to gain on the Confederate Army (Abraham Lincoln’s Classroom). Direct encouragement for movement and action from President Lincoln himself could not inspire hastiness in McClellan (Pagles
2012). Abraham Lincoln’s Classroom accounts McClellan’s conduct as “insubordinate…” and the New World Encyclopedia adds, “McClellan came under extreme criticism…when it found that…forces had not only slipped away unnoticed, but also…they misled the Union Army through the use of Quaker Guns; fake guns…” (2014). This past season of war and activity was enshrouded in momentous, prosperity-producing phenomena along with a very personal undertone of character calamity. Such phenomena surrounded George McClellan on the path that he paved through life. From epic railroad growth to taking part in an electoral race for presidency; historical themes are everywhere in sight. McClellan acted General of the Union Army at a point, which fought against the Confederates and what they stood for in the Civil War of the United States (Cohen et al 408-411). The three abovementioned subjects, on their own, boast mighty junctures in America’s historical landscape. Such legendary happenings also flourished from the Union’s triumph at the Battle of Antietam in September 1862. This fight gave America a victory with which to collaboratively announce the Emancipation Proclamation and supplied logic to Britain and France that guided their decision to suspend support towards the Confederacy (New World Encyclopedia). The numerous and distinct effects that arrived in consequence to both acts tower over the era as famously as great change. It is safe to say that much of our present experience of the world can be attributed to what this age, in all its influences, brought forth for our nation.
Sears’ thesis is the Union could have won the war faster. McClellan was an incompetent commander and to take the initiative to attack an defeat the Confederate army. The Army of Northern Virginia, under...
When we compare the military leaders of both North and South during the Civil War, it is not hard to see what the differences are. One of the first things that stand out is the numerous number of Northern generals that led the “Army of the Potomac.” Whereas the Confederate generals, at least in the “Army of Northern Virginia” were much more stable in their position. Personalities, ambitions and emotions also played a big part in effective they were in the field, as well as their interactions with other officers.
Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederate States of America, showed weaknesses within his leadership which may have contributed to the confederacy’s loss and the unions win . Davis failed in three vital ways. These ways were: his relations with other confederate authorities and with the people, as well as in his fundamental concept of his job as president and in his organization and specific handling of his role as commander in chief . Davis failed in maintaining communication with leaders and with his people, often unable to admit when he is wrong which led to lack organization in his role . In addition, Davis was a conservative leader, not a revolutionary one which meant that his strength was often in protocol and convention rather than in innovation . Studying each of these aspects that represented a weakness in Jefferson Davis’s leadership, Lincoln in comparison provided more admirable and outstanding qualities within his leadership which in many ways affected the outcome of the war
It all started in the year 1862. General George McCellen currently controls the army of the Potomac. When it was determined that McCellen was a bad general, in December of 1862 he was replaced with General Ambrose Burnside. Within a week, Burnside decided on a campaign to the Southern capitol, Richmond. He told his plans to Lincoln and Lincoln approved, but told Burnside the only way for a win was to move quickly. Burnside split his group into three grand divisions, each with two corps. Burnside’s division arrives first at Fredericksburg; when he arrived there weren’t many Confederates. After Burnside’s arrival there was a swarm of Confederates who arrived. The problem was, that while the Confederates moved into position, General Burnside had to wait for pontoon builders so they could cross the Rappahannock River. (See Map1) He had requested pontoons from Harper’s Ferry but they hadn’t arrived yet and came two weeks later. This gave the Confederates time to get an advantageous position over the Union. While Burnside waited he looked at the town from on top of a ridge.
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).
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
General Burnside’s “Campaign to Richmond” led the Army of the Potomac to the far side of the Rappahannock River, opposite of Fredericksburg, on the 19th of November 1862. Burnside envisioned pontoon boats stretching twice across the river to allow for a swift and continuous passage of his army. This is where Burnside’s problems began. The pontoon boats arrived several days later and Confederate scouts in the city were able to report the Army of the Potomac’s location. Within days, General Lee’s Rebel f...
After the second Battle of Manassas, the Army of the Potomac was demoralized and President Lincoln needed someone that could reorganize it. President Lincoln liked General McClellan personally and admired his strengths as an administrator, organizer, and drillmaster. Lincoln was aware that the soldiers loved General McClellan and had nicknamed him “Little Mac.” Knowing this, President Lincoln ordered General McClellan to “assume command of Washington, its defenses and all forces in the immediate vicinity.”1 This was not a field command but intended for General McClellan to take the returning demoralized Army and the new soldiers coming into Washington and make them a fighting force, nothing more. Lincoln knew as well that although Ge...
