The Internal Gettysburg: Little Round Top and the Siege of Addiction in Kensington

I. Introduction: Two Battlefields, One War?

A. Framing the Metaphor: The Internal Civil War of Addiction and the Slopes of Little Round Top

History offers stark, visceral moments that resonate beyond their specific time and place, providing frameworks through which later generations attempt to comprehend enduring human struggles. The Battle of Little Round Top, a ferocious and pivotal engagement during the Battle of Gettysburg, stands as such a moment—a desperate fight for high ground that profoundly influenced the course of the American Civil War. This clash of Union and Confederate forces on a rocky Pennsylvania hillside, marked by strategic urgency, tactical improvisation, and profound human sacrifice, presents a powerful, albeit challenging, lens through which to examine a different kind of civil war: the internal conflict waged within the mind and body of an individual grappling with illicit drug addiction. This internal battle, often invisible and deeply stigmatized, finds a harrowing contemporary epicenter in the Kensington neighborhood of Philadelphia, an area synonymous with the devastating impacts of the opioid crisis, homelessness, and profound personal destruction.

This analysis seeks to explore the resonance between these two seemingly disparate battlefields. By employing the historical conflict at Little Round Top as a central metaphor, the aim is to illuminate the complex, often misunderstood nature of addiction as an internal siege. Metaphor, in this context, serves not to equate distinct experiences but to leverage the tangible clarity of military conflict—its strategies, terrain, assaults, defenses, and human costs—to foster a deeper understanding of the neurological, psychological, and environmental forces clashing within and around individuals ensnared by substance use disorder. The structure will first delve into the historical realities of the fight for Little Round Top, then examine the multifaceted nature of addiction, particularly within the specific, challenging context of Kensington, before drawing explicit parallels and contrasts to evaluate the metaphor's power and limitations.

B. Overview of the Comparative Analysis: History, Addiction Science, and Human Experience

To construct this comparative analysis, a detailed examination of both conflicts is necessary. The engagement at Little Round Top requires understanding the key figures whose decisions shaped the fight—commanders like Gouverneur K. Warren, Strong Vincent, Joshua Chamberlain, Patrick O’Rorke, Evander Law, and William Oates—and the specific military units under their command, such as the 20th Maine, 15th Alabama, and 140th New York. Crucial are the tactical maneuvers employed, including the defense of high ground, flanking attempts, and the desperate bayonet charge, as well as the brutal reality of the soldiers' experiences and the staggering human cost.

Simultaneously, the internal conflict of addiction demands exploration through multiple lenses. This includes the neurobiological underpinnings—how drugs like opioids and stimulants hijack the brain's reward pathways, altering judgment and control. It encompasses the psychological cycle of craving, tolerance, withdrawal, and relapse, and the arduous process of recovery. Critically, the analysis must situate this struggle within the specific environmental context of Kensington, Philadelphia, examining how factors like poverty, historical deindustrialization, homelessness, trauma, and the prevalence of dangerous substances like fentanyl mixed with xylazine ("tranq") shape the battleground. Finally, it must acknowledge the devastating personal toll—physical, mental, and social—on individuals and the community. The analytical goal is to synthesize these elements, identifying thematic resonances—defense, attack, terrain (physical and mental), desperation, resilience, loss of control—that bridge the historical battlefield and the internal struggle [User Query Points 3-7].

C. Navigating Sensitivity: Acknowledging the Weight of Both Histories

Employing a historical battle, particularly one as iconic and laden with national significance as Gettysburg, as a metaphor for drug addiction requires careful navigation and explicit acknowledgment of the sensitivities involved. The comparison is fraught with potential pitfalls. It risks trivializing the unique sacrifices and national trauma embodied by the Civil War and the soldiers who fought and died at Little Round Top. Conversely, it could inadvertently romanticize or dramatize the grim, often isolating reality of addiction, potentially obscuring the systemic failures and deep-seated social issues that fuel the crisis in places like Kensington.

Therefore, it must be stated unequivocally: this analysis does not intend to equate the experiences of a Union or Confederate soldier in 1863 with those of an individual struggling with substance use disorder in contemporary Philadelphia. The contexts, consequences, and societal perceptions are vastly different. The purpose of the metaphor is not equivalence but illumination. The stark, tangible nature of the military conflict—the clear objectives, the visible terrain, the documented actions of command, the immediate life-or-death stakes—can offer a framework for visualizing and understanding the often abstract, internalized, and poorly understood dynamics of addiction. The aim is to foster empathy and insight by highlighting shared themes of struggle, defense, desperation, and the critical importance of terrain, whether physical or psychological. Both Little Round Top and Kensington represent sites of immense human suffering and loss, demanding respectful and nuanced consideration of the lives impacted.

II. The Tangible Conflict: Defending Little Round Top

A. The Strategic Imperative: Why Little Round Top Mattered

On the afternoon of July 2, 1863, the second day of the Battle of Gettysburg, a relatively small, rocky hill south of the town unexpectedly became one of the most critical pieces of ground on the North American continent. Little Round Top, though overshadowed in height by its neighbor, Big Round Top, offered a commanding view of the surrounding terrain, including the Union line stretching north along Cemetery Ridge and the fields across which Confederate forces were advancing. Control of this elevation was strategically vital; it provided an anchor for the Union army's left flank and a superb platform for artillery, capable of enfilading attacks against any Confederate force attempting to assault Cemetery Ridge or move around the Union flank. Had Confederate forces seized Little Round Top, they could have placed their own artillery there, potentially unraveling the entire Union defensive position—the famous "fishhook" line—and achieving a decisive breakthrough that might have altered the outcome of the battle, and possibly the war.

