Gettysburg, 1st Day - Collapse of the Union line

As the Federals retreat to regroup on Cemetery Hill, Lee and Longstreet argue over strategy.
General Ewell later made the controversial decision not to press the attack and halted his advance in the East near Culp's Hill.
From the movie Gettysburg.

[@brucespencer4469]

Love General Longstreet saying to Lee, "not retreat Sir , redeploy! " Clever

[@justinedwards5021]

he was right it wouldn't have been a retreat, it would have been a tactical redeployment in order to force the union to pursue lee therefore allowing lee to find ground of his choosing to set up a defensive battle

[@decimated550]

lol 2:24 i like Lee expression and motions as he realizes that longstreet is suggesting to go on the defensive. lol the slow drop of the binoculars and the angry eyebrows like >=-I

[@bradschaeffer5736]

Supposedly Lee said to Longstreet that “If the enemy is still there tomorrow we will attack him.” To which Longstreet astutely replied: “If the enemy is still there it’ll be because he WANTS us to attack him, which is a good enough reason to me for not doing so.”

[@HuesopandillaGlorius]

Unfortunately, convincing Lee was not easy, his ego at that time made him very stubborn for better and for worse

[@dclark142002]

@@decimated550, worse than the defensive... Longstreet wants to maneuver across the face of an enemy who is already deployed...with a bad roadnet, to try to get behind him. This is exactly the mistake that the French made at Salamanca...which Lee would know very well. Longstreet is proposing a BAD plan, and Lee knows it.

[@Tommykey07]

I notice the way Lee is portrayed in this movie, after he criticizes or disagrees with someone, he then follows it up with a compliment about something the person did right. It is a good way to rebuke someone by making that person still feel valued.

[@andrewroberts7428]

i'm wondering if it's a backhanded compliment as lee was expressing gratitude to longstreet's subordinate, not longstreet himself

[@johnmccarron7066]

It's kind of a lost art of leadership. I've had plenty of leaders who were more interested in demonstrating their knowledge by verbally abusing or browbeating subordinates through the position of authority or expertise. There was never an actual interest in developing or mentoring junior leaders. For all of his faults as a commander and frankly as a person, Lee had a exceptional skill as a mentor to subordinate officers.

[@johnmccarron7066]

@@andrewroberts7428 It wasn't. Lee was thanking Longstreet, because his subordinate's excellent record and decisive nature reflected well upon Longstreet as a commander and officer. It meant he had chosen the right soldier for the job and developed him well for his position. A good commander will always feel a sense of accomplishment when receiving a positive report regarding one of their subordinate leaders.

[@mr.boomer8794]

That is Leadership

[@patricksmith5757]

Great observation. One of the reasons why he was a great military leader. I'm from Pennsylvania, yet have all the admiration in the world for Robert E. Lee. Exceptional general.

[@Rimasta1]

I think this was crucial, Longstreet wanted to fight a defensive battle in order to keep the Army intact. He wanted to redeploy the Army because he knew eventually Washington would press Meade into committing to the attack. Lee's mistake I believe was he contracted what the Japanese later called, "the victory disease". He became too accustomed to risk taking and succeeding, and he expected the Federal positions to break under his attacks, and when those positions stubbornly refused to break it cost him and his Army dearly.

[@thomassnapp1341]

Rimasta1 You are spot on. Had Lee listened to Longstreet, things might have been very different.

[@dclark142002]

+Thomas Snapp ...a greater loss, although perhaps not as bloody a one. Lee had the full information of the supply state and ammunition state of his army. The goal was to fight one decisive battle, not a campaign far from supply and reinforcement. Longstreet's 'plan' (which only emerged 20 years after the battle) would have had the AoNV engage in a night march on bad roads directly into the center of the oncoming 5 Federal corps. (If, as Longstreet states, he gave the advice at the end of day 1...if he gave that advice at the end of day 2, it was already impossible to carry out...since the army no longer had the supplies and ammunition to fight a second major engagement)

[@ConstantineJoseph]

I do not blame Lee. He understood the Napoleonic art of movement in corps level at lightning speed to surprise the enemy. It is his intelligence gathering that let him down at Gettysburg. If it were Napoleon himself he would utilise his vulnerable position to instigate the enemy to draw a frontal charge. In fact he should have feigned retreat to draw the union troops into a trap using his vulnerable position. That is the ultimate art of war. To use your position of supposed weakness and to give your enemy a false sense of security. That Lee did not master to win this battle. There was a chance for victory for the confederates and like Julius Caesar who used opportunity and every attempt to lure the enemy, General Lee could have done so much better than to use the good old sledgehammer frontal charge. He needed more guile to win this battle and did not bet on it but instead on the veteran ability of his soldiers

[@777Outrigger]

An attempted move around the Federal flank would have been very problematic. Federal Cavalry had improved a lot from previous battles, and they were on their home ground. Good luck getting on the high ground to provoke an attack from the Federals. I'm not sure that Longstreet even pushed that plan very hard himself. When Lee lost the initiative on the first day, personally, I'm not sure he had very good options.

[@fundamentos3439]

Absolutely right . Furthermore , Gen. Longstreet has become the scapegoat of this battle , which he so reluctantly was dragged to fight.

[@CognizantCheddar]

"Take that hill, if practicable." This moment indirectly highlighted how indispensable Thomas Jackson was to the Army of Northern Virginia and Lee, and how Ewell replacing Jackson as corps commander was no patch for the loss of Jackson. Ewell didn't deem it 'practicable.' It was late in the day, and his men had marched a long way, so he did nothing. The Army of the Potomac subsequently acquired the high ground for the rest of the battle. Obviously, this was crucial to its victory. Jackson, in contrast, was notorious for his avaricious eye for good ground and his willingness to march his troops to exhaustion to obtain it. Had Jackson been commanding that corp, he'd have taken those hills, guaranteed. And then US history, and perhaps world history with it, goes in a very different direction. A pivotal action by Jackson, often of his own initiative, was behind nearly every great victory by the Confederacy in the Eastern Theater between '61-'63. After Jackson was mortally wounded, Lee's apparent good luck on the battlefield permanently soured. It begs the question of which general was truly the most crucial to the Confederate cause.

[@calanon534]

Lee was the manager, Jackson was the prize fighter. They were a team, no one more valuable than the other, but without the other, the one left was bereft. I understand Lee's feelings perhaps more than most - the feeling that, with the death of someone important, you feel like your arm is missing, and things just don't quite go the way they used to. The Team isn't together any more. Here, we see Lee being the best manager he can, but without his prize fighter, he just can't win with the fighters he has left.

[@Stefanthenautilus]

With those words, the battle - and the war - were lost for the Confederacy, though none yet knew it

[@natelemay3063]

brilliant take on this phase of the war

[@lorrainedixon4440]

It depends what Jackson turned up. A seven days Jackson wouldn’t have even made it to Gettysburg.

[@shawnwitthoff471]

If Lee had both Jackson and Longstreet at Gettysburg I can't imagine a similar outcome at all

[@Stardweller1]

“Take the hill if practicable.” Yeah, that’ll go well for you.

[@rc59191]

Lot of people think if Jackson would of lived he would of taken the heights and won the battle but I feel like they lost that battle the minute Lee decided to not listen to Longstreets advice about redeploying the army.

[@Stardweller1]

Yeah, or at the very least, made it more difficult for himself. As to the other matter, I honestly think Jackson’s skill as a general is overstated. He was a good general, don’t get me wrong... but not QUITE as good as his reputation would have us believe.

[@rc59191]

@@Stardweller1 ya I think he's a bit overrated there's a theory that had Jackson not been wounded on his reconnaissance mission then his army would of met with disaster during his planned night attack. Also he was hated by just about everyone when he was a professor at the Virginia Military Institute.

[@dgray3771]

Bad choice of words in a moment that needed swift action. What Lee meant was take the hill but if they put up a bigger fight don't push it. But didn't think they would do so, thus the hill would be in their hands. What Ewell heard was, if you want and can spare some men take the hill. But it has no priority. So he ignored the " suggestion" . Would it have mattered is a whole other question.

