back to top
|thanks for the clarification. Hooker from what I've read seems to have had some good leadership qualities. He rebuilt the morale of the army after Fredricksburg. He looked after his soldiers welfare. Made sure they were better fed. He had done very well at the Division and Corps level. Like you said he just made a logical but wrong decision. But after getting the sense knocked out of him by the cannon ball he should have turned over command. From what I remember didn't his Corp commanders want to stay and fight at the end of the day of the flank attack thinking victory was still possible? Or was that just revisionism done on their part?