The urgency surrounding Little Round Top, however, arose not from meticulous planning but from a significant tactical error. Major General George Meade, commander of the Union Army of the Potomac, had intended for Major General Daniel Sickles's III Corps to occupy the southern end of Cemetery Ridge, anchoring the flank on Little Round Top. Sickles, however, deeming the ground assigned to him inadequate for defense and seeking slightly higher ground near the Peach Orchard along the Emmitsburg Road, moved his entire corps forward without authorization. This impetuous move created a large, vulnerable salient far in front of the main Union line and, crucially, left Little Round Top—the designated anchor of the flank—almost entirely undefended. It was this unforeseen gap, created by a subordinate's controversial decision, that transformed Little Round Top from a point on the map into the scene of a desperate, last-minute struggle for survival. The battle for the hill became a reactive scramble to fix a self-inflicted vulnerability, highlighting how battlefield realities often diverge sharply from initial strategic intentions, demanding rapid adaptation in the face of contingency and error. This contrasts with General Robert E. Lee’s intended flanking attack with Longstreet's corps, which itself deviated from plan as Hood's division swung eastward towards the Round Tops instead of driving up the Emmitsburg Road, partly due to encountering unexpected Union forces (including sharpshooters near Devil's Den) and the rugged terrain. The critical nature of Little Round Top thus emerged from the convergence of a Union blunder and a Confederate deviation, a focal point born of battlefield chaos rather than deliberate design.

B. Command Under Pressure: Leadership Decisions and Initiative

The defense of Little Round Top became a testament to the initiative and rapid decision-making of several Union officers acting largely independently amidst the confusion. The first critical intervention came from Brigadier General Gouverneur K. Warren, the Army of the Potomac's Chief Engineer. Sent by Meade to assess the situation on the left flank after Sickles's move became apparent, Warren climbed Little Round Top to find it occupied only by a small Signal Corps detachment. Seeing the glint of Confederate bayonets approaching from the southwest, Warren instantly recognized the imminent danger to the exposed flank. Without waiting for orders, he dispatched staff officers, including Washington Roebling, to urgently seek any available troops. His quick thinking and determination were widely credited with saving the position; as one V Corps division commander later wrote to him, "Your name ought to be forever connected with the saving of our left, for Round Top was saved by your foresight". Warren didn't just send messengers; he personally rode down the hill and encountered the 140th New York Infantry, convincing its commander, Colonel Patrick O'Rorke, to divert his regiment immediately up the slope.

Responding to Warren's desperate pleas, Colonel Strong Vincent, commanding the 3rd Brigade, 1st Division, V Corps, made perhaps the most consequential decision. Hearing from a staff officer about the undefended hill and the advancing Confederates, Vincent, a 26-year-old lawyer and the youngest brigade commander in the army at the time, took immediate action. Bypassing or anticipating orders from his division commander (whom some suspected was incapacitated ), Vincent declared, "I will take the responsibility of taking my brigade there," and ordered his four regiments—the 20th Maine, 83rd Pennsylvania, 44th New York, and 16th Michigan—to the hill at the double-quick. His brigade arrived mere minutes before the first Confederate elements reached the base of the hill. Vincent quickly deployed his men along the southern and western slopes, placing Colonel Joshua L. Chamberlain's 20th Maine on the extreme left flank with orders to hold at all costs. Vincent's decisive leadership and tactical placement were crucial, but he would not survive the battle, being mortally wounded while rallying his troops, reportedly urging them, "Don't give an inch".

Colonel Patrick "Paddy" O'Rorke of the 140th New York also displayed remarkable initiative. Intercepted by Warren as his regiment marched towards the fighting near the Wheatfield, O'Rorke, without hesitation, obeyed Warren's urgent request and led his men up the back slope of Little Round Top. Arriving at a critical moment when the Confederate Texans were beginning to overwhelm Vincent's right flank (the 16th Michigan), O'Rorke led his regiment in a charge down the forward slope. He was killed almost instantly at the crest, but his regiment plunged into the gap, suffering heavy casualties but successfully repulsing the attack and stabilizing the line.

On the far left, Colonel Joshua L. Chamberlain, a former professor of rhetoric and modern languages at Bowdoin College with limited prior combat command experience , faced repeated assaults from Colonel William C. Oates's 15th Alabama and elements of the 47th Alabama. Oates, under the overall command of Brigadier General Evander M. Law (who assumed division command after Major General John Bell Hood was wounded early in the assault ), aimed to turn the Union flank. Chamberlain skillfully managed his defense, refusing his flank (bending the end of his line back at an angle) to prevent being enveloped. After enduring multiple charges and with his men critically low on ammunition, facing the prospect of being overrun by the next assault, Chamberlain made the audacious decision to order a counterattack with fixed bayonets. This unexpected downhill charge broke the final Confederate push on the flank and secured the position. For his gallantry, Chamberlain was later awarded the Medal of Honor.

The Confederate command faced its own challenges. Law's brigade, including Oates's 15th Alabama, had endured a grueling march of nearly 25 miles that day in the July heat with little water before being thrown into the assault. Oates pressed his attack vigorously, maneuvering his regiment up the difficult slope and engaging in fierce combat. He later believed that if he had been supported by just one more regiment, he could have taken the hill and potentially won the battle for the Confederacy. However, facing determined resistance, heavy losses (including his own brother, Lieutenant John Oates ), exhaustion, and ultimately a flanking threat to his own right rear, Oates made the difficult decision to order a retreat.

The successful defense of Little Round Top thus appears less a product of high-level strategic direction and more the result of initiative exercised at the brigade and regimental level. In the fog and friction of battle, with communication lines strained and higher commanders potentially unaware of the rapidly developing situation (like Meade's initial unawareness of Sickles's move, or the delay in Law learning of Hood's wounding ), the actions of officers like Warren, Vincent, O'Rorke, and Chamberlain proved decisive. They adapted to the immediate reality they faced, sometimes bending or breaking formal protocols, to address the critical threat. This underscores how, in moments of intense crisis, empowering individuals closest to the action to make bold decisions based on the ground truth can be more effective than rigid adherence to a potentially outdated plan or hierarchical structure.