[@SoulKiller7Eternal]

@@Stardweller1 He did very well against piss poor generals in his valley campaign. One that put him to the test was General Kimball who beat Jackson at 1st Battle of Kernstown. Sent Jackson and his men running. The next time Jackson, or rather his men met their match, was 2nd Bull Run, or rather the start to it where the Stonewall Brigade met the Iron Brigade, and walked away learning, the Union had their own crack units. Jackson is said have been desperate in that fight, which was unlike him. That day he was going toe to toe against General Gibbon, who was always one step ahead of Jackson. Jackson's engagement walked away with losses they could ill-afford, and took a massive beating to the Stonewall Brigade, which walked away with more losses then the Iron Brigade did, although they weren't known by that title at this time. I place several Union commanders above Jackson. Hancock, Gibbon, Kimball, Sherman, Thomas, McDowell, and Hooker, possibly. There weren't many in the Union army that could even handle Jackson. Gibbon & Kimball did. Hancock proved himself as a capable commander in many situations, Sherman did as well. Thomas did too. McDowell, had a green army but his plan was sound, and had piss poor subordinates such as...Burnside. Hooker was aggressive, and did force Lee to split his army, but lost faith in himself at a critical moment. Had he not...Chancellorsville might have been a Union victory. Coming down on the rebel army with 2 to 1 advantages, with their rear being cut off by a Union corp, they would've been doggedly fighting just to keep their lines of retreat open.

[@Stephen-wb3wf]

"Do you understand what I mean?' Best line in the movie. Because Lee was used to Stonewall who would know what he meant but not Ewell and most of the people debating the battle for the next 150 years.

[@ivan-fk9yz]

Also notice that the orderly looks confused and does not repeat the order back like in other scenes. He doesn't understand what General Lee means. When Stonewall Jackson gives orders he is more decisive and people understand his intention quickly.

[@kevinpiacente3456]

Lee needed stonewall.

[@stonewalljackson5692]

@@kevinpiacente3456 Yes he did, I was much more successful than Ewell.

[@Strawberry-12.]

@@kevinpiacente3456 Jackson was good but I fell he was overated

[@kevinpiacente3456]

@@Strawberry-12. in what way??

[@oneputtsteven]

Lee always referred to Unions forces as "those people" and it is accurately part of the script here.

[@Dbusdriver71]

I agree Steven but the actor who is portraying Gen. Lee portrays him as aloof to the point of arrogance. Gen. Lee is hardly that. I submit Gen. Lee lost faith and may have unintentionally underestimated the Union Officer Corp based on how they conducted themselves and the strategies they used in past battles to this point. Gen. Lee was superintendent of West Point and knew so many of the Union Officers he engaged and fought against during the Civil War. Gen. Lee IS a genius; even at an early age, he was THAT Good so I'm not very happy with the way Gen. Lee was portrayed in this movie.

[@MM-qi5mk]

@@Dbusdriver71 disagree. Sheen played a complicated 19th century stoic Aristocrat like Lee was. He was a genius but still a man who had faults. That’s why I think it’s good to portray him that way and not the marble man

[@MarkhasSteelfort]

@@Dbusdriver71 Longstreet was better than Lee. Realistic and visionary.

[@Dbusdriver71]

@@MarkhasSteelfort BOTH should Genius thru out the Civil War. Gettysburg was a 'missed opportunity' that we look back on saying this was a turning point in American History that would have been 'if they had done thus'.

[@erwin669]

@@Dbusdriver71 honestly the more I look at Gettysburg it seems to become a study on why clear and concise communication and being able and willing to take the initiative is important for an army. Ewell not seizing the initiative he had won and falling back on the "if practical" part of Lee's order cost the Confederate's dearly. Then again on the second day General Anderson refused to reinforce Wright's Brigade after they took the crest of Cemetery Ridge and held it for 3 hours because he never received orders from AP Hill to advance. Then on the third day it is Longstreet delaying ordering Pickett to go forward. There are just so many instances at Gettysburg where if communication would have been more clear or commanders at the division level or higher had taken the initiative the Confederates might have won.

[@victorgigante5374]

Longstreet's advice was more than solid - Lee had fallen into the classic trap of letting his enemy pick where the fight was going to happen. He didn't know the terrain well enough, and he certainly didn't have enough information on where his enemy was and how many of them there were. If they'd fallen back as Longstreet advocated, they could have chosen where and when they made contact with the enemy and used their forces more efficiently. It's entirely plausible that an engagement further south - perhaps even south of the Maryland border, if they could escape from Meade for that long - would have gone in their favor, or at least more so than the disastrous last day at Gettysburg.

[@dclark142002]

Except that Lee's army didn't have the resources to fight two battles. Lee actually only had enough ammunition to fight one decisive battle. Plus, after the first day, there was every indication that the fight here could be a successful decisive battle. Lee's plan on Day 2 was sound, and only the execution was poor. Had Ewell and Longstreet's attacks been coordinated in time (which was mostly luck based, as command and control over that distance is problematic during this time period), the Federal Army would have been defeated and fallen back. Longstreet's 'plans' are to abandon the already successful action...move back through already scavenged land, cede the initiative to Meade....and blindly hope for another fight to materialize somewhere. This was never a practical or even worthwhile plan, and the myth surrounding its existence actively hinders an understanding of what actually happened during this campaign.

[@vicroc4]

​@@dclark142002What two battles? Up until this point both armies had been involved in skirmishes at best. Lee's ammunition supply is irrelevant at this point because he'd barely started using it. Much of the effort on the Second Day was aimed at pushing the Federals off the high ground that they had regrouped on after falling back through the town. What was being advocated here was for the army to withdraw and regroup on more favorable terrain. That's basic strategy, especially at this point in military development. Similar strategies had been the primary reason for Lee's victories up to this point - not letting himself get bogged down in a place that was going to make him spend ammunition (and lives) any more than necessary. Which is exactly what he let happen at Gettysburg.

[@SoulKiller7Eternal]

@@dclark142002 There wouldn't be two battles, this was a skirmish at best on day 1. Longstreet meant to disengage, not fight the enemy, making the supply point mute. Not an issue. Move south to Washington, the capital of the country, and FORCE the Union army to come at him on ground of the rebel's choosing. They needed Stuart to screen them though, and he was gone with the wind. However, the fight on Day 2, even if it had been coordinated well, the ground of Culp's Hill was well defended, with what was left of the Iron Brigade and other I Corps elements with II Corps and XI in support. There was no way in hell the Rebels would've won there. And they didn't. Their best chance was at the round tops where the Union was rushed to get men placed there. Sickles' in all his damn stupidity, accidentally stalled the enemy by moving his division forward. Idiot got a medal for that. It did force Hancock to send reinforcements that day, including what was left of the fabled Irish Brigade who marched into history that day, along with another regiment, the 1st Minnesota. Iron Brigade was already devastated and made their mark on history day 1. Now it was elements of the II Corps who would do the same.

[@SvendleBerries]

Fantastic movie, this. Thanks to Gettysburg reenactors, the producers were able to fill the field with what believably looked like a whole army.

[@ghostfox4]

Every year I revisit this movie on the anniversary. This year it’s 158. As a kid I grew up going to and passing through Gettysburg often as I’m from the south central region of the state. Gettysburg has always given me the eeriest feeling, the constant feeling of being watched, the feeling of knowing thousands of men fell there and I walk in those very same places, the energy I feel touching the rocks in Devil’s Den, or overlooking the field from up on top of Little Round Top. Walking past Jenny Wade’s house, hearing the stories of surgeons haunting the basement of the Seminary. Even as a grown adult, the place is quite literally “hauntingly beautiful”. I’m thankful I live so close by, and never realized until I was older that it was such a tourist attraction.

[@FordHoard]

I hope I can go there and visit one day. I live in Georgia, and there was quite a lot of battles here, but Gettysburg has always stuck out to me. Of course, it was one of the most if not the most important battle of the war.

[@Snarflelocker]

Happy anniversary, I’m with you.

[@guyinacoffeeshop2239]

Well said.

[@chancellorpalpatineakathes6130]

My elementary school teacher said she wanted to leave immediately as she felt a very heavy presence. So did my language arts teacher in 9th grade.

[@BlackEagleFeather]

I am a Black American and very interested in the battles of the Civil War. While I am glad the south lost because of the issue of slavery. I can't help but admire the tenacity of both sides. I always root for the underdog but I admire the leaders on both sides.

[@roguishpaladin]

CALVIN FOSTER This video might be of interest to you, then: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fajOg4p_rL9naaM The Townsends channel is a good reenactor channel focusing on 18th and 19th century reenactment (primarily food). In that video, he features Michael Twitty, who shows James Townsend a really tasty sounding barbecue. He also speaks a bit about black history and the challenges of being black and reenacting that period in history. I think it would be good for more black folk to get involved in reenactment. There's this perception that reenactors are there because they can be racist in an acceptable way, but I think most reenactors are there because they think that the clothing, the firearms, and the history interest them. Having more diversity in reenactment would help dispel this perception, I think.

