MHO Home   Forum Home   Help   Register   Login
 
 
Welcome to MilitaryHistoryOnline.com.
You are not signed in.
The current time is: 8/19/2018 10:36:52 PM
 (1863) Battle of Gettysburg
AuthorMessage
Page 1 of 2 (Page: 1  2 )
Larry Purtell
USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant


Posts: 638

Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/6/2018 5:24:48 PM
From the Memphis Daily Appeal. July 21, 1873


---------------
"My goal is to live forever. So far, so good.

kp
Belle Vernon, PA, USA
New User
E-2 Private


Posts: 13
http://mysite.verizon.net/kpolacek126/
Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/6/2018 6:57:52 PM
Interesting. Would not the loss at Gettysburg be Lee's responsibility? There may have been many other indications that the AOP was moving north. much faster than Lee expected. To depend on just one source for information on the location and movements of the AOP would seem something a seasoned and thoughtful commander would find foolish.
---------------
With respect,
KP

Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 3795

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/6/2018 7:00:29 PM
Hi Larry,

Interesting article laying the blame on JEB Stuart, rather than James Longstreet or for that matter even General Ewell, for not pressing the high ground! My take is that Longstreet, & Ewell were there at Gettysburg, fighting & trying! Where was JEB Stuart??? Therefore there is some merit to this contention!?

What say Y'all??

IMHO,
MD
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

Wayne Wachsmuth
Shippensburg, PA, USA
top 30
E-5 Sergeant


Posts: 239

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/8/2018 8:52:25 AM
Much has been written on the subject but there are a couple of pieces of data that are conveniently ignored by the anti Stuart faction. One of which I the recollection of H.B. Mcllellan of Stuart's staff and the other is Longstreet's letter of transmittal to Stuart along with Lee's last letter to Stuart (never found) in essence telling Stuart to do exactly what he did. A careful reading of Lee's after action report will also show that except for the time consumed Stuart had preformed what he was to do. The expectation that an expedition through enemy territory with three brigade of cavalry mounted on jaded horses could travel the distance required in the time allotted borders on fantasy and results in assumptions made by those with little appreciation of the logistics involved.

Wayne

Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 3795

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/8/2018 9:25:59 AM
Why Wayne,

I do believe your taking JEB's side on this!?

Ask yourself this: Did JEB make reconnaissance for the ANV & Lee,

his "#1 priority" in this move into Pennsylvania????

If so why did Lee have to play, "Where's Waldo" or rather "Where's JEB"!?

MD
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

dick evick
Waco , TX, USA
top 40
E-4 Corporal
Posts: 217

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/8/2018 10:02:45 AM
I've always wondered if the surprise at Brandy Station didn't have some influence on the excursion JEB made.

Kind of a "it's on you now" to the Union Cavalry?

Dick.

morris crumley
Dunwoody, GA, USA
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major
Posts: 1764

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/8/2018 2:28:54 PM

Quote:
I've always wondered if the surprise at Brandy Station didn't have some influence on the excursion JEB made.

Kind of a "it's on you now" to the Union Cavalry?

Dick.
--dick evick



Dick, I`ve often wondered is it that "in your face bravado" that imperiled Start`s judgement..or was it that he just underestimated the difficulty in riding around and through an army of 100,000 men...strung out, on quick march order, along a myriad of roads. On the peninsula, McClellan`s army was moving like a turtle, less strung out..almost stationary, when Stuart did the deed.

Respects, Morris
---------------
"You are a $70, red-wool, pure quill military genius, or the biggest damn fool in northern Mexico."

Phil andrade
London, UK
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Moderator
Posts: 3146

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/8/2018 5:18:25 PM
Someone said that Stonewall Jackson would argue if he thought Lee’s plan was wrong ; but, if his remonstration failed to convince Lee, Jackson would apply himself to that plan as if it were his own. Longstreet would argue, and, if he failed to convince, would argue.

To whom might we attribute responsibility for the Confederate loss at Gettysburg ?

Lee was responsible, although he might not have been culpable . The difference is important.

Meade does not escape responsibility, either !

Regards, Phil
---------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!"

"That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress."

Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes

Jim Cameron
North Bellmore, NY, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant


Posts: 763

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/8/2018 8:49:43 PM

Quote:
Much has been written on the subject but there are a couple of pieces of data that are conveniently ignored by the anti Stuart faction. One of which I the recollection of H.B. Mcllellan of Stuart's staff and the other is Longstreet's letter of transmittal to Stuart along with Lee's last letter to Stuart (never found) in essence telling Stuart to do exactly what he did. A careful reading of Lee's after action report will also show that except for the time consumed Stuart had preformed what he was to do. The expectation that an expedition through enemy territory with three brigade of cavalry mounted on jaded horses could travel the distance required in the time allotted borders on fantasy and results in assumptions made by those with little appreciation of the logistics involved.

Wayne
--Wayne Wachsmuth


People overestimate how fast cavalry can travel over extended distances and long periods of time. At the start of a campaign it will leave the infantry in the dust, but before long the infantry will be passing broken down horses and dismounted cavalrymen carrying their saddles. Given enough time, good infantry could actually walk down cavalry.
---------------
Jim Cameron

Every time I go to Gettysburg, I learn two things. Something new, and, how much I still don't know.

Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 3795

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/9/2018 8:34:56 AM

Quote:
Someone said that Stonewall Jackson would argue if he thought Lee’s plan was wrong ; but, if his remonstration failed to convince Lee, Jackson would apply himself to that plan as if it were his own. Longstreet would argue, and, if he failed to convince, would argue.

To whom might we attribute responsibility for the Confederate loss at Gettysburg ?

Lee was responsible, although he might not have been culpable . The difference is important.

Meade does not escape responsibility, either !

Regards, Phil
--Phil andrade



Phil,

Your right, the "Buck" ultimately stops with the commanding officers!

Regards,
Dave

BTW Wasn't Lee left with some Cavalry? Why didn't he order them on reconnaissance patrols??
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

dick evick
Waco , TX, USA
top 40
E-4 Corporal
Posts: 217

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/9/2018 10:04:52 AM
Dave, IIRC Albert Jenkins was with Ewell, not sure of other elements.

Dick.

Scott Brown
MA, USA
top 40
E-4 Corporal
Posts: 178

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/9/2018 6:16:03 PM
Great to hear from you, Wayne!

Here was my takeaway from the piece...

"They seem unwilling to accept Lee's self-accusation". Indeed.

Regards to all,
Scott B.

Wayne Wachsmuth
Shippensburg, PA, USA
top 30
E-5 Sergeant


Posts: 239

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/11/2018 9:04:46 AM
I note that in all of the replies to the initial question that no one has seemed to indicate that they have looked at the two references I mentioned. I have no inclination to hammer the relevant passages out for all to evaluate but would enjoin all those interested to look them up. Additionally Stuart's report mentions that horses were failing one day into the ride and records at GNMP show that roughly half of the mounts of the three brigades failed enroute and just where were replacements to be found?

Wayne

Wayne Wachsmuth
Shippensburg, PA, USA
top 30
E-5 Sergeant


Posts: 239

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/11/2018 12:47:46 PM
In all of the discussions about Stuart's travel to GB I have seen no one who has considered the logistical problem of the food and forage for the horses. Some have said the horses could gaze but that illustrates a lack go knowledge of horses. A horse can subsist on grazing if it is not required to work. If it is expected to work then additional food must be furnished . Army regs of the time specified 1 pound of oats per 100 pounds of body weight or on the order of 10 pounds of oats per day per horse plus 1.5 pounds of forage like hay which adds another 15 pounds of rations for each horse. Now with at least 5,000 animals in the three brigades just where were they going to come up with some 25 tons of oats per day. Even allowing the animals to graze even though not enough to maintain condition would have required on the order of 10 hours per day to graze and while doing that the horse isn't traveling. There is a reason for the old adage" amateurs talk tactics professionals talk logistics".

Wayne

Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 3795

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/11/2018 5:15:00 PM

Quote:
Great to hear from you, Wayne!

Here was my takeaway from the piece...

"They seem unwilling to accept Lee's self-accusation". Indeed.

Regards to all,
Scott B.
--Scott Brown



Hi Wayne,

Scott is right we hadn't heard from you for over 4 months!

What's up with that??
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

jthlmnn
Milwaukee, WI, USA
top 40
E-4 Corporal


Posts: 191

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/12/2018 9:03:22 AM
I found this presentation by Steve Knott (Army War College) to have some helpful insights. He begins to specifically address Stuart's actions at about the 19:00 mark. [Read More]

Yours,
JohnT

Wayne Wachsmuth
Shippensburg, PA, USA
top 30
E-5 Sergeant


Posts: 239

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/12/2018 9:52:06 AM
Hi Dave, Haven't seen much that was of interest to me over the past few months and have been engaged in planning our move into a retirement community later this year as advancing years (83 in August) make impossible to properly maintain our two acres worth of lawns and gardens. This subject is however. one of my favorites since there is much data published to assist in coming to a reasonably accurate conclusion about what Stuart was actually told to d and what he did but those who have voiced opinions on the subject have ignored that data along with the real world problems of doing 5,000 men and horses through enemy territory.

