This scene should have not been deleted. Plus, Ewell, not having Stuart present, had no idea what Union force may or may not have been on his left flank. Stuarts's absence was critical.
This scene should have been included in the film because it gives context to the discussion between Lee and Longstreet on Day 2. It's a powerful and important scene.
I agree. It highlighted Lee's tactical problem. He couldn't stay in place because he was in enemy country, with limited supplies and with an ever present risk of being cut off from an avenues of retreat to Virginia. At the same time, attacking the fortified positions would be unlikely to succeed and be very costly. Finally, withdrawing in the face of the enemy would be risky as well (although, in hindsight, the best of bad choices).
Yes and no for me. It's a good scene. Some of the additional scenes for film were not necessary, or good, for that matter, but this one is very well acted and introduces us to other figures, who even though aren't seen after, we hear a lot about from Lee and Longstreet. I also like how the scene shows Lee working through the problem more practically, instead of relying on wistful desire. Yet, Lee's conversation with Longstreet provides enough exposition to render this scene unnecessary in terms of film-making, since Longstreet and Lee discuss this matter on the second day, and it comes up again on the third. If I had the power, I'd probably keep the scene, but at over 4 1/2 hours, I'd want to make sure the movie keeps its pace. That's one thing you need to admire about this movie, it's very long, but it's so well acted and well paced that you don't really notice. Gods and Generals had a lot of problems with it, and one of them was the pacing. The movie was more than a half-hour shorter than Gettysburg, but feels like it drags and drags. Gettysburg was a nearly 5 hour film, but it was about as tight as a 5 hour film could be!
Patrick Ancona, Do you even know what the hell you’re talking about. Sit down and read a book about Gettysburg. For example, read Coddington; read Guelzo; read Pfanz. Maybe then you’ll understand what occurred at Gettysburg. Briefly, Lee did not listen to Longstreet’s advice. It’s Longstreet’s advice that scared Meade the most. That said, even that would have been problematic because the four brigades of cavalry that Lee did have with him were apparently not trusted to screen the proposed movement. Second, Stuart’s ride was sanctioned by Lee. Mistakes were made, but Lee, Mosby and others should share the blame with Stuart. Read Plenty of Blame to go Around. Secondly, Stuart performed very well on the retreat. The rest of your post is so inane that it’s not worth answering.
General Ewell noted postwar, "There were many mistakes made at Gettysburg, and I made most of them." He was a gentleman, and while he did in fact, make many mistakes, there were plenty to go around.
@@briancooper4959 And Lee was the one how promoted Ewell to replace Jackson. He had to have known that they were of different temperaments and would have interpreted orders in radically different ways.
Also Shelby Foote even says there was no winning in that anyways. Had Ewell taken that hill Meade would have pulled out and set up defensive positions somewhere else.
the generals on the northern flank were basically secondary to the main action after the first day. Hill also lost two of his corps to Pickett's Charge (Pettigrew and Pender) and got injured himself. Lee's insistence of using the artillery towards the copse also robbed Hill of his own flanking capability. Incredibly , the Charge might have succeeded if Hill's Corps simply moved together with the three brigades. Yet no order came for Hill's remaining troops to move in force, leaving Pickett's men isolated in the middle of the ground eating lead and choking on their own blood.
They should've kept this scene in and deleted some of the Pickett horseplay or the Armisted-Hancock bromance. This adds an incredible amount of information to the movie plus puts some other things in perspective.
But too bad that they couldn't explain how Longstreet's Corp lost most of the second day, turning around to avoid being seen by the Signal Corp on Little Round Top. Instead of About Face, March, the entire Corp, in true 19th Century fashion, turned around like a snake, and reversed course to locate a road that would take them the Union Left without being detected.
esp since the bromance seems to mainly be one way: from Armistead to Hancock, not the other way 'round. Hancock never really gave off any sense of regretting killing "Lo" or his men, while Lo was constantly ringing his hands over Hancock. But, then again, I'm a southern partisan and not really reconstructed.
