Lee and His Army in Confederate History

314 Pages·2001·22.09 MB·English

by  Gary W. Gallagher

3
1
3
f
o
1
t
e
e
h
s

/

Y
R
O
T
IS LEE & HIS
H
E
T
A ARMY IN
R
E
D
E
F
N CONFEDERATE
O
C
N
I
HISTORY
Y
M
R
A
S
I
H
D
N
A
EE Civil War America
L
/
r Gary W. Gallagher, editor
e
h
g
a
l
l
a
G

7
3
3
6

7
2
:
0
1

7
1
.
5
.
1
0
0
2

g
n
e
s
T
3
1
3
f
o
2
t
e
e
h
s

/

Y
R
O
T
S
I
H
E
T
A
R
E
D
E
F
N
O
C
N
I
Y
M
R
A
S
I
H
D
N
A
E
E
L
/
r
e
h
g
a
l
l
a
G

7
3
3
6

7
2
:
0
1

7
1
.
5
.
1
0
0
2

g
n
e
s
T
3
1
3
f
o
3
t
e
e
h
s

/

Y
R
O
T
IS LEE & HIS
H
E
T
A ARMY IN
R
E
D
E
F
N CONFEDERATE
O
C
N
I
HISTORY
Y
M
R
A
S
I
H
D
N
A
EE Gary W. Gallagher
L
/
r TheUniversityofNorthCarolinaPress
e
h
g
la ChapelHill&London
l
a
G

7
3
3
6

7
2
:
0
1

7
1
.
5
.
1
0
0
2

g
n
e
s
T
3
1
3
f
o
4
t
e
e
h
s

/

Y
R
O
T
S
I
H
E
T
A
R
E
ED ©2001
F
ON TheUniversityofNorthCarolinaPress
C
N Allrightsreserved
I
Y DesignedbyRichardHendel
M
AR SetinMonotypeBell
IS byTsengInformationSystems
H
D ManufacturedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica
N
A Thepaperinthisbookmeetstheguidelinesfor
E
LE permanenceanddurabilityoftheCommitteeon
/ ProductionGuidelinesforBookLongevityofthe
r
he CouncilonLibraryResources.
g
a
l
l
Ga LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData

37 Gallagher,GaryW.
3
6 LeeandhisarmyinConfederatehistory/
byGaryW.Gallagher.
p.cm.—(CivilWarAmerica)
Includesindex.
0-8078-2631-6(cloth:alk.paper)
1.Lee,RobertE.(RobertEdward),1807–1870—Military
leadership. 2.UnitedStates—History—CivilWar,1861–
1865—Campaigns. 3.ConfederateStatesofAmerica.
Army. 4.ConfederateStatesofAmerica—History.
I.Title. II.Series.
.. 2001
973.7'3'0092—dc21 2001027126
05 04 03 02 01 5 4 3 2 1

7
2
:
0
1

7
1
.
5
.
1
0
0
2

g
n
e
s
T
3
1
3
f
o
5
t
e
e
h
s

/

Y
R
O
T
S
I
H
E
T
A
R
E
D Once again for Eileen Anne, who always understands
E
F
N
O
C
N
I
Y
M
R
A
S
I
H
D
N
A
E
E
L
/
r
e
h
g
a
l
l
a
G

7
3
3
6

7
2
:
0
1

7
1
.
5
.
1
0
0
2

g
n
e
s
T
This page intentionally left blank
3
1
3
f
o
7
t
e
e
h
s

/

Y
R CONTENTS
O
T
S
I
H
E
T
A
R
E
ED Preface ix
F
ON Acknowledgments xv
C
N EssayCredits xvii
I
Y
M
AR PARTI.LEE’SCAMPAIGNS
S
HI TheNetResultoftheCampaignWasinOurFavor:
ND ConfederateReactiontothe1862MarylandCampaign 5
A
E
E TheYanksHaveHadaTerribleWhipping:
L
/ ConfederatesEvaluatetheBattleofFredericksburg 51
r
e
h Lee’sArmyHasNotLostAnyofItsPrestige:
g
a
l TheImpactofGettysburgontheArmyofNorthernVirginia
l
a
G andtheConfederateHomeFront 83

7
3
63 OurHeartsAreFullofHope:
TheArmyofNorthernVirginiaandthe
ConfederacyintheSpringof1864 115
PARTII.LEEASACONFEDERATEGENERAL
AnOld-FashionedSoldierinaModernWar?:
Lee’sConfederateGeneralship 151
IHavetoMaketheBestofWhatIHave:
LeeatSpotsylvania 191
FightingtheBattlesofSecondFredericksburgandSalemChurch:
LeeandJubalA.EarlyatChancellorsville 220
PARTIII.LEEANDHISARMYINTHELOSTCAUSE
ShapingPublicMemoryoftheCivilWar:
RobertE.Lee,JubalA.Early,andDouglasSouthallFreeman 255
Index 283

7
2
:
0
1

7
1
.
5
.
1
0
0
2

g
n
e
s
T
This page intentionally left blank
3
1
3
f
o
9
t
e
e
h
s

/

Y
R PREFACE
O
T
S
I
H
E
T
A
R
E
ED Robert E. Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia have engaged
F
ON myinterestfornearlyfortyyears.Asayoungpersondrawntothe
C
N Civil War, I read Douglas Southall Freeman’s R. E. Lee: A Biog-
I
raphy and Lee’s Lieutenants: A Study in Command. Freeman’s works,
Y
M
R togetherwithmanyoftheparticipants’accountstowhichhisfoot-
A
S notesledme,createdasensethatLeeandhisarmyheldcenterstage
I
H
in the Confederate drama. Indeed, the military conflict in Virginia
D
N
A seemedsynonymouswiththeCivilWarasawhole,andLeeemerged
E
E as a fabulously gifted soldier whose only weaknesses—including
L
/ excessive amiability with lieutenants—represented outgrowths of
r
e hispersonalvirtues.SubsequentexposuretostudiesbyThomasL.
h
g
a Connellyandotherrevisionisthistorianstestedmyearlyreadingof
l
l
a Confederatemilitaryaffairs.Thesescholarsemphasizedtheimpor-
G

7 tanceoftheWesternTheaterandaverredthatLostCausewriters
3
3
6 such as Jubal A. Early had distorted the record by vastly inflating
Lee’sabilitiesandwartimestature.
My own research over the years indicated that Freeman might
havebeenclosertothemarkthanmanyofthosewhoinsistedLee
andhisarmyhadbeenoverrated.VariouskindsofConfederatetes-
timony bespoke a national focus on Lee and his operations. Con-
siderableevidencealsosupportedtheLostCauseideathatsuperior
northern numbers and resources played a fundamental role in the
Confederate defeat. That Lost Cause warriors sometimes argued
frompositionsofstrengthnotonlyhelpsexplainwhytheirwritings
havebeentenaciouslyinfluentialbutalsoraisesanimportantcon-
cern.CanweacceptpartofwhatLostCauseauthorssaidaboutLee
and his army without also lending a measure of authority to their
denialofslavery’scentralitytosecessionandtheConfederacy,their
romanticportrayalofaunitedwhiteSouthbattlingtotheend,and
theirblatantdistortionsregardingotheraspectsofthewar?
The essays in this collection explore the relationship between
Lee’s operations and Confederate national morale, the quality and
nature of his generalship, and the thorny problem of how best to
handle Lost Cause writings about the Army of Northern Virginia

7
2
:
0
1

7
1
.
5
.
1
0
0
2

g
n
e
s
T