31 October 1863

The New Zealand Wars resume as British forces in New Zealand led by General Duncan Cameron begin their Invasion of the Waikato.

New Zealand Wars
Ngā pakanga o Aotearoa
Memorial in the Auckland War Memorial Museum for those who died, both European and Māori, in the New Zealand Wars. "Kia mate toa" can be translated as "fight unto death" or "be strong in death", and is the motto of the Otago and Southland Regiment of the New Zealand Army. The flags are that of Gate Pā and the Union Flag.
New Zealand
Result Loss of Māori land, retreat of Kingitanga to King Country
New Zealand Settlements Act 1863; confiscation of 16,000 km2 (6,200 sq mi) of Māori land
Māori iwi
18,000 (peak deployment) 5,000 (peak deployment)
Casualties and losses
745 killed (including civilians) 2,154 killed (including civilians)[1]

The New Zealand Wars were a series of armed conflicts that took place in New Zealand from 1845 to 1872 between the Colonial government and allied Māori on one side and Māori and Māori-allied settlers on the other. They were previously commonly referred to as the Land Wars or the Māori Wars[2] while Māori language names for the conflicts included Ngā pakanga o Aotearoa ("the great New Zealand wars") and Te riri Pākehā ("the white man's anger").[2] Historian James Belich popularised the name "New Zealand Wars" in the 1980s,[3] although the term was first used by historian James Cowan in the 1920s.[4]

Though the wars were initially localised conflicts triggered by tensions over disputed land purchases, they escalated dramatically from 1860 as the government became convinced it was facing united Māori resistance to further land sales and a refusal to acknowledge Crown sovereignty. The colonial government summoned thousands of British troops to mount major campaigns to overpower the Kīngitanga (Māori King) movement and also acquire farming and residential land for British settlers.[5][6] Later campaigns were aimed at quashing the so-called Hauhau movement, an extremist part of the Pai Mārire religion, which was strongly opposed to the alienation of Māori land and eager to strengthen Māori identity.[7]

At the peak of hostilities in the 1860s, 18,000 British troops, supported by artillery, cavalry and local militia, battled about 4,000 Māori warriors[8] in what became a gross imbalance of manpower and weaponry.[9] Although outnumbered, the Māori were able to withstand their enemy with techniques that included anti-artillery bunkers and the use of carefully placed , or fortified villages, that allowed them to block their enemy's advance and often inflict heavy losses, yet quickly abandon their positions without significant loss. Guerrilla-style tactics were used by both sides in later campaigns, often fought in dense bush. Over the course of the Taranaki and Waikato campaigns, the lives of about 1,800 Māori and 800 Europeans were lost,[5] and total Māori losses over the course of all the wars may have exceeded 2,100.

Violence over land ownership broke out first in the Wairau Valley in the South Island in June 1843, but rising tensions in Taranaki eventually led to the involvement of British military forces at Waitara in March 1860. The war between the government and Kīngitanga Māori spread to other areas of the North Island, with the biggest single campaign being the invasion of the Waikato in 1863–1864, before hostilities concluded with the pursuits of Riwha Tītokowaru in Taranaki (1868–1869) and Rangatira (chief) Te Kooti Arikirangi Te Turuki on the east coast (1868–1872).

Although Māori were initially fought by British forces, the New Zealand government developed its own military force, including local militia, rifle volunteer groups, the specialist Forest Rangers and kūpapa (pro-government Māori). The government also responded with legislation to imprison Māori opponents and confiscate expansive areas of the North Island for sale to settlers, with the funds used to cover war expenses[10][11]—punitive measures that on the east and west coasts provoked an intensification of Māori resistance and aggression.


The 1840 English language version of the Treaty of Waitangi guaranteed that individual Māori iwi (tribes) should have undisturbed possession of their lands, forests, fisheries and other taonga (treasures) in return for becoming British subjects, selling land to the government only (the right of pre-emption) and surrendering sovereignty to the British Crown. In the Māori language version of the Treaty, however, the word "sovereignty" was translated as kawanatanga which was a new word meaning "governance."[12] This led to considerable disagreement over the meaning of the Treaty.[12] Some Māori wanted to sign in order to consolidate peace and in hopes of ending the long intertribal Musket Wars (1807–1842) others wanted to keep their tino rangatiratanga, such as the Tūhoe in the Uruweras.

All pre-treaty colonial land-sale deals had taken place directly between two parties. In the early period of contact, Māori had generally sought trade with Europeans. The British and the French had established mission stations, and missionaries had received land from iwi for houses, schools, churches, and farms.

Traders, Sydney businessmen and the New Zealand Company had bought large tracts of land before 1840,.[13] The Treaty of Waitangi included the right of pre-emption on land sales, and the New Zealand colonial government, pressured by immigrant European settlers, tried to speed up land sales to provide farmland. This met resistance from the Kīngitanga (Māori King) movement that emerged in the 1850s and opposed further European encroachment.

Governor Thomas Gore Browne's provocative purchase of a disputed block of land at Waitara in 1859 set the government on a collision course with the Kīngitanga movement, and the government interpreted the Kīngitanga response as a challenge to the Crown's authority.[14] Governor Gore Browne succeeded in bringing 3500 Imperial troops from the Australian colonies to quash this perceived challenge, and within four years a total of 9,000 British troops had arrived in New Zealand, assisted by more than 4,000 colonial and kūpapa (pro-government Māori) fighters as the government sought a decisive victory over the "rebel" Māori.

The use of a punitive land confiscation policy from 1865, depriving "rebel" Māori of the means of living, fuelled further Māori anger and resentment, fanning the flames of conflict in Taranaki (1863–1866) and on the east coast (1865–1866).


The various conflicts of the New Zealand wars span a considerable period, and the causes and outcomes differ widely. The earliest conflicts in the 1840s happened at a time when Māori were still the predominant power, but by the 1860s settler numbers and resources were much greater. From about 1862 British troops began arriving in much greater number, summoned by Governor George Grey for his Waikato invasion, and in March 1864 total troop numbers peaked at about 14,000 (9,000 Imperial troops, more than 4,000 colonial and a few hundred kūpapa).[15]

Wairau Affray

The first armed conflict between Māori and the European settlers took place on 17 June 1843 in the Wairau Valley, in the north of the South Island. The clash was sparked when settlers led by a representative of the New Zealand Company—which held a false title deed to a block of land—attempted to clear Māori off the land ready for surveying. The party also attempted to arrest Ngāti Toa chiefs Te Rauparaha and Te Rangihaeata. Fighting broke out and 22 Europeans were killed, as well as four to six Māori. Several Europeans were slain after being captured. In early 1844, the new Governor, Robert FitzRoy, investigated the incident and declared the settlers were at fault. The Wairau Affray—described as the Wairau Massacre in early texts—was the only armed conflict of the New Zealand Wars to take place in the South Island.[16][17]

Northern War

Hone Heke cuts down the flagstaff on Flagstaff Hill at Kororāreka.
Governor (and later Premier) Sir George Grey in the 1860s.

The Flagstaff War took place in the far north of New Zealand, around the Bay of Islands, between March 1845 and January 1846. In 1845 George Grey arrived in New Zealand to take up his appointment as governor. At this time Hōne Heke challenged the authority of the British, beginning by cutting down the flagstaff on Flagstaff Hill at Kororāreka. The flagstaff had previously flown the colours of United Tribes of New Zealand but now carried the Union Jack and therefore symbolised the grievances of Heke and his ally Te Ruki Kawiti, as to changes that had followed the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi.

There were many causes of the Flagstaff War and Heke had a number of grievances in relation to the Treaty of Waitangi. While land acquisition by the Church Missionary Society (CMS) had been controversial, the rebellion led by Heke was directed against the colonial forces with the CMS missionaries trying to persuade Heke to end the fighting.[18][19] Despite the fact that Tāmati Wāka Nene and most of Ngāpuhi sided with the government, the small and ineptly led British had been beaten at Battle of Ohaeawai. Grey, armed with the financial support and far more troops armed with 32-pounder cannons that had been denied to FitzRoy, attacked and occupied Kawiti's fortress at Ruapekapeka, forcing Kawiti to retreat. Heke's confidence waned after he was wounded in battle with Tāmati Wāka Nene and his warriors, and by the realisation that the British had far more resources than he could muster, including some Pākehā Māori, who supported the colonial forces.[20]

After the Battle of Ruapekapeka, Heke and Kawiti were ready for peace.[21] It was Tāmati Wāka Nene they approached to act as the intermediary to negotiate with Governor Grey, who accepted the advice of Nene that Heke and Kawiti should not be punished for their rebellion. The fighting in the north ended and there was no punitive confiscation of Ngāpuhi land.[22]

Hutt Valley and Wanganui campaigns

The Hutt Valley campaign of 1846 came as a sequel to the Wairau Affray. The causes were similar—dubious land purchases by the New Zealand Company and the desire of the settlers to move on to land before disputes over titles were resolved—and the two conflicts shared many of the same protagonists. The campaign's most notable clashes were the Māori dawn raid on an imperial stockade at Boulcott's Farm on 16 May 1846 in which eight British soldiers and an estimated two Māori died,[23] and the Battle of Battle Hill from 6–13 August as British troops, local militia and kūpapa pursued a Ngāti Toa force led by chief Te Rangihaeata through steep and dense bushland. Ngāti Toa chief Te Rauparaha was also taken into custody during the campaign; he was detained without charge in Auckland for two years.[24]

The bloodshed heightened settlers' fears in nearby Wanganui, which was given a strong military force to guard against attack. In April 1847 an accidental shooting of a minor Wanganui Māori chief led to a bloody revenge attack on a settler family; when the perpetrators were captured and hanged, a major raid was launched on the town as a reprisal, with homes plundered and burned and livestock stolen. Māori besieged the town before mounting a frontal attack in July 1847. A peace settlement was reached in early 1848.[25]

First Taranaki War

The catalyst for the First Taranaki War was the disputed sale to the Crown of a 240 hectare block of land at Waitara, despite a veto by the paramount chief of Te Āti Awa tribe, Wiremu Kīngi, and a "solemn contract" by local Māori not to sell. Governor Browne accepted the purchase with full knowledge of the circumstances and tried to occupy the land, anticipating it would lead to armed conflict, and a demonstration of the substantive sovereignty the British believed they had gained in the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi. Hostilities began on 17 March 1860. The war was fought by more than 3,500 imperial troops brought in from Australia, as well as volunteer soldiers and militia, against Māori forces that fluctuated between a few hundred and about 1,500.[14] After a series of battles and actions the war ended in a ceasefire, with neither side explicitly accepting the peace terms of the other. Total losses among the imperial, volunteer and militia troops are estimated to have been 238, while Māori casualties totalled about 200. Though there were claims by the British that they had won the war, there were widely held views at the time they had suffered an unfavourable and humiliating result. Historians have also been divided on the result.[26] Historian James Belich has claimed that Māori succeeded in thwarting the British bid to impose sovereignty over them, and had therefore been victorious. Belich also states that the Māori victory was a hollow one, leading to the invasion of the Waikato.

Invasion of Waikato

The gunboat Pioneer at Meremere during the Invasion of the Waikato.

Governor Thomas Gore-Browne began making arrangements for a Waikato campaign to destroy the Kīngitanga stronghold at the close of the First Taranaki War. Preparations were suspended in December 1861 when he was replaced by Sir George Grey, but Grey revived plans for an invasion in June 1863. He persuaded the Colonial Office in London to send more than 10,000 Imperial troops to New Zealand and General Sir Duncan Cameron was appointed to lead the campaign. Cameron used soldiers to build the 18 km-long Great South Road to the border of Kīngitanga territory and on 9 July 1863 Grey ordered all Māori living between Auckland and the Waikato take an oath of allegiance to Queen Victoria or be expelled south of the Waikato River; when his ultimatum was rejected the vanguard of the army crossed the frontier into Kīngitanga territory and established a forward camp. A long series of bush raids on his supply lines forced Cameron to build an extensive network of forts and redoubts through the area. In a continual buildup of force, Cameron eventually had 14,000 British and colonial soldiers at his disposal as well as steamers and armoured vessels for use on the Waikato River. They fought a combined Māori contingent of about 4,000.[27]

Cameron and his Kīngitanga foe engaged in several major battles including the Battle of Rangiriri and a three-day siege at Orakau, capturing the Kīngitanga capital of Ngāruawāhia in December 1863, before completing their Waikato conquest in April 1864. The Waikato campaign cost the lives of 700 British and colonial soldiers and about 1,000 Māori.[28]

The Kīngitanga Māori retreated into the rugged interior of the North Island and in 1865 the New Zealand Government confiscated about 12,000 km2 of Māori land (4% of New Zealand's land area) for white settlement—an action that quickly provoked the Second Taranaki War.

Second Taranaki War

Between 1863 and 1866 there was a resumption of hostilities between Māori and the New Zealand Government in Taranaki, which is sometimes referred to as the Second Taranaki War. The conflict, which overlapped the wars in Waikato and Tauranga, was fuelled by a combination of factors: lingering Māori resentment over the sale of land at Waitara in 1860 and government delays in resolving the issue; a large-scale land confiscation policy launched by the government in late 1863; and the rise of the so-called Hauhau movement, an extremist part of the Pai Marire syncretic religion, which was strongly opposed to the alienation of Māori land and eager to strengthen Māori identity.[29] The Hauhau movement became a unifying factor for Taranaki Māori in the absence of individual Māori commanders.

The style of warfare after 1863 differed markedly from that of the 1860–1861 conflict, in which Māori had taken set positions and challenged the army to an open contest. From 1863 the army, working with greater numbers of troops and heavy artillery, systematically took possession of Māori land by driving off the inhabitants, adopting a "scorched earth" strategy of laying waste to Māori villages and cultivations, with attacks on villages, whether warlike or otherwise. Historian Brian Dalton noted: "The aim was no longer to conquer territory, but to inflict the utmost 'punishment' on the enemy; inevitably there was a great deal of brutality, much burning of undefended villages and indiscriminate looting, in which loyal Maoris often suffered."[30] As the troops advanced, the Government built an expanding line of redoubts, behind which settlers built homes and developed farms. The effect was a creeping confiscation of almost 4,000 km2 (1,500 sq mi) of land, with little distinction between the land of loyal or rebel Māori owners.[31] The outcome of the armed conflict in Taranaki between 1860 and 1869 was a series of enforced confiscations of Taranaki tribal land from Māori blanketed as being in rebellion against the Government.[32]

East Cape War

East coast hostilities erupted in April 1865 and, as in the Second Taranaki War, sprang from Māori resentment of punitive government land confiscations coupled with the embrace of radical Pai Marire expression.[29] The religion arrived on the east coast from Taranaki in early 1865. The subsequent ritual killing of missionary Carl Volkner by Pai Mārire (or Hauhau) followers at Opotiki on 2 March 1865 sparked settler fears of an outbreak of violence and later that year the New Zealand government launched a lengthy expedition to hunt for Volkner's killers and neutralise the movement's influence. Rising tensions between Pai Mārire followers and conservative Māori led to a number of wars between and within Māori iwi, with kūpapa armed by the government in a bid to exterminate the movement.[33]

Major conflicts within the campaign included the cavalry and artillery attack on Te Tarata pā near Opotiki in October 1865 in which about 35 Māori were killed, and the seven-day siege of Waerenga-a-Hika in November 1865.[34] The government confiscated northern parts of Urewera land in January 1866 in a bid to break down supposed Māori support for Volkner's killers and confiscated additional land in Hawke's Bay a year later after a rout of a Māori party it deemed a threat to the settlement of Napier.[35]

Titokowaru's War

The Armed Constabulary ambushed by Titokowaru's forces at Te Ngutu o Te Manu

War flared again in Taranaki in June 1868 as Riwha Titokowaru, chief of the Ngāti Ruanui's Ngaruahine hapu (sub-tribe), responded to the continued surveying and settlement of confiscated land with well-planned and effective attacks on settlers and government troops in an effort to block the occupation of Māori land. Coinciding with a violent raid on a European settlement on the East Coast by Te Kooti, the attacks shattered what European colonists regarded as a new era of peace and prosperity, creating fears of a "general uprising of hostile Māoris".[36][37]

Titokowaru, who had fought in the Second Taranaki War, was the most skilful West Coast Māori warrior. He also assumed the roles of a priest and prophet of the extremist Hauhau movement of the Pai Mārire religion, reviving ancient rites of cannibalism and propitiation of Māori gods with the human heart torn from the first slain in a battle.[38] Although Titokowaru's forces were numerically small and initially outnumbered in battle 12 to one by government troops,[7] the ferocity of their attacks provoked fear among settlers and prompted the resignation and desertion of many militia volunteers, ultimately leading to the withdrawal of most government military forces from South Taranaki and giving Titokowaru control of almost all territory between New Plymouth and Wanganui. Although Titokowaru provided the strategy and leadership that had been missing among tribes that had fought in the Second Taranaki War and his forces never lost a battle during their intensive campaign, they mysteriously abandoned a strong position at Tauranga-ika Pā[39] and Titokowaru's army immediately began to disperse. Kimble Bent, who lived as a slave with Titokowaru's hapu after deserting from the 57th Regiment, told Cowan 50 years later the chief had lost his mana tapu, or sacred power, after committing adultery with the wife of another chief.[39]

Once Titokowaru was defeated and the East Coast threat minimised, the alienation of Māori land, as well as the political subjugation of Māori, continued at an even more rapid pace.[40]

Te Kooti's War

Te Kooti's War was fought in the East Coast region and across the heavily forested central North Island and Bay of Plenty between government military forces and followers of spiritual leader Te Kooti Arikirangi Te Turuki. The conflict was sparked by Te Kooti's return to New Zealand after two years of internment on the Chatham Islands, from where he had escaped with almost 200 Māori prisoners of war and their families. Te Kooti, who had been held without trial on the island for two years, asked that he and his followers be left in peace, but within two weeks they were being pursued by a force of militia, government troops and Māori volunteers. The pursuit turned into a four-year guerrilla war, involving more than 30 expeditions[10] by colonial and Māori troops against Te Kooti's dwindling number of warriors.

Although initially fighting defensively against pursuing government forces, Te Kooti went on the offensive from November 1868, starting with the so-called Poverty Bay massacre, a well-organised lightning strike against selected European settlers and Māori opponents in the Matawhero district, in which 51 men, women and children were slaughtered and their homes set alight. The attack prompted another vigorous pursuit by government forces, which included a siege at Ngatapa pā that came to a bloody end: although Te Kooti escaped the siege, Māori forces loyal to the government caught and executed more than 130 of his supporters, as well as prisoners he had earlier seized. Dissatisfied with the Māori King Movement's reluctance to continue its fight against European invasion and confiscation, Te Kooti offered Māori an Old Testament vision of salvation from oppression and a return to a promised land. Wounded three times in battle, he gained a reputation for being immune to death and uttered prophecies that had the appearance of being fulfilled.[41] In early 1870 Te Kooti gained refuge from Tūhoe tribes, which consequently suffered a series of damaging raids in which crops and villages were destroyed, after other Māori iwi were lured by the promise of a ₤5,000 reward for Te Kooti's capture. Te Kooti was finally granted sanctuary by the Māori king in 1872 and moved to the King Country, where he continued to develop rituals, texts and prayers of his Ringatū faith. He was formally pardoned by the government in February 1883 and died in 1893.

A 2013 Waitangi Tribunal report said the action of Crown forces on the East Coast from 1865 to 1869—the East Coast Wars and the start of Te Kooti's War—resulted in the deaths of proportionately more Māori than in any other district during the New Zealand wars. It condemned the "illegal imprisonment" on the Chatham Islands of a quarter of the East Coast region's adult male population and said the loss in war of an estimated 43 percent of the male population, many through acts of "lawless brutality", was a stain on New Zealand's history and character.[42]


The New Zealand campaigns involved Māori warriors from a range of iwi, most of which were allied with the Kīngitanga movement, fighting a mix of Imperial troops, local militia groups, the specialist Forest Rangers and kūpapa, or "loyalist" Māori.

Imperial and colonial

NCOs of the 58th Regiment of the Foot in New Zealand, date unknown.
Chief of Ngati Toa who fought alongside Colonial forces at the Battle of Battle Hill.

In 1855 just 1,250 Imperial troops, from two under-strength British regiments, were in New Zealand. Although both were scheduled to depart at the end of the year, Browne succeeded in retaining one of them for use in New Plymouth, where settlers feared the spread of intertribal violence.[43] At the outbreak of Taranaki hostilities in 1860, reinforcements were brought from Auckland to boost the New Plymouth garrison, raising the total force of regulars to 450 and for many months the total number of Māori under arms exceeded the number of troops in Taranaki. In mid-April the arrival of three warships and about 400 soldiers from Australia marked the beginning of the escalation of imperial troop numbers.[44]

The buildup increased rapidly under Grey's term as governor: when the second round of hostilities broke out in Taranaki in May 1863 he applied to the Secretary of State in London for the immediate dispatch of three more regiments and also wrote to the Australian governors asking for whatever British troops that could be made available.[45] Lieutenant-General Duncan Cameron, the Commander-in-Chief of the British troops in New Zealand, began the Waikato invasion in July with fewer than 4,000 effective troops in Auckland at his disposal, but the continuous arrival of regiments from overseas rapidly swelled the force.[27]

Colonial Defence Force

Gustavus Von Tempsky, captain of the Forest Rangers.