C. The Fury of Battle: Tactics, Terrain, and the Soldier's Reality

The fight for Little Round Top was defined by its brutal intensity and the challenging physical landscape. The hill itself was steep, strewn with massive boulders, and covered in rocky, uneven ground. While offering excellent natural cover for defenders, it presented a formidable obstacle for the attacking Confederates, who had to scramble upwards "catching to the bushes and crawling over the immense boulders, in the face of incessant fire". Big Round Top to the south, though taller, was heavily wooded and considered less practical for deploying large numbers of troops or artillery at the time. The terrain dictated tactics: Union soldiers utilized the rocks and ledges for protection, firing down on the Confederates struggling up the slopes.

Colonel Vincent rapidly established his defensive line. He placed the 16th Michigan on the right, connecting with other Union elements further north; the 44th New York and 83rd Pennsylvania held the center along the western slope; and the 20th Maine curved back to the east, forming the army's vulnerable left terminus. Lieutenant Charles Hazlett's artillery battery (Battery D, 5th U.S. Artillery) was laboriously dragged to the summit, providing crucial fire support despite the difficulty of maneuvering guns on the rocky crest. Later reinforcements from Brigadier General Stephen Weed's brigade (following O'Rorke's 140th NY) included the 146th New York, 91st Pennsylvania, and 155th Pennsylvania, which extended the Union line northward along the hill's crest.

The Confederate assault came in waves, primarily from Law's Alabama brigade and Brigadier General Jerome B. Robertson's Texas Brigade (4th and 5th Texas, 3rd Arkansas – though the 3rd Arkansas primarily fought at Devil's Den). The fighting quickly devolved into desperate, close-quarters combat amidst the boulders—a "hill of blood and death". Soldiers on both sides described the chaos and intensity. Valerius Giles of the 4th Texas recalled the confusion as regiments became intermingled during the charge, field officers fell, and friendly artillery fire initially added to the mayhem. He noted the "viciousness in the very air we breathed" as soldiers took cover behind rocks and trees, fighting almost as individuals rather than cohesive units. The Confederates launched repeated attacks. The Texans and the 48th Alabama hammered Vincent's right and center, causing the 16th Michigan to falter and begin to give way before O'Rorke's 140th New York arrived to plug the gap. On the left, Oates's 15th and 47th Alabama regiments relentlessly assaulted Chamberlain's 20th Maine, attempting to find a way around the flank.

The climax on the left flank arrived when the 20th Maine, having repulsed multiple attacks, found its ammunition nearly exhausted. Facing the prospect of being overrun by yet another charge, Chamberlain gave the extraordinary order: "Bayonet!". Executing a maneuver sometimes described as a "right-wheel forward" or a "swinging door," the remaining men of the 20th Maine charged downhill. The depleted left wing swung forward, aligning with the center, and the entire line surged down the slope. Some accounts suggest Lieutenant Holman Melcher initiated a charge from the center simultaneously or spontaneously. This sudden, desperate onslaught with cold steel stunned the attacking Alabamians, already weary from the climb and the fighting. The Confederate line broke, and many were captured as they tried to retreat. Some narratives also credit Captain Walter Morrill's Company B of the 20th Maine, deployed earlier as skirmishers, and elements of the 2nd U.S. Sharpshooters, firing into the Confederate flank or rear from behind a stone wall, with contributing to the repulse. While the dramatic impact of the charge is legendary, some analysis suggests its decisiveness may be somewhat romanticized, arguing Oates was already contemplating withdrawal due to flanking threats and exhaustion.

Regardless of the precise weight given to the bayonet charge versus other factors, the human cost of the hour-long struggle for Little Round Top was immense. The Union defenders suffered approximately 550 casualties, while the attacking Confederates lost around 1,200 men. Key Union leaders fell: Vincent, O'Rorke, Weed, and Hazlett were all killed or mortally wounded. Oates lost nearly half his regiment, including his brother John. The 140th New York lost over 180 men in its brief, violent counterattack. Soldier accounts convey the grim reality: the exhaustion of Oates's men after their 25-mile march , the chaotic mix-up of units , the terror of friendly fire , the sheer brutality described by Oates of a soldier running past with his throat cut , and the ground littered with dead and wounded. The fight was characterized by extreme physical hardship—heat, thirst, the punishing terrain—and moments of visceral violence. The bayonet charge itself stands as a stark example of physical action born from desperation, a moment when depleted technology (ammunition) was replaced by the sheer physical force of a downhill assault. This intense physicality—endurance tested to its limits, the body as both weapon and vulnerability—marks the battle as a primal struggle decided not just by strategy but by raw human will and physical resilience against overwhelming odds.

