‘Good’ is a strong word. A lot of '61 was two sets of incompetents flailing at each other, and the dice coming up lucky for the South, while '62 and '63 was largely a series of unforced errors on the part of incompetent Northern generals. The strategic acumen of Lee et co is much overstated.
‘Good’ is a strong word. A lot of '61 was two sets of incompetents flailing at each other, and the dice coming up lucky for the South, while '62 and '63 was largely a series of unforced errors on the part of incompetent Northern generals. The strategic acumen of Lee et co is much overstated.
I wasn’t saying that southern generals were good, just that most of the northern ones didn’t seem to be. Sorry for being unclear.
Ah, yeah, completely correct then.
Tactical Acumen I think. That’s the overall reputation of Lee, earned or not. He’s never really been noted as a good strategist.