Dom71 Wrote, "But nobody was chewing on tall grass and playing cards waiting for them up there either. It isn't fair to minimize the other sides hardships." I wasn't minimizing the role of Vincent's Brigade. It was to demonstrating a simple compare / contrast to a degree. That was my point earlier in trying to be 'accurate,' in other words in an effort to better clarify.
Well b6 that account it would seem that's exactly what they were doing lol. I have not read Dejardins
For instance, take a peek at Dr. DesJardin's book when he stated, "Near sunrise of July 2 the men woke and managed a hasty breakfast before falling in. Officer's inspected the soldiers weapons...later, the entire division crossed over Rock Creek...and took a reserve position in a peach orchard. The men stacked arms and *rested* as more complete news of the battle began to reach them. Some cooked coffee and others spoke. Most of the afternoon on July 2 the 20th remained safely nested between the other regiments of the 5th Corps. along the Granite Schoolhouse Rd."
You were saying...? Now, keep this in mind and contrast it to the Alabamians' experience on that day below:
Cash/Jimklag wrote, "Let's not get carried away. Nobody was defending Big Round Top, so it was hardly a feat to go to the top." In fairness, both authors Dr. DesJardin and Glenn Tucker agree that, "Praising Chamberlain for his work in the battle should not, however, diminish the endurance, tenacity, and courage of the rest of the men - Alabamians alike, who did what they believed was their duty, to home, God, country, or comrades." And, "Oates emerged from the woods, crossed Plum Run without stopping for water in front of Round Top, confronted by the 2nd United States Sharpshooters under Major Homer S. Stoughton behind a stone wall. Oates continued despite the fire. Here the mountain is steep and treacherous...clambered over giant boulders in the face of enemy bullets, while the sharpshooters took cover and fired from the rocks...who squads might hide and fire. During this tortuous struggle the 15th had ceased to think of bluecoated enemies, rocks, bushes, or anything except one vital element - their missing canteens. Many fainted succumbing to heat and thirst. Law's brigade had marched 24 miles and Oats ascended without water the steep sides of a rugged mountain, carrying their muskets, ammunition, and haversacks. Greater heroes never shouldered muskets than these Alabamians. It was indeed a superb accomplishment. Now they required rest." Keep in mind...this was BEFORE the battle of Little Round Top even took place, which included several more hours. Remarkable feat of human strength and adrenaline, lol.
To both Dom71 and Cash/Jimklag, I would say - please do not be too hasty yourselves in making your own assertions as these two quotes refute your claim. And, it's because of this information why it's not foolhardy of folks, such as myself, who feel that greater recognition to these Alabamians is long overdue instead of yet another statue to Chamberlain (with respect on both sides; as both did their duty). Again, it's giving credit to a remarkable feat in 'American history; North or South. In this case, the South & I feel that more recognition to them (in place of Chamberlain) is a good balance and serves as a testament of what we today can still accomplish. When I read about the Alabamians, I often imagine anywhere from school students to the U.S. military today being captivated, mesmerized, inspired, and motivated by these very Alabamians. What amazing lessons could be taught to this current generation indeed! I do Federal reenacting and deplore the very foundations on which the Confederacy was built upon. But, these Alabamians captured the true American spirit whole-heartedly and they were just that - Americans true to the core. Yes, their monument (or a generalized monument to the Civil War soldier at that location) is long overdue vs. another statue of a single one man.
As far as 'Fort Hell' is concerned, Dr. Rasbach made an excellent claim & defense that Chamberlain more than likely attacked & received this wounding near Pegram’s Salient instead. Agreed, telegraphs were no doubt being used. But, the point is that various authors were indicating that Chamberlain himself was sending that form of communication directly while out in the field during the chaos of battle, which calls that component into question / doubt. It's important to keep in mind too that many of those authors writing about Chamberlain (in admiration of him) were using Chamberlain's exact quotes and taking them as 'gospel' because they were primary sources. Naturally, historians use primary sources as their #1 go-to source. But, if Chamberlain was in error to begin with that doesn't necessarily make those primary sources accurate and true. Plus, how many years did Chamberlain finally write about his Petersburg experiences? Wasn't it something round' the 33 year later mark?