GDG- Lee & Harrisburg
CWMHTours at aol.com
CWMHTours at aol.com
Tue Jan 24 18:08:05 CST 2012
Well, George-
As usual with your excellent refutation you blast my little battleship out
of the water (Oh the humanity!).
I CAN see Lee sending over a div and cav across the Susq R. It's
completely plausible.
But I can't see Lee sittin down W of the Rap R sin June ending
correspondence with Ol' Jeff going "Gee I'd really like to capture Harrisburg".
I can't see him being fixated on it.
Some people in the GDG play the board game of Risk. When you advance to
take a "country" on the board you lose peices. There is an attrition level
associated with any advancement going on. Then you may just have to have a
battle to get into your goal. So you lose more pieces. Then your enemy
counter-attacks and you have a big battle and then you lose more pieces.
And if you don't have enough pieces after that battle you lose the whole
thing and there goes your advance and all the pieces you invested in the
assault. Look at the Mule Shoe at Spotsylvania. An issue of overwhelming force
and neither side had it so they chewed each other up.
Do you play the game? It is fabulous and if I ran West Point or some
other miltary academy I would require the cadets to play the game all four
years. It is so instructive.
I don't think Lee was sitting around itching to get Hrsbg. I see the Old
Gambler as moving N to get the devastation out of the S and maybe have an
advantageous battle with the AoP. Two maxims of battle: overwhelming force
and balance.
By threatening Harrisburg Lee would have the initiative and advantage. He
could knock the N off balance by threatening the town. As the Great Poker
Player Lee's best asset was his focus on manueverablity.
What happens when that manueverability goes away? That's his best card.
Picture the whole ANV in Hrsbg. Half of his army is either drunk in the
saloons or lost in the brothels of town, which with the location of Camp
Curtain there must have had a bustling business. The AoP occupations of
Frederick MD render interesting witness to that. Coddington goes into the
problem a bit.
And let's say Lee does take Hrsbg- and clearly that could have been done
in June easily then the AoP comes up and renders siege. THEN other forces
are brought in from around the country. Part of Rosecrans's army could have
been sent by rail in a few days. There were 30k men in DC and 5k in Balt.
Throw those in and Lee would be surrounded, cut off from forage, and ammo
would be running low.
And for what? Harrisburg?
It was a RR town and junction. Miltary value. A supply base. Military
value. I think the Penn Central 4-track stone arch bridge, N of town, was
built by then. Camp Curtain- a military target.
But risk losing your army- ONLY army of the Conf in the east protecting
Richmond?
Lee's supply lines were to the Cumberland. If he takes his whole army
across that massive river he's screwed.
I can see him telling Ewell to send in a Div or 2 to take the town...
He wanted to scare the beejeezus out of Andrew Curtian, Darius Couch,
Stanton and Lincoln. He wanted to get the AoP out in the open and destroy it
"The enemy is there and we shall attack".
I think he would have bordered the town, scared the Yanks out and sent in
enough troops to destroy anything of military value and maybe collect a
ransom. But, think about it George, his army starts falling apart in town and
eventually he is going to be surrounded by the Yanks with no way to cross
the Susq R and get back to the Cumberland.
I'd like to see a good argument or position put forth that lays the risk
of Lee capturing the town versus being trapped and surrounded in a Northern
city with no communications to the South.
Can you give an argument or case stating how risking the destruction of
his army was worth the occupation of some little dinky capital city with mud
streets full of yokels?
Like playing the game of Risk there is a cost to every movement.
FOOTNOTE: The RR bridge over the Susq R is just massive as all hell (
Sorry Margaret ;-{)). 4 tracks. I think it was in place pre-Civil War.
RE: the destruction of masonry bridges it is very difficult. Read Walker's
efforts to destroy the C&O viaduct over the Monocacy pre-Antietam. I've
been on it a 1000 times and can see why. I have sat-mapped the bridge a
number of times tracing the RR lines being a train nut. It's worth a look.
FOOTNOTE: I still think Jeff Davis had flies in his eyes.
George- do you like my new sign-off?