The Colonial Defence Force, a cavalry unit of about 100 men, was formed by Colonel Marmaduke Nixon in May 1863[46] and served in Waikato[47] and militia forces were also used throughout the New Zealand wars. The Militia Ordinance 1845 provided for the compulsory training or service within 40 km of their town by all able-bodied European men aged between 18 and 60; the Auckland Militia and Volunteers reached a peak of about 1650 on active service in the early stages of the Waikato campaign;[27] and the last force—the Taranaki Militia—was released from service in 1872.[48]

A special 65-man bush-scouring corps, the Forest Rangers, composed of local farmers who were familiar with the bush, had proven guerrilla techniques and were capable of "roughing it", was formed in August 1863; the Forest Rangers split into two separate companies in November, with the second led by Gustavus von Tempsky and both served in Waikato and Taranaki. Other rangers corps during the New Zealand wars included the Taranaki Bush Rangers, Patea Rangers, Opotiki Volunteer Rangers, Wanganui Bush Rangers and Wellington Rangers.[49] From September 1863 the first contingents of what was planned as 5,000 military settlers—recruited on the goldfields of Australia and Otago with promises of free grants of land confiscated from "rebel" Māori—also began service in the Waikato. By the end of October the number of military settlers, known as the Waikato Militia, had reached more than 2,600[45] and total troop numbers peaked at about 14,000 in March 1864 (9,000 Imperial troops, more than 4,000 colonial and a few hundred kūpapa).[15]

In November 1864 Premier Frederick Weld introduced a policy of "self-reliance" for New Zealand, which included the gradual but complete withdrawal of Imperial troops, who would be replaced by a colonial force of 1,500. The move came at a time of rising conflict between Grey, who sought more extensive military operations to "pacify" the west coast of the North Island between Taranaki and Wanganui, and Cameron, who regarded such a campaign as unnecessary, impractical and contrary to Imperial policy.[50] Grey blocked Cameron's attempts to dispatch the first regiments from New Zealand in May 1865 and the first regiment finally embarked in January 1866. By May 1867 only the 2/18th Regiment remained in the country, their departure delayed by political pressure over the "peril" still facing settlers; the last soldiers finally left in February 1870.[51]

Imperial regiments and units stationed in New Zealand

British infantry regiments stationed in New Zealand during the New Zealand Wars were:[52][53]

Regiment Years in New Zealand Conflicts
12th (East Suffolk) Regiment of Foot 1860–1867 First Taranaki War, Invasion of the Waikato, Tauranga Campaign
14th (Buckinghamshire) Regiment of Foot 1860–1866 First Taranaki War, Invasion of the Waikato, Tauranga Campaign, Tītokowaru's War
18th (Royal Irish) Regiment of Foot 1863–1870 Invasion of the Waikato, Tītokowaru's War
40th (2nd Somersetshire) Regiment of Foot 1860–1866 First Taranaki War, Invasion of the Waikato,
43rd (Monmouthshire) Light Infantry 1863–1866 Invasion of the Waikato, Tauranga Campaign, Second Taranaki War
50th (Queens Own) Regiment of Foot 1863 -1867 Invasion of the Waikato, Tītokowaru's War
57th (West Middlesex) Regiment of Foot 1861 -1867 First Taranaki War, Second Taranaki War, Tītokowaru's War
58th (Rutlandshire) Regiment of Foot 1845–1858 Flagstaff War
65th (Yorkshire North Riding) Regiment of Foot 1846–1865 Hutt Valley Campaign, Wanganui Campaign, First Taranaki War,

Invasion of the Waikato

68th (Durham) Light Infantry 1864–1866 Invasion of the Waikato, Tauranga Campaign, Tītokowaru's War
70th (Surrey) Regiment of Foot[54] 1861–1866 First Taranaki War, Invasion of the Waikato, Second Taranaki War
80th (South Staffordshire) Regiment of Foot 1840–1846
96th Regiment of Foot 1841– 1645 Flagstaff War, Hutt Valley Campaign
99th (Lanarkshire) Regiment of Foot 1844–1847 Flagstaff War, Hutt Valley Campaign
Royal Artillery 1845– 1870 Flagstaff War, Hutt Valley Campaign, Wanganui Campaign, First Taranaki War, Invasion of the Waikato, Tauranga Campaign, Second Taranaki War, Titokowaru's War
Corps of Royal Engineers 1840– 1870 Flagstaff War, Hutt Valley Campaign, Wanganui Campaign, First Taranaki War, Invasion of the Waikato, Tauranga Campaign, Second Taranaki War, Titokowaru's War
Royal Corps of Sappers and Miners 1845– 1870 Flagstaff War, Hutt Valley Campaign, Wanganui Campaign
Army Medical Department 1860– 1870 First Taranaki War, Invasion of the Waikato, Tauranga Campaign, Second Taranaki War, Titokowaru's War
Army Hospital Corps 1861– 1870 First Taranaki War, Invasion of the Waikato, Tauranga Campaign, Second Taranaki War, Titokowaru's War
Purveyors Department 1860– 1870 First Taranaki War, Invasion of the Waikato, Tauranga Campaign, Second Taranaki War, Titokowaru's War
Commissariat Staff Corps 1861– 1870 First Taranaki War, Invasion of the Waikato, Tauranga Campaign, Second Taranaki War, Titokowaru's War
Military Train and Horse Transport Corps 1861– 1867 Invasion of the Waikato, Tauranga Campaign, Second Taranaki War,

Titokowaru's War

Ordnance Department 1845– 1859 Flagstaff War, Hutt Valley Campaign

Wanganui Campaign,

Military Store Department 1859– 1870 First Taranaki War, Invasion of the Waikato, Tauranga Campaign, Second Taranaki War

East Cape War, Titokowaru's War

Royal Marines 1845–1866 Flagstaff War, Hutt Valley Campaign

Wanganui Campaign, First Taranaki War, Invasion of the Waikato, Tauranga Campaign

Naval Brigade 1845–1866 Flagstaff War, Hutt Valley Campaign

Wanganui Campaign, First Taranaki War, Invasion of the Waikato, Tauranga Campaign


Chief Rewi Maniapoto

About 15 of the 26 major North Island tribal groups sent contingents to join the Waikato campaign, although sometimes they represented a single hapu, or clan, within the tribe. Continual presence on battlefields remained difficult for most, however, because of the constant need for tribal labour in their home community, so there was a constant turnover of small tribal groups. At Meremere, Paterangi, Hangatiki and Maungatatauri, between August 1863 and June 1864 Māori maintained forces of between 1,000 and 2,000 men, but troops were forced to disperse after each campaign because of labour and domestic needs at home. Belich has estimated that the total Māori mobilisation was at least 4,000 warriors, representing one-third of the total manpower available.[55]

Although they were not part of a structured command system, Māori generally followed a consistent strategic plan, uniting to build skilfully engineered defensive lines up to 22 kilometres (14 mi) long. Māori united under proven military commanders including Rewi Maniapoto and Tikaokao of Ngāti Maniapoto and Wiremu Tamihana of Ngāti Hauā.[56]

Strategy and tactics

Campaigners on both sides of the New Zealand wars had developed distinctive war strategies and tactics. The British set out to fight a European-style war, based on engaging with the opposing forces, besieging and then capturing fortified positions. The British Army were professional soldiers who had experience fighting in various parts of the Empire, many from India and Afghanistan, and were led by officers who were themselves trained by men who had fought at Waterloo.

Many of the Māori fighters had been raised during the Musket Wars, the decades-long bitter intertribal fighting during which warriors had perfected the art of building defensive fortifications around a . During the Flagstaff War Kawiti and Heke appear to have followed a strategy of drawing the colonial forces into attacking a fortified pā, from which the warriors could fight from a strong defensive position that was secure from cannon fire.

The word means a fortified strong point near a Māori village or community. They were built with a view to defence, but primarily they were built to safely store food. Puketapu Pā and then Ohaeawai Pā were the first of the so-called "gunfighter ", built to engage enemies armed with muskets and cannons. A strong, wooden palisade was fronted with woven flax leaves (Phormium tenax) whose tough, stringy foliage absorbed much of the force of the ammunition.[57] The palisade was lifted a few centimetres from the ground so muskets could be fired from underneath rather than over the top. Sometimes there were gaps in the palisade, which led to killing traps. There were trenches and rifle pits to protect the occupants and, later, very effective artillery shelters.[58] They were usually built so that they were almost impossible to surround completely, but usually presented at least one exposed face to invite attack from that direction. They were cheap and easily built—the L-Pa at Waitara was constructed by 80 men overnight—and they were completely expendable. The British repeatedly mounted often lengthy expeditions to besiege a , which would absorb their bombardment and possibly one or two attacks, and then be abandoned by the Māori. Shortly afterwards, a new would appear in another inaccessible site. like these were built in the dozens, particularly during the First Taranaki War, where they eventually formed a cordon surrounding New Plymouth, and in the Waikato campaign.[59]

Attack on a Māori by Sir James Edward Alexander, Commander of the West Yorkshire Regiment.

For a long time, the modern effectively neutralised the overwhelming disparity in numbers and armaments. At Ohaeawai Pā in 1845, at Rangiriri in 1863 and again at Gate Pā in 1864, British and colonial forces discovered that frontal attacks on a defended were extremely costly. At Gate Pā, during the 1864 Tauranga Campaign, Māori withstood a day-long bombardment in their underground shelters and trenches. The palisade destroyed, the British troops rushed the whereupon Māori fired on them from hidden trenches, killing 38 and injuring many more in the most costly battle for the Pākehā of the New Zealand Wars. The troops retired and Māori abandoned the .[60]

British troops soon realised an easy way to neutralise a . Although cheap and easy to build, a gunfighter required a significant input of labour and resources. The destruction of the Māori economic base in the area around the made it difficult for the hapu to support the fighting men. This was the reasoning behind the bush-scouring expeditions of Chute and McDonnell in the Second Taranaki War.[61]

The biggest problem for the Māori was that their society was ill-adapted to support a sustained campaign. A long campaign would disrupt food supplies and epidemics resulted in significant numbers of deaths among the Māori.[62] While the British could defeat Māori in battle, the defeats were often not decisive. For example, the capture of Ruapekapeka Pā can be considered a British tactical victory, but it was purpose-built as a target for the British, and its loss was not damaging; Heke and Kawiti managed to escape with their forces intact.[63] However the British force consisted of professional soldiers supported by an economic system capable of sustaining them in the field almost indefinitely, in contrast, the Māori warrior was a part-time fighter who also needed to work on producing food.


The main weapon used by the British forces in the 1860s was the Pattern 1853 Enfield. Properly described as a rifled musket, it was loaded down the barrel like a conventional musket but the barrel was rifled. While muskets were accurate to about 60–80 m, an 1853 Enfield was accurate to about 300 m to 400 m in the hands of an experienced soldier; at 100 m an experienced soldier could easily hit a human target. The rifle was 1.44 m long, weighed 4 kg and had a 53 cm socket bayonet. This rifle was also commonly used in the American Civil War by both sides.

The Calisher and Terry carbine (short rifle) was ordered by the New Zealand Government from Calisher and Terry, Birmingham gunsmiths in 1861 after earlier fighting against Māori showed the need for a carbine suited to fighting in heavy bush. This was the favoured weapon of the New Zealand Forest Rangers because of its shortness, its lightness, and its ability to be reloaded while the marksman lay down—unlike the Enfield, which required the soldier to stand to load the powder—and could be loaded on the run. This feature led to a decisive victory for the Forest Rangers at Orakau: several groups of soldiers harried the fleeing Māori but only the Forest Rangers, equipped with carbines, were able to follow them 10 km to the Puniu River shooting as they went.[64][65][66]

Revolvers were mainly used by officers but were a general issue for the Forest Rangers. The most common revolver appears to have been the five-shot Beaumont–Adams .44 percussion revolver. Other revolvers in use were the Colt Navy .36 1851 model with open top frame. The Colt was favoured by the Forest Rangers because it was light and accurate being a single-action revolver. Von Tempsky's second company of the Forest Rangers also used the Bowie knife.[67]


New Zealand Wars Memorial in Symonds Street, Auckland. The bronze statue at the base of the memorial is Zealandia.

Large areas of land were confiscated from the Māori by the government under the New Zealand Settlements Act in 1863, purportedly as punishment for rebellion.[68] In reality, land was confiscated from both "loyal" and "rebel" tribes alike. More than 16,000 km2 (6,200 sq mi) of land was confiscated. Although about half of this was subsequently paid for or returned to Māori control, it was often not returned to its original owners.[69] The confiscations had a lasting impact on the social and economic development of the affected tribes.

In the immediate aftermath of the wars in Taranaki, and land confiscations, a new town Parihaka was founded by Te Whiti o Rongomai,[70] based on principles of non-violent resistance. Parihaka's population grew to over 2,000 before the government sent the constabulary to arrest Te Whiti and his supporters on 5 November 1881. Another incident in the aftermath of the New Zealand Wars was the so-called Dog Tax War of 1898.

The legacy of the New Zealand Wars continues, but these days the battles are mostly fought in courtrooms and around the negotiation table. Numerous reports by the Waitangi Tribunal have criticised Crown actions during the wars, and also found that the Māori, too, had breached the treaty.[71] As part of the negotiated out-of-court settlements of tribes' historical claims (Treaty of Waitangi claims and settlements), as of 2011 the Crown is making formal apologies to tribes.[72]


The National Day of Commemoration for the New Zealand Wars was inaugurated in 2017 and is held on October 28.[73] In 2019, a commemorative plaque was unveiled for the New Zealand Wars in the New Zealand House of Representatives.[74]

In popular culture

A number of fictionalised accounts of the New Zealand Wars have been adapted for film and literature:

Last veterans

  • Edwin Bezar (1838–1936), last British soldier (and possibly last combatant).

See also


  1. ^ "End of the New Zealand Wars". New Zealand Ministry for Culture and Heritage. Retrieved 16 April 2013.
  2. ^ a b "Story: New Zealand Wars".
  3. ^ "The end of the war".
  4. ^ O'Malley 2019, p. 29.
  5. ^ a b King, Michael (1977). Te Puea: A Biography. Auckland: Hodder and Stoughton. p. 26. ISBN 0-340-22482-7.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  6. ^ Dalton, B.J. (1967). War and Politics in New Zealand 1855–1870. Sydney: Sydney University Press. p. 179.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  7. ^ a b Belich, James (1986x). The New Zealand Wars and the Victorian Interpretation of Racial Conflict (1st ed.). Auckland: Penguin. pp. 204–205. ISBN 0-14-011162-X.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  8. ^ Belich, James (1986a). The New Zealand Wars. Auckland: Penguin. pp. 126–133. ISBN 0-14-027504-5.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  9. ^ Belich 1986a, pp. 24–25.
  10. ^ a b Belich 1986a, p. 126.
  11. ^ Dalton 1967, pp. 181–182.
  12. ^ a b O'Malley 2019, p. 26.
  13. ^ Orange, Claudia (1987). The Treaty of Waitangi. Wellington: Allen & Unwin. pp. 32–33. ISBN 086861-634-6.
  14. ^ a b King, Michael (2003). The Penguin History of New Zealand. Penguin Books. p. 214. ISBN 0-14-301867-1.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  15. ^ a b Belich 1986a, pp. 125–133.
  16. ^ King 2003, p. 182.
  17. ^ Moon, Paul (2000). FitzRoy: Governor in Crisis 1843–1845|. David Ling Publishing. pp. 81–98. ISBN 0-908990-70-7.
  18. ^ Carleton, Hugh (1874). The Life of Henry Williams: "Early Recollections" written by Henry Williams. Vol. II. Early New Zealand Books (ENZB), University of Auckland Library. pp. 12, 28, 30–31, 35 ff.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  19. ^ (Carleton 1874, Appendix to Vol. II)
  20. ^ Nicholson, John (2006). White Chief – The Story of a Pakeha Maori. Penguin Books (NZ). pp. 100–140. ISBN 978-0-14-302022-6.
  21. ^ Kawiti, Tawai (October 1956). Hekes War in the North. No. 16 Ao Hou, Te / The New World, National Library of New Zealand Library. pp. 38–46. Retrieved 10 October 2012.
  22. ^ The Colonial New Zealand Wars, Tim Ryan and Bill Parham, pg28
  23. ^ Cowan, James (1922a). "Chapter 11: The Fight at Boulcott's Farm". The New Zealand Wars: A History of the Maori Campaigns and the Pioneering Period. Vol. 1, 1845–1864. Wellington: RNZ Government Printer.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  24. ^ Oliver, Steven (30 October 2012). "Te Rauparaha". Te Ara the Encyclopedia of New Zealand. Manatū Taonga Ministry for Culture and Heritage.
  25. ^ Cowan 1922a, Chapter14: The War at Wanganui.
  26. ^ Belich 1986x, p. [page needed].
  27. ^ a b c Belich 1986a, pp. 125–127.
  28. ^ King 2003, p. 216
  29. ^ a b Belich 1986x, pp. 204–205.
  30. ^ Dalton 1967, p. 241.
  31. ^ "The Taranaki Report: Kaupapa Tuatahi" (PDF). the Waitangi Tribunal. 1996.
  32. ^ "...the greater part of northern Taranaki was invaded, occupied, and finally confiscated without any act of rebellion having taken place..." Archived 10 May 2012 at the Wayback Machine, waitangi-tribunal.govt.nz
  33. ^ Dalton 1967, pp. 224–225, 240.
  34. ^ Cowan, James (1922b). "Chapter 11: East Coast Operations". The New Zealand Wars: A History of the Maori Campaigns and the Pioneering Period. Vol. 2, 1864–1872. Wellington: RNZ Government Printer.CS1 maint: ref=harv (link)
  35. ^ Deed of settlement of historical claims, Maungaharuru-Tangitu hapu and the Crown (PDF), Office of Treaty Settlements, 25 May 2013, pp. 21–22, retrieved 18 February 2018
  36. ^ Belich 1986x, p. [page needed].
  37. ^ David Morris, Speaker of the House of Representatives, March 1869, as cited by Belich.
  38. ^ Cowan 1922b, Chapter 20: Opening of the Titokowaru's Campaign
  39. ^ a b Cowan 1922b, Chapter 29: (pp. 285–294).
  40. ^ Ranginui Walker, Ka Whawhai Tonu Matou – Struggle Without End, Penguin Books, 1990, chapter 8.
  41. ^ Binney, Judith (30 October 2012). "Te Kooti Arikirangi Te Turuki". Te Ara – The Encyclopedia of New Zealand. Manatū Taonga Ministry for Culture and Heritage. Retrieved 10 May 2014.
  42. ^ "The Mangatu Remedies Report" (PDF). Waitangi Tribunal. 23 December 2013. Archived from the original (PDF) on 16 February 2016. Retrieved 1 July 2015.
  43. ^ Dalton 1967, pp. 28–30, 52.
  44. ^ Dalton 1967, pp. 103–104, 108–110.
  45. ^ a b Dalton 1967, pp. 174, 180
  46. ^ "Marmaduke George Nixon", The Encyclopedia of New Zealand
  47. ^ "New Zealand wars". Te Ara – The Encyclopedia of New Zealand.
  48. ^ "Armed forces", The Encyclopedia of New Zealand
  49. ^ Stowers, Richard (1996). Forest Rangers. Hamilton: self-published. pp. 1, 10–11, 34. ISBN 0-473-03531-6.
  50. ^ Dalton 1967, pp. 209–211, 218, 239.
  51. ^ Dalton 1967, pp. 227–230, 245, 275.
  52. ^ O'Malley 2019, p. 13.
  53. ^ The Oxford companion to New Zealand military history. McGibbon, I. C. (Ian C.), 1947–, Goldstone, Paul. Auckland, N.Z.: Oxford University Press. 2000. p. 70. ISBN 0195583760. OCLC 44652805.CS1 maint: others (link)
  54. ^ "70th (Surrey) Regiment of Foot". regiments.org. Archived from the original on 13 January 2008. Retrieved 6 July 2019.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link)
  55. ^ Belich 1986a, pp. 128–130.
  56. ^ Belich 1986a, pp. 131–133.
  57. ^ Cowan, James (1955). "Flax-masked Palisade". The New Zealand Wars: A History of the Maori Campaigns and the Pioneering Period: Volume I (1845–64). Retrieved 10 October 2012.
  58. ^ Belich 1986a, pp. 294–295.
  59. ^ Belich 1986a, pp. 106–107.
  60. ^ Belich 1986a, pp. 178–188
  61. ^ Belich 1986a, p. 239.
  62. ^ Rogers, Lawrence M. (1973). Te Wiremu: A Biography of Henry Williams. Pegasus Press. pp. 215–216.
  63. ^ Ian McGibbon, The Oxford Companion to New Zealand Military History, p.373
  64. ^ Stowers, Richard (1996). Forest Rangers. Hamilton: self-published. p. 106. ISBN 0-473-03531-6.
  65. ^ Von Tempsky, Artist and Adventurer. King M and Rose G.1981.
  66. ^ Tempsky, Gustavaus Ferdinand von. "Tempsky, Gustavaus Ferdinand von". Dictionary of New Zealand Biography. Ministry for Culture and Heritage. Retrieved 6 June 2019.
  67. ^ Stowers, Richard (1996). Forest Rangers. Hamilton: self-published. pp. 270–283. ISBN 0-473-03531-6.
  68. ^ "Maori land loss, 1860–2000". New Zealand Ministry for Culture and Heritage. Retrieved 20 July 2010.
  69. ^ "Treaty of Waitangi". New Zealand Ministry for Culture and Heritage. Retrieved 20 July 2010.
  70. ^ Riseborough, Hazel (1989). Days of Darkness: Taranaki 1878-1884. Wellington: Allen & Unwin. pp. 35–37. ISBN 0-04-614010-7.
  71. ^ "Turanga Tangata Turanga Whenua: The Report on the Turanganui a Kiwa Claims". Waitangi Tribunal. Archived from the original on 25 May 2010. Retrieved 20 July 2010.
  72. ^ "Ngāti Pāhauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill 273-2 (2011), Government Bill – New Zealand Legislation". legislation.govt.nz. 2011. Retrieved 13 September 2011. The Crown unreservedly apologises for not having honoured its obligations to Ngāti Pāhauwera under the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi) and through this settlement, the Crown seeks to atone for its wrongs and to begin the process of healing. The Crown looks forward to building a relationship with Ngāti Pāhauwera, based on mutual trust and co-operation, founded on the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi) and its principles.
  73. ^ "Date set to commemorate land wars | Ministry for Culture and Heritage". mch.govt.nz. Retrieved 2 June 2019.
  74. ^ Jessica Long (15 September 2019). "Compulsory New Zealand history curriculum will 'open Pandora's box'". Stuff.co.nz. Retrieved 20 September 2019.

