when historian mark grimsley recently published a brief piece exploring the origins of mcclellan as a feckless commander and suggested revisions, the response was both immediate and predictable. in the next issue of the publication, "civil war monitor," the letters appeared. dismissive, utterly dismissive of grimsley's efforts and unwilling to consider any other interpretation than the, by now, standard interpretation of mcclellan. i think opinions about mcclellan are almost baked in and unlikely to change. in his own day, of course, mcclellan had many warm friends, many warm political supporters and of course no shortage of critics and enemies. he had the misfortune to clash with abraham lincoln who himself was a controversial figure at the time but who quickly became the savior of the union, though i think mcclellan had something to do with that as well, the great emancipator, and the martyr president in the aftermath of his assassination. the reputation of lincoln has hardly helped mcclellan. as john hay noted in a letter to john g. nicole, john hay wrote, i think i have left the i