|
|
Union General Daniel SicklesAmerica's Civil War | Single Page | 5 comments | Print This Post | Email This Post Few figures in the Civil War were more controversial, flamboyant and charismatic than Union Major General Daniel Sickles. His proponents praised him as a great American hero, a superior soldier who displayed courage, initiative and foresight in the face of enemy guns. His detractors, on the other hand, criticized his generalship and denounced him as a scoundrel. In view of such divergent characterizations, Sickles' performances at the 1863 battles of Chancellorsville and Gettysburg call for close scrutiny and analysis. At a crucial point during each of those pivotal battles, Sickles advanced his army corps away from the main body of the Army of the Potomac to form a salient. Sickles' salients played key roles in the courses of the two battles and significantly influenced their outcomes. They also provide revealing insight into the character and leadership style of a unique and exasperating man. Subscribe Today
While most public figures seek to avoid controversy and scandal, 'Devil Dan Sickles seemed to embrace them. As both a political and military figure, he openly drank, defied authority and womanized, making a name for himself as one of history's most colorful characters. From his mid-30s until his death at age 94, he was continually embroiled in some sort of financial, legislative, sexual or homicidal crisis.
Born in Manhattan on October 20, 1819, Sickles rose to prominence as a lawyer in the notorious Tammany Hall political machine in New York City. His penchant for liquor, gambling and women certainly did not hinder his political career, and he was twice elected to the U.S. Congress. While serving in this capacity in 1859, Sickles shot and killed Philip Barton Key, son of composer Francis Scott Key, for having an illicit love affair with his wife, Teresa. The shooting took place on a city sidewalk in Washington in front of numerous passers-by and within view of the executive mansion.
With future Secretary of War Edwin Stanton as his lawyer, Sickles achieved a legal first when he was acquitted on the grounds of temporary insanity, and he remained in office. He was even viewed as something of a public hero after the sensational 22-day trial. In the Victorian social climate of the day, he was seen as a man who had fought to protect the sanctity of his marriage.
Following the surrender of Fort Sumter in April 1861, Sickles' patriotic fervor helped him to overcome his scandalous past. A Democrat who nevertheless supported President Abraham Lincoln's save-the-Union policies, Sickles was authorized by New York Governor Edwin Morgan to recruit a brigade of five regiments of volunteers to fight for the Union cause. Sickles undertook the task in earnest and raised the troops within a month. Lincoln, grateful for Sickles' efforts and support, nominated him for a brigadier general's commission to command his new brigade of New Yorkers, dubbed the Excelsior Brigade. After some initial hesitation by the Senate, the nomination was confirmed. The combative politician was now a political general.
On May 31, 1862, Sickles and his brigade got their first taste of war at the Battle of Fair Oaks on the Virginia Peninsula. The brigade fought well, and Sickles' leadership evinced the pluck and swagger that defined his personality. He earned a reputation as a hard-fighting officer. When Maj. Gen. Joseph Hooker was moved up to corps command, Sickles took over as commander of Hooker's old division. Shortly before the December 13, 1862, Battle of Fredericksburg, Va., Sickles was promoted to major general. When Hooker rose to command the Army of the Potomac in place of Maj. Gen. Ambrose E. Burnside, he immediately placed Sickles in command of the III Corps. Of the seven corps commanders in Hooker's reorganized army, only Sickles was not a professional soldier or a West Point graduate.
After the bitter Union defeat at Fredericksburg, Hooker was not about to make the same mistake Burnside had made of attacking Lee's strongly defended positions on the heights above the town. Instead, he devised a comprehensive strategic plan, based on deception and numerical superiority, to outflank Lee and force him to fight on open ground. Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7Help HistoryNet by bookmarking to
            Tags: 19th Century, America's Civil War, American Civil War, Historical Conflicts, Historical Figures
 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
What is HistoryNet?The HistoryNet.com is brought to you by the Weider History Group, the world's largest publisher of history magazines. HistoryNet.com contains daily features, photo galleries and over 5,000 articles originally published in our various magazines. If you are interested in a specific history subject, try searching our archives, you are bound to find something to pique your interest. |
From Our Magazines
|
Weider History Group |
Weider History Network: HistoryNet | Armchair General | Great History | Achtung Panzer! Terms of Use | Copyright © 2009 Weider History Group. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. |
||
Loading ...
5 Comments to “Union General Daniel Sickles”
I respectfully disagree with the conclusions presented in this article. I walked the ground and came to the same conclusions reached by Sickles. He saw what I saw; high ground to our fronts (west). Leave the original position in the saddle and head west; the Emmitsburg Pike terrain becomes compelling.
You get similar sensings walking eastward from Longstreet's positions. I this case, however, instead of running into a routinely expected, thin skirmish line, you run into two battle-tested Federal divisions. Although stretched over a significant distance, these divisions created conditions similar to those expected of a dedicated covering force. By late afternoon, Longstreet's Corps lacked the combat power and momentum to seize their objectives. We all ask ourselves many times over, "What would have happened if the opposing forces met for the first time at the base of Cemetery Ridge and the Round Tops?"
In a three-day period when every engagement was of great importance, I believe that these engagements between Longstreet and Sickles on the afternoon of the second day were pivotal and of paramount importance.
Thanks – Frank
By Frank Kolar on Dec 5, 2008 at 2:37 pm
given the man's basic diregard for all things of civility, authority, and a basic understanding of what he was doing, i feel that had any other gen. been in command of sickles corps there may have not even been a picket's charge on the 3rd, or even a third day of battle.
By tom on Dec 18, 2008 at 6:09 pm
Interesting article but author fails to see the obvious. at Chancellorsville Sickles action caused Lee to worry about Jackson's force being struck in the rear that he had two detach forces he had not intended to attck Birney. The author correctly points out that Gen Howard, XI Cdr. was warned by Gen Hooker to prepare for a possible flank attack from the west. Gen Howard's failure to properly entrench was the cause of the disaster not Gen Sickles movement. At Gettysburg, by moving the III corp forward, Gen Sickles placed it directly in the path of Gen Longstreet's I Corp attack utterly wrecking the timetable of Gen Lee's carefully devised echelon attack. The ensuing battles at the Peach Orchid, Wheatfield and Devil's den were battles in places Gen Longstreet had not expected and had thought he would swiftly pass through. Longstreets mission was to strike the flank of the US II Corp and not be delayed and embroiled in useless actions around the Emmitsburg Pike. Gen Sickle's Corp absorbed and dissipated Lee's mighty blow before it could strike where Lee wanted it to.
By James Waller on Apr 7, 2009 at 11:25 am
It seems to me that even though there were some unintended positives for the union from Sickles actions his flamboyant, political calousness cost the union thousands of lives. Meade was likely right in taking up defensive positions. Even though Lee would have attacked with greater force, the Union was in a position to smash Lee's forces. The ridge gave the Union an unapproachable position with cannon fire.
Just because Sickles caught the Rebels off guard doesn't mean that his decision was right. He forced the battle of the Wheatfield, causing the union to lose almost two entire armies. He forced units held in reserve to be moved forward and he forced Meade to fight in defense out in the open. I don't care what you walked. Sickles was a fool. Had night fall not come, and had Lee's General's not failed to reinforce their gains Gettysburg would have been lost.
By Rob on Apr 30, 2009 at 10:07 am
Remember Lee's decision to attack the middle was based on forcing Meade to retreat due to Sickles incompetance. Lee's decision was delayed because of the lack of intelligence from his calvary about the union reserve. Meade was right in redrawing his lines and taking up high positions. Had sickles not moved his army forward there would not have been a second or third day.
By Rob on Apr 30, 2009 at 10:11 am