| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - April 22 2005 : 8:36:16 PM
|
Except that's where Stuart had been. If he knew what was going on with the Federals - you know, being his job and all - he was already behind the lines when he decided to join Lee, bringing attractive articles in wagons to no point and no information of merit about the enemy along with his exhausted force. He apparently knew less than Lee did about the Federals, which is saying quite a bit. His men and horses were spent. It's not like he was an unused force ready to go even if he'd beaten the Federals July 3. Tally up the unused Federal reserves before you get excited about possibilities, both with Meade and at Washington.
Even if the South had won at Gettysburg, and the Feds retreated, they could do little. The South was screwed from Day One. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
  |
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - April 23 2005 : 12:09:11 AM
|
| Yeah, Yeah DC. but since they lacked your 20/20 hindsight, and there was no one with your wisdom to tell them otherwise, winning battles still seemed important to them. |
|
|
|
BJMarkland
Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - April 23 2005 : 1:13:04 PM
|
Paul, the problems people, or at least I, have are not that we doubt the Spencer's abilities, it is simply the wording you used: "...the Spencer stopped Pickett's charge." The word "stopped" indicates a direct action in response to only Pickett's charge. If you had used the word "influence" or something similar, maybe you would not be spending time looking up web resources, speaking of which. From a post you made to me regarding using web sources (it can be found as the last post on page 13):
"6. Too many websites are being posted which are of little value, or worse, confusing the argument. Newspaper clippings and chatrooms for hobbists are among the worst. If you are interested in the last night on the town in Deadwood Wild Bill Hicock had before he was killed, they are great! If you are trying to establish the reliability of a weapon in a major battle they simply distract. The poster should have at least the minimum knowledge to realize that!"
So, in essence you are criticizing me for including a link from the NRA dealing with target practice because it is from a "hobbists" [sic] site. And then you post this link: http://www.n-ssa.org/SKIRMISHLINE/1996/sep-oct2.html
which when you drill down to the parent is
http://www.n-ssa.org which reads:
"What is the North-South Skirmish Association...
* Civil War History
* Uniformed Union and Confederate teams, representing actual historical units.
* Individual and team competition in musket, carbine, revolver, and artillery.
* Costume competition for members and families.
The North-South Skirmish Association (N-SSA) was formed in 1950 to commemorate the heroism of the men, of both sides, who fought in the American Civil War, 1861-1865. The N-SSA promotes the shooting of Civil War firearms and artillery and encourages the preservation and display of Civil War materials. The N-SSA works to accomplish these goals by conducting skirmishes; competitive, live firing of these Civil War firearms and artillery. "
The above sounds like a site for a hobbyist or enthusiast to me.
Best of wishes,
Billy |
Edited by - BJMarkland on April 23 2005 1:15:20 PM |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - April 23 2005 : 5:21:13 PM
|
Wild I:You are welcome to your opinion. There are a lot of pretty good historians who think that Stuart behind Union lines with 5000 or so troopers could have caused a lot of disruption if he had not been stopped.
Of course you are right Prolar.What Stuart could or could not have achieved is a matter of opinion.But you cannot use opinion to support indirectly a post stating historical fact.This is what Warlord is attempting to do.
Stuart was dependent on Pickett's success for his mission not the other way round.
Warlord
My thanks for your most informative post.How it helps your case I don't know.No one disputes that Gregg held Stuart in check but this was done by cavalry charges with Sabers.I can find no description of
prolonged firefights where the Spencer was used extensively.
In fact if you add the Sharps, Henry, burnside, Colt and a few other types of breechloading carbines they will go all the way, Pard!
They were never supplied in any quantities to the Infantry.I can think of no major battle in the civil war where the result depended on cavalry action.
Tally up the unused Federal reserves before you get excited about possibilities, both with Meade and at Washington.
DC
I sometimes forget I'm dealing with the nieve and gullable and should be more careful with being too flippant.No Stuart was never going to make off with Abe.
