After reading the article “Why The North Won and The South Lost”, I kind of disagree with the way that the Union generals were ranked in order of contribution to the war effort. I think that William T. Sherman should have been ranked number 5 and Phillip Sheridan ranked number 4. The article even said that during the first three years of the war, Sherman’s contribution to the Union was very minor and negative and he didn’t even achieve success until the Atlanta Campaign in 1864, where he only directed because he was tight with Grant. Also, he had never won an offensive battle during his career.

Unlike Sherman, Phillip Sheridan’s contributions to the Union victory in Virginia’s Shenandoah Valley when he demolished Lieutenant General Jubal Early’s army and at Five Forks, Virginia where he seized a vital road junction that compelled Lee to evacuate Richmond and begin what ended with his surrender at Appomattox.
So, what do you think? Is Sheridan better than Sherman? Is Sherman all hype?
-Brittany