View single post by Hellcat
 Posted: Thu Aug 19th, 2010 02:04 am
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 
Hellcat
Root Beer Lover


Joined: Tue Nov 15th, 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 867
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

The arguement of the tactics being reversed doesn't seem to me as good an arguement as there is the question as to whether McClellan had a total victory. He won Antietam/Sharpsburg strategically, but it's his tactics that are questioned. Even if we say the tactics were reversed by adding the fight at South Mountain we are still left with the question of did McClellan win tactically or did his tactics fall short.

Also the question seems to be was Buford's actions at Gettysburg a delaying action or a holding action. I'd probably argue it was a holding action, both to hold the heights and hold the Army of Northern Virginia in Gettysburg until Reynolds 1st Corps could arrive. More holding the Heights as Lee could have easily just gone around him or kept moving north. South Maountain seemed more a delaying action meant to delay McClellan's advance.

In the end though it still comes back to the importance of the Gettysburg Address and if it is really what made the battle so important. And I still say that if we want to argue how that speech affected the view of the battle then we have to do the same thing with the Emancipation Proclamation and Antietam/Sharpsburg.

 

 Close Window