Culps Hill

[NH Civil War Gal]

General Greene should have gotten a lot more from Meade than he got and from Rhode Island. Greene was a modest and incredibly hardworking engineer. Meade hardly gives him more than a passing reference in the OR. Rhode Island was was in love with Burnside and Sprague was in love (well with himself) but in the politics of promoting Burnside or himself, NOT what was best or most laudatory in men. From some of my cursory reading, and I intend to dive deeper into this, I think Meade was a bit jealous of Greene's career as an engineer and at his comeback as a rock steady engineer and reliable soldier.

At first, the soldiers complained a GREAT DEAL about Greene and thought him an "old man" and a "worrier." But he was the real deal and the absolute best example of the old saying, "the farmer's boots make the best muck." He was right there with the men as he pointed EXACTLY and EXACTLY WHAT HEIGHT he wanted the breast works on Culp's Hill. As the night progressed and the old man was with them and constantly checking them and adjusting them, attitudes started to change as they saw the seriousness. Proof is in the pudding and at the end of the next day, they had their pudding. Greene was a hero to them from then on.

To me, Greene exemplifed the very best of a Yankee - hardworking, smart, adjustable, modest. He did his thing, played a VERY crucial part, if not THE crucial part in Gettysburg, and went back to what he did best without rancor and without trying to "rank" other officers. He was a wise man. He is very understudied and underwritten about. He is buried back in Rhode Island. He is definitely on my short list of Union officers I can admire in all aspects of their life.

 

[Jim Heen]

I looked him up in Tagg's Generals of Gettysburg and it says that his brigade was held in reserve at Antietam and Fredericksburg, so getting a CMH for assaulting Marye's Heights, well...............
Goes on to say: about his CMH 'for no reason readily apparent in the historical record, he was awarded the CMH'

Obviously political and he was heavily involved in NYC politics with 'problems'- which ultimately saw him leaving for New Jersey!

Speaking of the political angle, he got the brigade after the resignation of John Cochrane of the get Burnside fame.

In checking Stephen Sears' Chancellorsville, he does indicate that Shaler's brigade joined Burnham's 5- regiment "light division" in the attack on Marye's Heights during the Chancellorsville campaign. However, Sears also notes that the bulk of the fighting was done by Burnham's men who advanced against the stone wall at the base of the heights. They suffered 808 casualties, including 97 dead. Shaler's men advanced to Burnham's right along the Hanover Street and suffered 160 casualties with just 8 dead. Sears discussion of this attack focuses mostly on Burnham's advance. Sears does not mention Shaler other than to reference his OR report in the footnotes. Warner does not mention Burnham being awarded a medal for his role in capturing Marye's Heights. Perhaps because Burnham died in 1864 and Shaler survived, Burnham, was unable to campaign for such a medal after the war whereas Shaler did have that opportunity.

 

[Jim Heen]

General Greene should have gotten a lot more from Meade than he got and from Rhode Island. Greene was a modest and incredibly hardworking engineer. Meade hardly gives him more than a passing reference in the OR. Rhode Island was was in love with Burnside and Sprague was in love (well with himself) but in the politics of promoting Burnside or himself, NOT what was best or most laudatory in men. From some of my cursory reading, and I intend to dive deeper into this, I think Meade was a bit jealous of Greene's career as an engineer and at his comeback as a rock steady engineer and reliable soldier.

At first, the soldiers complained a GREAT DEAL about Greene and thought him an "old man" and a "worrier." But he was the real deal and the absolute best example of the old saying, "the farmer's boots make the best muck." He was right there with the men as he pointed EXACTLY and EXACTLY WHAT HEIGHT he wanted the breast works on Culp's Hill. As the night progressed and the old man was with them and constantly checking them and adjusting them, attitudes started to change as they saw the seriousness. Proof is in the pudding and at the end of the next day, they had their pudding. Greene was a hero to them from then on.

To me, Greene exemplifed the very best of a Yankee - hardworking, smart, adjustable, modest. He did his thing, played a VERY crucial part, if not THE crucial part in Gettysburg, and went back to what he did best without rancor and without trying to "rank" other officers. He was a wise man. He is very understudied and underwritten about. He is buried back in Rhode Island. He is definitely on my short list of Union officers I can admire in all aspects of their life.

A friend of mine, the late Dave Shaw, was a General Greene reenactor. Dave once told me that at age 90, Greene walked 20 miles to examine some dams or other construction he had worked on as a younger man to see how it was holding up. Greene was a very vigorous man.

 

[Cavalier]

It has been my impression that Chamberlain became a favorite when the book The 20th. Maine by Pullen came out in the early 1960s. That's when the adulation started and it reached a crescendo with the movie in the 90s.

I am also of the opinion that Chamberlain became the Civil War guy that it was socially acceptable to idolize because he at least appeared to have opinions that were similar to those of modern readers.

I believe over time the actual ramifications of his action on LRT became at least somewhat exaggerated because of these factors, and the fact that he wrote and spoke a lot about what happened there.