Further reading

  • Barthorp, Michael (1979). To Face the Daring Māori. Hodder and Stoughton.
  • Belich, James (1996) Making Peoples. Penguin.
  • Binney, Judith (1995). Redemption Songs: A Life of Te Kooti Arikirangi Te Turuki. Auckland: Auckland University Press.
  • Buick, T. Lindsay (1976). Old Marlborough. Christchurch: Capper Press. (Originally published in 1900)
  • Cowan, James, & Hasselberg, P. D. (1983) The New Zealand Wars. New Zealand Government Printer. (Originally published 1922) Online: Volume 1 1845–64, Volume 2 1864–72
  • Fletcher, Henry James, Rev., Turnbull, Alexander (ed.), National Library of New Zealand, Index of Māori Names, The New Zealand Collection of the University of Waikato Library, unpublished manuscript compiled about 1925 [1]
  • Green, David (2010). Battlefields of the New Zealand Wars: A Visitor's Guide. Auckland (North Shore): Penguin. ISBN 978-01432-0-4183.
  • Lee, Jack (1983). I have named it the Bay of Islands. Hodder and Stoughton.
  • Lee, Jack (1987). Hokianga. Hodder and Stoughton.
  • Maning, F.E. (1862). A History of the War in the North of New Zealand against the Chief Heke. (A near-contemporaneous account, although written primarily with an aim to entertain rather than with an eye to historical accuracy)
  • Maxwell, Peter (2000). Frontier, the Battle for the North Island of New Zealand. Celebrity Books.
  • O'Malley, Vincent (2019). The New Zealand Wars Ngā Pakanga O Aotearoa. Wellington: Bridget Williams Books. ISBN 9781988545998.
  • Ryan, Tim & Parham, Bill. The Colonial New Zealand Wars (1986, Wellington, Grantham House) ISBN 1-86934-006-X
  • Simpson, Tony (1979). Te Riri Pākehā. Hodder and Stoughton.
  • Sinclair, Keith (ed.) (1996). The Oxford Illustrated History of New Zealand (2nd ed.) Wellington: Oxford University Press.
  • Smith, S. Percy, Maori Wars of the Nineteenth Century, Whitcombe and Tombs Limited, Christchurch, 1910 [2], New Zealand Electronic Text Centre
  • Stringfellow, Olga (1960). Mary Bravender. Fictional treatment of the New Zealand Wars as seen through the eyes of a young Englishwoman.
  • Vaggioli, Dom Felici (2000). History of New Zealand and its inhabitants, Translated by J. Crockett. Dunedin: University of Otago Press. (Original Italian publication, 1896).
  • Walker, Ranginui (2004) Ka whawhai Tonu Matou: Struggle Without End Penguin.
  • Wright, Matthew (2006) Two Peoples, One Land: The New Zealand Wars Penguin ISBN 9780790010649
  • "The People of Many Peaks: The Māori Biographies". (1990). From The Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, Vol. 1, 1769–1869. Bridget Williams Books and Department of Internal Affairs.

External links

26 October 1863

The Football Association is founded.

The Football Association
FA crest 2009.svg
Founded26 October 1863; 156 years ago (1863-10-26)
FIFA affiliation
  • 1905–1920
  • 1924–1928
  • 1946–present
UEFA affiliation1954
IFAB affiliation1886
ChairmanGreg Clarke

The Football Association (FA) is the governing body of association football in England and the Crown dependencies of Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man. Formed in 1863, it is the oldest football association in the world and is responsible for overseeing all aspects of the amateur and professional game in its territory.

The FA sanctions all competitive football matches within its remit at national level, and indirectly at local level through the county football associations. It runs numerous competitions, the most famous of which is the FA Cup. It is also responsible for appointing the management of the men's, women's, and youth national football teams.

The FA is a member of both UEFA and FIFA and holds a permanent seat on the International Football Association Board (IFAB) which is responsible for the Laws of the Game. As the first football association, it does not use the national name "English" in its title. The FA is based at Wembley Stadium, London. The FA is a member of the British Olympic Association, meaning that the FA has control over the men's and women's Great Britain Olympic football team.[1]

All of England's professional football teams are members of the Football Association. Although it does not run the day-to-day operations of the Premier League, it has veto power over the appointment of the League Chairman and Chief Executive and over any changes to league rules.[2] The English Football League, made up of the three fully professional divisions below the Premier League, is self-governing, subject to the FA's sanctions.


For centuries before the first meeting of the Football Association in The Freemasons' Tavern on Great Queen Street, London on 26 October 1863, there were no universally accepted rules for playing football.[3][4] Six meetings near London's Covent Garden, at 81–82 Long Acre,[5] ended in a split between the Football Association and what would become the future rugby ten years later.[6] Both of them had their own uniforms, rituals, gestures and highly formalised rules.[7]

In each public school the game was formalised according to local conditions; but when the schoolboys reached university, chaos ensued when the players used different rules, so members of the University of Cambridge devised and published a set of Cambridge Rules in 1848 which was widely adopted.[3] Another set of rules, the Sheffield Rules, was used by a number of clubs in the North of England from the 1850s.

Eleven London football clubs and schools representatives met on 26 October 1863 to agree on common rules.[3][4] The founding clubs present at the first meeting were Barnes, Civil Service, Crusaders, Forest of Leytonstone (later to become Wanderers F.C.), N.N. (No Names) Club (Kilburn), the original Crystal Palace, Blackheath, Kensington School, Perceval House (Blackheath), Surbiton and Blackheath Proprietary School; Charterhouse sent their captain, B.F. Hartshorne, but declined the offer to join.[8] Many of these clubs are now defunct or play rugby union. Civil Service FC, who now plays in the Southern Amateur League, is the only one of the original eleven football clubs still in existence and playing Association Football.[4] although Forest School has been a member since the fifth meeting in December 1863.

Central to the creation of the Football Association and modern football was Ebenezer Cobb Morley. He was a founding member of the Football Association in 1863. In 1862, as captain of Barnes, he wrote to Bell's Life newspaper proposing a governing body for the sport that led to the first meeting at The Freemasons' Tavern that created the FA.[4] He was the FA's first secretary (1863–66) and its second president (1867–74) and drafted the Laws of the Game generally called the "London Rules" at his home in Barnes, London. As a player, he played in the first-ever match in 1863.

Photo of an early handwritten draft of the 'Laws of the game' for association Football drafted for and behalf of The Football Association by Ebenezer Cobb Morley in 1863 on display at the National Football Museum, Manchester.

The first version of the rules for the modern game was drawn up over a series of six meetings held in The Freemasons' Tavern from October till December.[4] Of the clubs at the first meeting, Crusaders, Surbiton and Charterhouse did not attend the subsequent meetings, replaced instead by the Royal Navy School, Wimbledon School and Forest School.[9] At the final meeting, F. M. Campbell, the first FA treasurer and the Blackheath representative, withdrew his club from the FA over the removal of two draft rules at the previous meeting, the first which allowed for the running with the ball in hand and the second, obstructing such a run by hacking (kicking an opponent in the shins), tripping and holding. Other English rugby clubs followed this lead and did not join the FA but instead in 1871 formed the Rugby Football Union.[3] The term "soccer" dates back to this split to refer to football played under the "association" rules. After six clubs had withdrawn as they supported the opposing Rugby Rules, the Football Association had just nine members in January 1864: Barnes, Kilburn, Crystal Palace, War Office (Civil Service), Forest Club, Forest School, Sheffield, Uppingham and Royal Engineers (Chatham).[10]

An inaugural game using the new FA rules was initially scheduled for Battersea Park on 2 January 1864, but enthusiastic members of the FA could not wait for the new year: the first game under F. A. rules was played at Mortlake on 19 December 1863 between Morley's Barnes team and their neighbours Richmond (who were not members of the FA), ending in a goalless draw. The Richmond side were obviously unimpressed by the new rules in practice because they subsequently helped form the Rugby Football Union in 1871. The Battersea Park game was the first exhibition game using FA rules, and was played there on Saturday 9 January 1864.[11] The members of the opposing teams for this game were chosen by the President of the FA (A. Pember) and the Secretary (E. C. Morley) and included many well-known footballers of the day.[12] After the first match according to the new FA rules a toast was given "Success to football, irrespective of class or creed".[13]

Another notable match was London v Sheffield, in which a representative team from the FA played Sheffield FC under Association rules in March 1866; Charles Alcock described this game as "first [match] of any importance under the auspices of the Football Association".[14] Alcock (of Harrow School) of the Wanderers was elected to the committee of the FA in 1866, becoming its first full-time secretary and treasurer in 1870. He masterminded the creation of the Football Association Cup[15]—the longest-running association football competition in the world—in 1871. Fifteen participating clubs subscribed to purchase a trophy. The very first Cup Final was held at The Oval on 16 March 1872, fought between the Wanderers and the Royal Engineers (RE), watched by 2,000 spectators.[4]

After many years of wrangling between the London Association and the Sheffield Football Association, the FA Cup brought the acceptance that one undisputed set of laws was required. The two associations had played 16 inter-association matches under differing rules; the Sheffield Rules, the London Rules and Mixed Rules. In April 1877, those laws were set with a number of Sheffield Rules being incorporated.

The FA Cup was initially contested by mostly southern, amateur teams but more professionally organised northern clubs began to dominate the competition during the early 1880s; "The turning point, north replacing south, working class defeating upper and professionals impinging upon the amateurs' territory, came in 1883."[16] Hitherto, public school sides had played a dribbling game punctuated by violent tackles, but a new passing style developed in Scotland was successfully adopted by some Lancashire teams, along with a more professional approach to training. Blackburn Olympic reached the final in March 1883 and defeated Old Etonians.[17] Near-neighbours Blackburn Rovers started to pay players, and the following season won the first of three consecutive FA Cups.[17][16] The FA initially tried to outlaw professionalism but, in the face of a threatened breakaway body (the British Football Association), by 1885 was forced to permit payments to players.[18] Three years later, in 1888, the first Football League was established, formed by six professional clubs from northwest England and six from the midlands.[16]

In 1992, the Football Association took control of the newly created Premier League which consisted of 22 clubs who had broken away from the First Division of the Football League. The Premier League reduced to 20 clubs in 1995 and is one of the richest football leagues in the world.[19]

The Football Association celebrated their 150th year by changing their logo. The new logo has retained the current logo's three lions but it would be in golden colour and also have "The FA" written above and also have "1863 150 years 2013" written below. It also has some writings of the laws of the game penned at the first meeting held at The Freemasons' Tavern.[20]

Women's football

By 1921 women's football had become increasingly popular through the charitable games played by women's teams during and after the First World War. In a move that was widely seen as caused by jealousy of the crowds' interest in women's games which frequently exceeded that of the top men's teams, in 1921 the Football Association banned all women's teams from playing on grounds affiliated to the FA because they thought football damaged women's bodies.[21][22]

For several decades this decision meant that women's football virtually ceased to exist. It only reversed from 1969 when, after the increased interest in football caused by England's 1966 World Cup triumph, the Women's Football Association was founded,[23] although it would take a further two years - and an order from UEFA - to force the (men's) Football Association to remove its restrictions on the playing rights of women's teams.[24] It was not until 1983 that the WFA was able to affiliate to the FA as a "County Association" and only in 1993 did the FA found the "Women's Football Committee" to run women's football in England.[25]

UK football sexual abuse scandal

In mid-November 2016, allegations of widespread historical sexual abuse at football clubs dating back to the 1970s began to emerge. On 21 November, the Football Association said it would set up a helpline;[26] this was established with the NSPCC and opened on 24 November,[27] reportedly receiving over 50 calls within the first two hours,[28] over 100 by 27 November,[29] and 860 ("more than three times as many referrals as in the first three days of the Jimmy Savile scandal") by 1 December[30] with 350 individuals alleging abuse.[31] The FA and NSPCC also collaborated to produce a film about how to keep children safe in the sport, featuring the captains of England's men's, women's and cerebral palsy football teams (Wayne Rooney, Steph Houghton and Jack Rutter).[32]

On 27 November, the FA announced it was to set up an internal review, led by independent counsel Kate Gallafent QC, into what Crewe and Manchester City knew about convicted child sex offender Barry Bennell and allegations of child sexual abuse in football, and investigate what information it was aware of at the time of the alleged offences.[33]

The FA was criticised by Conservative MP Damian Collins, chair of the House of Commons' Culture, Media and Sport Committee, for being too slow in reacting and not instigating a wider review.[34] Former sport minister Gerry Sutcliffe talked of previous concern about how the FA dealt with governance of the sport and with youth development (in the 1990s, the FA was said to have reacted "dismissively" to worries about sexual abuse in the game, and too slow to implement criminal record checks;[35] in 2003, the FA had scrapped a project meant to ensure children were being protected from sexual abuse;[36] and FA officials had been uncooperative with the review project, with ten of 14 FA staff not replying to interview requests and a report by the researchers of others being "prevented/bullied" from talking).[37] Sutcliffe said an independent body, such as the Department for Culture, Media and Sport should look at the issue rather than the FA investigating itself: "What I've seen in football over the years is that they're very narrow, very insular, and may not do a proper job even though with the right intentions."[38]

On 6 December 2016, the FA announced that, due to "the increased scope of the review since it was announced"[39] and Gallafent's other professional commitments, the review would be conducted by Clive Sheldon QC.[40] On 11 January 2017, the Sheldon review had made its first call for evidence, writing to all football clubs in England and Wales, amateur and professional, asking for information by 15 March about allegations of child sexual abuse between 1970 and 2005.[41] In March 2018, it was reported that the scale of evidence provided, plus the "chaotic nature of the archiving", had delayed the inquiry team's sift through the FA's legal files; around 500,000 pages of material from 6,000 files were uploaded to a digital platform, and 353 documents were identified as highly relevant. Sheldon expected to start writing his final report in August 2018.[42]

In July 2018, it was reported that the FA's independent inquiry had found no evidence of an institutional cover-up or of a paedophile ring operating within football. Sheldon's report, likely to be highly critical of several clubs, was initially expected to be delivered to the FA in September 2018,[43] but its publication was delayed, potentially by up to a year, pending the retrial of Bob Higgins and possible further charges against Barry Bennell.[44]

FA 2017 reform

Also in December 2016, five former FA executives - David Bernstein, David Davies, Greg Dyke, Alex Horne and David Triesman - called on Parliament's Culture, Media and Sport Committee to propose legislation to reform the FA, saying it was outdated, held back by "elderly white men", and unable to counter the power of the Premier League or "to reform and modernise in a fast-changing world".[45]

In April 2017, it was announced that some reforms, including reducing the size of the FA's board and increasing the number of women, would be submitted for approval to the FA's annual general meeting on 18 May. However, the proposed changes were criticised by some for not going far enough, particularly to improve minority representation.[46] The proposals were approved at the AGM and include:[47]

  • Establishing three positions on the FA board for female members by 2018
  • Reducing the size of the board to 10 members
  • Adding 11 new members to the FA Council to "better reflects the inclusive and diverse nature of English football"
  • Limiting board membership to three terms of three years
  • Introducing term limits for FA Council members

However, pressure for FA reform continued fuelled by allegations of racism and bullying in relation to the Mark Sampson and Eniola Aluko cases, and the historical sexual abuse scandal.[48] In October 2017, FA chairman Greg Clarke announced a "fundamental" review of the FA after admitting it had "lost the trust of the public" following the Sampson controversy.[49] In the same month, Clarke was criticised by sexual abuse victim Andy Woodward and the Professional Footballers' Association's chief executive Gordon Taylor for remarks Clarke made to a Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee hearing.[50][51][52]

Crown dependencies

The football associations within the Crown dependencies of Jersey (Jersey Football Association), Guernsey (Guernsey Football Association) and the Isle of Man (Isle of Man Football Association) are affiliated to the FA despite having a separate identity from that of the United Kingdom and by extension England.[53] They are considered county football associations by the FA. Matt Le Tissier and Graeme Le Saux have represented the FA's full national representative team and were born in Guernsey and Jersey respectively.[54]

The Guernsey Football Association, Isle of Man Football Association and Jersey Football Association have been affiliated with the FA since 1903, 1908 and 1905 respectively.[55][56][57]

The British Overseas Territory of Gibraltar's Gibraltar Football Association was affiliated to the FA from 1911 until it opted to become a fully recognised member of UEFA, a feat achieved after a 14-year legal battle. Joseph Nunez, the Gibraltar FA President claimed they were "unilaterally thrown out" of the FA following an intervention from Geoff Thompson.[55]

A loophole was closed in May 2008 by FIFA which allowed players born in the Channel Islands to choose which home nation within the United Kingdom they will represent at international level. During the 1990s, Trevor Wood (Jersey) and Chris Tardif (Guernsey) represented Northern Ireland.

Some of the other British Overseas Territories have local football associations or leagues (including the Anguilla Football Association, the , the Bermuda Football Association, the British Virgin Islands Football Association, the Cayman Islands Football Association, the Falkland Islands Football League, the Montserrat Football Association, the Turks and Caicos Islands Football Association), but these are not considered subsidiary to the Football Association. Although the British Overseas Territories are too small to support professional teams,[citation needed] they have produced players such as Clyde Best who have gone on to play professionally in the Football Association, and referees such as Carlyle Crockwell, who have refereed FIFA matches.

Relationship with FIFA

The Football Association first joined FIFA in 1905. The British Associations (England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales) opted to leave FIFA after World War I when FIFA chose not to exclude those who were part of the Central Powers from the organisation. The British Associations' stance had changed by 1922 and in 1924 they had rejoined FIFA.[note 1]

The British Olympic Association had fought against 'broken time' – monetary compensation for athletes' earnings when competing in the Olympic games. At the 1925 Olympic Congress in Prague, the British had made an amendment that concluded governing federations should define amateur status for their sports but only in accordance with the definition of amateurism accepted by the Olympic Congress. In 1928, Switzerland proposed to FIFA that in certain circumstances, 'broken time' payments should be allowed and FIFA accepted. The FA resigned from FIFA in protest against the proposal. As a result of the FA's resignation, England did not participate in the 1930, 1934 or 1938 FIFA World Cup.

At the 1930 Olympic Congress in Berlin, Belgian delegates proposed that for each sport the definition of amateur status be left to its international federation. The BOA argued for a common definition of amateurism and argued that 'broken time' payments were against the Olympic ideal.

The FA rejoined FIFA in 1946 and participated in their first World Cup in 1950. One of the first actions of the Football Association was to request the expulsion of the German and Japanese national football associations for their countries' role in World War II. Germany and Japan were prevented from qualifying for the 1950 FIFA World Cup as a consequence. They were re-acquainted with FIFA in 1950 following a second request from Switzerland who had had a previous request rejected in 1948.