Table 1: Key Units and Leadership at Little Round Top (July 2, 1863)

Affiliation	Corps	Division	Brigade	Regiment/Unit	Key Commanders	Notable Actions/Fate
Union	V Corps	1st Div	3rd Bde (Vincent)	Col. Strong Vincent	Bde Cmdr	Assumed responsibility for LRT defense, deployed brigade, mortally wounded
Union	V Corps	1st Div	3rd Bde	20th Maine	Col. Joshua Chamberlain	Held extreme left flank, refused flank, ordered bayonet charge
Union	V Corps	1st Div	3rd Bde	83rd Pennsylvania	Capt. Orpheus Woodward	Held center-left of Vincent's line
Union	V Corps	1st Div	3rd Bde	44th New York	Col. James Rice (later Bde Cmdr)	Held center-right of Vincent's line
Union	V Corps	1st Div	3rd Bde	16th Michigan	Lt. Col. Norval Welch	Held right flank, faltered under attack but held with reinforcements
Union	V Corps	2nd Div	3rd Bde (Weed)	Brig. Gen. Stephen Weed	Bde Cmdr	Brought reinforcements, mortally wounded
Union	V Corps	2nd Div	3rd Bde	140th New York	Col. Patrick O'Rorke	Diverted by Warren, charged into gap on Vincent's right, killed instantly
Union	V Corps	2nd Div	3rd Bde	146th New York	Col. Kenner Garrard (later Bde Cmdr)	Reinforced Union right-center on LRT
Union	V Corps	2nd Div	3rd Bde	91st Pennsylvania	Lt. Col. Joseph Sinex	Reinforced Union right on LRT
Union	V Corps	2nd Div	3rd Bde	155th Pennsylvania	Lt. Col. John Cain	Reinforced Union right on LRT
Union	Artillery Reserve	V Corps Artillery Bde	Battery D, 5th US Arty	1st Lt. Charles Hazlett	Battery Cmdr	Positioned guns on LRT summit, killed
Union	Army HQ	Engineers	---	Brig. Gen. Gouverneur K. Warren	Chief Engineer	Recognized threat, summoned reinforcements
Union	III Corps / V Corps	---	---	2nd US Sharpshooters	---	Skirmished with advancing Confederates, some joined 20th ME defense
Confederate	I Corps (Longstreet)	Hood's Div	Maj. Gen. John B. Hood	Div Cmdr	Ordered assault, wounded early
Confederate	I Corps	Hood's Div	Law's Bde	Brig. Gen. Evander M. Law	Bde Cmdr (later acting Div Cmdr)	Directed assault on Round Tops after Hood's wounding
Confederate	I Corps	Hood's Div	Law's Bde	15th Alabama	Col. William C. Oates	Led repeated assaults on 20th ME, attempted flank, ordered retreat
Confederate	I Corps	Hood's Div	Law's Bde	47th Alabama	Col. James Jackson / Lt. Col. M.J. Bulger	Assaulted 20th ME alongside 15th AL
Confederate	I Corps	Hood's Div	Law's Bde	4th Alabama	Lt. Col. L.H. Scruggs	Part of Law's assault
Confederate	I Corps	Hood's Div	Law's Bde	48th Alabama	Col. James L. Sheffield	Attacked Vincent's right flank alongside Texans
Confederate	I Corps	Hood's Div	Robertson's Bde	Brig. Gen. Jerome B. Robertson	Bde Cmdr	Directed assault on Devil's Den and LRT, wounded
Confederate	I Corps	Hood's Div	Robertson's Bde	4th Texas	Lt. Col. B.F. Carter (killed) / Maj. J.P. Bane	Assaulted Vincent's right-center
Confederate	I Corps	Hood's Div	Robertson's Bde	5th Texas	Col. R.M. Powell (wounded) / Lt. Col. K. Bryan (wounded) / Maj. J.C. Rogers	Assaulted Vincent's right-center

III. The Intangible Conflict: Addiction's Siege Within

A. The Neurological Battlefield: How Addiction Rewires the Brain

While the battle for Little Round Top unfolded on tangible, rocky ground, the conflict of addiction is waged primarily within the intricate landscape of the human brain. Addiction is now understood not as a moral failing or a simple lack of willpower, but as a chronic, relapsing brain disorder, a form of mental illness characterized by compulsive drug seeking and use despite devastating consequences. Much like cardiovascular disease damages the heart, addiction induces long-lasting changes in brain structure and function, impairing the very organ responsible for judgment, choice, and survival.

At the heart of this neurological conflict lies the brain's reward system, a network of structures including the ventral tegmental area (VTA), nucleus accumbens, and prefrontal cortex. This system evolved to ensure survival by releasing the neurotransmitter dopamine in response to naturally rewarding behaviors like eating, drinking, social connection, and sex, creating feelings of pleasure and reinforcing the motivation to repeat those essential activities. Addictive substances, however, hijack this finely tuned mechanism. Drugs like heroin, cocaine, fentanyl, and methamphetamine directly or indirectly flood the reward circuit with dopamine, often far exceeding the levels released by natural rewards and doing so with unnatural speed and intensity. This powerful surge creates an intense, albeit artificial, sense of pleasure or relief and strongly reinforces the drug-taking behavior, essentially teaching the brain to prioritize the drug above all else. It creates a deceptive "shortcut" to the brain's pleasure center.

Over time, the brain attempts to adapt to this chronic overstimulation. It may reduce its own dopamine production or decrease the number of dopamine receptors, leading to tolerance—the need for increasingly larger doses of the drug to achieve the desired effect. This adaptation has profound consequences. The drug itself becomes less pleasurable ("liking" decreases), yet the compulsion to use it ("wanting" or craving) intensifies. Furthermore, the brain's dampened response to dopamine means that natural rewards—food, hobbies, relationships—also lose their ability to bring pleasure, contributing to the anhedonia often experienced in addiction. The individual finds themselves trapped, needing the drug not necessarily for euphoria, but simply to feel "normal" and avoid the distress of withdrawal.

Crucially, addiction fundamentally compromises the brain regions responsible for executive functions, particularly the prefrontal cortex. This area governs judgment, decision-making, learning, memory, and impulse control. Brain imaging studies reveal physical changes in these critical areas in individuals with addiction. This damage explains why the initial, often voluntary, decision to try a drug can devolve into compulsive use where the individual seems unable to exert self-control, even when acutely aware of the catastrophic consequences. The brain's command center, responsible for weighing risks and making rational choices, is effectively impaired, undermined by the powerful signals emanating from the hijacked reward pathway. In this sense, the "enemy" in addiction is not merely the external substance but the brain's own altered circuitry, a civil war where the mechanisms designed for survival are turned against the self. The individual's intentions and values become casualties in a conflict waged within their own neurobiology.

