Maheshinte Prathikaaram

Maheshinte Prathikaaram () is a 2016 Indian Malayalam-language comedy drama film directed by Dileesh Pothan, in his directorial debut and produced by Aashiq Abu. The film stars Fahadh Faasil in the titular role alongside a supporting cast including Aparna Balamurali, Anusree, Alencier Ley Lopez and Soubin Shahir. Written by Syam Pushkaran, the story is based on an incident in the life of Thampan Purushan from Thuravoor, Cherthala. Shyju Khalid was the film's cinematographer, and the music was composed by Bijibal.

Maheshinte Prathikaaram's development began in 2013, when Pothan was working as an associate director for Abu (who was directing Idukki Gold, co-written by Pushkaran). Pushkaran suggested a story idea to Pothan which was based on an incident in his native village. At Pothan's insistence, Pushkaran wrote the screenplay that year and Abu later became interested in producing the film. Production was scheduled to commence from December 2014 after completing the casting process but, due to scheduling conflicts, it was postponed to August 2015. Principal photography began in early August in Idukki and nearby locations, where it was predominantly filmed. Shooting was completed in late October.

Maheshinte Prathikaaram was released in Kerala on 5 February 2016, in the rest of India on 12 February and globally on 26 February. The film was a commercial success, grossing ₹17.35 crore (₹173.5 million) at the Kerala box office on a budget of ₹3.50 crore (₹35 million). It received critical acclaim with praise going to the performances of its cast especially that of Fahadh Faasil's as one of his career best performances, humour, music, cinematography, editing and screenplay. At the 64th National Film Awards, it won the Best Original Screenplay and Best Feature Film in Malayalam, and at the 47th Kerala State Film Awards, it won the Best Original Screenplay and Best Film with Popular Appeal and Aesthetic Value. The film was remade into Tamil as Nimir (2018) and into Telugu as Uma Maheswara Ugra Roopasya (2020). Maheshinte Prathikaram is widely regarded as one of the defining movies of the Malayalam New Wave.

## Plot

Mahesh Bhavana is a small-time photographer who lives with his father, Vincent Bhavana. They run the digital photography Bhavana Studio in the Prakash region of Idukki district in Kerala. Next to the studio is a flex-board printing shop owned by Mahesh's good friend, Baby. His assistant Crispin is a Photoshop expert who designs the flex-boards. Mahesh is in a relationship with Soumya, his high-school sweetheart.

Baby becomes involved in a trivial argument with a loafer in the centre of the village. The dispute escalates, but passersby calm them down. However, Crispin appears and attacks the man who had argued with Baby. The man, joined by Jimson Augustine, jumps on Crispin in retaliation. Noticing the commotion, Mahesh tries to calm everyone down but Jimson, furious at Mahesh's authoritative stance, beats him up. Vincent breaks up the fight. Embarrassed, Mahesh vows to get back at Jimson and pledges that he will wear slippers only after he has avenged his humiliation.

Soumya is forced to end her relationship with Mahesh and marry a nurse residing in Canada. He learns about Jimson's whereabouts from Crispin and visits the garage where he apparently works as a welder. Its owner tells him that Jimson left for a better job in Dubai. Despite Baby's advice that he should forget the incident, Mahesh resolves to wait for Jimson's return; several weeks later, he enrolls in a kung fu course.

Jimsy, a young college student, goes to Bhavana Studio. She tells Mahesh that she wants to participate in Vanitha's cover competition and asks him to make her look as good as possible. Perplexed at the unusual request, Mahesh conducts the photo shoot. Jimsy's photograph turns out to be dull and unimpressive, and her irritation makes Mahesh question his skill as a photographer. Upset, he turns to his father for advice. Vincent explains photography as an art to his son. Mahesh goes through his father's photograph collection, finally understanding their angles and lighting, and gets an idea.

Instead of his familiar still photography, Mahesh photographs Jimsy in motion and sends the best photo to the magazine. Shortly afterward, Jimsy goes to Mahesh's house with the magazine containing her photo. Although she rebukes him for photographing her without permission, she also praises the photo. They become interested in each other, and soon fall in love. Jimsy realises this first, and calls Mahesh to talk about their future. She tells him that she is Jimson's younger sister, but his agitation is overshadowed by love and he decides to continue their relationship.

Several weeks later, Jimson is fired from his job for slapping his manager and is deported back to India. The following day, Mahesh and Baby challenge him to a hand-to-hand combat. After a few minutes of fighting, Mahesh pins down Jimson and Baby declares him the winner. Mahesh visits Jimson in a hospital on the next day and introduces himself to his mother in front of Jimsy. He admits his love for Jimsy and asks Jimson if he agrees to the relationship. Later in the credits it shows that Mahesh and Jimsy are together now.

## Cast

## Production

### Development

Maheshinte Prathikaaram is based on an incident in screenwriter Syam Pushkaran's native village. During the filming of Aashiq Abu's Idukki Gold (2013), Pushkaran discussed it with Abu's associate-director Dileesh Pothan, who decided to make his directorial debut with it. The idea for a film was developed; it was decided to set and shoot it in Idukki, since they believed it was a good location for a story about people living in the countryside. In August 2014, Fahadh Faasil was reported to star in the film, with Abu bankrolling it through his production house OPM Dream Mill Cinemas. It was Faasil's second film for Abu after 22 Female Kottayam (2012). Bijibal was signed as the film's composer and Shyju Khalid as its cinematographer. Filming was planned to start in the first week of December 2014. Maheshinte Prathikaaram was Pushkaran's first independent screenplay. In September 2014, Faasil was reported to join the project after completing Anwar Rasheed's Maniyarayile Jinnu. Because of Faasil's scheduling conflicts, production was postponed until early June 2015. It was postponed again when the actor was unavailable due to a conflict with Naale and Ayal Njanalla. Maheshinte Prathikaaram began production in early August 2015 for a planned Christmas release.

