Pet Peeves of the Battle of Gettysburg (Day 2) | Tim Smith 

couldn't agree more about your points. 20th Maine just one of many regiments who were hard pressed and did a great job but so over emphasized. Yes, Killer Angels was my starting point in reading. I worked decades ago on RT hauling woods chips and maintaining paths. NO ONE came up on paths to the 20th Maine. We were there for days working, they all drove on past us and parked up top and walked out by the Battery. One of my 1st LGB tours was out of the West Guide Station and he was like 85. I asked him. 'before the movie sir how many people ever had you go to the 20th Maine monument?" and he said 'none'. No one ever asked about it, there so many more places to see that were just as important to the battle. Kudos on your work, on your sticking to facts rather than hype. You made me a subscriber

The carnage on the afternoon of July 2nd is incredible.

I always learn something new when listening to Mr. Smith

My pet peeve is that any criticism of Longstreet is a defense of Lee. Longstreet's actions on the 2nd day were not his best work. If Lee's plan was too complex, Longstreet should have simplified it by attacking on his own initiative as early as possible with his two divisions and Anderson's by the shortest possible route against wherever it looked like the Union left ended. That was clearly what the tactical situation called for and some competent officer should have seen that and acted.

Great stuff, Tim. I think the bad rap on Longstreet, as well as on Stuart and Ewell, was a result of people not being able to accept that Lee was not at his best at Gettysburg and so he had to have been failed by his Generals. I look forward to your pet peeves from July 3rd!

Tim, your talks are very enjoyable and informing. Thanks for your expertise.

Day 2..... It's NOT Jenny Wades House. We were kids who went to Fantasyland, the classic stationwagon tour of the 60's. the trifold handout said 'Jenny Wades House'. Then someone invented the Interwebs and badda bing someone one day says 'Hey, you know its not Jenny wades house right? ' Wait wut?? Shattered, mind blown. Then of course they follow up with "and her name wasn't Jenny...." WHAT? The 1960's and 70's .... we were misled....but we did get cold A&W Root bears beside the Sherfy house. That sorta makes up for it

How do you do anything after marching 17 miles through the night? amazing!!!

The movie made it seem like the 20th Maine was the only one that actually mattered when I finally got to Gettysburg and saw that a little teeny tiny monument and wondered maybe they weren't as important as the

Excellent stuff, sir! Thank you. Can't wait for July 3 pet peeves!

“ Don’t fight uphill me boys”

Couple of thoughts: I am amazed they had a battle at all. Marching infantry all over the hills. OMG, the movement of troops is amazing. March down this road, right face then an oblique angle with 1000 men. HA! I would have marched them knee deep in a farmers pond! Lol 2nd, there were other troops being marched here and there. In the heat of the day, no water, bathroom breaks? Crummy shoes, clothes made of wool. How did those men hold up under those conditions? Anyway, i'll be seeing someone out there for a tour in the spring or fall. But not during the summer.

Great stuff Tim. Thanks! I was waiting for you to additionally mention the narrative one periodically hears that Lee’s July 2 master plan was to fully engage the Union Army with the attack in their front while Jeb Stuart would then sweep in from the East Calvary Field and overwhelm their rear.

Always look forward to Mr Smiths opinions.

The battle was in Gettysburg and JEB Stuart was in Carlisle!

To think Longstreet would purposely sabotage any battle is ridiculous. What I desire is a fully video of Early’s attack on July 2nd. This part of the battle is always overlooked

Once again, my thanks.

Just got through reading EP Alexander’s explanation of this! Aligns with what you say! Says forces were bivouacked 4 miles away and Lee the night before should have provided guides to bring up the forces if daylight attack would have been practicable

Always pleasurable - thanks

Thanks, Tim. Gen. Lee is responsible for the actions of his army.

Keep up the great work Tim! I love your talks!

Well done. Thank you for making and sharing this video

I agree Tim. Considering that Lee’s orders for the day and that the situation had changed with Sickle’s forward position. It changed a lot. Instead of McLaws Division going in first it made Longstreet change to the situation and send Hood in first. Several union units performed heroically, including Colonel Ireland on Culp’s Hill. You are correct, the Union army was able to send reinforcements to the areas imperiled and ended up outnumbering the Confederates at the points of attack. Hancock did some great work that day marshaling troops where they were needed.

You cannot deny Sickles was his own man, and he owned it. He even put himself in harms way knowing what he decided.

Thanks for recommending Garrys book Tim! The Myth of Little Round Top. I will definitely read this! Thanks for all your insights and pet peeves on this great battle. 👏👏 Could you pound your fist on the table next time and look a little more peeved? 😂🤣

Great stuff Tim!!!!!

Very nice video Mr. Tim!

You do a great job narrating and breaking down all of this controversy. Awesome content.