B. The Psychological War: Craving, Relapse, and the Struggle for Recovery

The neurological changes wrought by addiction manifest psychologically as a relentless internal war dominated by craving, the constant threat of relapse, and the arduous, often non-linear, path toward recovery. Craving is defined as a powerful, often overwhelming urge or desire to use the substance. Rooted in the brain's altered reward system and conditioned responses , cravings can feel irresistible and persist long after the cessation of drug use, representing a constant psychological siege.

This siege is often triggered by specific cues, both internal and external. External triggers include people associated with past drug use, specific locations where drugs were obtained or used, situations involving stress or celebration, or even the sight of drug paraphernalia. Internal triggers are equally potent and often more insidious; these include emotional states like stress, anxiety, sadness, anger, boredom, or loneliness. Even basic physiological states like hunger or fatigue can act as triggers, encapsulated in the recovery acronym HALT (Hungry, Angry, Lonely, Tired). These triggers reactivate the neural pathways associated with drug use, unleashing intense cravings and making relapse a constant danger.

The cycle of addiction involves a recurring pattern: initial use, leading to changes in the brain that produce tolerance (needing more drug) and withdrawal (physical and emotional distress when the drug is absent), which in turn fuels intense cravings, compulsive drug-seeking behavior, and further use, often despite accumulating negative consequences like health problems, relationship damage, or legal issues. Relapse, or the return to substance use after a period of abstinence, is a common feature of this chronic disorder, with rates comparable to those for other chronic illnesses like diabetes or hypertension.

Understanding relapse is crucial for navigating recovery. It often unfolds in stages. Emotional relapse may occur first, characterized by bottling up emotions, isolating oneself, neglecting self-care (poor sleep or eating habits), and focusing on others' problems, even without conscious thoughts of using. This stage lays the groundwork for future use, often masked by denial. Mental relapse involves an internal battle: craving intensifies, thoughts turn to people, places, and things associated with past use, the individual may minimize past negative consequences and glamorize the perceived benefits of using, lie, bargain with themselves, or actively plan a return to use. Physical relapse is the actual act of using the substance again. Recognizing these stages allows for intervention before a full physical relapse occurs.

Similarly, recovery is typically viewed as a process involving stages of change. In the precontemplation stage, the individual may not recognize a problem or may be in denial. Contemplation involves ambivalence—acknowledging the problem but fearing change or lacking confidence in the ability to quit. The preparation stage involves intending to take action soon and perhaps making small changes. The action stage involves actively modifying behavior, seeking treatment, and developing coping skills, but this phase is often marked by intense cravings, emotional turbulence, and high relapse risk. Finally, the maintenance stage involves sustaining change long-term, managing triggers, preventing relapse, and building a new life, a phase that can last for years or a lifetime. This model highlights the internal conflict inherent in recovery, the constant push and pull between the desire to change and the powerful forces of addiction.

The psychological war is thus characterized by a need for constant vigilance and the development of robust defenses. Coping mechanisms become the psychological equivalent of fortifications and counter-maneuvers. These include identifying and avoiding triggers, developing stress management techniques (like exercise, hobbies, mindfulness, meditation), building a strong support network (friends, family, support groups like AA/NA), engaging in therapy (like Cognitive Behavioral Therapy or CBT) to challenge irrational beliefs and learn new skills, and sometimes utilizing medication-assisted treatment (MOUD). The recovery journey is not a single battle won but a protracted campaign requiring sustained effort, strategic adaptation, and the marshaling of internal and external resources against a persistent, deeply entrenched adversary. The understanding that relapse is a potential tactical setback within this longer campaign, rather than a complete defeat, is vital. It counters the shame and hopelessness that can follow a return to use and encourages individuals to re-engage with their recovery efforts, much like an army might regroup and adjust its strategy after losing ground.

C. Kensington's Landscape: Environment as a Factor in the Conflict

The internal battle of addiction does not occur in a vacuum; it is profoundly shaped by the external environment. The Kensington neighborhood of Philadelphia serves as a stark illustration of how social, economic, and physical landscapes can constitute an active, hostile terrain in the fight against substance use disorder. Once a thriving industrial center known for its textile mills and working-class community spirit, Kensington experienced significant economic decline following deindustrialization in the latter half of the 20th century. This decline left a legacy of concentrated poverty (a staggering 45% poverty rate in some reports , compared to a high citywide rate of 21.7% ), high unemployment, and limited access to essential resources like healthcare and affordable housing.

This socioeconomic devastation created fertile ground for the opioid crisis to take root and flourish, transforming the neighborhood into what Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) officials have called the "East Coast's largest open-air drug market" , with reports of around 80 distinct drug markets operating within a small area. For some residents facing bleak economic prospects and pervasive hopelessness, drug use may begin as a form of self-medication or escape from harsh realities, while the drug trade itself can offer a perilous means of economic survival. The environment becomes characterized by visible signs of despair: widespread homelessness, with over a third of Philadelphia's homeless population reportedly residing in Kensington , numerous street encampments , and the constant, open presence of drug use and dealing.

