The Case Against Pickett's Charge

On the third day of the Battle of Gettysburg, Confederate General Robert E. Lee ordered what became known as Pickett’s Charge. Nearly 12,000 Confederate soldiers were told to march across open fields toward strong Union positions on Cemetery Ridge. Union cannons and rifles waited on higher ground behind stone walls and fences. From the viewpoint of many historians, this plan was a disaster waiting to happen. The distance was long, the land offered little cover, and the Union army was ready.

As the soldiers advanced, they were struck by heavy artillery fire. Entire lines were torn apart before they could even reach the Union lines. Those who did make it near the stone wall faced more gunfire at close range. The attack failed, and thousands of Confederate soldiers were killed, wounded, or captured in a very short period of time. This terrible loss weakened Lee’s army and ended his attempt to win a major victory on Northern soil.

Critics of Pickett’s Charge argue that Lee ignored warnings from other officers, who believed the Union center was too strong. They point out that the Confederates were already tired from days of fighting and had fewer supplies than the Union. Instead of choosing a defensive position or looking for a different strategy, Lee chose a risky frontal assault. From this perspective, Pickett’s Charge is seen as a tragic mistake—an unnecessary attack that cost many lives without any real chance of success.

The Case for Understanding Pickett's Charge

Although many people criticize Pickett’s Charge, some historians try to understand why General Lee believed it might work. Before the third day of battle, Confederate forces had won major victories at places like Chancellorsville. Lee had gained a reputation for bold moves that surprised and defeated larger Union armies. He also believed strongly in the courage and skill of his soldiers, who had often succeeded against difficult odds. With this history in mind, Lee may have trusted that one more daring attack could break the Union line.

The situation at Gettysburg also pressured Lee to take action. His army was deep in Northern territory, far from its usual supply lines. If he could win a big victory on Union soil, he hoped it might weaken Northern support for the war and encourage peace talks. Lee may have thought the Union center on Cemetery Ridge was weaker than it really was, especially after heavy fighting on the earlier days. From his point of view, a powerful attack in one place might be the best chance to end the battle—and perhaps the entire war—on favorable terms.

Understanding Pickett’s Charge does not mean agreeing with it. Instead, it asks us to look at the pressures, limited information, and past experiences that shaped Lee’s decision. Commanders in battle must choose quickly, often without knowing exactly what the enemy has prepared. By examining why Lee ordered the charge, students can see how leaders sometimes make risky choices they believe are necessary, even when those choices lead to tragic results.

Question 1 of 7

Comprehension Questions

1. Why do many historians criticize Pickett’s Charge?



2. Which detail from “The Case Against Pickett’s Charge” best supports the idea that the plan was extremely risky?



3. According to “The Case for Understanding Pickett’s Charge,” which factor most clearly explains why Lee believed the attack might succeed?



4. Which detail from “The Case for Understanding Pickett’s Charge” best supports the idea that Lee hoped for a big victory in the North?



5. How do the two passages most clearly differ in their presentation of Pickett’s Charge?



6. Which sentence best describes a main idea shared by BOTH passages?



7. Which discussion question would most help students think deeply about Pickett’s Charge using both passages?