- Joined
- Apr 4, 2017
- Location
- Denver, CO
Moscow in 1812 was a much bigger city than Harrisburg in 1863. But when Napoleon's enormous army made it there at the end of summer, the Russian peasantry would no longer deliver forage and grain to the city, and Napoleon had to retreat even though the Russian army had been beaten and was reorganizing.I tend toward this view. An army in enemy territory living off of the land will strip the country bare in a day. As already mentioned, Harrisburg had many rail and road networks, by the time the CSA got there, the stores would have been evacuated, gone. (We do know the citizens and city government were already engaged in this activity upon Ewell’s approach) the idea that Lee could concentrate and wait doesn’t conform with reality. An army deep in enemy territory with an extended supply line must keep moving a la Sherman to be able to live off of the land. Lee attacks on the 2nd & 3rd because his army is concentrated and his two options are attack or retreat. Waiting just isn’t in the cards.
Given the circumstances retreat was the better option.
The Confederates could not stay in Pennsylvania without a big fight, and the US army was surrounded by its loyal railroad network. Evacuating the wounded and resupplying the army was going to be vastly easier for the US. And by the 8th or 9th of July, Grant and some of his divisions could circulate up river to St. Louis and Louisville and ride the railroads east, while Sherman occupied Mississippi.
Harrisburg was a trap, which General Lee avoided.