This landscape is not merely a passive backdrop but an active combatant in the struggle with addiction. It presents constant exposure to triggers—seeing others use, encountering dealers, the palpable sense of despair—that can easily provoke cravings in those attempting recovery. The environment itself is physically dangerous, not only due to potential violence associated with drug markets but also because of the increasingly toxic nature of the drug supply. Fentanyl, a potent synthetic opioid, has largely replaced heroin and is frequently adulterated with xylazine ("tranq"), a veterinary tranquilizer. In 2021-2022, over 90% of street opioid samples tested in Philadelphia contained xylazine. This substance adds layers of danger: it causes profound sedation, suppresses breathing synergistically with opioids, is not reversed by the standard overdose antidote naloxone (Narcan), and is associated with severe, difficult-to-treat necrotic skin wounds that can occur even without injection. The Kensington environment, therefore, represents an escalation zone where the baseline dangers of opioid use are significantly amplified.

Furthermore, the structural factors underpinning the crisis—poverty, lack of opportunity, systemic racism contributing to health disparities, and inadequate access to treatment, mental healthcare, and stable housing—act as barriers, making escape from the cycle of addiction incredibly difficult. Research highlights the role of trauma (physical and psychological), social isolation, and hopelessness as fundamental drivers of the crisis. Studies of street-involved individuals in Philadelphia reveal high rates of unstable housing, involvement in survival sex, and co-occurring mental health issues, all contributing to risky drug use patterns. Statistics paint a grim picture: Philadelphia recorded 1,413 unintentional overdose deaths in 2022, an 11% increase from 2021, with disproportionate and rising rates among Black residents. While preliminary data suggests a slight decrease in resident deaths in 2023, the crisis remains acute, particularly for specific demographics. The Kensington environment thus functions like a battlefield saturated with hazards, where escape routes are few, reinforcements (like accessible treatment and housing) are scarce, and the very air seems thick with triggers and threats, actively working against those trying to achieve or maintain recovery.

D. Wounds of War: The Devastating Personal Toll

The war of addiction inflicts profound wounds, attacking the individual on every front—physical, mental, emotional, and social. The most immediate physical danger is fatal overdose, a risk dramatically heightened by the prevalence of fentanyl and its combination with xylazine. Beyond overdose, the physical toll includes the horrific, slow-healing, necrotic skin wounds associated with xylazine, which can lead to severe infections, systemic illness like endocarditis, and even amputation. Chronic substance use also leads to a host of other health problems, organ damage, and increased vulnerability to infectious diseases.

Mentally and emotionally, the burden is immense. Addiction frequently co-occurs with, or exacerbates, mental health conditions such as depression, anxiety disorders, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The experience of living with addiction, particularly in a harsh environment like Kensington, often involves exposure to significant trauma—violence, loss, exploitation—which can further fuel substance use in a vicious cycle. Internally, individuals often grapple with overwhelming feelings of guilt, shame, self-loathing, and profound hopelessness, making it difficult to envision a path to recovery or believe they are worthy of help.

Socially, addiction wreaks havoc. It erodes trust and destroys relationships with family and friends, often leaving individuals isolated precisely when they most need support. The stigma surrounding addiction creates significant barriers to seeking help, finding employment, securing housing, and reintegrating into the community. The compulsive nature of addiction often leads to a failure to meet major responsibilities at work, school, or home, further deepening social and economic marginalization. The impact ripples outward, affecting families, particularly children who may experience neglect or be removed into the child welfare system, perpetuating intergenerational cycles of trauma and disadvantage.

The collective weight of this personal toll is felt acutely in communities like Kensington. A 2019 Pew survey found that nearly 3 in 10 Philadelphia residents knew someone who had died from opioid use, and 41% felt the quality of life in their neighborhood was negatively affected, with this impact felt most strongly in the River Wards, including Kensington. The constant presence of suffering, overdose, and visible despair creates a sense of shared community trauma, eroding social cohesion and placing immense strain on healthcare, emergency services, law enforcement, and social support systems. Vulnerable populations face compounded challenges; studies highlight the specific risks and circumstances faced by street-involved women and the stark racial disparities in overdose mortality, with Black Philadelphians, particularly older men, bearing a disproportionate burden. This holistic destruction—attacking physical health, mental stability, emotional well-being, social connections, and overall life prospects—mirrors the pervasive impact of war, leaving scars both visible and deeply hidden, long after the active "combat" may have ceased.

Table 2: The Toll of Addiction in Kensington

Category of Impact	Specific Manifestations (Examples)	Relevant Information Sources
Physical	- High risk of fatal overdose (esp. fentanyl/xylazine) <br> - Severe necrotic skin wounds ("tranq wounds") <br> - Infections (abscesses, endocarditis, Hepatitis C, HIV risk via injection) <br> - Withdrawal symptoms (physical & psychological distress) <br> - Organ damage, general health decline <br> - Malnutrition, poor hygiene (associated with homelessness)
Mental/Emotional	- Co-occurring mental health disorders (depression, anxiety, PTSD) <br> - Psychological trauma (from lifestyle, environment, past experiences) <br> - Intense cravings, psychological dependence <br> - Guilt, shame, self-loathing, low self-esteem <br> - Hopelessness, despair, anhedonia (inability to feel pleasure) <br> - Cognitive impairment (judgment, decision-making)
Social/Community	- Broken relationships (family, friends), loss of trust <br> - Social isolation, loneliness <br> - Stigma and discrimination <br> - Homelessness, housing instability <br> - Involvement in criminal justice system <br> - Impact on child welfare, family separation <br> - Negative impact on neighborhood quality of life, community trauma <br> - Strain on public services (healthcare, EMS, law enforcement)
Economic	- Unemployment, inability to maintain employment <br> - Poverty, financial instability <br> - Cost of drugs, potential engagement in illicit activities for funds <br> - Healthcare costs (individual and societal) <br> - Reduced economic productivity in affected communities
Racial/Demographic Disparities	- Rising overdose deaths among Black residents, particularly older men <br> - Increased risk for Hispanic individuals <br> - Specific vulnerabilities of street-involved women

IV. Bridging the Battlefields: A Metaphorical Analysis

A. Strategic Parallels: Holding Ground, Repelling Assaults, Seeking Reinforcements

The desperate fight for Little Round Top offers compelling strategic parallels to the struggle for recovery from addiction. The physical high ground of the hill, offering commanding views and defensive advantages , finds its metaphorical counterpart in the "high ground" of stable sobriety. This internal position represents maintaining the executive functions of the prefrontal cortex—sound judgment, impulse control, rational decision-making—against the relentless "assaults" originating from the brain's hijacked reward system, which manifest as cravings and compulsions. Losing this internal high ground means succumbing to the impulse to use, relinquishing control to the addiction.

