Civil War history re-examined

Norristown native poses provocative questions about Gen. Robert E. Lee in newest book.

Some might say Albert M. Gambone has "overcompensated" for failing his history course at Norristown High School back in 1957.
But back then, he claims, no one ever told him about the important role Norristown played in the Civil War.
The author of four books on the Civil War who maintains a personal library of approximately 3,000 volumes on the subject, Gambone has virtually become a Civil War expert.

However, Gambone counters that he is "convinced there is no such thing as an 'expert' on the war . . . perhaps on a battle or a person or event . . . but not the entire war."

It was this past July 4 that Gambone's book, "Lee at Gettysburg . . . commentary on defeat" was released. The controversial work suggests that the famous Confederate general, Robert E. Lee, was not the great military genius portrayed in the history books and that it was Lee, not his subordinates, who bore the responsibility for the Confederate defeat at Gettysburg.

From his home in Myrtle Beach, S.C., Gambone good-naturedly denies that he has received disdain from friends and neighbors but admits that his next-door neighbor "absolutely refuses to read the Lee work."

On the other hand, on the day his latest book was released, Gambone presented two workshops on his subject at Gettysburg.
At the first, one man stood up, walked out and slammed the door. Following the second, at a book signing, another man approached the table, thanked Gambone and quietly told the author he had had strict instructions from his wife not "to buy a book from that son of a b--."

But Gambone says he has also heard from a South Carolina free lance author who takes exception to some things "but on the whole, he says it causes him to look at Lee with a more objective eye. That, in my opinion, is a great leap forward."

In his foreword, Gambone claims that history's portrayal of Robert E. Lee was a creation of image makers and that, while the general "was a God-fearing individual, devoted father, faithful husband, dedicated soldier and committed educator. In short, a good man... Lee never won more than five or six major battles."

The author further notes "that precious few generals in history are labeled 'great' when they lose a war!"

Furthermore, Gambone states that, Lee was, "by marriage, the legal grandson of the first president" and he speculates, "It is rather doubtful that Washington would have thought anything different of Robert E. Lee than how he viewed traitorous Benedict Arnold."

Gambone says his volumne on Lee is the result of six years of research. Three of his prior four books are biographies of Norristown men who were Civil War generals and who are all buried in Norristown's Montgomery Cemetery: John F. Hartranft (released in 1995), Samuel K. Zook (1996), and Winfield Scott Hancock (1997). The fourth book is a biography of Major General Daarius Nash Couch (2000) who was from New York and who led the Union II Corps prior to Hancock.

Born and raised in Norristown's East End, Gambone attended Lowell Technical Institute (now Lowell University), studying chemistry and mathematics, following his graduation from Norristown High. He later studied religion and philosophy at Mattactuck Community College in Waterbury, Conn. After moving from Norristown in 1965, he spent 35 years in New England, where he wascvice president of a manufacturing firm. He and his wife, Nancy moved to Myrtle Beach about six years ago.
It was only 20 years ago that the Civil War captured his interest when he read a condensed version of Carl Sandburg's "Lincoln."

"It left so many questions," he relates, "that I went back and read all six volumes and I was off and running. I was touched by the human factor of the war. I could really care less about the left flank or the right flank. Those men (in particular), Northern and Southern, were real flesh and blood and, when I was bitten, I wanted to crawl inside their heads to see what made them tick. I am still crawling and that is why everything I write is a bio of sort . . . even though it might be a monograph."

He says he was inspired to write the biographies "because I came across the names Hancock, Hartranft and Zook so often - Hancock the most. I graduated from the schools in Norristown and not once did anyone ever tell me about those men . . . not to mention the other two Civil War generals, Slemmer and McClennan. I was amazed that my hometown was so significant in the war and I decided to write about all five generals."

He adds that, at the time of the Civil War, Norristown's population numbered about 8,000 "and it is likely that no other town, North or South, with the same size population, had as many general-sons."