[@indy_go_blue6048]

Calvin, we might be kin as you and I share my mother's maiden name, lol. Anyway, as a born and raised Yankee I agree with you 100%. While I despise the radical republicans and the fire eaters of the South, I have a lot of admiration for )the fighting men and (most of) the leaders on both sides as well.

[@davidatkinson47]

More Americans died in that conflict than any other.

[@joshualight5234]

It was just a sad and tragic time. Most Americans of the time on both sides were white supremacists, that's what they were brought up to believe so I hope you don't judge them through 2018 eyes. It was an erroneous and tragic belief that caused a massive stain on our history. I think slavery would have eventually died in the South anyway, not sure if you believe that, the Civil War just kind of sped it along. Sad so many had to die just to get things on the right track again. But war has a way of sorting things out.

[@whattheheckamidoinghere4305]

Same, but as a white woman I hate how half of my people are mean to your people.

[@spade2187]

"I ordered firing on that hill but they are no firing kindly send out why" lol so kind general lee

[@rutabagasteu]

He was using the speech patterns of his day.

[@dandan9175]

No do it yourself

[@dab0331]

@CalvinV7 It don't matter when you're the head hocho

[@frankholtfreter3878]

"lch hatte angeordnet den Hügel unter Feuer zu nehmen aber es passiert nichts. Schicken Sie jemanden, der nachsieht".

[@brettfavreify]

A most interesting discussion that impacted the battle, changed the strategy and ultimately turned the war.

[@amadeusamwater]

Lee had two problems at Gettysburg. First, he was used to Jackson handling the details of his attacks, and was unused to doing it himself. He may have been rusty. Second, he had many officers newly promoted. They require more precise orders than he was used to giving. With Jackson and longstreet, all he had to do was tell them what he wanted done, and they could take it from there. new officers can't always do that.

[@jdsmith542]

It didn't help that Ewell, the key element of the crucial second day, was newly recovered from a serious wound, in poor health, and newly promoted.

[@amadeusamwater]

@@jdsmith542 Also newly married, if I recall correctly.

[@SoulKiller7Eternal]

Lee himself was also dealing with an illness. His health wasn't that great at this battle.

[@davidbutler1857]

This is a such a great battle film. Fun to leave playing on repeat all day long while you do small chores, or ya know, paint military minatures. :)

[@bcask61]

Every souvenir shop and t-shirt place in Gettysburg has the movie on a continuous loop. You can’t get away from it.

[@scarecrowlego884]

@@bcask61 I only heard the soundtrack in one muesem shop. I didn't see or hear the movie playing anywhere else

[@662wc5]

Gettysburg gets most of the attention due to being an eastern battle near the major cities of the east coast with many "embedded" reporters from major newspapers, but at the same time as this battle something happened several hundred miles west of Gettysburg that was even more devastating to the Confederacy. The Battle of Gettysburg was July 1 - 3, 1863, but the next day, July 4th, 1863, Vicksburg finally surrendered to Union forces under General Grant. The last link in the chain was complete, the Union controlled the entire length of the Mississippi for the first time in the war, and the confederacy was forever split in two.

[@R3dp055um]

An excellent point. The War in the West is largely ignored.

[@danmc7815]

Old comment, but yes. The Union control of the Mississippi was important not just to sever the west from the South, but also to allow commerce and supply for the Union. After Vicksburg, the Union grain could flow up and down the Mississippi and connected rivers.

[@thomassnapp1341]

Longstreet was correct in his observation - Had the Confederate Army marched on Washington, Mead would have been forced to follow and then, the Confederate Army could have turned and met them on ground of their own choosing - ground much better than Gettysburg.

[@noleybo56]

The Emmettsburg Road held the key which was in confederate hands. Lee could have manoeuvred his army which would have put him between Meade and Washington thereby inducing Meade to attack. Another Lee BLUNDER!!!!

[@Rimasta1]

Yup, I thought Longstreet had the right idea on how to achieve a strategic victory over the North, not just a tactical one.

[@thomassnapp1341]

noleybo56 Gen. Lee was not prone to "blunders", however the Union generals executed one blunder after another in the early years of the war. You are correct however, that this was a tremendous blunder by Lee. Had he followed the recommendations of Longstreet and other subordinate generals, this "blood bath" for the Confederacy may not have occurred. Had they moved (deployed) the troops on a march towards Washington as suggested by Longstreet, Mead would have had to pull his army off of the heights at Gettysburg and follow. The Confederate troops (with intelligence and plenty of time) could have stopped and taken a position known from previous reconnaissance along the steep heights of the road and lay in wait for the Union army. Plus, the Confederates could have positioned a division or a corps. off of the main road behind the advancing Union army and come up behind them when they engaged the Confederates on the road which would have probably resulted in the Union army being caught in terrible fire from the front, the back, and from both sides.

[@markviking7617]

I disagree with this. When you are in the enemy rear...you have to strike fast and hard. You don't have the luxury of hanging around playing defense.

[@scottgoodman8993]

​@Doug Bevins Sound reasoning except the use of the word traitors and patriots belie an even handed look at fact. Photos of confederate men captured at Gettysburg show emaciated soldiers. Asking/ordering emaciated men to march with little food and ammo would not advance the confederate "position". Elsewhere we see the artillery ordered to expend all their ammunition before Pickets charge. Lee may have felt he had to attack or not get another chance felt he had to attack or not get another chance. The dependence on "accepted" Napoleonic tactics was probably more destructive than the choice of location of the attack.

[@cm80]

"if practical" 2 words that prly haunted general lee til' he died

[@TheGroundedAviator]

Yeah I'd have said something along the lines of "take if possible and if not maintain pressure on them".

[@justinp5661]

Those words would have worked with Jackson in command...unfortunately he was already dead.

[@cm80]

@@justinp5661 jackson would have already took it...

[@jasonadams9229]

@@cm80 no he would have been reposled. The union had a fresh troops and 20 plus pieces to defend the hill. Plus the 12 and 3rd corp coming up

[@cm80]

@@jasonadams9229 so ewell was right for being complacent? i disagree. lee wanted to be agressive.

[@MW-eg4gu]

I wasn't there in the 1860s but I just think these two are spot on in their enactments of Longstreet and Lee. Excellent acting!

[@Zappiss]

Longstreet is indeed generally regarded as one of the best generals of the Confederacy. The Lost Cause movement tried to shift the blame for the loss at Gettysburg from Lee to Longstreet... I'm not saying Longstreet's performance in the battle was flawless, but the "dawn assault theory" for the second day and all the rest have been found quite baseless.

[@jasonhuff7725]

Longstreet on multiple occasions asked Lee to go to the right of Little Round Top. They would have had a chance to outflank the position. Most definitely if JEB Stuart and the Cavalry were available from the beginning instead of quote Riding around up North getting his name in the newspaper Lee could have properly scouted the area.

[@manilajohn0182]

@@jasonhuff7725 Stuart's errors in this campaign were minor. The primary mistake was Lee's, who gave Stuart contradictory orders and failed to make proper use of the cavalry which Stuart left behind.. This error of Lee's led to the disastrous meeting engagement on 1 July, which all but ruined Lee's plan of campaign.

[@Shafeone]

Let's give credit where credit is due to. As pickett himself said when asked why his attack failed: "I think the Union army had something to do with it." The Yankees fought magnificently that battle (except the 11th corps). The Iron Brigade, 20th Maine, 1st Minnesota, to name a few. Hanock was superb in the field and Meade conducted the battle as well as Lee did Antietam. Meade against all expectations completely outgeneralled Lee. And that, in the end, made the difference.

[@thomasbaron5367]

I think Lee should have taken Longstreet's advice

[@thomasbaron5367]

***** he was

[@aldousjosea.castro1887]

+Thomas Baron Doubt it. The Confederates did not have cavalry till the third day. Withdrawing blind would be a disaster.

