id was set in the arguments array for the "side panel" sidebar. Defaulting to "sidebar-1". Manually set the id to "sidebar-1" to silence this notice and keep existing sidebar content. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 4.2.0.) in /home/netscrib/public_html/civilwarcavalry/wp-includes/functions.php on line 4239id was set in the arguments array for the "footer" sidebar. Defaulting to "sidebar-2". Manually set the id to "sidebar-2" to silence this notice and keep existing sidebar content. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 4.2.0.) in /home/netscrib/public_html/civilwarcavalry/wp-includes/functions.php on line 4239:))
Wade Sokolosky
]]>Oh, and by the way, if you don’t like Sheridan, then the Berryville wagon train raid on 13 August, 1864 by Mosby and his command (his largest number of men in an action in the war) should have certainly tickled your fancy. It was a real stab to Phil’s ego and reputation and he had to ‘retrograde it’ back from whence he had started ten days earlier as a result! He got LOTS of guff from his superiors regarding that little calamity especially as Sheridan considered himself a great supply officer.
Actually, the yellowjackets probably got the best of BOTH commanders on that one!
]]>Gregg was quiet and unassuming, and went about his business. That, I suspect, is why he got long with Meade.
We don’t know why he left. His resignation letter says it was to take care of pressing business at home. The surgeon of the 6th Ohio Cavalry claimed it was because his nerves were shot. That may be, but we will never know–he never said anything publicly.
I have a theory: Gregg was friends with both Averell and Torbert, who were his West Point classmates. I think Gregg saw what sort of rotten treatment they got at the hands of Phil Sheridan, and I think Gregg figured that sooner or later–probably sooner–Sheridan would come back to the Army of the Potomac, and I don’t think Gregg was willing to serve under Sherdan’s command, and this was the only for him to avoid that. I can’t prove it, but I believe it to be true.
Eric
]]>Scott
]]>Yes, another time for the panel question but never again an audio problem of that nature at an LBHA!
John
]]>YOu will just have to find another opportunity to get that panel together and ask that question.
Hopefully, there won’t be any audio difficulties before hand.
Eric
]]>I say go for it. You’ll do a great job on Sheridan.
As for Averell, you know my thoughts on him, and I’m with you on it.
Eric
]]>Having read LITTLE PHIL, I know why you seleced that title for your examination of Sheridan and it had nothing to do with using it as an affectionate nickname for the man. I regret that when I chaired the recent LBHA Panel discussion on Eastern Cavalry leaders that ominpresent demon named time got in the way my asking the panel for a general assessment of Sheridan as cavalry commander. Greg Urwin has a different take on Sheridan and it would have been interesting to hear your opinion collide with his, in a constructive way, of course. Instead, I asked the listless Fitzhugh Lee question. Oh well, maybe another time.
John
]]>I found your blog on so many ideas and so little time very applicable and have had the same thought many times. One of the projects at the top of my list is a Sheridan bio. I think that you have covered his weaknesses in depth but I still think that there is so much about him that is just not out there. He was not a hell-bent for leather cavalryman. I’m going to albany this fall to really get into the Averell papers – Averell was really given the shaft. In my opinion, he was the most successful division commander in the Valley area during the summer and early fall of 1864 – Merritt and Custer (brigade only) not excepted. Rutherford’s Farm (4 guns and 250 pow’s), Moorefield (4 guns and hundreds of pow’s) Opequon (1 gun and scores of pow’s).
]]>