Pickett’s Charge at Gettysburg

[martybegan]

While Lee nor any of his Generals clearly stated what their objective was for invading Pennsylvania, my feeling was Lee wanted to bring the horrors of war to the doorsteps of Northerners in order to get people elected who were willing to let the South succeed from the Union.

But for whatever reason Lee’s Army is now confronting the Union Army in Gettysburg PA. The first of three days of the battle went fairly well for Lee, but while they had pushed the Union Army back they failed to take the high ground at Culp’s hill and Cemetery ridge. Day two Lee attacked both flanks which failed.

Day three Lee incorrectly thinks the Union center is weak because the flanks are well defended. Meade had played a hunch correctly and built up the center overnight. So Lee orders a frontal assault across a mile of open field despite witnessing what his outnumbered men did to Union forces at Fredericksburg over a shorter field just the year prior.

View attachment 988302

This is from Lee’s position, the arrow points to the copse of trees Pickett’s 13,000 men were to go towards and break thru the Union line. To add to the mile of open field are three well built fences his men must navigate.

View attachment 988300

This is from the Union position at the only point Pickett’s men reached - the high watermark of the Confederacy. Pickett started in the line of trees in the distance.
View attachment 988301

The assault began with the largest artillery attack ever to take place on this hemisphere. Approximately 170 cannons fired for almost two hours to soften up the Union line. People in Baltimore heard what sounded like distant thunder.
View attachment 988309

Initially Union artillery returned fire. But gunpowder smoke had obscured the view of the Confederacy and most of their shells were going over the Union line. Seeing this the Union commander of the artillery ordered his cannons into silence so the Confederates would think they had been taken out. It worked. Pickett’s men moved forward.

This is the field of fire of the Union artillery during Pickett’s charge. The red circle is the copse of trees Pickett was to head towards.
View attachment 988314

It was murder. That’s about all you can say. The Confederacy was over at this point. But like all wars they go on long after it’s over just delaying the inevitable and costing many lives and the further destruction of infrastructure of the losing side. Lee retreats back to Virginia and conducts a series of battles to defend Richmond.

Like many battles of the time, Gettysburg happened there because that's where the roads led.

 

[Mushroom]

Like mine, mere opinion. Lee nor his staff recorded it for us.

Right. Because it is common for seasoned and experienced military leaders to just take off and start a campaign with no goal at all in the end.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Right. Because it is common for seasoned and experienced military leaders to just take off and start a campaign with no goal at all in the end.

Who said that? Go read the OP

 

[martybegan]

As the Confederates got closer the artillery would have switched to canister or grape shot, basically turning their cannons into shotguns. The balls were steel rather than lead so they could pass through multiple troops.
View attachment 988332View attachment 988333

Remember this was also happening at the time musket/rifle fire became much more effective, so just wheeling your cannons up to the front line like back during the Napoleonic wars to spew out some cannister was much more dangerous due to the more effective range of rifled musket fire.

Not sure how much cannister the further batteries fired, but I'm sure the ones close in to the high water mark fired off a few.

 

[Mushroom]

Like many battles of the time, Gettysburg happened there because that's where the roads led.

And can't forget the Gettysburg and Hanover railroad. That was a major rail line in the area for moving food through the region. The rail was a major target of that phase of the campaign, and several days before the battle the Confederate forces had destroyed a railroad bridge over the Monocacy River as well as several miles of track.

Of much more importance in the Civil War were railroads. And a large number of the battles were at important rail junctions.

 

[martybegan]

Who said that? Go read the OP

They had the idea that they had to do SOMETHING besides play defense, but considering their massive material deficit, the best they could hope for was Harrisburg and then maybe beat up the Army of the Potomac a bit before heading back to Virginia.

No way they had the strength to hit DC, Baltimore or Philadelphia.

Gettysburg was happening at the time the Confederates were getting desperate, and desperate people make poor choices sometimes. Probably why the hard reasons were never really written down even after the war.

 

[martybegan]

And can't forget the Gettysburg and Hanover railroad. That was a major rail line in the area for moving food through the region. The rail was a major target of that phase of the campaign, and several days before the battle the Confederate forces had destroyed a railroad bridge over the Monocacy River as well as several miles of track.

Of much more importance in the Civil War were railroads. And a large number of the battles were at important rail junctions.

