The Interpretations of McClellans Generalship - Essay Example

Download file to see previous pages As a prominent person in one of the most talked-about battles in the history of America, several books have tackled McClellan’s position and contribution to the Civil War. It is known that the common view in most books depicts that the victory of the North in the Civil War is something inevitable due to mismanagement on the part of the South. Only a few authors tackle the Civil War and the victory of the North in a perspective that emphasizes the North’s dominance in terms of supplies, industrial infrastructure, and manpower.
Thomas Rowland’s George B. McClellan and Civil War History: In the Shadow of Grant and Sherman and James McPherson’s Ordeal by Fire The Civil War and Reconstruction are two books that completely cover the Civil War and McClellan’s generalship. Thus, it is interesting to know which information about George McClellan in the two books contradicts and which facts correspond with one another.

Thomas Rowland’s book revolves around George B. McClellan as a general and his contribution and role in the Civil War. Since the story revolves around him, the book covers his beginning--- from his previous work on the railroad to how he landed the position of a general in the Civil War. Initially, McClellan immediately attempted to get in touch with Winfield Scott, commander in chief of the American army, sending him several messages in which he suggested that the states between the Alleghenies and the Mississippi be organized as a military department under a head. On May 13, 1861, he received an order (dated May 3) appointing him to the command of the Department of Ohio, consisting of Indiana, Ohio, and Illinois, with later additions of western Pennsylvania and western Virginia.

On the other hand, McPherson’s book tackles the Civil War as the focal point of the story, discussing only McClellan as one of the major contributors to the battle and the North’s victory. It covers all the facets of the war itself. Hence, the story covers the start of the Civil War which depicts the philosophical, social, political, and economic political arguments that lead to the battle. Also, the book includes post-war events which include reuniting the nation and specifying the rights of the slaves from the South who have just gained freedom.

In conclusion, the major difference between the two books is their approach to discussing the Civil War and McClellan’s generalship. Rowland’s work utilizes the inductive method of discussion as it focuses on McClellan while broadening the topic to the Civil War as it tackles McClellan’s contribution to it. On the other hand, McPherson’s work uses the deductive method of discussion as its central subject is the Civil War, and discussions of McClellan’s generalship were only emphasized as the story narrates deductively from the Civil War to the figures who played important roles in it.
Concerning McClellan’s generalship, there are several points of agreement in the two books. Most importantly, both books confirm McClellan's position as a general of the Department of the Ohio, which consists of Indiana, Ohio, and Illinois, Pennsylvania, and Western Virginia, and his contributions toward the Civil War.  ...Download file to see next pages Read More