Started By
Message

re: Just finished "Rebel Yell", a book about Stonewall Jackson

Posted on 2/21/17 at 11:30 pm to
Posted by Champagne
Already Conquered USA.
Member since Oct 2007
48324 posts
Posted on 2/21/17 at 11:30 pm to
We must keep in mind that Washington DC was well fortified with redoubts, siege artillery, earthworks, and the like. This fortress system was manned with Union soldiers.

So, even if one of the great Confederate battle victories in the East was followed up with a quick advance on Wash DC, there could be no quick victory at Wash DC. The Army of Northern Virginia would have faced a well-manned, well-armed and well-supplied fortress system once they assembled their ranks to attack Wash DC.

AND the CSA would have somehow had to bring up some Siege Artillery to attack that fortress system.
Posted by Wishnitwas1998
where TN, MS, and AL meet
Member since Oct 2010
58203 posts
Posted on 2/21/17 at 11:51 pm to
A very good point


I'm still not sure it was possible from a manpower perspective but a very good point nonetheless. Like I said, I am not an expert
Posted by Rockbrc
Attic
Member since Nov 2015
7914 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 12:13 am to
There is a tale, possibly apocryphal, that Rommel went to Brice's Crossroads to study Forrest's tactics.
Posted by RollTide1987
Augusta, GA
Member since Nov 2009
65055 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 12:33 am to
quote:

Don't you mean take Culp's Hill on day one?



And if Lee's men take Culp's Hill on day one, guess what? The Battle of Gettysburg as we know it doesn't happen. Meade would have pulled his army back to the south as he was planning on doing to begin with. He had an area picked out on the map near Union Mills, Maryland called Pipe Creek. The ground there was better and more defensible than the position his army eventually occupied at Gettysburg.

Lee wins the Battle of Gettysburg at a cost of 7,000 casualties only to have to fight a bigger battle against an entrenched enemy in Maryland. He would have had to either a) attack or b) move his army back into Virginia and re-think his strategy because Meade would have been between him and Washington with little room for Lee to out-maneuver.

The only chance Lee ever had was on the Battle of Gettysburg's second day. If his men had successfully turned the Union left they might have been able to cut off Meade's line of supply and line of retreat, forcing Meade to counter-attack in a bloody assault which probably would have succeeded. Longstreet's men would have been tired and short on ammunition and manpower. Meade had the 15,000 men of Sedgwick's VI Corps, which were barely employed at all on July 2, to draw strength from. Longstreet's Corps, having suffered 50% casualties in its assault, would have been bulled over by VI Corps alongside elements of V Corps.

At best the battle ends in a draw, at worst it ends with Lee's right flank collapsing under the weight of the Sedgwick/Sykes assault and the Army of Northern Virginia is forced to beat a hasty retreat from the field.

With the failure of Longstreet's assault on the Union left, Lee effectively lost at Gettysburg on July 2. Pickett's Charge, as glorious and as explosive as it was, was actually the battle's anti-climax. There was no way they were taking that ridge and over 1,000 of his best soldiers were killed needlessly.
This post was edited on 2/22/17 at 12:48 am
Posted by Icansee4miles
Trolling the Tickfaw
Member since Jan 2007
29180 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 6:55 am to
Wow. An informative, intellectual thread makes 4 pages in the OT without devolving into adolescent comments. :slowclap:

This is all fascinating to me. I grew up next door to T. Harry Williams and often sat discussing the Civil War with him in his study, or checked out books from his extensive personal library. At that, I'm way out of my league with some of you guys, and enjoy reading y'all's thoughts. I'm about to order the book in the OP, I want to get back into reading more about this turning point in our country's brief history. It's interesting reading about the leaders of the CSA and their strengths on the battlefield, but they were also a really interesting bunch of personalities.
Posted by PJinAtl
Atlanta
Member since Nov 2007
12747 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 7:00 am to
quote:

quote:

Any other recommendations of books similar to Rebel Yell?
Company Aytch is a great book
Agreed. It is a really good book.

I haven't read many biographies on the individual generals, so I can't be of much help there.

The best book(s) on the war overall, imho, are the three volumes written by Shelby Foote. They may be a little more than what you are looking for though.

I have tried to make it a point to find books that detail the units my ancestors served in. So far I have read the following

Joe Brown's Army a great book about the 1st Georgia State Line - a unit that was formed in response to the Andrews Raid and was initially responsible for protecting the bridges along the rail line from Atlanta to Chattanooga. As Johnson fell back after the loss at Chattanooga, the 1st was folded into his command and saw action throughout the Atlanta campaign.

A Scythe of Fire focuses on the 8th Georgia and their service in the Army of Northern Virginia.

Cobb's Legion Cavalry covers that unit's service under JEB Stuart and Wade Hampton.

"I Will Give Them One More Shot": Ramsey's 1st Regiment Georgia Volunteers details a short lived unit that served under Lee during the Cheat Mountain campaign and under Stonewall in the valley.