The South was screwed from Day One.
Ever hear of Vietnam or dare one whisper it Iraq?To win a war a price has to be paid.Some don't think it worth it. |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - April 24 2005 : 11:46:45 AM
|
| Wild I: Agreed, anything Stuart could have done would only have been in support of Pickett's charge. Of course whatever effect it could have on the battle and what effect a change in the battle could have on the war is pure speculation. |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - April 24 2005 : 1:01:24 PM
|
BJ: The Spencer was used prior to the charges it set them up for Custer, as I have stated.
So the Spencer indirectly stopped Stuart and this indirectly stopped Pickett.Gotcha.It's all clear now. |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - April 24 2005 : 2:20:50 PM
|
As a matter of plain practical combat, the Spencer rifle stopped Pickett's charge
Warlord the above post is inaccurate.
|
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - April 25 2005 : 08:10:14 AM
|
Then allow me to leave you to bask in the reassuring warmth of your folly.To deny the the valor of your contrymen who manned the center of the Federal line and fought on equal terms and turned back the incomparable undefeated deathless army of Nothern Virginia.To deny the sheer guts and the single shot muzzle loading Springfield rifle with which they stopped the surging tide of the confederacy and changed the course of world history.
I note the absence of our two poets whose vicious elequance could not be employed in defence of their history.
My thanks to Prolar and BJ for their contributions and good luck to you sir. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - April 25 2005 : 11:50:26 AM
|
Pickett's advance was blown apart mostly by cannon and cannister, the South interpreting slack Union fire as disabled guns in the barrage at the beginning. But that wasn't so. Relatively few rebs reached Union lines at all. Had they in number, the Union reserves, some of which had not fought yet, could easily have absorbed it in theory. According to the statistics of the alleged attackers against the defenders, the South should have done much better and had more casualties. Apparently many stayed on their stomachs at the half way mark. But only Lee, apparently in the first throes of heart disease, thought it would work at all. Longstreet and Garnett and those guys couldn't see it happening, and they were right.
Gettysburg gets all the glory because it was a then rare victory back East and because of the photos Brady's guys took, but even if Lee had won, with all his casualties there was nothing behind him to resupply, and hardly any replacements, and the Union still had every advantage in the world and Lee coulnd't even shoe his men, never mind horses. It was Vicksburg that doomed the Confederacy because the South was split and the bigger Navy could keep the Mississippi open, allowing the South to be invaded from 360 degrees.
I really disagree with those who desire Magic Moments (The Highwater Mark of the Confederacy)and Great Men beloved by Destiny, because there are so many things that go into a major war it's too simplistic and often dead wrong. The South collapsed as a society long before Lee surrendered.
Really, absent monumental incompetence (the North gave it a go, for sure) there was no way for the South to win. Scott's supposed Anaconda plan which he'd configured before the war was pretty much right on. Like Kitchener, like Churchill, he knew this war would be long and the stronger economic society would win easily in the long run, and he was right. With the South having to maintain a Slave Patrol that took away many needed men for the Army, and no hard cash resource other than blockaded cotten, a currency openly laughed at, and millions of people that could hardly be trusted in their towns and homes, it was a dead letter from day one. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - April 26 2005 : 10:18:38 AM
|
Warlord
You have hoisted yourself on your own petard and if you are now feeling somewhat incommoded that is entirely your own fault.I think most of the regular contributers here have been on the receiving end of your venomous personal invective at some time or other.You seem incapable of carrying on a debate without resorting to it.However I have no desire to exchange insults with you so I'll just wish you well.
In the first world war,perhaps at Mons I'm not certain the British turned on the advancing Germans and checked them.This check was attributed to the Eee Enfield rifle in the hands of superbly trained rifle men.It is said the Germans thought they had run into massed machineguns.
Now the Spencer could be fired faster and loaded quicker and more sweetly that the Lee Enfield.And you place the Spencer in the hands of Federals facing Pickett?If this were true Amistead would never have breeched the defences.
