Always keep in mind that "Gettysburg" is a MOVIE, not a history lecture. It has to appeal to millions of non-historians in the compression of a couple of hours. The move "Patton" has gargantuan historical inaccuracies but the producers and directors successfully convey the essence of who the man was and what he did, which is the whole point. If you want an academic presentation, there are lecture rooms at West Point.
No, we don't want an academic presentation. But it is what it is -- we encounter many people who take all of it or parts of it as straight history so it's fair game to set the record straight.
The federal and confederate officers were trained in napoleonic tactics-the theory was that both ends fought and the reserves -so to speak - from the center was sent to refortify the ends leaving the middle of the line less populated with soldiers.
I’m glad you discussed the scene where Longstreet tells Lee that Meade is now in charge. As a real student of the battle, I’m always dismayed that historians gloss over this important point in history. They never discuss it. It kind of goes with the fact that they hardly ever discuss Meade anyway. Some historians talk about the battle and Lee’s decisions and it seems like Meade wasn’t even there. Which strangely enough Meade actually predicted later in life. Lee really wanted to fight Mr “FJ Hooker.” I have to believe when he found out it was Meade It was bad news to him. I wish you guys would expand on that. I’ve never heard one historian ever going to detail about this. I’ve studied this battle so extensively. I personally think it made a huge difference in the way the battle was fought not to mention the outcome. If you were playing an NFL football game at 1pm on Sunday and found out at noon that it was a different quarterback it would definitely change your strategy. Would love to hear everyone’s thoughts on this.
Thanks George for the comment. We also discussed this topic in our 'June 28' podcast episode. Lee likely would have preferred to fight Hooker after Chancellorsville, although we can wonder if Lee didn't much care who they threw at him at this point. Hence the line, "There may be an opportunity here..." As much as Gettysburg enthusiasts talk about the damage that was done to George Meade's reputation and image, one can argue that nothing was more damaging in modern times than his portrayal in Killer Angels / Gettysburg. The notion that Meade didn't really do anything is what one comes away with from the novel / movie. (For anyone who says, "it's just a movie," sorry but we encounter people in real life who have that perception.) As we noted in the podcast, we like to poke fun at the inescapable idea that Winfield Hancock was running the Army of the Potomac. We like Hancock too (who doesn't?) but come on!
@@battleofgettysburgpodcast thank you so much. I’ll look for that old podcast. Thank you for your input. I agree with you. Even Meade predicted that years to come it will be like he wasn’t even there. I’ve actually been on the battlefield and asked by people where Grant was during the battle. Jefferson Davis had a very high opinion of Meade. And he said so did Lee. I have always found it very revealing that the first thing Lee said after he signed the surrender documents at Appomattox was “please make sure general Meade knows about this.” I think he knew it was Meade who was pounding him all those months.
I have several interviews of Ron Prellaman the person who was in charge of horses and CSA troops for battle scenes if you want his contact info let me know as he had to deal with many actors to set them up with their horses.
I wish Spielberg would make a Pickett’s Charge movie with the authenticity of Saving Private Ryan’s opening scene. THAT would be intense!
Awesome Podcast! I really enjoyed this!
Thanks Estella!
Thanks, gentlemen!
Thanks for watching!
Great podcast, keep up the good work !
Thanks!
Always keep in mind that "Gettysburg" is a MOVIE, not a history lecture. It has to appeal to millions of non-historians in the compression of a couple of hours. The move "Patton" has gargantuan historical inaccuracies but the producers and directors successfully convey the essence of who the man was and what he did, which is the whole point. If you want an academic presentation, there are lecture rooms at West Point.
No, we don't want an academic presentation. But it is what it is -- we encounter many people who take all of it or parts of it as straight history so it's fair game to set the record straight.
The federal and confederate officers were trained in napoleonic tactics-the theory was that both ends fought and the reserves -so to speak - from the center was sent to refortify the ends leaving the middle of the line less populated with soldiers.
I’m glad you discussed the scene where Longstreet tells Lee that Meade is now in charge. As a real student of the battle, I’m always dismayed that historians gloss over this important point in history. They never discuss it. It kind of goes with the fact that they hardly ever discuss Meade anyway. Some historians talk about the battle and Lee’s decisions and it seems like Meade wasn’t even there. Which strangely enough Meade actually predicted later in life. Lee really wanted to fight Mr “FJ Hooker.” I have to believe when he found out it was Meade It was bad news to him. I wish you guys would expand on that. I’ve never heard one historian ever going to detail about this. I’ve studied this battle so extensively. I personally think it made a huge difference in the way the battle was fought not to mention the outcome. If you were playing an NFL football game at 1pm on Sunday and found out at noon that it was a different quarterback it would definitely change your strategy. Would love to hear everyone’s thoughts on this.
Thanks George for the comment. We also discussed this topic in our 'June 28' podcast episode. Lee likely would have preferred to fight Hooker after Chancellorsville, although we can wonder if Lee didn't much care who they threw at him at this point. Hence the line, "There may be an opportunity here..." As much as Gettysburg enthusiasts talk about the damage that was done to George Meade's reputation and image, one can argue that nothing was more damaging in modern times than his portrayal in Killer Angels / Gettysburg. The notion that Meade didn't really do anything is what one comes away with from the novel / movie. (For anyone who says, "it's just a movie," sorry but we encounter people in real life who have that perception.) As we noted in the podcast, we like to poke fun at the inescapable idea that Winfield Hancock was running the Army of the Potomac. We like Hancock too (who doesn't?) but come on!
@@battleofgettysburgpodcast thank you so much. I’ll look for that old podcast. Thank you for your input. I agree with you. Even Meade predicted that years to come it will be like he wasn’t even there. I’ve actually been on the battlefield and asked by people where Grant was during the battle. Jefferson Davis had a very high opinion of Meade. And he said so did Lee. I have always found it very revealing that the first thing Lee said after he signed the surrender documents at Appomattox was “please make sure general Meade knows about this.” I think he knew it was Meade who was pounding him all those months.
Great point. Are there any recent books that have taken a new look at Meade similar to the revitalization of Longstreet?
I have several interviews of Ron Prellaman the person who was in charge of horses and CSA troops for battle scenes if you want his contact info let me know as he had to deal with many actors to set them up with their horses.