### Writing

The character of Mahesh was based on Kuriyachira Purushan (popularly known as Thampan Purushan), Pushkaran's neighbour in their native Thuravoor, Alappuzha. Purushan was publicly beaten and humiliated when he tried to break up a fight, and vowed to wear his slippers only after he avenged the man who embarrassed him. His "enemy" went to Dubai, and he had to wait three years for revenge. As a child, Pushkaran heard about the incident from Purushan and discussed it with Pothan as an idea for a screenplay. Pushkaran began writing, setting the story in Pothan's native Kottayam; it was later changed to Idukki. He studied Idukki's culture and characteristics in his two-month stay during the filming of Idukki Gold, and found it an ideal backdrop. Pushkaran added a fictional romance to the story. The film paid tribute to Purushan (who died in December 2015 while the film was in post-production) in a title card.

Despite Maheshinte Prathikaaram's title, Pothan intended it to be a comedy: "I enjoy humour with a poignant touch. This was a narrative that had the potential to be a thriller but we wanted that element of realism to shine through". He and Pushkaran worked on the screenplay for nearly three years. With a few assistant directors, they honed it for about three months in Prakash City, a mountain village near Kattappana in Idukki (where the film is set). The screenplay was based on their observations of the village near the kavala (junction), which generated a detailed backstory for each of the film's characters. Pothan took note of the mannerisms of the shopkeepers in the kavala whom he considered a "witness to many of the incidents that unfold in the village, real and reel".

According to Pushkaran, he observed the strengths of both Pothan and Faasil and incorporated into the screenplay. The screenplay was revised several times between pre-production and filming, with Pushkaran preparing its first draft in mid-2013. In the meanwhile, he completed scripts for three other films. According to the writer, its creation was unhurried; the film was about village life, with which he was familiar (Thampan Purushan, on whom the story is based, was his father's friend). Pushkaran added that the screenplay had "less research but more observation". A revised screenplay was prepared after completing the casting, and it underwent several more revisions as filming progressed. Pushkaran, Pothan and Khalid discussed the screenplay every night after filming. Pushkaran said that there were changes to every scene in the film, based on suggestions by the director and cast.

### Cast and crew

According to Pothan, the film had the "perfect casting, despite the fact that several of them were newcomers". He first discussed the film with Fahadh Faasil during the filming of Iyobinte Pusthakam in 2014, in which the director played a minor role. Faasil, enthusiastic about the project, agreed to appear in the film after fulfilling his other commitments. Pothan described Mahesh as a simpleton with a multi-layered character and wanted an actor who would provide much finesse and subtlety to the portrayal. He added that Faasil was chosen for the "natural and spontaneous" actor in him. Pothan and Pushkaran cast Soubin Shahir as Crispin early in the screenwriting process. The director summoned Sujith Shanker, who debuted in Njan Steve Lopez (2015), for a script-briefing section as a possible Jimson. Although Shanker liked the story, he was uncertain whether he would fit in the role; however, Pothan had confidence in him.

Pushkaran's wife Unnimaya was the casting director and also acted and served as an assistant director in the film. She along with Pothan appeared in minor roles—Sarah and Eldho, a couple settled in the United States. In May 2015, Anusree was cast as Soumya, a nurse who is Mahesh's childhood sweetheart. Aparna Balamurali, who had appeared in Oru Second Class Yathra (2015), was encouraged by Pushkaran's wife (who is her university instructor) to audition for the role of Jimsy. Balamurali was briefed about her character only two days before filming began. Faasil suggested Alencier Ley Lopez, with whom he had worked in Annayum Rasoolum (2013), for Baby's role. Newcomer Lijimol Jose was chosen for the role of Soniyamol after she answered a casting call. Theatrical couple K. L. Antony Kochi and Leena Antony made their film debuts as Vincent Bhavana and Jimsy's mother, respectively. Pothan also hired local people to appear in the film in "whatever clothes they turned up in"; he believed that if he cast only actors, "the reality would have been compromised". The director wanted to "feel each frame of the film, be it the rustic ambiance, the clothes or the accent".

Ajayan Chalissery was Maheshinte Prathikaaram's art director. Chalissery designed the set for Mahesh's Bhavana Studio and nearby buildings, including a footwear shop which was built in a vacant area. "Each and every property used for the movie, from the steel plates used in kitchen to the photos and frames hung on the walls, the windows and doors, everything was intentionally used to reflect a house of Idduki natives", said Ajayan. Designer Sameera Saneesh was in charge of the film's costumes. All clothes worn by the cast were secondhands, bartered from local residents in exchange for new clothes, since Pothan believed that Maheshinte Prathikaaram's details should appear realistic. Martial artist and trainer "Kung-fu" Sajith was the film's stunt coordinator.

### Filming

Filming began in early August 2015, during the wet season, in the Idukki district of Kerala. Major portions of the film were shot in Thopramkudy, near Kattappana. In September, while filming in Cheruthoni, Faasil sustained a leg injury while performing a stunt with co-star Sujith Shanker. Although a two-day rest was advised, he decided to press on because of the tight shooting schedule. The filming in Idukki, which took 45 days, was wrapped up in late October.

There were two fight scenes in the film. For realism, the actors fought without rehearsing. Although the first scene utilised music and other technical enhancements, Pothan wanted the climactic fight to look more natural: "I felt it would be better to film it without its cinematic nature. To be able to relate to the scene, it had to look natural. Fahadh and Sujith had a tough time while shooting". The scene was filmed in four days on muddy grounds near the Cheruthoni and Idukki Dams. The film's appooppan thadi (milkweeds) were artificial; about 1,000 were made from lightweight materials. In a scene where Crispin cuts them down, most blew upward like real milkweeds and the scene had to be re-shot several times. The film was made on a budget of ₹45.0 million.

### Post-production

Cellador Productions of Bangalore worked on the film's sound design; Nixon George and Rajeesh K. R. designed its soundscape. Since Maheshinte Prathikaram was set in Prakash City in Idukki, it required natural sounds which blended with the dialogue and music instead of dominating them. George and Rajeesh recorded in all the locations and found it of great help during the final editing process. Creating sound effects for the climactic fight was difficult: "We used a big piece of meat to produce the sound effects of punches and kicks. It took a long time and a lot of trial and error". Editor Saiju Sreedharan was the film's colourist, correcting the colour grading and developing its digital intermediate.

