Here’s Ranger Chuck Teague presenting a battle walk on Little Round Top.
Wish I could be there to ask some questions. If Lee had been the winner, what were his post battle plans? Would Union forces have surrendered, or would they have retreated deep into Pennsylvania where the Confederates couldn’t reach them? CSA general vs CSA general, Union general vs Union general: Can you give an example of plans going wrong because a lower ranking general wouldn’t follow orders? Can you think of a time when an army would have better chance if they had listened to a lower ranking general?
If defeated, the Army of the Potomac would have to retreat into Maryland, most probably to the Pipe Creek Line. It would be politically disastrous for Lincoln and the Republicans. Governor Curtain was about to stand for reelection that fall, and would probably have lost the election. The political fallout would probably last well into the next year.
Thanks again for all the videos Al. I shared a couple of them with my Immigrants’ Civil War readers during my Facebook Film Fest this weekend.
I hope they enjoyed them, Pat.
At around 48:00 Ranger Chuck says the Gettysburg Battlefield Memorial Association had a rule that limited monuments to people of the rank of General and above and that that is why the 83rd monument only looks like Vincent. Now as I understand it it was a rule set forth by Pennsylvania for their monuments and not by the park. Nevertheless rangers keep citing a rule by the park commission as the reason there could not be a Chamberlain statue. This seems to me unlikely as there are monuments to people under the rank of General, for example John Burns, Reverend Father William Corby, and William Wells. If there indeed was such a rule it was surly overridden by the 1910 rule, “Hereafter monuments markers or tablets erected in honor of individuals shall be limited to officers and soldiers who for a conspicuous and exceptional act of heroism.” However the John Burns statue as dedicated in 1903.
So was there ever such a rule or is this something that is just being passed from park ranger to park ranger? Maybe it is true but I’m going to need to see the rule in writing to believe it at this point.
Compare the dates. The GBMA era ended in 1895. The 20th Maine’s monument was dedicated in 1886, so the GBMA’s rules would definitely be in effect for them. The Wells monument was dedicated in 1913. Now, having said all that, the 124th New York monument at Devil’s Den was dedicated in 1884, but it has Col. Ellis on it, and it was also definitely during the GBMA time. So there is at least one exception.
Well the 83rd monument was dedicated in 1899. But the GBMA rules did not end when their era ended. Sometime around 1903 the commissioners used the GBMA’s rules to turn Oates down on his 15th Alabama monument telling him the GBMA’s rules state all regimental markers must be in line of battle.
The GBMA’s laws appear to be all listed here on page 236: http://www.gdg.org/Research/Monuments/gbmahist.html
Though a park ranger might have access to another document I do not have.
FYI the Chamberlain monument was not proposed when the 20th Maine monument was. The Chamberlain monument was proposed around 1906. Also ranger Chuck seems to indicate the Chamberlain monument would have been by the 20th Maine monument. The proposed location was centered between the left and right flank markers.
Here’s the research I have so far on the Chamberlain and Oates monuments:
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Google+ account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Twitter account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Facebook account.
( Log Out /
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.