| |
Rick Schaus
Capon Springs, WV, USA
Posts: 1569
 | | General Meade | | Posted on: 1/31/2013 12:28:42 PM | I just started reading Tom Huntington’s, Searching for George Gordon Meade, The Forgotten Victor of Gettysburg, and thought I’d throw this out.
Despite the major Union victory at Gettysburg, with the exception of Gettysburg/Civil War forums such as this, and those who seriously study the battle/war, George G. Meade exists in relative obscurity.
Why?
Any thoughts/reasons?
---------------
VR, Rick Schaus
“Facts are for people who can’t create their own truth”
Bucky Katt
|
| Jim Cameron
North Bellmore, NY, USA
Posts: 2207
| | Re: General Meade | | Posted on: 1/31/2013 1:14:49 PM | That's where pretty much every CW general now exists.
To most people, the CW is Lee and Grant. Maybe some have heard of Sherman. How many WW1 generals could most people name? WW2 is Patton, Eisenhower, and MacArthur.
---------------
Jim Cameron
Every time I go to Gettysburg, I learn two things. Something new, and, how much I still don't know.
|
| Wayne Wachsmuth
Shippensburg, PA, USA
Posts: 785
| | Re: General Meade | | Posted on: 1/31/2013 1:18:08 PM | A large part of the reason lies in the fact that for most folks when Grant placed his Hq with the AOP it became "Grant's army". I have found any number of people who thought that Meade was fired when Grant came East.
Wayne
|
| Red Bailey
Prescott, AZ, USA
Posts: 2151
| | Re: General Meade | | Posted on: 1/31/2013 5:39:41 PM | Lee was a magnificent-looking, much beloved commander, Grant was a tenacious adversary, and Sherman was a somewhat eccentric fellow, but successful with his famous 'March to the Sea'. Meade's career, temperament, and dour-looking appearance doesn't appear heroic or oddball enough to compete with the big three.
---------------
Human action can be modified to some extent, but human nature cannot be changed. ....Lincoln
As usual,
Red
|
| KP
Belle Vernon, PA, USA
Posts: 336
| | Re: General Meade | | Posted on: 1/31/2013 10:15:37 PM | Few people know. I remember taking a tour of the town of Gettysburg. The guide, at one point, asked us to name the commander of the Union forces at Gettysburg. The quick reply by more than one was Grant.
---------------
With respect,
KP
|
| Carl from Dewey
Arizona,
Posts: 266
| | Re: General Meade | | Posted on: 2/1/2013 12:33:01 AM |
Quote:That's where pretty much every CW general now exists.
To most people, the CW is Lee and Grant. Maybe some have heard of Sherman. How many WW1 generals could most people name? WW2 is Patton, Eisenhower, and MacArthur.
--Jim Cameron
Good point.
These are the top ten things I think the average person knows about the Civil War:
10.Monitor and Merrimac
9. Fort Sumter
8. Sherman's march to Atlanta
7. Stonewall Jackson
6. Battle of Gettysburg
5. Lee
4. Grant
3. The Gettysburg Address
2. Slavery / Free the slaves
1. President Lincoln
I take that back. The average person probably could name only the top six.
---------------
Neophyte. Have mercy.
|
| Wayne Wachsmuth
Shippensburg, PA, USA
Posts: 785
| | Re: General Meade | | Posted on: 2/1/2013 8:56:49 AM | Some years ago a fellow guide had a real problem with a father who just "knew" that Grant commanded the AOP at Gettysburg. Sort of like the chap who upon seeing headstones for WW II veterans in the National Cemetery asked the Ranger if there was a WW II battle near there. Never underestimate the ignorance of the general public on matters of history.
Wayne
|
| Andy Ward
VT, USA
Posts: 227
| | Re: General Meade | | Posted on: 2/1/2013 9:13:48 AM | In my humble opinion, one reason Meade never gets is due is the fact that the press hated him. I believe that he was one of the first people to recognize that allowing the press to print what ever they wanted (troop strengths, plans, etc.) was damaging to the war effort so he started to somewhat control what the press printed.
