GDG- The Turning Point?

[NPeters102 at aol.com]

In a message dated 4/2/2007 11:15:04 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
smith_david_g at bah.com writes:

1)   That some people, championed by James McPherson in his latest
*Antietam*  book consider Antietam to be the true turning point of the
war because it  led to the emancipation of the slaves.
2) Another group of people considers  Gettysburg not to have been the
turning point, but something later,  generally the fall of Atlanta.  Gary
Gallagher has an essay in The  Confederate War in which he argues that
Confederate soldiers and those on  the home front did not see Gettysburg
as a key turning point.  Also, I  believe James McPherson (in *Battle Cry
of Freedom*) was one of the major  modern scholars to point out the
confluence between Atlanta, Sheridan in  the Valley, and Lincoln's
reelection in 1864.  BCoF is a big book, but  a high school student might
want to look at that chapter.  There may  be other sources as well.



David:
 
Interesting post. Please allow a lurker to weigh-in on this  issue.
 
I find Antietam & the EP very important politically. After the EP,  it became 
a war to free the slaves, as well as a war to preserve the Union.  It has 
been said that this was done more to keep England & France out of the  fray than 
to free the slaves. The question I always ask myself is "Was England  &/or 
France really considering jumping into the fray?" 
 
Without Chattanooga, is Atlanta & Sherman's March to the Sea  possible?
 
Re: Vicksburg, wasn't it Halleck who said that a victory at Vicksburg  was 
more important than the fall of 40 Richmonds. I cast my tally for the  Vicksburg 
Campaign & for the battle of Champion Hill specifically. 
 
But militarily speaking there are other Western Theater battles worthy  of 
consideration, IMHO.
 
Respectfully,

Mike  Peters
npeters102 at aol.com



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.