| HMSResolution | 03 Mar 2010 12:52 p.m. PST |
There doesn't seem to have been much written on Horatio Wright, Charles Griffin, or Andrew Humphreys during their time as corps commanders in the Army of the Potomac. When I first read A Wilson Greene's book on the Petersburg Campaign, I remember thinking to myself "who the hell are these guys?" Is there a consensus on their abilities as corps commanders? Does history (when it deigns to view them at all) view them favorably? Were they the equals of the men they replaced? |
| avidgamer | 03 Mar 2010 4:39 p.m. PST |
Wright was good and solid. Grant thought he was a good replacement if Meade needed to be 'gone'. Sheridan liked him too. Humphreys was a very capable officer and like Wright not one to attract attention to himself. He just did a good job. He was Meade's chief of staff for awhile. Griffin was a very nice Division commander and if he had a Corps command for a while he would have done a solid job. He was prone to get worked up and curse a lot though. He was more fiery than the other two. |
| FireZouave | 05 Mar 2010 6:47 a.m. PST |
Not that it means anything, but Joshua Chamberlain was mentored by Griffin. Supposedly, Chamberlain thought highly of him! |
| MahanMan | 05 Mar 2010 4:46 p.m. PST |
I seem to recall an anecdote (take *that* for what it's worth) during the Overland Campaign where Griffin came storming up to Meade in a rage about his division being stopped by another command; he let Meade have the rough edge of his tongue for a few minutes, while Grant sat nearby and listened, and Griffin then stamped off. Knowing Meade's notorious temper, Grant expressed surprise at Meade keeping calm and said "You should fire that General Gregg for talking that way", at which point Meade responded, "His name's Griffin, not Gregg, and that is only his way. He'll have forgotten all about it in a moment, and I cannot afford to lose him." |
| Bottom Dollar | 05 Mar 2010 4:48 p.m. PST |
yeah, yeah, Humphrey's had a good book… well, ok, more than good. |
| donlowry | 06 Mar 2010 9:38 p.m. PST |
All three were good commanders. Griffin only got to command 5th Corps after Sheridan fired Warren, but in my opinion he would have been better than Warren, who was too slow and cautious. Chamberlain didn't come right out and say so, but he seems to have been pleased with the elevation of Griffin, though he felt sorry for Warren. I think Wright was a slightly better commander of the 6th Corps than Sedgwick, who was also too cautious (see his performance at Chancellorsville/2nd Fredericksburg). Yes, Sheridan like Wright, but then the 6th Corps was the heart of his Army of the Shenandoah, so maybe it was just the corps that he liked. Humphries commanded the 2nd Corps after Hancock's old Gettysburg wound forced him to step down. He probably wasn't quite as good as Hancock, but who was? He was a better field commander than chief of staff. It seems to me that instead of consolidating his corps just before Grant arrived, Meade should just have changed their commanders, thus:
1st Corps -- Gibbon (former commander of the Iron Brigade)
2nd Corps -- Hancock
3rd Corps -- Humphries (former CG of a 3rd Corps division)
5th Corps -- Griffin (better than Sykes, better than Warren)
6th Corps -- Sedgwick
Chief of Staff -- Warren |
| Cleburne1863 | 08 Mar 2010 3:47 a.m. PST |
I always though it was interesting that the 3rd Corps was actually the largest corps in the AotP in March 1864 when they broke it up, giving two divisions to the 2nd Corps and one to the 6th Corps. They should have kept four corps instead of three large ones (not including the 9th). More maneuver elements and easier to manage troop levels. |
| HMSResolution | 08 Mar 2010 1:05 p.m. PST |
My understanding was that Meade felt he only had three officers capable of handling a corps in March of '64. I'm a big Gibbon fan, I wish he'd gotten to lead V Corps instead of Warren. |
| donlowry | 08 Mar 2010 1:29 p.m. PST |
Yes, I believe his excuse was that he didn't have 5 good corps commanders. My solution is given above. In the Wilderness, small corps would have been easier to control than large ones. |
| HMSResolution | 08 Mar 2010 2:00 p.m. PST |
Obviously my ignorance is about to show here, but was Meade influenced by the fact that the Army of Northern Virginia used three large corps? I also seem to recall in Taaffe's book on the Army of the Potomac's command structure that Meade had some problems securing major-generalcies for all of the officers he would have liked them for. |
| Cleburne1863 | 08 Mar 2010 2:07 p.m. PST |
"I also seem to recall in Taaffe's book on the Army of the Potomac's command structure that Meade had some problems securing major-generalcies for all of the officers he would have liked them for." That's not just a problem in the AotP. Rosecrans had the same problem in the AotC with both Brigadier and Major Generalies. |