@@teller1290 It might have come as that in the film but irl they were pretty close, Winfield and Almira Hancock were like family to him because they helped him during the darkest time of his life after his wife died and Lo was made a single father far away from home. Lo, Winfield, and John Reynolds were all stationed together in California when the war broke out, three had been friends since their westpoint days. Reynolds was well-liked by those on both sides and his death of the first was a tragic loss of life and his talent as one of the few competent Union corps commanders. George Pickett in the film was hilarious as kind of a comic relief character if this film could have one, heartbreaking to see his division destroyed and the toll it took on him from then on-“That old man destroyed my damn division”. Pickett oddly had a deep gratitude towards Lincoln, who as a senator sponsored Pickett’s admission to Westpoint.
Yeah....very annoying and childish. I could have done without the walk and singing ," a hunting we will go". Considering that Ewell,Early,and Rhodes made a huge error not taking Culps Hill that afternoon,a highly controversial decision,the director must have been drunk deleting this scene. C.Thomas Howell was as annoying as Jar Jar Binks in Star Wars. Couldnt imagine what Lucas was thinking
@@marquismonroe8656 if they had taken the hill the second and third day wouldn't have happened. The AOP would have pulled back to Meade's defensive line in MD. As much as the what ifs play out here, there are few that yield strategic success for the ANV, short somehow forcing a surrender.
I'm beginning to wonder about Lee's leadership skills. Yes, he was revered by his men, and respected by Union Generals. But his orders were often general or too vague. JEB Stuart was free to do what he wanted, and it cost Lee greatly at Gettysburg. His orders to Ewell for Culp's Hill were vague... "if practicable". All Ewell did was follow them exactly. But Lee was a fighter, and his men loved him for that. (Except Pickett...)
More like four.... and I concur... I watch this every year on the anniversary of the battle. My only quibble is that it could have used many more superimposed battle maps to help people keep track of what units were where. If you're not up on the specifics of the battle, it's so easy to get lost.
I was surprised at how many battles took place at Gettysburg. In addition to the battles in the movie the battle in the wheat field, peach orchard, Devil's den, Culp's hill, J.E.B. Stuart's defeat by Custer and others. These battles were mentioned in the movie but shown.
Wish Devils Den would of gotten more mention it's my favorite part of the battle. The way they went in there climbing through all those rocks and boulders up hill under fire it was no easy feat.
No mention in the movie of the most courageous event at Gettysburg, that of the 1st Minnesota which although incredibly outnumbered fought valiantly to stem the Confederate forces from advancing to victory on Day 2. They suffered 80% casualties, the highest rate on either side during the entire war. It was a suicide mission but saved the Union Army.
This scene demonstrates, without harping, the problem caused by Lee's unclear order to Ewell in the late afternoon. Lee sent a message to take Cemetery Hill "if possible". Stonewall Jackson would have understood the order and attacked, but Lee forgot that he was not sending the message to Jackson, who had died at Chancellorsville. Ewell was not yet accustomed to Lee's habit of sending what sometimes sounded more like suggestions than orders, and so dithered until daylight ran out. Historians today put this failure entirely on Lee for not giving Ewell a clear instruction.
The second part of Lee's order to Ewell specified a caveat that Ewell was to attack only if he could do so without bringing on a general battle. That means Ewell was to conduct the attack with just the men under his own command, he could expect no support from Hill on his right. That meant either Rodes' or Early's troops since Johnson had not yet arrived. Rodes' Division was blown from combat, Early's units were scattered. The only available force Ewell had was Avery's small brigade. Ewell let Lee know he could attack if supported by Hill on his right, but Hill demurred despite having two brigades in Pender's Division that had not been heavily engaged. Anderson's Division had arrived on the field but Lee chose to keep it as the army reserve and would not commit it to battle. Playing what if with Jackson is fun but pointless. The failure was not the wording of the order, the failure was that Johnson was not on the field when he was needed at 3pm to conduct the attack. Ewell's orders from the previous day specified he was to go to Gettysburg or Cashtown as circumstances may dictate. That is the order that Ewell fumed about. Ewell's reaction was to march two divisions towards Gettysburg and Johnson's Division towards Cashtown. On July 1, Ewell received a message from Hill that he was going to Gettysburg so Rodes and Early were perfectly positioned while Johnson was stuck in a traffic jam on the Chambersburg Pike and thus reached the field too late to be of any use on the first day.
"If practicable" has a MUCH different meaning than "if practical". The transmission of that message to General Ewell may have been misunderstood by Lee's aide when he brought the order to General Ewell?
