Gen. Lee--Illnesses/ Death of a Nation

[5fish]

I am going to reopen an old argument that has been raging for the last 144 years. I want to bring a new look at it. The mystery of Gen. Lee at Gettysburg, why did he go against basic military doctrine of attacking a superior force dug in and holding the high ground?

First, it will not be blamed on Gen. Stuart vanity and his failed ride around the union army. (Remember. Gen. Lee approved his plan)
Next, it will not be blamed on Gen. Longstreet childish behavior during the battle. ( It did not help thou.)
Last, it will not be blamed on Gen. Ewell for not taking the High ground on the first day, which I do believe cost Gen. Lee his only advantage he could of had.)

No, these are not the causes of the confederates defeat in 1863 in Pa. They are faints are ruses to take our attention away from the cause of Gen. Lee's defeat and the Death of a Nation.

Now you say the only one left except for the union army is Gen. Lee himself; and here to is a faint or ruse. The pro-Lee camp just say he was a general having a bad day. Like the Roman general at Canne or the Japanese admiral at Midway, this is false for those two commanders made what could be said good decisions but their adversaries just made better ones.

At Gettysburg, Gen Lee made obvious poor decision and went against know military doctrine not just once but twice. He attack a superior force dug in or high ground even common sense tells the odds of success is beyond poor only failure.

So the true question becomes: Why did Gen Lee go against military doctrine?

Is Health!!

A time line: In March of 1863, he had his first major heart and had not recovered by the Battle of Chandlerville in May 1863.

By July, He travels a few hundred miles on horse back through mountains to fight the battle of Gettysburg all within 14 weeks of a major attack.

In Oct of 1863, it looks like he had a minor heart attack.

Most of us have either had a heart attack or know someone who has had a heart attack. Now think today with modern medicine would a doctor advise Gen. Lee to do what he did during those 14 weeks.

Here is a man with a bad heart going from sea level to a few hundred or more feet above sea level. I known people with bad hearts and when they go above sea level they get chest pains and shortness of breath for a while. He also traveled on horse back that is hard on the body.

This is getting long so I will cut to the chase!

If you look you will find that he felt bad on his trip into Pa. and there is evidence he was sick at the battle of Gettysburg. He did not feel fine until the following April just in time for Gen. Grant to show up.

I believe Gen Lee thought he was dieing because back then if you got sick you usually died. I believe he thought Gettysburg might be his last battle. I believe he thought was the only one who had the skills to defeat the union so Gettysburg was most likely place if he was dieing to do.

The only thing that make sense why he would go against known military doctrine. He was acting out of desperation thinking his was ill and would be dead soon.

A quote: Gen. Lee "to be a good soldier you must love the army, to be a good commander you must be able to order the death of the thing you love"

That is a quote of a desperate man and a man who knows he sending his army on a suicide task. Gen Lee had other philosophical quotes during the battle of Gettysburg. Why does he get so philosophical at Gettysburg; because he thought he was dieing.

Here is a man in poor health at Gettysburg and heart attacks sometimes bring on depression, the higher altitudes with a bad heart could cause his brain not to work at full ability.

Histronians never think of his health and had a role in his defeat. It is not romantic if this great man earthly body let him down and not romantic if he thought he was the south only hope.

There is so much more I could add but I think this will get everyone thinking about it maybe an answer will be found

[OpnDownfall]

I too, have long believed that Lee's generalship was affected by bad health (recovering from or experiencing several small siezures, during his Gettysburg Campaign)
I would not go so far as to believe his actions were acts of desperation. But, rather, the debilitating effects of his health (physical And mental) clouded his judgement and caused him to take his physical status into his calculations as he planned and responded to the battle at Gettysburg.
For Lee, Gettysburg was the culmination of his being in Pa. in the first place (instead of reinforcing the Western Theatre) He had to see this battle as, probably, being Climactic to the War in the East. Not Only his logistics and supply problem, but his very ability to complete the battle, due to his health worries, might have forced Lee into making hasty and ill-considered decisions, just before and during the battle.

[Nico_Davout]

I disagree completely. Lee lost at Gettysburg because of 'victory disease'. He believed that his army CAN do anything. He wanted to make such 'suicidal' attack already at Chancellorsville on the 5th May (or 6th) against heavy Union defence. However Hooker lost his nerve and withdraw earlier.

[Dred]

Originally Posted by 5fish

Next, it will not be blamed on Gen. Longstreet childish behavior during the battle. ( It did not help thou.)


I never heard this "Lonsgstreet beeing childish" angle. If anything Longstreet tried to convince him NOT to attack. That's not beeing childish, thats tyring to preserve his army.



Now you say the only one left except for the union army is Gen. Lee himself; and here to is a faint or ruse. The pro-Lee camp just say he was a general having a bad day. Like the Roman general at Canne or the Japanese admiral at Midway, this is false for those two commanders made what could be said good decisions but their adversaries just made better ones.

I was always partial to this one. He made good decisions based on what was opened to him as far as the battle goes. Meade made a better decision when he abandoned his original plan and decided to stick it out on the hills of G-sburg. Given the position of the armies, and the logistical situation of the AoV.. Lee HAD to attack. That he failed does not mean he was a bad general.

At Gettysburg, Gen Lee made obvious poor decision and went against know military doctrine not just once but twice. He attack a superior force dug in or high ground even common sense tells the odds of success is beyond poor only failure.

So the true question becomes: Why did Gen Lee go against military doctrine?

Is Health!!

A time line: In March of 1863, he had his first major heart and had not recovered by the Battle of Chandlerville in May 1863.

By July, He travels a few hundred miles on horse back through mountains to fight the battle of Gettysburg all within 14 weeks of a major attack.

