MHO Home   Forum Home   Help   Register   Login
 
 
Welcome to MilitaryHistoryOnline.com.
You are not signed in.
The current time is: 4/25/2019 2:21:01 PM
 (1863) Battle of Gettysburg
AuthorMessage
gettysburgerrn
massapequa, NY, USA
top 40
E-4 Corporal


Posts: 134

Longstreet on July 2
Posted on: 3/25/2019 6:22:53 PM
I have question- If for some reason Longstreet got into position to launch his attack before Sickles into position in the Peach Orchard, it seems to me that attacking up the Emmitsburg road with the federal 3rd and 5th corps on the right flank of the First Corps would have been a recipe for confederate disaster. Therefore did the delayed start to the attack (for whatever reason..Im not even going to touch that one) on the confederate right actually enhance the effectiveness of Longstreet's attack by having a stretched out, poorly deployed 3rd corps in position (and further from supports) as opposed to a more compact 3rd corps line sitting square on the attackers flank... Just a thought

Ken
---------------
"You will find a great many of the truths we cling to depend greatly upon our own point of view...." Obi Wan Kenobi

Phil andrade
London, UK
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Moderator
Posts: 3810

Re: Longstreet on July 2
Posted on: 3/26/2019 4:09:01 AM
Ken,

The figures for the big fight on Day Two speak of a massively inflated Union casualty list : the striking feature being that the attacking Confederates inflicted at least one third more casualties than they themselves sustained. This must be attributable to the flawed deployment consequential upon Sickles’s move into a vulnerable salient. One might legitimately assume that the rebel assault achieved that disproportionate casualty exchange rate on account of the exposed and isolated federal resistance it encountered. Take that away from the scenario, and countenance the attackers coming up against a more coherent defensive line, and I would predict the very thing that Longstreet feared : a bloody repulse.

In the event , of course, the Confederate attack was contained , and the damage suffered by the three divisions of Hood, McClaws and Anderson was very bloody.....but the loss of 6,500 rebels against 9,000 yankees bears out your suggestion.

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

Scott Brown
MA, USA
top 40
E-4 Corporal
Posts: 204

Re: Longstreet on July 2
Posted on: 4/3/2019 11:00:42 AM
Ken,

In my opinion, Longstreet attacked at the most opportune time he could have.

Regards,
Scott B.

morris crumley
Dunwoody, GA, USA
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major
Posts: 2081

Re: Longstreet on July 2
Posted on: 4/3/2019 5:18:37 PM
I have always thought it strange, ( as have many others) that Lee called for Longstreet to attack along the Emmitsburg Road. Understanding that it angles up to "the ridge with the cemetery"....how is the right flank not endangered by counter-attack? Hood and Longstreet wanted to flank the Federal position.....and not being successful at convincing Lee to " move around to the right" ..Longstreet wanted to at least attack head on.

Is not Lee`s oblique attack risky?

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

Scott Brown
MA, USA
top 40
E-4 Corporal
Posts: 204

Re: Longstreet on July 2
Posted on: 4/3/2019 5:55:55 PM
Absolutely. We know where the Union troops were, though. Lee's original plan was based on faulty intel. Johnston's recon was hours old, and the Emmitsburg Road Ridge effectively blocked the ANV from seeing any new Union troop dispositions east of it.

Regards,
Scott B.

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


Posts: 4889

Re: Longstreet on July 2
Posted on: 4/4/2019 8:15:25 AM
Attacking some what blindly, on bad ground, on days 2, & 3, became a bad ANV habit!?

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

morris crumley
Dunwoody, GA, USA
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major
Posts: 2081

Re: Longstreet on July 2
Posted on: 4/4/2019 8:59:39 AM
But, if one looks at the supposed positioning of Meade`s forces...in other words, the disposition of the federal forces according to that faulty recon by Johnston, it still seems to me that an oblique attack up the Emmitsburg Road runs the risk of exposing the Confederate right to Union counterattack. Such a short interior line, and the roads behind Cemetery Ridge could present the opportunity for a speedy concentration of effort against Longstreet`s right as the attack develops.

This is why there is a rather brusque exchange between Lee and Longstreet on the deployment of his Divisions for the assault.

Longstreet was somewhat irritated that Lee was giving instructions to McClaws, and corrects Lee`s instruction by telling McClaws ," No, I want you to position your men this way" to which Lee interrupts, "No General, I want them positioned perpendicular to that." Clearly, if Lee would not allow a flanking move around the Union left..then Longstreet did not wish to expose his own right to the unknown that lay beyond those two hills and the ridge.

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

Larry Purtell
USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant


Posts: 708

Re: Longstreet on July 2
Posted on: 4/4/2019 1:23:05 PM
My belief is if Sickles and 3rd Corps stay on the intended line and Hood and McLaws attack obliquely along the Emmittsburg Road, Longstreet and or Hood and McLaw's quickly see their prediciment and either abort their advance or modify it on the fly.

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

Scott Brown
MA, USA
top 40
E-4 Corporal
Posts: 204

Re: Longstreet on July 2
Posted on: 4/6/2019 4:59:07 PM

Quote:
But, if one looks at the supposed positioning of Meade`s forces...in other words, the disposition of the federal forces according to that faulty recon by Johnston, it still seems to me that an oblique attack up the Emmitsburg Road runs the risk of exposing the Confederate right to Union counterattack. Such a short interior line, and the roads behind Cemetery Ridge could present the opportunity for a speedy concentration of effort against Longstreet`s right as the attack develops.

This is why there is a rather brusque exchange between Lee and Longstreet on the deployment of his Divisions for the assault.

Longstreet was somewhat irritated that Lee was giving instructions to McClaws, and corrects Lee`s instruction by telling McClaws ," No, I want you to position your men this way" to which Lee interrupts, "No General, I want them positioned perpendicular to that." Clearly, if Lee would not allow a flanking move around the Union left..then Longstreet did not wish to expose his own right to the unknown that lay beyond those two hills and the ridge.

Respects, Morris
--morris crumley


Morris,

The problem is that the accounts concerning Johnston's recon (including his own in private letters) never really said what he saw in terms of Union troop dispositions. You can make the argument that he completely missed Third Corps in bivouac north of LRT, and you can make the argument that Second Corps hadn't moved into position yet (from their overnight position east of the Taneytown Road near the Round Tops), and you could also make the argument that Geary moved out and back to Culps before Johnston got wherever he got to.

Regards,
Scott B.

 Forum Ads from Google