@@hvymettleOne reason Ewell did not attack earlier was that "Extra" Billy Smith had reported there were Federal troops on his flank (which Early mentions in the clip here). Turned out there were NOT any Feds there. So Extra Billy was another of the many Confederate 'goats' of the battle.
Really wish we could of gotten more of General Meade he was a pretty underrated General and would of been nice to get more insight from his perspective.
Meade was a lot like McLellan, a cautious and hesitant commander to attack Lee anywhere he was encountered for most of the war. However, at Gettysburg he did find the stones to make a stand.
This scene is very important in giving insight into the reasons why Lee chose to attack Ewell did not attack and it makes sense. History has judge him to harshly.
The other generals didn't want to leave it because they fought for it. But Lee was right. It was of no military importance. And they should have listened to Longstreet's opinion to travel around the enemy rear and flank them.
Perhaps. But Lee himself didn't even know where the Federal army was until Heth ran into it. And Lee arrived too late to command the first day effectively.
Agree, this is probably one of the most important decisions of the battle. I am history buff, your ordinary person would really need to know that this disaster fell on the South on the first night.
Read the declarations of secession by most of the states that seceded. They clearly mention slavery as being the reason they rebelled against the United States. The leaders of the South saw the writing on the wall. The Constitution itself would never have passed without the Northern states compromising with the Southern states, and giving them representation for 3/5 of their slaves, in Congress. For 80 years that gave the South dominance over the rest of the country, even with such founding fathers as Washington and Jefferson knowing--and mentioning--that slavery was the great 'original sin' of our nation. And yet, when immigration began tipping the scales of political power in Congress to the North, the South--after so many decades of exerting dominance over the nation--threw a fit in the form of a rebellion. Their slave-based economic system was going to end someday, but they couldn't read the writing on the wall. They refused to adapt, and evolve with the changing times. Life is change. You change, or get left behind. Even today, the lines are still very clear. During the Revolutionary War, the section of the colonies where there were the most people loyal to the old ways, the British Monarchy, were in the South, and Massachusetts had the highest number of rebel sympathizers. Today, as then, the South is still predominantly conservative, and Massachusetts is still predominantly liberal.
Unfortunately the North’s dream of massive federal government has chastened us ever since, we are now teetering on edge of collapse thanks to our bloated federal government!
@@vemmaguy1977 I honestly believe that you are confusing the scope of the federal government with its policies. There is nothing at all wrong with a United States. What we have done is focused funds and energy inappropriately. This is what has caused the bloated budget and most of our other problems.
Meade doesn't get enough credit for this battle IMHO. Its seen more as Lee's choke than Meade's win. But he was very steady and competent in this battle, probably not the right man to win the war as that fell to Grant, but definitely the right man for this battle.
while Meade was crucial in command, the frontline action was very far from his location in the middle of the fish hook. The last we "see"" of him is his command house being hit by the artillery barrage.
There was supposedly an allegorical joke among the Rebs that in order to reach Richmond, the Yanks would have to "get up early, go up a long street, get over the lee of a stone wall, and climb two hills"--references to Jubal Early, James Longstreet, Robert E. Lee, "Stonewall" Jackson, Ambrose P. Hill, and Daniel H. Hill.
arthur131313 After watching Gettysburg many times, I always wondered who played the part For General Euell, because they never showed us! Now I know! I like Sun Tzu's way of strategy, or even George Washington's simple strategy of hit and run, hit the enemy on the flanks then disappear, live to fight another day! At least Euell was trying not to lose the bulk of his army, like General Lee! Don't sqander a great army like what is too often the case, in most wars!
John Peterson, Yeah. Even though he’s listed in the credits, he was cut out of the theatrical release. I’m glad that they decided to put that scene into some of the DVD releases.
