The Battle of Gettysburg - Essay Example

The Battle of Gettysburg In the period between 1861 and 1865 saw a previously united nation go to war amongst the memberstates owing to fractious issues of slavery. Thus, the American civil war established rivalry between two factions that had different views about slavery. As a result, the Southern states declared their independence and seceded to the Confederate States as the remaining states formed the Union lead by Abraham Lincoln. The Battle of Gettysburg marks a turning point to the country’s history as the outcomes of the civil remain of great significance to historians even in the modern times. Numerous historians and novelists delve into the analysis of the civil war while focussing on various battles to paint a realistic image of events as they were. However, they lack consensus on issues that run deep and are pertinent to the motivation, reasons, and outcomes of the war. While there were numerous fronts of confrontation during the American civil war, this paper focusses on Gettysburg owing to the magnitude of the battle and outcomes. In addition, this paper employs the works of David Moore, Michael Shaara, and Edwin Coddington for the purposes of different opinions and from the viewpoints of various characters involved in the war. The named scholars are renowned for their quality analysis of historical events, which places their work at ease among their peers owing to significant research accompanied by lengthy bibliography essays. The scholars are in consensus about whom the participants in the battle of Gettysburg are, and have been accorded enormous analysis based on their conduct during the war. The battle involved a confrontation of enormous magnitude between union and confederate forces at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania in 1863. The battle lasted three days and resulted in heavy casualties from either side before the confederates were forced into a retreat and subsequent surrender. In line with participants, well detailed biographies by the scholars illustrate the kind of leadership provided by the then generals during the civil war. The characters of great importance during the Gettysburg confrontation include General George Meade of the Union faction and General Robert Lee who led the confederate soldiers. While over 160,000 soldiers engaged in the battle, the confederates had fewer men compared to the Union front. The scholars share different opinions on the opposing sides with a clear inclination of whom they would support. An in-depth look at Coddington’s ‘The Gettysburg Campaign’, although not clearly stated his tilt towards the Union forces is revealed as the writer engages the reader in a detailed narration of the events. Coddington’s account of the campaign is regarded as a fine volume of events as they were and as such, it has been highly influential in shaping how society thinks of the battle. Moreover, Coddington’s analysis depicts a rough image of the generals that led the battle giving rise to different sentiments on his account. The writer cites the mistakes made by the confederate generals during the three-day battle while bravery is illustrated for officers involved in the repulsion of the Pickett’s charge. It is the writer’s belief that the Union’s victory can be attributed to General Lee’s contempt of his opponents, overconfidence, and poor organisation (Coddington 680). In essence, Coddington hold General Lee culpable for the failure to make a decisive strike on the first day of the battle where the writer suggests a different outcome for the entire confrontation. This take absolves other perspectives such as lack of coordination, firepower, and ill-trained soldiers from all blame and setting it all on General Lee. Unfortunately, the writer’s work has always seized a unique spot among historians leaving almost no room for criticism. It has been argued that the writer relied on the General Lee’s use of the phrase ‘if practicable’ when issuing orders, which is seen as a suggestion rather than an order (Bowden and Ward 199). This has seen similar sentiments echoed historians covering the battle of Gettysburg, which serves to blind research into other possible causes of the defeat. This is evidenced by David Moore’s Gettysburg to Appomattox: The South’s Critical Failures where a detailed account of the battle is provided focussing on failure by the confederates. Coddington’s views are seemingly in full contradiction to the beliefs by other scholars who cite failure and lack of decisive action on the confederates’ part during the battle of Gettysburg. This is cited in the historical novel by David Shaara titled The Killer Angels, which is largely accepted by historians for having a unique perspective based on the role of General Lee in the battle. The writer reveals errors made by Lee and other Southern generals leading to the inevitable outcome at Gettysburg, which enriches the exploration of the battle. It is cited that the Southern soldiers failed to take high ground after their initial attack leading to a reinforced Union defence at Cemetery Hill. Notably, Shaara stands out as the only scholar who downplays the controversial ‘if possible’ theory and suggests its existence is by design. Another contribution to the confederate loss is the failure to report on Union positions by scouting infantries (Donovan and Greiss 148). As such, the writer does not shy away from indicating the role of each general in the loss at Gettysburg summarising the proceedings as gross tactical failures. These tactical blunders saw General Lee disregard preference by Longstreet to fight a defensive war and corner the Union forces at a better position. Shaara argue that Lee feared ruining the morale of his troops during the retreat process. Another point of interest among scholars lie with the reason for the battle of Gettysburg and essential, the civil war. Slavery was key to heightened political tension in the country during the 1850s, as political parties through their manifestos vowed to curtail its spread. This was seen as a threat to the economy of the southern states that seceded in protest after the election of Abraham Lincoln in the 1860 elections. The southerners are depicted as advocates of slavery as they believed in the need to expand the trade in order to ensure a consistent provision of labour in their farms. Slaves provided hands-on and cheap labour in large cotton plantations and in the manufacturing industries in Southern states. The rift between abolitionist and proslavery elements escalated beyond policies and legislation to bullets