Ron,

Actually the disparity in percentages appears to be principally due to the fact that the Confederates did most of the attacking, while the Federals defended. Artillery effectiveness improves significantly as range decreases, hence the attacker has a disadvantage. It was also found that Confederate artillery suffered less than 20 percent musketry casualties while the Federal figure was more than double in that category, which again makes sense since the defending artillery was placed in harm's way more often from opposing infantry attacks. Your point is well taken on the Hunt versus Hancock debate. It was found that the artillery casualty percentage in Pickett's division was about the same as the army as a whole--this category should have been much higher if Hunt's view had prevailed, and more artillery was available when Pickett launched his attack. Hancock had already fired away his long-range ammunition with minimal effectiveness. Tom