Tim Cantrell, First of all regarding Lee’s numbers, point about Lee having a tiny fraction is only true in certain circumstances. For example, Lee slightly outnumbered McClellan during the Seven Days. Lee also (except when he made the decisions to invade the North) usually fought in his home ground and had the luxury of a friendly populace to work on his behalf. When fighting in Virginia, he also had the advantage of strategic interior lines. Third, please don’t give me this BS that the North’s only war aim was economic. The 1860 Republican Party platform’s points were primarily about avoiding the expansion of slavery into the territories. Lincoln needed to keep the border states satisfied that they would leave the slaves in the states as is. In fact, Generals David Hunter and John Fremont got into trouble for freeing slaves in their areas of operation. In August 1862, it finally became militarily propitious to write (and on September 22, announce) the Emancipation Proclamation. Finally, I only know of one pro-Union fellow who rips into the neo-Confederates around here. The rest of us stick to discussing the movie, Gettysburg and the war. There is no specific language in the Constitution allowing for the overthrowing the government. People have taken the 10th Amendment’s language about rights not belonging to the Feds, belong to the states. History shows that the Articles of Confederation were inadequate for running a central government and a stronger Federal government was needed. All the times when states tried, or threatened to secede, proved to be disastrous for them and sometimes it occurred during the presidencies of Southern, slavery holding presidents (most notably under Madison and Jackson). And this is brought to you by a modern conservative who is pro-Trump.
So should have been included. I meant, we heard of Ewell so much after the first day, and I was expecting at least a scene from him. Was disappointed when i didn’t see it, but this makes me happy to see. It definitely should have been in the movie though. Adds so much more context.
As Lee said, the first day could not have gone any better if they had planned it. And while hindsight would be harsh on Ewell, with the absence of Stuart he chose likely the second best option. The best would have been to give general Tremble the brigade he asked for with a division in reserve support to either organize an orderly retreat or take possession of the adjoining hill. But with his inexperience, Ewell would not necessarily have had the spur to even carry out such a maneuver. With Stuart continuing to absent by 6am the second day, the defensive move was the better course, if for no other reason than Lee would never get the opportunity with the federals on the heights to truly know their numbers. Personally, I believe Lee would have considered the maneuver option except for two things: the Sickles blunder and the Chamberlain charge. The Sicles blunder gave Lee the impression he was still facing incompetent commanders, and the chamberlain charge was such an act of desperation it gave Lee the mistaken notion that he had nearly broken the union line. I also believe Lee's anger with Stuart made him a little more daring, especially since at this time even a successful resistance to his army was as good as a route. But not having Stuart, knowing how cautious Meade was, and seeing that there was no ideal approach on the center or either flank, it would see with limited men and supplies you look for a better position. But again, hindsight. It makes experts of us all.
This scene should have been included in the movie. Without it, one gets the impression that Ewell could have just walked onto the Hill and taken it easily. In fact, it's really not clear if taking the hill was "practical". Ewell's corps was thoroughly exhausted by the end of the day. They had marched dozens of miles, fought a running battle through the town of Gettysburg, and taken thousands of Union prisoners. They were in desperate need of rest and taking the hill at that point would have been a challenge.
That's what I always thought, that Ewell's troops were not capable because of their actions throughout the day. Now by no means am I mad that he failed, quite happy to be honest, but there were some real issues with the orders and the outcome.
This was a flawed movie, true. Yet, a mainstream movie about Gettysburg is something I didn't think I'd ever see, and I am grateful for it. I have read extensively on this period, and the Killer Angels is my favorite. A great, great book.
I was very skeptical about Martin Sheen at first, and even the first time I saw this. His work has grown on me, and I think he did a pretty good job. It must have been a very difficult role to play.
Ironically, one of Lee’s lines in the movie was “We move on the word of an actor?”, referring to intelligence provided by the stage actor turned spy Harrison.
Lee and Lincoln had one strategic mindset in common. To win a war you must not only defeat your enemy in the field, but defeat them so utterly that the people back home are sickened and repulsed when they fully realize the cost of waging war and finally reject the thought of it. It appears from my readings and a lecture or two, that far to many of the officers in the field, from both camps, were either oblivious to that necessity or simply inexperienced or unsuited to the task and unable to define 'discretion' and/or 'independent initiative' sufficiently.
