GDG- Re: ? and ?? /Colonel/ DeTrobriand and /Colonel/ Burling

[Alan D. Brunelle]

cameron2 at optimum.net wrote:
> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>
>
> << Anybody have any information and/or opinions as to why Major General Dan 
> Sickles chose to leave two brigades that were led by /Colonels/ without 
> any oversight of either of his two divisional commanders (Birney & 
> Humphreys) back in Emmitsburg on July 1, 1863 while he took the 
> remaining 4 brigades (commanded by Brig. Generals) along with his two 
> divisional commanders up to Gettysburg?  >>
>
> As far as I can recall he never explained this one way or the other.  My only guess is that given positive word of heavy contact at Gettysburg, he preferred to have both of his division commanders with him at the scene of the most likely action.  He may also have wanted to avoid leaving behind two brigades from the same division, which would effectively reduce that division commander to a brigade commander until they rejoined. 


Thanks Tom & Jim - I do agree with you Jim: it makes more sense to 
retain most of two brigades, then all of one, and a single brigade from 
another.

A couple of fall out questions though:

(1) Has anybody ever heard of one or the other (DeTrobriand or Burling) 
being in overall charge of the two brigades whilst in Emmitsburg? (I've 
seen lists of seniority w.r.t. to the generals, don't recall w/ colonels.)

(2) The 3rd Corps was posted in Emmitsburg because (as I understand) 
Meade was concerned about his armies left flank. Certainly at the time 
Sickles /was/ making his decision to split his forces he was not aware 
of the absence of a threat to the Emmitsburg area. (Even though he knew 
of a threat up in the Gettysburg area.)

Alan