Pickett Pickett’s charge, Lee should have used cold reasoning.

CowCavalry

First Sergeant
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
Did you think that response through?
My posts merely reflect the accuracy and prescience of his assessment. You meanwhile, are being results orientated. I think you are the one that needs to review what we are discussing (Lee's comment regarding Meade and the AOP) and think your responses through. You are making an entirely different argument based on the fact that Lee's attack failed.
 

John S. Carter

Sergeant Major
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
In what way?
The wast majority of line infantry on both sides was armed with some sort of rifle musket. With Springfields, Enfields and Lorenz's being the most common guns on both sides.
And on both sides there where a minority of units that was armed with smooth bores like the M/1842.

And the firearms where of a quality and model that was sufficiently good so that the limiting factor was the skill of the soldier.
Not the gun.

And have been shown in a number of ways, the skill, on both sides was simply not good.
Did the Confederate soldier have the rifle that the Union cav, had ?Was not the artillery of better range and effect? Did not the Union sharpshooter have a better weapon which was faster to load and further in distance ? Were the weapons which the Confederate infantry had were they mostly brought from home while the Union infantry had both pistols and rifles which were massed produced at Springfield and which parts could be replaced?Did not the North have a industrial system that could supply its military force with any weapon required with more machines which excelled whatever small manufacturing system the South had.Did not the North ordinance system replace the musket with rifles around the time of Gettysburg and was not Buford's cavalry not equipped with carbines which held Hill in place till Reynolds arrived? The weapon that one could load in the morning and fire all day.
 

John S. Carter

Sergeant Major
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Thanks for pointing this out, this comes up over and over.



Gallagher, in one of his lectures, says that the Confederate infantry never trusted the fuses and would get very upset if their artillery was firing over the top of them. Explosions over the top of friendly troops were, if not common, not unheard of. I got the impression that this wasn't specific to Gettysburg but rather an artifact of the lack of a solid industrial base in the South.

Adding to the 'fortune' column for the Confederates was the lack of ammunition for Hazard's batteries. Hunt (Chief of Artillery, AoP) seemed to think Pickett et al were lucky to have gotten as far as they did. Those batteries weren't able to effectively fire until the Confederate line came within canister range. After the war, he said "[Hazard's batteries] had unfortunately exhausted their long-range projectiles during the cannonade, under the orders of their corps commander, and it was too late tor replace them. Had my instructions [to cease fire] been followed here...I do not believe that Pickett's division would have reached our lines." (Battles and Leaders of the Civil War/Bradford)
This is a simple question with a simply yes or no and why if not answer=Was there a artillery observer with Alexander or one in a tree to observe the effect of the fire was having upon the Yankees in front where the CHARGE was to take place? Was the placement of the artillery such as this could not be seen? That would be like Napoleon's artillery at Waterloo/cannon balls to not bounce or explode on moist ground -then with the French knights at Agincourt ,horses weight down with men wearing heavy armour can not run and knights wearing same can not perform as knights in slosh. If there had been a unit to observe the effects that these factors ,long fuse,wet ground and ground not suitable for Knights then prehaps Frances ,Napoleon.and Lee would have altered there plans.Maybe Alexander would have shorten the fuse or maybe Lee would have saved Picket and Armistead from doing a Charge of the Light Brigade -without the horses,
 

thomas aagaard

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Location
Denmark
Were the weapons which the Confederate infantry had were they mostly brought from home while the Union infantry had both pistols and rifles which were massed produced at Springfield and which parts could be replaced?Did not the North have a industrial system that could supply its military force with any weapon required with more machines which excelled whatever small manufacturing system the South had.Did not the North ordinance system replace the musket with rifles around the time of Gettysburg and was not Buford's cavalry not equipped with carbines which held Hill in place till Reynolds arrived? The weapon that one could load in the morning and fire all day.
Ok, now you completely lost it. Weapons from home?*
What war do you think this is? the German peasant revolt of the early 16th century?

Infantry was not armed with revolvers.

If the north had a unlimited industrial capacity, why did they have to important hundred of thousands of muskets from Europe?
Why not simply make spencers and give it to every man in the army?
Because they did not have the industrial capacity to do so... no one did.

Not until very late in the war did the AoP finally get to a point where close to every infantry soldier had a springfield or enfield...
Why? because the north could not produce weapons in any huge number until then. And until the end of war massive numbers of Enfields was in use by the union.
At Gettysburg something like 15% of the federal army used smoothbores.

And seriously, are you even reading what other people post? you have repeatedly been told that Bufords men did not have repeaters.

Yes, the USSS had sharps... but that was two small battalions. Not something that decide a battle of more than 150.000men

And yes, 1½ regiment of union cavalry did have Spencer rifles that was used on the 3rd. But again not something that decide a battle.

Artillery.
No Lee used Napoleons and different rifled guns... just like the federal artillery. The federal superiority was down to much better training... and that the south had issues with their fuses.


Seriously, do some actual reading and stop believing in myths and exaggeration.



*yes there where some cases of this early in the war out west. But that was simply not the situation of Lees army in summer 1863.
 
Last edited:

Eric Wittenberg

1st Lieutenant
Keeper of the Scales
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Location
Columbus, OH
Did not the North ordinance system replace the musket with rifles around the time of Gettysburg and was not Buford's cavalry not equipped with carbines which held Hill in place till Reynolds arrived? The weapon that one could load in the morning and fire all day.

Boy, you are some piece of work. "The weapon that one could load in the morning and fire all day" is how the Confederates described the Spencer. I obviously wasted my time last night posting the results of actual primary source research demonstrating that John Buford's personal Henry rifle was the one and only repeating weapon in his division and that there were NO Spencer rifles. I've wasted all of the time on you that I care to waste. I'm finished. Enjoy your ignorance, champ. You're beyond any possible hope of redemption. Have a nice life out there in Lost Cause world, chief.
 
Last edited:

John S. Carter

Sergeant Major
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Boy, you are some piece of work. "The weapon that one could load in the morning and fire all day" is how the Confederates described the Spencer. I obviously wasted my time last night posting the results of actual primary source research demonstrating that John Buford's personal Henry rifle was the one and only repeating weapon in his division and that there were NO Spencer rifles. I've wasted all of the time on you that I care to waste. I'm finished. Enjoy your ignorance, champ. You're beyond any possible hope of redemption. Have a nice life out there in Lost Cause world, chief.
MUST BE A MCCLELLAN =CivilWarTalk,May 26.2013=Buford Cavalry used Spencers =ONE=Trice=TWO=Eric Wittenberg=Buford force used single shot carbines=SORRY wrong carbine rifle ,but still stop Hill due to the fact they were quicker to load .IT was CUSTER and his Wolferrines that had the first Spencers ONE more source=THE CIVIL WAR=Civil War-History and Stories=General John Buford Spencer Carbine Rifle-.The writers of these and other articles on Buford and his imaginary carbines are also pieces of WORK- GENERAL Wittenberg MAY 26
 
Top