re: Vlogging Through History's YouTube series on Ulysses S. Grant's Vicksburg Campaign

quote:

---

Jackson took the tools he was given (which wasn't much) and tied down forces nearly triple his own.

---

Well, if we're going to deduct points from Grant for taking on an incompetent in Pemberton, I guess we should deduct points from Jackson for taking on an incompetent in Nathaniel Banks. Banks wasn't even a professional soldier. He had been Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives just five years before and here he was commanding troops against a very experienced and wily Confederate officer. His subordinates were mostly political appointees as well (men such as John C. Frémont and Franz Sigel). These guys were scrubs. And while it's true that Jackson had a much smaller force than Banks did while in the Valley, Jackson was able to maneuver his forces in such a way that he equaled or outnumbered the Union army in size in every single battle.

That all being said, one cannot deny the audacity and skill Jackson utilized while bamboozling his opponents in the Shenandoah Valley. It was a brilliant campaign in every sense of the world. However, it pales in comparison to Grant's Vicksburg Campaign due to what each campaign accomplished. Jackson kept upwards of 50,000 Union reinforcements from reaching McClellan in front of Richmond, it is true. But Grant took 30,000 Confederate soldiers off the playing field. He captured an entire enemy army to go along with one of the most important strategic positions on the map. Grant fought and won five straight battles, shoved one Confederate army out of his way when he took Jackson (a state capital) before imprisoning another within the defenses surrounding Vicksburg. And he did it all while operating inside enemy territory while being collectively outnumbered.