## Themes and analysis

Maheshinte Prathikaaram, which uses rain as a metaphor, was filmed during the monsoon. Pothan cited K. G. George's 1982 film, Yavanika, as influencing him to use rain as part of the director's storytelling. The first half of the film was shot in the rain or immediately afterward, when the clouds were gone. Mahesh weeps during a downpour after attending his ex-girlfriend's wedding; the rain becomes a metaphor to "wash away the dreams Mahesh had built, essentially, giving him a new lease of life". It was the film's only use of a rain unit.

According to Sreehari Nair of Rediff.com, Maheshinte Prathikaaram has the key qualities of a great short story; he found it closer to the creative non-fiction style specialised by the writers of Esquire magazine in 1960s in terms of rhythm and pacing. Nair noted strong left-wing ideology in the film due to Pothan's political philosophy, with the director indirectly using the idea of equality inherent in his characters' belief system: "A game one can play on every subsequent viewing of the movie is to note how a major character in one scene had appeared as a minor character in some scene before". Each of the film's characters was unique. Pushkaran later clarified that the film did not reflect his personal or political views.

In an interview for The Hindu, Fahadh called Maheshinte Prathikaaram a "serious comedy". Despite its title, the film differed from earlier Malayalam revenge-centred films. It begins with Mahesh bathing in a pond, humming a popular song from 2000's Narasimham (a cult action film). It also alludes to the doomed character Sethumadhavan's vengeance in Kireedam (1989) and Chenkol (1993). In his review for The Times of India, Sanjith Sidhardhan called the film the "sweetest tale of revenge"; it "is not a regular revenge thriller; it has a heavy dose of rib-tickling comedy that stems from the actions of its rustic characters and their sensibilities".

## Music

The film's four-song soundtrack and score were composed by Bijibal, who also sang two songs. Lyrics were by Rafeeq Ahammed and Santhosh Varma; Varma wrote the final song, "Cherupunjiri". Bijibal, Vijay Yesudas, Sudeep Kumar, Sangeetha Sreekanth, Aparna Balamurali and Nikhil Mathew contributed vocals to the soundtrack. The film's songs were released by Muzik 247 on 1 January 2016.

The music was composed after the lyrics were written; Ahammed wrote the song "Idukki" as a poem in one day. According to Bijibal, it was easy to compose "Idukki" because it had such "motivati[ng] lyrics". He originally recorded the song with a small orchestra, singing it himself. The composer later recorded another version with a lush orchestra; however, Pothan thought it lacked the beauty of the original and used the first version in the film. In addition to her role as Jimsy, Balamurali sang "Mounangal" with Yesudas. Balamurali stated that she was made to sing on the sets frequently and opined that it influenced them at a later stage. A song titled "Ethetho" written by M. R. Jayageetha was initially recorded but never included in the film. Later the song was used with Telugu lyrics in Uma Maheswara Ugra Roopasya, Telugu remake of the film. The original version was released in August 2020 on Bijibal's official YouTube channel.

## Release

Maheshinte Prathikaaram's release plans were announced in January 2016. The film was released in 67 theatres in Kerala on 5 February. It was released in the rest of India on 12 February, and internationally two weeks later. The film was distributed in India by OPM Dream Mill Cinemas, opening outside Kerala in Bangalore, Mysore, Mangalore, Manipal, Chennai, Coimbatore, Hyderabad and Vizag. On 19 February 2016, it was released in Mumbai, Pune, Gujarat, Delhi and Madhya Pradesh.

The film was released on DVD and VCD by SAINA Video Vision on 10 May 2016. The film's television broadcasting right was purchased by Mazhavil Manorama, it premiered on TV on 14 September 2016, during the festival time of Onam in Kerala.

### Marketing

By March, the film's producers released a number of "dialogue posters" on social networking sites with popular lines from its characters. After Maheshinte Prathikaaram's release, Pothan, Abu, Faasil and Shahir visited theatres across Kerala to analyse audience reaction to the film; Faasil made a surprise appearance at a Payyanur theatre's ticket counter. In March, the crew (including Abu, Faasil, Jaffer Idukki and Bijibal) spoke with students at the Al Azhar College of Arts and Science in Thodupuzha in conjunction with the Mahatma Gandhi University Art Fest. For Vishu on 14 April, the producers released a three-minute behind-the-scenes video featuring auditions and the filming of several scenes.

## Reception

### Box office

After witnessing a low opening in the morning shows at the Kerala box office, the film's earnings picked up from the evening shows due to positive response from the audience. Favourable word of mouth helped the film, with its screen count in Kerala increasing from 67 to 88 in one week. The film performed steadily in Kerala during its third week, earning a total of ₹1 crore (₹10 million) over the weekend. After three weeks, its total earnings exceeded ₹10 crore (₹100 million). By the end of its run, it had earned ₹17.35 crore (₹173.5 million) in Kerala and was the highest-grossing film at the January – June box office. It had a run of over 125 days in some Kerala theatres, and ran for more than 50 days in Chennai.

Maheshinte Prathikaram was the highest earning Malayalam film at the United States box office over its third weekend (11–13 March), grossing \$16,819 on 17 screens and outperforming Action Hero Biju and Vettah. It earned a total of \$70,238 in three weeks. Earnings dropped to \$9,750 over the fourth weekend (18–20 March) from 13 screens. It maintained the top position over its sixth weekend (1–3 April) grossing \$5,086 from seven screens for a six-week total of \$92,596. It was the highest earning Malayalam film at the United Kingdom-Ireland box office during its second weekend (11–13 March), grossing £5,274 from 29 screens for a two-week total of £32,437. The film earned a total of £35,055 after its fourth weekend in the United Kingdom and Ireland.

### Critical response

S. R. Praveen of The Hindu gave a positive review: "Syam Pushkaran, in writing the revenge story, takes away the usual ingredients of hate and anger, and replaces it with lots of humour, arriving as a torrent in one-liners, in situations and even in the minute gestures of the characters ... Maheshinte Prathikaram provides clean entertainment, treading new paths in that endeavour. If revenge comes like this, let's have more of it". He praised Pothan's direction and Faasil's performance. Sify also had a positive review: "It's not often that you come across such an intelligent comedy that is extremely funny, thoroughly gripping and brilliantly packaged". The reviewer praised the performances: "One of the best things about this one is the performance of every artiste, both in main roles and also those who are there even in a scene or so". Also praising the screenplay, cinematography, and music, the review concluded: "Maheshinte Prathikaram is one of the finest comedies to have happened in Malayalam during recent years".

Mythily Ramachandran of Gulf News praised the film's humour and performances: "The anger and hatred one often associates with a revenge tale is missing"; humour takes over, and the film "busts the notion that revenge tales must be laden with gore and violence". According to Deepa Gauri of the Khaleej Times, Maheshinte Prathikaram is a boon for a Malayalam cinema with an "identity crisis". She praised the film's screenplay and direction: "Every frame shows the minute detailing, which gives [Maheshinte Prathikaaram] its real heart. Charming you with wit, underlining humour and with characters who behave without any cinematic hangover". Raj Vikram of Metromatinee.com also gave a positive review: "There is not a single scene in the film which appears cooked up ... He [Pothan] must be commended for being sure-footed about what he intended to portray". Vikram praised the performances by Faasil and the supporting cast, the "magnificent camera" and the "songs which seamlessly and melodiously merge with the narrative", concluding that it "is a movie that is true to itself. It surprises with its all pervading simplicity and makes even revenge look like a stroll in the park".

Anu James of the International Business Times gave the film four out of five stars and called it "a simple movie with the right amount of romance, comedy, action and revenge". Appreciating its casting and performances, James also praised the film's technical aspects: its cinematography, "crisp editing", direction, music, screenplay, costume design and art direction. Litty Simon of Malayala Manorama rated Maheshinte Prathikaram 3.75 out of 5: "Dileesh [Pothan] has managed to give a realistic and emotional drama. Humour blends well with the storyline in a subtle and spontaneous manner [with a] well-crafted script". Simon praised the performances of Faasil and others in the cast and the film's music and cinematography: "With its simplicity and realistic approach, the two-and-a-half-hour-long movie is refreshing and belongs to the 'neat' entertainer category".

Sanjith Sidhardhan of The Times of India rated the film 3.5 out of 5: "Maheshinte Prathikaaram is a movie that has many feel-good moments and something everybody can relate to. This tale of sweet revenge is a rare genial comedy". He appreciated its casting and screenplay, cinematography, editing and music, praising the performances of Faasil and other cast members and calling the film "visually appealing". Paresh C. Palicha of Rediff.com gave the film three out of five stars, praising Faasil's performance and its narrative style: "The plot is driven by characters and their reactions to a particular situation, and there is no solid form of story where we see a growth in characters or logical progression in the story".

## Awards and nominations

## Remakes

The film was remade into Tamil as Nimir (2018), directed by Priyadarshan. He stated that he had improvised the screenplay to suit the Tamil speaking audience. The film was also remade into Telugu as Uma Maheswara Ugra Roopasya (2020).

2016 film by Dileesh Pothan

Best Malayalam Feature Film National Film Award winners

Films whose writer won the Best Original Screenplay National Film Award

Films with screenplays by Syam Pushkaran

Malayalam films remade in other languages


Pickett's Charge

Pickett's Charge (July 3, 1863), also known as the Pickett–Pettigrew–Trimble Charge, was an infantry assault ordered by Confederate General Robert E. Lee against Major General George G. Meade's Union positions on the last day of the Battle of Gettysburg in Pennsylvania during the Civil War. Confederate troops made a frontal assault toward the center of Union lines, ultimately being repulsed with heavy casualties. Suffering from a lack of preparation and problems from the onset, the attack was a costly mistake that decisively ended Lee's invasion of the north and forced a retreat back to Virginia.

The charge is popularly named after Major General George Pickett, one of three Confederate generals (all under the command of Lieutenant General James Longstreet) who led the assault.

Pickett's Charge was part of Lee's "general plan" to take Cemetery Hill and the network of roads it commanded. His military secretary, Armistead Lindsay Long, described Lee's thinking:

> There was ... a weak point ... where [Cemetery Ridge], sloping westward, formed the depression through which the Emmitsburg road passes. Perceiving that by forcing the Federal lines at that point and turning toward Cemetery Hill [Hays' Division] would be taken in flank and the remainder would be neutralized. ... Lee determined to attack at that point, and the execution was assigned to Longstreet.

Lee believed that, after Confederate attacks on both the left and right flanks of the Union lines on July 2, Meade would concentrate his defenses there to the detriment of his center. However, on the night of July 2, Meade correctly predicted to General John Gibbon, after a council of war, that Lee would attack the center of his lines the following morning and reinforced that area with additional soldiers and artillery.

The infantry assault was preceded by a massive artillery bombardment that was meant to soften up the Union defense and silence its artillery, but it was largely ineffective. Approximately 12,500 men in nine infantry brigades advanced over open fields for three-quarters of a mile (1200 m) under heavy Union artillery and rifle fire. Although some Confederates were able to breach the low stone wall that shielded many of the Union defenders, they could not maintain their hold and were repelled with over 50 percent casualties.

Often cited as one of the turning points of the war, the farthest point reached by the attack has been referred to as the high-water mark of the Confederacy.

## Background

### Military situation

## Opposing forces

### Union

### Confederate

## Plans and command structures

Pickett's Charge was planned for three Confederate divisions, commanded by Maj. Gen. George Pickett, Brig. Gen. J. Johnston Pettigrew, and Maj. Gen. Isaac R. Trimble, consisting of troops from Lt. Gen. James Longstreet's First Corps and Lt. Gen. A. P. Hill's Third Corps. Pettigrew commanded brigades from Maj. Gen. Henry Heth's old division, under Col. Birkett D. Fry (Archer's Brigade), Col. James K. Marshall (Pettigrew's Brigade), Brig. Gen. Joseph R. Davis, and Col. John M. Brockenbrough. Trimble, commanding Maj. Gen. Dorsey Pender's division, had the brigades of Brig. Gens. Alfred M. Scales (temporarily commanded by Col. William Lee J. Lowrance) and James H. Lane. Two brigades from Maj. Gen. Richard H. Anderson's division (Hill's Corps) were to support the attack on the right flank: Brig. Gen. Cadmus M. Wilcox and Col. David Lang (Perry's brigade).

