From: KARLIN@BNLCL6.BNL.GOV (P.L. Cowan)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re:  Re: Lee-Longstreet
Date: 18 Aug 92 15:56:04 GMT
Organization: BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.23

In <1992Aug17.215529.3190@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> mancus@norm.jsc.nasa.gov writes:

: In article <1992Aug17.182354.8824@leland.Stanford.EDU>, whale@leland.Stanford.edu (Stephen Schmidt) writes:
: >In article <1992Aug17.155857.25877@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> I wrote:
: 
: >>[Gettysburg was the] first battle fought by Lee after losing Jackson.
: >>Longstreet was a reasonably good leader, but he didn't have the touch of
: >>genius that Jackson and Lee shared.
: 

[stuff deleted]

: > But, when Meade and Grant took over, Lee continued behaving as if he was
: > up against McClellan, and it was Longstreet who was warning that the Union
: > army had better commanders and the old tricks wouldn't work anymore. Hence
: > the loss at Gettysburg.
: 
:   Well, I still think this occurred partly because Lee had become somewhat
: dependent on Jackson as a corps commander.  Also, wasn't Lee sick for
: part of this campaign?  Gettysburg was Lee at his worst.  Meade was not
: a bad commander, and he picked an excellent defensive position for this
: battle; Lee should have retired rather than fight him there.
: 

First, let me say that I don't believe that Lee really did all that well
against McClelland. Of the 6 battles they fought (5 during the Seven Days plus
Antietam) McClelland won 5 from the tactical point of view. Lee's army 
took much more severe casualties than McClelland's, and the COnfederacy was in a
poor position to replace these. The problem was that both sides would have
benefitted by having the other commander (although J.E. Johnston was roughly
equivalent to McClelland).

Now to the point, the story is that Lee suffered both from diarreha and a bad
back at Gettysburg. In fact most of the Confederate Army had diarreha. The
expanation for the edidemic was that the Confederates had not been able to
acquire fresh vegitables until they invaded the North, and their digestive
systems had trouble adjustin to the new diet. I have a had time believing that 
this is applicable to Lee, however, since I imagine he had enjoyed a better
diet even in the South. There is little doubt that he was sick, because he was
reported to have un-buttoned the top few buttons of his wool uniform jacket. 
This was unheard of for the "Marble Man" even in Southern heat.

The bad back is blaimed on the long horse ride from Fredericksburg. This was
the longest distance that the Army of Nothern Va. covered in any campaign and
Lee was no spring chicken. Reportedly, his back was bad enough that he could
not sleep (something with which I can sympathize).

: battle; Lee should have retired rather than fight him there.

In fact, Lee had the best of it for the first two days. If we are allowed
"should-have's" he should-havelet Meade take the offensive on July 3 (if he
would have). 

:   Suppose First Manassas had gone the other way?  Would the demoralized
: CS army have been able to prevent the Union from taking the capital almost
: immediately?  Who knows?
: 

I seriously doubt that the Union army would have been any more able to
follow-up their hypothetical victory than the Confederates were their real one.
A half-trained Confederate army should have been able to march into Washington
and arrest Linclon in the White House. As history shows the Confederates were
not this well trained at 1st Manassas, but the Union was worse.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
P. L. Cowan	Please send replies, comments etc. (no flames thank you) to 
COWAN@ANL.GOV 	(I'm posting this from a friend's account)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa