
George B. McClellan and Civil War History
In the Shadow of Grant and Sherman
No se pudo agregar al carrito
Add to Cart failed.
Error al Agregar a Lista de Deseos.
Error al eliminar de la lista de deseos.
Error al añadir a tu biblioteca
Error al seguir el podcast
Error al dejar de seguir el podcast
3 meses gratis
Compra ahora por $18.50
No default payment method selected.
We are sorry. We are not allowed to sell this product with the selected payment method
-
Narrado por:
-
Kirk Winkler
Perhaps no other Union commander's reputation has been the subject of as much controversy as George B. McClellan's.
Thomas J. Rowland presents a framework in which early Civil War command can be viewed without direct comparison to that of the final two years. Such comparisons, in his opinion, are both unfair and contextually inaccurate. Only by understanding how very different was the context and nature of the war facing McClellan, as opposed to Grant and Sherman, can one discard the traditional "good general-bad general" approach to command performance. In such a light, McClellan's career, both his shortcomings and accomplishments, can be viewed with clearer perspective.
©1998 The Kent State University Press (P)2013 Redwood AudiobooksListeners also enjoyed...




















Reseñas de la Crítica
Las personas que vieron esto también vieron:

A different perspective
Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.
Thomas J. Rowland
Nearly all of my reading regarding Gen. McClellan has been ancillary. The primary focus would be a particular battle, or another commander, or Lincoln. As the author described, McClellan invariably comes off as difficult, obstinate, insubordinate, and potentially cowardly or traitorous.
I wanted to learn more. Even if he was not ultimately successful, surely someone did not rise to the top with no redeeming qualities.
Mr. Rowland provided the information, and gave a vigorous defense of “Little Mac’s” actions. As suspected, he likely did get an excessively bad rap. He had to take the Army from a small, untrained force and create a professional fighting force at a time when warfare was changing.
However some of Mr. Rowland’s logic did not convince me. There famous incident where the president and others were waiting to speak to Mac and the general ignored them and went to bed is frequently retold. The author discounts it by calling into question the legitimacy of John Hay’s story, and stating nobody else told of the account. Mr. Hay had a long, distinguished career in government, serving numerous presidents. I’ve read biographies on him, and do not recall anyone describing him as a liar. If nobody else commented on the event, they neither denied it. Perhaps the insubordinate behavior was so typical as to make it unremarkable?
Mr. Rowland did convince me the general was likely not as irredeemable as normally portrayed, but he did not convince me Mac was not a jerk. Or that he lacked aggressive tendencies where they were needed.
One final point; the information conveyed probably could have been condensed to a third of the book’s length. A great deal of time was spent explaining why others were jerks also.
E for effort
Se ha producido un error. Vuelve a intentarlo dentro de unos minutos.