The target of the Confederate assault was the center of the Union Army of the Potomac's II Corps, commanded by Maj. Gen. Winfield S. Hancock. Directly in the center was the division of Brig. Gen. John Gibbon with the brigades of Brig. Gen. William Harrow, Col. Norman J. Hall, and Brig. Gen. Alexander S. Webb. On the night of July 2, Meade correctly predicted to Gibbon at a council of war that Lee would try an attack on Gibbon's sector the following morning. To the north of this position were brigades from the division of Brig. Gen. Alexander Hays, and to the south was Maj. Gen. Abner Doubleday's division of the I Corps, including the 2nd Vermont Brigade of Brig. Gen. George J. Stannard and the 121st Pennsylvania under the command of Col. Chapman Biddle. Meade's headquarters were just behind the II Corps line, in the small house owned by the widow Lydia Leister.

The specific objective of the assault has been the source of historical controversy. Traditionally, the "copse of trees" on Cemetery Ridge has been cited as the visual landmark for the attacking force. Historical treatments such as the 1993 film Gettysburg continue to popularize this view, which originated in the work of Gettysburg Battlefield historian John B. Bachelder in the 1880s. However, recent scholarship, including published works by some Gettysburg National Military Park historians, has suggested that Lee's goal was actually Ziegler's Grove on Cemetery Hill, a more prominent and highly visible grouping of trees about 300 yards (274 m) north of the copse.

The much-debated theory suggests that Lee's general plan for the second-day attacks (the seizure of Cemetery Hill) had not changed on the third day, and the attacks on July 3 were also aimed at securing the hill and the network of roads it commanded. The copse of trees, currently a prominent landmark, was under ten feet (3 m) high in 1863, visible to a portion of the attacking columns only from certain parts of the battlefield.

From the beginning of the planning, things went awry for the Confederates. While Pickett's division had not been used yet at Gettysburg, A. P. Hill's health became an issue and he did not participate in selecting which of his troops were to be used for the charge. Some of Hill's corps had fought lightly on July 1 and not at all on July 2. However, troops that had done heavy fighting on July 1 ended up making the charge.

Although the assault is known to popular history as Pickett's Charge, overall command was given to James Longstreet, and Pickett was one of his divisional commanders. Lee did tell Longstreet that Pickett's fresh division should lead the assault, so the name is appropriate, although some recent historians have used the name Pickett–Pettigrew–Trimble Assault (or, less frequently, Longstreet's Assault) to more fairly distribute the credit (or blame). With Hill sidelined, Pettigrew's and Trimble's divisions were delegated to Longstreet's authority as well. Thus, Pickett's name has been lent to a charge in which he commanded 3 out of the 11 brigades while under the supervision of his corps commander throughout.

Pickett's men were almost exclusively from Virginia, with the other divisions consisting of troops from North Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, and Tennessee. The supporting troops under Wilcox and Lang were from Alabama and Florida.

In conjunction with the infantry assault, Lee planned a cavalry action in the Union rear. Maj. Gen. J. E. B. Stuart led his cavalry division to the east, prepared to exploit Lee's hoped-for breakthrough by attacking the Union rear and disrupting its line of communications (and retreat) along the Baltimore Pike.

Despite Lee's hope for an early start, it took all morning to arrange the infantry assault force. Neither Lee's nor Longstreet's headquarters sent orders to Pickett to have his division on the battlefield by daylight. Historian Jeffrey D. Wert blames this oversight on Longstreet, describing it either as a misunderstanding of Lee's oral order or a mistake. Some of the many criticisms of Longstreet's Gettysburg performance by the postbellum Lost Cause authors cite this failure as evidence that Longstreet deliberately undermined Lee's plan for the battle.

Meanwhile, on the far right end of the Union line, a seven-hour battle raged for the control of Culp's Hill. Lee's intent was to synchronize his offensive across the battlefield, keeping Meade from concentrating his numerically superior force, but the assaults were poorly coordinated and Maj. Gen. Edward "Allegheny" Johnson's attacks against Culp's Hill petered out just as Longstreet's cannonade began.

## Artillery barrage

The infantry charge was preceded by what Lee hoped would be a powerful and well-concentrated cannonade of the Union center, destroying the Union artillery batteries that could defeat the assault and demoralizing the Union infantry. But a combination of inept artillery leadership and defective equipment doomed the barrage from the beginning. Longstreet's corps artillery chief, Col. Edward Porter Alexander, had effective command of the field; Lee's artillery chief, Brig. Gen. William N. Pendleton, played little role other than to obstruct the effective placement of artillery from the other two corps. Despite Alexander's efforts, then, there was insufficient concentration of Confederate fire on the objective.

The July 3 bombardment was likely the largest of the war, with hundreds of cannons from both sides firing along the lines for one to two hours, starting around 1 p.m. Confederate guns numbered between 150 and 170 and fired from a line over two miles (3 km) long, starting in the south at the Peach Orchard and running roughly parallel to the Emmitsburg Road. Confederate Brig. Gen. Evander M. Law wrote, "The cannonade in the center ... presented one of the most magnificent battle-scenes witnessed during the war. Looking up the valley towards Gettysburg, the hills on either side were capped with crowns of flame and smoke, as 300 guns, about equally divided between the two ridges, vomited their iron hail upon each other."