In Oct of 1863, it looks like he had a minor heart attack.

Not sure how a heart attack 5 months later excuses anything...

Most of us have either had a heart attack or know someone who has had a heart attack. Now think today with modern medicine would a doctor advise Gen. Lee to do what he did during those 14 weeks.

My instructor just had triple bypass after a heart attack and told him to rest only 6 weeks.. granted though, he will not be walking from VA to PA either...

Here is a man with a bad heart going from sea level to a few hundred or more feet above sea level. I known people with bad hearts and when they go above sea level they get chest pains and shortness of breath for a while. He also traveled on horse back that is hard on the body.

Height above sea level of Richmond, VA is 250ft, Cemetary Hill was only 520 feet. There is a greater difference in elevation to be experienced if you walk from Washington DC to Front Royal. Typicaly, barometric pressure drops about .1 inches mercury for every hundred feet. It takes alot more than .25 inches to feel the affects. That would be about the difference between 70 degrees and sunny and a thunderstorm rolls in.






The only thing that make sense why he would go against known military doctrine. He was acting out of desperation thinking his was ill and would be dead soon.

He was acting out of depseration sure, but desperation to win a major battle in the north. It is the only thing that eluded him, and the only thing that might have saved the Confederacy.

A quote: Gen. Lee "to be a good soldier you must love the army, to be a good commander you must be able to order the death of the thing you love"

If Mclellan had understood that concept he would have been a much better leader. The fact that Lee understood it is why the Confederacy was able to hold out so long.

That is a quote of a desperate man and a man who knows he sending his army on a suicide task. Gen Lee had other philosophical quotes during the battle of Gettysburg. Why does he get so philosophical at Gettysburg; because he thought he was dieing.

Lee was philosophical throughout the entire war. And he knew how to get the job done throughout the entire war.



Here is a man in poor health at Gettysburg and heart attacks sometimes bring on depression, the higher altitudes with a bad heart could cause his brain not to work at full ability.

Histronians never think of his health and had a role in his defeat. It is not romantic if this great man earthly body let him down and not romantic if he thought he was the south only hope.

Yet he still managed to fight for 2 more years through deteriorating supply lines for the south and still managed to make Grant shake in his boots a couple times.

I dunno... I guess I'm just not buying the health issue. Too much happened AFTER Getteysburg that was still going good for the army. My personal opinion? With their backs against the wall (IE; an invading army on their own land) The AoP was a force to be reckoned with. Same thing goes wiht the AoV... when you're defending your own land you will fight a hell of a lot better than if it's somebody elses.

[OpnDownfall]

On the Penninsula, Lee attacked superior numbers. Through several days of battle the inexperienced Lee was unable to effectively coordinate his attacks against the AoP and still won a stunning victory. Two years later, Lee is more experienced in Army Command and especially the ANV, attacks superior numbers, through several days of battle, is unable to coordinate his attacks, and meets a stunning defeat.
The most discernable differnces that might have adversely affected Lee's generalship was the absence of Gen. Jackson and Lee's deteriorating health. Which was more debilitating to Lee at Gettysburg is, of course, debatable.

[Dred]

Originally Posted by OpnDownfall

On the Penninsula, Lee attacked superior numbers. Through several days of battle the inexperienced Lee was unable to effectively coordinate his attacks against the AoP and still won a stunning victory. Two years later, Lee is more experienced in Army Command and especially the ANV, attacks superior numbers, through several days of battle, is unable to coordinate his attacks, and meets a stunning defeat.
The most discernable differnces that might have adversely affected Lee's generalship was the absence of Gen. Jackson and Lee's deteriorating health. Which was more debilitating to Lee at Gettysburg is, of course, debatable.

I think his "Victories" on the peninsula should be chalked up more to McLellan's ineptitude as an efective field commander.

[OpnDownfall]

It is interesting to note that after Gettysburg, neither Lee or Meade could overcome the other, even after Longstreet and his Corps was belatedly sent West.

[5fish]

Some notes:

Longstreet was uncooperative with Gen. Lee the whole battle like a pouting child.

Have you checked the altitude along the whole route through the mountains the army of NoVA took. I think you will find higher levels.

Military Doctrine ignore: Gen. Hooker had a superior force but left his right flank exposed and Gen. Lee took advantage of it. Gen Meade never gave and opportunity to exploit.

Gen. Lee just ignore basic military doctrine for no good reason.

He was acting desperate and the question is why? What would cause a man who prided himself in his own self-control to become desperate. Maybe the notion of his illness and impending death.

He made it clear he wanted to be the final battle so why? Yes he knew the south ability to fight was beginning to wane but it was not in free fall yet. His desire for this to be the last battle was I believe he felt his time was short.

[5fish]

Originally Posted by Nico_Davout

I disagree completely. Lee lost at Gettysburg because of 'victory disease'. He believed that his army CAN do anything. He wanted to make such 'suicidal' attack already at Chancellorsville on the 5th May (or 6th) against heavy Union defence. However Hooker lost his nerve and withdraw earlier.

I have heard this argument before I don't except it for Gen. Lee have to not respect his foe. Gen. Lee never gave the indication he had lost any respect for the AoP.

[ole]

It is interesting to note that after Gettysburg, neither Lee or Meade could overcome the other, even after Longstreet and his Corps was belatedly sent West.

The classic situation of not being strong enough to whup, but being too strong to be whupped.

Forget who said what, so I'll just flail away. Longstreet's petulance was on the second day when he became aware that Lee's plans couldn't work, but he insisted on following them anyway.

I don't buy that Lee's feeling poorly was a reason for his desperation. Heading for Pennsyvania was a desperate act--he needed a victory. And he needed it now! Thing is, he was this close.

ole