What effect, if any, did Stuart's failures, just prior to Gettysburg, have on the outcome of the battle?

 

Probably not as much as you'd think. Its impossible to say why I answered that way without jumping to the end for my reasons.

 

I think Stuart's folly is obvious right from the begining. Here is Buford's cavalry occupying the high ground in Gettysburg. Meanwhile, Longstreet is sending reports of union cavalry in gettysburg to Lee, but Lee's aids won't wake him up. Clearly, Stuart has already failed Lee. We just need to see how far this all goes.

 

Picture yourself as the Commanding General of the Army of Northern Virginia. You plan, prior to the invasion of the North, to conduct a defensive campaign wherever possible, since you are outnumbered and in enemy country. Your opposing General is a Pennsylvania man, knows the region. Your intelligence is poor, since you don't know the strength of the enemy, where he is, because your cavalry ("eyes") failed you. This is where we are at the end of chapter 4.

How do you proceed?
a) Attack
b) Probe/Recon
c) Take a defensive posture
d) Retreat
e) Redeploy

 

edit
(I didn't intent to detract from Vito's post or Bill's. I was typing and got interrupted as they were posting...)
4. Longstreet
Longstreet and Lieutenant Colonel Arthur Lyon Fremantle.
Just as Shaara uses the Spy/Longstreet interlude as a vehicle for introducing several kinds of important information about the current situation and the coming battle to the reader, he uses the Freemantle/Longstreet interaction as a device for introducing us to the activites of the troops behind the Southern line as well as some more general aspects of the war. Shaara wants us to know something about the the affinities of Southern society with Mother England and about the position of England toward the war.

Sometimes it is as though the Fremantle character is like the chorus in an ancient Greek drama...it is a running commentary from outside the context of North/South on the war and the battle to come.

Are there other functions of the Fremantle role that are important to the developng story?

 

Yes, that is correct, but only if you are willing to listen to the advice and intelligence that is brought to you. As we are about to see, Longstreet warns Lee of the folly of the attack, but Lee's mind is made up.

 

Longstreet, Chapter 4, June 29.

As the titles of the chapters repeat, I'll try to use the dates to make clear which chapter we are discussing.

Longstreet is in camp and we get a glimpse of his life with is army. The author points out how he now keeps his distance from the men.

We meet Pickett, Garnett and Armistead, along with the British Colonel Freemantle.

Did you notice Longstreet's focused, unbiased assessment of both his troops and the union troops? Longstreet is not a man to get caught up in emotion. Armistead seems to be fairly well grounded when compared to Pickett, but even he is overly optomistic compared to Longstreet.

Freemantle is truly the link to the past. As slow as the American military is to adopt new tactics based on modern weapons, Freemantle is back at least 40 years.

Perhaps the most critical point to observe in this chapter is the discussion of the reasons for the war that are explored in response to Freemantle's reply about why England doesn't come in on the side of the south. What did the rest of you think about that discussion? What did you think of Pickett's analogy?

 

Yes, that is absolutely right, but its more like a tragedy than a drama. Who is the tragic hero?

 

Sorry, I was writing while you posted this. I think my post responds to some of this. I do think Fremantle provides a view back to an even earlier time in the history of warfare. He also serves as the catlyst for a discussion about the South's reasons for the war.

I hope peopel don't look past this chapter too quickly. there are some key nuggets here concerning the views of the south and Longstreets view of both armies.

 

Did Lee, or Meade for that matter, consciously plan to fight at Gettysburg at the end of chapter 4? Was Longstreet thinking of one big battle here?

Longstreet pg. 61: "The day of the one battle war is over, I think.............They all expect one smashing victory. Waterloo and all that. But I think that kind of war is over. We have trenches now......."

We're on the eve of the main event, and Longstreet is not even thinking of a major battle. Gettysburg is just a town with many roads leading into it so the South can concentrate its army before the North shows up in force.

Stuart's joyriding has led to a Union advantage, thanks to Buford's soldiering. Can it be overcome by the south?