A Loyal Neo-Anti Unionist,
Peter
In a message dated 1/24/2012 5:11:19 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
georgeconnell at mac.com writes:
Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
Peter,
Some relevant items from my Gettysburg notes:
• During the Antietam Campaign when General John Walker, just up from
Richmond with his two-brigade division, reported to Lee at Frederick, he says
Lee told him that the Army was going to Harrisburg, destroy the Pennsylvania
railroad bridge, and then go to Philadelphia, Baltimore, or Washington.
(B&L, vol. 3). See also R. E. Lee, Vol II, pp. 360-1 for on his thoughts on
operating east of the Susquehanna during this campaign.
• Dorsey Pender, June 28, 1863, June 28, 1863: "I hope we may be in
Harrisburg in three days..." Lee's Lieutenants, Vol III, pp.76-77.
• Lee to Ewell: “If Harrisburg comes within your means, capture it.”
O.R., 27, pt.3. p.914
• ..."orders were...issued to move upon Harrisburg. O.R., 27, pt. 2, p..
316.
• June 28: Ewell ordered Rhodes to cross the river and capture Harrisburg.
Rich Kohr, Gettysburg LBG, 8/6/6
• Lee’s orders to Hill on June 28 were to follow in trace of Early,
cross the Susquehanna downstream from Harrisburg, and seize the railroad
between Harrisburg and Philadelphia. James Robertson, General A. P. Hill, p. 204
• "Then 'Jeb' started the entire column for Carlisle, vis Dillsburg. He
chose this objective because he reasoned that if the SOuthern infantry had
advanced to the Susquehanna and were not in the vicinity of York, they must
be around Carlisle or Harrisburg." Lee's Lieutenants, Vol III, p. 137.
• Lee: “To-morrow, gentlemen, we will not move to Harrisburg as expected,
but will go over to Gettysburg and see what General Meade is after.”
Gettysburg Nobody Knows, pp 110-111.
• Lee was going to Harrisburg. So say the document and spontaneous
utterances. He changed his mind because of a lack of cavalry to block the passes.
Tony Nicastro, LGB, in a lecture to the Gettysburg Licensed Battlefield
Guide class, 6/27/6
• In Lee’s perfect world: he would dig in at Cashtown, block the passes,
wait for Stuart, and head for Harrisburg if possible. Tony Nicastro, LGB,
in a lecture to the Gettysburg Licensed Battlefield Guide class, 6/28/6
Now that's ten citations from eight respected sources; I have more but it
gets repetitious.
You can moan, you can grumble, and you can speculate, but what you cannot
do is doubt any longer. Lee was going to Harrisburg (and other points east
of the Susquehanna)--and he was taking a lot of infantry with him.
Regards,
George
26ª11'56"N 81ª48'19W"
On Jan 24, 2012, at 4:01 PM, CWMHTours at aol.com wrote:
> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
> George....
>
> I love you Man....
>
> But I DO doubt it......
>
> Think of the consequences for Lee.
>
> Before capturing a big city like Hrsbg he would have an intact artmy.
He
> takes that army on the wrong side of the river.
>
> Look at the Confederate occupation of Frederick in the CW. Before Ant.
> they lost a lot of men getting drunk in the town, not to mention
Jackson
> falling asleep during the sermon in the Presbytyrian church.
> Occupying a city for ANY army is fraught with danger. You don't just
go
> in and parade around. You risk losing control of yo0ur army.
>
> Lee was in the N only to threaten the N, not to capture a city.
>
> And, Sir, please tell me what benefit Lee would gain fro being on tne
> wrong side of the Sus R when his supply lines were in the Cumberlaand?
> Politely, I would like to hear an argument for Lee going into
Harrisburg. To me
> it makes no sense.
>
> So I do doubt it.,
>
> A Loyal Neo-Anti Unionist,
> Peter
>
>
> In a message dated 1/24/2012 3:34:20 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> georgeconnell at mac.com writes:
>
> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
> Peter,
>
> There is absolutely no doubt that Lee intended to capture Harrisburg.
To
> do that, he would have to move infantry east of the Susquehanna. How
long
> they would stay is another question and very much depends on how much
time he
> had before the AoP would have been close.