There are so many critical instances and so many heroic figures at Gettysburg that some will always be left out of the place in history they derserve.

John

 

[1st New Jersey Brigade]

It has been my impression that Chamberlain became a favorite when the book The 20th. Maine by Pullen came out in the early 1960s. That's when the adulation started and it reached a crescendo with the movie in the 90s.

I am also of the opinion that Chamberlain became the Civil War guy that it was socially acceptable to idolize because he at least appeared to have opinions that were similar to those of modern readers.

I believe over time the actual ramifications of his action on LRT became at least somewhat exaggerated because of these factors, and the fact that he wrote and spoke a lot about what happened there.

There are so many critical instances and so many heroic figures at Gettysburg that some will always be left out of the place in history they derserve.

John

Very true. Everyone that fought there and in any other battle was a hero. Without the pvts, corps, sargs. etc., no one would have ever heard of Chamberlain. I salute the unsung hero's!
Someone I reenact with almost throws up at the mention of his name. After thinking about the way he feels and learning more about the battle, I understand why he feels this way.
A lot of battles within the battle. They all did their duty to the best of their ability!

 

[NH Civil War Gal]

that some will always be left out of the place in history they derserve.

I agree but I think in Greene's case it was somewhat deliberate by Meade which is a shame. I'm not down on Meade particularly either. He was a good general and he had a lot of political factors against him, but he did NOT give credit where it was due with Greene and that tarnish's him a bit. Greene was the type to just get on with the job, do far more that was expected, could read the room well, and move on. The others could/should have taken lessons from him.

 

[121st PA Vols]

Very true. Everyone that fought there and in any other battle was a hero. Without the pvts, corps, sargs. etc., no one would have ever heard of Chamberlain. I salute the unsung hero's!
Someone I reenact with almost throws up at the mention of his name. After thinking about the way he feels and learning more about the battle, I understand why he feels this way.
A lot of battles within the battle. They all did their duty to the best of their ability!

We all love heroes and many of the stories about the battle surfaced early, before emotion cooled or research evolved. With LRT somewhat exaggerated, Col. Chamberlain came along as a matter of course, becoming almost the only story besides Pickett's Charge. This was perpetuated by influential concerns including the Park, museums, literature, even the guides. It used to be "truth" that 15,000 charged across the mile long field in an unbroken line in Picketts Charge and nothing could be further from the truth. So it goes.

Having said that, the 20th Maine fought a fierce and bloody struggle against a tough bunch in the 15th Ala. The 20th lost 32% casualties (29k, 91w, 5mc), the highest in the brigade. Col. Oats of the 15th had 34% casualties (31k. 50w, 90mc), the highest in their brigade that was fighting in severe circumstance to their left as well as rear at Devils Den.

Bottom line, it's good seeing more research coming out (new truths?) that I hope doesn't diminish the story of Little Round Top.

 

[Cavalier]

@NH Civil War Gal Is there some evidence that Meade deliberately ignored Greene's efforts? Just wondering.

John

 

[CavRTO]

I agree but I think in Greene's case it was somewhat deliberate by Meade which is a shame. I'm not down on Meade particularly either. He was a good general and he had a lot of political factors against him, but he did NOT give credit where it was due with Greene and that tarnish's him a bit. Greene was the type to just get on with the job, do far more that was expected, could read the room well, and move on. The others could/should have taken lessons from him.

Meade was a strange leader in that not only was he hard on himself but had the bad habit of not recognizing others accomplishments when they were warranted. Unfortunately for Greene, his being so low key that it worked against him by not just Meade but others too including historians.

 

[LibertyAndUnion]

Without the 6,000 casualties of the First Corps in seven hours on July 1, you have no Culps Hill or Little Round Top to save.

 

[Cavalier]

The pressure and stress Meade was under at Gettysburg seem incredible to me but still, he comes down through the pages of history, at least in my opinion, as a really hard guy to like.

John

 

[NH Civil War Gal]

@NH Civil War Gal Is there some evidence that Meade deliberately ignored Greene's efforts? Just wondering.

John

No one knows if it is deliberate but in the OR, Meade gives Greene and Culp's Hill just two or three lines. I don't remember the full statement now but it is almost like dam*ing with faint praise. And that has baffled historians for years, why such a vital battle and critical General to Meade's success was hardly mentioned. You can't even say it was glossed over!

 

[Jim Heen]

A few years ago I did a General Greene Culp's Hill diorama, which I include below. Since no one makes a General Greene figure, I substituted General Thomas to portray Greene (see below closeup). Thomas seemed appropriate as he and Greene both did well with outnumbered forces defending hill positions.

 

[NH Civil War Gal]

This whole thing got me to searching and I found this: This is from "https://searching4meade.com/2012/10/07/paper-battles/"

So I may be slightly revising my opinion about this whole Meade thing as I continue my research. But not about Rhode Island and Sprague. From some other reading I was doing earlier, I have a feeling Meade almost didn't quite understand what was going to happen with the Reports once he submitted them.

