Stuart's Attack on July 3rd

[thomas aagaard]

and Stuart was a good one for obeying orders right! Guess if he was following orders to be Lee's eyes and ears Gettysburg may have never taken place to begin with. "3500 very tired cavalry" but highly aggressive under a very aggressive Leader. Why it reminds me of a very tired Country and Leader outnumbered 10 to 1 or by even much more taking it to the enemy. Ukraine!

you simply can't compare a tactical situation happening over a few hours and to how one country is fighting another.

Especially not when Ukraine is fighting on the defensive and in comparison Stuart would be trying to force infantry back with his cavalry. Something that very very rarely happened during the civil war. That was simply not how cavalry was used.

I think the concept of Stuart being 'very tired' exaggerates the issue as all the horses were worn down from hard campaigning. All were on their last leg so to speak. And the trains Stuart captured were laden with fodder. You can probably make the argument that Stuart's cavalry was better feed than the AOP's remembering how compromised their supply lines were.

But not really relevant to the point. Even if Stuart had pushed the federal cavalry out of they way, he would have run into federal infantry. And there is no real way for very tired cavalry to beat infantry fighting on the defensive. Not in a way that don't take a lot of time and is very very costly to the cavalry.

 

[121st PA Vols]

you simply can't compare a tactical situation happening over a few hours and to how one country is fighting another.

Especially not when Ukraine is fighting on the defensive and in comparison Stuart would be trying to force infantry back with his cavalry. Something that very very rarely happened during the civil war. That was simply not how cavalry was used.


But not really relevant to the point. Even if Stuart had pushed the federal cavalry out of they way, he would have run into federal infantry. And there is no real way for very tired cavalry to beat infantry fighting on the defensive. Not in a way that don't take a lot of time and is very very costly to the cavalry.

I wasn't responding to a point. What point are you talking about? I was making a point about the oft exaggerated condition of Stuart's cavalry.

 

[George1863]

Can any contributor to this thread construct a scenario where 3,500 fresh Confederate cavalry in Meade's rear could have altered the outcome of the battle? Maybe after the first day, on reflection: had Stuart appeared on Meade's flank in the Buford/Barlow phase I guess that Meade may have withdrawn to Pipe Creek. On the second or third day, say. I love to learn but I honestly can't see how Stuart could me more than an annoyance, at best.

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

No it was spread out all over the place as reinforcement for the other corps.

Which is why Meade couldn't launch a counterattack after the repulse of the main Confederate charge on July 3.

That said, moving infantry brigades to block cavalry harassing your rear is much easier and quicker than concentrating them in a force capable of launching an offensive blow.

I think the concept of Stuart being 'very tired' exaggerates the issue as all the horses were worn down from hard campaigning. All were on their last leg so to speak. And the trains Stuart captured were laden with fodder. You can probably make the argument that Stuart's cavalry was better feed than the AOP's remembering how compromised their supply lines were.

Stuart's three main brigades had ridden more miles with longer days and fought more skirmishes than their Union counterparts leading up to July 3. Having well-fed horses doesn't provide rest.

 

[bayonet]

you simply can't compare a tactical situation happening over a few hours and to how one country is fighting another.

Especially not when Ukraine is fighting on the defensive and in comparison Stuart would be trying to force infantry back with his cavalry. Something that very very rarely happened during the civil war. That was simply not how cavalry was used.


But not really relevant to the point. Even if Stuart had pushed the federal cavalry out of they way, he would have run into federal infantry. And there is no real way for very tired cavalry to beat infantry fighting on the defensive. Not in a way that don't take a lot of time and is very very costly to the cavalry.

And you fail to realize what one can do in a fight to the death regardless of being outnumbered, exhausted, hungry, surrounded, etc. (ever been in one?). You maybe 90% or more right but Stuart died 9 months later and again we will never know what was going on inside his head with 100% certainty. Looking at the Map he looks to be too far to the East and slowly trotting South if his orders were to cover Lee's left flank. But maybe he was heading to the Hanover Road to patrol the Left Flank going East and West and that ends it your correct.
History is written by the survivors, victors, and the living. Maybe its why I enjoy reading the first hand accounts of the Privates, Corporals, Sergeants, and lower ranked officers. They tell it like it is. Most Politicians and Generals will not for the most part admit failures on their part. Although a few have.
What if he never ran into Custer, What if he turned West and did hit the Union rear, what if he hit the Hanover Road and called it a day. What if Armistead survived on July 3 and 10 years later wrote "Yeah you know maybe it was not such a great idea attacking across that big open field with all them Yankees up there"! We will never know. But the Books will keep on coming with "what ifs" and "this is what speculate".

