Dear Quinn,

Please do not take my original posting as a desire to detract from the contribution of other states or to elevate Alabama's contribution beyond historical fact.

Though I have no ancestors from the Tarheel state, I'm fully familiar with the statistics of the contributions of North Carolina and its people both at Gettysburg and generally in the WBTS. As I understand it, no state contibuted more soldiers to the Confederacy as a percentage of their population than did NC and as a direct result, no state suffered more losses as a percentage or its population than did NC. Regarding the particular contributions of NC at Gettysburg, I'm convinced that the most severe fighting of the battle may well have occurred between Pettigrew's and the Iron Brigade on the first day at Herbst's/McPherson's Woods. The losses of the 26th North Carolina are legendary. The treatment of the North Carolina troops and Heth's/Pettigrew's Division by the Virginia newspapers and perpetuated for years thereafter was cruel and unjust. No soldiers fought more heroically, suffered more and deserve more praise than NC at Gettysburg.

I posed the "discussion" due to my recent reading and re-reading of several books and articles of the individual days and specific actions at Gettysburg. Though I have not a single ancestor who fought at Gettysburg, my wife's ancestors were all over the battlefield in Archer's, Wilcox's, Barksdale's, Laws' and Jenkins' brigades. In an attempt to "map" her ancestor's locations on the battlefield, it occurred to me that I was finding them in almost every major part of the conflict. As a natural extension of this thinking, I then began to look specifically at the contribution of the Alabama infantry units in the battle.

As you may know, the Alabama brigades of Laws, O'Neal and Wilcox were at Gettysburg. In addition, Archer's Brigade of Heth's Division was a mixed Tennessee and Alabama unit. I am not sure if this was planned or not, but their was one "full" brigade of Alabamians in each of the three (3) Confederate Corps at Gettysburg, not including Archer's men. This is not the case with the North Carolinians, as there were none in Longstreet's Corps and though Virginians are included in Pickett's Division of Longstreet's Corps, they did not arrive until the evening of July 2nd which eliminates their inclusion in the actions on the Confederate right on the second day.

For the claim of "Alabama Only" participating on each day and in each major portion of the engagement you must look at infantry only and at regimental or larger participation. If artillery is included, then "most" of the Southern states are represented at every area of the battlefield on each day.

Alabamians and North Carolinians figured in regimental and brigade level participation at every section of the battlefield, except for Longstreet's attack on the second day on the Confederate right. There were no North Carolina infantry units in either McLaws' or Hood's Divisions. Even if one includes Anderson's Division of Hill's III Corps in the actions on the Confederate right, there was no North Carolina infantry engaged; however, one might make a claim for Virginians as Mahone's brigade was a part of Anderson's division, but not actively engaged on the second day.

Not for numbers involved or losses suffered, but strictly due to the organization, arrival times and disposition of Lee's army do I believe that Alabama can make the claim of being in every "major" action on each day at Gettysburg. The only place where this claim suffers is Ewell's assault on Cemetery Hill late on July 2nd when Rodes' division which included O'Neal's brigade arrived in position too late to participate in the assault due to darkness.

Let me restate that this "claim" is not meant to detract, in any way, from the contribution of any other Southern state at Gettysburg. It is; however, a recognition of the large-scale participation of Alabama infantry units on each day and in each major area of the battlefield, a claim which I believe is unique.

Jim

P>