|View single post by ole|
|Posted: Tue May 12th, 2009 05:49 am||
|But good thoughts, Pam.
I've not been there yet. But I've been given to understand that Hazlett found a narrow spot where two of his guns were sited. But that the site was narrow and limited the use of the guns to making encouraging noise.
So the Confederates sieze the hill. Can they site Hazlett's guns any better than he could and actually threaten Meade's flank with artillery fire? I don't think so. Could they move a brigade, let alone a division over that hill to threaten Meade's flank with infantry? The VI Corps might have some influence in this decision.
A poster on another board opined that the real benefit to the Confederates having control of the hill would have been in denying control to the Federals.
But a critical threat to Meade's left flank? I just don't see it. Launch an attack from that sector? Impracticable. A couple of batteries to threaten? Not likely.
Great stories and books and books were and are sold extolling the virtues of that hill and its occupancy. In this thread, I'm questioning the romanticism with percieved practicality. I've been wrong on numerous occasions. I'm looking for being proven wrong on this one. I just don't think LRT was a significant part of the battles of Gettysburg.