Logic on Stuart?

[brigance]

Tim, interesting information. Stuart had an important decision dealing with which brigades to leave behind. I've always held the belief that since Stuart's movements were so much dangerous, moving behind the Union army, he would want the brigadiers which were most reliable and worked cohesively. Jones could have been an impediment to Stuart given their history.

[trice]

Originally Posted by brigance

a lot of good information is on this thread.

given what's been said, would anyone say that Stuart disobeyed the orders that he had, as ambiguous and vague as they were?

I don't think so. His orders allow him enough discretion to decide what to do. We might or might not think he was mistaken in his judgement, but I don't think you could say he was disobedient.

Originally Posted by brigance

so much history has been written blaming Stuart for the loss at Gettysburg. But if he followed his orders, and didn't start the battle, can he really be solely blamed for the loss?

There are really only two choices:
a) either he should have moved as he did or
b) he should have retraced his steps when he ran into the moving Union army

If a, then we'd have to find a way he could have been in contact with the ANV by June 30. Unless you imagine an AoP command not acting as it did, or a lucky break of some kind for Stuart, that's virtually impossible

if b, Stuart ends up at the tail end of the ANV, behind Longstreet. Then he either has to move through/around Longstreet, or he has to trail after him. Either way, he's on the wrong side of the mountain coming up the Cumberland to carry out his recon/screening function and Lee will get little info on the AoP advance that way. However, Lee would have definitely had him available on June 30 to send through the gap to Gettysburg if he had wanted to do so in this case.

Regards,
Tim

[trice]

Originally Posted by brigance

Tim, interesting information. Stuart had an important decision dealing with which brigades to leave behind. I've always held the belief that since Stuart's movements were so much dangerous, moving behind the Union army, he would want the brigadiers which were most reliable and worked cohesively. Jones could have been an impediment to Stuart given their history.

Possibly. But Jones was also a darn good officer in the field (as he showed when he hammered the 6th US Cavalry at Gettysburg). Given the problem with Robertson's rank and inexperience/incompetence in Lee & Stuart's eyes, Stuart had a tough problem in deciding whether he took Jones or Hampton.

Regards,
Tim

[brigance]

[quote=trice]PGiven the problem with Robertson's rank and inexperience/incompetence in Lee & Stuart's eyes, Stuart had a tough problem in deciding whether he took Jones or Hampton./quote]

That's true. I think given the circumstances he took the right man. Hampton was consistent throughout all his long distance rides and didnt have the relationship issues that Stuart had with Jones.

[trice]

Originally Posted by brigance

That's true. I think given the circumstances he took the right man. Hampton was consistent throughout all his long distance rides and didnt have the relationship issues that Stuart had with Jones.

In that sense, I think he did. Hampton was a superb officer (who also didn't quite agree with Stuart on some issues, but handled it better).

OTOH, it is fairly clear that leaving Robertson in command worked out to the detriment of the Army as a whole. Taking Jones might have been uncomfortable to Stuart, but Jones was clearly an alert and active commander. Leaving Hampton behind to control Robertson deserved serious consideration with such an option available.

The question becomes whether or not the negative of Robertson in command back at the gaps is worth more than the irritation of having Jones with Stuart on the raid.

There is, of course, another option: Stuart can let Hampton command the raid and stay behind himself.

Regards,
Tim

[brigance]

Leaving Hampton behind is an interesting idea and could have possibly seen better results. I don't think they would have played a larger role though. Longstreet intended on the cavalry left behind to act as bait after the ANV was ahead of them. The plan essentially took them out of an active role within the Pennsylvania Campaign. If anything, Lee should have overruled Longstreet and not consented to the plan.

I doubt the plan WOULD have happened had Stuart stayed back with the left behind brigades. But that happening is itself highly improbable. Aside from not wanting to miss out on the thrill of the adventure, Stuart was the best man on either side to lead that sort of cavalry movement. Some of the decisions that had to be made along the way could have been made poorly by subordinate commanders.