• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades
  • Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Civil War book, Attack & Die

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Gary

58 Cal.
Joined
Jun 19, 2004
Messages
2,388
Reaction score
1
by Grady McWhiney & Perry Jamieson.

The authors discuss how the aggressiveness of the South resulted in heavy casualties and thus their losing the war. They attribute the aggressiveness to the Celtic heritage of the South. In supporting their claim, they discuss how the Celts were aggressive in battle, relying on the charge, and little else for victory. They trace Celtic battles from the days when the Celts battled the Romans and show how the final struggle between Celts and the Anglos (who predominantly settled around New England & New York) was the American Civil War.

Fine & dandy, but it doesn't explain why Lee or Hood, both of whom are (by name) of English descent, were extremely aggressive. It doesn't explain how the Union Army was hardly any different (Fredericksburg, Cold Harbor II, Spotsylvania Court House) attacked and suffered high casualties.

Good reading book, but despite the scholarly cites, I remain skeptical. For me the redeeming quality of the book is it is the first time I've seen anything on the course of study of the antebellum West Point Cadet.
 
Lee and most all other Confederate leaders were excellent strategists, and realized that having the smaller forces and supplies, they needed to fight primarily from a defensive position. They chose the best positions as you pointed out in your list of battles. Most generally it requires at least 2/3 more forces on the attacking side to remove the defenders from a good position. Lee and et al did their best to be in the best defendible position. When they did take the offensive it was following the military strategem: The best defense is a good offense. 2nd Manasas, Chancellorville are good examples of flank attacks when the rebs took up the offensive successfully. Giving their men (Celtic warriors) the best opportunity for a win, they'd turn them loose, and they'd (the rank and file) would follow through. Don't remember who said it, but a noted authority of the time said, (paraphrased):"give me rebel infantry and Yankee Artillery and I'd whip the world."
 
Back
Top