On one occasion a reporter, from Chicago I believe, printed sensitive information against the army’s orders and Meade had him drummed out of camp. This embarrassed and angered newspaper reporters and for the rest of the war and his entire life they were not at all kind to him. I truly believe that this helped damage his reputation.
Never underestimate the power of the press!
Andy
|
| artbagley
Tampa, FL, USA
Posts: 444
| | Re: General Meade | | Posted on: 2/1/2013 4:06:37 PM | Definitely Grant's arrival and "supreme commander" rank.
Meade was in the limelight for ... July, August, September, through the JCCW hearings of 1863, then got obscured by the winter halt of campaigning, then pushed further into the background by Grant coming east in early spring 1864.
Actually, I think that's the way Meade wanted it, if I correctly remember excerpts out of his letters home. He probably didn't care "one pinch of owl dung" how the press reacted to his ban/expulsion (with thanks to Union BG Samuel Sturgis for that quip!).
Sherman hated the press, too; belive this was mentioned (or Sherman quoted) in Ken Burns' famous 1991 series, "The Civil War."
Art "Not Embedded" B.
|
| Scott Brown
MA, USA
Posts: 1400
| | Re: General Meade | | Posted on: 2/1/2013 6:22:02 PM | [Read More]
Andy makes a great point about the press, but here's one who didn't hold a grudge. Gouverneur Carr's obit can be found here...
[Read More]
And what he had to say about Meade can be found here...
[Read More]
Regards,
Scott B.
---------------
"All this is pure invention"
|
| Rick Schaus
Capon Springs, WV, USA
Posts: 1569
| | Re: General Meade | | Posted on: 2/1/2013 7:04:36 PM |
Quote:In my humble opinion, one reason Meade never gets is due is the fact that the press hated him. I believe that he was one of the first people to recognize that allowing the press to print what ever they wanted (troop strengths, plans, etc.) was damaging to the war effort so he started to somewhat control what the press printed.
On one occasion a reporter, from Chicago I believe, printed sensitive information against the army’s orders and Meade had him drummed out of camp. This embarrassed and angered newspaper reporters and for the rest of the war and his entire life they were not at all kind to him. I truly believe that this helped damage his reputation.
Never underestimate the power of the press!
Andy
--Andy Ward
The feeling was mutual.
The problem was that newspapers wielded great power and influence in the U.S. during Meade’s time.
Meade wrote of his dislike of the press as early as 1846, when he was a young Lieutenant on Taylor’s staff:
” If there is anything I do dislike, it is newspaper notoriety. I think it is the curse of our country, and fear it is seriously injuring our little army, whose tone once was utterly opposed to making use of the public press to sustain their cause.”
His real conflicts with the press seem to have started in 1864, based on an article that began very complementary, but ended much to Meade’s disgust (rightfully):
” I don't know whether you saw an article in the Inquirer of the 2d inst. on me, which the writer intended to be very complimentary.2 At the close of it he refers to an eventful occasion when Grant saved the life of the nation, when I desired to destroy it. I could not make out what in the world this meant; but fortunately I found the author, one Edward Cropsey, and having sent for him, he explained that he had heard that on the night of the second day's battle of the Wilderness I had urged on General Grant the withdrawal of the army across the Rapidan, but Grant had firmly resisted all my intercessions, and thus the country was saved the disgrace of a retreat. I asked his authority; he said it was the talk of the camp. I told him it was a base and wicked lie, and that I would make an example of him, which should not only serve to deter others from committing like offenses, but would give publicity to his lie and the truth. I accordingly issued an order denouncing the falsehood, and ordering the offender to be paraded through the lines of the army with a placard bearing the inscription, "Libeler of the Press," and then that he should be put beyond the lines and not allowed to return. This sentence was duly executed, much to the delight of the whole army, for the race of newspaper correspondents is universally despised by the soldiers.
General Grant happened to be present when I was making out the order, and fully approved of it, although he said he knew the offender, and that his family was a respectable one in Illinois. After the man had been turned out and the affair had become public, then I learned to my surprise that this malicious falsehood had been circulated all over the country.”
