long
before they discovered that Lee's army, and not Richmond, was the
vital point of the Confederacy. Not a single attempt was made to
seize strategic points, and if we may judge from the orders and
dispatches in the Official Records, their existence was never
recognised. To this oversight the successive defeats of the Northern
forces were in great part due. From McClellan to Banks, each one of
their generals appears to have been blind to the advantages that may
be derived from a study of the theatre of war. Not one of them hit
upon a line of operations which embarrassed the Confederates, and all
possessed the unhappy knack of joining battle on the most
unfavourable terms. Moreover, when it at last became clear that the
surest means of conquering a country is to defeat its armies, the
true objective was but vaguely realised. The annihilation of the
enemy's troops seems to have been the last thing dreamt of.
Opportunities of crushing him in detail were neither sought for nor
created. As General Sheridan said afterwards: "The trouble with the
commanders of the Army of the Potomac was that they never marched out
to "lick" anybody; all they thought of was to escape being "licked"
themselves."

But it is not sufficient, in planning strategical combinations, to
arrive at a correct conclusion as regards the objective. Success
demands a most careful calculation of ways and means: of the numbers
at disposal; of food, forage, and ammunition; and of the forces to he
detached for secondary purposes. The different factors of the
problem--the strength and dispositions of the enemy, the roads,
railways, fortresses, weather, natural features, the morale of the
opposing armies, the character of the opposing general, the
facilities for supply have each and all of them to be considered,
their relative prominence assigned to them, and their conflicting
claims to be brought into adjustment.

For such mental exertion Jackson was well equipped. He had made his
own the experience of others. His knowledge of history made him
familiar with the principles which had guided Washington and Napoleon
in the selection of objectives, and with the means by which they
attained them. It is not always easy to determine the benefit, beyond
a theoretical acquaintance with the phenomena of the battle-field, to
be derived from studying the campaigns of the great masters of war.
It is true that no successful general, whatever may have been his
practical kno