 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 30th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 434 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |   |
Mark
Last edited on Sat Jan 22nd, 2011 04:08 pm by Mark
| View single post by Mark | |||||||||||||
| Posted: Sat Jan 22nd, 2011 04:07 pm |
|
||||||||||||
|
Mark Member
|
Hooker was a very capable general. In my opinion, at Chancellorsville he was done in by Corps commanders who couldn't stand him (Slocum, Howard, Sedgwick and Sykes). His inability to get along with General Hallack and President Lincoln didn't help much either. I doubt those problems would have worked themselves out if he had been at Gettysburg. However, with the exception of Chancellorsville General Hooker did remarkably well as a commander. Mark Last edited on Sat Jan 22nd, 2011 04:08 pm by Mark |
||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||