Regards,
Wayne

Jim Cameron
North Bellmore, NY, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant


Posts: 763

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/12/2018 9:30:31 PM

Quote:
In all of the discussions about Stuart's travel to GB I have seen no one who has considered the logistical problem of the food and forage for the horses. Some have said the horses could gaze but that illustrates a lack go knowledge of horses. A horse can subsist on grazing if it is not required to work. If it is expected to work then additional food must be furnished . Army regs of the time specified 1 pound of oats per 100 pounds of body weight or on the order of 10 pounds of oats per day per horse plus 1.5 pounds of forage like hay which adds another 15 pounds of rations for each horse. Now with at least 5,000 animals in the three brigades just where were they going to come up with some 25 tons of oats per day. Even allowing the animals to graze even though not enough to maintain condition would have required on the order of 10 hours per day to graze and while doing that the horse isn't traveling. There is a reason for the old adage" amateurs talk tactics professionals talk logistics"

Wayne
--Wayne Wachsmuth


There is of course considerable discussion of the wagons Stuart captured along the way, even if the benefits of the forage they contained tends to be overlooked. But I can't just off the top of my head recall reading anything about what Stuart may have had with him in terms of his own trains. Unless the intent was to subsist entirely off the countryside - problematical, as explained above - it would seem that he would needed a train just for forage. Do we know what, if anything, Stuart had by way of his own supply train?
---------------
Jim Cameron

Every time I go to Gettysburg, I learn two things. Something new, and, how much I still don't know.

Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 3795

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/12/2018 10:12:28 PM
Gentlemen,

We must remember JEB Stuart, in addition to not supporting the ANV with reconnaissance at Gettysburg, he also didn't accomplish his mission of attacking the rear of the middle of the Union lines on day three, his Cavalry was turned back by the Union Cavalry.

The ultimate result:

[Read More]

JEB was left wanting at Gettysburg!?

MD
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

Wayne Wachsmuth
Shippensburg, PA, USA
top 30
E-5 Sergeant


Posts: 239

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/13/2018 8:14:46 AM
Stuart took only a few ambulances and his artillery for his only wheeled vehicle;es before capturing the Federal wagons.

Wayne

Jim Cameron
North Bellmore, NY, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant


Posts: 763

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/13/2018 12:59:56 PM
Which would mean his force was a wasting asset basically from the get-go.
---------------
Jim Cameron

Every time I go to Gettysburg, I learn two things. Something new, and, how much I still don't know.

John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant
Posts: 790

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/13/2018 9:24:56 PM
Wayne,

Wouldn't the troopers be carrying maybe three days worth of oats on a partial ration basis. Say they are issued 15 pounds and feed 5 pounds a day plus grazing. Add in they will be taking what they can get from farms in their route of march and while not ideal nor what was called for they should have had maybe 4 days in them right?
---------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country.
"to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"


Wayne Wachsmuth
Shippensburg, PA, USA
top 30
E-5 Sergeant


Posts: 239

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/14/2018 10:06:19 AM
Therein lies the problem John. Having been on the march since just after Brandy Station any oats an individual trooper might have had (unlikely) would have been long used. Recall that Stuart's man had been busy for several engagements in the Aldie, Middleburg, Upperville area fighting Federal cavalry. There were no supply trains following Stuart for that interval. A retired Colonel (US Army) who really knew horses told me that without proper nutrition a horse will have problems working after about 3 days due to deterioration of the connecting tissue between the hoof and the bones of the leg and in about a week the horse is done. Books written by officers on Stuart's staff confirm that horse loss was considerable on the march and even though horses were taken from farms etc. those were not trained cavalry horses to and would last only a few days before failing.
One letter in the records at GNMP from one of Hampton's troopers estimate the loss of mounts to be in excess of 2000 Another letter in the Bachelor Papers says about half of the mounts. Either way that's a helluva lot of horses.

Wayne

dick evick
Waco , TX, USA
top 40
E-4 Corporal
Posts: 217

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/14/2018 10:16:14 AM
Wayne, many Thanks for the info you have provided. I will never look at Stuart's Ride the same after reading the sources you mentioned.