>
> Regards,
>
> George
> 26ª11'56"N 81ª48'19W"
>
> On Jan 24, 2012, at 2:32 PM, Dave Gillespie wrote:
>
>> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>> The Susquehanna River is extremely low once it gets past Harrisburg,
>> where it is also very low. I have seen a good deal of the
>> Susquehanna, both in South Central PA (I grew up in Carlisle, PA) and
>> in South Central New York, where it is much deeper, yet narrower. It
>> is a fascinating river.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dave Gillespie
>> Parsippany, NJ
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 2:28 PM, <CWMHTours at aol.com> wrote:
>>> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>>> Jeff and Andy bring up some good issues.
>>>
>>> The Susq R is an amazing river basin and the largest water source of
> the
>>> Ches Bay. Goes all the way up into southern NY state.
>>>
>>> Extremely wide. Just north of the state border with MD there is a
huge
>>> dam, the Conowingo. some 30-40 mi north of that is 3 Mile Island.
>>>
>>> Someone correct me but if I recall correctly rocks are apparent in
low
>>> water on the R at Wrightsville.
>>>
>>> I cannot imagine any sane Conf commander putting any significant
> number of
>>> infantry east of the river during the GTYSBG campaign. You might as
> well
>>> wave goodbye as they marched off to Johnson's Island.
>>>
>>> If I wuz Ewell I'd put cavalry that could move fast east of the
river
> but
>>> not infantry.
>>>
>>> In magazines like American Heritage I have read stories of loggers
> putting
>>> log rafts a good mile long down the river from NY. Pretty amazing
> stories.
>>>
>>> The Susq R is an earthquake fault. Interesting on the East Coast.
> The
>>> Hudson also is an earthquake fault, oddly enough. If I lived in
> Manhatten I
>>> wouldn't be able to sleep knowing that. And certainly in a high rise.
>>>
>>> If you go online you can see that the southern half of the C Bay is
a
>>> crater from a meteor striking it millions of years ago.
>>>
>>> The Conowingo Dam basin is an environmental issue (No politix
here!).
> The
>>> overflow is full of phosphates which are killing the bay (I need my
>>> crabs!). And more frighteningly the dam has pretty much silted up
to
> water level
>>> with silt. The silt is full of heavy metals, which scares experts,
and
>>> costs me sleep at night worrying about it.
>>>
>>> Cadmium, lead, mercury, etc. It is pretty scary.
>>>
>>> That's my story, along with the 57mm's gun in Wrightsville and I am
>
>>> sticking to it.
>>>
>>>
>>> A Loyal Neo-Anti Unionist,
>>> Peter
>>>
>>>
>>> In a message dated 1/24/2012 1:50:30 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>>> amills at jplcreative.com writes:
>>>
>>> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>>> Jeff:
>>>
>>> Out of curiosity: is the dam in which you refer, the one just below
> City
>>> Island across from the city?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: gettysburg-bounces at arthes.com
> [mailto:gettysburg-bounces at arthes.com]
>>> On Behalf Of Jeff Burk
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 1:42 PM
>>> To: GDG
>>> Subject: Re: GDG- Inevitable defeat
>>>
>>> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>>> Your point about the river being shallow is true today. However
that
> is
>>> because the river has been dammed upstream. during the war the
river
>>> flowed free.
>>>
>>>
>>> Namaste
>>>
>>> Jeff Burk
>>>
>>>
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: "CWMHTours at aol.com" <CWMHTours at aol.com>
>>>> To: gettysburg at arthes.com
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 1:14 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: GDG- Inevitable defeat
>>>>
>>>> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>>>> The river at that point is frequently shallow in summer droughts
but
>>>> very wide and quite an obstacle. Very rocky.
>>>>
>>>> A smart and careful commander would not want to put more than an
>>>> expeditionary force that could have been sacrificed on the east
side
> of
>>> the river.
>>>> Harrisburg was no significant military goal other than being a
state
>>>> capital and RR center.
>>>>
>>>> Thre are 2 57mm guns sitting on the west side of the river there.