To say that Pickett was defeated by the Spencer is to say he was defeated by superior technology.It is to say that the battle was not fought on equal terms.It is to deprive your countrymen of their place in history.It is to do them an appalling injustice .
DC
Really, absent monumental incompetence (the North gave it a go, for sure) there was no way for the South to win.
We have kicked this about a bit however---.A defeat at Gettysburg would have been yet another example of monumental incompetence to add to two years of defeats and humiliation.What would another defeat have done to the moral of the North.It is not possible to quantify the will to fight.Your contention that the South never stood a chance is fine until you factor in the human element.If your accountants view of war was correct then we would still have our Empires.The US since WW2 has been involved in conflicts where it has stopped way short of what its military might could have achieved.
Gettysburg was far more important to the moral of the North than Vicksburg.The turning point in conflicts is found first in the will of the people.Vicksburg might have been a far greater stratigic victory to the North than Gettysburg.But it was a seige with the confederate defenders of 20000 marching out with flags flying.Gettysburg saw the main field army of the confederacy defeated for the first time.The North at the time would have swapped 10 Vicksburgs for one Gettysburg.
|
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - April 26 2005 : 10:47:23 AM
|
I disagree mine is an 'accountant's view' because I suggest consideration of more than bad poetry and unlikely last words and stirring remarks - oh, and the crucial affect of few or non-existent repeaters - in looking at these battles.
The ANV was defeated, arguably to history, at Antietam when Lee first came north. And no, Lincoln and Halleck and everyone knew Vicksburg was the more important. Gettysburg got a lot of coverage in the north, of course, and we have those photos right off, which people hadn't seen before, of the field and the dead. But assuming reasonable losses and nothing beyond what these battles normally wrought, the AOP would be refitted and remanned pretty quick, without taking men from the huge defense works around Washington. Lee couldn't attack Washington with the AOP at his back. How many men would he have able to fight? Not enough. He'd have to retreat or risk getting nailed. If he captured a city he'd be hard pressed to leave it. He had no supplies, no navy, nothing, and a huge hostile population the further north he went. It was an admitted foray to inspire a victory for European recognition.
You keep postulating this war as if the North was totally fixated on it. It wasn't, although folks in the neighborhood of southern Pennsylvania on July 1, 1863 likely were. It was building railroads, administering California, exploring the arctic, non-war factories were booming, the population was growing faster than ever even factoring in war dead, there was plenty of labor and more coming.
The South had nothing else but the war going on for itself, and soon enough went into religious revival, unfair food allotment, black market, and large numbers bolted. As early as Shiloh, soldiers refused to fight. I don't mean to imply the north shined it on, but it didn't apply anywhere near its full strength to crushing the South. By the end of 1864, Grant had artillery units he sent home into storage because he had no imaginable use for them, plus entire infantry Corps with nothing to do. Think of that. Not just AN entire corps, more than SEVERAL, totally supplied, mounted, complete with hospitals and associate units, fed, ready and rarin' to go. The South never had that at the beginning.
Meanwhile, in 1864, other northern armies were fighting the Sioux. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - April 26 2005 : 11:16:26 AM
|
| Dark Cloud: Isn't this the same program that had Crazy Horse driving Reno from the timber with a tomahawk charge? Getting hard up for reference sources aren't you? |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - April 26 2005 : 12:35:44 PM
|
If not the precise series, one just like it. They run together in my mind. Nobody has laughed harder at these melodramatic offerings than I. But if you're going to bow and scrape, as some here do, at the altar of some sort of forensic science (at least when it helps their immediate cause), then you have factor in this episode, which shows how field of fire, time of advance, this and that, should have equalled more reb dead than it did. Much more. A "mystery" why it did not, which the heroic men of science will solve.
