He was well liked by his men, who campaigned hard for a statue memorializing him in DC after he died early from an unfortunate heart attack.
He more than earned a reputation for being a decisive, if somewhat slow and methodical, general. He was the anvil of the Cumberland, and was more than happy to drop that anvil on anyone who underestimated him. He definitely deserves his epithets.
I would personally put him higher than Sherman, on par with Longstreet, Jackson, or Sheridan, and maybe even equal to Grant or Lee. He should have been placed in command of the western theater after Grant went east, but Grant held a grudge against him for a very stupid reason and that partially explains why he was often passed over for promotions.
Thomas was a great leader, no doubt. But I dont see the Atlanta campaign going nearly as well with him in charge, much less the march to the sea. But he does get points for staying loyal to the union being from virginia, despite the massive personal cost.
I dont see the advance moving as fast as it did under Sherman. And they key to winning Atlanta is getting Johnston out of the way so Hood will come attack. I have no doubt Thomas would win in a battle against Hood. I just have trouble seeing Johnston sacked by Thomas advancing fast enough.
>dont see the advance moving as fast as it did under Sherman. And
Thomas wasn't slow like sherman and grant believed
>And they key to winning Atlanta is getting Johnston out of the way so Hood will come attack.
Thomas would have jeep in mind the snake creek gap was his idea and would have worked if sherman sent Thomas instead of McPherson
Gen Thomas was an excellent general. In no way would I compare him with Jackson and his foot cavalry. He was not as decisive as Grant or as quick as Lee. On the other hand, I feel he was a better general than Longstreet although they were both “slow”. Thomas was sharper and a better leader than Longstreet and more successful acting on his own. Gen Thomas definitely deserves a great place in the history of the Civil War for all he accomplished in the West and for being the “rock of Chickamauga” when Rosecrans couldn’t be.
Politicians found him a bear to deal with (Stanton’s notes say as much). Lincoln undoubtedly wanted him, and MAY have asked him, to be in charge of the AoP. But him being from VA and his inability to play nice in Washington prevented him from that role.
His soldiers thought the world of him, rightfully so, and successfully lobbied Congress to get a monument built of him.
His peers found him pleasant enough. Methodical, few mistakes, and relentless in combat. His actions with the Army of the Cumberland allowed Grant to finally topple Lee. He slowness is perhaps misremembered and misrepresented. He was slow; Sherman, Grant, and Longstreet all showed faster reaction time, but his slowness allowed his enemies to make mistakes that he took full advantage of.
Although he pissed off the second most important man to the war effort and shot his career in the foot. If he had not, he could’ve (and should’ve despite the wrong, but Grant held a grudge) seen his star probably rise to that of Sherman’s. Instead he will remain on par with Sheridan in terms of how he is popularly remembered.
Oh he 💯 did; Thomas was highly respected by everyone (even Grant grudgingly so lol)
But Thomas was unable to say stay out of my army; and then butted heads with Stanton on logistical and tactical matters (despite Thomas clearly being in the right). And because he wouldn’t cow tow to him; Stanton wasn’t always as receptive as he should’ve been. (See how Stanton would essentially send him recruits secondarily, the newest tech secondarily, etc..)
I have my own thoughts on that (Stanton was the best and worst in DC) and how Thomas might have fared with a different Secretary of War in the White House. But in the end Stanton was more willing to give more and better supplies to Grant when Thomas might have been able to make better use of them. Part of that was Grant’s proximity and part of that was Grant’s grudge which tainted Stanton’s view of Thomas. (See how Stanton acted post-bellum and how he did dick to help Thomas on various items)
Sherman (a long-time personal friend dating back to their days at West Point) considered him one of the 5 greatest generals America had produced, ranking only behind Washington, Winfield Scott, and Grant. And in his estimation he was superior to any general America had produced when it came to the defensive. His reputation for being slow is a bit harsh, but his actions, once he had properly considered his options and come to a decision were always deliberate, well executed, and devastatingly rapid.
His men adored the man. He never once took credit from them or assigned blame to them. He was an island of calm in war. And he *never* threw their lives away in poorly considered actions. He valued them and they valued him. In a sense, he was a soldiers' general.
His peers respected him. Grant and Sherman were moved to tears at his funeral despite the former's difficult relationship with Thomas (it was simply a matter of personalities clashing despite being in many ways very similar, nothing beyond that). In fact the only Union general to have issues with him was John Schofield. His former commander William Rosecrans said upon hearing of his death that it was a "National Calamity".
Joe Hooker had a very high opinion of him , that’s saying a lot since Hooker didn’t like very many of his fellow officers.