I'm somewhat baffled that this excursion was attempted with the limitations of the cavalry mounts. Perhaps some mounts were expected to be captured but certainly not enough.

Seems the ANV might have been better served with Stuart remaining the front and on the right of the advance, at least some forage and blacksmith service would have been available.

Dick.

Larry Purtell
USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant


Posts: 638

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/14/2018 11:20:27 AM
I've been following all the comments with great interest and agree that Stuart was pretty much on a no win ride. One has to wonder after 26 months of warfare how Lee and Stuart could have so badly misjudged the capability's and endurance of the men and horses on such a protracted campaign. Did the ANV command plan on substituting captured,impressed and stolen horses to make good their losses? Numerous accounts tell of work horses pressed into ANV artillery batteries and supply trains, but I have seen very few about suitable cavalry mounts being available. Even if civilian mounts were available it takes a lot time to properly train a mount not to panic and bolt the first time it's near gunfire. Not being used to hours and hours of hard riding many civilian horses would break down and go lame or drop from exhaustion. That Stuart did as well as he did is commendable.

Larry
---------------
"My goal is to live forever. So far, so good.

Wayne Wachsmuth
Shippensburg, PA, USA
top 30
E-5 Sergeant


Posts: 239

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/14/2018 12:48:51 PM
To illustrate the vulnerability of impressed mounts one of Stuart's officers writes of finding some horses hidden in a woodlot and leaving his jaded mount in "trade" for one of them. That horse failed in 3 days! As to the overestimation of capabilities recall that Lee has no staff worthy of the name to keep tabs on such matters and keep him updated. Also one of Stuart's personalty would never have said Boss, I think we can't accomplish that mission we'd better reconsider.

Wayne

Larry Purtell
USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant


Posts: 638

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/14/2018 3:02:26 PM
Hi Wayne. Pretty much much what I thought. It would seem the whole Gettysburg campaign was run on a wish and hope. It was like just show up and kick yankee ass and collect the victory.

Regards, Larry
---------------
"My goal is to live forever. So far, so good.

Wayne Wachsmuth
Shippensburg, PA, USA
top 30
E-5 Sergeant


Posts: 239

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/14/2018 3:34:11 PM
Larry, Given the history of the previous two years it is, I think easy to see how such an attitude could take hold in the ANV.

Jim Cameron
North Bellmore, NY, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant


Posts: 763

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/14/2018 4:33:18 PM
Buford was also experiencing difficulties. As he wrote to Pleasanton from Gettysburg on June 30, "My men and horses are fagged out. I have not been able to get any grain yet. It is all in the country, and the people talk instead of working. Facilities for shoeing are nothing. Early's people seized every shoe and nail they could find."

What this shows is that cavalry on both sides were competing for the same resourses.
---------------
Jim Cameron

Every time I go to Gettysburg, I learn two things. Something new, and, how much I still don't know.

Larry Purtell
USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant


Posts: 638

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/14/2018 4:34:55 PM
Agreed Wayne. It was like the whole Gettysburg campaign for ANV was just show up, kick ass while AOP just stood there and took it.


Larry
---------------
"My goal is to live forever. So far, so good.

Wayne Wachsmuth
Shippensburg, PA, USA
top 30
E-5 Sergeant


Posts: 239

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/15/2018 9:31:35 AM
To add a bit to Jim's point the difference in roads in VA and MD and PA is that most of the roads in VA were of a sandy nature where many of the more northern roads had crushed rock surfaces causing the horses shoes to wear out much faster.

Wayne

Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 3795

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/15/2018 4:00:44 PM

Quote:
Gentlemen,

We must remember JEB Stuart, in addition to not supporting the ANV with reconnaissance at Gettysburg, he also didn't accomplish his mission of attacking the rear of the middle of the Union lines on day three, his Cavalry was turned back by the Union Cavalry.

The ultimate result:

[Read More]

JEB was left wanting at Gettysburg!?

MD
--Michigan Dave



To go 1 step further with the Confederate Cavalry at Gettysburg, I mentioned JEB's attack on the Union rear not succeeding on day 3, here is GNMP Ranger Chuck Teague doing a great Battlefield Walk of the East Cavalry Field! Explaining why JEB didn't succeed!?

[Read More]

BTW Great explanations by Ranger Teague, what say you about JEB's failure on day 3??