Seems the reason it didn't is because many of the confederates never made the charge, or so it's claimed. In conjunction with letters of the reb soldiers - this assumes they were not made up - who participated in Pickett's charge, a reasonable if not proveable case can be made that large numbers of rebels hit the stomach at the something Rd. (I cannot recall the name)when they couldn't get through the nearby fence. Or something like.
When such melodramatic claims are made for a firearm that statistically doesn't even factor in the battle, if there at all, this has at least as much weight, wouldn't you say? Real scientists. With degrees, even. A must watch. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - April 26 2005 : 1:18:26 PM
|
I disagree mine is an 'accountant's view' because I suggest consideration of more than bad poetry and unlikely last words and stirring remarks - oh, and the crucial affect of few or non-existent repeaters - in looking at these battles
It's an accountant's view because you endow every Federal trooper with a strategic insight into the conflict.Regardless of the incompetant generals leading them to yet another Chancellorsville or Fredericksburg they knew that all would come right in the end.
Well armies don't work that way.It is what is happening to me right now that counts.At Gettysburg 260 men of the 71st Pennsylvania held somewhat different views to yours DC.Seeing the steadyness of Pickett's troops they threw down their recently acquired Spencers[courtesy of Warlord]and fled.One running regiment is of no account until this malaise takes hold of a division and then an army.How many defeats would it take to reduce the Federals to an ineffective rabble.Regardlees of the strenght of their reserves this was their first team they were fielding at Gettysburg.It just would not look good to have them flooding back into Washington.
I may have mentioned in another life that disillusioned French troops went to the front baaing like sheep.Have you factored in disillusionment into your theory.And as you have pointed out the vast majority of population were indifferent to the war.That should have worked wonders in the motivating department.
Industrial strenght and manpower have to be moblised and applied.For over two years there was no indication that the North had the leadership or management know how to apply this superiority.
To hold your view you must dismiss any chance of the command and control functions of the Federals ever being decapitated and you must be convinced that the Federals would pay the price.And there is no way you could call that at the outset of the conflict. |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - April 26 2005 : 3:03:15 PM
|
As a matter of plain practical combat, the Spencer rifle stopped Pickett's charge
How many repeaters directly faced the men charging up the hill I don't know.
You could have saved yourself an awful lot of grief if you had admitted that 3 weeks ago,but better late than never.Well done.
If it was not for our intervention in World War 2, you would be speaking German.
Actually it was the Germans who declared war on the US.
you insolent jerk!
That's ok Warlord.Good luck to you now.
|
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - April 26 2005 : 3:08:40 PM
|
| DC: I won't vouch for your History's Mysteries program. I saw some it some time ago and it was very forgettable.However, I believe you were right about Emmitsburg Rd. Wild I, that road came under fire but it was never in the heart of the Union defence lines as you said. Warlord, the Sharps was not a repeater, it was a breech loading single shot. I know you know better. I don't know what distance Stuart was shot from, but I bet it was not 80 rods. I don't see any reason to doubt that there were Spencers at Gettsburg and two of Custer's regiments were equipped with them. Warlord is right on. I would think that they were not the only units with Spencers, but I have never read of any infantry unit having them. |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - April 26 2005 : 5:41:53 PM
|
Wild I, that road came under fire but it was never in the heart of the Union defence lines as you said.
Prolar
The road ran oblique through the Federal lines and continued into noman's land where it was interdicted [it had been the Federal front line on d1 and d2]and enfiladed by Federal artillery firing from the angle,LRT and Cemetry Ridge.
Mayo's Brigade of Trimbles Division was actually defeated before it reached the Emmetsburg road by elements of 2nd corps[108 NY,8TH Ohio,1ST Mass]posted far in advance of the road.
I think my statement holds up but thanks for the opportunity to clarify it. |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - April 26 2005 : 10:56:08 PM
|
Wild I: You are right, I never should have said never.However since the 3rd day was the time the discussion was about, It doesn't really matter where the lines were on the previous two days.
