Competent amateur generals

[briantk]

Can anyone nominate politically appointed officer with little or no military background, but in the end proved to be good military officer?

My nominee is John A. Logan, "Black Jack" Logan, Copperhead who fought for the Union Army in the west.

Narses, Armenian eunuch who served for Justinian, succeeded after Belisarius' dismissal and continued Justinian's campaign with great success.

[KingSargent]

Clive of India. Started as a clerk ("writer" in HEIC jargon), won an empire.

[DKTanker]

Two of Washington's most steadfast officers, serving him loyally from the seige of Boston to the victory at Yorktown had absolutely no prior military service.

 

Henry Knox, 25 year old Boston book seller at the time of the siege of Boston became Washington's General of Artillery.

 

Nathanel Greene helped organize a local milita but was told that because of his limp, he couldn't be an officer. So be it, said Greene, I'll carry a musket and do my duty. Greene was very well read on military tactics and strategy, so well read that Washington put Greene in charge of Boston after Howe hauled ass. Greene, a one time musket carrying private, was promoted to Brigadier General.

 

Of course neither were political appointments but....

Edited February 29, 2008 by DKTanker

[Old Tanker]

The most controversial was Daniel Sickles of NY.

 

He had one of the most interesting lives in U.S. history.

 

He was the first American to get away with murder using the temporary insanity plea .

 

His forward movement at Gettysburg of the 3rd Corps on day two was seen as a disaster though he argued it broke the cohesion of the CSA attack and saved the day. He lost a leg that day and left the field smoking a cigar.

 

He was one of the main drivers to establish the Gettyburg National Battlefield Park .

 

He served in Cong. and as an ambassador and he was awarded the CMH about 1890. His leg is preserved in a museum along the cannonball that hit it.

[Jim Martin]

Julius Caesar was a political appointee to govern Cisalpine Gaul...

[John Dudek]

Two of Washington's most steadfast officers, serving him loyally from the seige of Boston to the victory at Yorktown had absolutely no prior military service.

 

Henry Knox, 25 year old Boston book seller at the time of the siege of Boston became Washington's General of Artillery.

 

Nathanel Greene helped organize a local milita but was told that because of his limp, he couldn't be an officer. So be it, said Greene, I'll carry a musket and do my duty. Greene was very well read on military tactics and strategy, so well read that Washington put Greene in charge of Boston after Howe hauled ass. Greene, a one time musket carrying private, was promoted to Brigadier General.

 

Of course neither were political appointments but....

 

Another one who was not politically appointed... Nathan Bedford Forrest. He started the war as a Private, later formed his own unit and fought in the Western Theatre, raising hell with Union supply lines and winning most of the battles that he fought in, oftentimes with far inferior numbers. The Author Shelby Foote later called him one of the true genius' to come out of the American Civil War

[Mikel2]

As far as people with unexpected military talents... Hernan Cortes - His only formal training was a lawyer. Might explain his opportunistic and deceiving talents

[67th Tigers]

Clive of India. Started as a clerk ("writer" in HEIC jargon), won an empire.

 

Yes, he did, but only to secure an Ensignsy and he then worked his way up by merit. He was Commissioned an Ensign in 1743, was made Captain shortly before Arcot (1751), was promoted out of turn to Lt Col in 1753 and at Plassey (1757) was a Colonel.

[Jim Martin]

Benedict Arnold was a wealthy merchant who equipped his own militia unit out of his own pocket.

 

He was an excellent general, and a pretty decent admiral, too.

[shep854]

Benedict Arnold was a wealthy merchant who equipped his own militia unit out of his own pocket.

 

He was an excellent general, and a pretty decent admiral, too.

 

But for one minor indiscretion...

[John Dudek]

But for one minor indiscretion...

 

Surely, you're not going to hold that little "West Point Thing" against him, are you? One minor blot on an otherwise stellar career.

Edited March 2, 2008 by John Dudek

[KingSargent]

But for one minor indiscretion...

It was a major 'indiscretion,' but I can understand why he did it considering the crapping on he was getting from the Continental Congress and Army.

