Was Stonewall Jackson a Genius General?

Originally posted by no1marauder
I'm not trying to "manipulate" the figures. The biggest problem is that while the figures from the US side are fairly precise and accurate, the Army of Northern Virginia, while an excellent fighting army, was a terrible administrative one and what figures we have for their losses are guesstimates. It is conceded that at Antietam the great majority of the ...[text shortened]... clusive example, obviously his flank attack at Chancellorsville was almost flawlessly conducted.

The figures of the 'dead' at Sharpsburg is not a topic that I/we wish to debate any further then. Your (slight) concession is good enough. Not that that would usually stop further argument on this board ~ I thought 'nitpicking' was obligatory.

As for the 'Stonewall' nickname, you may discern a certain lack of interest from me about the whole thing. As you say, it happened 150+ years ago. Maybe Jackson is looking on this from 'Valhalla' with Bee sharing a glass of Jack Daniels and smiling!

Thank you for the last paragraph that gives Jackson credit for some 'post Shenandoah' activity. His work at Chancellorsville was, as you say, excellent.

I think we are done now? Thanks...been interesting

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I don't, I was talking about myself, not other people.

Originally posted by no1marauder
I'm not trying to "manipulate" the figures. The biggest problem is that while the figures from the US side are fairly precise and accurate, the Army of Northern Virginia, while an excellent fighting army, was a terrible administrative one and what figures we have for their losses are guesstimates. It is conceded that at Antietam the great majority of the ...[text shortened]... clusive example, obviously his flank attack at Chancellorsville was almost flawlessly conducted.

Interesting exchange! You know which side I favored, but what occurred to me during the reading was that the people at the time, a century and a half ago hardly knew where, when and how many. Intelligence on battle fields was scarce. I read somewhere that a single pair of walkie-talkies could have won the day at Gettysburg.

If anything, Jackson's tendency to be closer to the action might have given him an advantage in intelligence.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I've read that in similar manner, Confederate cavalry had tremendous impact on many Civil War battles, and generally outperformed their peers on the Union side.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

That's true. Whether it was northern horsemanship improving, or more probably the Confederacy just being outmanned so overwhelmingly, that its cavalry no longer was enough.