American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

Okay, here's my question for you historians...

If Gen Reynolds does not get killed at Gettysburg, especially not early on the first day...

1) Would it have had an effect on the battle and what?

2) Would they have disbanded I Corps after the battle or just built it back up with Reynolds in charge?



Col Thompson
1/3/VI
AoS

1.) I feel it certainly would have had an effect, whether or not on the first day I don't know, but possibly the layout of troops would have been different, the retreat and reorganization may have gone better too, recall he was in command until Meade got there.

2.) Possibly, but if not he would have been given command of another I am certain. I assume probably the 5th Corps. Wouldn't that be a bunch of men, Hancock, Reynolds, Sedgewick. Grant may even has chosen him over Meade.

Any which way the Northern leadership at Gettysburg came of age and the loss of leadership the South had showed at Gettysburg and was further hurt by the battle itself, especially in the cavalry and artillery. Henry Hunt outclassed Pendleton that battle and Stuart was outclassed by a few officers of the North.

<center>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


<b>Lieutenant General Scott "The Mad Prussian" Ludwig</b>
Commanding Officer, Western Theater, CSA
"The Army Commissary" and "The Traveling Blowhard of Virginia"
Retired ANV Commander 2004-06

http://www.networkforgood.org

[url="http://napoleonicwargaming.com"]Napoleonic Wargaming - INWC[/url]</center>

Definite impact, since it took quite awhile for Howard to know he was the senior guy on the field.

I don't know that I Corps would have met a different fate, but Reynolds would have had a significant job. Howard or some of the other Corps CO's might not have!


General Jeff Laub
Union Chief of the Army
ACWGC Cabinet Member
http://www.geocities.com/laubster22/UnionHQ/

Sirs,

Good question!

1- My understaning was that Reynolds had already intended to make a fighting withdrawal, at least he intimated as much in a note (not sure of the reference unfortunately, I remember reading it somewhere) to Meade, that he would if necessary have barricaded the streets to Gettysburg. Perhaps the reason the Union lost so heavily in the retreat was that a lot of the Union soldiers were captured in Gettysburg itself. Had Reynolds lived to authorise a withdrawal, he would have had time to do so. Heth got his nose bloodied mid morning, during which Reynolds was killed) Rodes did not attack until after 1pm, leaving a few hours for him to withdraw.

With neither Lee or A.P.Hill on the field to urge Heth after him Reynolds may well have been able to pull back to the hills south of Gettsyburg.

2 - I Corps was disbanded due to losses. Had the loss of I Corps been less severe at Gettysburg, there would not have been any reason to disband it. As one of the better Corps Commanders, he'd have kept his job (or taken someone else's, as LT Gen Ludwig says).

Col P. Kenney
4th Brigade
1st Division
III Corps
Army of the Mississippi, CSA

With Reynolds in charge the South likely wouldn't have enjoyed the good results it did enjoy on the 1st day. In that case, Lee might not have wanted to fight it out there. Perhaps Longstreet's idea of moving to the right to force Meade to re-deploy would have been more attractive to Lee. So, the lack of 1st day Southern success may have prolonged the war in the end, or changed the outcome completely.

Major Bill Cirillo
3rd Brigade, 1st Div.
XX Corps, AoC, USA

Here's a link to an very interesting thread I just found. It's pretty much to the point BTW.

http://thecivilwarhomepagediscussion282 ... nolds.html

This looks like a fantastic ACW site with lots to explore.

Major Bill Cirillo
3rd Brigade, 1st Div.
XX Corps, AoC, USA

double post, sorry