He was raised to General of the Army of the Potomac when Vicksburg fell to him.
2007-09-20 06:41:59
·
answer #1
·
answered by Mark S 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
Grant’s plan was further stymied after the Union defeat at Chickamauga and the subsequent need to break the siege at Chattanooga. After his own victory at Chattanooga in November, however, Grant wasted few hours in writing the President what he thought the next strategic moves should be. As a possible winter attack, Grant revived the touchy Mobile campaign while the Chattanooga victors were gathering strength for a spring offensive to Atlanta. Grant reasoned that Lee would vacate Virginia and shift strength toward Atlanta. For the Mobile-Montgomery plan, Grant asked for Banks’ resources in the Gulf Department. Lincoln again balked because the Texas seacoast would be abandoned. Grant’s rebuttal explained that Napoleon III would really be impressed with a large Army-Navy operation against Mobile Bay. The Red River campaign, Grant believed, would not provide as dramatic a demonstration. The President told Grant again that he had to heed the demands of Union diplomacy, but at the same time he encouraged Grant to enlarge his strategic proposals to include estimates for a grand Federal offensive for the coming spring of 1864.
Grant’s plan of January 1864 projected a four-pronged continental attack. In concert, the four armies were to move on Atlanta, on Mobile (after Banks took Shreveport), on General Robert E. Lee’s communications by a campaign across the middle of North Carolina on the axis New Bern–Neuse River–Goldsboro–Raleigh–Greensboro, and on Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia in the hope of defeating it in an open battle. Lincoln opposed the North Carolina phase, fearing that Grant’s diversion of 60,000 effective bayonets from formations covering Washington was too dangerous. Lincoln knew that Lee’s eyes were always fixed on the vast amount of supplies in the depots around the Washington area.
Though Lincoln scuttled some of Grant’s professional schemes, he never lost his esteem for Grant’s enthusiasm and intelligence. In February 1864 Congress revived Winfield Scott’s old rank of lieutenant general; and Grant was promoted on March 9, making him senior to all Union officers.
There were no 4 star Union generals during the Civil War. Grant was the first to be confirmed by Congress as Lt. Gen. (3 Star) since the appointment of George Washington. His appointment to 4 star came after the Civil War was over by a full year and he was the first to attain that rank.
2007-09-20 06:28:46
·
answer #2
·
answered by third_indiana_cavalry 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
After a victory at Chattanooga in late 1863, Abraham Lincoln made him general-in-chief of all Union armies. there were no 5 star generals until WWII Pershing was actually made a 6 star general in the fact that he was a general of the Armies. At the time of the civil war there were no 4 star generals, even Lee was only a 3 star general of the South.ah but in his biography there is a quote "In the postwar reorganization of the army he was promoted to full general in 1866 and oversaw the military portion of Reconstruction and the reduction of the army." he was not made a full general until after the war. and further from another wikepedia article"On July 25, 1866, the U.S. Congress established the rank of "General of the Army of the United States" for Ulysses S. Grant. When appointed general of the Army, Grant wore the rank insignia of four stars and coat buttons arranged in three groups of four.
After Grant retired to private life, he was succeeded as General of the Army by William T. Sherman, effective March 4, 1869. In 1872, Sherman ordered the insignia changed to two stars with the arms of the United States in between.
By an Act of June 1, 1888, the grade of lieutenant general was discontinued and merged in that of General of the Army, which was then conferred upon Philip H. Sheridan. (The cover of Sheridan's autobiography was decorated with four stars within a rectangle evocative of the four-star shoulder strap worn by Grant.) The rank of general of the Army ceased to exist upon the death of Sheridan on August 5, 1888 and the highest rank of the United States Army was again the two star major general rank.
Unlike the 1944 rank with a similar title, General of the Army in the 1866-1888 period was equivalent to a modern-day four-star general. The unique title reflected the fact that only one officer could hold the rank at any time."
2007-09-20 05:22:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by bob t 4
·
3⤊
0⤋
SirWilliam: Grant was not a 5-star general. The rank at that time would equate with the modern 4-star general, and Grant himself wore only 4 stars on his uniform. The 5-star insignia was not created until December 1944 and was given to generals Marshall, MacArthur, Eisenhower, Arnold, and Bradley.
Bob T: There were 4-star generals during the American civil war, and Grant was one of them. And there were also no 5-star generals during World War 1.
2007-09-20 05:26:55
·
answer #4
·
answered by blakenyp 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
He was actually appointed such in early 1864, this was after Gettysburg in 1863, as well as Grant's own victory at Vicksburg (simultaneous with Gettysburg in July). The last battle of significance in which Grant participated was Chattanooga (his victory) in November 1863.
2007-09-20 05:14:05
·
answer #5
·
answered by aboukir200 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
...Lincoln appointed Grant as General of the Army (the first "5" star General) the date is disputed but none the less, Grant was the "big dog on the block"....Sherman was second in command...
2007-09-20 05:13:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
After he reclaimed Chattanooga
2007-09-20 05:22:40
·
answer #7
·
answered by Frosty 7
·
2⤊
0⤋