I also really like the Shaara books. Gods & Generals, The Killer Angels and Last Full Measure cover the war in the east. A Blaze of Glory, A Chain of Thunder, The Smoke at Dawn and The Fateful Lightning cover Shiloh, Vicksburg, Chattanooga and Sherman's March to the Sea.
Posted by No Colors
Sandbar
Member since Sep 2010
10377 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 7:10 am to
quote:

Take Little Round Top on the first day of fighting at Gettysburg.

It wasn't really in play on the first day. They could have won the battle by taking Cemetery Ridge on the afternoon of the first day, but they didn't press hard enough.

The Union Army moved in during the night and occupied Little Round Top. Hood and Longstreet wanted to flank it by taking Big Round Top on Day 2 and exposing the Union rear to their artillery, but Lee wouldn't allow it.

Those were the two missed opportunities.
Posted by LCA131
Home of the Fake Sig lines
Member since Feb 2008
72597 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 7:19 am to
RT1987, you come across as pretty learned about these matters.

What do you think would have happened if Lee moves forward and 'wins', Meade moves south to Pipe Creek, and Lee doesn't engage but moves further North and carries the fight that way? I think that is discussed in the book as an option for the South to weaken the Yankee will.

I know it is all conjecture but fun to chew on.
Posted by Wishnitwas1998
where TN, MS, and AL meet
Member since Oct 2010
58203 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 7:34 am to
quote:

Wow. An informative, intellectual thread makes 4 pages in the OT without devolving into adolescent comments. :slowclap:


I know, it's miraculous
Posted by PJinAtl
Atlanta
Member since Nov 2007
12747 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 7:43 am to
quote:

The Union Army moved in during the night and occupied Little Round Top. Hood and Longstreet wanted to flank it by taking Big Round Top on Day 2 and exposing the Union rear to their artillery, but Lee wouldn't allow it.
I remember reading somewhere that on day 1, Lee gave Ewell vague instructions about taking Culp's Hill and Cemetery Hill - basically he suggested they be taken, if practical, as opposed to ordering it done.

Lee was used to giving Jackson such "suggestions" and Jackson would follow through, as to him no suggestion or situation was impractical. Ewell on the other hand needed to be told directly, and since he wasn't, he chose not to expend the troops to take the positions.
Posted by Hawgnsincebirth55
Gods country
Member since Sep 2016
16035 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 7:50 am to
quote:

once Washington was taken terms would have been agreed upon quickly
I've always wondered what was to stop the north from just gathering up another army and attacking again later if this happens. I mean as soon as the southern troops leaves what's stops Lincoln from breaking the truce and raising a bigger army
Posted by Tigeralum2008
Yankees Fan
Member since Apr 2012
17131 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 8:20 am to
If the confederates took those hills at Gettyburg, do you think the Union would have remained?

If I was a Union general, I'd let the confederates advance further northward then cut off their overextended supply lines and choose a battlefield where I held tactical advantage.

I do not believe the South had the resources to sustain an invasion of the North like what we saw with Sherman's March to the Sea.
Posted by maxxrajun70
baton rouge
Member since Oct 2011
3726 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 8:45 am to
did she cry more, more, more?
Posted by LarryDavid
Los Angeles
Member since Sep 2010
4207 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 8:58 am to
Best book I read about him is called "I Rode With Stonewall", which are the war experiences of the youngest member of Jackson's staff. May be the best civil war book I've ever read and I've read most of them.
Posted by LCA131
Home of the Fake Sig lines
Member since Feb 2008
72597 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 9:08 am to
quote:

and I've read most of them.




Over 70,000 books have been written about the Civil War.

No, you haven't.
Posted by LarryDavid
Los Angeles
Member since Sep 2010
4207 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 9:31 am to
Ok, more than you. I meant to say about Jackson.
This post was edited on 2/22/17 at 9:33 am
Posted by Tmcgin
BATON ROUGE
Member since Jun 2010
4969 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 10:08 am to
Watch the end of Ken Burns the Civil War
Historian Shelby Foote put it perfectly.
The south was on Fools Errand, they had neither the men
or the manufacturing to win that war from the beginning
Grant and Sherman (LSU PRES) knew this and just put their thumb down on the South til it justifiably died.
Fools Errand
Posted by StrongSafety
Member since Sep 2004
17547 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 10:08 am to
Why is there a persistent, dogged and almost stubborn desire to glorify the "accomplishments" of an otherwise horrible human being amongst confederacy (treasony) sympathizers/snowflakes ?

There are millions of other great and worthy patriotic and loyal to their country white men to honor that have done great things in this country (and continue to do so) but there is yall choose to honor these busters?

I don't get it
Posted by Wishnitwas1998
where TN, MS, and AL meet
Member since Oct 2010
58203 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 10:16 am to
Even if you think they were essentially Lucifer incarnated their military skills are to be respected and studied

Also, be more creative with your trolls
This post was edited on 2/22/17 at 10:17 am
Posted by YouAre8Up
in a house
Member since Mar 2011
12792 posts
Posted on 2/22/17 at 10:21 am to
quote:

racist
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 5Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram