Sorry about your loss. I've lost family members at Guadalcanal and one at Okinawa. My ancestors are traced to a Union Major that ran an Alabama Negro Regiment during the civil war.
OT: Gettysburg
- Thread starter Spectrumalaska
- Start date
Thanks.. didn't know him of course. But always felt bad for the guy and all the others. Same to you I'm sorry for your losses.
That's fascinating about the Union Major! I may have to do some digging into those regiments. I've been thinking again about the civil war a lot lately. Once something gets into my head I feel the need to research it for awhile, lol!
It wasn't uncommon. There was a movie called "Glory" in 1989 that was similar.
Yeah I have heard about such regiments before. Just meant it is fascinating that one of your ancestors commanded one of them. I've never seen that movie - might check it out thanks
Thanks for the recommendation. I've watched some war movies in the past but my knowledge of them is admittedly rather limited. I'm a bit embarrassed to realize the movie in question seems to be a major blockbuster yet I'd never heard of it till tonight, lol. Going to have to watch it!
Note: I apologize for getting your thread off track earlier. Wasn't my intention.
Wagner. From Penn Yan in the finger lakes of western New York.
Thank you will have to see if I can find some information on him. I have some relatives up near Syracuse. Pass the finger lakes or nearby going up there from PA. Beautiful area for sure
GRANT TAKES COMMAND by Bruce Catton on Rare Book Cellar
New York: Book-Of-The-Month Club, 1994. Book of the Month Club Edition. Hardcover. Item #161233 Fine in a Fine dust jacket.
www.rarebookcellar.com
On the subject of the Civil War and Gettysburg I recommend reading Gary Gallagher. Gallagher was a professor of American history at both Penn State and UVA. He is highly critical of author Shelby Foote ideas and opinions of the war. I watch quite a lot of YouTube videos of Ranger Matt Ackinson talking about the Battle of Gettysburg. Matt grew up in Houston, Mississippi. His talks are highly entertaining.
When I first got married to my wife 25 years ago her parents lived out in the country in Loudon County west of Leesburg, VA in Northern Virginia. Ball's Bluff, Manasses, Winchester were all close by. Never got to Gettysburg which I regret, but I did get to Antietam.
Don't forget there were politics involved. McClellan was a Democrat and had no respect for Lincoln.
Foote was a big promoter of the ”Lost Cause Theory” where the South had no chance in ever winning the war. Gallagher argues that it simply is not true.
Last edited:
It’s pretty obvious that the South had a REAL chance at certain points…. I admire Foote but I would disagree with him here
I agree with Shelby. Taking Vicksburg was key to stopping trade down the Mississippi into New Orleans. The union army was tearing up railroad tracks and burning fields all along the main travel routes. The north had superior industrial powers, money, and numbers. What happened was destined to happen. The north eventually wore them down.
why Lee didn’t march on Washington DC and take it when he had momentum was a big mistake.
Exactly … the South HAD chances… not the greatest of odds but chances nonetheless
The North was far from unified on the war. There were factions within the Union that did not want the war to continue. I have a different take on Lee. Lee’s hero was fellow Virginian, George Washington. Washington and his army lived to fight another day. Never taking on the full brunt of British army in a major fight. Both times Lee took his army to the North to take on the full force of the Union army, Antietam in 1862 and Gettysburg in 1863 resulted in him having to drag his army back across the Potomac with far less soldiers than he had before these two battles. Soldiers he could not afford to lose. I think he would have been better off to have quick, hit and run, guerrilla style raids on Northern cities while still protecting Richmond.
DC was pretty well fortified during civil war. Confederate General Jubal Early led an attack in July of 1864 and was repelled fairly quickly after Grant ordered battle tested troops to reinforce the lesser experienced troops who were guarding Washington. I think this was more of a diversion than a genuine attempt to capture the capitol. It forced Grant to take away troops from the fight in Northern Virginia. General McCook, who McCook, Nebraska was named after was most likely the most competent Union leader of this battle.
I often wondered the same thing. Read Rebel Yell, tells the full story of Stonewall Jackson. What the day to day life was like the strategy he uses to surprise the union forces.
Real chance? You're Thermopylae dream'n Spartan. Despite Lee's ability to win individual battles, his decision to fight a conventional war against the more densely populated and industrialized North is considered by many historians to have been a fatal strategic error. The Union's naval superiority, larger population, industrial capacity, and resources were insurmountable obstacles for the Confederacy to overcome.
Here’s the point… the south did not have to win… just avoid losing… sentiment in North was not 100% in… if the South hangs around, perhaps two countries
Frankly a bit parallel to Revolutionary
I made a post earlier mentioning how much I like to read and listen to retired Professor Gary Gallagher talk about the Civil War. Galagher argues against to the well-established public perception that Lee was a gracious loser and he worked hard to reconcile the South back into the Union. In one lecture Galagher states that those who believe this about Lee simply don't have the facts and have not read what Lee wrote after the war. Galagher maintains Lee was far more concerned with avoiding being tried for treason after the war.
No matter how we all feel about this … isn’t it amazing how 160 plus years later, this still captivates us?
I don't think the Union needed 100%. The overall sentiment in the North was predominantly against secession and in support of preserving the Union. Most importantly the command structure of the North was willing to go all the way in order to preserve the Union.
Honest Abe held steady, Winfield "Old Fuss and Feathers" Scott hatched the Anaconda Plan, U.S. Grant out-bled them and W. Tecumseh Sherman laid waste. Great thread.
The South likely wins at Gettysburg but the North still wins at Vicksburg. Ewell was indecisive and let the Union take the hills around Gettsburgh which would not have happened with Jackson.
How this impacts the larger war is hard to say. Winning Gettysburg might have forced Lincoln into a desperate situation with Lee's army in the north and the public might have demanded a peace deal that led to an independent South. But at the same time the Union had control of the Mississippi and that had greater long term strategic significance with Grant and Sherman now able to move to the eastern theater.
The combination of losing both battles at the same time was more than the South could handle though they fought on for two more years.
Amazon prime/freevee has a four part series on US Grant that came out in 2020. It’s pretty good
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
Recruiting NEB assistant coaches: Feature stories on Ekeler, Bradden + Addison Williams- Latest: Jesseblackshirts43
-
