<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sumner as Queeg?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://behind.aotw.org/2006/08/30/sumner-as-queeg/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://behind.aotw.org/2006/08/30/sumner-as-queeg/</link>
	<description>the backwash of a digital history project</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 22:30:30 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Harry</title>
		<link>http://behind.aotw.org/2006/08/30/sumner-as-queeg/comment-page-1/#comment-2169</link>
		<dc:creator>Harry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2006 23:24:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aotw.org/blog/2006/08/30/sumner-as-queeg/#comment-2169</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m having a hard time understanding what &quot;coniving&quot; was going on here.  McClellan was detached to serve on the commission.  Are we to accept that he was somehow expected to not make any recommendations regarding cavalry without &quot;going through&quot; Sumner?  Maybe we need to see what his orders were.  I may be wrong, but I don&#039;t think he was assigned to the commission by Sumner.  Mac was also expected to make observations and recommendations regarding infantry.  Was he bypassing every infantry officer of higher rank in doing so?

And note that it was not uncommon for the creme of the officer corps, the engineers, to spend some time in the cavalry.  Lee himself was assigned there for a time, though he spent precious little of it actually in the field.

Harry</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m having a hard time understanding what &#8220;coniving&#8221; was going on here.  McClellan was detached to serve on the commission.  Are we to accept that he was somehow expected to not make any recommendations regarding cavalry without &#8220;going through&#8221; Sumner?  Maybe we need to see what his orders were.  I may be wrong, but I don&#8217;t think he was assigned to the commission by Sumner.  Mac was also expected to make observations and recommendations regarding infantry.  Was he bypassing every infantry officer of higher rank in doing so?</p>
<p>And note that it was not uncommon for the creme of the officer corps, the engineers, to spend some time in the cavalry.  Lee himself was assigned there for a time, though he spent precious little of it actually in the field.</p>
<p>Harry</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mitch H.</title>
		<link>http://behind.aotw.org/2006/08/30/sumner-as-queeg/comment-page-1/#comment-2167</link>
		<dc:creator>Mitch H.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2006 20:16:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aotw.org/blog/2006/08/30/sumner-as-queeg/#comment-2167</guid>
		<description>Keep in mind that &quot;the whole Cavalry arm&quot; in question consisted of the 1st &amp; 2nd Cavalry Regiments, just-established.  The 1st Cavalry was, in effect, half of the arm&#039;s establishment.  And Johnston - who bounced from the artillery to the topographical engineers to the cavalry to, just before the war, quartermaster general - apparently fancied himself the 19th century equivalent of an MBA - capable of &quot;managing&quot;, regardless of how much he knew about the business at hand.  

The picture that Dimitri draws of McClellan &amp; Johnston&#039;s conniving only adds to the impression left by Rafuse &amp; Beatie, of what seems to be McClellan&#039;s serious issues with authority, and tells me a lot more about McClellan &amp; Johnston than it does about Sumner, who even here is still something of a hollow blank in his own story. 

I still don&#039;t have a clear picture of who Sumner was.  How did he react to his conspiring officers?  What were things like in the 1st Cavalry?  I have some picture of what things were like in the 2nd Cavalry - Freeman&#039;s portrait in the first volume of his biography of Lee&#039;s dreary slog of court-martials and paperwork, punctuated by reports of other officers&#039; excursions against bandits and Indians, is &lt;a href=&quot;http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Gazetteer/People/Robert_E_Lee/FREREL/1/21*.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;quite evocative&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Keep in mind that &#8220;the whole Cavalry arm&#8221; in question consisted of the 1st &amp; 2nd Cavalry Regiments, just-established.  The 1st Cavalry was, in effect, half of the arm&#8217;s establishment.  And Johnston &#8211; who bounced from the artillery to the topographical engineers to the cavalry to, just before the war, quartermaster general &#8211; apparently fancied himself the 19th century equivalent of an MBA &#8211; capable of &#8220;managing&#8221;, regardless of how much he knew about the business at hand.  </p>
<p>The picture that Dimitri draws of McClellan &amp; Johnston&#8217;s conniving only adds to the impression left by Rafuse &amp; Beatie, of what seems to be McClellan&#8217;s serious issues with authority, and tells me a lot more about McClellan &amp; Johnston than it does about Sumner, who even here is still something of a hollow blank in his own story. </p>
<p>I still don&#8217;t have a clear picture of who Sumner was.  How did he react to his conspiring officers?  What were things like in the 1st Cavalry?  I have some picture of what things were like in the 2nd Cavalry &#8211; Freeman&#8217;s portrait in the first volume of his biography of Lee&#8217;s dreary slog of court-martials and paperwork, punctuated by reports of other officers&#8217; excursions against bandits and Indians, is <a href="http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Gazetteer/People/Robert_E_Lee/FREREL/1/21*.html" rel="nofollow">quite evocative</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Harry</title>
		<link>http://behind.aotw.org/2006/08/30/sumner-as-queeg/comment-page-1/#comment-2166</link>
		<dc:creator>Harry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2006 15:53:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aotw.org/blog/2006/08/30/sumner-as-queeg/#comment-2166</guid>
		<description>&quot;Johnston and Davis&quot; above should read &quot;Johnston and McClellan&quot;, though I&#039;m sure Davis was considering the Cavalry arm as well.

HArry</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Johnston and Davis&#8221; above should read &#8220;Johnston and McClellan&#8221;, though I&#8217;m sure Davis was considering the Cavalry arm as well.</p>
<p>HArry</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Harry</title>
		<link>http://behind.aotw.org/2006/08/30/sumner-as-queeg/comment-page-1/#comment-2165</link>
		<dc:creator>Harry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2006 15:26:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aotw.org/blog/2006/08/30/sumner-as-queeg/#comment-2165</guid>
		<description>Brian,

Is chain of command sacrosanct?  Does it work both ways?  Can you see where this is going?

We might also keep in mind that what Johnston and Davis were thinking about was not just the 1st US Cavalry regiment (Sumner&#039;s domain), but the Cavalry arm as a whole.  Certainly no one expected McClellan to come back from Europe and report his findings to Sumner.

I don&#039;t see this &quot;scheme&quot; as nefarious.

Harry</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brian,</p>
<p>Is chain of command sacrosanct?  Does it work both ways?  Can you see where this is going?</p>
<p>We might also keep in mind that what Johnston and Davis were thinking about was not just the 1st US Cavalry regiment (Sumner&#8217;s domain), but the Cavalry arm as a whole.  Certainly no one expected McClellan to come back from Europe and report his findings to Sumner.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t see this &#8220;scheme&#8221; as nefarious.</p>
<p>Harry</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Downey</title>
		<link>http://behind.aotw.org/2006/08/30/sumner-as-queeg/comment-page-1/#comment-2163</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Downey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2006 13:31:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aotw.org/blog/2006/08/30/sumner-as-queeg/#comment-2163</guid>
		<description>Also, Dimitri has posted a follow-on in &lt;a href=&quot;http://cwbn.blogspot.com/2006/08/sumner-mcclellan-johnston-davis-and.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Sumner, McClellan, Johnston, Davis, and Hardee&lt;/a&gt;.  More good material from Matthew Moten&#039;s &lt;i&gt;Delafield Commission&lt;/i&gt; book. 

Dimitri makes the case that McClellan and Johnston (and maybe Jefferson Davis) weren&#039;t going to include Sumner in the decision process, anyway.

&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;i&gt;Not because he was stupid, but because he was an old soldier set in his ways.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

OK, I understand why McClellan and Johnston thought they needed to bypass Sumner. I still see it as fundamentally wrong. Still smell arrogance, too. 

You&#039;re a junior Army officer. Don&#039;t like the way things are going?  Talk to your boss. You put it to your chain of command.