Despite its ferocity, the fire was mostly ineffectual. Confederate shells often overshot the infantry front lines—in some cases because of inferior shell fuses that delayed detonation—and the smoke covering the battlefield concealed that fact from the gunners. Union artillery chief Brig. Gen. Henry J. Hunt had only about 80 guns available to conduct counter-battery fire; the geographic features of the Union line had limited areas for effective gun emplacement. He also ordered that firing cease to conserve ammunition, but to fool Alexander, Hunt ordered his cannons to cease fire slowly to create the illusion that they were being destroyed one by one. By the time all of Hunt's cannons ceased fire, and still blinded by the smoke from battle, Alexander fell for Hunt's deception and believed that many of the Union batteries had been destroyed. Hunt had to resist the strong arguments of Hancock, who demanded Union fire to lift the spirits of the infantrymen pinned down by Alexander's bombardment. Even Meade was affected by the artillery—the Leister house was a victim of frequent overshots, and he had to evacuate with his staff to Powers Hill. The counter-battery fire depleted the northern ammunition stocks, leaving them insufficient time to replenish before the southern assault. For the rest of his life, Hunt always maintained that had he been allowed to do what he'd intended—saved his long range shells for the attack he knew was coming, then bombarded the Confederate forces with every gun available once they lined up for their advance—the charge would never have happened and many northern lives would have been saved.

The day was hot, 87 °F (31 °C) by one account, and humid, and the Confederates suffered under the hot sun and from the Union counter-battery fire as they awaited the order to advance. When Union cannoneers overshot their targets, they often hit the massed infantry waiting in the woods of Seminary Ridge or in the shallow depressions just behind Alexander's guns, causing significant casualties before the charge began.

Longstreet had opposed the charge from the beginning, convinced the charge would fail (which ultimately proved true), and had his own plan that he would have preferred for a strategic movement around the Union left flank. In his memoirs, he recalled telling Lee:

> General, I have been a soldier all my life. I have been with soldiers engaged in fights by couples, by squads, companies, regiments, divisions, and armies, and should know, as well as any one, what soldiers can do. It is my opinion that no fifteen thousand men ever arrayed for battle can take that position.

Longstreet wanted to avoid personally ordering the charge by attempting to pass the mantle onto young Colonel Alexander, telling him that he should inform Pickett at the optimum time to begin the advance, based on his assessment that the Union artillery had been effectively silenced. Although he hadn't become aware of such a development, Alexander eventually notified Pickett that he was running dangerously short of ammunition, sending the message "If you are coming at all, come at once, or I cannot give you proper support, but the enemy's fire has not slackened at all. At least eighteen guns are still firing from the cemetery itself." Pickett asked Longstreet, "General, shall I advance?" Longstreet recalled in his memoirs, "The effort to speak the order failed, and I could only indicate it by an affirmative bow."

Longstreet made one final attempt to call off the assault. After his encounter with Pickett, he discussed the artillery situation with Alexander, and was informed that Alexander did not have full confidence that all the enemy's guns were silenced, and that the Confederate ammunition was almost exhausted. Longstreet ordered Alexander to stop Pickett, but the young colonel explained that replenishing his ammunition from the trains in the rear would take over an hour, and this delay would nullify any advantage the previous barrage had given them. The infantry assault went forward without the Confederate artillery close support that had been originally planned.

## Infantry assault

The entire force that stepped off toward the Union positions at about 2 p.m. comprised about 12,500 men. Although the attack is popularly called a "charge", the men marched deliberately in line, prepared to speed up and charge only when they were within a few hundred yards of the enemy. The line consisted of Pettigrew and Trimble on the left, and Pickett to the right. The nine brigades of men stretched over a mile-long (1,600 m) front. The Confederates immediately encountered heavy artillery fire and were slowed by fences in their path. Fire from Lt. Col. Freeman McGilvery's concealed artillery positions north of Little Round Top raked the Confederate right flank, artillery fire from Cemetery Hill hit the left, while the center faced the cannons of the II Corps with the Union artillery reserve in a second line behind. The ground between Seminary Ridge and Cemetery Ridge is slightly undulating, and the advancing troops periodically disappeared from the view of the Union cannoneers while advancing the nearly three quarters of a mile across open fields to reach the Union line.

As the three Confederate divisions advanced, awaiting Union soldiers began shouting "Fredericksburg! Fredericksburg! Fredericksburg!" in reference to the disastrous Union advance on the Confederate line during the 1862 Battle of Fredericksburg. Shell and solid shot in the beginning turned to canister and musket fire as the Confederates came within 400 yards of the Union line. At this point Confederate unit cohesion and morale began to break down. The last shelter before reaching the Union lines lay at 300 yards, in the sunken depression of the Emmitsburg Road. Thousands of Confederates took to the ground there and refused to advance any further, many surrendering to Union troops after the battle. Over 2/3rds of the initial force may have failed to make the final charge; at contact the mile-long front had shrunk to less than half a mile, as the men filled in gaps that appeared throughout the line and followed the natural tendency to move away from the flanking fire.

On the left flank of the attack, Brockenbrough's brigade was devastated by artillery fire from Cemetery Hill. They were also subjected to a surprise musket fusillade from the 8th Ohio Infantry regiment. The 160 Ohioans, firing from a single line, so surprised Brockenbrough's Virginians—already demoralized by their losses to artillery fire—that they panicked and fled back to Seminary Ridge, crashing through Trimble's division and causing many of his men to bolt as well. The Ohioans followed up with a successful flanking attack on Davis's brigade of Mississippians and North Carolinians, which was now the left flank of Pettigrew's division. The survivors were subjected to increasing artillery fire from Cemetery Hill. More than 1,600 rounds were fired at Pettigrew's men during the assault. This portion of the assault never advanced much farther than the sturdy fence at the Emmitsburg Road. By this time, the Confederates were close enough to be fired on by artillery canister and Alexander Hays' division unleashed very effective musketry fire from behind 260 yards of stone wall, with every rifleman of the division lined up as many as four deep, exchanging places in line as they fired and then fell back to reload.

Trimble's division of two brigades followed Pettigrew's, but made poor progress. Confusing orders from Trimble caused Lane to send only three and a half of his North Carolina regiments forward. Renewed fire from the 8th Ohio and the onslaught of Hays' riflemen prevented most of these men from getting past the Emmitsburg Road. Scales's North Carolina brigade, led by Col. William L. J. Lowrance, started with a heavier disadvantage—they had lost almost two-thirds of their men on July 1. They were also driven back and Lowrance was wounded. The Union defenders also took casualties, but Hays encouraged his men by riding back and forth just behind the battle line, shouting "Hurrah! Boys, we're giving them hell!". Two horses were shot out from under him. Historian Stephen W. Sears calls Hays' performance "inspiring".