[@dclark142002]

+Thomas Baron Lee's purpose was to engage the Federal Army in the North, in the Open, and defeat it. Day 1 of the battle certainly met the criteria. Once engaged, if he were to take Longstreet's advice, Lee would have had to disengage, move his army a sufficient distance away from the AotP, and then attempt to find a better location to fight the decisive battle Lee sought. Bear in mind that the road net restricts Lee's options here, as that Gettysburg is the nexus, and therefore all roads lead AWAY from where Longstreet wants to go. In addition, Longstreet and Lee only know the location of two or three of the seven Union corps. The main road around the union left is actually held by Federal forces. How can a blind movement into a strong force of Federals a good idea?Far better to attempt to attack as Lee did on day 2. That almost worked, and had Longstreet and Ewell properly coordinated, it had a good chance of succeeding. Day 3 was a gamble on Lee's part, since he could no longer afford to contemplate another battle beyond this one. Supplies, time, and ammunition meant that by day 3, Gettysburg had to be the decisive battle, and the only other option was a retreat. Lee gambled on pushing the force off the hill and lost.

[@gorankatic40000bc]

+Aldous Jose A. Castro no it would not, Meade was reserved and defensive minded the whole campaign. He was passive.

[@Rancoroth419]

Jackson, who was killed a few months before Gettysburg would have taken Culp's Hill without orders to deny the enemy a strong position. Its a pity for the Confederate Strategy, as Lee has been referenced as saying Stone Wall Jackson was like his Right Arm...so he issued orders to his Corps. as if he still had Jackson there, but instead, it was Ewell, a New to command general who did not have near the initiative Jackson would have had in his place. Longstreet was a Defensive Genius, but not as good at coordinating offensive actions as Jackson. Longstreet never wanted to stand up to Lee. Jackson, given his fiery personality would have convinced Lee to withdraw had it not been to their advantage. The entire Army of Northern Virginia, after a string of victories, particularly after Fredricksburg, had this air of Confidence and Ego bordering on Arrogance. They thought they were invincible despite the Union's larger numbers, they underestimated the commanders on the Union side, despite knowing all of them intimately, and encountered a Union army that had just had a new tougher supreme Commander named. Meade was tougher then Burnsides.

[@lifesjourney9801]

The American Civil War is one of the most gruesome, courageous, heroic story I have even known in my life. Very well documented and the men whether they are in the Union or Confederate are very brave people.

[@analtubegut66]

There's nothing brave about fighting for white supremacy. It's a hundred percent vile

[@Shafeone]

But the point is that Grant DID know the advantages he had and used them to end the war in 11 months where other commanders had failed. Every time his army inflicted casualties it was a victory in this modern war that he understood had arrived. Like all Genls. he made mistakes. But he also showed real brilliance at Vicksburg that belies the "Grant was just hammer" concept. The fact is Grant knew how to beat Lee. And he did. And he was NEVER intimidated. I love the man for that alone.

[@reaper411b]

13 years later. That's crazy dude, that this clip has been up for 13 years. I fuckin love this movie, ever since I was a kid. And I love your comment. Grant's a fuckin legend, one of my personal heroes, for being a troubled man with many failings and failures, but being uniquely suited to the task at hand. An absolute brilliant commander and THE man to defeat Lee. 13 years later lol, hope you still check your youtube 🤘🤘

[@HuesopandillaGlorius]

George Meade is also one of the few not to be intimidated by Lee and Gettysburg showed it.

[@lafeelabriel]

@@HuesopandillaGlorius No disrespect to Meade, as I am sure that he'd agree with this if he was alive to say this.. But the ones that won this battle for the North were Hancock, Buford, and, last but certainly no means least, Reynolds.

[@lafeelabriel]

Oh and can't forget Warren.

[@DonMeaker]

Lee suffered from illness that day, and was confined to his tent most of the day. That is why he was always late to learn of the situation, and late to act on momentary weakness.

[@rubinsteve1]

longstreet was right, they should have headed to Washington instead.

[@traviserickson3603]

Easier said than done as far as moving south and east - that was where the union army was coming up from in the first place. But no doubt a more defensive mindset would have been smarter.

[@roguishpaladin]

Also, who knows which way the Union army would've retreated. Since much fo the damage was done to the northeast, perhaps the Union retreats southwest towards Frederick. If so, that opens up a lot of railroads and ways in which the Confederate forces could try to slip around the Union forces. It also could've turned into a divide-and-conquer situation. There's just no way to be sure.

[@seanwalters1977]

Still would have been a tall order to get around the Union army and lay siege to the most heavily defended city in the world at the time. They would have to have hoped to take the city immediately as Meade would have been hot on their tail.

[@seanwalters1977]

@@CowboyAxe When DC was half the size with no fortifications at all? Bad comparison but ok. Also comparing the British army to the Confederates is interesting but ok

[@seanwalters1977]

@@CowboyAxe Over 40 forts built no more than a mile apart with interlocking fields of fire, connected trench lines and rifling pits, 90,000 or so troops in Meade's army, 50-70,000 fresh troops at any given time in DC with up and coming officers ready to lead and no Confederate Navy to think of to blockade DC from the coast to stop supplies. Explain how the confederates would have done it.

[@guyinacoffeeshop2239]

Thank you. Excellent portrayal of Lee and Longstreet. It's a wonder how much things may have been different if Stonewall Jackson were still alive.

[@hivicar]

"We pushed two corps, but there are five more comin." There's also a scene from earlier that day that has Longstreet telling General Hood that "they counted five corps, including the two we engaged today."

[@SantomPh]

the meeting scene is actually later on the second day. Without Stuart they had no idea how many men were actually there. The major detailing the plan estimates 70 000 to 90 000 men; Longstreet says 5 corps including 2 , while earlier he says 5 more meaning 7 corps. Stuart just left the others guessing, and everyone paid for it

[@CorekBleedingHollow]

Lee's ego doomed his army. Should've listened to everything Longstreet said.

[@ProjecthuntanFish]

He was a very humble man so try again

[@luigigranata2723]

Lee had no ego. I don't know what you're talking about. Lee was not the direct cause of the loss. Ewell's mistake on day 1, Stuart and his calvary missing and areas not being scouted, and a few other things. Had Ewell occupied Culp’s Hill, the union army would have had to leave and fought somewhere else that might not have been to their advantage. Also nightfall at Culp's Hill played a factor. Had it not been for the darkness, they would have been able to capture Culp's Hill and Baltimore Pike, which was where the union’s communication line, all the supply waggons, artilery, etc was. They would have forced Meade to retreat and it would have been a turning point in the war for confederate victory.

[@shrapnel77]

"Lee had no ego." Well, there is the "marble man" myth proved. Everyone has ego. Everyone. There was once a story recited about Lee after the war. While at Lee college, there was two young honeys talking to him on horseback. They were young and starstruck. Lee's horse kept bucking and neighing, but Lee got him under control, much two the delight of the woman. It turns out Lee was digging his spur in the horse's side to incite the horse. He was "showing off" for the ladies. I get why he did it, just do not put someone on such a high pedestal that they are immune from judgement.

[@Jsanc2075]

It wasn't Lee's ego, it was his terrible desperation to end the war right then a d there that clouded his judgment.

[@Tyrfingr]

In hindsight everyone can be the wiser man. Being in the spotlight at the time when things go down on the other hand, matters are not at all as clear. From Lee's point of view, where he was positioned, he must have felt sure of his actions.

[@rc59191]

Longstreet will always be my favorite of the Confederate generals since he knew they didn't have the numbers to be throwing away lives needlessly in charges up hills and across open fields.

[@thijshagenbeek6554]

Longstreet had the soundness of mind to see the strategic outcome. To see they could win the offensive by a defensive action. Its a very difficult thing, to ask of men who won the entire day and gained ground to at time give up said ground for better ground in order to achieve the desired battlefield victory. This very factor is still a learning thing in Westpoint. To force the situation at hand to provide the room to manouvre to gain the strategic innitiative by local succeses.

[@koalabay08]

MY grandmother's grandfather fought July 1 1863 151st Regiment company H when he was 28. He got shot and died Jan 1864 from his wounds. . His name is on the PA Monument in Gettysburg. George Spangler lived near East Berlin and Dover PA , not far from Gettysburg and his son John (my great grandfather was only 2 when his dad died. I dont live far from Gettysburg and go there often. I watch this move often as I sent for the complete set It is a lovely area

[@Shafeone]

The record shows that in fact Meade, being new to command and still getting used to the position, prefered to defend rather than attack and was drawing up a defensive plan at Pipe Creek when the battle broke out. Maybe Meade would have felt compelled to attack because of pressure from Washington but not out his own desire to close with the Rebs.