I can’t remember which writer best explained this meeting however I don’t think this depiction is accurate historically. I think Lee rides over to Ewells position sometime during the evening of the first day. He begins to question Ewell but Early seems to dominate the conversation for some reason. Perhaps Ewell was not feeling well but Early, being a lawyer is a fast thinker and a fast talker and I don’t think Lee was happy about the answers he was getting but being the first day and they having been victorious there was no real reason to think that trouble was on the way. I don’t think this depiction of Early is accurate.
the movie came straight from the Shaara book, Killer Angels. It was a novel that gave a little more life to all these personalities we have studied. I don't think the movie makers did a bad job... following the book! The battle has so many details worth mentioning that it could be a long running tv drama. But not in our lifetime. Interest in the Union and Confederate soldier is waning. It's all about race now. By the way, Union govt still owes my family $12 for the livestock and corn they stole. LOL.... good catch on the Ewell, Early mixup
General Lee arrived in Gettysburg as if he still had Stonewall Jackson. General Jackson would never have left the Union in possession of the high ground while there was still daylight on the first day. Lee then gave one of the worst orders in his career. He ordered General Ewell, " I want to you to take that hill, if practicable " What is " practicable " to one General is not necessarily " practicable " to another. General Ewell was cautious, and deferred a great deal to General Early. General Early was normally a real firebrand, but on that day was uncharacteristically cautious. With Lee's failures on the first day, he should have followed the advice of General Longstreet. Disengaged, swung around the Union army,,and forced Union General Meade to attack him. Lee might not have won the day but he would have won the battle. Yes the scene should have been included, it was needed for context.
This scene perfectly illustrated why the Confederates attacked in the south on Day 2 of Gettysburg- surely 3 minutes of the endless speeches that dulled this movie could have been deleted instead of this scene!
The regular release largely ignored everything but Longstreet's corps. This would have been a helpful to give an idea of what happened in the other two corps.
It is always sad to see great scenes deleted from the fished product but, editing must be done to prevent the film from being too long for one sitting in a movie theater. The finished product was already 4 1/2 hours long. I wish they would put out a new cut with more deleted scenes integrated into the finished product for home consumers.
I too believe these deleted scenes should have been included. Too bad there is probably no interest in creating an expanded special addition. I'd buy it.
+Mike Watkins. The entire director's cut is available for free at Archivesdotorg. archive.org/details/Gettysburg.1993 I haven't watched it all the way through, but there're a couple of deleted scenes included in what I have watched.
This scene specifically. It was a mistake to leave in the scene with Trimble describing his encounter with Ewell **in lieu** of these generals accounting for themselves for The First Day. Both should have been left in.
If Lee hoped that Ewell (not “Euell” ) would have taken Cemetery Hill, he should have ordered him to do so. Instead he gave vague orders that made it sound like he was leaving Ewell to his discretion, then complained that Ewell used discretion. How does he get so idolized, again? In other news: I’ll be damned, Pat Falsi did have a line after all. “No sir.”
I was an extra in this movie.I wished they would’ve kept this scene.It reopens The What If If Jackson would have survived,He would have never let them have the town.🤷♂️
Jared French One of Jackson’s orders was to keepm moving so they can’t dig in and Ewell stopped,He was unsure.Great Division Commander But no Corp Commander.
Interestingly, most of the commanders in that room, especially Early, where key advocates of the Lost Cause movement and members of the Robert E Lee fanclub. They went to great lengths at the end of the war to place much of the blame of Gettysburg on Longstreet and to deflect it away from Ewell and Stuart.
Hei Hei, Most is the commanders in that room by the time the Lost Cause movement started. Rodes was killed in the 1864 Valley Campaign. A.P. Hill was killed days before the war ended. Ewell kept silent about Lee and died in 1872 (2 years after Lee). Early was the only Lost Cause advocate present.
As Other's are Suggesting & Saying. Most Definitely this Scene shouldn't of been Deleted from the Film. IT'S Entire Content's was so Crucial too the Third Day's Outcome. Although Robert E. Lee was a Brilliant Commander, Unquestionably & Had been Very Fortunate. In His Past against the Union Army of The Potomac. On the Second Day at Gettysburg, He Misjudged His Own General's, as well as the Union Commander's, then Opposing His Own. Also the lack of Stuart's Cavalry kept Him from knowing the Terrain & the Opposition that, They we're facing all Over, and especially on His Flanks the previous Day. FYI The South's Artillery though Numerous, and had been Impressive previously. On the Third Day it was Less than Effective or useful as the Union just Kept moving Thiers away & bring more to Bear. Theirs was Just Better. In My Humble POV, Lee should have Moved Right or around Meade's Left Flank, Blocking them from Washington DC, as Longstreet was Saying. Or Lee could of Withdrew & then Saved a Good Portion of His Casualties from that Third Day. IF He had Done Such a Thing? The results wouldn't of been as Devastating as they Ended up being. Coincidentally this July 1-3 rd makes Up the 160th Anniversary of that Great Battle. IT Ended Up that Gettysburg was, R E Lee's, Waterloo of the Civil War. Since ever After it, all The Northern Army of Virginia, & The Confederacy could do. Was too Stall, Confront, or Withdrawal Continually, while staying in Front of the Union Forces, as they Continued on too Richmond the South's Capital. Thank You for Sharing all of the Previous Clip's.