The boss still doesn&#039;t get it?  Request higher authority review. There are procedures for that. Procedures in place for a good reason.  Good order and discipline, for example.

Still not satisfied?  Get over it.  Become a civilian. Write a book.  Run for office.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Also, Dimitri has posted a follow-on in <a href="http://cwbn.blogspot.com/2006/08/sumner-mcclellan-johnston-davis-and.html" rel="nofollow">Sumner, McClellan, Johnston, Davis, and Hardee</a>.  More good material from Matthew Moten&#8217;s <i>Delafield Commission</i> book. </p>
<p>Dimitri makes the case that McClellan and Johnston (and maybe Jefferson Davis) weren&#8217;t going to include Sumner in the decision process, anyway.</p>
<blockquote><p><i>Not because he was stupid, but because he was an old soldier set in his ways.</i></p></blockquote>
<p>OK, I understand why McClellan and Johnston thought they needed to bypass Sumner. I still see it as fundamentally wrong. Still smell arrogance, too. </p>
<p>You&#8217;re a junior Army officer. Don&#8217;t like the way things are going?  Talk to your boss. You put it to your chain of command.</p>
<p>The boss still doesn&#8217;t get it?  Request higher authority review. There are procedures for that. Procedures in place for a good reason.  Good order and discipline, for example.</p>
<p>Still not satisfied?  Get over it.  Become a civilian. Write a book.  Run for office.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Downey</title>
		<link>http://behind.aotw.org/2006/08/30/sumner-as-queeg/comment-page-1/#comment-2162</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Downey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2006 13:20:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aotw.org/blog/2006/08/30/sumner-as-queeg/#comment-2162</guid>
		<description>Thanks Scott, interesting questions.  &#039;Above my paygrade&#039;, to be sure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Scott, interesting questions.  &#8216;Above my paygrade&#8217;, to be sure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: scott s.</title>
		<link>http://behind.aotw.org/2006/08/30/sumner-as-queeg/comment-page-1/#comment-2158</link>
		<dc:creator>scott s.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Aug 2006 21:23:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aotw.org/blog/2006/08/30/sumner-as-queeg/#comment-2158</guid>
		<description>Well, this certainly brings up some good questions of pre-war relationships.  One thing I wondered about this, was what made fellow-engineer Johnston an expert on cavalry, or even on Sumner?  As far as McClellan, I have to assume he knew nothing about cavalry before his appointment to the commission, except what any American officer might know, with the possible exception of things picked up from Mahan at West Point as commander of the Company of Engineers. 

I think maybe more needs to be done IRT Davis/Sumner.  Davis had served with Sumner in the Dragoons, and seems to have continued his interest in mounted forces and tactics.  As a US Senator, he was involved in forming Army policy in using mounted troops in executing the Indian policy.  I assume he drew some conclusions, resulting in the creation of cavalry vs additional dragoons.  So I have to also assume that in Sumner, he saw something that he liked (as he had done with favorite AS Johnston in the other Cav regiment).  Unless Sumner had been pressed on him by other political forces, or part of a compromise which allowed appointment of Johnston.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, this certainly brings up some good questions of pre-war relationships.  One thing I wondered about this, was what made fellow-engineer Johnston an expert on cavalry, or even on Sumner?  As far as McClellan, I have to assume he knew nothing about cavalry before his appointment to the commission, except what any American officer might know, with the possible exception of things picked up from Mahan at West Point as commander of the Company of Engineers. </p>
<p>I think maybe more needs to be done IRT Davis/Sumner.  Davis had served with Sumner in the Dragoons, and seems to have continued his interest in mounted forces and tactics.  As a US Senator, he was involved in forming Army policy in using mounted troops in executing the Indian policy.  I assume he drew some conclusions, resulting in the creation of cavalry vs additional dragoons.  So I have to also assume that in Sumner, he saw something that he liked (as he had done with favorite AS Johnston in the other Cav regiment).  Unless Sumner had been pressed on him by other political forces, or part of a compromise which allowed appointment of Johnston.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