[@philfeld2107]

"Take that hill if practicable... do you understand what I mean?" if practicable... those 2 words sealed the fate of the confederacy

[@spade2187]

Yup and good riddance

[@bobber0623]

If practicable means i am the commanding general and i am not up front like you are so i leave it to your judgement

[@rupertsmith5815]

The confederacy was already losing when Gettysburg happened even if the confederacy won the battle Vicksburg would still fall and the Army of the Potomac would just come back.

[@Shafeone]

I agree with you completely. people forget that the Union army was grievously wounded as well having lost roughly 23,000 men in three days of heavy fighting. And Meade was still new to command and was physically/emotionally exhausted. Longstreet would have welcomed a counter-attack. Like I have said. It is easy for people to judge from the anticeptic atmosphere of time and distance. We were not there that day. Meade was a pro who knew his business. I give him the benefit of the doubt.

[@Lullaby454]

'If practicable' ... two words that many argue cost the Army of Northern Virginia the battle. If Lee had firmly ordered Ewell to attack they could have taken the heights on the first day.

[@Shafeone]

@massivivid James Longstreet understood quite well the power of the rifled musket and artillery in the hands of determined troops. His ideal battle was Fredericksburg where, safe behind sturdy cover, his men could open up on massed ranks of the enemy and decimate them. At Gettysburg he said to Fremantle that in many ways he thought the Union position was even better than his had been at Marye's Heights. So clearly HE saw what war had become. Lee never did until it was too late.

[@JamesB21a]

History is lucky Lee didn't listen to Longstreet here.

[@xotl2780]

Vicksburg fell basically immediately after this. No Pennsylvania invasion would have saved the South.

[@bluegrassreb1]

@@xotl2780 if they'd marched on DC and actually won, nothing else would have mattered

[@DialgaMarine3]

Jake Mackie By this point in time, the south was already being choked to death, and it was established after Antietam that the south would receive no support from Britain or France, which was vital. All a Gettysburg victory would’ve led to would be Lee’s forces remaining intact and the war going on a little longer than it did. Grant’s campaign in the west had basically sealed the confederacy’s fate already

[@anglishbookcraft1516]

Unlucky*

[@ActionableFreedom]

@@DialgaMarine3 George B. McClellan wanted to conclude peace in 1894 on some terms or other and he lost to Lincoln by 5%. There were anti draft riots all over the North. A capture of DC would've forced the north to negotiate.

[@touffeman027]

Thank you for the information !

[@theroachden6195]

"If practicable." But what the movie left out was he didn't want Ewell to get into a general engagement to take them either which he so said to Ewell.

[@cripplehawk]

I always wondered.....If Stonewall Jackson had not died and was at Gettysburg. Would the CSA have won?

[@Bartolone42]

Yes you're right - a very important hill indeed! ;-)

[@AdmRose]

Doubtful that Gettysburg would have happened at all. Lee only split Jackson's Second Corps after his death. Had he not died that split would not have happened and you wouldn't have had the massive scattering of Lee's army in the days leading up to Gettysburg. Remember that it was Heth's division of Hill's Third Corps that ran into Buford's calvary; those units used to be under Jackson in the Second Corps.

[@PeterDavid7KQ201]

Doubtful. The entire campaign was a clusterf--k waiting to happen.

[@kamenridernephilim]

From a New Jerseyian the critics and leftists pricks do not realize just how close things were. For all the stereotyping they do of the South they fail to realize how fierce and cunning opponents the Confederates were.

[@jimscaggs2422]

I have wondered that also, one can only speculate but given the fact that Jackson was a far different general than Ewell the outcome most certainly would have been different. Would it have lead to a total Confederate victory and an independent CSA well that we will never know.

[@noleybo56]

@noleybo56 being several miles from the battlefield. If it is fault finding or scapegoating then is not Ewell, Stuart or Longstreet. The defeat a Gettysburg was Lee's and Lee's alone. A written order to Ewell to take Culp's Hill was all that was needed. And I'm quite sure Dick Ewell would have pitch in with all his vigor. That was the type of soldier and the man Dick Ewell was. A gallant and noble soldier.

[@tachikoma747]

@TOCR815 Shelby Foote himself stated clearly that George Meade outgeneraled Lee during Gettysburg. Meade doesn't get much press but if you read the behind the scenes logistical work that Meade did at Gettysburg, the shuffling of reinforcements etc., he did a remarkable job. Most importantly, Meade trusted his subordinates and relied on them to make crucial battlefield decisions. If Hancock had told Meade a Union version of Picketts Charge was a bad idea, Meade would have listened.

[@touffeman027]

Great ! Thank you for this.

[@Shafeone]

Shelby Foote said it best: "Lee took long chances because he had to. If Grant was in Lee's pocition he probably would have taken long chances too." Grant was a truly modern general. In a way the contract between the two is allegorical. Lee is old school Napoleanic fields and squares...Grant new school total war. Grant knew it was a war of economies as much as armies. Both excelled with what they were given. And the fact is Grant kept Lee on the defensive always. He "got it"

[@dclark142002]

Interestingly enough, Lee wasn't as strong at the logistical game as Grant...and it REALLY hurts him at Gettysburg. After all, why can't Lee withdraw? He doesn't have a source of food that isn't the farms he has already marched over...so he has to move into untouched areas. Why does Lee stay for day 2 and day 3? He doesn't have enough ammunition to fight more than one major battle...and day 1 was sexy enough to get him to stay. But once he stays, he can't withdraw or redeploy because the Federal army blocks the only ways for Lee to move that allow Lee to continue campaigning. If Lee has to move away from the battle after day 1, he essentially is forced to end the campaign. Brilliant positioning and maneuvering by Meade.

[@Mrfairchap]

This was a hugely difficult decision for Lee and, strangely enough, the crux of the entire battle, even though it was only the first day. Longstreet's advice to withdraw to the south and east was no doubt militarily sound, but who could blame Lee for keeping his foot on Meade's neck after such a successful first day? I believe that Lee was correct in keeping up the pressure, but events conspired against him and led to the eventual Confederate defeat; sometimes, a general needs luck in battle, and Lee had none at Gettysburg.

[@jdsmith542]

The trouble was, Lee saw the first day as a victory, when it was nothing more than an inconclusive engagement. Yes, they pushed two Union Corps back in some disorder, but both withdrew to better ground, unharasssed by cavalry, and were steadily joined by fresh troops. Without Stuart, Lee was blind, and had stumbled into this fight more or less by accident. The first day ended with Meade holding the best ground, and the Army of the Potomac bloodied but willing.

[@SantomPh]

"When the Emperor chooses a general ,he does not ask 'is he good?' but " is he lucky?"- Gen Calvet ,Sharpe's Mission

[@HorFell]

Nah Lee had luck on the first day. If he had withdrawn then, he would have been able to in good order having bloodied the Union and then "redeployed" which is the correct term; into more favorable ground of HIS choosing where HE would be the entrenched one forcing the engagement.

[@carlheckert9614]

What Lee saw as a victory on the first day was Union Army doing what they intended to do... slow Lee's army down while they entrenched on the high ground and waited for the rest of the Union Army.

[@dclark142002]

How could Lee withdraw to the south? That was land his army had already swept clean (remember, they are supplying their food from off the land). Lee can't 'withdraw' to the east...as that is where the Army of the Potomac is. Longstreet only made his famous, 'we should have gone to the right' argument 20 years after the battle...and a good examination of the maps, the positions of the armies, and the supply situation and context really damns that 'idea' as flimsy revisionist dreaming. Lee could only afford to fight one battle (see his ammunition supply reserves). Once the 1st day had gone so well, Lee was trapped into making THIS be the battle of the campaign. There wasn't enough ammunition to fight another one.

[@truthteller9154]

Whats interesting to note is on day 1 of the battle Lee understood the importance of taking the hills beyond Gettysburg, namely Culps Hill, before the federals did. Buford did predict however that Lee would beat them there but we don't actually know if he said that or not. If Jackson were alive he would of taken the hill or at least attempted too, Ewell didn't even try.

[@aarontate1667]

Freakin love this movie

[@lebarosky]

Interesting about Longstreet v Lee. Both agreed that the Army of Northern Virginia should take the strategic offensive. Where they differed was tactics. Lee advocated the tactical offensive, and the Army lost 30 to 40 percent in a series of battles that will live forever in the annals of military history. Longstreet advocated the tactical defensive but Lee thought that the morale of the army required that it attack. The only time Longstreet's method was adopted was at Fredricksburg.

