It must seem to the casual reader of the history of the war of
1861-65, that enough has already been written upon the campaign of
Chancellorsville. And there are numerous brilliant essays, in the
histories now before the public, which give a coup-d'oeil more or less
accurate of this ten-days' passage of arms. But none of these spread
before the reader facts sufficiently detailed to illustrate the
particular theory advanced by each to account for the defeat of the
Army of the Potomac on this field.
The stigma besmirching the character of the Eleventh Corps, and of
Howard, its then commanding general, for a panic and rout in but a
small degree owing to them; the unjust strictures passed upon Sedgwick
for his failure to execute a practically impossible order; the truly
remarkable blunders into which Gen. Hooker allowed himself to lapse,
in endeavoring to explain away his responsibility for the disaster;
the bare fact, indeed, that the Army of the Potomac was here beaten by
Lee, with one-half its force; and the very partial publication, thus
far, of the details of the campaign, and the causes of our
defeat,--may stand as excuse for one more attempt to make plain its
operations to the survivors of the one hundred and eighty thousand men
who there bore arms, and to the few who harbor some interest in the
subject as mere history.
To say that Gen. Hooker lapsed into blunders in explaining his
share in this defeat, is to use a form of words purposely tempered to
the memory of a gallant soldier, who, whatever his shortcomings, has
done his country signal service; and to avoid the imputation of baldly
throwing down the gauntlet of ungracious criticism. All reference to
Gen. Hooker's skill or conduct in this, one of the best conceived and
most fatally mismanaged of the many unsuccessful advances of the Army
of the Potomac, is made with sincere appreciation of his many
admirable qualities, frankly, and untinged by bitterness. But it must
be remembered, that Gen. Hooker has left himself on record as the
author of many harsh reflections upon his subordinates; and that to
mete out even justice to all requires unvarnished truth.
The most uncalled-for slur upon the conduct of his lieutenants
probably occurs in his testimony before the Committee on the Conduct
of the War. Before withdrawing from the south side of the
Rappahannock, after the decisive events of the battle-field had cooped
up the army between the river and its intrenchments, Hooker called
together all his corps commanders, and requested their several
opinions as to the advisability of attack or retreat. Whatever
discussion may have then been had, it was generally understood, in
after-days, that all but one of these generals had expressed himself
freely for an immediate advance. In referring to this understanding,
while denying its correctness, Hooker used the following language:--
"So far as my experience extends, there are in all armies officers
more valiant after the fight than while it is pending; and, when a
truthful history of the Rebellion shall be written, it will be found
that the Army of the Potomac is not an exception."
Merely to characterize as ungenerous this aspersion upon the
courage of such men as then served under Hooker, savors of error on
the side of leniency. And, inasmuch as these words strike, as it
were, the keynote of all the statements which Hooker has vouchsafed
with reference to these events, they might be assumed fairly to open
the door to unsparing criticism. But it is hoped that this course has
been avoided; and that what censure is dealt out to Gen. Hooker in the
succeeding pages will be accepted, even by his advocates, in the
kindly spirit in which it is meant, and in which every soldier of the
beloved old Army of the Potomac must uniformly refer to every other.
There is, moreover, no work on Chancellorsville which results from
research into all records now accessible.
The work of Allan and Hotchkiss, of 1867, than which nothing can be
more even-handed, or more admirable as far as it goes, adopts
generally the statements made in the reports of the Confederate
generals: and these are necessarily one-sided; reports of general
officers concerning their own operations invariably are. Allan and
Hotchkiss wrote with only the Richmond records before them, in
addition to such information from the Federal standpoint as may be
found in general orders, the evidence given before the Committee on
the Conduct of the War, and newspaper correspondence. At that time
many of the Federal reports were not to be had: such as were at the
War Department were hardly accessible. Reports had been duly made by
all superior officers engaged in and surviving this campaign,
excepting only the general in command; but, strange to say, not only
did Gen. Hooker refrain from making a report, but he retained in his
personal possession many of the records of the Army of the Potomac
covering the period of his command, and it is only since his death
that these records have been in part recovered by the Secretary of
War. Some are still missing, but they probably contain no important
matter not fully given elsewhere.
Although Hooker testified before the Committee on the Conduct of
the War: "Without an exception I forwarded to that office"--the War
Department--"all the reports and returns and information concerning
the army, and furnished them promptly, and, as I think, as no other
army commander has done," his memory had at the moment played him
traitor, for a considerable part of these records were not disposed of
as stated. It should be remarked, however, that Hooker is not singular
in this leaning towards the meum in the matter of records.
The sources relied on for the facts herein given are the reports of
the officers engaged, both Federal and Confederate, added to many
private notes, memoranda, and maps, made by them; the testimony before
the Committee on the Conduct of the War, which included Hooker's
examination; and the maps made by the Engineer Department of the
United-States Army, and those of Capt. Hotchkiss.
This latter officer was the topographical engineer of the Second
Corps of the Army of Northern Virginia, and made his surveys by order
of Gen. Lee immediately after the campaign. They are of the greatest
assistance and value.
Eighteen years have elapsed since North and South crossed swords
upon this memorable field; and it would seem that all Americans can
now contemplate with unruffled heart the errors under which "the Army
of the Potomac was here beaten without ever being fought," as well as
boast with equal pride, not only of the abundant courage displayed by
either side, but of the calm skill with which Gen. Lee wrested victory
from a situation desperately compromised, and of the genius of that
greatest of his lieutenants, Thomas J. Jackson, who here sealed with
his blood his fidelity to the cause he loved so well.
It has been said that this campaign furnishes as much material for
the psychological as for the military student. And certainly nothing
less than a careful analysis of Hooker's character can explain the
abnormal condition into which his mental and physical energy sank
during the second act of this drama. He began with really masterly
moves, speedily placing his wary adversary at the saddest
disadvantage. But, having attained this height, his power seemed to
pass away as from an over-tasked mind. With twice the weight of arm,
and as keen a blade, he appeared quite unable to parry a single lunge
of Lee's, quite unable to thrust himself. He allowed his corps
commanders to be beaten in detail, with no apparent effort to aid them
from his abundant resources, the while his opponent was demanding from
every man in his command the last ounce of his strength. And he
finally retired, dazed and weary, across the river he had so ably and
boastingly placed behind him ten days before, against the opinion of
nearly all his subordinates; for in this case the conditions were so
plain that even an informal council of war advised a fight.
With character-study, however, this sketch has nothing to do. It
is confined to describing events, and suggesting queries for the
curious in military history.
Up to Podcast Index