For strategic movement only, and that didn't get perfected until the Franco-Prussian war 20 years later.

Tactical movement was still done the same way as the Romans did, Foot and Hoof until motor vehicles came into play.

 

[Weatherman2020]

And can't forget the Gettysburg and Hanover railroad. That was a major rail line in the area for moving food through the region. The rail was a major target of that phase of the campaign, and several days before the battle the Confederate forces had destroyed a railroad bridge over the Monocacy River as well as several miles of track.

Of much more importance in the Civil War were railroads. And a large number of the battles were at important rail junctions.

The railroad ended at Gettysburg. And it was new. It wasn’t a railroad town.

 

[Mushroom]

Who said that? Go read the OP

I did, and it is the usual semi-nonsensical spins of throwing in your own beliefs and ignoring anything of actual history. It was not to "bring home the horrors of war", it was not to try and change the election. Like the 1862 campaign, he wanted to fight in Northern Territory, not Southern Territory. And learning his mistake from the Maryland Campaign, swung out wider to force the Union forces to respond to him as well as spread their forces over a wider area.

This is basic military tactics. And hell, 1863 was not even an election year. You might have a small sliver of a point, if say that battle was in 1864. But it was 1863, and like the Japanese in WWII he was looking for a "knock-out punch", by capturing either DC or Philadelphia. Most preferably DC, as that was his intent in the Maryland Campaign also.

 

[Weatherman2020]

I did, and it is the usual semi-nonsensical spins of throwing in your own beliefs and ignoring anything of actual history. It was not to "bring home the horrors of war", it was not to try and change the election. Like the 1862 campaign, he wanted to fight in Northern Territory, not Southern Territory. And learning his mistake from the Maryland Campaign, swung out wider to force the Union forces to respond to him as well as spread their forces over a wider area.

This is basic military tactics. And hell, 1863 was not even an election year. You might have a small sliver of a point, if say that battle was in 1864. But it was 1863, and like the Japanese in WWII he was looking for a "knock-out punch", by capturing either DC or Philadelphia. Most preferably DC, as that was his intent in the Maryland Campaign also.

Lee several times mentioned elections and outcomes of those elections.

Your opinion is just that. Opinion.

 

[Mushroom]

For strategic movement only, and that didn't get perfected until the Franco-Prussian war 20 years later.

Tactical movement was still done the same way as the Romans did, Foot and Hoof until motor vehicles came into play.

More importantly, for logistics. Unlike the Romans, the forces by that time had a greatly increased logistical footprint.

The Romans typically fought with hand weapons. In the Civil War, they used ammunition. And a hell of a lot of ammunition.

A typical soldier only carried around 60 rounds of ammunition. A cannon would have around 12 rounds in their caisson. When a battle started, both sides would set up a munition point, where ammo would be shuttled back and forth between that supply point and the forces at the front. And after a battle (or even during if it was a long battle) both sides would have to rush more ammo to the front to replace what had been expended. That is where the railroads were critical, as they could rush more supplies quickly to the area.

Look at almost every major battle of the war. Bull Run, Bull Run II, Richmond, Danville, Gettysburg, Chattanooga, Atlanta, the list just goes on and on. Almost every single major battle of the Civil War occurred within a dozen miles of a major rail line. Not for movement of the troops themselves, but for either their own supplies, or to cut off supplies to the enemy.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Like many battles of the time, Gettysburg happened there because that's where the roads led.

I think you can safely say that of every battle in history. If you add in riverports and seaports.

 

[martybegan]

I think you can safely say that of every battle in history. If you add in riverports and seaports.

Ones that target taking territory, or ones dictated by logistics, yes.

Things like the 1940 Battle of France, or 1914 Tannenberg, the targets were the destruction of the opposing army. That leads to different considerations.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Ones that target taking territory, or ones dictated by logistics, yes.

Things like the 1940 Battle of France, or 1914 Tannenberg, the targets were the destruction of the opposing army. That leads to different considerations.

Regardless of the final objective a modern army needs roads, rivers or seaborne transport for supply. The days when an army could support itself by "gleaning" (looting the countryside) are long gone.

 

[martybegan]

Regardless of the final objective a modern army needs roads, rivers or seaborne transport for supply. The days when an army could support itself by "gleaning" (looting the countryside) are long gone.

In Western Europe most rivers are obstacles, not means of transport.