Conceding that he is now not sure he will get to the other two generals' biographies, Gambone declares, "I belong to the Hancock Society of Montgomery County and have a great interest in Montgomery Cemetery. I have lectured there frequently and am embarrassed that it is in such a state of destruction and the townspeople, in general, know so little (about it). It is a treasure chest of historical information."

Listing what he calls "just a few examples," Gambone notes that when Winfield Scott Hancock was a Democratic presidential contender, Pennsylvania, Norristown and Montgomery County did not vote for him.

"Of all Union generals, he was undoubtedly the most respected and beloved in the South for his bravery and human compassion," he continues. "John Hartranft, a citzen soldier, won the Medal of Honor for his work at the first battle of Manassas. He took the bridge at the Battle of Antietam, defeated Lee's last offensive at the Battle of Fort Stedman, was the jailer during the Lincoln Conspiracy Trial and put Mary Surratt to death by Federal government fiat. After the war, he was twice governor of Pennsylvania. He gave blacks the right to vote in this state and did away with the Molly Maguires."

He notes that the Civil War obelisk on the green just south of the court house in Norristown lists Zook's name as the highest ranking officer to die during the war from Montgomery County.

Reiterating his pride in Norristown's contributions, the writer says, "White men and women were not the only Norristown and Norristown-area contributors because, if you look upon that monument near the court house (in Norristown), you will see the names of those area men who belonged to the famed 54th Massachusetts.

"That regiment was the focal point for the movie 'Glory' and their assault upon Battery Wagner in July of 1863, which cost them almost half of their numbers. The 54th Mass. was not only from the Bay State; they came from many parts of the Union and Norristown gave its own numbers as well. And for many, the actions and bravery of those black men turned the tide of hatred and doubt then associated with the Negro. Consequently, there is plenty of pride to go around for everyone."

He adds, "If I had one wish, it would be that our schools and teachers would pass onto the youth the pride of where they are from - and what those who went before them really did."

Lee is a man who stands on his own. Any review of his personal writings and personal accounts with Lee reveal an upstanding gentleman bound by a sense of honor and duty.

Revisionist authors from PA who write books to smear his good name could not hold General Lee's knickers. He was more man than most of us could ever imagine.

God Bless General Robert E. Lee!

Robert E. Lee, was not the great military genius portrayed in the history books and that it was Lee, not his subordinates, who bore the responsibility for the Confederate defeat at Gettysburg.

While not wanting to get into a lengthy argument, it is often said the had Stonewall Jackson been at Gettysburg, the outcome of the war would have have been different.

Yes, Lee did do some stupid things during the Civil War, but you don't become a General by doing nothing. Does Gambone examine why Lee named commander of the CSA Army? Or what his record was prior the WBtS?

Lee never won more than five or six major battles.

Well, I believe George Washington won exactly one major battle (Yorktown). But Washington was undoubtably a great general. How many Northern Generals won more than 5 or 6 major battles? Grant, probably. Pretty sure nobody else did.

Lee's achievements were monumental. But revisionist historians need to tear down anyone on the "wrong side" of history.

Robert E. Lee, was not the great military genius portrayed in the history books and that it was Lee, not his subordinates, who bore the responsibility for the Confederate defeat at Gettysburg.

I guess I didn't realize this was a particularly controversial position. Lee decided to try a frontal attack under Pickett rather than the flank attack advocated by Longstreet. Considering the nature of the ground and the superiority of Union artillery, this was undoubtedly a serious mistake. It was Lee's mistake.

Improvements in artillery and small arms were rapidly making mass charges obsolete. That Lee and a great many other generals in the WBTS did not understand this is not particularly surprising. It took most European generals till 1917 to thoroughly learn it.

Lee was a great man and a great general. But Gettysburg was not a stunning example of his brilliance.

Washington was undoubtably a great general.

Only because his character and tenacity saved the cause of Independence. He was not particularly good either tactically or strategically.

Oddly enough, the greatest military genius on either side in that war was probably Benedict Arnold. And he was on both sides!

BA was in many ways the inverse of Washington. A truly great soldier and a man of no character.

Robert E. Lee, was not the great military genius portrayed in the history books and that it was Lee, not his subordinates, who bore the responsibility for the Confederate defeat at Gettysburg.

