View single post by j harold 587
 Posted: Tue Jul 3rd, 2007 03:42 pm
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 
j harold 587
Member


Joined: Tue Jun 12th, 2007
Location: Wilmington, Ohio USA
Posts: 166
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

I agree very much with PvtClewell. I feel that was a very well stated post.Also we must realize that there was a deep stream and a mill pond to the Union right of Culps Hill. That prevented easy movement of CSA troops or artillery to their left. There was a distinct advantage to the heights as well as a pre retreat artillery line and infantry support.  The inability of Ewell to position counter battery fire due to limited movement and lack of day light and I'm not sure artilllery support was even available. If an attempt to take the hill had been mounted it almost surely would have failed due to lack of artillery support.

 Also the Union line extended well to their right beyond Culps hill.The fish hook term did not show up untill vey late 1880s.  What Mead established was a triangle defense. The military training of the time (remember Lee had commanded West Point) was to hit both ends of the triangle to condense reserves to the center and pull reserves to the left and right. Then a strong push at the weakened center would bring a break through. Also any over shots from the artillery would strike the condensed reserves. This was a common problem for CSA artillery. Mead is recorded to have advised his staff prior to the third day that he anticipateed an attack in the center. The commander of a NY regiment near the copse of trees had his men double charge their smooth bore weapns (placing two projectiles on one powder charge) in anticipation of being attacked on the third day.  

 Close Window