[@galoon]

Thanks for the info! I'll have to look for that book--I also have the Avalon Hill game "Devil's Den" which my friends and I used to play a lot when we were in college--it's a company-level simulation which covers the whole fight for Devil's Den and Little Round Top. I didn't realize Oates and 2 other reg. commanders got sunstroke. I can understand Col. Jackson of the 47th AL being criticized, but not Law! Longstreet (and partly Lee) I think are to blame. Plus the Feds put up a good fight.

[@balladofathinman]

Losing Jackson at Chancellorsville, in May, sealed the Rebs fate. Ewell, was the Souths version of Burnside, on a good day.

[@tomawen5916]

Lee, having 75,000 troops under his command of the Army of Northern Virginia, knew that this was the one and only opportunity to destroy his foe, the Army of the Potomac with 90,000 troops. Tragically, Lee felt it was his duty to fight his battle after the initial engagement with the Federal forces. Longstreet knew the predicament. Better to fight a defensive battle forcing the Federals to lose men at a higher ratio than the Confederates. While total losses were fairly equal in numbers, for the Confederates, it was a full third of their army. For the Federals, only a quarter. Lee would never have an army this size ever again. Not two years later he would surrender a force of 28,000 troops to Grant's army of 114,000.

[@fett333]

Yes the Pennsylvania campaign represented Lee’s last best chance for a tactical triumph that may have led to victory- however after Day One it would have been very difficult to “redeploy” as Longstreet suggested without Stuart’s “still missing” Calvary to screen the movement and give Lee accurate information on Meade”s position and positioning in response to Lee’s movements

[@rubenmartin5928]

Maybe we should not have fought here.

[@GaTiger11]

@Doug Bevins He's quoting a line from the clip. He's quoting Longstreet, in particular.

[@Zappiss]

Attacking early was the key to success, when the orders were given both Little Round Top and Round Top were unoccupied... and they stayed unoccupied as late as 2pm, when the first Union troops started to arrive. If Longstreet would have taken his objectives earlier, Pickett would have been able to reinforce him later in the day; so no need to include him in the initial assault.

[@jdsmith542]

Longstreet suffered from the 'slows', particularly when he was opposed to the plan, such as he was at Gettysburg. Lee had a blind spot for Longstreet's failing in that regard.

[@Shafeone]

@noleybo56 Lee was referring to Cemetery Hill (and yes he was asking Ewell to start a fight but not a battle which was contradictory). Lee curiously did not offer support of Hill's Corps for any assault so Ewell wisely decided attacking uphill through town against 43 field pieces and an unscathed Union reserve division was not practicable. But Culp's Hill was undefended. Ewell had left orders to Allegheny Johnson to take it but then absent-mindedly left to see Lee and never followed up(cont)

[@hvymettle]

There was a second part to Lee's order to Ewell that is not mentioned in this scene. The order was to take the hill if practicable, but only if he could do so without bringing on a general engagement. Ewell thought an attack was possible, if supported on his right by Hill's Corps, who told Lee that Pender's and Heth's troops were too fought out. Lee determined to keep Anderson's division as the army reserve so no support was available to Ewell. Rodes division was blown from combat and disordered by its movement through the town. It would have to deploy from column to line under Union artillery fire and so could not form for an attack. Hays was in the town guarding prisoners, Gordon and Smith were guarding the left flank. That left Ewell only Avery's undersized brigade to make an attack as Johnson's division had not yet reached the field. Had Lee wanted Ewell to attack, he should have issued a less ambiguous command. To seize Cemetery Hill at that point required a general engagement involving all forces then available on the field.

[@dclark142002]

Yep. Of course, had a more 'active' general been in command...he would have disobeyed Lee's order. But...that was not the case.

[@hvymettle]

@@dclark142002 Ewell had already disobeyed Lee's order not to bring on a general engagement when he had Rodes attack Oak Ridge. Faced with the same order again he hesitated to violate it for a second time that day. Had Lee wanted the attack made he should have given explicit orders to do so.

[@Ecotic]

I just keep thinking how hot their outfits must have been for July. Even as far north as Pennsylvania it was probably high 80's, low 90's. They're wearing gloves too, that had to be suffocating.

[@julianscheirer9971]

It's insanely humid in PA in the summer too...

[@ivan09193]

1:48 Lee: Do you understand what I mean? Attache: Welp, sounds like attacking is done for the day. Ewell says good luck with the battle, dude - sounds like you've got things managed.

[@hvymettle]

Longstreet's suggestion to move around the Union right only makes sense if the AoNV had driven the Union forces off Cemetery Hill and forced them to retreat to Meade's Pipe Creek Line. Then the AoNV could have come barrelling down the Emmittsburg Rd. to Emmitsburg and turned the Union line, enabling the AoNV to get to Frederick and occupy a line on the Monocacy River. Then Lee could wait and see if Meade attacked, which he would not necessarily have to since he was between Lee and DC. Since the AoNV did not drive the AoP off of Cemetery Hill on the first day, Lee would have had to use the Fairfield Rd. and Chambersburg Pike to get to Hagerstown and then cross South Mountain to get to Frederick since the Emmitsburg Rd. was controlled by the Union position. The AoP would have the inside track since it controlled the Taneytown Rd. and Baltimore Pike, and could get into a blocking position before the AoNV could get between him and DC. There is no magical position that the AoNV could have occupied between Meade and DC, forcing Meade to attack. One only has to study a map and apply military logic to see that Lee was correct in ignoring Longstreet's suggestion, moving the army in the face of the enemy was not practical.

[@andydietz3945]

Often overlooked is the charge of the 1st Minnesota in the Battle of Gettysburg...5 minutes, and the history of a nation.

[@Kev95682]

"Take that hill if practicable..." Maybe the battle and the war would have turned out differently if he had said to take that hill at all costs.

[@Tanakun09]

I agree. And the advantage would of gone to the Confederate army.

[@Hockey_Josh]

Absolutely, that one sentence changed the course of history.

[@Tanakun09]

You are right on the ball their friend. Although the notion still stands. Had the hills been taken. Perhaps more casualties on the Union side might been doubled.

[@Rimasta1]

I think Longstreet had the right idea, they should have redeployed and moved between the Army of the Potomac and D.C., and fought the Union Army on ground of their choosing in a defensive battle. Fredericksburg, Antietam, the Siege of Petersburg, Vicksburg, and other battles showed I think how a smaller confederate force could maul a much larger Federal force if they were in good defensive positions with supporting units and secure flanks, I believe the concept of invading the North was defeat the Union Army outside the Capital, and then dictate terms of peace to Lincoln in the White House. Theyd essentially have Lincoln by the balls at that point.

[@Badgerbitesback]

Rimasta1 Oh I dont know. Moving across the front of an entrenched enemy? Without Stuart's cavalry to screen? Would have been risky, to say the least.

[@Zappiss]

Pickett was quite a march away when the battle started, since his division was guarding the rear of the column. You may be misrepresenting Lee, didn't he just say that the attack could be carried out successfully with two divisions instead of three (when Longstreet told him Pickett would probably not have time to join him)?

[@galoon]

Good post, rebel2276--I remember reading that Law's brigade lost their canteen detail to the Feds during that march; so in addition to the heat, they marched and went into that hellacious fight with NO WATER! Those boys were tough...

[@jasonhuff7725]

That is a very interesting question. At Gettysburg the Army of Potomac had seven corps and excellent long range artillery. Without taking Cemetery Ridge when it was unoccupied Gen Ewell failed to take the high ground. Stonewall Jackson would have pushed South and set up his defense laterally from West to East across the area. Second Corps would have cut off the north south roads into the battlefield. First and Third Corps would have marched into an established perimeter to created a 360 degree defense. It would have looked similar to Bastogne in December 1944. All roads cut off. Field artillery in the center so no matter the direction of attack of the Army of the Potomac, they would have been under concentrated shell fire. However, I agree with a previous commenter that it would have been a one or two day battle and the North would have still overwhelmed the South with men weapons industry and attrition.

[@SantomPh]

The North would have had a similar position as the actual battle as the ANV had no actual reason to even fight for Gettysburg and the AoTP any real reason to defend it. Lee would have just halted his army for no good reason. The Union didn't need to attack them at all had they occupied all the high ground and the town. It was only because Lee attacked them and forced them onto the ridges that it became a battle. What would happen is not Gettysburg but another battle further east with another name with the Union already entrenched and the Confederates having wasted days and weeks sitting on top of militarily useless hills, the column probably being raided from behind by Buford and other Union cavalry.

