General Lee at Gettysburg

[JChambers]

Now that I see how many different opinions all of us here on treasurenet have to offer, I have a topic for us all to discuss. What is everyone's standpoint on General Lee at Gettysburg? Genius? Failure? Do you think that the disaster could have been prevented, and could Pickett's charge have actually worked? I'm full of opinons on this subject, I for one love the General and believe that he was the greatest officer of the entire war, arguably in the history of more recent wars. So let's hear what anyone else has to say.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[snake35]

General Robert E Lee was the worst thing for the south. Without him the war would have been over years earlier. He was a genius tactician.

 

[d2]

If Lee would have listend to Longstreet and got between the federals and Washington at Gettysburg the battle may have turned out different. Lee done the most with the least. Not only a great leader but a great man also. Born and raised in the south I hate we lost the war simply because I hate to lose, but I wonder if we would have won, what would do you think the CSA would be like today?..d2

 

[MichaelB]

D2, there was a book of fiction I read about 30 yrs ago where the CSA was not defeated and two countries existed until WWII. When Germany attacked the Union the CSA rejoined and defeated the Germans. As a young teenager it seemed intense but I am sure it would be tame now. I have never been able to determine the title of the book.

MichaelB

 

[d2]

I will try and find it. Never heard of it...d2

 

[BamaBill]

The book you're trying to think of is, "If the South had won the Civil War," by MacKinlay Kantor. I too read that book when I was young and its pretty good speculative fiction.

 

[d2]

Thanks, I will find it...d2

 

[JChambers]

I myself will have to check out the book, it would be interesting to see where the south would stand now in modern times with all that is going on with the "War on Terror". As for Lee, I think he was the greatest officer of the war, on either side. I believe he could have won the war for the south if he had just recieved more supplies. Lee was a great tacticion and I believe that he could have thwarted any foe. I do agree that if he had listened to Longstreet he would have been able to dig into a strong defensive position and the Federals would have had to hit em. When that happened and Meade had been routed, the Rebels could have moved right on to Washington. On the other hand, given the circumstances; they had fought in Gettysburg for two days, with no descisive action in either direction. They had already lost much of their force and ammunition and were pretty much commited at that point. Lee's plan on July 3rd would have worked, if his artillary had done their part, but unfortunately for you southern boys, they did not. If they had cleared some of the infantry they would have confused the men in the center and broken their lines sucsessfully. The other possiblility for all to think on is maybe Lee just wanted the war to be over either way...just food for thought.

 

[transplant]

most of lee artillery was over shooting there target on July 3 also if you add back to battles the number of rounds not fired by the south[some 10,000 weapons had been loaded with 2 or more rounds] these would made a different also. I think if the south had won you would see more power being held by the states than what we have now. the government that we have now is center in washington, it to big and to wasteful.

 

[Bossgobbler23]

I'm a Northern man that loves history but I'm with you, I think Lee was one of the greatest generals of all time, a man of honor, and I love the man. But with that said, he was human too and made several critical errors at Gettysburg. He took long chances because he had to in previous battles, which made him a genius and a legend. He was always out gunned and outnumbered. This time he could've chosen the ground and made the Union attack as Longstreet suggested. But in truth the battle had already begun without him and the first day's results were promising... so I can see why he stayed on the attack but this lead to his doom in PA. Pickett's charge however is one decision he probably wished he had back but hindsight is always 20/20. Decision makers don't have the luxury of hindsight. I also wonder what would've happened to the CSA if they had won the war. I tend to believe it would not have lasted long and that Georgia would've seceded from the CSA. The Georgia govoner was VERY big on states rights and threatened to secede during the war. I think it was states rights that contributed to the South's losing the war. I believe they needed a stronger central government to invoke a draft and to suspend the right of habeas corpus like Lincoln did.

 

[mobrigade]

No disrespect but Gettysburg is so over analyzed.

 

[civilman1]

I'm a Northern man that loves history but I'm with you, I think Lee was one of the greatest generals of all time, a man of honor, and I love the man. But with that said, he was human too and made several critical errors at Gettysburg. He took long chances because he had to in previous battles, which made him a genius and a legend. He was always out gunned and outnumbered. This time he could've chosen the ground and made the Union attack as Longstreet suggested. But in truth the battle had already begun without him and the first day's results were promising... so I can see why he stayed on the attack but this lead to his doom in PA. Pickett's charge however is one decision he probably wished he had back but hindsight is always 20/20. Decision makers don't have the luxury of hindsight. I also wonder what would've happened to the CSA if they had won the war. I tend to believe it would not have lasted long and that Georgia would've seceded from the CSA. The Georgia govoner was VERY big on states rights and threatened to secede during the war. I think it was states rights that contributed to the South's losing the war. I believe they needed a stronger central government to invoke a draft and to suspend the right of habeas corpus like Lincoln did.

Amen Greg....Very good point...

