View single post by HankC
 Posted: Wed Aug 18th, 2010 04:56 pm
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 
HankC
Member


Joined: Tue Sep 6th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 517
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Since this is all 'what-if' with few facts over which to quibble, about the best I can come up with is the assertion about strategic/tactical success being a major factor.

At both Antietam and Gettysburg, each side held the same position at the end of the battle as at the start. Then Lee withdrew.

If South Mountain is considered as the 'first day' of Antietam, then Lee, similar to Buford, uses a delaying action to ensure he can hold the high ground while his forces converge, similar to Meade at Gettysburg. So the battle tactis are the same though with the sides reversed.

I'm not really sure that Potomac veterans thought of the battle as saving New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Washington, though I may stand corrected. Defending the capital was alwasy a high priority. Anxiety over it's capture was much higher at the time of Jackson's valley campaign.

On the other hand, Fort Stevens gets a lot of ink since Lincoln 'was there' and Monacacy, strategically more decisive, is mostly forgotten.


HankC

 Close Window