Fredericksburg? Unnecessary?

[Simmsm88]

I've read through James M. McPherson's "Battle Cry...", attended the National Park Service battlefields in the area, and the Fredericksburg City Museum.

My question is: Was the battle of Fredericksburg avoidable? I'm sure it was avoidable, but was it avoidable to the extent that Burnside could have sustained a good reputation and pursued victory? Correct if I'm wrong but didn't the pontoons arrive late? I asked at the Fredericksburg shop if Burnside could have crossed elsewhere. He stated the Confederates would have sent troops but dispatched Early's cavalry to disrupt the assault.

 

[dvrmte]

I've read through James M. McPherson's "Battle Cry...", attended the National Park Service battlefields in the area, and the Fredericksburg City Museum.

My question is: Was the battle of Fredericksburg avoidable? I'm sure it was avoidable, but was it avoidable to the extent that Burnside could have sustained a good reputation and pursued victory? Correct if I'm wrong but didn't the pontoons arrive late? I asked at the Fredericksburg shop if Burnside could have crossed elsewhere. He stated the Confederates would have sent troops but dispatched Early's cavalry to disrupt the assault.

Burnside could have crossed elsewhere. Stonewall Jackson didn't want to fight Burnside at Fredericksburg anyway. He suggested to Lee that they defend the North Anna line where it was advantagous for defense and counterattack. Lee decided to defend at Fredericksburg because he didn't want to give up any Confederate territory.

Burnside's position and his artillery on Stafford Heights prevented any significant counterattacks. I give him credit that he kept his flanks well anchored.

Jackson predicted, "We will whip the enemy, but gain no fruits ofvictory."

 

[trice]

I've read through James M. McPherson's "Battle Cry...", attended the National Park Service battlefields in the area, and the Fredericksburg City Museum.

My question is: Was the battle of Fredericksburg avoidable? I'm sure it was avoidable, but was it avoidable to the extent that Burnside could have sustained a good reputation and pursued victory? Correct if I'm wrong but didn't the pontoons arrive late? I asked at the Fredericksburg shop if Burnside could have crossed elsewhere. He stated the Confederates would have sent troops but dispatched Early's cavalry to disrupt the assault.

The pontoons probably arrived about as quickly as should have been expected given the timing of orders and the state of the roads. Burnside's claim about this is a little overdone.

Crossing the Rappahannock above Fredericksburg is difficult. There are fords there but few roads. It leads into that lovely area known as "The Wilderness" in those days (worse for troop movements in the 1860s then it would be today). Hooker tried it, leading to defeat at Chancellorsville -- and I consider Hooker had much more time to prepare and was much more capable than Burnside. Grant and Meade tried it in 1864 with similar bloody results. I have no confidence in Burnside succeeding by heading that way; when he tried it after Fredericksburg, it led to the fiasco known as the "Mud March".

Below Fredericksburg, the Rappahannock is wider and deeper. Ships could come up to Fredericksburg in those days, but not go past it. The river is a much different obstacle below the town, requiring greater support on logistics and bridging.

Tim