re: Better Confederate General: Jackson or Longstreet?

quote:

---

Grants Vickburg campaign was very good but what Jackson pulled off in the Shenandoah Valley campaign of 1862 was one of the most brilliant campaigns in American military history.

---

It was brilliant, yes, but it did not have the same impact as Grant's Vicksburg Campaign had on the war. Jackson prevented 40,000 Union troops from reinforcing McClellan in front of Richmond - forces McClellan really didn't need. Had McClellan actually had an ounce of aggression within him in the spring of 1862, he would have captured Richmond and ended the war before Jackson's Valley Campaign had ended.

Jackson had the advantages of interior lines, friendly country, and going up against an enemy who, while outnumbering him overall, was always outnumbered 4-to-3 by Jackson when actually engaging him in battle.

Grant was cut off from home, had no interior lines to speak of, was deep within enemy country, and also found himself slightly outnumbered by the armies of Johnston and Pemberton. Yet he fought five battles, won all of them, crushed Johnston's army outside of Jackson, before driving Pemberton's into the defenses around Vicksburg.

The strategic implications of Vicksburg far outweighed the strategic implications of the Valley. Jackson's efforts merely prolonged the war. Grant's brought it closer to its conclusion.