What good is the historian doing if she let's the studio presenter continually say 11,000 men died in the battle? 53,000 men died during those 3 days! Good God why let that man say the wrong number over and over again? Is she really a historian, or just that stupid?

Correction.......there were 51,000 casualties not deaths......approx 11,000 died......get your facts strait

I did put the wrong word. But, the best estimate is 17,000 counting the men they couldn't find. Either way, they were wrong. Oh, by the way straight is spelled s-t-r-a-i-g-h-t.

It's 53,000 casualties, 48 thousand dead in three days of battle. 11,000 dead on the FIRST day.

From Encarta:
"With the repulse of Pickett's Charge, the Battle of Gettysburg was virtually over. On the night of July 4, Lee began his retreat to Virginia, expecting a counterattack from the federal army. Meade, however, did not attack, due perhaps to heavy rains which hampered pursuit of the retreating Confederates. During the three days of battle, the Union Army had about 23,000 casualties, and the Confederates had at least 25,000. "

quote:

Originally posted by ghostgirl77:
Correction.......there were 51,000 casualties not deaths......approx 11,000 died......get your facts strait

With the repulse of Pickett's Charge, the Battle of Gettysburg was virtually over. On the night of July 4, Lee began his retreat to Virginia, expecting a counterattack from the federal army. Meade, however, did not attack, due perhaps to heavy rains which hampered pursuit of the retreating Confederates. During the three days of battle, the Union Army had about 23,000 casualties, and the Confederates had at least 25,000.

The team's contact with the "spirit people" got it wrong again and again. From the very first "impressions" of Confederate "snipers" being killed in the attic. Union forces ran willy-nilly through the town on Day One of the battle, The Confederates choked in the center of town as three columns crashed into each other coming down different street, halting the Confederate pursuit. There would have been no Union troops to shoot at through the hole in the bricks, and certainly no Union troops to race up the stairs to kill them

Unfortuantely for us, all we heard was a hash of misinformation and fuide book stuff. PS There is no "Little Round Top Farm". A wonderful exercise in phonus balonus.

These brits know nothing of the civil war!
17,000 deaths 10,000 missing, 1,000 captured!

Doc, she's no historian, I've looked her up, she has an "honorary" title from Bristol Uni. In other words: she's as fake as Yoda, I mean, Brian Shepherd and shame on them, the show might be for entertainment/tourism promotion only, but even a schoolkid would know better than to spout that crap. On the other hand, if y'all go check this YouTube clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LbPKjT-d6I ff to 5:00 , you'll get some satisfaction off seeing this "historian" at work. It's hysterical.

I wasn't pleased with her at all. They should got Brian Pohanka. or Shelby Foote, To bad that they died. I was at Brians funeral. Totally She screwed up with the number i don't even think she was a historian.. Maybe the English civil war but not with the American Civil War, Even i didn't like the sachs bridge part.

Number of ways to crunch the casualty numbers what you come up with.
Some consider the numbers from the actual three days of fighting. Others include the wounded that died in days and weeks following the battle.
No matter how you look at it. It was a bloody and violent battle. Many never recieved a proper burial. The area is bound to have some supernatural events.
Too bad these so called "ghost hunters" made a commercial disaster out of this show.

I was puzzled by "Little Round Top Farm" too. Did they mean the Rose Farm? That's the best-known farm in that part of the battlefield. Why not give it the correct name?

My first hint that the night wouldn't exactly be accurate came pretty quick, when the announcer said the battle happened in 1865. OY!!!!!

for all the discussion on the amount of "casualties" during this battle, here is the information that i have found on 2 different websites...
wikipedia-Union-23,055 casualties which includes 3,155 killed, 14,531 wounded, 5,369 captured or missing; Confederate-23,231 casulaties which includes 4,708 killed, 12,693 wounded, 5,830 captured or missing.
historyplace.com-Union-23,000 casualties which is dead, wounded, or missing; Confederate-28,000 casualties which includes dead, wounded, or missing.
The website americancivilwar.com also lists the total casualties at 51,000.
So, it would seem that the MH historian was fairly accurate in the numbers. And as far as being judgemental on dates and all that, can any of you saying negative things list the dates for the important battles in British history? The announcer slipped up and he even admitted it and apologized for it. Give them a break guys.

Here's something that bothered me, during the overview they made it sound like the South had intended for the battle to be in Gettysburg, it was by chance it was there. The South was stopping in Gettysburg to raid a shoe factory, their target location for battle was Harrisburg, PA. A small branch of them made it all the way to Wrightsville which caused Columbia to attempt to blow up the center of the Wrightsville-Columbia Bridge, the largest wooden covered bridge of the time, which ended up burning the whole bridge down. (We're covering the Civil War in History class.Lancaster, that's why I know so much about the Wrightsville Columbia Bridge)

quote:

Originally posted by sarahb1863:
I was puzzled by "Little Round Top Farm" too. Did they mean the Rose Farm? That's the best-known farm in that part of the battlefield. Why not give it the correct name?

My first hint that the night wouldn't exactly be accurate came pretty quick, when the announcer said the battle happened in 1865. OY!!!!!

There is a bed and breakfast called the little round top farm so I am thinking they were there. Thats not own by the NPS. The Rose Farm is and they wouldnt been alowed to be there.

I have a BS in history with an emphasis in American History. I was quite disappointed with the facts of Gettysburg the show kept stumbling all over. As a Pennsylvanian, frequent visitor to Gettysburg, member of different preservation societies--they could have gotten a credible American historian--such as McPherson, Sears, Gallagher, or Wert to present the facts without misleading the audience. If they picked up any of the mentioned historians books they would have gotten their facts right! The worse thing you can do is mislead people with incorrect facts! I hope the shows they do around the US they use CREDIBLE HISTORIANS. Don't do a disservice to your viewers!