Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > American History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

American History American History Forum - United States, Canada, Mexico, Central and South America


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old August 3rd, 2012, 06:05 PM   #1

Salah's Avatar
Unchained
¤ Blog of the Year ¤
 
Joined: Oct 2009
From: Baltimorean-in-exile
Posts: 17,048
Blog Entries: 135
Winfield S. Hancock, 'the Superb'


I'm reading this right now:

Amazon.com: Winfield Scott Hancock: A Soldier's Life (9780253210586): Jordan: Books
Amazon.com: Winfield Scott Hancock: A Soldier's Life (9780253210586): Jordan: Books


Hancock, known as 'the Superb', or alternatively, 'the Profane', is one of the under-appreciated figures of the Civil War. A Pennsylvania-born West Pointer, the divisions caused by the Southern secession hit Hancock hard. Two of his best friends, Henry Heth and Lewis Armistead, both joined the Confederacy. Both Hancock and Armistead were wounded during Pickett's Charge, but only Hancock survived.

Hancock's military career was at its peak during the Gettysburg Campaign. He famously exposed himself to Rebel fire on the third day, telling his aide 'there are times when a corps commander's life does not count'. At the time he was commanding the Second Corps of the Army of the Potomac; he claimed in letters home to his wife that he had been offered the command of the entire Army though there is no other evidence for this.

Hancock's service under Grant was not as noticeable, and he was troubled by the painful wound he received at Gettysburg. Like Grant, his successes during the War carried him into a political career, but he lost his bid for the presidency to James Garfield in 1880. Hancock died six years later.

Other than his soldierly bearing and his talents as a commander, Hancock stood out for his spectacular temper and his outbursts of oaths and profanity. He was a leonine personality, and something of a 'character', standing out as one of the most impressive figures to hold a command in the Federal Army.

Last edited by Salah; August 3rd, 2012 at 06:10 PM.
Salah is offline  
Remove Ads
Old August 3rd, 2012, 06:08 PM   #2

Viperlord's Avatar
Southern Unionist
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 5,334
Blog Entries: 12

Quote:
Other than his soldierly bearing and his talents as a commander, Hancock stood out for his spectacular temper and his outbursts of oaths and profanity. He was a leonine personality, and something of a 'character', standing out as one of the most impressive figures to hold a command in the Federal Army.
I have nothing against Brian Mallon, but I thought him a very odd choice to portray Hancock in the movie Gettysburg for the simple reason that Hancock was neither a small man or a soft-spoken one.

I could be wrong, but I was almost certain Hancock's nickname was "The Superb".
Viperlord is offline  
Old August 3rd, 2012, 06:10 PM   #3

Salah's Avatar
Unchained
¤ Blog of the Year ¤
 
Joined: Oct 2009
From: Baltimorean-in-exile
Posts: 17,048
Blog Entries: 135

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viperlord View Post
I could be wrong, but I was almost certain Hancock's nickname was "The Superb".
And you're right goddamnit...
Salah is offline  
Old August 3rd, 2012, 06:14 PM   #4

Viperlord's Avatar
Southern Unionist
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 5,334
Blog Entries: 12

I think it's notable that even in his somewhat reduced capacity under Grant, he was still the favored leader for attacks, and when Grant proposed that Meade be sent to the Shenandoah to counter Early, he suggested putting Hancock in Meade's place. Even then, he was that highly regarded.
Viperlord is offline  
Old August 4th, 2012, 04:12 AM   #5

Tuthmosis III's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2011
From: above sea level in NJ
Posts: 1,812
Blog Entries: 2

Is it true that McClellan gave him the nickname after the battle of Williamsburg?
Tuthmosis III is offline  
Old August 6th, 2012, 05:03 AM   #6

Viperlord's Avatar
Southern Unionist
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 5,334
Blog Entries: 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuthmosis III View Post
Is it true that McClellan gave him the nickname after the battle of Williamsburg?
Yes, it's true. Unlike Fighting Joe Hooker (Who in fairness, earned his name), it wasn't the result of a newspaper error.
Viperlord is offline  
Old August 6th, 2012, 07:33 PM   #7

Tuthmosis III's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2011
From: above sea level in NJ
Posts: 1,812
Blog Entries: 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viperlord View Post
Yes, it's true. Unlike Fighting Joe Hooker (Who in fairness, earned his name), it wasn't the result of a newspaper error.
Yeah, I heard about that. LOL.
"...fighting[.] Joe Hooker..." And he was indeed a pretty aggressive corps commander before and after Chancellorsville. (I'm sure Sherman had his reasons for going with Howard after McPherson was killed...)

Back to Hancock: (from Antietam: The Soldier's Battle by John Michael Priest(1989), p. 185)

Quote:
"Come away from here, general, you ought not to be here."
The general snapped his eyes upon one of his still panting aides who had overanxiously interrupted his superb performance [of dressing down a major who was behind a tree before an impending Confederate attack on his unit].
"The enemy is coming right toward us!" the officer exclaimed while pointing a badly shaking finger toward Cooke's screaming line as it crossed the Hagerstown Pike.
"Damn them!" Hancock spat. "Let them come! That's what we are here for...."
Tuthmosis III is offline  
Old August 31st, 2012, 06:52 PM   #8

Viperlord's Avatar
Southern Unionist
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 5,334
Blog Entries: 12

Quote:
(I'm sure Sherman had his reasons for going with Howard after McPherson was killed...)
Well, the reason he didn't go with Hooker was for the simple reason that he and Hooker absolutely loathed one another. Regardless of whose fault it was, it was probably correct for Sherman not to rely on someone who hated his guts. Why the command wasn't given to the extremely capable John "Black Jack" Logan, whom Sherman actually quite liked, is a mystery only explainable by Sherman's preference for West Pointers, even "Uh-Oh" Howard. Sherman apparently realized he'd been wrong, and tried to make it up to Logan by having him lead the Army of the Tennessee in the Washington review.


Quite off-topic on my part though.
Viperlord is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > American History

Tags
hancock, supreme, winfield


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Winfield Scott and other generals of the Mexican War Salah American History 2 April 22nd, 2012 11:16 AM
Winfield Scott vs Duke of Wellington Ricdog War and Military History 120 September 12th, 2011 04:06 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.