[@SandmanGotBeer]

"Maybe we should not have fought here?"

[@frankmcwilliams618]

I've watched this movie 15 times, an after all the reading,and study, the opportunity for a flanking movement on the left was doable if euwell had pushed on over the hill.

[@traviserickson3603]

If Ewell took the heights Meade would have pulled back. He already had plans to do so. Gettysburg would have simply been a 1 day skirmish.

[@frankmcwilliams618]

Travis Erickson meade was new in command, an confronted by the best general the south had, was hesitating, tje high ground saved the uinion.

[@roguishpaladin]

Frank McWilliams It's hard to say. Meade in general had a reputation for being indecisive, but this was countered by his familiarity with Pennsylvania. If the battle wasn't IN Pennsylvania, who knows what might have happened. Probably not a presidency-defining battle victory which turned the election for Lincoln, though, and Jeb Stuart probably would've had a field day burning crops in Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, and maybe even New Jersey. If you don't press Lee, he can either cause trouble north or head to Washington..and he'd be picking the battlefield then.

[@flywheel986]

The words, "If practical", in his orders to Early, cost Lee this battle.

[@Shafeone]

@noleybo56 If I may. This was Lee's second attempt at invasion in nine months. He saw this opportunity as a repeat of Sept. 62 only with a more powerful army and no lost order 191 to hinder him. (Lee had read in northern papers about the lost order and came to believe that that was the reason his Maryland campaign ended abruptly.) Lee knew that time was against the CSA. He knew this was the most powerful his army would ever be and that the initiative after Cville was on his side. [cont]

[@wvu3]

I've have always wondered how Lee felt on the 1st day at Gettysburg. The first battle he didn't have his "right hand man" at his side during a battle.

[@prinzvongriechenland7667]

2:07 "General Lee, its like 2nd Manassas all over again" damm epic quote

[@Shafeone]

He arrived in the late afternoon. He was at Cashtown when the fighting broke out and for a while left matters to AP Hill until he bagan to realize that things were amiss...the volume of fire he heard in the distance implied more than just a skirmish. He got there in time to witness the second phase of day one when Heth attacked with his remaining two brigades followed by Pender in the west and the brief 2nd CSA Corps. vs. UN 11th Corps. battle north of the town.

[@Shafeone]

@TheQuadStuff Pettigrew went here for shoes but returned when he saw Buford's men. Then Buford chose to defend the high ground south of the town from the ridges to the west if the Rebs came back in the am. Then AP Hill for some reason sent two divisions to reconnoiter Gettysbug. Then Heth on the scene superseded his orders and ordered his division to take the town which was reckless. Then Reynolds, who HAD the authority to call up he I , XI and III corps chose to defend the ground. Bang!

[@Southern777]

I think Martin Sheen did a awesome job at portraying Robert E Lee in this movie, I also have to commend Robert Duvall on his portrayal as well in Gods and Generals.

[@douglaslally156]

Longstreet's strategy was sound and I never understood why Lee insisted on maintaining the fight at Gettysburg. Was it hubris or just overconfidence? Had they disengaged a very powerful army would have threatened DC. Instead a beaten and decimated army stumbled back into Virginia. Lee blew his best chance to end the war.

[@BattlestarPegasus]

Lee believed in defeating the enemy army in the field. That was the norm in those days. Once the enemy army was defeated then the politics could happen. He thought he was in a good position to defeat them and he want wrong. Day 2 of Gettysburg was about 60k vs 70k. Victory might have meant a new nation in the south,

[@markviking7617]

Hmmmmm, I never bought Longstreet's vision. You can play defense on your own ground, not when you are in the enemies rear. The North would have cut them off from their supplies and starved them out.

[@roguishpaladin]

mark viking The Confederate army was already north of the Union army. If anything, his strategy would have brought the Confederate forces closer to Virginia (though the Union forces would still be out there, of course). In addition, the land in Maryland was a little more friendly to the Confederates than Pennsylvania was - Maryland was a Southern state which had been policed harshly by Lincoln to prevent it from joining the Confederacy. Check out what happened later with Jubal Early and Monocacy. The game would be to get to Washington before the Union could reinforce those forts, and I think they might have. All they had to do was embarrass Lincoln, but they failed to do so.

[@schaerffenberg]

Absolutely correct. Faced with such as disadvantageous situation before Gettysburg, and given Lee's previous strategic skill, one wonders why he did not launch a powerful feint attack there to temporarily throw Union forces onto the defensive, then quickly disengage and march his army against Washington, D.C. I can only speculate that he was prevented from doing so by Jefferson Davis, who had previously, at Bull Run, forbade his field commanders from moving on the Capital. Any enlightenment concerning this issue would be welcome.

[@SuperChuckRaney]

@@markviking7617 When he is talking about 'playing defense', he means to have the Union attack CSA dug-in positions. He doesn't mean to sit in a castle for 4 months, it's still a 3 day battle. Defensive works, simple items such as breastwork and trenches lower causality greatly. Look at how well those 2 fences worked in the Union Favor

[@galoon]

You're right--4pm was a lot later than Lee had expected. If I remember correctly, this was the start of an en echelon attack from the CS right to the left, with the result that Culp's Hill wasn't attacked until after dark, and many units in the center never did join the fight.

[@noleybo56]

@Shafeone Again you are quite correct, the 1st Corps retreat through Gettysburg was as well organized as it could have been. It's as you say the 11th corps troops started the rout when they charge through the town in an uncontrolled mob. Unfortunately the 1st Corps got caught up in it.As to Howard being a scoundrel I concur.

[@TheSirPrise]

You see I hold the opposite view, I see myself as a federalist. There's a reason why the USA became a federal union rather than the confederacy is aimed to be and that's because confederacies simply do not work. The US almost ceased to exist in its early years because of the confederate form of government, the lack of centralized power meant that hardly any meaningful reforms or decisions were made as each stated kept vetoing each other, it almost destroyed the nation.

[@indy_go_blue6048]

Someone said the Confederacy "died of a theory" as they realized the same thing later in the war. Joe Brown, governor of Georgia withheld supplies to the main armies throughout the war, saving them for "our own boys"; he threatened to secede from the CSA in 1864 on more than one occasion.

[@kyle18934]

@@indy_go_blue6048 also didnt the rail lines stay private, so the CSA army could not travel by rail unless they went to each owner to get permission to use the rail. that would really suck to be out of supplies because a governor did not want to contribute to the supply effort. all of that food just sitting there but out of reach

[@Zappiss]

(I was referring to your comments on page 2, no idea why this reply got posted here)

[@1800aubrey]

I haven’t carefully studied the battle of Gettysburg. But in this convo Longstreet sounds like a Edward III just before Crecy, and Lee sounds like he is tired of fighting, and wants to just get on with it.

[@GeorgiaPound77]

Pride always comes before the fall

[@Zappiss]

Good analysis, rebel 2276, I have to agree on that one. It's clear that Longstreet never committed fully to the role Lee gave him, that is, the replacement of Jackson as his aggressive corps commander (who would deliver the decisive blow in a battle). Longstreet indeed sulked as if he could't accept that he wasn't the overall commander... I think it's also possible that Longstreet delayed on the 2nd day as long as he could hoping Pickett would arrive on the field in time for the attack.

[@jdsmith542]

Longstreet was a defensive genera; unlike Jackson and Lee, he hated open engagements. Moving him into Jackson's role was one of Lee's most costly errors. Lee's plans called for a high degree of personal daring and initiative from his corps commanders, and at Gettysburg he was poorly served by his generals.

[@buckthebarbarianredneck684]

Hey y'all, who wants to start a flame war? I'll go first: "The south was bad"

[@indy_go_blue6048]

The war wasn't about slavery.

[@docholiday1806]

Hyunjay Cho guess what? Only four states cited slavery as one of the causes. Many states refused to join the csa until Lincoln’s call for troops. This was a defensive war against tyranny.

[@chuchulainn9275]

You like to play with fire huh? 😅

[@anonymousanonymity2815]

Doc Holiday oh so when the CSA said they would offer no quarter to black prisoners that wasn’t evil? How about those states sending people into other states, overriding those state laws to get their slaves back? That seems like tyranny on the part of slave states.

[@adamp5879]

Lincoln didn’t care if the slaves were freed or not and the war was really about economic growth of the union

[@batman88ironman]

Grant: it’s over Lee I have the high ground! Lee: you under estimate the power of my forces.

[@Jermster_91]

Grant was at Vicksburg.

