News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

Pickett's Charge

Started by alfred russel, May 27, 2020, 07:52:08 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

The Minsky Moment

Which makes Jeff Davis Jerry Jones.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

alfred russel

So doing a bit more digging...maybe this will be interesting to someone other than me...

Hancock's II Corps had 5 batteries attached, with a total of 26 guns. These batteries were all close to the point of attack.

Of the 26 guns, it seems 10 were available as the infantry approached (6 of those from one battery in Ziegler's Grove).

1st New York Light, Battery B: 4 guns, only 1 was operational at the time of Pickett's Charge, and that gun was overrun. 10 were killed including the commander.

1st Rhode Island Light, Battery A: 6 guns, 1 was destroyed in the confederate bombardment, and 4 more ran out of ammunition and were withdrawn. The remaining 1 gun was wheeled to the line to fire cannister in the infantry attack.

1st Rhode Island Light, Battery B: 6 guns, 3 were damaged, the remaining 3 were withdrawn prior to the infantry attack. All officers were killed or wounded.

1st United States, Battery I: 6 guns, all guns were apparently operational by the time of the infantry attack. The commander was killed.

4th United States, Battery A: 6 guns, 4 guns disabled before the attack, 2 were moved to the line to fire cannister  in the infantry attack. The commander was killed (this was Cushing's Battery)

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

There's a fine line between salvation and drinking poison in the jungle.

I'm embarrassed. I've been making the mistake of associating with you. It won't happen again. :)
-garbon, February 23, 2014

alfred russel

Quote from: Berkut on May 27, 2020, 10:53:14 PM

The reasons for cannons engaged is essentially the same - the Union doesn't know where the attack is coming, so while they did concentrate a lot of their cannon in the center, they could not concentrate it all, while Lee was confident he was not going to be attacked, and hence was more willing to just strip his artillery to concentrate it at the point of attack. There is also a spacing issue - when attacking, you can spread it out in line, while aiming it into a point. When defending, you have to keep you artillery lined up alongside your infantry (mostly). But once it was clear what was happening, the Union artillery was definintely concentrated, and was used to devastating effect.

The artillery fire was concentrated--the artillery maybe not as much.

The park service says the union had 360 cannon at the battle.

https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/hh/9/hh9j.htm

The numbers engaged in Pickett's Charge are variable depending on the source -- they seem to vary from 80 to 125. The portion of the line engaged includes the line from Little Round Top to Cemetery Hill (a theory I have is the difference in cannon engaged is whether the cannon on Cemetery Hill are included, but I don't know that). There were only 6 cannon on Little Round Top and they engaged by any standard. That leaves something like 240 cannon elsewhere on the battlefield...that is a lot of cannon and I'm not sure where they would be. I don't think Big Round Top was taken until later in the day and while Culp's Hill would have a number, it won't be the bulk of that number.

Obviously it is an answerable question...you can just look up the units and count the artillery pieces...basically everyone's location is well documented at Gettysburg.
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

There's a fine line between salvation and drinking poison in the jungle.

I'm embarrassed. I've been making the mistake of associating with you. It won't happen again. :)
-garbon, February 23, 2014

grumbler

#18
The question may be aswerable, but I have no idea what the question *is*.

Here's a map (easily found) of the artillery locations on the third day of Gettysburg:


https://www.battlefields.org/learn/maps/gettysburg-picketts-charge-artillery-placements

If you can ask the question, it can probably be answered.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

alfred russel

Quote from: grumbler on May 28, 2020, 10:08:22 AM
The question may be aswerable, but I have no idea what the question *is*.

Here's a map (easily found) of the artillery locations on the third day of Gettysburg:


That map shows 124 guns (if my quick count is correct).

That map shows artillery positions on Cemetery Hill (though I don't think it extends down to Little Round Top - I understand there were 6 guns there).

The park service indicated that there were 360 union cannon...that leaves well over 200 unaccounted for. The question is, where were all those guns?
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

There's a fine line between salvation and drinking poison in the jungle.

I'm embarrassed. I've been making the mistake of associating with you. It won't happen again. :)
-garbon, February 23, 2014

Syt

Probably in the laundry.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.
—Stephen Jay Gould

Proud owner of 42 Zoupa Points.

The Brain

Women want me. Men want to be with me.

Razgovory

Quote from: alfred russel on May 28, 2020, 10:19:54 AM
Quote from: grumbler on May 28, 2020, 10:08:22 AM
The question may be aswerable, but I have no idea what the question *is*.

Here's a map (easily found) of the artillery locations on the third day of Gettysburg:


That map shows 124 guns (if my quick count is correct).

That map shows artillery positions on Cemetery Hill (though I don't think it extends down to Little Round Top - I understand there were 6 guns there).

The park service indicated that there were 360 union cannon...that leaves well over 200 unaccounted for. The question is, where were all those guns?


Either in the reserve or guarding other parts of the line.  Keep in mind that cemetery ridge was not the only place under attack that day and you can't have everyone just rush to spot of decision.
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

grumbler

Quote from: alfred russel on May 28, 2020, 10:19:54 AM
That map shows 124 guns (if my quick count is correct).