>>>>
>>>> A Loyal Neo-Anti Unionist,
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In a message dated 1/24/2012 2:22:49 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>>>> mdblough1 at comcast.net writes:
>>>>
>>>> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>>>> Tom-The militia destroyed it in order to keep the Confederates
using
> it
>>> to
>>>> cross over the the eastern shore of the Susquehanna. Harrisburg is
> on
>>> the
>>>> east and this would have enabled the Confederates to attack the
city
>>> from
>>>> both sides. While Lee initially ordered the bridge's destruction,
> the
>>> ANV
>>>> generals on the scene saw the advantages to saving it and tried to
> save
>>> it.
>>>> The Susquehanna is not one of the wildest rivers in the world but
>>> bridges
>>>> were needed to cross it and with that bridge out there wasn't
another
>>> until
>>>> Harrisburg. The hope was to destroy sections so it could be
rebuilt
>>> later
>>>> but, in the days before dynamite, that sort of precision wasn't
> easily
>>>> obtained. The Columbia-Wrightsville bridge was a wood & stone
covered
>>> bridge
>>>> believed to be the longest such bridge in the world at the time
and
> the
>>> flames
>>>> that destroyed the wood, leaving only the granite supports.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Margaret
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Tom" <bunco973 at optonline.net>
>>>> To: "GDG" <gettysburg at arthes.com>
>>>> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 10:38:11 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: GDG- Inevitable defeat
>>>>
>>>> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>>>>>>> And
>>>> in fact, if you think about it, the damn thing IS still made of
big
>>>> granite blocks. Now just how are you going to knock the darn thing
> over
>>>> without a
>>>> whole lot of valuable time and trouble? <<< It was destroyed, by
> fire
>>>> (not the granite supports of course), by Union militia.
>>>> Regards, Tom B.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: CWMHTours at aol.com
>>>> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 9:28 PM
>>>> To: gettysburg at arthes.com
>>>> Subject: Re: GDG- Inevitable defeat
>>>>
>>>> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>>>> Dave,
>>>>
>>>> Respectfully Sir,
>>>>
>>>> I think we disagree, sir.
>>>>
>>>> Where is it written that Lee disagreed with Jackson about
destroying
>>>> infrastructure in the North? I think Lee was just about as
> aggressive as
>>>> Jackson was in bringing the war to your opponent. for example,
> Antietam,
>>>
>>>> Gtysbg,
>>>> & Monocacy.
>>>>
>>>> I am not dispersing you personally. I just see Lee & Jackson as
> being a
>>>> balanced combination.
>>>>
>>>> By the time of 2nd Man Lee could see the Hammer and the Anvil.
>>>>
>>>> The Hammer was Jackson.
>>>>
>>>> The Anvil was the wonderful James Peter Longstreet, the Old
> Warhorse.
>>>>
>>>> Also, just curious, I don't recall reference to Lee being
concerned
>>> about
>>>> destroying the RR bridge over the Susq. R. being a big concern of
> his.
>>> And
>>>> in fact, if you think about it, the damn thing IS still made of
big
>>>> granite blocks. Now just how are you going to knock the darn
thing
> over
>>>> without a
>>>> whole lot of valuable time and trouble?
>>>>
>>>> Lee's 3 raids up north where just that. Raids. Move overwhelming
> forces
>>>> up north and attack piecemeal in overwhelming force.
>>>>
>>>> The purpose of going north for Lee was to de-stabilizing the North.
>>>> Everything else was a subset.
>>>>
>>>> A Loyal Neo-Anti Unionist,
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.co
>>> m
>>>> -to unsubscribe
>>>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>>>>
>
----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.co
>>> m
>>>> -to unsubscribe
>>>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.co
>>> m -to unsubscribe
>>>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com
>>> -to unsubscribe
>>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>>>
>>>
>
----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com
>>> -to unsubscribe
>>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>>>
>>>
>
----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com -to unsubscribe
>>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>>
>>
>
----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com -to unsubscribe
>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>
>
>
----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com
> -to unsubscribe
> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>
>
----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com -to unsubscribe
> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com
-to unsubscribe
http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
More information about the Gettysburg
mailing list