Slightly off topic

While the book focuses primarily on the officers involved, think about the enlisted infantrymen.

In 1863, the infantry got to where they were going by marching, shoulder to shoulder typically four across and as far back from the guy in front as your fingers could reach when bent at the elbow. The most common rifles were the Model 1863 Enfield or the Model 1861 Springfield. Each weighs about 10 pounds. On their right hip, suspended by a two inch leather belt is a cartridge box containing 40 rounds for the musket. Each of these weighs about two ounces and the minie ball, a conical bullet, it fires is just over half an inch in diameter and

 

I'm a little late to this discussion, so I'll refer back to some of the points already made. I agree that Shaara has crafted the story from Lee's perspective primarily and that his right hand man, Longstreet, is presented in a way that we will all get to know him very well. While the southern soldier is characterized as being unified in religion, culture, and blind loyalty to the land, -- and therefore not equivocal about fighting in the war, Lee is more complicated in character. He is fighting for the South because he never had a choice. He is reluctant but determined. He has been successful now for two years having never left a battlefield in enemy hands. He is invading the North blindly, but is confident in a final Southern victory. He looks at Gettysburg as an opportunity --, but relies on Longstreet's defensive intuition and values his counsel. It has so far not occurred to Lee that he is spread thin out along the Pennsylvania countryside without any knowledge of where the enemy is or what the enemy is planning to do. It is Longstreet who decides to remedy the lack of intelligence from Jeb Stuart by employing the spy. The spy is skillful -- plays a role as a simple farmer looking for his runaway wife to garner information -- and knows it. He is smart, but uneducated -- a Cajun citizen who speaks French with a strange accent. And he speaks a substandard dialect of English.. Not just an odious mercenary scout, he is silly, forward, and tactless. His knowledge of a few lines from Shakespeare come from his experience as an actor -- not from any formal education. So he is by nature an actor -- and despite the accuracy of his information about the location and strength of the Army of the Potomac, he is playing a role even now -- Harrison is a fake; noone even knows his real name.

Balancing Lee and Longstreet, I think Chamberlain is equally favored by Shaara as a character in the story. Much of the novel will be devoted to the roles of Longstreet on the one side and Chamberlain on the other. Buford and Reynolds are two other Yankees that are presented in a positive light, but are clearly short shrifted as compared to Chamberlain. He is the intellectual who is trying hard to be a normal guy -- to be a leader and a soldier. But he is hopelessly liberal. He can't even shoot his deserters, but chooses to lecture them and cajol them to reconsider and to fight. He believes in the special angelic spark -- yes the perfection-- that distinguishes him -- and his fellow soldiers and even the enemy soldiers-- from animals. But he is a philosopher, not a preacher. While Longstreet is careful and practical -- a defensive general-- , Chamberlain on the other side of the battle is almost enthusiastic and willing. He welcomes the opportunity fight hard and to take a dangerous risk when there seems to be nothing to lose. He is not afraid for himself. Because of his rank he doesn't get the credit he deserves. And we will see that it is from Chamberlain that Shaara takes the name for his novel, The Killer Angels.

These are some of my impressions as I read the book. I think someone has already said that it is remarkable how Shaara can embed the reader right into the story. It is if we were there.

 

Rob..........good questions. I thought Longstreet's plan to reposition between the Union Army and Washington was excellent. Would have allowed Lee's army to choose their own ground. Just as Wellington did at Waterloo. Wellington sheltered many of his troops behind sloping hills, to withstand Napoleon's massive artillery barrages. Let the French come to him on ground of his choosing. Wellington squares formed behind the hills, so the French cavalry could not see what they were getting into. Protecting themselves behind walls, etc, as the did at Fredericksburg was the right strategy for Lee's army in hindsight, keep bleeding the North.

Lee failed to listen to Longstreet. Hitler failed to listen to his Generals, who cautioned him against a two front war. Finish off England before engaging Russia, which he did not do. Napolean listened only to Josephine (smart man ).

In hindsight Longstreet is right. Let's hold off until we read/refresh about the events leading up to the first day's battle for the high ground.

 

Bill, I'm not convinced that Lee was motivated to attack, go on the offensive, because of Davis' letter. I think pride entered into the equation. Defensive strategy was not considered "manly". Lee did not like to be referred to as the King of Spades, while his men dug trenches to protect themselves. He loved his men, the men loved him, and he wanted to go on the attack because his men wanted it that way.

 

As a matter of fact, the Civil War was largely responsible for the creation of the Menswear industry in America. Brooks Brothers became a supplier to the U.S. Army and created the size standardization that allowed for mass production of mens clothing. Once sizes were standardized the next logical step was the production of off the rack clothing. Prior to the Civil War there was no such thing as standard sizes, and mens clothing, for the most part had to be custom made.

This is one of the first things I was taught when I was taking my apprenticeship as a menswear cutter/patternmaker in the 1960s.

 

with the south's belief in states rights over a strong fed gov. I did not know thay believed the Constitution allowed for secession. I think the south went to war because they did not want to tolerate a fed gov telling them what to do, particularly when it would significantly affect their livelihood.

 

[QUOTE=ajlafleche,Aug 24 2006, 01:23 PM] Slightly off topic

While the book focuses primarily on the officers involved, think about the enlisted infantrymen.

In 1863, the infantry got to where they were going by marching, shoulder to shoulder typically four across and as far back from the guy in front as your fingers could reach when bent at the elbow. The most common rifles were the Model 1863 Enfield or the Model 1861 Springfield. Each weighs about 10 pounds. On their right hip, suspended by a two inch leather belt is a cartridge box containing 40 rounds for the musket. Each of these weighs about two ounces and the minie ball, a conical bullet, it fires is just over half an inch in diameter and

 

I think Chamberlain was a natural born leader.

 

I'm so happy to see some new names posting above. I see we have already mentioned the first chapter on Chaimberlain. Let's focus on him tonight and tomorrow.

To the new comers; we are trying to move along at a methodical pace. Even though we have all read ahead, let's try to keep the discussion focussed on the current section. In this way, more new comers may join us. Plus, it forces us to keep to the details of each section.

 

While I just don't think I can add to what you have all posted, I can say that this story has dragged me in and made me feel like I'm there. It's descriptive without being boring. The emotions and thoughts of the men are described so well, you can feel them yourself.

A great read so far.