 

Motivations in a rebellion/civil war are tricky but BA joined in when the goal was to establish American rights as Englishmen. He might not have been so enthusiastic about the whole independence gig, especially as the contemporary Continental Congress was not providing evidence of being anything other than a collection of assholes unfit to run a country. Of course the same thing could be said of George Rex's Ministers and Parliament, but BA had never seen them close-up.

 

It should be noted that he stayed in America and took risks in command of Loyalist units and operations rather than hide in Blighty. Had he been captured, his ass was toast. It is also possible that he viewed a Loyalist-assisted British success as a way to acheive his goal of Rights For Americans under the Crown.

[Redbeard]

Those of the successful field commanders being born with a Royal title you could say were appointed with a CV where military merrits not necessarily were the most important points, but nevertheless did very well. Examples could be: Alexander the Great, Gustavus Adolph, Karl XII, Frederick the Great or Archduke Charles. The German Crownprince IMHO also did quite well in WWI as an army commander. Anyway, the higher you get in military ranks, the more politics wiil decide who is promoted, at some point on the ladder your military skills are rather indifferent, and certainly not enough.

 

In a more modern context the American automobile company manager Knudsen (GM?) who was given a three star General's rank and put in charge of war production contributed more to allied victory than did most allied field commanders.

 

Regards

 

Steffen Redbeard

[Jim Martin]

But for one minor indiscretion...

 

If it weren't for his turning coat, he'd be one of the pantheon of great heroes of the Revolution.

[shep854]

KingSargent, Jim, that's my point exactly. His treason is the ONLY thing most Americans think of when they hear his name. It was certainly enlightening when I started learning of Arnold's contribution to the Colonial cause.

[John Dudek]

It was a major 'indiscretion,' but I can understand why he did it considering the crapping on he was getting from the Continental Congress and Army.

 

Motivations in a rebellion/civil war are tricky but BA joined in when the goal was to establish American rights as Englishmen. He might not have been so enthusiastic about the whole independence gig, especially as the contemporary Continental Congress was not providing evidence of being anything other than a collection of assholes unfit to run a country. Of course the same thing could be said of George Rex's Ministers and Parliament, but BA had never seen them close-up.

 

It should be noted that he stayed in America and took risks in command of Loyalist units and operations rather than hide in Blighty. Had he been captured, his ass was toast. It is also possible that he viewed a Loyalist-assisted British success as a way to acheive his goal of Rights For Americans under the Crown.

 

Agreed, and had the British tried to enlist and establish more Regular Army Regiments from among the Loyalist Units already in existance, perhaps the war might have taken a different turn for them. As it was, the only British Regular Regiment raised in the colonies was the two battalion, 84th Regiment of Foote, Royal Highland Emigrants.

[KingSargent]

Agreed, and had the British tried to enlist and establish more Regular Army Regiments from among the Loyalist Units already in existance, perhaps the war might have taken a different turn for them. As it was, the only British Regular Regiment raised in the colonies was the two battalion, 84th Regiment of Foote, Royal Highland Emigrants.

IIRC (it's been 40 years since I did a paper on the Loyalists), there were actually five Regular regiments raised in America, besides the five-bn 60th Foot (Royal Americans, later King's Royal Rifle Corps) formed in the 1760s.

 

The problem was the timing. In 1775-77, Gage, Howe, and Co. did not want to turn the 'rising' into a civil war, so they resisted using Loyalists. By the time they were replaced and the French were in, the situation had deteriorated too badly for using the Loyalists to change much - aside from turning the conflict into a bitter bloody civil war, just as Howe and Gage had feared.

[Delta65driver]

My vote goes for Joshua Chamberlain

 

Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain (September 8, 1828 – February 24, 1914) was a college professor from Maine who volunteered to join the Union Army without the benefit of any formal military education, and became a highly respected and decorated Union officer during the American Civil War, reaching the rank of brigadier general (and brevet major general). For his gallantry at Gettysburg, he was awarded the Medal of Honor. He was given the honor of commanding the Union troops at the surrender ceremony for the infantry of Robert E. Lee's Army at Appomattox, Virginia. After the war, he served as a Republican Governor of Maine for four terms and served on the faculty and as president of his alma mater, Bowdoin College

 

He was definetly a natural born leader....

