- Aug 3, 2019
Yep - but it wasn't clear to me that you were not intending to address the action on the 18th, which has been the subject of numerous assertions by him, and the role of Lilly's four guns using shell and shrapnel ("long range canister") against infantry in the terrain described by Liddell. That's why I conditioned mine with "if", as I'm sure you noticed.No, I'm talking about the action on the 19th, because 67th provided a specific citation to an article which discusses the value of Lilly's artillery support in the action on the 19th and which argues that the cannister support provided on that occasion by Lilly's guns was the key factor in the engagement.
(I assume you read the article.)
There are abundant reports about the actions of the respective units on the 19th which have not yet been vetted here. However, I have already noted that some of the field officers in Walthall's Brigade explicitly noted coming under artillery fire during the battle on the 19th and 20th -which was customary for infantry officers to note for obvious reasons. They did not do that in their reports of the 18th. And - if you've actually been following this - I'm unaware of anybody asserting that artillery played no role if it supported a unit armed with repeaters. Of course it did. The discussion about the 18th took off because somebody was claiming that the Confederate casualties in that specific fight were attributable to Lilly and not to the Spencer-armed units, in contradiction of all the primary sources. I take it you don't agree with that.