The FA's main commercial asset is its ownership of the rights to England internationals and the FA Cup. Broadcasting income remains the FA's largest revenue stream with both domestic and international broadcasting rights for England fixtures and the FA Cup tied up until at least 2021.

For the four seasons from 2008 to 2012, the FA secured £425 million from ITV and Setanta for England and FA Cup games domestic television rights, a 42% increase over the previous contract, and £145 million for overseas television rights, up 272% on the £39 million received for the previous four-year period.[58] However, during 2008–09 Setanta UK went into administration, which weakened the FA's cashflow position.

Turnover for the year ending 31 July 2016 was £370 million on which it made a profit after tax of £7 million. It has also made an investment of £125 million back into every level of Football in 2016. In July 2015 the FA announced plans to carry out a significant organisational restructure, in order to deliver considerable cost savings to invest in elite England teams, facilities and grassroots coaching.[59]

The FA's income does not include the turnover of English football clubs, which are independent businesses. As well as running its own operations the FA chooses five charities each year to which it gives financial support.[60][61]

During the last three years, the FA received £350,000 in fines from players over comments made on Twitter, the most recent fine being a £25,000 to Rio Ferdinand. The highest fine given during the last three years was a £90,000 fine to Ashley Cole in 2012 after calling the FA "a bunch of twats." The FA has been more and more strict on comments made by players on Twitter, as the FA has disciplined 121 players overall in the last three years.[62]


The FA Cup trophy used from 1992 to 2013

The FA also runs several competitions:


Prince William is the current President of the FA.

The FA has a figurehead President, who since 1939 has always been a member of the British Royal Family. The Chairman of the FA has overall responsibility for policy. Traditionally this person rose through the ranks of the FA's committee structure (e.g. by holding posts such as the chairmanship of a county football association). In 2008 politician David Triesman was appointed as the FA's first "independent chairman", the first from outside the football hierarchy. The day-to-day head of the FA was known as the Secretary until 1989, when the job title was changed to Chief Executive.

Office Name Tenure
President Arthur Pember 1863–1867
E.C. Morley 1867–1874
Sir Francis Marindin 1874–1890
Lord Kinnaird 1890–1923
Sir Charles Clegg 1923–1937
William Pickford 1937–1939
The Earl of Athlone 1939–1955
The Duke of Edinburgh 1955–1957
The Duke of Gloucester 1957–1963
The Earl of Harewood 1963–1971
The Duke of Kent 1971–2000
The Duke of York 2000–2006
The Duke of Cambridge 2006–present
Chairman Charles Clegg 1890–1937
Amos Brook Hirst 1941–1955
Arthur Drewry 1955–1961
Graham Doggart 1961–1963
Joe Mears 1963–1966
Andrew Stephen 1967–1976
Harold Thompson 1976–1981
Bert Millichip 1981–1996
Keith Wiseman 1996–1999
Geoff Thompson 1999–2008
David Triesman 2008–2010
David Bernstein 2011–2013
Greg Dyke 2013–2016
Greg Clarke 2016–present
Secretary E.C. Morley 1863–1866
R. W. Willis 1866–1867
R. G. Graham 1867–1870
Charles Alcock 1870–1895
Frederick Wall 1895–1934
Stanley Rous 1934–1962
Denis Follows 1962–1973
Ted Croker 1973–1989
Chief executive Graham Kelly 1989–1998
Adam Crozier 2000–2002
David Davies 2002–2003 (acting)
Mark Palios 2003–2004
David Davies 2004–2005 (acting)
Brian Barwick 2005–2008
Ian Watmore 2009–2010
Alex Horne 2010–2010 (acting)
Martin Glenn 2015–2019
Mark Bullingham 2019–present
General Secretary Alex Horne 2010–present
Executive Director David Davies 1998–2000

Board of directors

Taken from The FA's website on 29 September 2017[64]

National Game representatives:

  • Robert Cotter
  • Mervyn Leggett
  • Jack Pearce

Professional Game representatives:

  • Peter McCormick (OBE)
  • Jim Rodwell

Independent Non-Executive directors:

  • Roger Devlin


  1. ^ Ireland had since been partitioned. Northern Ireland remained part of the United Kingdom, the Irish Free State was independent of Britain. The latter is now the Republic of Ireland.


  1. ^ "Team GB decision reached". TheFA.com. 26 June 2011. Retrieved 3 March 2015.
  2. ^ "The Premier League and Other Football Bodies". Premier League. Retrieved 17 May 2007.
  3. ^ a b c d "History of Football - The Global Growth". FIFA.com. 1994. Retrieved 10 December 2015.
  4. ^ a b c d e f "The History of the FA". The Football Association. Retrieved 10 December 2015.
  5. ^ "The spiritual home of the Football Association". The Freemasons Arms, Covent Garden. Archived from the original on 5 March 2011. Retrieved 13 September 2018. It was here that the Football Association met in 1863 to thrash out the laws of a game now played in more than 200 countries across the globe.
  6. ^ "Soccer's Masonic Birthplace". 15 June 2010. Archived from the original on 25 February 2018. Retrieved 13 September 2018.
  7. ^ J. Deschamps (20 February 2015). "Freemasons Created the Game of Football". Retrieved 13 September 2018., quoting the books “Freemasons For Dummies,” and “Solomon’s Builders: Freemasons", authored by Master Christopher L. Hodapp
  8. ^ Harvey, Adrian (2005). Football, the First Hundred Years: The Untold Story of the People's Game. Routledge. p. 135. ISBN 978-0-415-35018-1.
  9. ^ "Scottish Sports History" (PDF).
  10. ^ Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle, 23 January 1864
  11. ^ "Football - first FA match". London Remembers. Retrieved 18 March 2020.
  12. ^ Sporting Life, 6 January 1864
  13. ^ Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle, 16 January 1864; pg. 3, New Readerships
  14. ^ Alcock, C.W. (1906). Football: The Association Game. London: George Bell & Sons. p. 14.
  15. ^ Friends of West Norwood Cemetery. "FOWNC Newsletters - Friends of West Norwood Cemetery".
  16. ^ a b c Jolly, Richard (23 October 2010). "Football's working-class roots". The National. Retrieved 11 May 2020.
  17. ^ a b "Blackburn Olympic 1883". When Saturday Comes. October 2006. Retrieved 11 May 2020.
  18. ^ Lewis, R.W. "'Touched Pitch and Been Shockingly Defiled': Football, Class, Social Darwinism and Decadence in England, 1880-1914", in Mangan, J.A. (1999) Sport in Europe: Politics, Class, Gender (Frank Cass, London), pp.117-143.
  19. ^ "Premier League wages keep on rising, Deloitte says". BBC News. 9 June 2011.
  20. ^ "A link to the past". www.thefa.com. 23 October 2012. Retrieved 28 December 2012.
  21. ^ Brennan, Patrick. "Women's Football". Retrieved 11 September 2014.
  22. ^ "The rebirth of women's football: more than a century on, it's a game worth watching". New Statesman. 17 October 2014. Retrieved 18 October 2014.
  23. ^ "History of Women's Football". Women's Sport and Fitness Foundation. Retrieved 18 October 2014.
  24. ^ "Women's Football" (PDF). London: Department for Culture, Media and Sport. 18 July 2006. Retrieved 10 August 2011.
  25. ^ "Women and Football". Spartacus Educational. Retrieved 18 October 2014.
  26. ^ Taylor, Daniel (21 November 2016). "Six come forward after Andy Woodward's allegations of abuse at Crewe". The Guardian. Retrieved 21 November 2016.
  27. ^ Press Association (24 November 2016). "NSPCC launches hotline for sexually abused footballers". The Guardian. Retrieved 25 November 2016.
  28. ^ Cacciottolo, Mario (25 November 2016). "Football sex abuse claims: Two more ex-players speak out". BBC News. BBC. Retrieved 25 November 2016.
  29. ^ "Sex abuse: Football Association to investigate allegations". BBC. BBC. 27 November 2016. Retrieved 27 November 2016.
  30. ^ "Football abuse hotline receives 'staggering surge' in calls". BBC News. BBC. 1 December 2016. Retrieved 1 December 2016.
  31. ^ Dodd, Vikram (1 December 2016). "Police say 350 people have come forward to report child sex abuse in football". The Guardian. Retrieved 1 December 2016.
  32. ^ "Football sex abuse: England captains make child safety film". BBC News. BBC. 3 December 2016. Retrieved 3 December 2016.
  33. ^ "FA sets up review into child sex abuse in football after Barry Bennell claims". The Guardian. 27 November 2016. Retrieved 27 November 2016.
  34. ^ "Football Association child sex abuse review 'not enough'". BBC. 28 November 2016. Retrieved 28 November 2016.
  35. ^ Reed, Jim; Ray, Louis Lee (8 December 2016). "Football abuse: FA reacted 'dismissively' to protection calls". BBC News. BBC. Retrieved 8 December 2016.
  36. ^ Reed, Jim (30 November 2016). "FA 'pulled all funding' from child protection project". BBC. Retrieved 3 December 2016.
  37. ^ Taylor, Daniel (1 April 2017). "Police receive reports that child abuse is still happening in football". The Observer. Retrieved 2 April 2017.
  38. ^ "Southampton 'abuser' still working in football". BBC News. BBC. 3 December 2016. Retrieved 3 December 2016.
  39. ^ "Terms of reference for review into alleged non-recent child sexual abuse in football". Football Association. FA. Retrieved 6 December 2016.
  40. ^ "Harry Redknapp criticises FA over coach claims". BBC News. BBC. 6 December 2016. Retrieved 6 December 2016.
  41. ^ "Review into child abuse in football makes first call for evidence". The Guardian. 11 January 2017. Retrieved 12 January 2017.
  42. ^ Steinberg, Jacob (28 March 2018). "FA sexual abuse inquiry head ready to investigate any clubs who fail to cooperate". Guardian. Retrieved 18 July 2018.
  43. ^ Taylor, Daniel (26 July 2018). "FA sexual abuse inquiry finds no evidence of institutional cover-up". Guardian. Retrieved 30 July 2018.
  44. ^ Taylor, Daniel (26 September 2018). "Football sexual abuse scandal review may be delayed for more than a year". Guardian. Retrieved 26 September 2018.
  45. ^ "FA reform: Former chiefs say 'elderly white men' block change". BBC News. BBC. 12 December 2016. Retrieved 12 December 2016.
  46. ^ "FA council votes unanimously to accept reforms". BBC Sport. BBC. 3 April 2017. Retrieved 5 April 2017.
  47. ^ "Diving bans: Football Association approves retrospective action". BBC. 18 May 2017.
  48. ^ Taylor, Daniel (16 October 2017). "Revealed: the 14-word email that puts FA's Greg Clarke under fresh scrutiny". The Guardian. Retrieved 30 October 2017.
  49. ^ Rumsby, Ben (26 October 2017). "Greg Clarke admits out-of-touch FA has 'lost the trust of the public'". The Telegraph. Retrieved 30 October 2017.
  50. ^ Rumbsy, Ben (25 October 2017). "Greg Clarke under fire again as abuse survivor Andy Woodward accuses FA chairman of 'humiliating' him". Telegraph. Retrieved 30 October 2017.
  51. ^ "Woodward 'devastated & deeply upset'". BBC Sport. BBC. 26 October 2017. Retrieved 30 October 2017.
  52. ^ Kelner, Martha (26 October 2017). "PFA's Gordon Taylor considering legal action against FA chairman Greg Clarke". Guardian. Retrieved 30 October 2017.
  53. ^ "FA Handbook 2013-14" (pdf). TheFA.com. p. 621. Retrieved 2 February 2014.
  54. ^ "Islands lack competition — Pitman". BBC News. 25 March 2009. Retrieved 2 February 2014.
  55. ^ a b Menary, Steve (2007). Outcasts! : the lands that FIFA forgot. Studley: Know the Score!. ISBN 978-1905449316.
  56. ^ "Anti-discrimination policy". GuernseyFA.com. Retrieved 3 February 2014.
  57. ^ Junttila, Jukka. "Jersey" (pdf). junttila.net. p. 4. Retrieved 21 February 2015.
  58. ^ New Deals Sweet for FA, football365.com, 31 October 2007
  59. ^ "The Football Association 2015/16 Financial Results". The FA. Retrieved 18 March 2017.
  60. ^ TheFA.com
  61. ^ "6 villages for 2006" – Official Charity Campaign of the 2006 FIFA World Cup SOS Children's Villages, 20 July 2006
  62. ^ "FA made £350,000 from Twitter fines in just three years". Retrieved 31 October 2014.
  63. ^ "The FA People's Cup launches". The FA. Retrieved 10 February 2015.
  64. ^ Association, The Football. "The FA Board". www.thefa.com.

External links

Media related to The Football Association at Wikimedia Commons

1 July 1863

The Battle of Gettysburg begins.

Northern Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania (1861–1865)
Gettysburg Campaign, (1863)
Battlefield of Gettysburg, (1863)

The Battle of Gettysburg (locally /ˈɡɛtɪsbɜːrɡ/ (About this soundlisten))[11] was fought July 1–3, 1863, in and around the town of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, by Union and Confederate forces during the American Civil War. The battle involved the largest number of casualties of the entire war and is often described as the war's turning point.[12][13] Union Maj. Gen. George Meade's Army of the Potomac defeated attacks by Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia, halting Lee's invasion of the North.

After his success at Chancellorsville in Virginia in May 1863, Lee led his army through the Shenandoah Valley to begin his second invasion of the North—the Gettysburg Campaign. With his army in high spirits, Lee intended to shift the focus of the summer campaign from war-ravaged northern Virginia and hoped to influence Northern politicians to give up their prosecution of the war by penetrating as far as Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, or even Philadelphia. Prodded by President Abraham Lincoln, Maj. Gen. Joseph Hooker moved his army in pursuit, but was relieved of command just three days before the battle and replaced by Meade.

Elements of the two armies initially collided at Gettysburg on July 1, 1863, as Lee urgently concentrated his forces there, his objective being to engage the Union army and destroy it. Low ridges to the northwest of town were defended initially by a Union cavalry division under Brig. Gen. John Buford, and soon reinforced with two corps of Union infantry. However, two large Confederate corps assaulted them from the northwest and north, collapsing the hastily developed Union lines, sending the defenders retreating through the streets of the town to the hills just to the south.[14]

On the second day of battle, most of both armies had assembled. The Union line was laid out in a defensive formation resembling a fishhook. In the late afternoon of July 2, Lee launched a heavy assault on the Union left flank, and fierce fighting raged at Little Round Top, the Wheatfield, Devil's Den, and the Peach Orchard. On the Union right, Confederate demonstrations escalated into full-scale assaults on Culp's Hill and Cemetery Hill. All across the battlefield, despite significant losses, the Union defenders held their lines.

On the third day of battle, fighting resumed on Culp's Hill, and cavalry battles raged to the east and south, but the main event was a dramatic infantry assault by 12,500 Confederates against the center of the Union line on Cemetery Ridge, known as Pickett's Charge. The charge was repulsed by Union rifle and artillery fire, at great loss to the Confederate army.[15]

Lee led his army on a torturous retreat back to Virginia. Between 46,000 and 51,000 soldiers from both armies were casualties in the three-day battle, the most costly in US history.

On November 19, President Lincoln used the dedication ceremony for the Gettysburg National Cemetery to honor the fallen Union soldiers and redefine the purpose of the war in his historic Gettysburg Address.


Military situation

Gettysburg Campaign (through July 3); cavalry movements shown with dashed lines
This 1863 oval-shaped map depicts Gettysburg Battlefield during July 1–3, 1863, showing troop and artillery positions and movements, relief hachures, drainage, roads, railroads, and houses with the names of residents at the time of the Battle of Gettysburg.
A Harper's Weekly illustration showing Confederate troops escorting captured African American civilians south into slavery. En route to Gettysburg, the Army of Northern Virginia kidnapped approximately 40 black civilians and sent them south into slavery.[16][17][18]

Shortly after the Army of Northern Virginia won a major victory over the Army of the Potomac at the Battle of Chancellorsville (April 30 – May 6, 1863), Robert E. Lee decided upon a second invasion of the North (the first was the unsuccessful Maryland Campaign of September 1862, which ended in the bloody Battle of Antietam). Such a move would upset the Union's plans for the summer campaigning season and possibly reduce the pressure on the besieged Confederate garrison at Vicksburg. The invasion would allow the Confederates to live off the bounty of the rich Northern farms while giving war-ravaged Virginia a much-needed rest. In addition, Lee's 72,000-man army[6] could threaten Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Washington, and possibly strengthen the growing peace movement in the North.[19]

Initial movements to battle

Thus, on June 3, Lee's army began to shift northward from Fredericksburg, Virginia. Following the death of Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson, Lee reorganized his two large corps into three new corps, commanded by Lt. Gen. James Longstreet (First Corps), Lt. Gen. Richard S. Ewell (Second), and Lt. Gen. A.P. Hill (Third); both Ewell and Hill, who had formerly reported to Jackson as division commanders, were new to this level of responsibility. The Cavalry Division remained under the command of Maj. Gen. J.E.B. Stuart.[20]

The Union Army of the Potomac, under Maj. Gen. Joseph Hooker, consisted of seven infantry corps, a cavalry corps, and an Artillery Reserve, for a combined strength of more than 100,000 men.[5]

The first major action of the campaign took place on June 9 between cavalry forces at Brandy Station, near Culpeper, Virginia. The 9,500 Confederate cavalrymen under Stuart were surprised by Maj. Gen. Alfred Pleasonton's combined arms force of two cavalry divisions (8,000 troopers) and 3,000 infantry, but Stuart eventually repulsed the Union attack. The inconclusive battle, the largest predominantly cavalry engagement of the war, proved for the first time that the Union horse soldier was equal to his Southern counterpart.[21]

By mid-June, the Army of Northern Virginia was poised to cross the Potomac River and enter Maryland. After defeating the Union garrisons at Winchester and Martinsburg, Ewell's Second Corps began crossing the river on June 15. Hill's and Longstreet's corps followed on June 24 and 25. Hooker's army pursued, keeping between Washington, D.C. and Lee's army. The Union army crossed the Potomac from June 25 to 27.[22]

Lee gave strict orders for his army to minimize any negative impacts on the civilian population.[23] Food, horses, and other supplies were generally not seized outright, although quartermasters reimbursing Northern farmers and merchants with Confederate money were not well received. Various towns, most notably York, Pennsylvania, were required to pay indemnities in lieu of supplies, under threat of destruction. During the invasion, the Confederates seized some 40 northern African Americans. A few of them were escaped fugitive slaves, but most were freemen; all were sent south into slavery under guard.[16][17][18]

On June 26, elements of Maj. Gen. Jubal Early's division of Ewell's Corps occupied the town of Gettysburg after chasing off newly raised Pennsylvania militia in a series of minor skirmishes. Early laid the borough under tribute, but did not collect any significant supplies. Soldiers burned several railroad cars and a covered bridge, and destroyed nearby rails and telegraph lines. The following morning, Early departed for adjacent York County.[24]

Meanwhile, in a controversial move, Lee allowed J.E.B. Stuart to take a portion of the army's cavalry and ride around the east flank of the Union army. Lee's orders gave Stuart much latitude, and both generals share the blame for the long absence of Stuart's cavalry, as well as for the failure to assign a more active role to the cavalry left with the army. Stuart and his three best brigades were absent from the army during the crucial phase of the approach to Gettysburg and the first two days of battle. By June 29, Lee's army was strung out in an arc from Chambersburg (28 miles (45 km) northwest of Gettysburg) to Carlisle (30 miles (48 km) north of Gettysburg) to near Harrisburg and Wrightsville on the Susquehanna River.[25]

In a dispute over the use of the forces defending the Harpers Ferry garrison, Hooker offered his resignation, and Abraham Lincoln and General-in-Chief Henry W. Halleck, who were looking for an excuse to rid themselves of him, immediately accepted. They replaced Hooker early on the morning of June 28 with Maj. Gen. George Gordon Meade, then commander of the V Corps.[26]

On June 29, when Lee learned that the Army of the Potomac had crossed the Potomac River, he ordered a concentration of his forces around Cashtown, located at the eastern base of South Mountain and eight miles (13 km) west of Gettysburg.[27] On June 30, while part of Hill's Corps was in Cashtown, one of Hill's brigades, North Carolinians under Brig. Gen. J. Johnston Pettigrew, ventured toward Gettysburg. In his memoirs, Maj. Gen. Henry Heth, Pettigrew's division commander, claimed that he sent Pettigrew to search for supplies in town—especially shoes.[28]

When Pettigrew's troops approached Gettysburg on June 30, they noticed Union cavalry under Brig. Gen. John Buford arriving south of town, and Pettigrew returned to Cashtown without engaging them. When Pettigrew told Hill and Heth what he had seen, neither general believed that there was a substantial Union force in or near the town, suspecting that it had been only Pennsylvania militia. Despite General Lee's order to avoid a general engagement until his entire army was concentrated, Hill decided to mount a significant reconnaissance in force the following morning to determine the size and strength of the enemy force in his front. Around 5 a.m. on Wednesday, July 1, two brigades of Heth's division advanced to Gettysburg.[29]

Opposing forces


Key commanders (Army of the Potomac)

The Army of the Potomac, initially under Maj. Gen. Joseph Hooker (Maj. Gen. George Meade replaced Hooker in command on June 28), consisted of more than 100,000 men in the following organization:[30]

During the advance on Gettysburg, Maj. Gen. Reynolds was in operational command of the left, or advanced, wing of the Army, consisting of the I, III, and XI Corps.[31] Note that many other Union units (not part of the Army of the Potomac) were actively involved in the Gettysburg Campaign, but not directly involved in the Battle of Gettysburg. These included portions of the Union IV Corps, the militia and state troops of the Department of the Susquehanna, and various garrisons, including that at Harpers Ferry.


