Hancock's 2nd Corp AOP

[NY Cavalry]

For those union guys among us I have a question. Where can I find some more info on the 2nd corp and its regiments. I know it was heavily engaged at Fredericksburg and at Chancellorsville.

I play mostly with my own oob's. I just took the games June 30th oob and make any adjustments that I want. I have increased the 2nd corp in many respects. I find it funny that the stock oob have the Minnesota regiment rated an "8" while in the actual battle Hancock said they didn't perform very well. In reading of the battle I believe Hancock was wrong in that statement.

This game isn't very friendly to small regiments. They just seemed to get gobbled up pretty quickly. The first division 2nd corp has many of these small regiments. That division doesn't hold up very well in battle. Would it be better to combine some of these regiments?

I'd like to see any oobs that have been specifically created for the 2nc corp. I have been playing as the 2nd corp in several sp games this week and am wondering if anyone has any thoughts concerning this corp. It is difficult to fight offensively with this corp and the 1st division can get gobbled up even when fighting defensively on good terrain.

[Armchair General]

Well historically there a few books devoted to its history. One is written by a former veteran called "History of the Second Corps in the Army of the Potomac." It is very well done.

As for sizes, at earlier battles like Antietam or Fredericksburg the Second carried quite a punch. But those two battles destroyed their ranks, Fredericksburg especially. Caldwell's First Division was really nothing but an enlarged brigade. Both Cross' and Kelly's brigades were pitifully undermanned. It doesn't take long in an OP game to lose the Irish Brigade.

[DavidAcheson140PVI]

Well being as two of my relatives were part of Zooks Brigade, Caldwells Division. I feel that im am partial to the second corps. I will have to pick that book up on the history of the second corps. Both of my relatives were at Fredericksburg, Chancellorsville, and Gettysburg and being that hancock is my favorite general of the civil war I will look forward to reading that. plus i look forward the any oob with the second corps featured prominently.

[kg_sspoom]

The 1st Minnesota charged a WHOLE DIVISION (Andersons) (Wilcox and Barksdale I think)and plugged a gap the second day paying for it with 68% casualties in a very short time.They bought time for re-enforcements to arrive plugging the hole in the Union center. They definately played their part that day.
I cant Imagine it was that day Hancock was talking about =)

[NY Cavalry]

Proceeding along the line, I met a regiment of the enemy, the head of whose column was about passing through an unprotected interval in our line. A fringe of undergrowth in front of the line offered facilities for it to approach very close to our lines without being observed. It was advancing firing, and had already twice wounded my aide, Captain Miller. The First Minnesota Regiment coming up at this moment, charged the rebel regiment in handsome style, capturing its colors, and driving it back in disorder.
I cannot speak too highly of this regiment and its commander in its attack, as well as in its subsequent advance against the enemy, in which it lost three-fourths of the officers and men engaged.

This is from Hancock's official report. " I cannot speak to highly of...." is his quote and I think he is wrong but he did write it.


http://www.civilwarhome.com/hancockgettysburg.htm

[KG_Soldier]

I think you're misreading that Harmon. "I cannot speak too highly. . . ." Meaning that there is no way he can speak too highly of them, so no matter how much praise he gives them, it will not be enough.

[NY Cavalry]

I think you're misreading that Harmon. "I cannot speak too highly. . . ." Meaning that there is no way he can speak too highly of them, so no matter how much praise he gives them, it will not be enough.

I read that phrase several times and it can be understood both ways. In reading Gettysburg The Second Day Harry W Pfanz interprets it as a slight and not an acknowledgment of success. From his book page 414.


I understand the sacrifice that regiment made and its accomplishment, but did Hancock? The unit took (according to Pfanz took 82% casualties. Forty were outright killed and the rest were wounded with many eventually returning to the regiment.

[Armchair General]

Well being as two of my relatives were part of Zooks Brigade, Caldwells Division. I feel that im am partial to the second corps. I will have to pick that book up on the history of the second corps. Both of my relatives were at Fredericksburg, Chancellorsville, and Gettysburg and being that hancock is my favorite general of the civil war I will look forward to reading that. plus i look forward the any oob with the second corps featured prominently.

Here's a link to it. It's a lot easier to read if you download it as a PDF from the bar on the left side of the screen. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924026471510

[KG_Soldier]

I think you're misreading that Harmon. "I cannot speak too highly. . . ." Meaning that there is no way he can speak too highly of them, so no matter how much praise he gives them, it will not be enough.

I read that phrase several times and it can be understood both ways. In reading Gettysburg The Second Day Harry W Pfanz interprets it as a slight and not an acknowledgment of success. From his book page 414.


I understand the sacrifice that regiment made and its accomplishment, but did Hancock? The unit took (according to Pfanz took 82% casualties. Forty were outright killed and the rest were wounded with many eventually returning to the regiment.

"The First Minnesota Regiment coming up at this moment, charged the rebel regiment in handsome style, capturing its colors, and driving it back in disorder.

I cannot speak too highly of this regiment and its commander in its attack, as well as in its subsequent advance against the enemy, in which it lost three-fourths of the officers and men engaged."

Sorry, but why would he praise them in the sentence above (". . .charged the rebel regiment in handsome style, capturing its colors, and driving it back in disorder."), if he didn't think highly of them?

[RebBugler]

I think you're misreading that Harmon. "I cannot speak too highly. . . ." Meaning that there is no way he can speak too highly of them, so no matter how much praise he gives them, it will not be enough.

I agree, Pfanz erred with his interpretation...plain as day, unless Pfanz gives additional info to support his interpretation.

Also, it's like saying "I can't speak highly enough".