They Met at Gettysburg

As the Gettysburg literature goes, Stackpole's They Met at Gettysburg provides the lightest reading you're going to get, while still retaining good substance. This is because Stackpole focuses on army commanders' strategy and decision making, and mostly the movements of corps and occasionally divisions. Refreshingly absent are the mind-numbing minutiae of smaller unit dispositions that are cherished by many "buffs" but render the reader unable to see the forest for the trees. What remains is an excellent overview or introduction to Gettysburg, with some insightful analysis and opinions thrown in by the author. Stackpole draws from mostly secondary sources, and the best known primary sources such as the Official Records, Battles and Leaders and Freemantle. He covers all the clichés on the southern side: Ewell's failure to assault and take the high ground, Longstreet's petulance, Stuart's waywardness and Lee's uncharacteristic reluctance to maneuver. For the Union, however, Stackpole seems most focused on Meade, and lays the blame squarely on the Union army commander for letting Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia escape. He even entertains the idea that Meade WANTED Lee to get away--thus the title of this review. Stackpole concludes by stating that Gettysburg belongs in Creasy's Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World. I disagree. I think that J.F.C. Fuller, who in his Military History of the Western World includes only the Seven Days, Vicksburg and Chattanooga as the decisive battles of the American Civil War, comes closer to the mark. As interesting as Gettysburg is as a study in command, it was not decisive in that the ANV returned across the Potomac, bloodied but unconquered. They had simply been repulsed from what could best be described as a raid, not an invasion, and would fight on for two more years.

Stackpole was my introduction to many civil war battles. He writes simply and concise and makes you want to investigate these battles more in depth. Of Course these nerds that dont have a life and have read every volume of every civil war battle ever written are not going to like Stackpoles books, this one included, but everyone that has a love and expertise of military history had to start somewhere and if your a novice and want a introduction to this battle this is the book for you. Stackpole eases you into the battle. He is an expert at that. If you like it then certainly go to Coddington's Gettysburg Campaign. This is not the end all book of Gettysburg but if you want your interest piqued Stackpole is an expert. If your a novice and want to be totally baffled by a battle read Showalter's Tannneberg: Clash of Empires. Oh for the guy that said in his review he quit halfway through Stackpole's The Fredricksburg Campaign cause Stackpole took too long to get to the actual fighting. Genious it is calledd The Fredrickburg Campaign not The Battle of Fredricksburg. If it says campaign your going to get almost equal amounts of before, during, and after the battle. If you get a book like that and your bored learn how to skim the boring parts til you get to the meat.

Do not buy this book if you wanted a detailed blow by blow description of the battle, see Coddington's work for a great study of the battle. While sections of the book do have detailed analysis and descriptions it's the look at the command structure that sets this book apart.Stackpole goes to great lengths to show the differences between Meade and Lee and how these differences affected the ebb and flow over the course of the 3 days in question. I've read many books on Gettysburg and there was something about this book that really appealed to me, whether it was the way the author presented the material or his writing style I can't say but I thoroughly enjoyed this book.

They Met at Gettysburg is an good intermediate level text of the battle. Stackpole, a retired Army general, knows his subject and digs deep into the minds of Lee and Meade. There is much more emphasis on troop movements and battle philosophy than on the actual fighting. For instance, Pickett's Charge earns less than 5 pages of text in a 400 page book. Stackpole is also a little harder on General Longstreet, and softer on Lee, than one would expect. He repeatedly says this was Lee's worst battle, but just as often says that Lee was far superior to Meade, Longstreet, and everyone else on the field. A little hero worship, perhaps. You can see the references to this book in Michael Shaara's The Killer Angels, except that Shaara has a more favorable impression of Longstreet. All in all, a fine book, but not as good as I anticipated