Key commanders (Army of Northern Virginia)

In reaction to the death of Lt. Gen. Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson after Chancellorsville, Lee reorganized his Army of Northern Virginia (75,000 men) from two infantry corps into three.[32]

First day of battle

Overview map of the first day of the Battle of Gettysburg, July 1, 1863

Herr Ridge, McPherson Ridge and Seminary Ridge

Anticipating that the Confederates would march on Gettysburg from the west on the morning of July 1, Buford laid out his defenses on three ridges west of the town: Herr Ridge, McPherson Ridge and Seminary Ridge. These were appropriate terrain for a delaying action by his small cavalry division against superior Confederate infantry forces, meant to buy time awaiting the arrival of Union infantrymen who could occupy the strong defensive positions south of town at Cemetery Hill, Cemetery Ridge, and Culp's Hill. Buford understood that if the Confederates could gain control of these heights, Meade's army would have difficulty dislodging them.[33]

First shot monument

Confederate General Henry Heth's division advanced with two brigades forward, commanded by Brig. Gens. James J. Archer and Joseph R. Davis. They proceeded easterly in columns along the Chambersburg Pike. Three miles (5 km) west of town, about 7:30 a.m. on July 1, the two brigades met light resistance from vedettes of Union cavalry, and deployed into line. According to lore, the Union soldier to fire the first shot of the battle was Lt. Marcellus Jones.[34] Lt. Jones later returned to Gettysburg, in 1886 erecting a monument marking the spot where he fired the first shot.[35] Eventually Heth's men encountered dismounted troopers of Col. William Gamble's cavalry brigade. The dismounted troopers resisted stoutly, delaying the Confederate advance by firing their breechloading carbine from behind fences and trees.[36] Still, by 10:20 a.m., the Confederates had pushed the Union cavalrymen east to McPherson Ridge, when the vanguard of the I Corps (Maj. Gen. John F. Reynolds) finally arrived.[37]

North of the pike, Davis gained a temporary success against Brig. Gen. Lysander Cutler's brigade but was repulsed with heavy losses in an action around an unfinished railroad bed cut in the ridge. South of the pike, Archer's brigade assaulted through Herbst (also known as McPherson's) Woods. The Union Iron Brigade under Brig. Gen. Solomon Meredith enjoyed initial success against Archer, capturing several hundred men, including Archer himself.[38]

General Reynolds was shot and killed early in the fighting while directing troop and artillery placements just to the east of the woods. Shelby Foote wrote that the Union cause lost a man considered by many to be "the best general in the army."[39] Maj. Gen. Abner Doubleday assumed command. Fighting in the Chambersburg Pike area lasted until about 12:30 p.m. It resumed around 2:30 p.m., when Heth's entire division engaged, adding the brigades of Pettigrew and Col. John M. Brockenbrough.[40]

As Pettigrew's North Carolina Brigade came on line, they flanked the 19th Indiana and drove the Iron Brigade back. The 26th North Carolina (the largest regiment in the army with 839 men) lost heavily, leaving the first day's fight with around 212 men. By the end of the three-day battle, they had about 152 men standing, the highest casualty percentage for one battle of any regiment, North or South.[41] Slowly the Iron Brigade was pushed out of the woods toward Seminary Ridge. Hill added Maj. Gen. William Dorsey Pender's division to the assault, and the I Corps was driven back through the grounds of the Lutheran Seminary and Gettysburg streets.[42]

As the fighting to the west proceeded, two divisions of Ewell's Second Corps, marching west toward Cashtown in accordance with Lee's order for the army to concentrate in that vicinity, turned south on the Carlisle and Harrisburg roads toward Gettysburg, while the Union XI Corps (Maj. Gen. Oliver O. Howard) raced north on the Baltimore Pike and Taneytown Road. By early afternoon, the Union line ran in a semicircle west, north, and northeast of Gettysburg.[43]

However, the Union did not have enough troops; Cutler, whose brigade was deployed north of the Chambersburg Pike, had his right flank in the air. The leftmost division of the XI Corps was unable to deploy in time to strengthen the line, so Doubleday was forced to throw in reserve brigades to salvage his line.[44]

Around 2 p.m., the Confederate Second Corps divisions of Maj. Gens. Robert E. Rodes and Jubal Early assaulted and out-flanked the Union I and XI Corps positions north and northwest of town. The Confederate brigades of Col. Edward A. O'Neal and Brig. Gen. Alfred Iverson suffered severe losses assaulting the I Corps division of Brig. Gen. John C. Robinson south of Oak Hill. Early's division profited from a blunder by Brig. Gen. Francis C. Barlow, when he advanced his XI Corps division to Blocher's Knoll (directly north of town and now known as Barlow's Knoll); this represented a salient[45] in the corps line, susceptible to attack from multiple sides, and Early's troops overran Barlow's division, which constituted the right flank of the Union Army's position. Barlow was wounded and captured in the attack.[46]

As Union positions collapsed both north and west of town, Gen. Howard ordered a retreat to the high ground south of town at Cemetery Hill, where he had left the division of Brig. Gen. Adolph von Steinwehr in reserve.[47] Maj. Gen. Winfield S. Hancock assumed command of the battlefield, sent by Meade when he heard that Reynolds had been killed. Hancock, commander of the II Corps and Meade's most trusted subordinate, was ordered to take command of the field and to determine whether Gettysburg was an appropriate place for a major battle.[48] Hancock told Howard, "I think this the strongest position by nature upon which to fight a battle that I ever saw." When Howard agreed, Hancock concluded the discussion: "Very well, sir, I select this as the battle-field." Hancock's determination had a morale-boosting effect on the retreating Union soldiers, but he played no direct tactical role on the first day.[49]

General Lee understood the defensive potential to the Union if they held this high ground. He sent orders to Ewell that Cemetery Hill be taken "if practicable." Ewell, who had previously served under Stonewall Jackson, a general well known for issuing peremptory orders, determined such an assault was not practicable and, thus, did not attempt it; this decision is considered by historians to be a great missed opportunity.[50]

The first day at Gettysburg, more significant than simply a prelude to the bloody second and third days, ranks as the 23rd biggest battle of the war by number of troops engaged. About one quarter of Meade's army (22,000 men) and one third of Lee's army (27,000) were engaged.[51]

Second day of battle

Robert E. Lee's plan for July 2, 1863

Plans and movement to battle

Throughout the evening of July 1 and morning of July 2, most of the remaining infantry of both armies arrived on the field, including the Union II, III, V, VI, and XII Corps. Two of Longstreet's divisions were on the road: Brig. Gen. George Pickett, had begun the 22 mile (35 km) march from Chambersburg, while Brig. Gen. E. M. Law had begun the march from Guilford. Both arrived late in the morning. Law completed his 28-mile (45 km) march in eleven hours.[52]

The Union line ran from Culp's Hill southeast of the town, northwest to Cemetery Hill just south of town, then south for nearly two miles (3 km) along Cemetery Ridge, terminating just north of Little Round Top. Most of the XII Corps was on Culp's Hill; the remnants of I and XI Corps defended Cemetery Hill; II Corps covered most of the northern half of Cemetery Ridge; and III Corps was ordered to take up a position to its flank. The shape of the Union line is popularly described as a "fishhook" formation.[citation needed]

The Confederate line paralleled the Union line about a mile (1,600 m) to the west on Seminary Ridge, ran east through the town, then curved southeast to a point opposite Culp's Hill. Thus, the Union army had interior lines, while the Confederate line was nearly five miles (8 km) long.[53]

Lee's battle plan for July 2 called for a general assault of Meade's positions. On the right, Longstreet's First Corps was to position itself to attack the Union left flank, facing northeast astraddle the Emmitsburg Road, and to roll up the Union line. The attack sequence was to begin with Maj. Gens. John Bell Hood's and Lafayette McLaws's divisions, followed by Maj. Gen. Richard H. Anderson's division of Hill's Third Corps.[54]

On the left, Lee instructed Ewell to position his Second Corps to attack Culp's Hill and Cemetery Hill when he heard the gunfire from Longstreet's assault, preventing Meade from shifting troops to bolster his left. Though it does not appear in either his or Lee's Official Report, Ewell claimed years later that Lee had changed the order to simultaneously attack, calling for only a "diversion", to be turned into a full-scale attack if a favorable opportunity presented itself.[55][56]

Lee's plan, however, was based on faulty intelligence, exacerbated by Stuart's continued absence from the battlefield. Though Lee personally reconnoitered his left during the morning, he did not visit Longstreet's position on the Confederate right. Even so, Lee rejected suggestions that Longstreet move beyond Meade's left and attack the Union flank, capturing the supply trains and effectively blocking Meade's escape route.[57]

Lee did not issue orders for the attack until 11:00 a.m.[58] About noon, General Anderson's advancing troops were discovered by General Sickles' outpost guard and the Third Corps–upon which Longstreet's First Corps was to form–did not get into position until 1:00 p.m.[59]

Hood and McLaws, after their long march, were not yet in position and did not launch their attacks until just after 4 p.m. and 5 p.m., respectively.[60]

Attacks on the Union left flank

Overview map of the second day of the Battle of Gettysburg, July 2, 1863

As Longstreet's left division, under Maj. Gen. Lafayette McLaws, advanced, they unexpectedly found Maj. Gen. Daniel Sickles's III Corps directly in their path. Sickles had been dissatisfied with the position assigned him on the southern end of Cemetery Ridge. Seeing ground better suited for artillery positions a half mile (800 m) to the west— centered at the Sherfy farm's Peach Orchard—he violated orders and advanced his corp to the slightly higher ground along the Emmitsburg Road, moving away from Cemetery Ridge. The new line ran from Devil's Den, northwest to the Peach Orchard, then northeast along the Emmitsburg Road to south of the Codori farm. This created an untenable salient at the Peach Orchard; Brig. Gen. Andrew A. Humphreys's division (in position along the Emmitsburg Road) and Maj. Gen. David B. Birney's division (to the south) were subject to attacks from two sides and were spread out over a longer front than their small corps could defend effectively.[61] The Confederate artillery was ordered to open fire at 3:00 p.m.[62] After failing to attend a meeting at this time of Meade's corps commanders, Meade rode to Sickles' position and demanded an explanation of the situation. Knowing a Confederate attack was imminent and a retreat would be endangered, Meade refused Sickles' offer to withdraw.[63]

Meade was forced to send 20,000 reinforcements:[64] the entire V Corps, Brig. Gen. John C. Caldwell's division of the II Corps, most of the XII Corps, and portions of the newly arrived VI Corps. Hood's division moved more to the east than intended, losing its alignment with the Emmitsburg Road,[65] attacking Devil's Den and Little Round Top. McLaws, coming in on Hood's left, drove multiple attacks into the thinly stretched III Corps in the Wheatfield and overwhelmed them in Sherfy's Peach Orchard. McLaws's attack eventually reached Plum Run Valley (the "Valley of Death") before being beaten back by the Pennsylvania Reserves division of the V Corps, moving down from Little Round Top. The III Corps was virtually destroyed as a combat unit in this battle, and Sickles's leg was amputated after it was shattered by a cannonball. Caldwell's division was destroyed piecemeal in the Wheatfield. Anderson's division, coming from McLaws's left and starting forward around 6 p.m., reached the crest of Cemetery Ridge, but could not hold the position in the face of counterattacks from the II Corps, including an almost suicidal bayonet charge by the 1st Minnesota regiment against a Confederate brigade, ordered in desperation by Hancock to buy time for reinforcements to arrive.[66]

As fighting raged in the Wheatfield and Devil's Den, Col. Strong Vincent of V Corps had a precarious hold on Little Round Top, an important hill at the extreme left of the Union line. His brigade of four relatively small regiments was able to resist repeated assaults by Brig. Gen. Evander M. Law's brigade of Hood's division. Meade's chief engineer, Brig. Gen. Gouverneur K. Warren, had realized the importance of this position, and dispatched Vincent's brigade, an artillery battery, and the 140th New York to occupy Little Round Top mere minutes before Hood's troops arrived. The defense of Little Round Top with a bayonet charge by the 20th Maine, ordered by Col. Joshua L. Chamberlain but possibly led by Lt. Holman S. Melcher, was one of the most fabled episodes in the Civil War and propelled Col. Chamberlain into prominence after the war.[67][68]

Attacks on the Union right flank

Union breastworks on Culp's Hill

Ewell interpreted his orders as calling only for a cannonade.[56] His 32 guns, along with A. P. Hill's 55 guns, engaged in a two-hour artillery barrage at extreme range that had little effect. Finally, about six o'clock, Ewell sent orders to each of his division commanders to attack the Union lines in his front.[citation needed]

Maj. Gen. Edward "Allegheny" Johnson's Division "had not been pushed close to [Culp's Hill] in preparation for an assault, although one had been contemplated all day. It now had a full mile (1,600 m) to advance and Rock Creek had to be crossed. This could only be done at few places and involved much delay. Only three of Johnson's four brigades moved to the attack." [69] Most of the hill's defenders, the Union XII Corps, had been sent to the left to defend against Longstreet's attacks, leaving only a brigade of New Yorkers under Brig. Gen. George S. Greene behind strong, newly constructed defensive works. With reinforcements from the I and XI Corps, Greene's men held off the Confederate attackers, though giving up some of the lower earthworks on the lower part of Culp's Hill.[70]

Early was similarly unprepared when he ordered Harry T. Hays' and Isaac E. Avery's Brigades to attack the Union XI Corps positions on East Cemetery Hill. Once started, fighting was fierce: Col. Andrew L. Harris of the Union 2nd Brigade, 1st Division, came under a withering attack, losing half his men. Avery was wounded early on, but the Confederates reached the crest of the hill and entered the Union breastworks, capturing one or two batteries. Seeing he was not supported on his right, Hays withdrew. His right was to be supported by Robert E. Rodes' Division, but Rodes—like Early and Johnson—had not been ordered up in preparation for the attack. He had twice as far to travel as Early; by the time he came in contact with the Union skirmish line, Early's troops had already begun to withdraw.[71]

Jeb Stuart and his three cavalry brigades arrived in Gettysburg around noon but had no role in the second day's battle. Brig. Gen. Wade Hampton's brigade fought a minor engagement with newly promoted 23-year-old Brig. Gen. George Armstrong Custer's Michigan cavalry near Hunterstown to the northeast of Gettysburg.[72]

Third day of battle

Overview map of the third day of the Battle of Gettysburg, July 3, 1863

Lee's plan

General Lee wished to renew the attack on Friday, July 3, using the same basic plan as the previous day: Longstreet would attack the Union left, while Ewell attacked Culp's Hill.[73] However, before Longstreet was ready, Union XII Corps troops started a dawn artillery bombardment against the Confederates on Culp's Hill in an effort to regain a portion of their lost works. The Confederates attacked, and the second fight for Culp's Hill ended around 11 a.m. Harry Pfanz judged that, after some seven hours of bitter combat, "the Union line was intact and held more strongly than before."[74]

Lee was forced to change his plans. Longstreet would command Pickett's Virginia division of his own First Corps, plus six brigades from Hill's Corps, in an attack on the Union II Corps position at the right center of the Union line on Cemetery Ridge. Prior to the attack, all the artillery the Confederacy could bring to bear on the Union positions would bombard and weaken the enemy's line.[75]

Much has been made over the years of General Longstreet's objections to General Lee's plan. In his memoirs, Longstreet described their discussion as follows:

[Lee] rode over after sunrise and gave his orders. His plan was to assault the enemy's left centre by a column to be composed of McLaws's and Hood's divisions reinforced by Pickett's brigades. I thought that it would not do; that the point had been fully tested the day before, by more men, when all were fresh; that the enemy was there looking for us, as we heard him during the night putting up his defences; that the divisions of McLaws and Hood were holding a mile [1,600 m] along the right of my line against twenty thousand men, who would follow their withdrawal, strike the flank of the assaulting column, crush it, and get on our rear towards the Potomac River; that thirty thousand men was the minimum of force necessary for the work; that even such force would need close co-operation on other parts of the line; that the column as he proposed to organize it would have only about thirteen thousand men (the divisions having lost a third of their numbers the day before); that the column would have to march a mile [1,600 m] under concentrating battery fire, and a thousand yards [900 m] under long-range musketry; that the conditions were different from those in the days of Napoleon, when field batteries had a range of six hundred yards [550 m] and musketry about sixty yards [55 m]. He said the distance was not more than fourteen hundred yards [1280 m]. General Meade's estimate was a mile or a mile and a half [1.6 or 2.4 km] (Captain Long, the guide of the field of Gettysburg in 1888, stated that it was a trifle over a mile). He then concluded that the divisions of McLaws and Hood could remain on the defensive line; that he would reinforce by divisions of the Third Corps and Pickett's brigades, and stated the point to which the march should be directed. I asked the strength of the column. He stated fifteen thousand. Opinion was then expressed that the fifteen thousand men who could make successful assault over that field had never been arrayed for battle; but he was impatient of listening, and tired of talking, and nothing was left but to proceed.[76]

The "High Water Mark" on Cemetery Ridge as it appears today. The monument to the 72nd Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry Regiment ("Baxter's Philadelphia Fire Zouaves") appears at right, the Copse of Trees to the left.

Largest artillery bombardment of the war

Around 1 p.m., from 150 to 170 Confederate guns began an artillery bombardment that was probably the largest of the war. In order to save valuable ammunition for the infantry attack that they knew would follow, the Army of the Potomac's artillery, under the command of Brig. Gen. Henry Jackson Hunt, at first did not return the enemy's fire. After waiting about 15 minutes, about 80 Union cannons added to the din. The Army of Northern Virginia was critically low on artillery ammunition, and the cannonade did not significantly affect the Union position.[77]

Pickett's Charge

Around 3 p.m., the cannon fire subsided, and 12,500 Southern soldiers stepped from the ridgeline and advanced the three-quarters of a mile (1,200 m) to Cemetery Ridge in what is known to history as "Pickett's Charge". As the Confederates approached, there was fierce flanking artillery fire from Union positions on Cemetery Hill and north of Little Round Top, and musket and canister fire from Hancock's II Corps. In the Union center, the commander of artillery had held fire during the Confederate bombardment (in order to save it for the infantry assault, which Meade had correctly predicted the day before), leading Southern commanders to believe the Northern cannon batteries had been knocked out. However, they opened fire on the Confederate infantry during their approach with devastating results. Nearly one half of the attackers did not return to their own lines.[citation needed]

Although the Union line wavered and broke temporarily at a jog called the "Angle" in a low stone fence, just north of a patch of vegetation called the Copse of Trees, reinforcements rushed into the breach, and the Confederate attack was repulsed. The farthest advance of Brig. Gen. Lewis A. Armistead's brigade of Maj. Gen. George Pickett's division at the Angle is referred to as the "High-water mark of the Confederacy".[78] Union and Confederate soldiers locked in hand-to-hand combat, attacking with their rifles, bayonets, rocks and even their bare hands. Armistead ordered his Confederates to turn two captured cannons against Union troops, but discovered that there was no ammunition left, the last double canister shots having been used against the charging Confederates. Armistead was wounded shortly afterward three times.

