Gettysburg: Assault on the Round Tops....Should they have gone to the right?

Even if, given 20-20 hindsight, Lee had done something different... would it have ultimately mattered?

Given a crushing economic superiority and population advantage, I would contend that the South was finished once the North: 1) found Grant (and a competent supporting cast) to wage an effective war of attrition... and 2) once the North acquired and maintained the societal will to pay the enormous price in blood.

Lee could have done what any of you suggested... or spent the 3 days playing bocce and canasta... and the war ends the same.
 
Even if, given 20-20 hindsight, Lee had done something different... would it have ultimately mattered?

Given a crushing economic superiority and population advantage, I would contend that the South was finished once the North: 1) found Grant (and a competent supporting cast) to wage an effective war of attrition... and 2) once the North acquired and maintained the societal will to pay the enormous price in blood.

Lee could have done what any of you suggested... or spent the 3 days playing bocce and canasta... and the war ends the same.


On a grand strategic level you are completely right. The North basically used about a ninth of the available resources compared to the South effectively using more than 100% of theirs. But the people of the time could not see this and many in the North genuinely thought they were going to lose the war and see the rise of a new nation. I don't think Lee was one of these people. I think he knew the South could not win but honour made him choose his state over his nation.
 
On the second day of battle, most of both armies had assembled. The Union line was laid out resembling a fishhook. Lee launched a heavy assault on the Union left flank, and fierce fighting raged at Little Round Top, the Wheatfield, Devil's Den, and the Peach Orchard. Confederate generals including Longstreet had wanted to attack by flanking the Union forces and hitting them from the side and behind. Lee overruled this plan and insisted on a frontal assault, which was unsuccessful at the cost of heavy casualties on both sides.

Should Lee have listened to his generals and gone with the flanking attack they had wanted?
Yes. Lee's direct attacks almost never worked.
 
Lee and co. made a mistake with their tactics.

However, I honestly believe that the bigger mistake was made by George Meade (Union). He could have finished off Lee's forces, but instead, chose to cease operations once the Confederate forces were repulsed.
 
I am not convinced the Union forces were in much shape to decisively pursue. They had suffered gravely, as had the Confederates.

I feel that Meade would have risked the same level of bloody reverse the Russians frequently received on the Eastern Front from counter-attacking Germans. Close pursuit sounds dynamic.... but often a beaten (though not broken) enemy will turn on you and inflict a sharp reverse.

For once, sitting pat was likely the way to go.
 
I think it must also be remembered that the Union forces had just completed a long and hard forced march to catch up to the Confederates who had been moving at a more reasonable pace. The battle was joined well before Mead was on the field and he didn't arrive until it was too dark to do anything.

He was also the seventh commanding General and they had all seen how effective sitting is a defensive position without counter-attacking was throughout the preceding year.
 
This spring break me and a friend are going down to Gettysburg to check things out. Any advice on how to get the best experience while visiting? I'll have about 13 days to do it.

Oh yeah...They should've gone to the right!
 
Don't try cutting through the woods from Devils Den to the Round Tops.
I almost lost a boot in there. :)


As to Union pursuit of the retreating Confederate's, Meade's army was pretty banged up too, and pursuing them might have allowed the Confederates an advantage in that they had dug in expecting an attack.
 
This spring break me and a friend are going down to Gettysburg to check things out. Any advice on how to get the best experience while visiting? I'll have about 13 days to do it.

Oh yeah...They should've gone to the right!

13 days? Then make sure you go to Antietam. It's wasn't very built up last time I was there, unlike Gettysburg.

Of course, read all you can about the battle before you visit... but you already knew that, didn't you.
 
Saw a History Channel program "Modern Marvels-- Civil War Tech"... mentioned how the railroad and (I think) Assistant Surgeon George Otis then commander of the Union Army Railroad is one of the key players unsung heroes of Gettysburg for the use of the railroad to transport fresh troops and supplies TO Gettysburg and the transport of the wounded during end of each day's battle.
Program said it weren't not for this the Union would've probably suffered a disastrous defeat.

Just thought I'd throw that into the pot.
 
Saw a History Channel program "Modern Marvels-- Civil War Tech"... mentioned how the railroad and (I think) Assistant Surgeon George Otis then commander of the Union Army Railroad is one of the key players unsung heroes of Gettysburg for the use of the railroad to transport fresh troops and supplies TO Gettysburg and the transport of the wounded during end of each day's battle.
Program said it weren't not for this the Union would've probably suffered a disastrous defeat.

Just thought I'd throw that into the pot.

Transportation - be it Union railroads or command of the sea - was a huge factor in successful warfare. Still is. Not for nothing was it said, "get there firstest with the mostest" by Confederate General Forrest. Not for nothing did Sherman never miss a chance to destroy a railroad on his marches.

The other key factor was that the Union had the men to move in the first place. The Union could afford a Cold Harbor or a Fredricksburg; the South could not afford Pickett's Charge.
 
Saw a History Channel program "Modern Marvels-- Civil War Tech"... mentioned how the railroad and (I think) Assistant Surgeon George Otis then commander of the Union Army Railroad is one of the key players unsung heroes of Gettysburg for the use of the railroad to transport fresh troops and supplies TO Gettysburg and the transport of the wounded during end of each day's battle.
Program said it weren't not for this the Union would've probably suffered a disastrous defeat.

Just thought I'd throw that into the pot.

Another person who was vital to the Union success but does not get much in the way of credit was the commander of the artillery, a COL Hunt or Holt (I can't remember which). His skill in organising the artillery was astounding.
 
Another person who was vital to the Union success but does not get much in the way of credit was the commander of the artillery, a COL Hunt or Holt (I can't remember which). His skill in organising the artillery was astounding.

A Google search reveals a Major General Henry Hunt in command of Union Artillery.
 
Just back from there for a week, and having done all of the marches from the confederate side, I would give a resounding YES as an answer to the question of the thread. The most Horrible ground I've seen. In fact, the WHOLE army should have. Even going to the right wouldn't have helped at the round tops. There is a steep incline all around. Nothing but rolling hills and inclines for the confederates everywhere there. You're always going "up" while walking from their viewpoint.
 
Just curious...does anyone know if there is a certain signifigance to people leaving coins at the monuments? On the guided tour he mentioned the pennies due to Lincoln's feature at a specific site. But, on our own exploration tour by foot throughout the whole area, we noticed coins left at the monuments and markers, such as at little round top.
 
Near as I can find, it's a way of people honoring the dead, leaving an offering of sorts.
 

Latest Discussions

Back
Top