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


View Poll Results: How would you rate George Meade as a general?
10 stars 1 6.25%
9 stars 0 0%
8 stars 5 31.25%
7 stars 7 43.75%
6 stars 2 12.50%
5 stars 0 0%
4 stars 0 0%
3 stars 0 0%
2 stars 0 0%
1 star 1 6.25%
Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 16th, 2013, 01:30 PM   #1

Viperlord's Avatar
Scalawag
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 7,640
Blog Entries: 21
George G. Meade, "The Old Snapping Turtle"


How do you rate George Meade, the Army of the Potomac's ablest and longest-serving commander, as a general? I would probably say a nice respectable seven stars, personally. Meade was a very good general, and given the somewhat difficult position he occupied in 1864-1865, I cut him a bit of slack for some of the mishaps. Still, I'm not sure I can raise the rating higher than a strong seven for Meade; he performed superbly at Gettysburg, competently for the rest of 1863, and gave a mixed bag of a performance in 1864, at best. Ultimately, perhaps it's not really his fault he never got the chance to prove he was worthy of more.

Last edited by Viperlord; March 16th, 2013 at 01:43 PM.
Viperlord is online now  
Remove Ads
Old March 16th, 2013, 01:47 PM   #2

Apachewarlord's Avatar
Chief idiot
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Hippy town U.S.A.!
Posts: 5,690
Blog Entries: 2

I agree with Viper, seven for me.

Anyway, Stefany continues to show that she's only ware of two numbers, and this thread isn't even about Grant or Lee!
Apachewarlord is offline  
Old March 16th, 2013, 01:48 PM   #3

Viperlord's Avatar
Scalawag
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 7,640
Blog Entries: 21

Okay, I'm now really not sure that Stefany isn't a bot who can only comprehend binary.
Viperlord is online now  
Old March 16th, 2013, 01:49 PM   #4

Apachewarlord's Avatar
Chief idiot
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Hippy town U.S.A.!
Posts: 5,690
Blog Entries: 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viperlord View Post
Okay, I'm now really not sure that Stefany isn't a bot who can only comprehend binary.
No, if that was a case, than she'd be able to use more sources than just Wiki.
Apachewarlord is offline  
Old March 16th, 2013, 02:01 PM   #5
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Mar 2011
From: Bulgaria
Posts: 1,986
Blog Entries: 6

^^ I agree with Viperlord that Meade was a very good general - he got appointed to lead the Army of the Potomac 3 days before it was engaged into battle with the Army of Northern Virginia, led by no else, but Robert E. Lee, and his name itself horrified his opponents, but Meade managed nonetheless to drive him away from the North.
Also, he did quite well at Fredericksburg where he managed to brake through the Confederate right. Before that, at the battle of Second Manassas where Lee yet again managed to inflict a defeat on the Union army, it was Meade who defended the pivotal Henry House which allowed the remainder of the Union army to escape.

It's worth noting that Meade was quite underrated because he was vastly over - shadowed by Grant and the journalists had made a pact within themselves only to mention him in their newspapers when he losses a battle because he hated them, much like Sherman, also, he was quite modest, by my opinion.

I have always found Grant's decision to keep Meade in charge of the Army of the Potomac very strange and by my opinion, wrongful, because in that way the commanding of the army had become quite troublesome and also, all the credit for victories went directly to Grant and most of the failures - to Meade.

As a side note, I have always found it funny how Hooker resigned his post as a commander of the Army of the Potomac just 3 days before the engagement with Lee - I presume he was just afraid of the Confederate general
I guess that same reason made Reynolds decline the offer to lead the army as well, so Lincoln simply ordered Meade to do it, because he was tired of generals declining
Stefany is offline  
Old March 16th, 2013, 02:02 PM   #6
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Mar 2011
From: Bulgaria
Posts: 1,986
Blog Entries: 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viperlord View Post
Okay, I'm now really not sure that Stefany isn't a bot who can only comprehend binary.
I just happen to like Meade, that's all. Besides, I don't always vote with only 10 or 1...
Stefany is offline  
Old March 16th, 2013, 02:02 PM   #7

Apachewarlord's Avatar
Chief idiot
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Hippy town U.S.A.!
Posts: 5,690
Blog Entries: 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stefany View Post
^^ I agree with Viperlord that Meade was a very good general - he got appointed to lead the Army of the Potomac 3 days before it was engaged into battle with the Army of Northern Virginia, led by no else, but Robert E. Lee, and his name itself horrified his opponents, but Meade managed nonetheless to drive him away from the North.
Also, he did quite well at Fredericksburg where he managed to brake through the Confederate right. Before that, at the battle of Second Manassas where Lee yet again managed to inflict a defeat on the Union army, it was Meade who defended the pivotal Henry House which allowed the remainder of the Union army to escape.

