back to top
|Is it fair to say that General Lee was unusually agressive and that he had been extremely fortunate for a variety of reasons that this had not caught up with him till Gettysburg? My understanding is that in the Pennisular Campaign that he demonstrated it, and that McClellan responded appropriately. That at Fredricksburg that the movement of just two generals from Central to Left Front might have had a material impact on the final result. Then I would raise the question of whether General Hooker was "outgeneraled", or that General Lee was again very lucky? My very limited research on the subject suggests that Agressive General Lee usually subjected the Army of Northern Virginia to very heavy causalties in his admitted many victories. Was then Gettysburg more a case of Lady Luck catching up with him as opposed to him just having a bad hair day? NOTE: THESE ARE ALL POSED AS QUESTIONS!