My two cents is that had Lee taken the hill his Army is trapped there for later siege work. Longstreet had the correct view, move this force and find another opportunity like what just happened in Gettysburg to eventually decimate the Union forced following them. #definitelyKeepMoving
One historian recently (late 2022, I believe) determined that the Union rear was set for a general withdrawal from the field. Isn't it amazing how minutes or seconds can change the course of an entire war?
Lee said afterwards that the defeat was all his fault, but this scene shows how he came to his decision to launch a series of frontal attacks uphill - manoeuvre or withdrawal would both invite the Yankees, who were observing his every move, to attack an exposed flank with superior forces out in the open.
I think this conversation demonstrates that even after their success on day 1, a lot of the Southern command was already getting uneasy. Though it seemed like they had an early advantage, the truth was they merely pushed the Union out of terrain they never intended to hold anyway. Their stand on ridges west and north of town was just to protect the terrain south of town namely Cemetery Ridge which was their true target. The whole first day was basically a delaying tactic so they could fall back on Cemetery Ridge when the rest of the army arrived. Of course it got the Union 1st and 11th corps almost destroyed, but it achieved its goal of protecting the best terrain on the battlefield.
Brad W, didn't it ever occur to you, that Lee being a decent man, the slaves he freed could have been captured sts by some more harsh? I am not excusing holding people in bondage but the slavery issue was not settled by a long shot at that time.
I have a theory and I suppose this is as good of a place as any to put it out there. Robert E. Lee made a tragic decision when he ordered General Pickett to lead his division, supported by units of others, to make that frontal attack smack into the middle of a very strong Union line. Why did he do it? I think it was this.....Lee was, by all accounts, a very religious man. He had several victories that, to him and everyone else, seemed miraculous. When he arrived at Gettysburg he was faced with an obviously poor position. If he were to win the war then it was now or never. He must have felt that he was being tested by his God. Would he trust his faith and attack against what seemed to be insurmountable odds? He needed just this one win, a chance to end the war in a matter of weeks. He took the chance and it failed him. But, a commander must make choices that will give his men victory or give them defeat. He has to choose. He chose. It is all a man can ever do.
Pickett's Division had 15 Virginia regiments that had not fought. Lee was going to fight every unit he had to show the Union forces what sacrifice they had better be prepared to make if they were ever going to corner his forces and win. And in the end, that's what it took. Meade was never willing to make those kind of attacks, it took Grant to face up to the task, and he took 60,000 casualties in 30 days during the Overland Campaign before he bottled Lee up in Richmond.
@@hvymettle I think Lee was also thinking of Austerlitz, where Napoleon had draw the Austrians and Russian attention away from their center by a fight on the flank, resulting in the center being weak.
Not taking the high ground was one of many mistakes the South made in Gettysburg. Also vacating in favor of finding another ground fight on what have been in their favor. I'm a Pennsylvanian and so glad the North won but I'll admit Longstreet is a very underrated general. In Gettysburg he was better than Lee.
I think this view is based on Longstreet being against Pickett's charge, sure he was right about that. But what none of his advocates want to talk about is that his delayed attack on July 2nd is a big reason why Lee was in this bad position in the first place. It was at least as damaging as Ewell failing to take Culp's Hill on the 1st if not more so. The fifth corps arrived on Little Round Top no more than 20 minutes before the Confederates got there. Had Longstreet's attack come even an hour sooner, the South may well have captured the Round Tops and split the Union line while they were still disorganized and won. Longstreet should not get a pass for this just because he was right about Pickett's charge. The truth is, every single one of Lee's subordinates screwed the pooch in this battle with the possible exception of Hill. And Hill was sick and had little to do with the battle at all.
