 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
Member
| Joined: | Thu Mar 8th, 2007 |
| Location: | Masapequa, Ny, USA |
| Posts: | 130 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
ken
| View single post by gettysburgerrn | |||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri Sep 12th, 2008 12:11 pm |
|
||||||||||||
|
gettysburgerrn Member
|
I don't think it was a personal matter of trying to prove Pettigrew wrong. Rather I think it was a matter of not fully appreciating his opinion and thinking he was overstating the matter. As far as they thought this was militia who was going to run like they did against Early a few days prior...or the alternative theory (which I think may be more accurate) is that they took the matters under advisement but they sent enough force (2 divisions, heth and pender, plus artillery) to deal with what they thought was in front of them, with no realization that significant infantry elements of the AoP were that close. Its funny though, the only command decison that Hill made during the battle is the one that started it. ken
|
||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||