Copse of Trees 1882 and Now

Gettysburg Greg

First Sergeant
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Location
Decatur, Illinois
hc ave combo2.jpg

Unfortunately, the area around the Angle and Copse of Trees was not the subject of any photographer until William Tipton's 1882 panoramas taken from Hancock Avenue. Tipton recorded a series of 360 degree photos for French artist Paul Philippoteaux to use as a model for his Cyclorama painting. Below is a detail from one of Tipton's 1882 images that includes the Copse of Trees as it appeared less than 20 years after the battle. My similar modern photo shows the farm lane, now Hancock Avenue is crowded with monuments and tourists.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
View attachment 164011
Unfortunately, the area around the Angle and Copse of Trees was not the subject of any photographer until William Tipton's 1882 panoramas taken from Hancock Avenue. Tipton recorded a series of 360 degree photos for French artist Paul Philippoteaux to use as a model for his Cyclorama painting. Below is a detail from one of Tipton's 1882 images that includes the Copse of Trees as it appeared less than 20 years after the battle. My similar modern photo shows the farm lane, now Hancock Avenue is crowded with monuments and tourists.
I really enjoy your then and now photos. Really are amazing, take away the monuments and it really isn't much difference. good stuff
 
I wonder if any period photos were taken around the PA monument looking towards the Emmitsburg Rd along McGilvery's line. My ancestor's 9th Michigan Battery monument is placed there.
 
Last edited:
View attachment 164011
Unfortunately, the area around the Angle and Copse of Trees was not the subject of any photographer until William Tipton's 1882 panoramas taken from Hancock Avenue.

Nothing unfortunate about that, since it is unlikely that the bunch of trees that were there in 1882 were around in 1863 and/or had any significance in the battle, since there are zero contemporary references regarding them.

One man's fairytale that unfortunately the Park Service propagates, and generations upon generations drinking that kool-aid.

This is a 1863 picture looking at the center of the Union lines from LRT, which clearly shows the lack of such a beast (click to enlarge) :

the-center-of-the-federal-position-viewed-from-little-round-top-gettysburg-pa-july-1863.jpg
 
Last edited:
Also, this is a fun one from Harper's weekly July 25th 1863: The bottom engraving is of the center of the Union line, clearly depicting the front line of the Artillery that was supposed around the Copse of Trees. Notice the prominence of that later feature in the contemporary engraving...

(click to enlarge)

battle-gettysburg-1500.jpg
 
I was thinking Lee used the term copse of trees
Lee referred to it as a "little clump of trees" opposite Pender's position (Lee's Lieutenants, Vol III). Lt Col Edmund Rice of Gibbon's division, in B&L, Vol III, says "the right of Hall's and the left of Webb's brigades were in a clump of trees". Gen Henry Hunt in his account in B&L also refers to posting batteries "near the clump of trees". The clump of trees were there, but none of the contemporary accounts I have read refer to it as a "copse", I think that came from Bachelder. Oddly, none of Longstreet's accounts, either in B&L or From Manassas to Appamattox, makes any mention of a clump of trees.
 
Lee referred to it as a "little clump of trees" opposite Pender's position (Lee's Lieutenants, Vol III). Lt Col Edmund Rice of Gibbon's division, in B&L, Vol III, says "the right of Hall's and the left of Webb's brigades were in a clump of trees". Gen Henry Hunt in his account in B&L also refers to posting batteries "near the clump of trees". The clump of trees were there, but none of the contemporary accounts I have read refer to it as a "copse", I think that came from Bachelder. Oddly, none of Longstreet's accounts, either in B&L or From Manassas to Appamattox, makes any mention of a clump of trees.

None of those were contemporary (AKA 1863ish) sources. Matter of fact, all of those were published after Bachelder's garbage...
 
Nothing unfortunate about that, since it is unlikely that the bunch of trees that were there in 1882 were around in 1863 and/or had any significance in the battle, since there are zero contemporary references regarding them.

So, you are saying that the trees in the 1882 picture, didn't exist at all in 1863?
 
None of those were contemporary (AKA 1863ish) sources. Matter of fact, all of those were published after Bachelder's garbage...
Yes, the articles that make up B&L came out between 1884-1887, 20 years later. But Lt Col Rice (a major at the time of the battle) is an eyewitness account. He was in the thick of the fighting and was awarded the Medal of Honor in 1891 for his actions that day. So I would say he is a pretty reliable account that would have little interest in mentioning a clump of trees that weren't there at the time. Matter of fact, I would think he would want to correct Bachelder if he was wrong, but he specifically stated there was a clump of trees.
 
Nothing unfortunate about that, since it is unlikely that the bunch of trees that were there in 1882 were around in 1863 and/or had any significance in the battle, since there are zero contemporary references regarding them.

One man's fairytale that unfortunately the Park Service propagates, and generations upon generations drinking that kool-aid.

This is a 1863 picture looking at the center of the Union lines from LRT, which clearly shows the lack of such a beast (click to enlarge) :

View attachment 164076
@E_just_E , I tend to agree that the Copse was not the aiming point for PC, I am in the Ziegler Grove crowd, however there was a "clump" of trees there in 1863, although much smaller than the grouping seen in later years. In fact, it is visible in a blow up of the Brady image you posted. Frassanito points it out in Early Photography. Here is a blow up in which I point out the Copse as well as the much more significant Ziegler Grove-thanks for the comment.
brady jpeg.jpg
 
Back
Top