Changes in technology over the centuries, as well as differences in geography and resources, make comparisons seem apples and oranges. However, it is feasible to measure how well a general did with what he had to work with and considering the opponents he faced. In that regard, Washington was an absolutely superb strategist, the best the United States has produced, ever.
Personally, I wouldn’t go that far; in fact, I think one of Washington’s own subordinates, Nathanael Greene, was a superior strategist. But I would agree that Washington was a gifted strategical thinker, able to balance purely military factors with larger political considerations.
Palmer makes his case in a book published last month.
Advertisements
When you consider Washington’s on the job training (French and Indian War) and his latter on the job training (Rev. War), given that and his education in contrast to those British generals who went to the finest British military institution, Washington was a natural. Had he more professional education and experience, I believe that he would have bested those prim and proper Brits in strategy and tactics.