Cavalry battles

There were two significant cavalry engagements on July 3. Stuart was sent to guard the Confederate left flank and was to be prepared to exploit any success the infantry might achieve on Cemetery Hill by flanking the Union right and hitting their trains and lines of communications. Three miles (5 km) east of Gettysburg, in what is now called "East Cavalry Field" (not shown on the accompanying map, but between the York and Hanover Roads), Stuart's forces collided with Union cavalry: Brig. Gen. David McMurtrie Gregg's division and Brig. Gen. Custer's brigade. A lengthy mounted battle, including hand-to-hand sabre combat, ensued. Custer's charge, leading the 1st Michigan Cavalry, blunted the attack by Wade Hampton's brigade, blocking Stuart from achieving his objectives in the Union rear.[citation needed]

Meanwhile, after hearing news of the day's victory, Brig. Gen. Judson Kilpatrick launched a cavalry attack against the infantry positions of Longstreet's Corps southwest of Big Round Top. Brig. Gen. Elon J. Farnsworth protested against the futility of such a move, but obeyed orders. Farnsworth was killed in the attack, and his brigade suffered significant losses.[79]



"The Harvest of Death": Union dead on the battlefield at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, photographed July 5 or July 6, 1863, by Timothy H. O'Sullivan

The two armies suffered between 46,000 and 51,000 casualties, nearly one third of all total troops engaged, 28% of the Army of the Potomac and 37% of the Army of Northern Virginia.[80] Union casualties were 23,055 (3,155 killed, 14,531 wounded, 5,369 captured or missing),[8] while Confederate casualties are more difficult to estimate. Many authors have referred to as many as 28,000 Confederate casualties,[81] and Busey and Martin's more recent 2005 work, Regimental Strengths and Losses at Gettysburg, documents 23,231 (4,708 killed, 12,693 wounded, 5,830 captured or missing).[9] Nearly a third of Lee's general officers were killed, wounded, or captured.[82] The casualties for both sides during the entire campaign were 57,225.[83]

In addition to being the deadliest battle of the war, Gettysburg also had the highest number of generals killed in action. The Confederacy lost generals Paul Jones Semmes, William Barksdale, William Dorsey Pender, Richard Garnett, and Lewis Armistead, as well as J. Johnston Pettigrew during the retreat after the battle. The Union lost Generals John Reynolds, Samuel K. Zook, Stephen H. Weed, and Elon J. Farnsworth, as well as Strong Vincent, who after being mortally wounded was given a deathbed promotion to brigadier general. Additional senior officer casualties included the wounding of Union Generals Dan Sickles (lost a leg), Francis C. Barlow, Daniel Butterfield, and Winfield Scott Hancock. For the Confederacy, Major General John Bell Hood lost the use of his left arm, while Major General Henry Heth received a shot to the head on the first day of battle (though incapacitated for the rest of the battle, he remarkably survived without long-term injuries, credited in part due to his hat stuffed full of paper dispatches). Confederate Generals James L. Kemper and Isaac R. Trimble were severely wounded during Pickett's charge and captured during the Confederate retreat. General James J. Archer, in command of a brigade that most likely was responsible for killing Reynolds, was taken prisoner shortly after Reynolds' death.[citation needed]

The following tables summarize casualties by corps for the Union and Confederate forces during the three-day battle.[84]

John L. Burns, veteran of the War of 1812, civilian who fought at the Battle of Gettysburg with Union troops, standing with bayoneted musket. Mathew Brady's National Photographic Portrait Galleries, photographer. From the Liljenquist Family Collection of Civil War Photographs, Prints and Photographs Division, Library of Congress
Union Corps Casualties (k/w/m)
I Corps 6059 (666/3231/2162)
II Corps 4369 (797/3194/378)
III Corps 4211 (593/3029/589)
V Corps 2187 (365/1611/211)
VI Corps 242 (27/185/30)
XI Corps 3801 (369/1922/1510)
XII Corps 1082 (204/812/66)
Cavalry Corps 852 (91/354/407)
Artillery Reserve 242 (43/187/12)
Confederate Corps Casualties (k/w/m)
First Corps 7665 (1617/4205/1843)
Second Corps 6686 (1301/3629/1756)
Third Corps 8495 (1724/4683/2088)
Cavalry Corps 380 (66/174/140)

Bruce Catton wrote, "The town of Gettysburg looked as if some universal moving day had been interrupted by catastrophe."[85] But there was only one documented civilian death during the battle: Ginnie Wade (also widely known as Jennie), 20 years old, was hit by a stray bullet that passed through her kitchen in town while she was making bread.[86] Another notable civilian casualty was John L. Burns, a 69-year old veteran of the War of 1812 who walked to the front lines on the first day of battle and participated in heavy combat as a volunteer, receiving numerous wounds in the process. Despite his age and injuries, Burns survived the battle and lived until 1872.[87] Nearly 8,000 had been killed outright; these bodies, lying in the hot summer sun, needed to be buried quickly. Over 3,000 horse carcasses[88] were burned in a series of piles south of town; townsfolk became violently ill from the stench.[89] Meanwhile, the town of Gettysburg, with its population of just 2,400, found itself tasked with taking care of 14,000 wounded Union troops and an additional 8,000 Confederate prisoners.[90]

Confederate retreat

Gettysburg Campaign (July 5 – July 14, 1863)

The armies stared at one another in a heavy rain across the bloody fields on July 4, the same day that, some 900 miles (1,500 km) away, the Vicksburg garrison surrendered to Maj. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant. Lee had reformed his lines into a defensive position on Seminary Ridge the night of July 3, evacuating the town of Gettysburg. The Confederates remained on the battlefield, hoping that Meade would attack, but the cautious Union commander decided against the risk, a decision for which he would later be criticized. Both armies began to collect their remaining wounded and bury some of the dead. A proposal by Lee for a prisoner exchange was rejected by Meade.[91]

Lee started his Army of Northern Virginia in motion late the evening of July 4 towards Fairfield and Chambersburg. Cavalry under Brig. Gen. John D. Imboden was entrusted to escort the miles-long wagon train of supplies and wounded men that Lee wanted to take back to Virginia with him, using the route through Cashtown and Hagerstown to Williamsport, Maryland. Meade's army followed, although the pursuit was half-spirited. The recently rain-swollen Potomac trapped Lee's army on the north bank of the river for a time, but when the Union troops finally caught up, the Confederates had forded the river. The rear-guard action at Falling Waters on July 14 added some more names to the long casualty lists, including General Pettigrew, who was mortally wounded.[92] General James L. Kemper, severely wounded during Pickett's charge, was captured during Lee's retreat.[citation needed]

In a brief letter to Maj. Gen. Henry W. Halleck written on July 7, Lincoln remarked on the two major Union victories at Gettysburg and Vicksburg. He continued:

Now, if Gen. Meade can complete his work so gloriously prosecuted thus far, by the literal or substantial destruction of Lee's army, the rebellion will be over.[93]

Halleck then relayed the contents of Lincoln's letter to Meade in a telegram. However, the Army of the Potomac was exhausted by days of fighting and heavy losses. Furthermore, Meade was forced to detach 4,000 troops North to suppress the New York City Draft Riots,[94] further reducing the effectiveness of his pursuit. Despite repeated pleas from Lincoln and Halleck, which continued over the next week, Meade did not pursue Lee's army aggressively enough to destroy it before it crossed back over the Potomac River to safety in the South. The campaign continued into Virginia with light engagements until July 23, in the minor Battle of Manassas Gap, after which Meade abandoned any attempts at pursuit and the two armies took up positions across from each other on the Rappahannock River.[95]

Union reaction to the news of the victory

The news of the Union victory electrified the North. A headline in The Philadelphia Inquirer proclaimed "VICTORY! WATERLOO ECLIPSED!" New York diarist George Templeton Strong wrote:[96]

The results of this victory are priceless. ... The charm of Robert E. Lee's invincibility is broken. The Army of the Potomac has at last found a general that can handle it, and has stood nobly up to its terrible work in spite of its long disheartening list of hard-fought failures. ... Copperheads are palsied and dumb for the moment at least. ... Government is strengthened four-fold at home and abroad.

— George Templeton Strong, Diary, p. 330.

However, the Union enthusiasm soon dissipated as the public realized that Lee's army had escaped destruction and the war would continue. Lincoln complained to Secretary of the Navy Gideon Welles that "Our army held the war in the hollow of their hand and they would not close it!"[97] Brig. Gen. Alexander S. Webb wrote to his father on July 17, stating that such Washington politicians as "Chase, Seward and others," disgusted with Meade, "write to me that Lee really won that Battle!"[98]

Effect on the Confederacy

In fact, the Confederates had lost militarily and also politically. During the final hours of the battle, Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens was approaching the Union lines at Norfolk, Virginia, under a flag of truce. Although his formal instructions from Confederate President Jefferson Davis had limited his powers to negotiate on prisoner exchanges and other procedural matters, historian James M. McPherson speculates that he had informal goals of presenting peace overtures. Davis had hoped that Stephens would reach Washington from the south while Lee's victorious army was marching toward it from the north. President Lincoln, upon hearing of the Gettysburg results, refused Stephens's request to pass through the lines. Furthermore, when the news reached London, any lingering hopes of European recognition of the Confederacy were finally abandoned. Henry Adams, whose father was serving as the U.S ambassador to the United Kingdom at the time, wrote, "The disasters of the rebels are unredeemed by even any hope of success. It is now conceded that all idea of intervention is at an end."[99]

Compounding the effects of the defeat would be the end of the Siege of Vicksburg, which surrendered to Grant's Federal armies in the West on July 4, the day after the Gettysburg battle.[citation needed]

The immediate reaction of the Southern military and public sectors was that Gettysburg was a setback, not a disaster. The sentiment was that Lee had been successful on July 1 and had fought a valiant battle on July 2–3, but could not dislodge the Union Army from the strong defensive position to which it fled. The Confederates successfully stood their ground on July 4 and withdrew only after they realized Meade would not attack them. The withdrawal to the Potomac that could have been a disaster was handled masterfully. Furthermore, the Army of the Potomac had been kept away from Virginia farmlands for the summer and all predicted that Meade would be too timid to threaten them for the rest of the year. Lee himself had a positive view of the campaign, writing to his wife that the army had returned "rather sooner than I had originally contemplated, but having accomplished what I proposed on leaving the Rappahannock, viz., relieving the Valley of the presence of the enemy and drawing his Army north of the Potomac." He was quoted as saying to Maj. John Seddon, brother of the Confederate secretary of war, "Sir, we did whip them at Gettysburg, and it will be seen for the next six months that that army will be as quiet as a sucking dove." Some Southern publications, such as the Charleston Mercury, were critical of Lee's actions. On August 8, Lee offered his resignation to President Davis, who quickly rejected it.[100]

Gettysburg became a postbellum focus of the "Lost Cause", a movement by writers such as Edward A. Pollard and Jubal Early to explain the reasons for the Confederate defeat in the war. A fundamental premise of their argument was that the South was doomed because of the overwhelming advantage in manpower and industrial might possessed by the North. They also contend that Robert E. Lee, who up until this time had been almost invincible, was betrayed by the failures of some of his key subordinates at Gettysburg: Ewell, for failing to seize Cemetery Hill on July 1; Stuart, for depriving the army of cavalry intelligence for a key part of the campaign; and especially Longstreet, for failing to attack on July 2 as early and as forcefully as Lee had originally intended. In this view, Gettysburg was seen as a great lost opportunity, in which a decisive victory by Lee could have meant the end of the war in the Confederacy's favor.[101]

After the war, General Pickett was asked why Confederates lost at Gettysburg. He was reported to have said, "I always thought the Yankees had something to do with it."[102]

Gettysburg Address

Gettysburg, November 19, 1863. Crowd of citizens, soldiers, and etc., with a red arrow indicating Abraham Lincoln

The ravages of war were still evident in Gettysburg more than four months later when, on November 19, the Soldiers' National Cemetery was dedicated. During this ceremony, President Abraham Lincoln honored the fallen and redefined the purpose of the war in his historic Gettysburg Address.[103]

Medal of Honor

There were 72 Medals of Honor awarded for the Gettysburg Campaign. 64 of the awards were for actions taken during the battle itself, with the first recipient being awarded in December 1864. The last Medal of Honor was posthumously awarded to Lieutenant Alonzo Cushing in 2014.[104]

Historical assessment

Decisive victory controversies

The nature of the result of the Battle of Gettysburg has been the subject of controversy. Although not seen as overwhelmingly significant at the time, particularly since the war continued for almost two years, in retrospect it has often been cited as the "turning point", usually in combination with the fall of Vicksburg the following day.[13] This is based on the observation that, after Gettysburg, Lee's army conducted no more strategic offensives—his army merely reacted to the initiative of Ulysses S. Grant in 1864 and 1865—and by the speculative viewpoint of the Lost Cause writers that a Confederate victory at Gettysburg might have resulted in the end of the war.[105]

[The Army of the Potomac] had won a victory. It might be less of a victory than Mr. Lincoln had hoped for, but it was nevertheless a victory—and, because of that, it was no longer possible for the Confederacy to win the war. The North might still lose it, to be sure, if the soldiers or the people should lose heart, but outright defeat was no longer in the cards.

Bruce Catton, Glory Road[106]

It is currently a widely held view that Gettysburg was a decisive victory for the Union, but the term is considered imprecise. It is inarguable that Lee's offensive on July 3 was turned back decisively and his campaign in Pennsylvania was terminated prematurely (although the Confederates at the time argued that this was a temporary setback and that the goals of the campaign were largely met). However, when the more common definition of "decisive victory" is intended—an indisputable military victory of a battle that determines or significantly influences the ultimate result of a conflict—historians are divided. For example, David J. Eicher called Gettysburg a "strategic loss for the Confederacy" and James M. McPherson wrote that "Lee and his men would go on to earn further laurels. But they never again possessed the power and reputation they carried into Pennsylvania those palmy summer days of 1863."[107]

However, Herman Hattaway and Archer Jones wrote that the "strategic impact of the Battle of Gettysburg was ... fairly limited." Steven E. Woodworth wrote that "Gettysburg proved only the near impossibility of decisive action in the Eastern theater." Edwin Coddington pointed out the heavy toll on the Army of the Potomac and that "after the battle Meade no longer possessed a truly effective instrument for the accomplishments of his task. The army needed a thorough reorganization with new commanders and fresh troops, but these changes were not made until Grant appeared on the scene in March 1864." Joseph T. Glatthaar wrote that "Lost opportunities and near successes plagued the Army of Northern Virginia during its Northern invasion," yet after Gettysburg, "without the distractions of duty as an invading force, without the breakdown of discipline, the Army of Northern Virginia [remained] an extremely formidable force." Ed Bearss wrote, "Lee's invasion of the North had been a costly failure. Nevertheless, at best the Army of the Potomac had simply preserved the strategic stalemate in the Eastern Theater ..."[108] Furthermore, the Confederacy soon proved it was still capable of winning significant victories over the Northern forces in both the East (Battle of Cold Harbor) and West (Battle of Chickamauga).[citation needed]

Peter Carmichael refers to the military context for the armies, the "horrendous losses at Chancellorsville and Gettysburg, which effectively destroyed Lee's offensive capacity," implying that these cumulative losses were not the result of a single battle. Thomas Goss, writing in the U.S. Army's Military Review journal on the definition of "decisive" and the application of that description to Gettysburg, concludes: "For all that was decided and accomplished, the Battle of Gettysburg fails to earn the label 'decisive battle'."[109] The military historian John Keegan agrees. Gettysburg was a landmark battle, the largest of the war and it would not be surpassed. The Union had restored to it the belief in certain victory, and the loss dispirited the Confederacy. If "not exactly a decisive battle", Gettysburg was the end of Confederate use of Northern Virginia as a military buffer zone, the setting for Grant's Overland Campaign.[110]

Lee vs. Meade

Photo of a balding and bearded George Meade in a military uniform. The somewhat thin figure is standing while holding a kepi.
George G. Meade

Prior to Gettysburg, Robert E. Lee had established a reputation as an almost invincible general, achieving stunning victories against superior numbers—although usually at the cost of high casualties to his army—during the Seven Days, the Northern Virginia Campaign (including the Second Battle of Bull Run), Fredericksburg, and Chancellorsville. Only the Maryland Campaign, with its tactically inconclusive Battle of Antietam, had been less than successful. Therefore, historians have attempted to explain how Lee's winning streak was interrupted so dramatically at Gettysburg. Although the issue is tainted by attempts to portray history and Lee's reputation in a manner supporting different partisan goals, the major factors in Lee's loss arguably can be attributed to: (1) his overconfidence in the invincibility of his men; (2) the performance of his subordinates, and his management thereof; (3) his failing health, and (4) the performance of his opponent, George G. Meade, and the Army of the Potomac.[citation needed]

Photo of white-haired and bearded Robert E. Lee in a double breasted gray uniform with three stars on his collar
Robert E. Lee

Throughout the campaign, Lee was influenced by the belief that his men were invincible; most of Lee's experiences with the Army of Northern Virginia had convinced him of this, including the great victory at Chancellorsville in early May and the rout of the Union troops at Gettysburg on July 1. Since morale plays an important role in military victory when other factors are equal, Lee did not want to dampen his army's desire to fight and resisted suggestions, principally by Longstreet, to withdraw from the recently captured Gettysburg to select a ground more favorable to his army. War correspondent Peter W. Alexander wrote that Lee "acted, probably, under the impression that his troops were able to carry any position however formidable. If such was the case, he committed an error, such however as the ablest commanders will sometimes fall into." Lee himself concurred with this judgment, writing to President Davis, "No blame can be attached to the army for its failure to accomplish what was projected by me, nor should it be censured for the unreasonable expectations of the public—I am alone to blame, in perhaps expecting too much of its prowess and valor."[111]

The most controversial assessments of the battle involve the performance of Lee's subordinates. The dominant theme of the Lost Cause writers and many other historians is that Lee's senior generals failed him in crucial ways, directly causing the loss of the battle; the alternative viewpoint is that Lee did not manage his subordinates adequately, and did not thereby compensate for their shortcomings.[112] Two of his corps commanders—Richard S. Ewell and A.P. Hill—had only recently been promoted and were not fully accustomed to Lee's style of command, in which he provided only general objectives and guidance to their former commander, Stonewall Jackson; Jackson translated these into detailed, specific orders to his division commanders.[113] All four of Lee's principal commanders received criticism during the campaign and battle:[114]

  • James Longstreet suffered most severely from the wrath of the Lost Cause authors, not the least because he directly criticized Lee in postbellum writings and became a Republican after the war. His critics accuse him of attacking much later than Lee intended on July 2, squandering a chance to hit the Union Army before its defensive positions had firmed up. They also question his lack of motivation to attack strongly on July 2 and 3 because he had argued that the army should have maneuvered to a place where it would force Meade to attack them. The alternative view is that Lee was in close contact with Longstreet during the battle, agreed to delays on the morning of July 2, and never criticized Longstreet's performance. (There is also considerable speculation about what an attack might have looked like before Dan Sickles moved the III Corps toward the Peach Orchard.)[115]
  • J.E.B. Stuart deprived Lee of cavalry intelligence during a good part of the campaign by taking his three best brigades on a path away from the army's. This arguably led to Lee's surprise at Hooker's vigorous pursuit; the engagement on July 1 that escalated into the full battle prematurely; and it also prevented Lee from understanding the full disposition of the enemy on July 2. The disagreements regarding Stuart's culpability for the situation originate in the relatively vague orders issued by Lee, but most modern historians agree that both generals were responsible to some extent for the failure of the cavalry's mission early in the campaign.[116]
  • Richard S. Ewell has been universally criticized for failing to seize the high ground on the afternoon of July 1. Once again the disagreement centers on Lee's orders, which provided general guidance for Ewell to act "if practicable." Many historians speculate that Stonewall Jackson, if he had survived Chancellorsville, would have aggressively seized Culp's Hill, rendering Cemetery Hill indefensible, and changing the entire complexion of the battle. A differently worded order from Lee might have made the difference with this subordinate.[117]
  • A.P. Hill has received some criticism for his ineffective performance. His actions caused the battle to begin and then escalate on July 1, despite Lee's orders not to bring on a general engagement (although historians point out that Hill kept Lee well informed of his actions during the day). However, Hill's illness minimized his personal involvement in the remainder of the battle, and Lee took the explicit step of temporarily removing troops from Hill's corps and giving them to Longstreet for Pickett's Charge.[118]
Photo of dark-haired and bearded Winfield S. Hancock in a dark uniform with a determined look
Winfield S. Hancock

In addition to Hill's illness, Lee's performance was affected by heart troubles, which would eventually lead to his death in 1870; he had been diagnosed with pericarditis by his staff physicians in March 1863, though modern doctors believe he had in fact suffered a heart attack.[119] He wrote to Jefferson Davis that his physical condition prevented him from offering full supervision in the field, and said, "I am so dull that in making use of the eyes of others I am frequently misled."[120]

As a final factor, Lee faced a new and formidable opponent in George G. Meade, and the Army of the Potomac fought well on its home territory. Although new to his army command, Meade deployed his forces relatively effectively; relied on strong subordinates such as Winfield S. Hancock to make decisions where and when they were needed; took great advantage of defensive positions; nimbly shifted defensive resources on interior lines to parry strong threats; and, unlike some of his predecessors, stood his ground throughout the battle in the face of fierce Confederate attacks.[citation needed]

Lee was quoted before the battle as saying Meade "would commit no blunders on my front and if I make one ... will make haste to take advantage of it." That prediction proved to be correct at Gettysburg. Stephen Sears wrote, "The fact of the matter is that George G. Meade, unexpectedly and against all odds, thoroughly outgeneraled Robert E. Lee at Gettysburg." Edwin B. Coddington wrote that the soldiers of the Army of the Potomac received a "sense of triumph which grew into an imperishable faith in [themselves]. The men knew what they could do under an extremely competent general; one of lesser ability and courage could well have lost the battle."[121]