Warlord: I know of at least three other versions of the shooting of Stuart. One of them was Huff at 15-20 yards, the others are different people, including one with a Spencer. I have a replica 1860 Army. I have fired it some but never at 440 yards. How much would you hold over at that range? I can accept 80 yards as a good shot, but I ain't buying 80 rods. |
|
|
|
prolar
Major
Status: offline |
Posted - April 27 2005 : 10:16:35 AM
|
| Warlord, yes some people can do amazing things with a gun. I don't doubt that you have seen some of them. Still, people and guns have limits.For instance, as confident as you are of hitting that bottle, how sure are you that the gun could group all its shots inside the diameter of a beer can at 50 yards? |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - April 28 2005 : 11:00:51 AM
|
Tell me wILD do you still think there were very few Spencer's used in the civil war now?
I think you are the one having trouble with numbers Warlord
How many repeaters directly faced the men charging up the hill I don't know.
700000 Springfields were issued during the war.They were the mainstay of the Federal infantry from start to final victory.Your Spencers were not issued until 1863 and then only to cavarly units.
Arms and equipment of the Union states the following."Few Federal infantry regiments were lucky enough to receive the revolutionry repeaters that made their appearance during the final two years of the war.By the time the cavalry had got their Spencers the work had been done Gettysburg and Vicksburg had been fought and won by single shot muzzel loaders.
Speaking of you wILD. The japanese attcked Pearl Harbor initiating our declaration of war on the Axis. And we were involved beforehand, supplying gas, ammunition and arms to you
You sent us nothing.In fact you "invaded"us [technically]
It was the German declaration of war on the US which resulted in the US response. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - April 28 2005 : 11:54:47 AM
|
Wild, focus on Lend Lease, 50 destroyers, and we did not invade Ireland which, by the by, couldn't quite bring itself to prefer the Allies to Hitler. We did not invade England, either, but were asked to base there. The US coughed up more war produce than the rest of the world combined starting from ground zero, and it was this unimaginable industrial might clicked on overnight that won the war. So don't bitch.
Also, the best pilots in the RAF of sainted memory were Polish refugees; this gets less coverage than it ought, don't you think? |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - April 28 2005 : 12:43:58 PM
|
Wild, focus on Lend Lease, 50 destroyers,
We got no 50 destroyers.
We did not invade England, either, but were asked to base there.
Who asked the US to base in Ireland?
and it was this unimaginable industrial might clicked on overnight that won the war.
The war was lost in Europe.
Also, the best pilots in the RAF of sainted memory were Polish refugees;
Who were betrayed. |
|
|
|
Dark Cloud
Brigadier General
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - April 28 2005 : 1:17:36 PM
|
Are we pretending Northern Ireland was part of Ireland, then? England got fifty destroyers.
England.
News to us, England, France, Germany, and Poland.......
What were the options? War with the Soviets who were going to take it anyway? The US didn't betray Poland, we had no treaty with them pre-War. Britain did but had no choice after the war. Give them a break. England went to war beccause of Poland when it couldn't afford to. Where were the heroic boys in Green during all this? Unable to see the difference between Churchill and Hitler? Huh. |
Dark Cloud
copyright RL MacLeod
darkcloud@darkendeavors.com
www.darkendeavors.com
www.boulderlout.com |
|
|
|
wILD I
Brigadier General
Ireland
Status: offline |
Posted - April 28 2005 : 1:36:48 PM
|
Are we pretending Northern Ireland was part of Ireland, Our constitution said it was.
The US didn't betray Poland,
Ever hear of Yalta where the big three carved up Europe?
What were the options? War with the Soviets
But of course. The US would not pay the price thus the war was lost.
Where were the heroic boys in Green during all this
Not assisting an occupying power.
Unable to see the difference between Churchill and Hitler? Huh
Sure we could. Churchill was the one who put criminals in uniform and let them loose in Ireland.And when Hitler went belly up, just to get up Churchill's nose our PM went to the German embassy and signed the book of condolences.[but then our PM was a Yank]
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Springfield Cartridge ID
