Why was ambrose burnside important in the civil war?

Answer 1

Yes.

He was a modest man, very aware of his limitations, and he twice turned down the top job of commander of the Army of the Potomac.

For some reason, they pressured him into accepting the job, by telling him that it would otherwise go to Joe Hooker, whom Burnside detested.

He did his best, but was genuinely unlucky (even with the weather) and had to be replaced by Hooker after all.

Burnside seems to have been one of the most pleasant and honourable of all the Civil War Generals.

Answer 2

He is not regarded as important.

Burnside was an officer of modest abilities, and he never pretended otherwise. He did not want to be promoted to the level of army commander, but was pushed into it.

His plan for the Battle of Fredericksburg was perfectly sound, but he should have abandoned it when his pontoons went astray, preventing him from crossing the river before Lee had manned the heights. His next move, to try to outflank Lee, was washed-out by torrents of rain.

In the shocking blunder of the Battle of the Crater (Petersburg), Burnside had to take the blame, though it was none of his fault, and he was never given a significant job after that.

Burnside remains one of the most decent and agreeable of Civil War Generals, but history has classified him as one of those 'unlucky' commanders, who are usually judged to be their own worst enemy.

Answer 3

confederate.