Meade had his own detractors as well. Similar to the situation with Lee, Meade suffered partisan attacks about his performance at Gettysburg, but he had the misfortune of experiencing them in person. Supporters of his predecessor, Maj. Gen. Joseph Hooker, lambasted Meade before the U.S. Congress's Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War, where Radical Republicans suspected that Meade was a Copperhead and tried in vain to relieve him from command. Daniel E. Sickles and Daniel Butterfield accused Meade of planning to retreat from Gettysburg during the battle. Most politicians, including Lincoln, criticized Meade for what they considered to be his half-hearted pursuit of Lee after the battle. A number of Meade's most competent subordinates—Winfield S. Hancock, John Gibbon, Gouverneur K. Warren, and Henry J. Hunt, all heroes of the battle—defended Meade in print, but Meade was embittered by the overall experience.[122]

Battlefield preservation

CW Arty M1857 Napoleon front.jpg
M1857 12-Pounder "Napoleon" at Gettysburg National Military Park Gettysburg, Pennsylvania.
LocationAdams, Pennsylvania, United States
WebsitePark Home (NPS.gov)

Today, the Gettysburg National Cemetery and Gettysburg National Military Park are maintained by the U.S. National Park Service as two of the nation's most revered historical landmarks. Although Gettysburg is one of the best known of all Civil War battlefields, it too faces threats to its preservation and interpretation. Many historically significant locations on the battlefield lie outside the boundaries of Gettysburg National Military Park and are vulnerable to residential or commercial development.[citation needed]

On July 20, 2009, a Comfort Inn and Suites opened on Cemetery Hill, adjacent to Evergreen Cemetery, just one of many modern edifices infringing on the historic field. The Baltimore Pike corridor attracts development that concerns preservationists.[123]

Some preservation successes have emerged in recent years. Two proposals to open a casino at Gettysburg were defeated in 2006 and most recently in 2011, when public pressure forced the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board to reject the proposed gambling hub at the intersection of Routes 15 and 30, near East Cavalry Field.[124] The Civil War Trust also successfully purchased and transferred 95 acres at the former site of the Gettysburg Country Club to the control of the U.S. Department of the Interior in 2011.[125]

Less than half of the over 11,500 acres on the old Gettysburg Battlefield have been preserved for posterity thus far. The Civil War Trust (a division of the American Battlefield Trust) and its partners have acquired and preserved 1,022 acres (4.14 km2) of the battlefield in more than 30 separate transactions since 1997.[126] Some of these acres are now among the 4,998 acres of the Gettysburg National Military Park.[127] In 2015, the Trust made one of its most important and expensive acquisitions, paying $6 million for a four-acre parcel that included the stone house that Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee used as his headquarters during the battle. The Trust razed a motel, restaurant and other buildings within the parcel to restore Lee's Headquarters and the site to their wartime appearance, adding interpretive signs. It opened the site to the public in October 2016.[128]

Commemoration in U.S. postage and coinage

Gettysburg Centennial Commemorative issue of 1963
Gettysburg National Military Park Quarter, issued 2011

During the Civil War Centennial, the U.S. Post Office issued five postage stamps commemorating the 100th anniversaries of famous battles, as they occurred over a four-year period, beginning with the Battle of Fort Sumter Centennial issue of 1961. The Battle of Shiloh commemorative stamp was issued in 1962, the Battle of Gettysburg in 1963, the Battle of the Wilderness in 1964, and the Appomattox Centennial commemorative stamp in 1965.[129] A commemorative half dollar for the battle was produced in 1936. As was typical for the period, mintage for the coin was very low, just 26,928.[130] On January 24, 2011, the America the Beautiful quarters released a 25-cent coin commemorating Gettysburg National Military Park and the Battle of Gettysburg. The reverse side of the coin depicts the monument on Cemetery Ridge to the 72nd Pennsylvania Infantry.[131]

In popular culture

Film records survive of two Gettysburg reunions, held on the battlefield. At the 50th anniversary (1913), veterans re-enacted Pickett's Charge in a spirit of reconciliation, a meeting that carried great emotional force for both sides. At the 75th anniversary (1938), 2500 veterans attended, and there was a ceremonial mass hand-shake across a stone wall. This was recorded on sound film, and some Confederates can be heard giving the Rebel Yell.

The Battle of Gettysburg was depicted in the 1993 film Gettysburg, based on Michael Shaara's 1974 novel The Killer Angels. The film and novel focused primarily on the actions of Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, John Buford, Robert E. Lee, and James Longstreet during the battle. The first day focused on Buford's cavalry defense, the second day on Chamberlain's defense at Little Round Top, and the third day on Pickett's Charge.

The south winning the Battle of Gettysburg is a popular premise for a point of divergence in American Civil War alternate histories. Here are some examples which either depict or make significant reference to an alternate Battle of Gettysburg (sometimes simply inserting fantasy or sci-fi elements in an account of the battle):

See also


  1. ^ Coddington, p. 573. See the discussion regarding historians' judgment on whether Gettysburg should be considered a decisive victory.
  2. ^ Official Records, Series I, Volume XXVII, Part 1, pages 155–168
  3. ^ Official Records, Series I, Volume XXVII, Part 2, pages 283–291
  4. ^ Official Records, Series I, Volume XXVII, Part 1, page 151
  5. ^ a b Busey and Martin, p. 125: "Engaged strength" at the battle was 93,921.
  6. ^ a b Busey and Martin, p. 260, state that "engaged strength" at the battle was 71,699; McPherson, p. 648, lists the strength at the start of the campaign as 75,000.
  7. ^ Official Records, Series I, Volume XXVII, Part 1, page 187
  8. ^ a b Busey and Martin, p. 125.
  9. ^ a b Busey and Martin, p. 260, cite 23,231 total (4,708 killed;12,693 wounded;5,830 captured/missing).
    See the section on casualties for a discussion of alternative Confederate casualty estimates, which have been cited as high as 28,000.
  10. ^ Official Records, Series I, Volume XXVII, Part 2, pages 338–346
  11. ^ Robert D. Quigley, Civil War Spoken Here: A Dictionary of Mispronounced People, Places and Things of the 1860s (Collingswood, NJ: C. W. Historicals, 1993), p. 68. ISBN 0-9637745-0-6.
  12. ^ The Battle of Antietam, the culmination of Lee's first invasion of the North, had the largest number of casualties in a single day, about 23,000.
  13. ^ a b Rawley, p. 147; Sauers, p. 827; Gallagher, Lee and His Army, p. 83; McPherson, p. 665; Eicher, p. 550. Gallagher and McPherson cite the combination of Gettysburg and Vicksburg as the turning point. Eicher uses the arguably related expression, "High-water mark of the Confederacy".
  14. ^ "Battle of Gettysburg". Encyclopædia Britannica. Britannica.com. February 15, 2017. Retrieved July 3, 2012.
  15. ^ Murray, Williamson; Hsieh, Wayne Wei-siang (2016). "The War in the East, 1863". A Savage War:A Military History of the Civil War. Princeton University Press. p. 278. ISBN 978-0-69-116940-8.
  16. ^ a b Symonds, pp. 49–54.
  17. ^ a b Loewen, James W. (1999). Lies Across America: What American Historic Sites Get Wrong. New York City, New York: Touchstone, Simon & Schuster, Inc. p. 350. Retrieved March 5, 2016. Lee's troops seized scores of free black people in Maryland and Pennsylvania and sent them south into slavery. This was in keeping with Confederate national policy, which virtually re-enslaved free people of color into work gangs on earthworks throughout the south.
  18. ^ a b Simpson, Brooks D. (July 5, 2015). "The Soldiers' Flag?". Crossroads. WordPress. [T]he Army of Northern Virginia was under orders to capture and send south supposed escaped slaves during that army's invasion of Pennsylvania in 1863.
  19. ^ Coddington, pp. 8–9; Eicher, p. 490.
  20. ^ Eicher, pp. 489–491.
  21. ^ Symonds, p. 36.
  22. ^ Trudeau, pp. 45, 66.
  23. ^ Moore, Frank (September 25, 1864). "The Rebellion Record: A Diary of American Events, with Documents, Narratives Illustrative Incidents, Poetry, Etc". Putnam – via Internet Archive.
  24. ^ Nye, pp. 272–278.
  25. ^ Symonds, pp. 41–43; Sears, pp. 103–106; Esposito, text for Map 94 (Map 34b in the online version); Eicher, pp. 504–507; McPherson, p. 649.
  26. ^ Sears, p. 123; Trudeau, p. 128.
  27. ^ Coddington, pp. 181, 189.
  28. ^ Eicher, pp. 508–509, discounts Heth's claim because the previous visit by Early to Gettysburg would have made the lack of shoe factories or stores obvious. However, many mainstream historians accept Heth's account: Sears, p. 136; Foote, p. 465; Clark, p. 35; Tucker, pp. 97–98; Martin, p. 25; Pfanz, First Day, p. 25.
  29. ^ Eicher, p. 508; Tucker, pp. 99–102.
  30. ^ Eicher, pp. 502–503.
  31. ^ Coddington, p. 122.
  32. ^ Eicher, p. 503.
  33. ^ Sears, pp. 155–158.
  34. ^ "Battle of Gettysburg: Who Really Fired the First Shot – HistoryNet". www.historynet.com.
  35. ^ "The Battle of Gettysburg and the American Civil War – The First Shot Marker". archive.org. Archived from the original on April 16, 2005.
  36. ^ Martin, pp. 80–81. The troopers carried single-shot breechloading carbines manufactured by Sharps, Burnside, and others. It is a modern myth that they were armed with multi-shot repeating carbines. Nevertheless, they were able to fire two or three times faster than a muzzle-loaded carbine or rifle.
  37. ^ Symonds, p. 71; Coddington, p. 266; Eicher, pp. 510–511.
  38. ^ Tucker, pp. 112–117.
  39. ^ Foote, p. 468
  40. ^ Tucker, p. 184; Symonds, p. 74; Pfanz, First Day, pp. 269–275.
  41. ^ Busey and Martin, pp. 298, 501.
  42. ^ Pfanz, First Day, pp. 275–293.
  43. ^ Clark, p. 53.
  44. ^ Pfanz, First Day, p. 158.
  45. ^ Pfanz, First Day, p. 230.
  46. ^ Pfanz, First Day, pp. 156–238.
  47. ^ Pfanz, First Day, p. 294.
  48. ^ Pfanz, First Day, pp. 337–338; Sears, pp. 223–225.
  49. ^ Martin, pp. 482–488.
  50. ^ Pfanz, First Day, p. 344; Eicher, p. 517; Sears, p. 228; Trudeau, p. 253. Both Sears and Trudeau record "if possible."
  51. ^ Martin, p. 9, citing Thomas L. Livermore's Numbers & Losses in the Civil War in America (Houghton Mifflin, 1900).
  52. ^ Longstreet, From Manassas to Appomattox: Memoirs of the Civil War in America, (Philadelphia:J. B. Lippincott, 1896), pp. 364, 365
  53. ^ Clark, p. 74; Eicher, p. 521.
  54. ^ James Longstreet, From Manassas to Appomattox. (Philadelphia, PA: J. R. Lippincott company, 1896), p. 365.
  55. ^ Sears, p. 255; Clark, p. 69.
  56. ^ a b Edward Porter Alexander, Military Memoirs of a Confederate. (New York: Charles Scribner & Sons, 1907), p. 408
  57. ^ Longstreet, From Manassas to Appomattox: Memoirs of the Civil War in America, (Philadelphia:J. B. Lippincott, 1896), pp. 364, 368
  58. ^ Longstreet, From Manassas to Appomattox: Memoirs of the Civil War in America, (Philadelphia:J. B. Lippincott, 1896), p. 365
  59. ^ Longstreet, From Mannassas to Appomattox: Memoirs of the Civil War in America, p. 366
  60. ^ Pfanz, Second Day, pp. 119–123.
  61. ^ Pfanz, Second Day, pp. 93–97; Eicher, pp. 523–524.
  62. ^ Longstreet, From Manassas to Appomattox: Memoirs of the Civil War in America, p. 369
  63. ^ Eicher
  64. ^ Harman, p. 59.
  65. ^ Harman, p. 57.
  66. ^ Sears, pp. 312–324; Eicher, pp. 530–535; Coddington, p. 423.
  67. ^ Eicher, pp. 527–530; Clark, pp. 81–85.
  68. ^ Morgan, James. "Who saved Little Round Top?". Camp Chase Gazette. Retrieved February 21, 2016. Col. Chamberlain did not lead the charge. Lt. Holman Melcher was the first officer down the slope.
  69. ^ Edward Porter Alexander, Military Memoirs of a Confederate. (New York: Charles Scribner & Sons, 1907), p. 409
  70. ^ Eicher, pp. 537–538; Sauers, p. 835; Pfanz, Culp's Hill, pp. 205–234; Clark, pp. 115–116.
  71. ^ Report of Maj. Gen. R. E. Rodes, CSA, commanding division. JUNE 3 – August 1, 1863.--The Gettysburg Campaign. O.R.-- SERIES I—VOLUME XXVII/2 [S# 44]
  72. ^ Sears, p. 257; Longacre, pp. 198–199.
  73. ^ Harman, p. 63.
  74. ^ Pfanz, Culp's Hill, pp. 284–352; Eicher, pp. 540–541; Coddington, pp. 465–475.
  75. ^ Eicher, p. 542; Coddington, pp. 485–486.
  76. ^ Longstreet, James (1896). From Manassas to Appomattox: Memoirs of the Civil War in America. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA: J. B. Lippincott. pp. 386–387.
  77. ^ See discussion of varying gun estimates in Pickett's Charge article footnote.
  78. ^ McPherson, pp. 661–663; Clark, pp. 133–144; Symonds, pp. 214–241; Eicher, pp. 543–549.
  79. ^ Eicher, pp. 549–550; Longacre, pp. 226–231, 240–44; Sauers, p. 836; Wert, pp. 272–280.
  80. ^ https://www.historynet.com/gettysburg-casualties
  81. ^ Examples of the varying Confederate casualties for July 1–3 are Sears, p. 498 (22,625); Coddington, p. 536 (20,451, "and very likely more"); Trudeau, p. 529 (22,874); Eicher, p. 550 (22,874, "but probably actually totaled 28,000 or more"); McPherson, p. 664 (28,000); Esposito, map 99 ("near 28,000"); Clark, p. 150 (20,448, "but probably closer to 28,000," which he inaccurately cites as a nearly 40% loss); Woodworth, p. 209 ("at least equal to Meade's and possibly as high as 28,000"); NPS (28,000)
  82. ^ Glatthaar, p. 282.
  83. ^ Sears, p. 513.
  84. ^ Busey and Martin, pp. 125–147, 260–315. Headquarters element casualties account for the minor differences in army totals stated previously.
  85. ^ Catton, p. 325.
  86. ^ Sears, p. 391.
  87. ^ "Gettysburg's Most Unlikely Hero, An Elderly Citizen Who Volunteered".
  88. ^ Sears, p. 511.
  89. ^ Woodworth, p. 216.
  90. ^ Leonard, Pat. "Nursing the Wounded at Gettysburg".
  91. ^ Eicher, p. 550; Coddington, pp. 539–544; Clark, pp. 146–147; Sears, p. 469; Wert, p. 300.
  92. ^ Clark, pp. 147–157; Longacre, pp. 268–269.
  93. ^ Coddington, p. 564.
  94. ^ https://www.history.com/topics/american-civil-war/draft-riots
  95. ^ Coddington, pp. 535–574; Sears, pp. 496–497; Eicher, p. 596; Wittenberg et al., One Continuous Fight, pp. 345–346.
  96. ^ McPherson, p. 664.
  97. ^ Donald, p. 446; Woodworth, p. 217.
  98. ^ Coddington, p. 573.
  99. ^ McPherson, pp. 650, 664.
  100. ^ Gallagher, Lee and His Army, pp. 86, 93, 102–05; Sears, pp. 501–502; McPherson, p. 665, in contrast to Gallagher, depicts Lee as "profoundly depressed" about the battle.
  101. ^ Gallagher, Lee and His Generals, pp. 207–208; Sears, p. 503; Woodworth, p. 221. Gallagher's essay "Jubal A. Early, The Lost Cause, and Civil War History: A Persistent Legacy" in Lee and His Generals is a good overview of the Lost Cause movement.
  102. ^ "This site is temporarily unavailable". www.brotherswar.com. Archived from the original on March 8, 2017. Retrieved January 19, 2017.
  103. ^ White, p. 251. White refers to Lincoln's use of the term "new birth of freedom" and writes, "The new birth that slowly emerged in Lincoln's politics meant that on November 19 at Gettysburg he was no longer, as in his inaugural address, defending an old Union but proclaiming a new Union. The old Union contained and attempted to restrain slavery. The new Union would fulfill the promise of liberty, the crucial step into the future that the Founders had failed to take."
  104. ^ Bradley, Mark. "Medal of Honor – 1st Lt. Alonzo H. Cushing". U.S. Army Center of Military History. Retrieved September 21, 2018.
  105. ^ McPherson, p. 665; Gallagher, Lee and His Generals, pp. 207–208.
  106. ^ Catton, p. 331.
  107. ^ Eicher, p. 550; McPherson, p. 665
  108. ^ Hattaway and Jones, p. 415; Woodworth, p. xiii; Coddington, p. 573; Glatthaar, p. 288; Bearss, p. 202.
  109. ^ Carmichael, p. xvii; Goss, Major Thomas (July–August 2004). "Gettysburg's "Decisive Battle"" (PDF). Military Review: 11–16. Retrieved November 11, 2009.
  110. ^ Keegan, pp. 202, 239.
  111. ^ Sears, pp. 499–500; Glatthaar, p. 287; Fuller, p. 198, states that Lee's "overweening confidence in the superiority of his soldiers over his enemy possessed him."
  112. ^ For example, Sears, p. 504: "In the final analysis, it was Robert E. Lee's inability to manage his generals that went to the heart of the failed campaign." Glatthaar, pp. 285–286, criticizes the inability of the generals to coordinate their actions as a whole. Fuller, p. 198, states that Lee "maintained no grip over the operations" of his army.
  113. ^ Fuller, p. 195, for example, refers to orders to Stuart that "were as usual vague." Fuller, p. 197, wrote "As was [Lee's] custom, he relied on verbal instructions, and left all details to his subordinates."
  114. ^ Woodworth, pp. 209–210.
  115. ^ Sears, pp. 501–502; McPherson, pp. 656–657; Coddington, pp. 375–380; A more detailed collection of historical assessments of Longstreet at Gettysburg may be found in James Longstreet#Gettysburg.
  116. ^ Sears, p. 502; A more detailed collection of historical assessments of Stuart in the Gettysburg Campaign may be found in J.E.B. Stuart#Gettysburg.
  117. ^ McPherson, p. 654; Coddington, pp. 317–319; Eicher, pp. 517–518; Sears, p. 503.
  118. ^ Sears, pp. 502–503.
  119. ^ Schmidt, Jim (June 25, 2008). "Civil War Medicine (and Writing): Medical Department #18 – Lee's Health at Gettysburg".
  120. ^ Sears, p. 500.
  121. ^ Sears, p. 506; Coddington, p. 573.
  122. ^ Sears, pp. 505–507.
  123. ^ "Preservation Trust Helps Secure Key Piece of Ground in Gettysburg, Baltimore Civil War Roundtable Newsletter, August 2004" (PDF).
  124. ^ Gettysburg casino plan defeated, Penn State Civil War History Center, April 15, 2011 Archived April 20, 2013, at the Wayback Machine
  125. ^ Writer, SCOT ANDREW PITZER Times Staff. "Country club site acquisition ends 25-year Park Service effort".
  126. ^ [1] American Battlefield Trust "Saved Land" webpage. Accessed May 24, 2018.
  127. ^ "Gettysburg – American Battlefield Trust". www.battlefields.org.
  128. ^ [2] The Washington Post, "Lee's Gettysburg headquarters restored, set to open Oct. 28." Accessed May 24, 2018.
  129. ^ "Arago: 1963 Civil War Centennial Issue". arago.si.edu.
  130. ^ HNAI US Coin Auction Catalog #1145, Stamford, CT. Heritage Capital Corporation. 2010. p. 160.
  131. ^ "America the Beautiful Quarters® Program – U.S. Mint". www.usmint.gov.