The dynamic of defense and attack resonates strongly. The Union soldiers repelling wave after wave of Confederate charges mirrors the individual in recovery actively employing coping mechanisms to fend off cravings and resist triggers. Confederate attempts to flank the Union line, seeking a weak point , parallel the insidious ways triggers can emerge unexpectedly—a sudden stressful event, an encounter with a person from the past, a wave of negative emotion—threatening to bypass established defenses. Chamberlain's decisive bayonet charge, an aggressive counter-maneuver born of desperation when defensive resources (ammunition) were depleted , can be likened to proactive, sometimes drastic, coping actions in recovery: abruptly leaving a high-risk situation, making an urgent call to a sponsor or therapist, engaging in intense physical activity to override a craving, or making a firm commitment to enter treatment.

The critical role of reinforcements at Little Round Top—the timely arrival of Vincent's brigade, O'Rorke's 140th New York plugging a gap, Weed's brigade bolstering the line —underscores the vital importance of external support in addiction recovery. These supports function as reinforcements against the internal siege: professional help like therapy and counseling, peer support groups (AA, NA, SMART Recovery), medication-assisted treatments (MOUD) like methadone or buprenorphine which help stabilize brain chemistry and reduce cravings, supportive family and friends, and community resources. Just as the arrival of reinforcements at LRT had to be timely to be effective, access to support in recovery often needs to be immediate, especially during moments of crisis or high vulnerability. Delays in accessing treatment or support can be the equivalent of reinforcements arriving too late.

Furthermore, the concept of logistics is crucial in both contexts. The soldiers at Little Round Top needed ammunition, water, and supplies to sustain their defense. Similarly, individuals in recovery require essential resources to maintain their "defense." These include not only access to treatment and support networks but also basic needs like stable housing, adequate nutrition and sleep (the HALT factors ), healthcare for co-occurring conditions, and opportunities for employment or meaningful activity. A lack of these fundamental resources significantly weakens an individual's ability to withstand the pressures of addiction and the challenges of recovery, much like an army cannot fight effectively without a secure supply line. The environment of Kensington often represents a profound deficit in these critical supports and resources, making the strategic challenge of recovery exponentially harder for those living there. The battle for recovery, therefore, is not merely a contest of internal willpower but is strategically dependent on the availability and accessibility of external reinforcements and logistical support.

B. Contrasting Terrains: Physical vs. Mental and Urban Landscapes

While strategic parallels exist, the terrains upon which these battles are fought differ significantly, revealing further dimensions of the metaphor. The terrain of Little Round Top was physical, tangible, and relatively static during the battle itself—a landscape of rock, soil, and elevation that offered clear advantages and disadvantages. Its features could be scouted, analyzed, and utilized for cover or assault paths.

The "terrain" of addiction, however, is multi-layered and dynamic. The internal terrain is the neurobiological landscape of the brain—its circuits, pathways, and chemical balances. Unlike the fixed geology of Little Round Top, this internal terrain is characterized by its malleability. Chronic drug use actively reshapes this landscape, damaging neural connections, altering receptor density, and creating entrenched pathways associated with craving and compulsion. The terrain itself becomes compromised, an active part of the conflict rather than just a passive stage. Defending this terrain involves not just holding ground but actively working to repair and rewire these neural pathways through abstinence, therapy, and potentially medication.

The external terrain for those struggling with addiction in Kensington is the urban landscape—a complex environment of streets, dilapidated buildings, homeless encampments, and open-air drug markets. This terrain is characterized by its pervasive hostility. It is saturated with triggers, readily available drugs (often dangerously adulterated with substances like xylazine ), potential violence, and a lack of safe spaces. It offers constant reminders of despair and makes escape feel impossible. This contrasts sharply with the natural, albeit dangerous, environment of Little Round Top. The urban terrain of Kensington actively conspires against recovery, presenting environmental hazards far more complex and persistent than the physical obstacles faced by soldiers in 1863.

These internal and external terrains interact perniciously. The neurological damage caused by addiction impairs the judgment and impulse control needed to navigate the hazardous external environment of Kensington safely. Simultaneously, the constant exposure to triggers within that environment relentlessly activates the compromised reward pathways in the brain, fueling cravings and undermining recovery efforts. This dynamic interplay between a shifting internal landscape and a hostile external one makes the battlefield of addiction exceptionally complex and challenging, a constantly evolving siege on multiple fronts, unlike the geographically defined conflict at Little Round Top.

C. Shared Human Experiences: Resilience, Desperation, and the Fight for Survival

Despite the vast differences in context and terrain, the human experiences within both conflicts echo with shared themes of desperation, resilience, and the fundamental fight for survival. Accounts from soldiers at Little Round Top convey a spectrum of emotions: fear in the face of death, courage under fire, profound exhaustion, a sense of duty, the bonds of camaraderie, and moments of sheer desperation leading to extraordinary action. These experiences find parallels in the narratives of individuals battling addiction. They too experience fear—of withdrawal, of relapse, of judgment, of the future. They grapple with shame and isolation but also find moments of clarity, resolve, and profound courage in seeking help or maintaining sobriety. The relentless cycle of addiction brings its own form of exhaustion, while the fight for recovery demands immense perseverance.