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

And you fail to realize what one can do in a fight to the death regardless of being outnumbered, exhausted, hungry, surrounded, etc. (ever been in one?). You maybe 90% or more right but Stuart died 9 months later and again we will never know what was going on inside his head with 100% certainty. Looking at the Map he looks to be too far to the East and slowly trotting South if his orders were to cover Lee's left flank. But maybe he was heading to the Hanover Road to patrol the Left Flank going East and West and that ends it your correct.
History is written by the survivors, victors, and the living. Maybe its why I enjoy reading the first hand accounts of the Privates, Corporals, Sergeants, and lower ranked officers. They tell it like it is. Most Politicians and Generals will not for the most part admit failures on their part. Although a few have.
What if he never ran into Custer, What if he turned West and did hit the Union rear, what if he hit the Hanover Road and called it a day. What if Armistead survived on July 3 and 10 years later wrote "Yeah you know maybe it was not such a great idea attacking across that big open field with all them Yankees up there"! We will never know. But the Books will keep on coming with "what ifs" and "this is what speculate".

Just a quick correction: he didn't run into Custer. He ran into David Gregg. Let's give the credit where it's due.

 

[121st PA Vols]

Can any contributor to this thread construct a scenario where 3,500 fresh Confederate cavalry in Meade's rear could have altered the outcome of the battle? Maybe after the first day, on reflection: had Stuart appeared on Meade's flank in the Buford/Barlow phase I guess that Meade may have withdrawn to Pipe Creek. On the second or third day, say. I love to learn but I honestly can't see how Stuart could me more than an annoyance, at best.

George1863, I can tell you that back in the day, this was one of the stories (myths) that was told by more than a few guides I knew. As a guide, we had very little literature unless you were willing to get into the ORs. Certainly not the definitive works we have today where 'episodes' of the battle are published and mapped in great detail; 2nd Day at Gburg, Devils Den, E. Cav Field, Culps Hill etc. That doesn't excuse perpetrating a myth, but I know it occurred. Here are a few other examples.

* The battle was an total accident
* The battle was fought over a pair of shoes
* Reynolds was killed by a sharpshooter
* Doubleday invented baseball
* The Barlow-Gordon 'incident'
* The 11th corps fought poorly
* Pickett's Charge involved 15,000 infantry
* Stuart would strike the rear as the charge occurred
* Ewell dropped the ball. Period. Stonewall Jackson would have leaped over the AOP (single bound) and taken DC!

I can tell you the area south of Culps Hill (is this the rear?) is rugged terrain with countless hills and thick woodlots, Rock Creek being a water hazard in some spots 10-12 feet deep plus the Mill Pond. We used to fish back there and it was a far worse hazard during the battle. The entire concept of Stuart in the real is fanciful in my view, but, what is the rear?....had he gotten past the 12th corps and Neill's HUGE brigade to Slocum's right with 1775 engaged.

 

[121st PA Vols]

Which is why Meade couldn't launch a counterattack after the repulse of the main Confederate charge on July 3.

That said, moving infantry brigades to block cavalry harassing your rear is much easier and quicker than concentrating them in a force capable of launching an offensive blow.



Stuart's three main brigades had ridden more miles with longer days and fought more skirmishes than their Union counterparts leading up to July 3. Having well-fed horses doesn't provide rest.

That's true Joshism. Stuart was likely more worn down. While I'm not an expert, I used to be around horses 10 years ago with some frequency and know that while they are fragile, breaking down fast, they also recover well if not outright injured.
Having said that, Stuart's mounts and men fought well enough that day vs Gregg!

 

[bayonet]

Just a quick correction: he didn't run into Custer. He ran into David Gregg. Let's give the credit where it's due.

But Gregg was not dressed as snappy as Custer and didn't have 2 horses shot out from under him, or was it 3! Makes for a juicy story Hollywood types eat up Cheers

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

Maybe its why I enjoy reading the first hand accounts of the Privates, Corporals, Sergeants, and lower ranked officers. They tell it like it is. Most Politicians and Generals will not for the most part admit failures on their part.

