Hello class!
I'm excited to meet you when school begins next month. Your assignment this summer is to read Shaara's book, keeping in mind the themes of unity and disunity. We'll use this book as a springboard for a discussion of Twain, Emerson, Thoreau, Douglass and others against the backdrop of the American Civil War.
Specifically, I'd like you to post 2 blog responses to the text on our class page. These responses are meant for you to have the opportunity to share your insights into the reading with your classmates. Look specifically at the characters involved in this great struggle. How did the actions of Lee, Chamberlain, et. al. shape the outcome of the Battle at Gettysburg? What was the battle like from the perspective of the generals? From that of the foot soldiers? Is warfare of the 19th century different from warfare of the 21st century? Why or why not?
As I said, please post two blog responses by the time school begins. You can earn extra credit if you post a third response. Also, please feel free to respond to what your peers have to say, in a civil manner of course.
Good luck!
The battle of Gettysburg, which is known as the bloodiest battle of the Civil war including over 50,000 casualties, was truly a battle of brother against brother. It is also considered a turning point in the war for both sides. Robert E. Lee took all the strength of the confederate army and threw it at the north in an attempt to end the war by destroying the army. Lee thought with a strategic and unorthodox tactic he would succeed in destroying the army but, his plan backfired the union army was prepared. Lees army failed they were outmanned, unprepared and had much less weapon power. They shouldn’t of been surprised in the loss they had tried this once before a year ago in the Battle of Antietam in Sharpsburg, Maryland and the same thing happened they lost due to being unprepared. It was truly the biggest turning point in the war.
ReplyDeleteLee was well respected by the army, he is an old man and has a great amount of experience, while Longstreet is younger and has more knowledge of modern war and newer weapons. At times Longstreet would try and persuade Lee, at one point he gets Lee to change his mind, which in return puts his men at a disadvantage. On the other side of the turmoil was Chamberlain who was able to save his men who had little to no weapons remaining. Chamberlain was also the lowest ranking of the three men and was also more easily relatable being that before he went to war he was just a regular teacher.
ReplyDeleteOne of the most significant relationships depicted throughout Shaara's novel was that between General Lee and his second in command, Longstreet. Lee is a well respected older general coming to the end of his days. He is a master tactician and is respected by all of his men. Longstreet is eleven years his junior, with less experience but an interestingly modern view of warfare. Durring the battle of Gettysburg, Longstreet had suggested to Lee that a more defensive position be taken between the union troops and Washington D.C. Lee choose to ignore this suggestion and lead a futile attack at the union soldiers defending the hills surrounding the town. Two conflicting ideas with the same general goal is the basis of the war and this novel. It was interesting to see how this was portrayed subtly within the plot. The view of the generals durring this war seemed vastly different. The generals seemed to be nothing more then the men behind the curtain, making all the tactical calls and battle plans, but seemed to remain naive of what the greater picture was. The infantry men on the other hand, seemed to talk about their ideas on slavery and others which differentiated from side to side. The men showed far more understanding as to what was happening, and how this debacle turned into a fraternal blood bath.
ReplyDeleteThe Army relies on information to be transferred quickly and correctly to ensure that the proper action can be taken. General Lee has to decide what information is true and what is just rumors. The reader can see how difficult of a job Lee has because his decisions put the lives of thousands of men at stake. To make his job easier General Lee has his second in command whom he trusts with almost everything. This just goes to show that if one trust worthy story makes up a rumor or becomes a traitor, a whole army can fall easily.
ReplyDeleteOne of the most important people in the Confederate army and in the civil war was Robert E Lee. Robert E Lee the commander of the confederate army was known as a great tactician but his ideas always conflict with his men he uses a more traditional type of combat even while being advised to use newer ideas. For example he frequently has conflicts with General James Longstreet who advises a more defensive strategy. Another important person was Colonel Joshua L. Chamberlain although he was a lower ranking officer he was important to the union army, it was he who accepted the surrender of the Confederate army at Appomattox. Warfare in the nineteenth century is nothing compared to today’s modern warfare. In the nineteenth century they had swords, muskets, and cannons. Swords are for close combat, muskets take to long to load, and cannons can’t be taken to many places. Warfare in the twentieth century is much different then the nineteenth century. In the twentieth century we have automatic weapons that are small powerful and easy to reload warfare has improved even more then could have been imagined. Warfare was a big contribution to the fall of the confederate army but, warfare isn’t just weapons its tactics too. Robert E Lee made a mistake no using new ideas and being a traditional army the Union knew what they were going to be up against. Lee’s biggest contribution to the Civil War was letting the union know what they were going to do.
ReplyDelete