[67th Tigers]

Agreed, and had the British tried to enlist and establish more Regular Army Regiments from among the Loyalist Units already in existance, perhaps the war might have taken a different turn for them. As it was, the only British Regular Regiment raised in the colonies was the two battalion, 84th Regiment of Foote, Royal Highland Emigrants.

 

The 60th (4 Bns) and 84th (3 Bns) were enlisted in the Americas, while the 79th and 88th were filled with recruits from NY later. There were around 50 Provincial Regiments (of which only 30-40 were in existance at any one time), 8 of which had more than one battalion (the extreme end being the New Jersey Volunteers, 6 battalions).

 

Annoyingly, I lost a harddisk recently, and the spreadsheet for this which was almost done (just a few Hessian battalions to locate). The loyalists are fairly easy to locate though, I might get round to adding them (and the Continentals) back in.

[Marek Tucan]

My vote goes for Joshua Chamberlain

 

Maine regiment... Isn't he featured in the Gettysburg movie?

[67th Tigers]

Maine regiment... Isn't he featured in the Gettysburg movie?

 

Yes, the 20th Maine Volunteer Infantry.

 

Good officer, very "British", but then he was an Anglo-Huguenot of the kind that dominated the British officer class.

[DesertFox]

Wasn't he "Anti-Noble" where most British officers were very "Pro-Noble" and many nobles themselves

[John Dudek]

IIRC (it's been 40 years since I did a paper on the Loyalists), there were actually five Regular regiments raised in America, besides the five-bn 60th Foot (Royal Americans, later King's Royal Rifle Corps) formed in the 1760s.

 

The problem was the timing. In 1775-77, Gage, Howe, and Co. did not want to turn the 'rising' into a civil war, so they resisted using Loyalists. By the time they were replaced and the French were in, the situation had deteriorated too badly for using the Loyalists to change much - aside from turning the conflict into a bitter bloody civil war, just as Howe and Gage had feared.

 

The 84th was envisioned to be a multi-battalioned British Regular Regiment, (Redcoat, Blue Facings) taking advantage of the Scots and Irish Emigrant population living in the colonies in order to fill their rolls. Had it not been for that unfortunate battle at Moore's Creek Bridge, NC., the 84th would have alot closer to attaining their goal. I wasn't aware that there were other British Regular Regiments raised in North America during the American Revolution. I was going with what Mary Beacock Fryer wrote in her book "The King's Men."

[John Dudek]

My vote goes for Joshua Chamberlain

 

Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain (September 8, 1828 – February 24, 1914) was a college professor from Maine who volunteered to join the Union Army without the benefit of any formal military education, and became a highly respected and decorated Union officer during the American Civil War, reaching the rank of brigadier general (and brevet major general). For his gallantry at Gettysburg, he was awarded the Medal of Honor. He was given the honor of commanding the Union troops at the surrender ceremony for the infantry of Robert E. Lee's Army at Appomattox, Virginia. After the war, he served as a Republican Governor of Maine for four terms and served on the faculty and as president of his alma mater, Bowdoin College

 

He was definetly a natural born leader....

 

Agreed. The man was a classical warrior out of antiquity and not just a "book bender." He was wounded numerous times throughout the war, while leading his men into battle. The worst bullet wound he sustained occurred at Petersburg where doctors judged the wound to be mortal. Afterwards, the news that he had died was sent home to his family, although he lived another 50 years. This bullet wound to the lower abdomen nicked his bladder, while doing even more damage and eventually killed him in 1914. (Probably a burst aneurysm)

[KingSargent]

Agreed. The man was a classical warrior out of antiquity and not just a "book bender." He was wounded numerous times throughout the war, while leading his men into battle. The worst bullet wound he sustained occurred at Petersburg where doctors judged the wound to be mortal. Afterwards, the news that he had died was sent home to his family, although he lived another 50 years. This bullet wound to the lower abdomen nicked his bladder, while doing even more damage and eventually killed him in 1914. (Probably a burst aneurysm)

Ah yesss.... The Ould Wound.... (shot through both hips, BTW)

 

The fact that he was 85 had nothing to do with his death, I suppose. :rolleyes:

 

In his academic career, the only subject he never taught at Bowdoin was Mathematics. Good writer, too.