Re: Longstreet
Roger W. Cole (rogrcole@quijote.lang.usf.edu)
Wed, 6 Apr 1994 09:25:48 ECT
While I agree with Claude Foster and the others through the years that
the Pickett/Longstreet charge on July 3 "should never have been ordered,"
I wonder if Longstreet's summation that no 15,000 men ever arrayed could
have taken the position might not have been too facile *before* as
opposed to *after* the fact. Certainly his 1862 experiences offered
mixed evidence: (1) the position he had held on Marye's heights at
Fredricksburg, seemingly invincible, was carried by Sedgwick during the
Chancelorsville campaign (though less abundantly defended); (2) Hood of
his own corps had managed an uphill breakthrough at Gaines Mill during
the 7 Days; however, the Confederates had been bloodily repulsed at
Malvern Hill. Finally, though Longstreet was not there, Thomas' people
managed to assault and take a position of such natural strength
(Missionary Ridge) that its commander, Bragg, had deemed it "impregnable"
and "ought to have been held by a line of skirmishers against any
assualting column." Many excuses have been offered over the years for
the Confederate failure to hold Missionary Ridge, but all of them
together somehow seem to fail in adequate explanation. In any event, it
is no more clear to me than apparently was to Lee that the July 3rd
assault was "bound to fail." Longstreet's hindsight was 20/20.
Roger Cole