Reevaluation of Pemberton at Vicksburg

<p>Historians have largely agreed that Pemberton should shoulder the blame for the poor Confederate performance during the Vicksburg campaign. General consensus exists among American Civil War historians that Pemberton proved a confused indecisive and incompetent commander and his poor leadership led to the Confederate defeat. However an examination of the Vicksburg campaign conducted at the operational level of war shows that throughout the campaign Pemberton led a capable and competent defense not just of Vicksburg but of the Mississippi Department he commanded. He relied on an operational approach that involved fighting from prepared defensive positions in favorable terrain deep in his own territory and anchored by natural obstacles. To attack such a position Pemberton knew an opponent would need a large force operating over an extended line of communications (LOC). Pemberton intended to interdict his opponent's LOC using a strong cavalry force thus preventing the enemy from achieving the offensive momentum necessary to break through Vicksburg's defenses. This was a sound operational approach. However it failed because of an ineffective Confederate command structure that among other failures denied Pemberton the resources particularly adequate cavalry forces required to implement his operational approach.</p><p>This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore you will see the original copyright references library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world) and other notations in the work.</p><p>This work is in the public domain in the United States of America and possibly other nations. Within the United States you may freely copy and distribute this work as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.</p><p>As a reproduction of a historical artifact this work may contain missing or blurred pages poor pictures errant marks etc. Scholars believe and we concur that this work is important enough to be preserved reproduced and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.</p><br>