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

[John Baniszewski]

I am no fan of Dan Sickles, but I do have to give him credit for what he did on July 1.  It is important that armchair quarterbacks like ourselves take certain things into consideration before we judge the actions of the leaders at Gettysburg.  So what did Sickles know on July 1?

He knew that Confederate soldiers had been seen at Fairfield.  If Lee's army wanted to operate offensively, it could travel south from Fairfield just a few miles to the Waynesboro Pike, which it could then take southeast, threatening the rear of Meade's army, and putting it in a position from which it could march on Washington.  A Union force at Emmitsburg would be astride the Waynesboro Pike, and be able to block such a movement.  Therefore, Sickles' placement at Emmitsburg made sense.  But then on July 1, he is informed that there is fighting at Gettysburg, and Sickles knows that it makes sense for him to march toward where the battle is occurring.  He is in a tough spot - should he block a potential route that the Confederates could use to flank the AOP, or should he march toward the sound of the guns.  I think he made the best compromise solution he could - march toward Gettysburg with most of his troops, where he knew there was a battle, where
 his personal presence was most needed, and leave enough of a force at Emmitsburg to block a potential Confederate advance along the Waynesboro Pike.

Kudos to Dan for what he did on July 1.  As for the following day, kudos are definitely not merited.

John Baniszewski