Lee's early training restrained him somewhat educated in Napoleonic tactics. Longstreet did have a different perspective, at least knowing enough that the Confederacy could not win an offensive campaign. Yet that is very much what they were engaged in during the Gettysburg campaign.
When it became apparent, as it did in 1863 at the latest, that there would be no intervention from France and Great Britain on the side of the rebels, the so-called Confederacy should have cut their losses and called it quits. They would've saved the lives of thousands of their own young men...
They should have never seceded ! As Sam Houston argued, the South had the constitution to defend their rights and had they been smarter and less belligerent, they could have tied up Mr. Lincoln and the Republicans in court, (even though the legal system was much weaker), and played for the long game. The constitution would have protected their states rights .
Some historians press the point that Gettysburg isn't (or wasn't) the turning point to the contemporaries as it is to us today. However they definitely should've hung it up when Atlanta fell or at the very latest after Lincoln's election. But I agree they should've never seceded; to this very day the 15 slave states then existing could still block passage of an amendment ending slavery.
Not true - Grant said in his memoirs that Davis' adoption of a strategy which defended cities and territory were in the end what did the Confederacy in. Some of this was probably done in response to political pressures, but according to Grant, Joseph Johnston's strategies of preserving the Confederate armies in the field by only attacking when they had the advantage of topography and/or situations which favored victory would have made the war much tougher to win for the Federals, Johnston's masterly campaign of tactically brilliant retreats before Atlanta made the Federals pay a high price in blood for every inch of ground they gained. Grant said in his memoirs that he believed that if the Confederates could have prolonged the war for perhaps another year or so, the war weariness in the north would have most likely resulted in a negotiated peace. Lee's forced defense of Richmond as insisted upon by Davis and his rash and foolish replacement of Johnston with John Bell Hood in front of Atlanta was the death knell. Yes there was political pressure to fight for the cities of Richmond and Atlanta, but in doing so the Army of Northern Virginia and the Army of Tennessee were fed in to the meat grinder and melted away under the sheer weight of numbers that the Federals had.
Gen. Jackson would have moved, and taken that hill....and quite possibly the battle....even the war.Greatest General in the Civl War, Thomas Jackson (as he said, the name of Stonewall belongs to the men, not to me)
James M. McPherson: “The course of the battle might have gone differently-e.g., Jackson probably would have attacked Cemetery and perhaps Culp's Hill on July 1, but there is no guarantee that the attack would have been successful, so I think the outcome of the battle probably would have been pretty much the same as it was.”
They should have kept this scene in. I had wondered why they didn't address Baldy Dick's failure to advance. One main issue I had with the movie from opening night until now...Martin Sheen. He was painful to watch, and painful to hear. Robert Duvall should have played the great General in both movies. Sheen played Lee as a sissy boy. That shitty accent has nothing to do with the accent if a Virginia aristocrat. General Lee deserved better. When I was a child, Robert E. Lee was perhaps the most admired man in American history. Now he is received by way too many ignorant people. People ignorant of the history, the times, and this great man.
One of the contributing factors of the Confederate defeat at Gettysburg was the near disappearance of A.P. Hill during the battle. The triphammer attacks the ANV launched from right to left starting with Hood on the extreme right stalled out when they reached Hill's Corps attacks on the Union center, we're poorly coordinated and stopped all together when it was time for Pender and Heth's divisions to go in.
They don't want to attack. They don't want to withdraw. What do they want to do? They can't wait it out because everyday they wait, the union army gets more support and union position more fortified.
If you didn't know your history you could almost think that Early was the corps commander here and not Ewell. Ewell was, at least according to Shelby Foote, quite passive during this meeting, leaving most of the talking to Early.