That map shows artillery positions on Cemetery Hill (though I don't think it extends down to Little Round Top - I understand there were 6 guns there).

The park service indicated that there were 360 union cannon...that leaves well over 200 unaccounted for. The question is, where were all those guns?

I believe that your 360 Union guns number is wrong.  According to Gottfried's The Artillery of Gettysburg there were 355 total guns at Gettysburg. 
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

alfred russel

Quote from: grumbler on May 28, 2020, 01:40:39 PM


I believe that your 360 Union guns number is wrong.  According to Gottfried's The Artillery of Gettysburg there were 355 total guns at Gettysburg.

https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/hh/9/hh9j.htm

That number is from the national park service.
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

There's a fine line between salvation and drinking poison in the jungle.

I'm embarrassed. I've been making the mistake of associating with you. It won't happen again. :)
-garbon, February 23, 2014

Valmy

#25
Well if the Confederates really had 270 cannons and Pickett's Charge was their big attack that Lee had staked the whole war on, it seems far weirder that they would not have used more of their guns in their attack. It makes much more sense that the Union would disperse their guns along their line of defense. Though I suppose there are only so many guns you can park in a 1.5 mile long line.

It could also be a question of ordinance. Maybe they only had so much available or so much they could safely store in one place they expected to be under fire.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

alfred russel

Quote from: Valmy on May 28, 2020, 02:02:54 PM
Well if the Confederates really had 270 cannons and Pickett's Charge was their big attack that Lee had staked the whole war on, it seems far weirder that they would not have used more of their guns in their attack. It makes much more sense that the Union would disperse their guns along their line of defense. Though I suppose there are only so many guns you can park in a 1.5 mile long line.

It could also be a question of ordinance. Maybe they only had so much available or so much they could safely store in one place they expected to be under fire.

As you mention the limiting factor was ordinance.

I can't get their numbers to work either, but they didn't have an artillery reserve--all their artillery was with the corps. If you factor in that it probably didn't make sense to bring down Ewell's Artillery and the horse artillery would stay with Stuart, 100 cannon not participating in the barrage isn't crazy (the number included is debatable--and apparently 50 or so never fired despite being included in any event--because of the ammunition issues).
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

There's a fine line between salvation and drinking poison in the jungle.

I'm embarrassed. I've been making the mistake of associating with you. It won't happen again. :)
-garbon, February 23, 2014

The Brain

Quote from: alfred russel on May 28, 2020, 02:24:47 PM
Quote from: Valmy on May 28, 2020, 02:02:54 PM
Well if the Confederates really had 270 cannons and Pickett's Charge was their big attack that Lee had staked the whole war on, it seems far weirder that they would not have used more of their guns in their attack. It makes much more sense that the Union would disperse their guns along their line of defense. Though I suppose there are only so many guns you can park in a 1.5 mile long line.

It could also be a question of ordinance. Maybe they only had so much available or so much they could safely store in one place they expected to be under fire.

As you mention the limiting factor was ordinance.


:huh:
Women want me. Men want to be with me.

Razgovory

I just looked at a map of the third day.  Man, the Confederates were really fucked.  They had fewer men, exterior lines, and a small town splitting their force.  I wonder why the Union didn't attack.
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

alfred russel

Valmy--here is why I think the confederate numbers are plausible--but not saying they are correct of course.

Lets assume the park service is correct that the confederates had 270 cannon. Probably 40 were horse artillery with Stuart.

That leaves 230 cannon for infantry. The confederates did not have an artillery reserve, so all else being equal each corps should have 1/3 of the artillery--or about 75-80 cannon.

If you assume Alexander pulled the artillery from Longstreet's and Hill's Corps to be available to support the attack, but not Ewell's (on the north side of the battlefield), that means about 150-160 would be available for the attack. How many were there?

QuoteConfederate general Robert E. Lee ordered a massive artillery bombardment of the center of the Union line prior to the attack that Friday afternoon. The responsibility for lining up the guns fell to Colonel Porter Alexander, who poached cannons from wherever he could find them. "Nothing remotely like it had been seen before in this war," the historian Stephen W. Sears has written, continuing:

"With their crews hidden from sight, the guns stood silent in their long ranks like deadly, solitary sentinels. Heat waves radiated off the black iron Parrott and Rodman rifles; the bronze Napoleons gleamed brightly in the sunlight. On Little Round Top an awed Major Thomas Hyde, viewing this array "seemingly directed toward the centre of our line," counted 100 guns visible just from his vantage point."

But how many guns were there in total? Historians' numbers have varied. Sears claimed 163, while others, such as Douglas Southall Freeman, have cited Alexander's postwar memoir in concluding that there were 140 guns altogether, 56 of which went unused. In two different books, the British historian Brian Holden Reid has provided two different numbers: 164 in one, 172 in the other (while noting that 56 of those went unused).

https://www.encyclopediavirginia.org/numbers_at_pickett_s_charge

That directionally makes sense.
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

There's a fine line between salvation and drinking poison in the jungle.

I'm embarrassed. I've been making the mistake of associating with you. It won't happen again. :)
-garbon, February 23, 2014