Does Dan Sickles deserve a monument at Gettysburg. (1 Viewer)

braddinpa

Sergeant Major
Joined
Jul 9, 2011
Messages
1,628
Dan has always been a controversial figure in Death and Life.

(here is really good neutral Bio of him http://www.amazon.com/SICKLES-GETTY...F8&qid=1390759372&sr=8-2&keywords=dan+sickles )

Yet, he has no monument at Gettysburg. (All the other Corp commanders have one) Although the one monument for the Excelcior Brigade was supposed to have his bust (according to legend, but he supposedly misappropriated funds for it.)

His one division commander Humphrey's has a monument. So why not Dan. For good or bad. He played a major role at Gettysburg and lost a leg for it and won a medal of Honor. Howard has monument, So why not Dan.

What the heck! I say, Sickles deserves a monument.

Brad
 
I don't know that he deserves a monument based on his accomplishments at Gettysburg. Certainly, he did more for the South than he did the North. He disobeyed orders and put his Corps in an exposed position, one that seriously weakened the Union positions, and saw his Corps destroyed as a result. It was only through a series of unbelievably fortunate events that the whole Union Army wasn't rolled up on July 2 because of Sickles. -- Al
 
With hindsight you are correct. I think the thing that hurt his cause for a monument was his "war of words" with Meade. If he had just let it go and basically said I screwed up. He would have been like Howard (who had his corp break in 2 months) and had a monument.
 
With hindsight you are correct. I think the thing that hurt his cause for a monument was his "war of words" with Meade. If he had just let it go and basically said I screwed up. He would have been like Howard (who had his corp break in 2 months) and had a monument.
Ah yes, politics and the war of words will get you every time. Meade and Sickles didn't much care for one another.:rolleyes2: -- Al
 
I really liked the book by Hessler that I included in the Link. I came away knowing more about Sickles the man. It covers his entire life (of course a big part of it was Gettysburg). I think his point was there was a lot of confusion (On July 1st he received contradictory orders, and he opted to make the right decision and March to Gettysburg and leave a brigade back to guard the trains). And on the second sent multiple messages to Meade requesting where he was supposed to go.

I could excuse him for advancing to the peach orchard. But my big fault is in doing so. He entire right flank was hanging in the air. While the left had gaps in the line. A horrible position.
 
Had he taken the high road and not tried to trash Meade. He probably would have a monument. (think about it, lost his leg and he won the medal of honor). And I have to admit. He didn't exactly lead a saintly life. That is one thing I can say about Howard. After the Debacles at Chancellorsville and Gettysburg, He did pretty good out west and actually commended an Army. And he was a good guy. He was instrumental in founding Howard University one of the first African American Universitys.
 
I really liked the book by Hessler that I included in the Link. I came away knowing more about Sickles the man. It covers his entire life (of course a big part of it was Gettysburg). I think his point was there was a lot of confusion (On July 1st he received contradictory orders, and he opted to make the right decision and March to Gettysburg and leave a brigade back to guard the trains). And on the second sent multiple messages to Meade requesting where he was supposed to go.

I could excuse him for advancing to the peach orchard. But my big fault is in doing so. He entire right flank was hanging in the air. While the left had gaps in the line. A horrible position.
I also understand Sickles not wanting to stay in his assigned position as he had no sight lines. Why not advance to the higher ground in front? Well, his decision didn't allow that his superiors might have put him there for a reason and that maybe they could see what he couldn't. Sickles move to improve his position/sight line, while understandable, proved the point of following orders as he set up right in front of Longstreet's build-up, which Sickles hadn't seen. I forget who it was but one senior Union commander watched Sickles advance to the Peach Orchard line and made the observation that soon those men (III Corps) would be running back. Sickles was about the only Union commander on the field that couldn't see Longstreet's concentration. Sickles got his better sight line, at least for a little while. -- Al
 
That was one of the interesting claims that Sickles made. He claimed that he uncovered the flanking movement when he sent Berdan and a few other regiments to scout the woods. They actually bumped into the extreme right flank of the Confederate line. But the movement of Longstreets men were not detected. I never realized how far west they went until I went to the Ranger walk at the 150th. They were really out of sight. Fascinating history.







I also understand Sickles not wanting to stay in his assigned position as he had no sight lines. Why not advance to the higher ground in front? Well, his decision didn't allow that his superiors might have put him there for a reason and that maybe they could see what he couldn't. Sickles move to improve his position/sight line, while understandable, proved the point of following orders as he set up right in front of Longstreet's build-up, which Sickles hadn't seen. I forget who it was but one senior Union commander watched Sickles advance to the Peach Orchard line and made the observation that soon those men (III Corps) would be running back. Sickles was about the only Union commander on the field that couldn't see Longstreet's concentration. Sickles got his better sight line, at least for a little while. -- Al
 
I think Al in his first posted answered the question why he doesn't have or deserve one.
 