In congruence with President Lincoln’s statements regarding the differentiation between fighting the confederates and ending slavery, Union officers upheld slaveholders constitutionally guaranteed right to own slaves. They continually reassured slave holders in loyal boarder states that the Union would not be fighting against the institution of slavery and any runaway slaves would be returned. This policy was strictly followed by most generals and many runaway slaves were returned to their masters to face punishment or death. Despite this danger, slaves continued to run away and enter Union lines. As this persisted, many Union officers were forced to reconsider the official policy of their superiors. General Benjamin F. Butler was one of the first to break the trend, providing food and shelter to slaves who had previously worked for the Confederacy, and ultimately putting the able-bodied men to work. He justified his actions...
Four and a half months after the Union defeated the Confederacy at the Battle of Gettysburg, Abraham Lincoln delivered the Gettysburg Address on November 19, 1863. He gave the Union soldiers a new perspective on the war and something to fight for. Before the address, the Civil War was based solely on states’ rights. Lincoln’s speech has the essence of America and the ideals that were put into the Declaration of Independence by the founders. The sixteenth president of the United States was capable of using his speech to turn a war on states rights to a war on slavery and upholding the principles that America was founded upon. By turning the Civil War into a war that was about slavery he was able to ensure that no foreign country would recognize the south as an independent nation, thus ensuring Union success in the war. In his speech, Lincoln used the rhetorical devices of juxtaposition, repetition, and parallelism.
Four and a half months after the Union defeated the Confederacy at the Battle of Gettysburg, Abraham Lincoln delivered the Gettysburg Address on November 19, 1863. He gave the Union soldiers a new perspective on the war and a reason to fight in the Civil War. Before the address, the Civil War was based on states’ rights. Lincoln’s speech has the essence of America and the ideals that were instilled in the Declaration of Independence by the Founders. The sixteenth president of the United States was capable of using his speech to turn a war on states’ rights to a war on slavery and upholding the principles that America was founded upon. By turning the Civil War into a war about slavery he effortlessly ensured that no foreign country would recognize the South as an independent nation, ensuring Union success in the war. In his speech, Lincoln used the rhetorical devices of juxtaposition, repetition, and parallelism, to touch the hearts of its listeners.
Q: How did Winfield Scott’s and George McClellan’s politics and prior military experience inform or influence their military strategy and approach to the war?
Racism in the criminal justice system has been dominant for decades but has come to the forefront as of late. With several controversies surrounding both the United States and Canada, racism is a topic that will not be disappearing anytime soon. For Donald Marshall Jr. it took 14 years to finally show the country why he was prosecuted for the murder of Sandy Seal. This essay will outline how the Canadian Criminal Justice System failed Marshall as a youth. Real Justice: Convicted for Being a Mi’kmaq: The Story of Donald Marshall written by Bill Swan will show how Marshall was neglected by the justice system at every turn. Furthermore, connecting the treatment Donald Marshall was subjected to with class lectures dealing with subjects such as
GEN McClellan may not have been a great war time General but he excelled at training Soldiers, getting his men ready to fight and raising the morale of the Armies he commanded. Multiple historians and various political leaders agreed on this point about McClellan. In a statement, President Lincoln told John Hayes,” There is no man in the army who can man these fortifications and lick these troops into shape half as well as he” . As it can be seen from a statement from a prominent figure such as the President during the war, GEN McClellan was a Soldiers General, but the ability to get political leaders on his side was another story. His cautious attitude towards war soured his reputation with both congress. McClellan’s biggest political obstacle was Edward Stanton, the Secretary of War. He started to work on a petition that would end McClellan’s career.
The Thirty Years War was a series of conflicts, not-knowingly involving most European countries from 1618 to 1648. The war, which was fought mainly in Germany, was started when Bohemian Protestants furiously attacked the Holy Roman Emperor in terms to impose a restriction on their religious and civil liberties. By understanding the Thirty Years War, you will notice the notable religious, political and social changes. The changes paved the religious and political maps of Europe. Not only did this war affect the religious and political demographic, it caused populations to perish and lose large amounts of their goods. What was known as a religious battle, turned out to be a political feud in competition of which state has the greater power affecting men, women, soldiers and civilians. “[The bohemians] had no idea that their violent deed would set off a chain reaction of armed conflict that would last thirty years and later be called Europe’s “first world war” of the modern era.” When the war ended, the lands were defiled and over 5 million people were killed.