[@jeffmiller1159]

@@Jermster_91 that's how good of a general he was. Grant could command troops wherever he was and he wasn't even the head of the army at the time, LOL

[@noleybo56]

NO! I beg your pardon, I'm not misrepresenting Lee. On the 2nd of july Pickett was three miles odf the battlefield. He send a staffer a Maj W Harrison in search of Lee while he sought out Longstreet. Old Pete told Geo that his division should go into bivouac until needed. Harrison joined the two generals with a message from Lee. "Tell Geo Pickett Ishall not want this evening, to let the men rest, and I will send him word when I want him",

[@garthvader8868]

The South didn’t need to win, they just needed not to loose the war.

[@Extremefighters]

I dont know why people think the Civil war was a boring one...

[@TheRomanRuler]

Propably becouse it has 2 quite similar armies fighting against each others, as it was a civil war. In European wars it was often nations of roughly equal size fighting against each others, and their armies could be quite different. Every war is interesting if you search deep enough. But on the top, American civil war can seem as boring, a far smaller nation trying to fight against far larger nation with quite similar tactics and armies.

[@prechabahnglai103]

I supposed if we call it a secession war (though a failed one) it might be better recieved.

[@thebcr1012]

Exaclty who said the war was "boring" ?

[@Shafeone]

@noleybo56 Remember. Jackson had only been dead for 2.5 mos by this time and Ewell had been Jackson's favorite subordinate so Lee trusted Ewell who was actually there at the foot of the hills, not peering through his glass. But the fact that Ewell served under Jackson ironically ill-served Lee here for Ewell had probably never received a discretionary order in his entire time under Stonewall. Lee was used to giving discretionary orders as a courtesy knowing Jackson would read them as direct.

[@Shafeone]

He was at Taneytown because he wanted to be centrally located within his three wings. He sent first Reynolds then Hancock up to Gettysburg to decide if there was a fight to be had there. He headed out late in the evening of July 1 and arrived early July 2. "Well," he said. "We may as well fight it out here."

[@d.richmond7112]

It's A shame that Lieutenant Colonel Rufus R. Dawes & His 6th Wisconsin weren't added to this film . The 6th had 2 Outstanding Victories at both The Railroad Cut & Culp's Hill . Yes In both of those occasions it was The Confederates that were on the run . "Iron Brigade Forward !"

[@mjwpowerstroke]

Lol. The Confederates, the 2nd Miss that the 6th WI attacked at the railroad cut, had another Yankee regiment on the run. He simply waited and blindsided that Confederate regiment that day. The 2nd Miss had bad leadership also under President Davis’ nephew, (the brigade commander)he was simply a political appointee.

[@indy_go_blue6048]

It's a shame that this movie was based on a novel instead of actual history; now a generation of people believe this is the way it really happened, right down to the speeches.

[@Gregoryt700]

Studies have shown that Lee had the highest proportion of casualties of any Civil War general, even Grant. Grant only became 'bloody' when he went up against Lee. Clearly Lee's penchant for the aggressive attack was a key reason for this - Pickett's charge only being the most obvious ex. Some rude young man questioned me on this with inappropriate language. As a gentleman and a scholar (my PhD is in philosophy, but I studied history at an Ivy League school), I can only suggest he do his own research (Wikipedia and KZbin will not be enough), and then if he can keep up with the conversation he can join in

[@nealhebert6644]

Gregoryt700 Oh boy, a PhD! You and your colleagues post here quite a bit. I suppose I should be honored to reply.

[@kevinsanchez7885]

+Gregoryt700 grant was bloodied because he faced a better general. 60000 troops in six weeks should tell you that.

[@roguishpaladin]

Gentleman is not a title that a gentleman takes for himself, but is instead something that is recognized in others. You are no gentleman, I fear, regardless of whether or not you are correct.

[@Robofish12]

I'd also like to add that Lee lost more men commanding one Army than Grant did commanding FIVE. Lee was not nearly as good of a general as people make him out to be.

[@indy_go_blue6048]

Had Lee taken command of the Union army instead of going with VA, the war would've been over in 1862. No way he would've pissed around in front of Williamsburg, Yorktown and Richmond like McClelland did. He was a good general, he simply didn't have the means to fight the way he wanted to and once Grant came along, as well as he handled things between the Wilderness and Richmond, he was finished, and he knew it but he continued to do his duty as he saw it.

[@noleybo56]

Your point is understood. But If Lee so wish he could have added Pickett's division for a bigger push. If he had I think this weigh might have tip the balance in his favour. The point I'm making, is picket's division was at hand if Lee had wanted to use it.

[@Fenris77]

Great vid!

[@jessehowell1567]

Glad the Union won. My people may have still been in bondage.

[@TheSirPrise]

Depends entirely on how you view the United States. If you view it as a confederation of states (which it was originally intended to be but since the presidency of Washington all the way to the present day it has rejected this form of union) then no, states shouldn't be forced to stay. But if you view the US as a country governed ultimately by the federal government that nullifies state rights then yes, states should be forced to remain in the union. This debate is older than the civil war.

[@ElBandito]

Federal government should have more authority than states, otherwise the nation will never be strong enough. Without federal authority, you can bet colored people would have still been treated separately like garbage in the South, even to this day. Some states might have even stayed out from the World Wars.

[@starcorpvncj]

As an Australian we have a Federal Govt and State Govts. But the Fed Govt is much stronger than that of the States. For example the Senate is by far the weaker of our two houses of parliament. Everytime I go to the individual states in the US ts like visiting different countries. Each seems to have so many policies such as personal income tax and foreign investment laws etc that to me seem best left to unified Federal laws. And this is not to mention phone, train, and bus systems etc. It can be so confusing. I am not being critical, just a bit confused, lol.

[@noleybo56]

Well, I Did not matter that much why they were not on the field on the 1stJuly. Simply because Lee did not wish for a battle to take place with out control. As his order to Ewell specified "Dont not bring on a general engagement on till the army is up",Lee was a planner.

[@noleybo56]

@lebara sky Yeah, this is the strange assumptions surrounding "Gettysburg".Remember Lee's admonition to General Ewell, "take the hill if practicable but do not bring on a general engagement until the army is up". Now the hill that Lee was referring too was Cemetery Hill which was in the hands of the 1st and 11th corp Union.If Ewell would have disobeyed Lee's discretionary order and attack Culp's Hill he would have with one swoop out manoeuvred the Union troops on Cemetery Hill......

[@Rancoroth419]

The Washington Garrison was numbered about 20-25,000 Soldiers with fortifications. That being said, had the Confederate Army been able to Destroy the Army of the Patomac and its 95,000 or take them out of action...the 75,000 strong Army of Northern Virginia could have forced Washington to Capitulate. 1. 25,000 cannot all concentrate in one area to defend that much space. Lee could have easily matched their size, forced them to face off and consolidate, and flank with 50,000 troops. End Game.

[@aldousjosea.castro1887]

+Iloyd Martinez Cute. Too bad the Union and Rebels suffer mostly equal casualties in all their battles. Odds are Lee would have only 35,000 men after "destroying"the AotP.

[@xanderluv]

+Iloyd Martinez if if if if if if ....if only

[@AdmRose]

Those fortifications were the most extensive on the planet at the time. A garrison that size could have easily withstood the remnants of Lee's army for an extended period of time; they would simply just have to wait until Lee's supplies ran dry and he was forced to withdraw. A siege only works if the attacker is more well supplied than the defender and this would not have been the case.

[@jimscaggs2422]

+Peter David while Washington was the most heavily defended city on the continent, a Confederate victory at Gettysburg would've been a political disaster for Lincoln, and would've empowered the anti war faction in the North and more than likely force Lincoln to negotiate a peace treaty recognizing the C.S.A perhaps even forcing Lincoln to resign.Fun to speculate on the what if's of history of course no one can say for sure what would of happen.

[@xanderluv]

jim scaggs How would the Confederates gotten across the Potomac? They win in Gettysburg...whats next?

[@stonewalljackson5692]

I would've won that battle for you General Lee sir, I was your very best.

[@noleybo56]

The message was sent to Pickett in late afternoon. But one must remember that Longstreet offensive began at 4pm so there was still time for Pickett's division to enter the fray later theat day if Lee so wished.

[@CharlieVetter-wk9hf]

Something to note though was that Pickett only had three of his five brigades at Gettysburg. Two had been left in Virginia.

[@cullenellis5886]

One of my favorite parts