  • Bearss, Edwin C. Fields of Honor: Pivotal Battles of the Civil War. Washington, D.C.: National Geographic Society, 2006. ISBN 0-7922-7568-3.
  • Busey, John W., and David G. Martin. Regimental Strengths and Losses at Gettysburg, 4th ed. Hightstown, NJ: Longstreet House, 2005. ISBN 0-944413-67-6.
  • Carmichael, Peter S., ed. Audacity Personified: The Generalship of Robert E. Lee. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2004. ISBN 0-8071-2929-1.
  • Catton, Bruce. Glory Road. Garden City, NY: Doubleday and Company, 1952. ISBN 0-385-04167-5.
  • Clark, Champ, and the Editors of Time-Life Books. Gettysburg: The Confederate High Tide. Alexandria, VA: Time-Life Books, 1985. ISBN 0-8094-4758-4.
  • Coddington, Edwin B. The Gettysburg Campaign; a study in command. New York: Scribner's, 1968. ISBN 0-684-84569-5.
  • Donald, David Herbert. Lincoln. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995. ISBN 0-684-80846-3.
  • Eicher, David J. The Longest Night: A Military History of the Civil War. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001. ISBN 0-684-84944-5.
  • Esposito, Vincent J. West Point Atlas of American Wars. New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1959. OCLC 5890637. The collection of maps (without explanatory text) is available online at the West Point website.
  • Foote, Shelby. The Civil War: A Narrative. Vol. 2, Fredericksburg to Meridian. New York: Random House, 1958. ISBN 0-394-49517-9.
  • Fuller, Maj. Gen. J. F. C. Grant and Lee: A Study in Personality and Generalship. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1957. ISBN 0-253-13400-5.
  • Gallagher, Gary W. Lee and His Army in Confederate History. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2001. ISBN 978-0-8078-2631-7.
  • Gallagher, Gary W. Lee and His Generals in War and Memory. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1998. ISBN 0-8071-2958-5.
  • Glatthaar, Joseph T. General Lee's Army: From Victory to Collapse. New York: Free Press, 2008. ISBN 978-0-684-82787-2.
  • Harman, Troy D. Lee's Real Plan at Gettysburg. Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 2003. ISBN 0-8117-0054-2.
  • Hattaway, Herman, and Archer Jones. How the North Won: A Military History of the Civil War. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1983. ISBN 0-252-00918-5.
  • Keegan, John. The American Civil War: A Military History. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2009. ISBN 978-0-307-26343-8.
  • Longacre, Edward G. The Cavalry at Gettysburg. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1986. ISBN 0-8032-7941-8.
  • McPherson, James M. Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era. Oxford History of the United States. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. ISBN 0-19-503863-0.
  • Martin, David G. Gettysburg July 1. rev. ed. Conshohocken, PA: Combined Publishing, 1996. ISBN 0-938289-81-0.
  • Murray, Williamson and Wayne Wei-siang Hsieh. "A Savage War:A Military History of the Civil War". Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2016. ISBN 978-0-69-116940-8.
  • Nye, Wilbur S. Here Come the Rebels! Dayton, OH: Morningside House, 1984. ISBN 0-89029-080-6. First published in 1965 by Louisiana State University Press.
  • Pfanz, Harry W. Gettysburg – The First Day. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2001. ISBN 0-8078-2624-3.
  • Pfanz, Harry W. Gettysburg – The Second Day. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1987. ISBN 0-8078-1749-X.
  • Pfanz, Harry W. Gettysburg: Culp's Hill and Cemetery Hill. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1993. ISBN 0-8078-2118-7.
  • Rawley, James A. (1966). Turning Points of the Civil War. University of Nebraska Press. ISBN 0-8032-8935-9. OCLC 44957745.
  • Sauers, Richard A. "Battle of Gettysburg." In Encyclopedia of the American Civil War: A Political, Social, and Military History, edited by David S. Heidler and Jeanne T. Heidler. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2000. ISBN 0-393-04758-X.
  • Sears, Stephen W. Gettysburg. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2003. ISBN 0-395-86761-4.
  • Symonds, Craig L. American Heritage History of the Battle of Gettysburg. New York: HarperCollins, 2001. ISBN 0-06-019474-X.
  • Tagg, Larry. The Generals of Gettysburg. Campbell, CA: Savas Publishing, 1998. ISBN 1-882810-30-9.
  • Trudeau, Noah Andre. Gettysburg: A Testing of Courage. New York: HarperCollins, 2002. ISBN 0-06-019363-8.
  • Tucker, Glenn. High Tide at Gettysburg. Dayton, OH: Morningside House, 1983. ISBN 978-0-914427-82-7. First published 1958 by Bobbs-Merrill Co.
  • Wert, Jeffry D. Gettysburg: Day Three. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001. ISBN 0-684-85914-9.
  • White, Ronald C., Jr. The Eloquent President: A Portrait of Lincoln Through His Words. New York: Random House, 2005. ISBN 1-4000-6119-9.
  • Wittenberg, Eric J., J. David Petruzzi, and Michael F. Nugent. One Continuous Fight: The Retreat from Gettysburg and the Pursuit of Lee's Army of Northern Virginia, July 4–14, 1863. New York: Savas Beatie, 2008. ISBN 978-1-932714-43-2.
  • Woodworth, Steven E. Beneath a Northern Sky: A Short History of the Gettysburg Campaign. Wilmington, DE: SR Books (scholarly Resources, Inc.), 2003. ISBN 0-8420-2933-8.

Memoirs and primary sources

Further reading

External media
Battlefields.org maps & photos
Gettysburg.edu paintings & photos
  • Adkin, Mark. The Gettysburg Companion: The Complete Guide to America's Most Famous Battle. Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 2008. ISBN 978-0-8117-0439-7.
  • Bachelder, John B. The Bachelder Papers: Gettysburg in Their Own Words. Edited by David L. Ladd and Audrey J. Ladd. 3 vols. Dayton, OH: Morningside Press, 1994. ISBN 0-89029-320-1.
  • Bachelder, John B. Gettysburg: What to See, and How to See It: Embodying Full Information for Visiting the Field. Boston: Bachelder, 1873. OCLC 4637523.
  • Ballard, Ted, and Billy Arthur. Gettysburg Staff Ride Briefing Book. Carlisle, PA: United States Army Center of Military History, 1999. OCLC 42908450.
  • Bearss, Edwin C. Receding Tide: Vicksburg and Gettysburg: The Campaigns That Changed the Civil War. Washington, D.C.: National Geographic Society, 2010. ISBN 978-1-4262-0510-1.
  • Boritt, Gabor S., ed. The Gettysburg Nobody Knows. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997. ISBN 0-19-510223-1.
  • Desjardin, Thomas A. These Honored Dead: How the Story of Gettysburg Shaped American Memory. New York: Da Capo Press, 2003. ISBN 0-306-81267-3.
  • Frassanito, William A. Early Photography at Gettysburg. Gettysburg, PA: Thomas Publications, 1995. ISBN 1-57747-032-X.
  • Lyon Fremantle, Arthur J. The Fremantle Diary: A Journal of the Confederacy. Edited by Walter Lord. Short Hills, NJ: Burford Books, 2002. ISBN 1-58080-085-8. First published 1954 by Capicorn Books.
  • Gallagher, Gary W., ed. Three Days at Gettysburg: Essays on Confederate and Union Leadership. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press, 1999. ISBN 0-87338-629-9.
  • Gottfried, Bradley M. Brigades of Gettysburg. New York: Da Capo Press, 2002. ISBN 0-306-81175-8.
  • Gottfried, Bradley M. The Maps of Gettysburg: An Atlas of the Gettysburg Campaign, June 3–13, 1863. New York: Savas Beatie, 2007. ISBN 978-1-932714-30-2.
  • Grimsley, Mark, and Brooks D. Simpson. Gettysburg: A Battlefield Guide. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1999. ISBN 0-8032-7077-1.
  • Guelzo, Allen C. Gettysburg: The Last Invasion. New York: Vintage Books, 2013. ISBN 978-0-307-74069-4. First published in 2013 by Alfred A. Knopf.
  • Hall, Jeffrey C. The Stand of the U.S. Army at Gettysburg. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2003. ISBN 0-253-34258-9.
  • Haskell, Frank Aretas. The Battle of Gettysburg. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing, 2006. ISBN 978-1-4286-6012-0.
  • Hawthorne, Frederick W. Gettysburg: Stories of Men and Monuments. Gettysburg, PA: Association of Licensed Battlefield Guides, 1988. ISBN 0-9657444-0-X.
  • Hoptak, John David. Confrontation at Gettysburg: A Nation Saved, a Cause Lost. Charleston, SC: The History Press, 2012. ISBN 978-1-60949-426-1.
  • Huntington, Tom. Pennsylvania Civil War Trails: The Guide to Battle Sites, Monuments, Museums and Towns. Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 2007. ISBN 978-0-8117-3379-3.
  • Laino, Philip, Gettysburg Campaign Atlas, 2nd ed. Dayton, OH: Gatehouse Press 2009. ISBN 978-1-934900-45-1.
  • McMurry, Richard M. "The Pennsylvania Gambit and the Gettysburg Splash". In The Gettysburg Nobody Knows, edited by Gabor Boritt. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997. ISBN 0-19-510223-1.
  • McPherson, James M. Hallowed Ground: A Walk at Gettysburg. New York: Crown Publishers, 2003. ISBN 0-609-61023-6.
  • Petruzzi, J. David, and Steven Stanley. The Complete Gettysburg Guide. New York: Savas Beatie, 2009. ISBN 978-1-932714-63-0.
  • Shaara, Michael. The Killer Angels: A Novel. New York: Ballantine Books, 2001. ISBN 978-0-345-44412-7. First published 1974 by David McKay Co.
  • Stackpole, Gen. Edward J. They Met at Gettysburg. Harrisburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 1956, OCLC 22643644.

External links

18 May 1863

The Siege of Vicksburg begins.

From the spring of 1862 until July 1863, during the American Civil War, Union forces waged a campaign to take the Confederate stronghold of Vicksburg, Mississippi, which lay on the east bank of the Mississippi River, halfway between Memphis to the north and New Orleans to the south. The Siege of Vicksburg divided the Confederacy and proved the military genius of Union General Ulysses S. Grant.

Vicksburg was one of the Union’s most successful campaigns of the war. Although General Ulysses S. Grant’s first attempt to take the city failed in the winter of 1862-63, he renewed his efforts in the spring. Admiral David Porter had run his flotilla past the Vicksburg defenses in early May as Grant marched his army down the west bank of the river opposite Vicksburg, crossed back to Mississippi and drove toward Jackson. After defeating a Confederate force near Jackson, Grant turned back to Vicksburg. On May 16, he defeated a force under General John C. Pemberton at Champion Hill. Pemberton retreated back to Vicksburg, and Grant sealed the city by the end of May. In three weeks, Grant’s men marched 180 miles, won five battles and captured some 6,000 prisoners.

Grant made some attacks after bottling Vicksburg but found the Confederates well entrenched. Preparing for a long siege, his army constructed 15 miles of trenches and enclosed Pemberton’s force of 29,000 men inside the perimeter. It was only a matter of time before Grant, with 70,000 troops, captured Vicksburg. Attempts to rescue Pemberton and his force failed from both the east and west, and conditions for both military personnel and civilians deteriorated rapidly. Many residents moved to tunnels dug from the hillsides to escape the constant bombardments. Pemberton surrendered on July 4, and President Abraham Lincoln wrote that the Mississippi River “again goes unvexed to the sea.”

30 March 1863

The Danish prince Wilhelm Georg is chosen as King George of Greece.

George l; born Prince William of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg; was King of Greece from 1863 until his assassination in 1913.

Originally a Danish prince, George was born in Copenhagen, and seemed destined for a career in the Royal Danish Navy. He was only 17 years old when he was elected king by the Greek National Assembly, which had deposed the unpopular former king Otto. His nomination was both suggested and supported by the Great Powers: the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the Second French Empire and the Russian Empire. He married the Russian grand duchess Olga Constantinovna of Russia, and became the first monarch of a new Greek dynasty. Two of his sisters, Alexandra and Dagmar, married into the British and Russian royal families. King Edward VII and Tsar Alexander III were his brothers-in-law and King George V and Tsar Nicholas II were his nephews.

George’s reign of almost 50 years was characterized by territorial gains as Greece established its place in pre-World War I Europe. Britain ceded the Ionian Islands peacefully, while Thessaly was annexed from the Ottoman Empire after the Russo-Turkish War. Greece was not always successful in its territorial ambitions; it was defeated in the Greco-Turkish War. During the First Balkan War, after Greek troops had captured much of Greek Macedonia, George was assassinated in Thessaloniki. Compared with his own long tenure, the reigns of his successors Constantine, Alexander, and George II proved short and insecure.

George was born at the Yellow Palace, an 18th-century town house at 18 Amaliegade, right next to the Amalienborg Palace complex in Copenhagen. He was the second son and third child of Prince Christian of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg and Princess Louise of Hesse-Kassel. Until his accession in Greece, he was known as Prince William, the namesake of his grandfathers William, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg, and Prince William of Hesse-Kassel.
George and his family, 1862: Frederick, Christian IX, George; Dagmar, Valdemar, Queen Louise, Thyra, Alexandra

Although he was of royal blood, his family was relatively obscure and lived a comparatively normal life by royal standards. In 1853, however, George’s father was designated the heir presumptive to the childless King Frederick VII of Denmark, and the family became princes and princesses of Denmark. George’s siblings were Frederick who succeeded their father as King of Denmark, Alexandra who became wife of King Edward VII of the United Kingdom and the mother of King George V, Dagmar, Thyra and Valdemar.

George’s mother tongue was Danish, with English as a second language. He was also taught French and German. He embarked on a career in the Royal Danish Navy, and enrolled as a naval cadet along with his elder brother Frederick. While Frederick was described as “quiet and extremely well-behaved”, George was “lively and full of pranks”.

Following the overthrow of the Bavarian-born King Otto of Greece in October 1862, the Greek people had rejected Otto’s brother and designated successor Luitpold, although they still favored a monarchy rather than a republic. Many Greeks, seeking closer ties to the pre-eminent world power, Great Britain, rallied around Prince Alfred, Duke of Edinburgh, second son of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert. British prime minister Lord Palmerston believed that the Greeks were “panting for increase in territory”, hoping for a gift of the Ionian Islands, which were then a British protectorate. The London Conference of 1832, however, prohibited any of the Great Powers’ ruling families from accepting the crown, and in any event, Queen Victoria was adamantly opposed to the idea. The Greeks nevertheless insisted on holding a plebiscite in which Prince Alfred received over 95% of the 240,000 votes. There were 93 votes for a Republic and 6 for a Greek. King Otto received one vote.

With Prince Alfred’s exclusion, the search began for an alternative candidate. The French favored Henri d’Orléans, duc d’Aumale, while the British proposed Queen Victoria’s brother-in-law Ernest II, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, her nephew Prince Leiningen, and Archduke Maximilian of Austria, among others. Eventually, the Greeks and Great Powers winnowed their choice to Prince William of Denmark, who had received 6 votes in the plebiscite. Aged only 17, he was elected King of the Hellenes on 30 March 1863 by the Greek National Assembly under the regnal name of George I. Paradoxically, he ascended a royal throne before his father, who became King of Denmark on 15 November the same year. There were two significant differences between George’s elevation and that of his predecessor, Otto. First, he was acclaimed unanimously by the Greek Assembly, rather than imposed on the people by foreign powers. Second, he was proclaimed “King of the Hellenes” instead of “King of Greece”, which had been Otto’s style.

His ceremonial enthronement in Copenhagen on 6 June was attended by a delegation of Greeks led by First Admiral and Prime Minister Constantine Kanaris. Frederick VII awarded George the Order of the Elephant, and it was announced that the British government would cede the Ionian Islands to Greece in honor of the new monarch.

The new 17-year-old king toured Saint Petersburg, London and Paris before departing for Greece from the French port of Toulon on 22 October aboard the Greek flagship Hellas. He arrived in Athens on 30 October 1863, after docking at Piraeus the previous day. He was determined not to make the mistakes of his predecessor, so he quickly learned Greek. The new king was seen frequently and informally in the streets of Athens, where his predecessor had only appeared in pomp. King George found the palace in a state of disarray, after the hasty departure of King Otto, and took to putting it right by mending and updating the 40-year-old building. He also sought to ensure that he was not seen as too influenced by his Danish advisers, ultimately sending his uncle, Prince Julius, back to Denmark with the words, “I will not allow any interference with the conduct of my government”. Another adviser, Count Wilhelm Sponneck, became unpopular for advocating a policy of disarmament and tactlessly questioning the descent of modern Greeks from classical antecedents. Like Julius, he was dispatched back to Denmark.

From May 1864, George undertook a tour of the Peloponnese, through Corinth, Argos, Tripolitsa, Sparta, and Kalamata, where he embarked on the frigate Hellas. Proceeding northwards along the coast accompanied by British, French and Russian naval vessels, the Hellas reached Corfu on 6 June, for the ceremonial handover of the Ionian Islands by the British High Commissioner, Sir Henry Storks.

Politically, the new king took steps to conclude the protracted constitutional deliberations of the Assembly. On 19 October 1864, he sent the Assembly a demand, countersigned by Constantine Kanaris, explaining that he had accepted the crown on the understanding that a new constitution would be finalized, and that if it was not he would feel himself at “perfect liberty to adopt such measures as the disappointment of my hopes may suggest”. It was unclear from the wording whether he meant to return to Denmark or impose a constitution, but as either event was undesirable the Assembly soon came to an agreement.

On 28 November 1864, he took the oath to defend the new constitution, which created a unicameral assembly with representatives elected by direct, secret, universal male suffrage, a first in modern Europe. A constitutional monarchy was set up with George deferring to the legitimate authority of the elected officials, although he was aware of the corruption present in elections and the difficulty of ruling a mostly illiterate population. Between 1864 and 1910, there were 21 general elections and 70 different governments.

Internationally, George maintained a strong relationship with his brother-in-law, the Prince of Wales, and sought his help in defusing the recurring and contentious issue of Crete, an overwhelmingly Greek island that remained under Ottoman Turk control. Since the reign of Otto, the Greek desire to unite Greek lands in one nation had been a sore spot with the United Kingdom and France, which had embarrassed Otto by occupying the main Greek port Piraeus to dissuade Greek irredentism during the Crimean War. During the Cretan Revolt, the Prince of Wales sought the support of British Foreign Secretary Lord Derby to intervene in Crete on behalf of Greece. Ultimately, the Great Powers did not intervene and the Ottomans put down the rebellion.

13 July 1863

Opponents of conscription begin three days of rioting in New York City.


On July 13, 1863, as the second day of a new military draft lottery in New York City got underway, demonstrations broke out across the city in what began as an organized opposition to the first federally mandated conscription laws in the nation’s history, but soon morphed into a violent uprising against the city’s wealthy elite; its African-American residents; and the very idea of the Civil War itself. The New York City Draft Riots, which would wreak havoc on the city for four days and remain the largest civilian insurrection in American history, exposed the deep racial, economic and social divides that threatened to tear the nation’s largest city apart in the midst of the American Civil War.

Thanks to its status as the business capital of the United States, New York City was a deeply divided city at the start of the Civil War in April 1861. Its merchants and financial institutions were loath to lose their southern business and the city’s then-mayor, Fernando Wood, had called for the city to secede from the Union. Meanwhile, to the city’s poorer citizens, the war increasingly came to be seen as benefitting only the rich, as the coffers of the city’s elites filled with the financial spoils of battle and the conflict became known as a “rich man’s war, poor man’s battle.” The passage of the nation’s first military draft act, in March 1863, only worsened the situation. Not only did it allow men to buy their way out of military service by paying a commutation fee of $300 , it also exempted blacks from the draft, as they were not yet considered American citizens. Opposition to the draft was widespread across the North, and in New York, some of the loudest critics of the bill could be found in city government, as politicians railed against the legality of the bill and its impact on the city’s working class poor.

1 July 1863

The Battle of Gettysburg begins.


The largest military conflict in North American history begins this day when Union and Confederate forces collide at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. The epic battle lasted three days and resulted in a retreat to Virginia by Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia.

Two months prior to Gettysburg, Lee had dealt a stunning defeat to the Army of the Potomac at Chancellorsville, Virginia. He then made plans for a Northern invasion in order to relieve pressure on war-weary Virginia and to seize the initiative from the Yankees. His army, numbering about 80,000, began moving on June 3. The Army of the Potomac, commanded by Joseph Hooker and numbering just under 100,000, began moving shortly thereafter, staying between Lee and Washington, D.C. But on June 28, frustrated by the Lincoln administration’s restrictions on his autonomy as commander, Hooker resigned and was replaced by George G. Meade.

Meade took command of the Army of the Potomac as Lee’s army moved into Pennsylvania. On the morning of July 1, advance units of the forces came into contact with one another just outside of Gettysburg. The sound of battle attracted other units, and by noon the conflict was raging. During the first hours of battle, Union General John Reynolds was killed, and the Yankees found that they were outnumbered. The battle lines ran around the northwestern rim of Gettysburg. The Confederates applied pressure all along the Union front, and they slowly drove the Yankees through the town.

By evening, the Federal troops rallied on high ground on the southeastern edge of Gettysburg. As more troops arrived, Meade’s army formed a three-mile long, fishhook-shaped line running from Culp’s Hill on the right flank, along Cemetery Hill and Cemetery Ridge, to the base of Little Round Top. The Confederates held Gettysburg, and stretched along a six-mile arc around the Union position. Lee’s forces would continue to batter each end of the Union position, before launching the infamous Pickett’s Charge against the Union center on July 3.