As a Southerner this scene is heart breaking. Even though the South won on the first day. Every man in that room knew that they had failed. They knew they had paid a high price for a partial victory. When with a little more aggression, a little more discipline, a little more coordination of effort they could have had the high ground. Every man in that room, Early, Ewell, Rhodes, and Hill, all had served under Jackson. Each one knew that had Jackson been there they would have taken the high ground or fought through the night to take it. Of the men most responsible for the failure at Gettysburg all but two were in that room. James Longstreet and JEB Stuart had a great deal to do with the failure at Gettysburg. Longstreet, although very good on defense. I think Longstreet was slow and a bit to cautious. Longstreet, I think was also jealous of Jackson and the relationship Jackson had with Lee. Not until the counterattack on the 2nd day at the Wilderness did Longstreet come into his own. Unfortunately getting wounded trying to organize a flanking movement on Grant. He too was lost to the cause of liberty for a time. JEB Stuart failed to remain in contact with the main body of the army and left the army blind. Needless to say that the battle probably would not have take place at Gettysburg if proper intelligence had been provide to Lee. In fact, if Lee had known where the Union army was. Lee would not have allow AP Hill to go into Gettysburg. Nor would he have recalled Ewell who was within 8 hours march of Harrisburg. Lee would have pushed all his troops up the back side of the mountains and crossed over the Susquehanna River, shelled, raided and burn Harrisburg to the ground. Follow the river south and destroy every bridge until he decided to cross back onto the south side of the river and push toward Baltimore. Reposition between Baltimore, and Washington DC and then raid, shell, and burn. No fix position fights just maneuver and strike, wear them down. If Lee could have pulled that off. The strategic importance of the fall of Vicksburg on July 4th would have seemed less important, at least for a while. But those are dreams every Southerner can have anytime he wants it. It is July 1st, early in the morning and AP Hill has not decided to allow his troops to go into Gettysburg yet. He could and should have kept his troops pushing up the backside of the mountains pushing to catch up with Ewell and then on to Harrisburg. One moment in time, just one decision and it could all have been different. If only Jackson had been there.
As a Northerner, I grow weary of listening to Southerners try to shift blame on to everyone BUT General Lee. Brilliant man that he was, for whatever reason, be it arrogance, miscalculation, or as some suggest , illness, Lee's decision making that week was uncharacteristically poor. I don't fault him terribly for the first day, but he accepted battle on day two from an inferior position, and then CONTINUED to take up the fight even after it was proven to him what an inferior position he held. Day three should have NEVER happened. If Meade had not taken such punishing loses, Lee might have lost his entire army. Longstreet was exactly right. Find better ground and make them come to YOU.
Longstreet wasn't slow. Eisenhower even said Longstreet couldn't have launched that attack until 3:30 pm. I think Eisenhower knows something about logistics.
@@jaywinters2483 Ok, Please provide your reference, I want to see this and understand Eisenhower's reasoning. On July 2nd the day before Pickett's charge Longstreet's Corp was pretty much in the same position as he would be on July 3rd. As far as manpower he would not have to move vary much. Longstreet was suppose to coordinate his attack with Ewell on Culp's Hill so to tied down Union force. These attacks were suppose to take place in the morning. These two attacks were suppose to take place in the morning to allow the whole day for the battle to develop. Too many times for the South, sunset ended battles and prevent the full exploitation of a success.
There is a far higher power in play than mere men and their feeble attemps to run this world. I think Lee in his soul was following that higher power, even if it meant defeat.
@@richardhertz8996 Lee wasn't to blame for any blunder but Pickett's Charge. Stuart had taken his cavalry on a raiding spree around the area outside of Gettysburg to secure supplies and gather intel on incoming reinforcements, but sent no runners to inform Lee of his whereabouts or the intel he gathered for several crucial days. It was the equivalent of Napoleon not having Grouchy and his 30,000 men at the Battle of Waterloo when it counted to defeat Wellington before Blucher's Prussian forces arrived. Stuart's cavalry was the eyes of the Army of Northern Virginia, and without reconnaissance Lee had no way of knowing what forces faced him at any point along the line, all he could do was estimate the strength he faced to his center and flanks.
Lee should never have replaced Stonewall Jackson with Ewell. A better corps commander would have been General John B. Gordon from Georgia. I suspect Lee's dedication to Virginia prompted him to prefer Virginians regardless of merit.
I have Gettysburg on DVD. I don't remember Ewell being in the movie at all. Nor Rhodes. This is the only speaking part that AP Hill has. I believe he was in one of the shots of the first day near a cabin in a red shirt (his trademark). I'm not sure who the other general is in this standing behind Ewell.
they should bring back the whole movie back on dvd with all deleted scenes, especially when Buford's calvary enter Gettysburg, and when Lee confronted Gen Ewell about why he didn't seize the high ground of Cemetery Hill on the first day.