What an absolute slur on General Lee. While it is true that the General in charge must take the reponsibilty for the loss of the battle, re Gettysburg one must consider the lack of full commuication between Lee and the Corps Commander on the Confederate right, Longstreet. Then too, what if the mercurical Stonewall had been in charge of the Confederate left on days one and two of Gettysburg to carry out Lee's directives instead of the lethargic Gen. Ewell? Methinks the battle might well have come out differently.

I could really care less about the left flank or the right flank.

Not the best way to earn a reputation for insightful commentary on military tactics. In other words, he gives opinion in the form of biography. Interesting approach, but hardly worth taking seriously.

General Lee took responsibilty for the failure of Pickett's charge on the afternoon it occurred, as the very courageous Confederate participants came straggling back to the Confederate lines.

General Lee was a great leader of men anda great general, as he constantly was able to turn battlefield disadvantages to his advantage over Union generals time and time again. How many Union generals were gone through by the time Grant came on the scene? Lee was the only commander of the Army of Northern Virginia throughout the war.

The Civil War was fought was great and honorable emn. Their courage and heroism, though ordinary citizens, on both sides is still a source of amazement to me as I tour their battlefields. Where did this country get this kind of men?

Winning battles isn't enough. Hannibal could win battles, but he failed to make strategic use of his victories. Other generals have been considered "losers" in history, but the outcome of their strategic maneuvering tells a different story: Nathanael Greene, for instance.

Think of baseball: base hits are nice, but hits don't win the game. In football, yardage gains are wonderful, but they only win when they reach the end zone. It's not uncommon to post better raw stats than your opponent and still lose the game.

Lee is admired by many (excluding our resident FReeper South-bashing contingent whom I'm sure will be here any second). He is admired primarily because he won a number of battles tactically on the field and a fair number of other strategic victories against a more powerful and well equipped foe. And he inspired his men. And he conducted himself with dignity in defeat. He was hardly flawless and I confess to belonging to the "he should have listened to Longstreet crowd". Actually, he should have taken the high ground at the first opportunity(including the evening of the first day's skirmishes even before all his forces arrived) and had Stuart reeled in for more prompt recon. My son and son to be are both great(X3) nephews of Gen. William Barksdale of my homestate who was killed on the low ground as you are all well aware. (Barksdale's sister Virginia was my wife's great great grandmother) Lee won most of his victories by choosing his own ground and choosing it well. That is a fairly consistent mark of all successful military leaders.

I have respect for Grant as well but from a different perspective of tactics. Grant was very very determined...something that separated him from all his predecessors. I am a big fan of Stonewall Jackson but Lee had some pretty fair generals in his stead. I'm not sure I would blame most of the Gettysburg defeat on Jackson's death. One could argue that the entire Gettysburg campaign was misguided. One could argue all of these tactics forever, in fact some do.

It's not a controversial position to anyone that's read anything about that battle in particular, or the War of Northern Agression in general.

Lee freely admitted at the time, and maintatained in later years it was a huge mistake. Longstreet was agast when Lee informed him of his plan and didn't want to participate.

A frontal attack, over open ground, uphill, in broad daylight, to the center of a superior force. It was nuts. Lee knew it, but his genius was knowing what unexpected actions he could get away with.

His genius took a vacation at Gettysburg. It happens.

This isn't exactly news. Lee's willingness to accept great casualties when he could ill afford them has been a subject of discussion for some time, as has the question of whether a different, less territorial strategy would have been better for his side. Also, D.S. Freeman included many mythical and unsubstantiated accounts in his biography of Lee. And those who huff about assaults on Lee's reputation ought to give a thought to what was done to Longstreet by Lee's own admirers.

But Lee was a classy guy who did show many virtues. And he was certainly a good military commander. While another hypothetical leader could have won the war for the Confederacy, most of the real ones wouldn't have made it last as long as Lee did. Lee's choice of Confederate command over his oath to the union and constitutution is something that makes it hard for some to take the "Marble Man" image.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.