Civil War History - "What if..." DiscussionsWhat if they had attacked instead of digging in...? What if he was in charge of the army instead...? Did you ever have a "What if..." question, and you weren't sure where to post it? Here's the place to ask these speculative questions!
While I can't blame Stuart for being the cause of Lee losing Gettysburg, it is partially his fault that the battle occured there. Stuart was on an ego trip in my opinion. He had been surprised and pretty beaten up at the Battle of Brandy Station, and he felt as if he needed to redeem himself. He decided to make another ride around the AotP, but this time it was an utterly pointless ride, unlike his first, in which he gathered vital and timely intel on Little Mac. This ride was about his bruised ego, and if he had been doing his job, there is the possiblity that there would have been a battle somewhere else, or that Lee would have had the high ground at Gettysburg, not Meade. The CSA cavalry was equal to the Union cavalry at this point, and the Union cav did its job splendidly. Stuart could have been just as effective, if not more so, if he wasn't riding around and capturing wagon trains.
But, assuming that Stuart stays with the ANV, I think you'll see a successful capture of Harrisburg. With the cavalry, Lee will have a consistent understanding of where the enemy is. The cavalry will also allow for better aquisition of supplies which will help maintain the campaign in Pennsylvania.
Personally, I don't see Lee's 'fascination' with Harrisburg. Take a quick look at a map and you'll see the Susquehanna is pretty wide there. When the Confederate spearhead reaches the outskirts of Harrisburg the Army of the Potomac is generally south (and of course to the east) of the Army of Northern Virginia. If Lee crosses the Susquehanna, I think he winds up getting trapped on the other side.
"Lee's army was left blinded in enemy territory without detailed knowledge of the terrain, roads, or their opponent's strength and positions. This lack of knowledge was a significant reason that the Battle of Gettysburg started on July 1, 1863, before Lee could fully concentrate his army as planned." -
The above is a specific copy from Wikipedia which sums up the criticism of JEB Stuart during the Gettysburg Campaign. I have never been a subscriber to this theory for a number of reasons: 1. 'without detailed knowledge of the terrain or roads' - which should make one wonder what Lee is doing there to begin with. 2. Lee might not know exactly where the specific units of the Army of the Potomac are, but he knows they're coming and 3. the only reason why the Battle of Gettysburg is what it is is because Lee commits, after Heth stumbles in looking for shoes, Lee could very well have ordered some type of concentration to the west of Gettysburg and been there in force, fully concentrated prior to Federal arrival and it also ignores the fact that the Federals are arriving piecemeal on the first day as well.
I think the only reason that Lee wanted headed for the Susquehana was to be able to threaten Philadelphia if he was at all able to. But I don't think he had any real intention of crossing and carrying on over there. You are quite right CW by saying that if he had crossed, he would have quite possibly been trapped, and I don't think he would do that. I think his only intention was to draw the AoP out and get them to fight on ground of his choosing. However, without Stuart, he didn't know the ground very well, unless he could get some information out of Ewell, who had been at Carlisle Barracks in his younger days. Without knowing the terrain, he couldn't really choose a good place to fight, even though Gettysburg was as good a place as any, you needed to hold the high ground, and he didn't. Having been left blind by Stuart, he went in to the fight not knowing the terrain, and because he didn't listen to Longstreet, fought a battle on ground he wasn't sure of and against a force that held the high ground. But I don't think he ever had any intention of really taking his army across the river in the first place. Take the bridge, maybe occupy Harrisburg, but when Meade comes up, come back across and bring him to battle.
Personally, I don't see Lee's 'fascination' with Harrisburg. Take a quick look at a map and you'll see the Susquehanna is pretty wide there.
It wasnt so much the town of Harrisburg, but the rail links, and the bridge spaning the river which Lee was hoping to burn down to the ground.
[/quote] "Lee's army was left blinded in enemy territory without detailed knowledge of the terrain, roads, or their opponent's strength and positions. This lack of knowledge was a significant reason that the Battle of Gettysburg started on July 1, 1863, before Lee could fully concentrate his army as planned."[/quote]
I don't subscribe to this for a number of reasons. 1. It's Wikipedia. 2. Lee's army was not left blind when Stuart departed from the ANV in June. He left behind two of his five brigades. They were left in command of James Longstreet who opted to leave them in the passes of the Blue Ridge and not taking them into the North. To say Stuart left the army blind is an injustice to the man. 3. The reason the battle started, which was not supposed to happen, was on the hands of Heth and of Hill. They wern't looking for shoes, but they were a convienient excuse. They were just looking for a fight.
__________________ Ancestors in the 28th, 38th, 46th, 59th and 22nd Btn. Virginia Infantry and 2nd Virginia Cavalry.
No, the real problem is most historians forget that Stuart was engaged with Union cavalry, protecting Lee's backdoor, just days before his departure.
Stuart didn't start his trip north to Pennsylvania, the last large Confederate unit to do so, until June 25. At this late date, Stuart's cavalry was already, more than 30 miles south of where Hooker was crossing his army, over the Potomac River, on that same day, June 25.
The problem wasn't ego. The problem was Stuart could not have his cavalry, in two places at the same time.
my question is this, why send stuart so far east at all? There were two East West rail connections, the V&T and B&O. If the CSA could even temporarily control both, it would leave the union armies in a serious situation. Take out Altoona, Harrisburg, Hanover and Piedmont, you would compromise Meade's abilities to receive supplies. This wouldl place both sides on roughly equal ground logistically if only temporarily. It would not have been beyond Lee's realm of acceptance either as a tactic, Wellington used the "desert" against Napoleon in Spain.
__________________ Great-Great Grand Nephew of George H. Pfau, 4th NJ Vol Infantry
Last edited by milhistbuff1; 07-15-2007 at 12:05 PM.
If that were so, why didn't Lee replace him in command of the Army of Northern Virginia cavalry.
If Stuart was totally at fault, where was R.E. Lee and his "command decision" as a Confederate general.
Of course, I suppose it's better to hold Stuart entirely wrong, and never read his OR report.
One cannot fairly say that Stuart was incompetent, and not then ask why Lee did nothing about it.
I believe the mere threat of Stuarts cav posed a problem. For one, they are gonna panic civvies...two, they hurt the Lincoln administration...3 Im not sure he was sent,,,didnt Stuart devise his own run? custersluck13
Confederate cavalry, particularly during the beginning of the war seems to be causing constant headaches for the Feds, whether its Forrest, Stuart....they always seem to be showing up somewhere grabbing prisoners and taking supplies.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Ancestors in the 28th, 38th, 46th, 59th and 22nd Btn. Virginia Infantry and 2nd Virginia Cavalry. 
Linear Mode