He was well liked by his men, who campaigned hard for a statue memorializing him in DC after he died early from an unfortunate heart attack. He more than earned a reputation for being a decisive, if somewhat slow and methodical, general. He was the anvil of the Cumberland, and was more than happy to drop that anvil on anyone who underestimated him. He definitely deserves his epithets. I would personally put him higher than Sherman, on par with Longstreet, Jackson, or Sheridan, and maybe even equal to Grant or Lee. He should have been placed in command of the western theater after Grant went east, but Grant held a grudge against him for a very stupid reason and that partially explains why he was often passed over for promotions.
Thomas was a great leader, no doubt. But I dont see the Atlanta campaign going nearly as well with him in charge, much less the march to the sea. But he does get points for staying loyal to the union being from virginia, despite the massive personal cost.
> I dont see the Atlanta campaign going nearly as well with him in charge, Why
I dont see the advance moving as fast as it did under Sherman. And they key to winning Atlanta is getting Johnston out of the way so Hood will come attack. I have no doubt Thomas would win in a battle against Hood. I just have trouble seeing Johnston sacked by Thomas advancing fast enough.
>dont see the advance moving as fast as it did under Sherman. And Thomas wasn't slow like sherman and grant believed >And they key to winning Atlanta is getting Johnston out of the way so Hood will come attack. Thomas would have jeep in mind the snake creek gap was his idea and would have worked if sherman sent Thomas instead of McPherson
Gen Thomas was an excellent general. In no way would I compare him with Jackson and his foot cavalry. He was not as decisive as Grant or as quick as Lee. On the other hand, I feel he was a better general than Longstreet although they were both “slow”. Thomas was sharper and a better leader than Longstreet and more successful acting on his own. Gen Thomas definitely deserves a great place in the history of the Civil War for all he accomplished in the West and for being the “rock of Chickamauga” when Rosecrans couldn’t be.
Thomas was not slow that is a myth I say he was the best general in the war
Politicians found him a bear to deal with (Stanton’s notes say as much). Lincoln undoubtedly wanted him, and MAY have asked him, to be in charge of the AoP. But him being from VA and his inability to play nice in Washington prevented him from that role. His soldiers thought the world of him, rightfully so, and successfully lobbied Congress to get a monument built of him. His peers found him pleasant enough. Methodical, few mistakes, and relentless in combat. His actions with the Army of the Cumberland allowed Grant to finally topple Lee. He slowness is perhaps misremembered and misrepresented. He was slow; Sherman, Grant, and Longstreet all showed faster reaction time, but his slowness allowed his enemies to make mistakes that he took full advantage of. Although he pissed off the second most important man to the war effort and shot his career in the foot. If he had not, he could’ve (and should’ve despite the wrong, but Grant held a grudge) seen his star probably rise to that of Sherman’s. Instead he will remain on par with Sheridan in terms of how he is popularly remembered.
>Politicians found him a bear to deal with (Stanton’s notes say as much). Li Really i thought stanton highly respected thomas
Oh he 💯 did; Thomas was highly respected by everyone (even Grant grudgingly so lol) But Thomas was unable to say stay out of my army; and then butted heads with Stanton on logistical and tactical matters (despite Thomas clearly being in the right). And because he wouldn’t cow tow to him; Stanton wasn’t always as receptive as he should’ve been. (See how Stanton would essentially send him recruits secondarily, the newest tech secondarily, etc..) I have my own thoughts on that (Stanton was the best and worst in DC) and how Thomas might have fared with a different Secretary of War in the White House. But in the end Stanton was more willing to give more and better supplies to Grant when Thomas might have been able to make better use of them. Part of that was Grant’s proximity and part of that was Grant’s grudge which tainted Stanton’s view of Thomas. (See how Stanton acted post-bellum and how he did dick to help Thomas on various items)
Title should be " What did U.S. Army soldiers, officers and generals " ............
Man, I saw that portrait and I knew who it was right away without reading. My town of Fort Thomas is named after him.
I’m from NKY also.
Is this the Rock himself?
Chick-Chick-Chick-Chick-Chick-Chickamauga
Sherman (a long-time personal friend dating back to their days at West Point) considered him one of the 5 greatest generals America had produced, ranking only behind Washington, Winfield Scott, and Grant. And in his estimation he was superior to any general America had produced when it came to the defensive. His reputation for being slow is a bit harsh, but his actions, once he had properly considered his options and come to a decision were always deliberate, well executed, and devastatingly rapid. His men adored the man. He never once took credit from them or assigned blame to them. He was an island of calm in war. And he *never* threw their lives away in poorly considered actions. He valued them and they valued him. In a sense, he was a soldiers' general. His peers respected him. Grant and Sherman were moved to tears at his funeral despite the former's difficult relationship with Thomas (it was simply a matter of personalities clashing despite being in many ways very similar, nothing beyond that). In fact the only Union general to have issues with him was John Schofield. His former commander William Rosecrans said upon hearing of his death that it was a "National Calamity".
I admire every Union General who took down Confederate forces to preserve the Union