Why so much on Lee and NO CHAPTER at ALL on Meade? This is an imbalance. Why not contrast a commander who has been in place for just over a year with one who takes over 3 days before the battle? One thinks he knows his army, and the other doesn't even know where all the parts of his army are.
Also why make up Sgt. Kilrain's character when Andrew Jackson Tozier, a real life Medal of Honor recipient, and part of the old 2d ME Inf. is on the scene, holding the flag in the bend of his elbow while firing a rifle at the enemy, and ultimately helping to inspire the bayonet charge?
Also, if it were up to me, Chamberlain's defense of the Union left on Day 2 would be compared with Col. David Ireland's 137th NY defending the right flank. Although there are key differences, the similarities are striking.
And then there is Longstreet at Lee's headquarters on the evening of the 2d day. In reality, Longstreet's failure to understand Lee's orders for the morning of July 3 is why the so called Pickett's Charge takes place at all.
For all the complaints that I have, it is a good novel. To be perfectly fair, Michael Shaara always said it was a novel, and not a history. His failing, if you can call it that, was that he is such a good writer that most who read his work believe it to be the actual, and complete, story of the battle.