and bloodshed (Moore 165). The main contention was the regard of black African slaves as property in spite of the declaration of independence, which declare equality among all men. While the republicans hoped to enforce the law in accordance to this statement, the southerners viewed slaves as property and the statement was void in this case. These issues caused much friction that spilt over after Lincoln’s ascend to power and subsequent secession by a portion of the southern states. Most scholars and historians are in consensus with regard to the role of slavery in the civil war and battles such as the one in Gettysburg. In addition to the above, some scholars cite other reasons for the war including sectionalism where each state hoped to cling its own political, social, and economic practices without interference from the unification of states. As such, political figures took up the responsibility of protecting what they held dear. Similarly, the United States acquired its territory through conquest and negotiations but hoped to impose unilateral policies supreme to the state laws. This polarised regions and evoked colonial sentiments on states that previously professed sovereignty. The outcome of the national elections that saw the election of President Lincoln did not relieve matters since proslavery elements viewed the events as a loss of influence. This follows the president’s capacity to apply the executive branch to rectify slavery in United States territories and expand effectively to those opposed abolition. While the common belief resulting in the American civil war lies with the variance in slavery directive, some scholars are of a different opinion. A good example is illustrated by Shaara who is of the opinion that General Lee had other motivation other than the threat to slavery (Shaara 354). The writer describes the constitution of the Confederate army as one filled with rebels and volunteers most of whom were not only self-equipped, but also unpaid. Shaara observed that the army had a common background in terms of religion, economy, and language as opposed to the Union’s army, who had different backgrounds but fighting for unity. The writer masterfully dismisses the commanding officers involved in the battle at Gettysburg for their failures and loss. Notably, General Lee is on the spot as the writer fails to understand reasons behind his support for the slavery institution. In this manner, Shaara suggests that slavery was not the main reason for the civil war after establishing that the general did not benefit directly in slavery. In The Killer Angels, attempts are made to sanitise Lee from slavery on claims that he did own slaves and the only involvement was in the management of his in-law’s estate. This generates a myriad of suggestions that could have acted as motivation for the Confederate general. With this in mind, the writer downplays the significance of slavery in the battle of Gettysburg and the civil war in general. While scholars disagree on various technicalities of the war, they strike consensus on the impacts of the war with regard to political, economic, and social aspects in the United States. As the war drew to a close, the economy of the country lay in tatters especially at the southern warfronts. This is because most of the fighting took place in at the periphery of the confederate state, which served to destroy the economic progression of the south. Most scholars view this as a tactical move on the Union’s side that was specifically designed to cripple the southern economy. In another light, scholars agree that the civil war in general played a fundamental role in the economic revolution that swept across the United States leading to industrialisation. This follows the enactment of legislations by the republican majority that promoted industrialisation during the 19th century as the country recovered from the years of internal conflict. The decisive battle of Gettysburg contributed to the end of the civil war after a failed attempt by the Southern army to progress to the northern territory. Over time, President Lincoln issued an executive that asserting the freedom of slaves in the southern states, which saw the mass migration of African American to the north owing to the favourable conditions presented by the Union. As such, the Union’s social and moral concerns had prevailed as the war concluded resulting in the abolition of slavery across the United States. Each event leading to the Emancipation Proclamation culminated to a single political ramification to which most scholars are in agreement. The assassination of President Lincoln days after issuing the executive order that saw the emancipation of slave across the United States. Historians suggest that a lot could have been accomplished under the leadership of President Lincoln, having described him as a man of deep convictions on social matters. In conclusion, the scholars of focus in this paper illustrate deep similarity in their analysis of the battle of Gettysburg. Not only do they focus on the details and progression of the confrontation, but are also critical of either sides for various tactical decisions made leading the renowned outcome. However, significant bias is cited in each of the well-researched works as the scholars seek to justify and explore the mood surrounding the battle of Gettysburg. As much as they try to maintain a neutral position in their analysis, it is evident that each writer is inclined to one side while criticising the other. This can be attributed to the fact that the scholars already knew the outcome of the battle and for the purposes of public relations, want to be associated with the team advocating for humane treatment of African Americans. For this reasons, most scholars acknowledge slavery as the main cause of the civil war as other cite other reasons and downplay its role. Notably, scholars are in consensus on the impacts of the war in general leading to the assassination of President Lincoln by Confederate sympathisers. Works Cited Bowden, Scotty and Ward, Bill. Last Chance for Victory: Robert E. Lee and the Gettysburg Campaign, Massachusetts: Da Capo Press, 2009. Print. Coddington, Edwin. The Gettysburg Campaign: A Study in Command, New York: Touchstone, 1997. Print. Donovan, Timothy and Greiss, Thomas. The American Civil War, New York: Square One Publishers Inc, 2002. Print. Moore, David. Gettysburg To Appomattox: The South’s Critical Failures, New York: Office Outlet Publishing, 2010. Print. Shaara, Michael. The Killer Angels: A Novel of the Civil War, Broadway: Modern Library, 2004. Print. Read More