Regards,
MD

As George Armstrong Custer would say, "Go you Wolverines"!!!!


Why take my word for it! Here is JEB himself telling what happened!!!!!?????

[Read More]
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

jthlmnn
Milwaukee, WI, USA
top 40
E-4 Corporal


Posts: 191

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/17/2018 8:06:16 PM

Quote:
Hi Wayne. Pretty much much what I thought. It would seem the whole Gettysburg campaign was run on a wish and hope. It was like just show up and kick yankee ass and collect the victory.

Regards, Larry
--Larry Purtell


Very close, Larry. Lee had planned on "stealing a march" on Hooker/Meade, concentrating in Pennsylvania, and then destroying the AoP piecemeal, as it arrived. Everything depended on the AoP "playing catch-up." The fact that the AoP was not stationary, as expected, but already moving, threw a wrench not only into Stuart's ride-around, but Lee's plan as a whole. It was Hooker/Meade who "stole a march" on Lee.

Yours,

JohnT

Wayne Wachsmuth
Shippensburg, PA, USA
top 30
E-5 Sergeant


Posts: 239

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/18/2018 9:27:52 AM
The AOP was moving because the signal station on Maryland Heights at Harpers Ferry saw the ANV crossing the river at Sharpsburg and relayed that info to the AOP. That's why Hancock's crops was moving, blocking Stuart's intended route when just the day before it had been reported to be static.

Wayne

Jim Cameron
North Bellmore, NY, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant


Posts: 763

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/18/2018 3:51:49 PM

Quote:

To go 1 step further with the Confederate Cavalry at Gettysburg, I mentioned JEB's attack on the Union rear not succeeding on day 3, here is GNMP Ranger Chuck Teague doing a great Battlefield Walk of the East Cavalry Field!

BTW Great explanations by Ranger Teague, what say you about JEB's failure on day 3??



Stuart had no such mission. Ranger Teague's "explanations" notwithstanding.


---------------
Jim Cameron

Every time I go to Gettysburg, I learn two things. Something new, and, how much I still don't know.

Wayne Wachsmuth
Shippensburg, PA, USA
top 30
E-5 Sergeant


Posts: 239

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/18/2018 4:38:27 PM
Stuart's "mission" to attack the rear of the Federal position ranks as another of the many myths of the campaign.

Wayne

John R. Price
Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant
Posts: 790

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/18/2018 4:55:23 PM
Wayne,

For some reason I was/am under the impression that when cutting loose from a supply train having the troopers carry at least some supply of oats/grain was SOP. I thought/think that I've read it more than once for that and/or prior era's. But anyway wouldn't those several engagements/delays and that if there was a trooper carried issue being depleted as a result make it imperative that JEB reconnect with the main army. That at that point he should have turned back and placed himself between the ANVA and the advancing AOP if only to make the ANVA's supply train available for him to use?
---------------
A battle long forgotten by our country in a war never understood by our country.
"to satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds, in the name of destiny and in the name of God"


Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 3795

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/18/2018 5:18:41 PM

Quote:

Quote:

To go 1 step further with the Confederate Cavalry at Gettysburg, I mentioned JEB's attack on the Union rear not succeeding on day 3, here is GNMP Ranger Chuck Teague doing a great Battlefield Walk of the East Cavalry Field!

BTW Great explanations by Ranger Teague, what say you about JEB's failure on day 3??



Stuart had no such mission. Ranger Teague's "explanations" notwithstanding.



--Jim Cameron



Jim,

Just what was Stuart's orders or mission on day 3 at Gettysburg??

MD
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

Jim Cameron
North Bellmore, NY, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant


Posts: 763

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/18/2018 7:14:28 PM
Flank security for Ewell. Had the AOP been forced to withdraw, Stuart would have operated against its line of retreat as a matter of SOP.
---------------
Jim Cameron

Every time I go to Gettysburg, I learn two things. Something new, and, how much I still don't know.

Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 3795

Re: Stuart, not Longsteet, responsible for loss at Gettysburg
Posted on: 5/19/2018 10:33:31 AM
Well Jim,

He certainly got involved for someone who's orders were to help back up Ewell's Infantry, & only if he was needed!

Do you think his actions on Day 3 reflect a hang-over from letting Lee down, regardless of how??

His motivation, He felt a need to prove himself to Lee & the ANV?

Regards,

MD
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

Page 1 of 2 (Page: 1  2 )
 Forum Ads from Google