We are now going to hearing a lot about Gettysburg. It is the 150th anniversary of that three day battle. A lot of people believe it is the turning point in the way.
I think this is misleading in the same way that D-Day is represented as the turning point in WW II. (The Germans were in retreat on the East since Stalingrad fell in early 1942.)
As you read about Gettysburg, don't forget that Vicksburg was besieged and would surrender on July 4th. No matter what happened at Gettysburg Vicksburg was still going to fall.
If all you know about the battle is Killer Angels (and it is very good), it does not tell the whole story.
After the break, my thoughts on Gettysburg.
First, Shaara seems to rely a lot on Longstreet that Lee had choices to wait for the Union Army to attack. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Lee was invading and his supply lines were very long. The longer he stayed in Pennsylvania the more tenuous his position would be. He had to attack and defeat the Union army as quickly as possible.
To my knowledge, only twice did a Civil War army cut itself from its supply: Grant in the Vicksburg campaign and Sherman's march to the sea. In both those cases, those armies were moving to re-establish their supply lines. Lee had no such plan and no such ability. If he defeats the Army of the Potomac, what does he do?
Second, it is unclear what a Confederate victory would have meant. There are very few battles in the Civil War where one army destroys the other. I can think of three: Richmond (the Union army was made up of green units), Westport, and Nashville. The later two were in 1864 and there was no support for those armies to reconstitute itself. After the first two days of Chancellorsville. a major of Union corps commanders wanted to stay.
Remnants of the Union Army, the Army of the Potomac, would still have been viable and would have defended DC. The largest corps of the Army of the Potomac had seen next to no action. Essentially, all of Lee's army had been committed at Gettysburg. Lee could not have stayed in Pennsylvania long, especially after such a bloody battle.
I heard someone claim today on C-Span that a Confederate victory at Gettysburg would have meant French and British recognition of the CSA. With the Emancipation Proclamation, that was not going to happen.
As Bruce Catton has noted, the real high tide of the Confederacy was late 1862 when both Maryland and Kentucky was invade by CSA armies. Both were defeated.
Third, Shaara has to make choices on what he will focus on. He does not write about the sacrifice of the 1st Minnesota on the second day, but I'm not sure that it was really crucial. There were Union troops nearby and the Confederate force was not going to stay on Cemetery Ridge because it was not big enough to defend against the Union forces that would counter-attack.
However, it is disappointing not enough is made about Greene's defense of Culp's Hill. On the second day, Union forces were being moved off Culp's Hill to reinforce other parts of the Union army and in the end only Greene's brigade was left. It was a very strong defensive position, but Greene's defense, against three Confederate brigades, was as heroic as anything on Little Roundtop.
Fourth, with some notable exceptions (the 11th Corps dispositions north of Gettysburg and Sickles move of the Third Corps forward), the Union army at all levels outperformed the Confederate Army. Part of this was due to the fact that at Gettysburg, the number of able officers of Lee's army were much fewer. (By the way, having looked at where Sickles was supposed to have placed his troops, his move makes some sense. His intended line was dominated by higher ground. He moved his corps to that higher ground. Of course, there is no reason to believe he understood the entire place of the Union army.)
One of the most important events after the battle was Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, one of the great documents in our country's history.
With all of that, the next four days are crucial in keeping the Union together.