On the right flank, Pickett's Virginians crossed the Emmitsburg road and wheeled partially to their left to face northeast. They marched in two lines, led by the brigades of Brig. Gen. James L. Kemper on the right and Brig. Gen. Richard B. Garnett on the left; Brig. Gen. Lewis A. Armistead's brigade followed closely behind. As the division wheeled to the left, its right flank was exposed to McGilvery's guns and the front of Doubleday's Union division on Cemetery Ridge. Stannard's Vermont Brigade marched forward, faced north, and delivered withering fire into the rear of Kemper's brigade. At about this time, Hancock, who had been prominent in displaying himself on horseback to his men during the Confederate artillery bombardment, was wounded by a bullet striking the pommel of his saddle, entering his inner right thigh along with wood fragments and a large bent nail. He refused evacuation to the rear until the battle was settled.

As Pickett's men advanced, they withstood the defensive fire of first Stannard's brigade, then Harrow's, and then Hall's, before approaching a minor salient in the Union center, a low stone wall taking an 80-yard right-angle turn known afterward as "The Angle". It was defended by Brig. Gen. Alexander S. Webb's Philadelphia Brigade. Webb placed the two remaining guns of (the severely wounded) Lt. Alonzo Cushing's Battery A, 4th U.S. Artillery, at the front of his line at the stone fence, with the 69th and 71st Pennsylvania regiments of his brigade to defend the fence and the guns. The two guns and 940 men could not match the massive firepower that Hays' division, to their right, had been able to unleash.

Two gaps opened up in the Union line: the commander of the 71st Pennsylvania ordered his men to retreat when the Confederates came too close to the Angle; south of the copse of trees, the men of the 59th New York (Hall's brigade) inexplicably bolted for the rear. In the latter case, this left Captain Andrew Cowan and his 1st New York Independent Artillery Battery to face the oncoming infantry. Assisted personally by artillery chief Henry Hunt, Cowan ordered five guns to fire double canister simultaneously. The entire Confederate line to his front disappeared. The gap vacated by most of the 71st Pennsylvania, however, was more serious, leaving only a handful of the 71st, 268 men of the 69th Pennsylvania, and Cushing's two 3-inch rifled guns to receive the 2,500 to 3,000 men of Garnett's and Armistead's brigades as they began to cross the stone fence. The Irishmen of the 69th Pennsylvania resisted fiercely in a melee of rifle fire, bayonets, and fists. Webb, mortified that the 71st had retreated, brought the 72nd Pennsylvania (a Zouave regiment) forward. Initially, the regiment was hesitant to attack, this being due to the regiment not recognizing Webb as brigadier general (he had recently been promoted.) However, the 72nd moved forward after realizing their error, helping to plug the gap in the line. During the fight, Lt. Cushing was killed as he shouted to his men, three bullets striking him, the third in his mouth. The Confederates seized his two guns and turned them to face the Union troops (to no avail, as the armaments lacked ammunition). At this point, Union soldiers arrived and successfully charged into the breach.

The advancing Northerners overwhelmed the Confederate forces; the rebel advance then collapsed in turn. Given that Union forces had killed each senior Confederate officer commanding the forward-most units, no man had the authority to command the Southern forces to fall back in an orderly manner. This resulted in a disorganized retreat.

The infantry assault lasted less than an hour. The supporting attack by Wilcox and Lang on Pickett's right was never a factor; they did not approach the Union line until after Pickett was defeated, and their advance was quickly broken up by McGilvery's guns and by the Vermont Brigade.

## Aftermath

While the Union lost about 1,500 killed and wounded, the Confederate casualty rate was over 50%. Pickett's division suffered 2,655 casualties (498 killed, 643 wounded, 833 wounded and captured, and 681 captured, unwounded). Pettigrew's losses are estimated to be about 2,700 (470 killed, 1,893 wounded, 337 captured). Trimble's two brigades lost 885 (155 killed, 650 wounded, and 80 captured). Wilcox's brigade reported losses of 200, Lang's about 400. Thus, total losses during the attack were 6,555, of which at least 1,123 Confederates were killed on the battlefield, 4,019 were wounded, and a good number of the injured were also captured. Confederate prisoner totals are difficult to estimate from their reports; Union reports indicated that 3,750 men were captured.

The casualties were also high among the commanders of the charge. Trimble and Pettigrew were the most senior casualties of the day; Trimble lost a leg, and Pettigrew received a minor wound to the hand (only to die from a bullet to the abdomen suffered in a minor skirmish during the retreat to Virginia). In Pickett's division, 26 of the 40 field grade officers (majors, lieutenant colonels, and colonels) were casualties—twelve killed or mortally wounded, nine wounded, four wounded and captured, and one captured. All of his brigade commanders fell: Kemper was wounded seriously, captured by Union soldiers, rescued, and then captured again during the retreat to Virginia; Garnett and Armistead were killed. Garnett had a previous leg injury and rode his horse during the charge, despite knowing that conspicuously riding a horse into heavy enemy fire would mean almost certain death.

Armistead, known for leading his brigade with his cap on the tip of his sword, made the farthest progress through the Union lines. He was mortally wounded, falling near "The Angle" at what is now called the high-water mark of the Confederacy and died two days later in a Union hospital. Ironically, the Union troops that fatally wounded Armistead were under the command of his old friend, Winfield Scott Hancock, who was himself severely wounded in the battle. Per his dying wishes, Longstreet delivered Armistead's Bible and other personal effects to Hancock's wife, Almira. Of the 15 regimental commanders in Pickett's division, the Virginia Military Institute produced 11 and all were casualties—six killed, five wounded.

Stuart's cavalry action in indirect support of the infantry assault was unsuccessful. He was met and stopped by Union cavalry under the command of Brig. Gen. David McMurtrie Gregg about three miles (5 km) to the east, in East Cavalry Field.

As soldiers straggled back to the Confederate lines along Seminary Ridge, Lee feared a Union counteroffensive and tried to rally his center, telling returning soldiers and Wilcox that the failure was "all my fault". Pickett was inconsolable for the rest of the day and never forgave Lee for ordering the charge. When Lee told Pickett to rally his division for the defense, Pickett allegedly replied, "General, I have no division."

