CivilWarTalk.com - A free and friendly Civil War community.
CivilWarTalk.com
The Dispatch Depot at Civil War Talk  

Go Back   The Dispatch Depot at Civil War Talk > The Backpack - Essential Discussions > Civil War History - Gettysburg Forum

Civil War History - Gettysburg Forum Gettysburg! It's not just a National Park. It's a Civil War Battlefield. For some it's historic and storied past are almost an obsession! All related discussions are welcome here!

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 08-20-2004, 11:04 AM
dawna's Avatar
First Sergeant (1000+ posts)
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: canada
Posts: 1,485
Default

Thank you Tommy. Was A.P. Hill's division involved in Pickett's charge?

Dawna
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-20-2004, 09:21 PM
Sergeant (500+ posts)
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ill.
Posts: 530
Default

dawna
"Why Did Early wait until after Lee's death to publicly attack Longstreet?"
Because he was afraid, and rightly so, that Lee would come to the defence of his old war horse.
"What caused the lack of communication with Jeb Stuart's unit during the Battle of Gettysburg?" With the AoP between him and Lee, none of his messengers could get thru the lines.
"What was Longstreet's option instead of Pickett's charge?" To resign?? The PPT charge was not his option, but Lee's, and its possible he had no other option, except retreating. This is still being debated today.
Pickett's Division was of Longstreet's Corp; Pettigrew and Trimble were in the 3rd Corp of A.P.Hill
Chuck in Il.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-20-2004, 10:10 PM
aphillbilly
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dawna
Charles is correct. The bulk of the troops in the charge were Hill's. Why Longstreet was given the task of leadership over it is a bit odd given Longstreets obvious distaste for the endeavor. Whereas Hill was much more eager for a fight as usual. Naturally the outcome would have been the same. But as merely my opinion, I think Hill would have done a better job than Longstreet. Still failing of course. I believe Robertson's book puts forth the idea that less life may have been lost even in defeat had a more interested leader been in charge. Who knows?

YMOS
tommy
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-20-2004, 10:54 PM
Sergeant (500+ posts)
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ill.
Posts: 530
Default

tommy,
From skimming thru Coddington, it appears that Lee wanted an attack at each end of the line early on the morning of July 3rd, Culps Hill by Ewell again, and Longstreet at the other end with 2 divisions, although exactly where he was to attack was very ambiguious. I gather that Lee just went ahead and kept Longstreet as leader of the new attack plan created after the early morning attack was delayed.
Chuck in Il.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-21-2004, 05:22 PM
dawna's Avatar
First Sergeant (1000+ posts)
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: canada
Posts: 1,485
Default

Thank you Charles for your response. From what I understand, Longstreet tried to change General Lee's mind several times regarding Pickett's charge, and I was wondering if he had a "Plan B?"

Dawna
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-21-2004, 05:24 PM
dawna's Avatar
First Sergeant (1000+ posts)
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: canada
Posts: 1,485
Default

Tommy:

Given Longstreet's distaste for General Lee's plan, is this why it took him so long to position his troops?

Dawna
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-21-2004, 08:43 PM
Private (25+ posts)
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 36
Default

Dawna, Longstreet wanted to move around to the south from the beginning. He had scouts out all morning on the third, and somehow managed to ignore the fact that Lee wanted Pickett up early in the morning. He seemed to be focusing on setting a plan of his own in motion that Lee didn't even know about. Thus, without Pickett up, Lee had to change his plans.

Longstreet had been trying to convince Lee to move off by the right flank since the morning of the 2nd. This idea, to me, seems absurd. Lee was moving around blind since Stuart was away until mid day on the 2nd, and Ewell was firmly stuck in and to the east of town. Furthermoe, the proposition that he move portions of his corp (namely Hood; he was the one who wanted to do it on the 2nd) around the roundtops on the 2nd is just as crazy. By the time Hood touched of his assault, it would have been just about dark, and he would be tangling with just about all of the union 6th corp.

I think the answer to your most recent question is that he was caught up in planning his move to the south. But to me, thats no excuse for ignoring orders from your commander.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-21-2004, 09:28 PM
aphillbilly
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dawna,
I hesitate to say why in this particular battle he was so long in doing what he was asked to do. But by and large he was fairly slow setting up in several engagements to the point it was something of a joke amongst the ANV. As an example on May 6th during the Battle of the Wilderness a Richmond cannoneer:

“Like a fine lady at a party, Longstreet was often late in his arrival at the ball but he always made a sensation...with the grand old First Corps, sweeping behind him, as his train.”
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-22-2004, 11:00 AM
dawna's Avatar
First Sergeant (1000+ posts)
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: canada
Posts: 1,485
Default

Ben & Tommy:

Wouldn't ignoring your commander be no less than insubordination?

Dawna
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-22-2004, 12:41 PM
Private (25+ posts)
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 36
Default

Longstreet was bordering on insubordination the whole time and quite often, almost stepped across the line. I think it was only Lee's friendship with the man that Kept Longstreet from being scolded. But yea, I see it as insubordination. Theres an interesting quote from Longstreet

"I consider it a part of my duty to express my views to the commanding general. If he approves and adopts them, it is well; if he does not, it is my duty to adopt his views, and to execute his orders faithfully as if they were my own.”

THis is something Longstreet wrote to his uncle after the battle. Authors have suggested that this was his heavy conscience talking, for he clearly did not, in my opinion, carry out Lee's orders to the best of his ability.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0
Back to top
Bringing the American Civil War to Life. Copyright © 1999 - 2008, CivilWarTalk.com. Site Version 4.3
The American Civil War | Forum | Resource Center | Image Gallery | Links | Site Map | XML | Donations