(Letter to his wife, 9 June, 1864)
The article that provoked Meade’s ire was:
” NEWSPAPER ARTICLE ON GENERAL MEADE, MENTIONED IN LETTER OF JUNE 9, 1864. SEE PAGE 202, VOL. II
(Philadelphia Inquirer, June 2, 1864)
MEADE'S POSITION
He is as much the commander of the Army of the Potomac as he ever was. GRANT plans and exercises a supervisory control over the army, but to MEADE belongs everything of detail. He is entitled to great credit for the magnificent movements of the army since we left Brandy, for they have been dictated by him. In battle he puts troops in action and controls their movements; in a word, he commands the army. General GRANT is here only because he deems the present campaign the vital one of the war, and wishes to decide on the spot all questions that would be referred to him as General-in-Chief.
History will record, but newspapers cannot, that on one eventful night during the present campaign GRANT'S presence saved the army, and the nation too; not that General MEADE was on the point to commit a blunder unwittingly, but his devotion to his country made him loth to risk her last army on what he deemed a chance. GRANT assumed the responsibility and we are still
ON TO RICHMOND”
I’m not sure if this is the incident that Andy was referring to?
I haven’t found any reference to Meade being angry at reporters/newspapers for printing news of sensitive military information, although Northern papers were a source of information for Lee, and others in the Confederacy.
Other reporters took offense to Meade’s actions and, from then on, it appears that Meade had a second war on his hands, with the press.
Reporter Sylvanus Cadwallader provided a surprisingly objective account of the incident in his book, Three Years With Grant
There were some articles that were favorable to Meade, but more that were unfavorable.
Some of those articles, from both sides, appear in L&L II
However, Meade’s conflict with the press was really not ongoing at the time of Gettysburg.
I don’t specifically recall any of the numerous Gettysburg articles that Larry has posted containing criticism of Meade.
Meade’s anger over being maligned and not receiving the credit that he felt he was due did not end with the press:
” I have seen but few newspapers since this movement commenced, and I don't want to see any more, for they are full of falsehood and of undue and exaggerated praise of certain individuals who take pains to be on the right side of the reporters. Don't worry yourself about this; treat it with contempt. It cannot be remedied, and we should be resigned. I don't believe the truth ever will be known, and I have a great contempt for History.”
(Letter to his wife, 10 April, 1865)
---------------
VR, Rick Schaus
“Facts are for people who can’t create their own truth”
Bucky Katt
|
| Mike Johnson
Stafford, VA, USA
Posts: 2946
| | Re: General Meade | | Posted on: 2/1/2013 10:13:19 PM |
Quote:That's where pretty much every CW general now exists.
To most people, the CW is Lee and Grant. Maybe some have heard of Sherman. How many WW1 generals could most people name? WW2 is Patton, Eisenhower, and MacArthur.
--Jim Cameron
Three may be the limit for most people.
Meade may be more like Devers. Eisenhower listed Devers ahead of Bradley, Patton, Hodges, Simpson, and Patch in terms of his contribution to winning the war in Europe. But, Devers is mostly unknown. Even Bradley who once was quite well known, is not that well known these days.
Now, Meade and Devers did not have the same personalities. Meade was prickly and lacked diplomatic skills. Devers was polished and diplomatic.
Meade was well known in the decades that followed the civil war. And Meade is better known than most of the Navy flag officers in the war. Farragut might be the only one that could conceivably be better known than Meade.
|
| Carl from Dewey
Arizona,
Posts: 266
| | Re: General Meade | | Posted on: 2/4/2013 1:04:43 PM | The posters here are correct, names fade over time. Gen Schwarzkopf, a leading personality of the first Gulf War, for example, is already largely forgotten by the general populace.
Among Civil War generals, some who went on to fame in the Wild West extended their name a bit further, such as Custer, Crook, and to a lesser extent Sheridan. By the same token, Douglas "I shall return" MacArthur wading ashore was an iconic figure of WWII, but he was kept famous longer by his involvement in the Korean War.
---------------
Neophyte. Have mercy.
|
| |
|
|
|