 

[{Sentinel}]

I love both Longstreet and Lee, and on this occasion, I agree with my fellow Georgian/South Carolinian, Gen Longstreet as do many scientists and historians today. They think that Gen. Lee was suffering from a mild stroke or heart attack the couple days directly preceding Gettysburg. The Confederate Army got to the town first and I cannot think that Gen Lee would not have occupied the hills of Little Round Top and Round Top in a clear state of mind. Anyone, from a private up, knew that good defensible high ground was what decided the outcomes in many battles. Indeed, the Southerners were fighting with passion and reason and still managed to put up a heroic effort....you can only imagine if the would have been in defensive positions. But to make a long story short, Gen Lee was a master tactician and soldier, as was Longstreet, but Lee should have listened to Longstreet and they should have choosen better ground. Withdraw from there and march on closer to Washington and threaten an invasion there. Or at the very least withdraw to better defensible ground. Everyone knows that that was indeed our 'high water' mark though I disagree with many who claims the war was virtually over after that as the war went on for nearly two more years with some more outstanding victories from the Southerners including the Battle of the Crater and Chickamauga. In summation, yes Lee should have listened to Longstreet, not the other way around, even if Longstreet would have not delayed, the fact still remains that it WAS VERY BAD ground to fight on and not in the least DEFENSIBLE.

 

[{Sentinel}]

Yes Amen to your "Defensive fight" that was basically the jist of my above statement. It is elementary knowledge. One good soldier entrenched was worth 3 or 4 attacking. Yes, I agree with you beale that Jackson was a legendary strategist and tactician of whom I revere VERY much, however, I cannot give him all the credit as Lee was also a master strategist. Lee drove McClellan from the Peninsula in the Seven Days without by and large, any help from Jackson.

This shows that Lee could stand alone. But I digress, as I have honor for both of those men.

 

[jmsbna]

Read, Lost Triumph, by Tom Carhart. He provides and intersting theory on how J.E.B. Stuart's battle on the East Calvary field was what lost the battle.

 

[Joel]

For many years following the war, Confederate Veterans were notorious for "throwing one of their own on the grenade" to immortalize another. A beautiful example of this was General Longstreet. Without going into great detail, I believe that it is safe to say that, if not for General Longstreet's lengthy and unfortunate roll as the Confederate Veteran "whipping boy," General Lee would not be remembered with nearly the stainless reverence that he is today. If you have not already, I would encourage you to read about this; it is very sad what the Confederate Veterans unjustly did to General Longstreet's reputation in the interest of vindicating General Lee of his (Lee's) poor decisions during the Battle of Gettysburg.

And, "Pickett's Charge?!" General Pickett did not order that charge on the third day of the battle of Gettysburg. It should have more appropriately been remembered as "Lee's Charge." General Pickett was yet another victim in the post war South's desperate attempt to vindicate General Lee. Joel

 

[Monty]

Lee was the most talented tactician of the war and was generally loved by his men who were always very loyal. That did indeed account for the war lasting a couple of years longer than it ordinarily would have. He chose good leaders In Longsstreet, Jackson, Stewart, etal and they were able to out flank and outfox the Union generals at nearly every turn. In the end he simply ran out of everything including men and couldn't come near fighting on level ground anymore. He probably saved many thousands of lives by surrendering when he did. His tactics are still studied in our Military War Colleges and as a matter of fact it was Lee's tactic that Schwartzkoff used in the first Iraq war. Feint to the front and then outflank and attack from the flank to defeat the enemy. Monty

 

[Mainedigger]

There were both excellent and questionable decisions made by Lee and his generals, but what really did them in was unreliable or non-existent supply lines. Even when those supply lines were reliable, there were meager supplies brought thru and most of the Army of Northern Virginia had inadequate clothing...no shoes, coats etc. I think more of their soldiers were casualties due to this more so than any damage inflicted by Union soldiers. Hindsight is 20/20 and is easy to analyze decisions now. Lee was a great general however I think he gets more credit for early success when it was more the Union generals incompetence than anything else. However Lee did use their incompetence to his advantage and was smart enough to capitalize on the opportunities presented to him early on.

 

[Joel]

I am a huge admirer of Confederate General Robert E. Lee. He was, indeed an amazing leader as well as a brilliant tacticianist. My point is merely that blame, just like credit, should be extended to the deserving individual. Consequently, I believe that it was unjust and a severe crime against history for the Confederate Veterans to affix blame to Longstreet and Pickett for tactical errors that were committed by Lee at Gettysburg for the purpose of creating some stainless, immortal and historically inaccurate image of the man (Lee). There was no need for this; Lee's character as well as his numerous accomplishments were nearly stainless and immortal without slander and embellishment.

Further, I do not believe that General Lee, himself, would have approved of the slanderous methods that were used to create this image that has been passed onto us by these individuals. It was not at all consistant with his true character.

We should also remember that General Lee took full responsibility for his failings at Gettysburg. Following "Pickett's Charge," Lee was heard repeating, "it's all my fault" to his badly beaten and demoralized troops as they were passing by him while returning to the Confederate lines. Joel

 

[BamaBill]

I think slavery was a Propoganda tool used to keep enlistments up. The fact is, if slavery was such an issue, then why did the North not want the repatriated slaves after the war? There are several sources (newspapers, memos in gov't) that make that clear. Do you think Billy Yank would have been willing to go to war about States Rights? I was not born a Southerner, but I can sure see their point of view.

The South lost the war in my opinion, due to a few of the following factors:
1. Didn't have the supply of men and materials that the North did, so the South had a limited amount of time in which to win the war, before it became materially impossible.
2. Bad intelligence. Many times battles were decided not by manpower, but by whoever made the fewest number of mistakes.
3. Lost a lot of their best tacticians (Generals) early in the war.
4. Like many rebellions that have failed, not everybody in the South was in support of the war effort and without complete and utter committment its very difficult to win any war.