The generals might have an agenda, but they also have a sense of the big picture. The grunts in the firing line attacked where they were told to attack. They will give useful perspectives on how the attack played out, but not why it was made nor the effect of its success or failure on the battle plan.

 

[George1863]

Just on the issue of the fatigue of Stuart's cavalry - and not to be contentious. I have been trying to follow Stuart's progress day by day since he crossed into Maryland and rode on into Pennsylvania. I am a complete amateur in this - but I can't see how men and horses were able to grab even a few hours rest at one time after tearing up the B&O at Winchester on the 26th June. Kilpatrick, Gregg and Custer were dogging them all along and the further they moved north, the more of Meade's troops they encountered passing across their front towards what became a major battle. I wondered if anyone could share a more informed timeline of Stuart's movements in the week before East Cavalry Field? Was there an opportunity to rest up for a day?

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

I wondered if anyone could share a more informed timeline of Stuart's movements in the week before East Cavalry Field?

Plenty of Blame to Go Around.

 

[George1863]

Plenty of Blame to Go Around.

Thanks. I am reading it now. The Wittenberg/Petruzzi is a great read. I am more interested in whether you think it is right, however. I am sure I can find another book that argues the opposite. It doesn't start well for the idea that Stuart could have impacted the battle: Hampton's brigade are doubled up on horses from setting out in the small hours of the 25th June..

 

[George1863]

Further to the above. Stuart's men encamped near Salem Depot on the night of 24th June, cooked three days rations and did not unsaddle their horses. 'It would be eight days before they had the luxury of unsaddling their horses again..., (Wittenberg/Petruzzi, 'introduction,' xxvi). So I think that yes, by the 2nd/3rd July, they were shattered, men and horses.

 

[bayonet]

Further to the above. Stuart's men encamped near Salem Depot on the night of 24th June, cooked three days rations and did not unsaddle their horses. 'It would be eight days before they had the luxury of unsaddling their horses again..., (Wittenberg/Petruzzi, 'introduction,' xxvi). So I think that yes, by the 2nd/3rd July, they were shattered, men and horses.

So are you saying Stuart and his Troopers had no RED BULL or 5 HOUR ENERGY available to them?

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

I am more interested in whether you think it is right

Eric is widely regarded, especially around here, as the living expert on cavalry operations in the Eastern Theater of the American Civil War. So yes I think his assessments of Stuart's ride and East Cavalry Field are accurate.

 

[George1863]

Eric is widely regarded, especially around here, as the living expert on cavalry operations in the Eastern Theater of the American Civil War. So yes I think his assessments of Stuart's ride and East Cavalry Field are accurate.

I don't doubt that at all. I am wondering if Stuart's command was any more worn out than many others. I understand that Sedgwick's men may have marched similar distances in about the same time.

 

[Eric Wittenberg]

Eric is widely regarded, especially around here, as the living expert on cavalry operations in the Eastern Theater of the American Civil War. So yes I think his assessments of Stuart's ride and East Cavalry Field are accurate.

That's very kind of you, Josh. Thank you!

 

[121st PA Vols]

I don't doubt that at all. I am wondering if Stuart's command was any more worn out than many others. I understand that Sedgwick's men may have marched similar distances in about the same time.

That's probably one truth you can bank on @George1863 that everyone was worn down from historic, in some cases epic marches. If willing to do the work, you can plot out who was where, when, and arrival times to the field. Sun stroke killed more than a few. Not sure you can measure who was worn out more than another unit. Kent Masterson Brown maintains half the AOP was barefoot after the battle.
And one thing I'll mention as a native that gets way too little attention is the hilly nature of northern Maryland and southern PA. It's a real workout on those roads in some areas with steep inclines.

 

[rpkennedy]

That's probably one truth you can bank on @George1863 that everyone was worn down from historic, in some cases epic marches. If willing to do the work, you can plot out who was where, when, and arrival times to the field. Sun stroke killed more than a few. Not sure you can measure who was worn out more than another unit. Kent Masterson Brown maintains half the AOP was barefoot after the battle.
And one thing I'll mention as a native that gets way too little attention is the hilly nature of northern Maryland and southern PA. It's a real workout on those roads in some areas with steep inclines.

One of Meade's first actions as army commander was to request 50,000 pairs of shoes for the AotP. Hard marching that June had worn down a lot of footwear.

Ryan