He deserves two monuments. One showing the position he was suppose to be in, and the second where he ended up after disobeying his orders.
 
I like George's answer: short, sweet, and correct.:wink2: The man was a menace. I think they should erect a monument to the men of his corps who die as a result of his failure to obey orders. If he hadn't have lost his leg, he would have faced a court marshal rather than received a Medal of Honor.:mad:
 
Thanks Everyone who responded and gave their opinion. Very much appreciated. Brad
 
I like George's answer: short, sweet, and correct.:wink2: The man was a menace. I think they should erect a monument to the men of his corps who die as a result of his failure to obey orders. If he hadn't have lost his leg, he would have faced a court marshal rather than received a Medal of Honor.:mad:

Louis is a true sport, even though it took some persuading we got him to pose with a picture of Monty at Duxford. I reckon it would take several rather fine Whiskies to get him to do the same with Mr Sickles! :salute::

As for Dangerous Dan, I can see both sides, he did indeed cost a lot of Union lives that day and the word menace rings true. On the other hand the movement of his troops was one of ' the ' events of that battle and a talking point to this day, so if not a monument perhaps something along the lines of ' It was here Dan Sickles' ......etc etc.

What I love so much about battles such as Gettysburg, Waterloo, Somme, Battle Of Britain are the what if's^&cool

Rob
 
Just to clear-up some things: General Sykes also does not have an equestrian monument on the field at Gettysburg. He commanded the Fifth Corps of the Army of the Potomac. Sickles has a small monument where he was wounded near the Trostle Barn. A short walk from United States Avenue where one can park a car and then proceed up a drive on the west side of the barn. The monument can be located there.

Now, just to "muddy-up" some things: When Berdan's sharpshooters (1st Regiment USSS) and the 3rd Maine advanced into Pitzer's Woods, they did not encounter Longstreet's men. Rather, at that point they actually engaged Anderson's Division of A.P. Hill's Corps moving into position in a brief firefight before withdrawing. I suspect that the information they disclosed passed through the chain of command and got to Sickles whose experience just a few months previously at Chancellorsville induced him to advance his line forward beyond the position contemplated by General Meade. Keep in mind that Sickles held an excellent position at Chancellorsville (Hazel's Grove), but when General Hooker ordered him to vacate that high ground, the Confederates posted artillery there and were able to link their otherwise disjointed battle lines together to finish off the Federals. There is no question that Sickles disobeyed Meade's orders, regardless of his motivation. The remaining question is whether, inadvertently, his forward movement actually saved the Federal position on Cemetery Ridge. Several points: Neither Meade nor Lee realized where the flanks of their opponent rested. Unlike us today, neither Meade nor his subordinates knew Lee's plans at the time. Actually, Little Round Top WAS NOT Lee's objective in his attack. Longstreet, once he got into position south of A.P. Hill, was to attack up the Emmittsburg Road in an en eschelon fashion, striking the Federals farther north near Cemetery Hill. Sickles' forward line, as indefensible as it was, nevertheless acted as a breakwater to fragment and blunt the Confederate attack in different sectors of the field, thereby preventing the coordinated jaggernaut envisioned by Lee. Also keep in mind that Sickles only had two divisions. Had he stayed on Cemetery Ridge, his position there was no better defended in that low ground either. Since the Sixth Corps was just arriving and assuming that the Confederates attack wound-up somewhat south from their intended objective, Sickles's two divisions could have been penetrated. With no real estate behind them to buy time for needed reinforcements, the Confederates would have been in Meade's rear immediately. But since there were separate firefights in Devil's Den, Little Round Top, Wheatfield, and Peach Orchard, Lee's men did not have the essential coordination to make the intended attack successful, thereby allowing Meade sufficient time to send in supports. Anyway, regardless of how you feel about the man as a commander, in a sense he is the "hero" of Gettysburg because he was instrumental in having the battlefield memorialized after the war as a result of his tenure on the New York Monuments Commission.
Did he deserve the Medal of Honor? Probably not, but his special pleading before Lincoln secured that honor. From that point his reputation was mired with petty arguments against Meade, including outright falsification of Meade's intention at Gettysburg before the Committee on the Conduct of the War. Quite an interesting man, indeed--a man who, before the war, committed a homicide and was exonerated ; and after the war, working for the U.S. in Spain, tried to carry on an affair with the queen.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top