I don’t think Col. Strong Vincent hasn’t received more notoriety.

Unrelated side, there's been some interesting archeology lately at Hougoumont Manor, one of two forward fights at Waterloo.

Great video! Those are my pet peeves too! Glad someone with a platform is saying these things :D

Very interesting stuff! Looking forward to the Pet Peeves of the Battle of Gettysburg (Day 3) | Tim Smith...

My theory about Sickles is his poor performance made Lee think the Union position was worse than it was, encouraging him to make the all-out attach on day 3.

The pivotal battle on July 2nd was Cemetery Hill. With full engagement from Rodes Division allowing the Confederates to take Cemetery Hill on July 2nd, they probably win the battle on July 3rd and history would have been re-written.

Longstreet was a humbug. He let his emotions get in the way of performing his duties to the best of his abilities that battle. How people can not see that I do not know.

Request: Tim’s review of The Killer Angels

Lee's order was to attack up the Emmitsburg Road, which was impractical given the III Corps' advanced position. Longstreet was forced to shift Hood's division to McLaws' right as an adjustment, which did take time. Even then Hood wanted to shift further to the right, but there wasn't enough time left in the day. Granted, Sickles' position was a bad one, and he should not have advanced to it. It would have been interesting to see what would have happened had Sickles remained along the Cemetary Ridge/Little Roundtop line. How would Longstreet's attack have developed?

I like a comment I heard concerning the wounding of Dan Sickles..."It was BAD news for Sickles, but GOOD news for the union army!"

Just remembered the East Cavalry Field/Jeb Stuart narrative was actually for July 3. Maybe that one will be on your July 3 Pet Peeves video! Now that I have made a mess of my comments on this video, I guess it is time for my second cup of coffee…

Hope i can see you in 2 weeks.

I agree that a lot of the Confederates' conundrum on Day 2 has sooo much to do with Lee's (let's just call it what it was) UNCERTAIN game plan--the subordinate issues ALL can be traced back to that. Personally I'll always be partial to your Day 1 "pet peeve" with regard to the proper pronunciation of "Willoughby's Run" (?) lol. Oh, I remember...lol

My pet peeve is discussing Early in the "early part of the battle."

I had a pet peeve once. I trained it to poop outside.

Excellent you could of gone an hour and I would have enjoyed it. Would love to read Garry Adelman’s book but it is way out of my price range. Get him to put out new addition.

Not to defend Sickles, BUT Meade had several opportunities (all of which he declined, starting with a request from Dan himself for clarification) to see for himself. Sending his son was I think, a deliberate insult to Sickles, in the midst of a fraught relationship.

I partly agree and partly disagree on Sickles. I agree it was a mistake. i agree that he did not win the battle, they likely would have won and stopped the attackes even easier had they maintained the correct position. But, as things went, his movement did disrupt things from the attack so things certainly did not go as planned from the CSA part because of the move. But, by the same point, Sickles likely only moved because he did not move on his own at Chancellorsville and he was the only one reporting the flank march and Hooker did nothing and did not order him to stop it. he likely felt bad and felt he was not going to allow a similar mistake to happen so he went on his own this time. Had he done that at Chancellorsville the result would have been different. He learned his lesson...regretfully, he applied the lesson to another situation where it was not a mistake to stay put. People are wrong that this won the battle. plus, he did not move there with the expectation of getting beat up.. he thought he could repulse an attack better by moving forward, so no matter what the defenders say, what happened in the end was not his intent either.

I don't agree with you.Generals,especially Longstreet, let Lee down

To me the picture of Longstreet at Gettysburg is one of curiousity. Was he reluctant because he disagreed with Lee's strategy, or could he have been a closet northern sympathizer?

My first pet peeve is that people cannot find several things to be true at once: it can be true that Chamberlain leading the 20th Maine in defence of Little Round Top was extraordinary and a critical part of the Union surviving day 2, and that there were many many extraordinary acts by other leaders that were critical to success. Why does every attempt to correct “myths” lead to criticism of Chamberlain? Bringing all stories to the fore should not require diminishing one of the stories. My other pet peeve is that the beautifully written “The Killer Angels”” is critiqued as if it were a non-fiction account. Shaara used Chamberlain as a device to represent heroism as displayed by all parties. It was just as important to highlight that idea in a novel as it would be to provide detailed accounts of the action in a piece of non-fiction. Visitors can have their heroes and learn facts at the same time. We need both in order to fully understand the experience of war.

By what distorted reasoning do you deduce that "Lee had 50,000 casualties at Gettysburg and 20,000 of them on the second day"?! This is an astounding statement, totally false. Tim, you're good in a lot of things, but I think you missed this one.

Oops. “Cavalry” not “Calvary”! 🫣

Excellent analysis as always Tim - thank you!