Paper Battles

The official reports that officers submitted following a battle often created their own conflicts, wars of letters waged by their own comrades in arms. Other officers in the army scoured the reports to see what had been said about their units. Those who felt slighted often made their displeasure felt.

Brigadier General John Robinson's division fought bravely at Gettysburg but the general was miffed to receive no mention in Meade's official report.

If George Meade wasn't aware of this before he submitted his report on the Battle of Gettysburg, he certainly was afterwards. One of officers his report ticked off was Brigadier General John C. Robinson, who commanded the Second Division of the I Corps during the battle but received no mention. He made his feelings known in a letter he wrote on November 15, 1863. "General," wrote Robinson, "I feel it is my duty to inform you of the intense mortification and disappointment felt by my division in reading your report of the battle of Gettysburg.

"For nearly four hours on July 1 we were hotly engaged against overwhelming numbers, repulsed repeated attacks of the enemy, captured three flags and a very large number of prisoners, and were the last to leave the field.

"Meade wrote to Slocum the next February, granting some points, disputing others. "I very much regret that any injustice should have been done in my official report of the battle of Gettysburg to any part of the Twelfth Corps or any officer in it," he wrote. "I do assure you most sincerely that nothing was further from my intentions, and that what has occurred was the result of accident and not of design, the occurrence of which I will endeavor to explain."

He admitted to some mistakes but was not willing to take blame for some errors of omission. It was just not possible to credit every brigade and division, he explained. As for omitting George Greene's stubborn defense of Culp's Hill on July 2, Meade said, "I am willing to admit that, if my attention had been called to the services of Greene's brigade in the pointed manner it now is, I would have given it credit for this special service."

In other words, if it was so important to you, why didn't you say more in your official report? He had a point. While Slocum had praised Greene in his report, he hadn't gone overboard. "Although General Greene handled his command with great skill, and although his men fought with gallantry never surpassed by any troops under my command, the enemy succeeded in gaining possession of a portion of our intrenchments," Slocum had noted. "After a severe engagement of nearly three hours' duration, General Greene remained in possession of the left of our line of works, while the right, which had previously been held by the First Division, was in possession of the enemy. During this engagement, General Greene was re-enforced by three regiments from the First Corps and three from the Eleventh Corps, all of which did good service."

 

[RoBert "Bert" Hile]

Welcome to the Fog of War, Gentlemen, and its lies, half-truths, and political agendas. Ever since Washington, a military hero was rewarded with political office and that is just how it is. Point is that both hills were important as was the saddle which was the object of "the charge" on day three. Culp's Hill was taken for a short period on the night of the 2nd day but without support, the Southerners were driven out. Holding the Roundtops gives the South a block on one of the many roads that feed into Gettysburg. (One reason that Gettysburg isn't an accidental meeting, it is a communications hub if you look down on the surrounding area, about 10 roads coming to and through the town, a railroad terminus so you could receive supplies, and it gives you any direction to leave that one would want. So Lee pointed to that spot as did Meade to go there and then see what happens.)

If you had read anything about Grant and the closing days of the war, you would have found that Grant was shocked to find Chamberlin alive and on duty. Grant states he only gave Chamberlin the star because he thought he was on his death bed. Like Lee towards Pickett's fish-eating during Five Forks, Grant didn't think much of the man. But Chamberlin works after the war in the South for the Freeman's organization, and only leaves to step off the boat in Maine to be its Governor. But Chamberlin isn't the only man to reap the reward for military service as did Garfield. Both men don't play up their roles, but the supporters around them did and embellished the action a bit by overstating. Such as Chamberlin stopping in front of Col. Oats who works the action on his colt several times at Chamberlin and then turns the pistol over to him. Brave? just lucky? both? or surprised enough not to act until the Southern Col. was satisfied that his weapon was useless. You could also say it makes Chamberlin look foolish for just standing there with sword in hand, by doing something, knocking the gun from the man's hand, and making him a POW would have shown action and bravery under fire. Now that is a hero of battle, not the stupid, ****, he's got a gun. Makes you wonder.

If every battle was written about as much as Gettysburg it would be found that there are enough what if's, maybes, and oops, did I do that as we have found at Gettysburg. History and fiction are ground like glass together to make a window pane that isn't so clear that we can not say for sure that Custer in disobeying his orders saved the union. And if you were wondering what Lee was thinking, look up the Battle of Bliemham during the "lace" wars and see what Lord Marlborough was doing. If you don't have a flank make one in the center of your enemy's line. There was one point where 300 men held a 300-yard part of the center line of the Federal forces at Gettysburg on that third day. (On the other end of the center away from the "clump of Trees.")

 

[Jim Heen]

Gettysburg Battlefield Guide Charlie Fennell is a Culp's Hill guy. He once described Pickett's Charge as an attempt to take Culp's Hill from the rear.

 

[JeffBrooks]

American generals named Greene who saved the country just get no respect!