Reseña del libro "Jointness in 1780 Charleston and 1861-1865 Charleston (en Inglés)"
Jointness between army and naval forces has been the focus of many historical studies. Yet, it is often difficult to determine how effective jointness was in accomplishing the required mission. Would the outcome have been the same if the forces operated more jointly? To help resolve this problem, this research focuses on a comparison and analysis between the jointness in the successful siege of Charleston by the British in 1780, and the unsuccessful siege of Charleston by the Union in 1861-1865. This research examines what role jointness played in the successful and failed sieges of Charleston during the two time periods. Charleston's geography and fortifications played a key role in necessitating the need for forces to operate jointly. The effect of battle command and centers of gravity in relation to how forces operate jointly is also discussed. This research serves as a historical case study to help better understand the importance of jointness.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