It's worth noting that Meade was quite underrated because he was vastly over - shadowed by Grant and the journalists had made a pact within themselves only to mention him in their newspapers when he losses a battle because he hated them, much like Sherman, also, he was quite modest, by my opinion.

I have always found Grant's decision to keep Meade in charge of the Army of the Potomac very strange and by my opinion, wrongful, because in that way the commanding of the army had become quite troublesome and also, all the credit for victories went directly to Grant and most of the failures - to Meade.

As a side note, I have always found it funny how Hooker resigned his post as a commander of the Army of the Potomac just 3 days before the engagement with Lee - I presume he was just afraid of the Confederate general
I guess that same reason made Reynolds decline the offer to lead the army as well, so Lincoln simply ordered Meade to do it, because he was tired of generals declining
That was the best reasoning you've ever given.
Apachewarlord is offline  
Old March 16th, 2013, 02:04 PM   #8

Sam-Nary's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: At present SD, USA
Posts: 6,101

I would say seven. His handling of Gettysburg was great, but Meade never achieved a level of success on par with it. His pursuit of Lee after Gettysburg was hampered by the effects of the battle and commands from his superiors, and once Grant came East, his post was reduced to that of carrying out Grant's orders... He could have done better, but trying to take an independent command from 1864-1865 would require him to force Grant to be more of an administrator rather than a battlefront commander, in order to prove it.
Sam-Nary is online now  
Old March 16th, 2013, 02:07 PM   #9

Viperlord's Avatar
Scalawag
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 7,640
Blog Entries: 21

Quote:
As a side note, I have always found it funny how Hooker resigned his post as a commander of the Army of the Potomac just 3 days before the engagement with Lee - I presume he was just afraid of the Confederate general
While Hooker may very well have been afraid of another showdown with Lee, he resigned because he was bickering with Halleck in Washington.

Quote:
it was Meade who defended the pivotal Henry House which allowed the remainder of the Union army to escape.
Meade commanded one of the several brigades that did so.


Quote:

I have always found Grant's decision to keep Meade in charge of the Army of the Potomac very strange and by my opinion, wrongful, because in that way the commanding of the army had become quite troublesome and also, all the credit for victories went directly to Grant and most of the failures - to Meade.
It was a very pragmatic arrangement. Grant ensured the Army of the Potomac did what it was supposed to do and gave it drive and direction; Meade was retained to run the day-to-day operations of the army, though Grant wasn't hesitant to interfere when necessary. Grant couldn't command the Army of the Potomac and run the war simultaneously, so he found a fairly neat compromise solution, though it did compromise the efficiency of the AotP's command in some ways. But it was the best solution possible at the time.


Nothing in your post indicates Meade was a military genius worthy of a 10.

Last edited by Viperlord; March 16th, 2013 at 02:12 PM.
Viperlord is online now  
Old March 16th, 2013, 02:09 PM   #10

Viperlord's Avatar
Scalawag
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: VA
Posts: 7,640
Blog Entries: 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stefany View Post
I just happen to like Meade, that's all. Besides, I don't always vote with only 10 or 1...
Name one of these polls where you haven't.
Viperlord is online now  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > American History

Tags
george, meade, the old snapping turtle



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Did George Washington really add "so help me God" to his oath of office? Mick Jagger American History 12 June 3rd, 2016 09:51 PM
George Meade in the Gettysburg Campaign Viperlord American History 41 March 16th, 2013 10:15 AM
The Ship "Thomas"; chapter 7 of Liverpool and Slavery by "a Genuine 'Dicky Sam'" Tony Franks-Buckley European History 4 July 16th, 2012 11:19 AM
George Meade - 'the Old Snapping Turtle' Salah American History 16 April 4th, 2012 01:07 PM
"The Next 100 Years" by George Friedman Equilibrium History Book Reviews 3 August 3rd, 2010 06:24 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.