In george b mcclellan and civil war history rowland presents a framework in which early civil war command can be viewed without direct comparison to that of the final two years such comparisons in his opinion are both unfair and contextually inaccurate only by understanding how very different was the context and nature of the war facing mcclellan as opposed to grant and sherman can one discard the traditional good general bad general approach to command performance in such a light . In july 1861 george b mcclellan was given the command of the union armies in the east and later he was promoted to the position of general in chief the commander of all of the union armies across the entire strategic map of the civil war besides this mcclellan is also known for building the army of the potomac into a formidable force of more than 100000 well equipped and well trained men. Civil war scholars have found the quality of union leadership in the early years of the war wanting and that it was not until us grant and wt sherman emerged that success was ensured on the other hand grant and sherman knew failure but were judged less harshly than was mcclellan in george b mcclellan and civil war history rowland presents a framework in which early civil war command . Perhaps no other union commanders legacy in the civil war has been the subject of as much controversy as george b mcclellans since the midpoint of this century however he has emerged as the complex general who though gifted with administrative and organizational skills was unable and