The Union counteroffensive never came; the Army of the Potomac was exhausted and nearly as damaged at the end of the three days as the Army of Northern Virginia. Meade was content to hold the field. On July 4, the armies observed an informal truce and collected their dead and wounded. Meanwhile, Maj. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant accepted the surrender of the Vicksburg garrison along the Mississippi River, splitting the Confederacy in two. These two Union victories are generally considered the turning point of the American Civil War.

History may never know the true story of Lee's intentions at Gettysburg. He never published memoirs, and his after-action report from the battle was cursory. Most of the senior commanders of the charge were casualties and did not write reports. Pickett's report was apparently so bitter that Lee ordered him to destroy it, and no copy has been found. Years later, when asked why the charge at Gettysburg failed, Pickett reportedly said, "I've always thought the Yankees had something to do with it."

Virginian newspapers praised Pickett's Virginia division as making the most progress during the charge, and the papers used Pickett's comparative success as a means of criticizing the actions of the other states' troops during the charge. It was this publicity that played a significant factor in selecting the name Pickett's Charge. Pickett's military career was never the same after the charge, and he was displeased about having his name attached to the repulsed charge. In particular North Carolinians have long taken exception to the characterizations and point to the poor performance of Brockenbrough's Virginians in the advance as a major causative factor of failure. Some historians have questioned the primacy of Pickett's role in the battle. W. R. Bond wrote in 1888, "No body of troops during the last war made as much reputation on so little fighting."

Additional controversy developed after the battle about Pickett's personal location during the charge. The fact that fifteen of his officers and all three of his brigadier generals were casualties while Pickett managed to escape unharmed led many to question his proximity to the fighting and, by implication, his personal courage. The 1993 film Gettysburg depicts him observing on horseback from the Codori Farm at the Emmitsburg Road, but there is no historical evidence to confirm this. It was established doctrine in the Civil War that commanders of divisions and above would "lead from the rear", while brigade and more junior officers were expected to lead from the front, and while this was often violated, there was nothing for Pickett to be ashamed of if he coordinated his forces from behind.

## The Lost Cause

Pickett's Charge has become one of the central symbols of the literary and cultural movement known as the Lost Cause, in particular for Virginians. Proponents extol the bravery of Confederate soldiers attacking headlong into Union lines, the capable leadership of southern generals inspiring overwhelming confidence in their men, especially that of Virginians such as Lee and Pickett, and the tantalizing closeness of ultimate victory. William Faulkner, the quintessential Southern novelist, summed up the picture in Southern myth of this gallant but futile episode:

> For every Southern boy fourteen years old, not once but whenever he wants it, there is the instant when it's still not yet two o'clock on that July afternoon in 1863, the brigades are in position behind the rail fence, the guns are laid and ready in the woods and the furled flags are already loosened to break out and Pickett himself with his long oiled ringlets and his hat in one hand probably and his sword in the other looking up the hill waiting for Longstreet to give the word and it's all in the balance, it hasn't happened yet, it hasn't even begun yet, it not only hasn't begun yet but there is still time for it not to begin against that position and those circumstances which made more men than Garnett and Kemper and Armistead and Wilcox look grave yet it's going to begin, we all know that, we have come too far with too much at stake and that moment doesn't need even a fourteen-year-old boy to think This time. Maybe this time with all this much to lose than all this much to gain: Pennsylvania, Maryland, the world, the golden dome of Washington itself to crown with desperate and unbelievable victory the desperate gamble, the cast made two years ago.

Over time this view came to dominate perceptions of the battle, despite the initial protestations from groups both north and south. Northern veterans in particular opposed the decreasing emphasis on their hard-fought defense of Cemetery Ridge in favor of extolling the bravery and sacrifice of the attacking Confederate army. Non-Virginian southerners took offense at the overwhelming focus the myth places on Virginian leaders and Virginian troops, despite that larger number of Northern Carolina troops, who sustained greater casualties than the Virginian regiments. Nevertheless, after decades of strident historicizing this narrative had firmly taken root and by the battle's 50th anniversary in 1913 it had become in many ways the standard interpretation of what occurred.

Modern analysis, however, has increasingly shifted away from many of the Lost Cause interpretation's tenets. Lee's decision to conduct the attack has been characterized as the culmination of multiple strategic and tactical blunders, and the sacrifice of his troops as unnecessary. Examination of casualty records, capture reports, and first hand accounts has revealed that substantial numbers of Confederate troops involved in the attack refused to make the final charge, instead choosing to shelter in the sunken depression of the Emmitsburg Road and surrender to Union soldiers after the battle. And later research has shown that it is unlikely Pickett's charge could ever have provided the decisive victory imagined by Lee; a study using the Lanchester model to examine several alternative scenarios suggested that Lee could have captured a foothold on Cemetery Ridge if he had committed several more infantry brigades to the charge; but this likely would have left him with insufficient reserves to hold or exploit the position afterwards.

## The battlefield today

The site of Pickett's Charge is one of the best-maintained portions of the Gettysburg Battlefield. Despite millions of annual visitors to Gettysburg National Military Park, very few have walked in the footsteps of Pickett's division. The National Park Service maintains a neat, mowed path alongside a fence that leads from the Virginia Monument on West Confederate Avenue (Seminary Ridge) due east to the Emmitsburg Road in the direction of the Copse of Trees.

Pickett's division, however, started considerably south of that point, near the Spangler farm, and wheeled to the north after crossing the road. In fact, the Park Service pathway stands between the two main thrusts of Longstreet's assault—Trimble's division advanced north of the current path, while Pickett's division moved from farther south.

A cyclorama painting by the French artist Paul Philippoteaux entitled The Battle of Gettysburg, also known as the Gettysburg Cyclorama, depicts Pickett's Charge from the vantage point of the Union defenders on Cemetery Ridge. Completed and first exhibited in 1883, it is one of the last surviving cycloramas in the United States. It was restored and relocated to the new National Park Service Visitor Center in September 2008.

Confederate infantry assault during the Battle of Gettysburg in the American Civil War