The motivations driving individuals in these struggles, while different in specifics, share a core element of survival. Soldiers fought for a cause, for their nation, for the men beside them, and ultimately, for their own lives. Individuals struggling with addiction fight for survival against a potentially fatal illness, for relief from physical or emotional pain, for a return to a state of perceived normalcy, or for the chance to reclaim a life lost to the drug. Both scenarios push individuals to their absolute limits, forcing critical decisions under extreme pressure. Chamberlain's order to charge when facing annihilation or Oates's decision to retreat when flanked and overwhelmed mirror the high-stakes choices faced in addiction: the decision to finally seek treatment after hitting rock bottom, the split-second choice to resist a powerful craving, or the difficult decision to cut ties with enabling relationships.

Resilience shines through in both narratives. The ability of Union soldiers to withstand repeated, ferocious assaults on Little Round Top speaks to their tenacity and endurance. Similarly, the capacity of individuals in recovery to maintain sobriety day after day despite persistent triggers, internal struggles, and environmental challenges, or their courage to return to treatment after a relapse, demonstrates profound resilience. Both battlefields, though vastly different, become arenas where the limits of human endurance, the depths of desperation, and the remarkable capacity for resilience are starkly revealed.

D. Thematic Echoes: Control, Chaos, Defense, Sacrifice, and the Nature of Conflict

Analyzing the two conflicts through a thematic lens reveals further echoes and divergences. The theme of control versus chaos is central to both. Military operations strive for command and control, yet the reality of battle, as vividly described by soldiers at Little Round Top, is often chaotic, confused, and unpredictable. Addiction is fundamentally characterized by a loss of self-control, an inability to regulate substance use despite intention or consequence, representing an internal surrender to chaos. Both the military commander and the individual seeking recovery attempt to impose order—strategic, tactical, or psychological—on powerful, disruptive forces.

Defense is another resonant theme. The Union army fought desperately to defend a specific piece of physical territory deemed vital to their survival. The individual in recovery engages in a constant defense—of their sobriety, their mental health, their future, their very self—against the invasive and destructive influence of addiction. This involves building psychological defenses (coping skills) and seeking secure external positions (supportive environments, treatment programs).

The concept of sacrifice permeates both narratives. Little Round Top demanded the ultimate sacrifice from hundreds of soldiers who were killed or maimed. Addiction also demands profound sacrifices, though often extracted unwillingly over time: physical health, mental well-being, relationships, careers, financial stability, personal freedom, and ultimately, life itself. Recovery, too, requires sacrifice: giving up the substance that may have provided temporary relief or pleasure, confronting painful emotions, undertaking difficult behavioral changes, and sometimes sacrificing old relationships or lifestyles.

Finally, considering the nature of the enemy highlights a crucial distinction that deepens the "civil war" metaphor for addiction. At Little Round Top, the enemy was external, distinct, and identifiable—Confederate soldiers in opposing uniforms. In addiction, the "enemy" is far more complex and insidious. It is partly external—the drug itself, the environmental triggers, the societal factors contributing to vulnerability. But critically, it is also profoundly internal. The fight is against the brain's own altered reward pathways, against deeply ingrained psychological patterns, against impulses and cravings generated from within. This internal division, where parts of the self (the desire for health and control) are in direct conflict with other parts (the neurologically driven compulsion to use), makes the addiction struggle uniquely challenging. The lines between "self" and "enemy" become blurred in a way they rarely do in conventional warfare. This internal fragmentation, this war against aspects of one's own mind and body, is perhaps the most poignant and accurate dimension of the "civil war" metaphor as applied to addiction.

Table 3: Metaphorical Parallels: Little Round Top vs. Addiction (Kensington Context)

Element	Little Round Top Example	Addiction (Kensington Context) Example	Thematic Link
Key Terrain	Physical high ground of LRT; commanding view, defensive advantage	Internal "high ground" of sobriety/stability; prefrontal cortex control vs. reward system. External terrain of Kensington (hostile, trigger-filled).	Strategic Importance, Defense, Environmental Influence
Enemy Force	Confederate soldiers (external, identifiable)	The drug, cravings, triggers, altered brain pathways (internal & external, insidious)	Nature of Conflict, Attack/Assault
Defensive Position	Union line along slopes, utilizing rocks/cover	Coping mechanisms, therapy, support systems, healthy routines, self-care (HALT)	Defense, Strategy, Resilience
Critical Maneuver	Chamberlain's bayonet charge (desperate counterattack)	Decisive coping actions (seeking help, leaving triggers, relapse prevention plan)	Initiative, Crisis Response, Turning Point
Reinforcements	Arrival of Vincent's, O'Rorke's, Weed's troops	Therapy, MOUD, support groups, family/friends, community resources	Support, Logistics, Timeliness
Logistics/Supplies	Need for ammunition, water	Need for treatment access, housing, healthcare, employment, basic needs	Resources, Sustainability, Vulnerability
Casualties/Cost	Soldiers killed/wounded; loss of leaders	Overdose deaths, physical/mental health decline, lost relationships, social/economic ruin	Human Cost, Sacrifice, Devastation
Leadership Challenge	Command decisions under pressure, initiative in chaos (Warren, Vincent)	Maintaining motivation, making healthy choices despite impaired judgment, navigating recovery stages	Control vs. Chaos, Decision-Making
Terrain Impact	Steep, rocky slopes impeding attack, providing cover	Internal brain changes impairing function; external Kensington environment providing triggers/dangers	Environmental Influence, Dynamic Battlefield
Internal Conflict	N/A (External enemy)	Brain's reward system vs. executive control; desire for sobriety vs. compulsion to use	Civil War Metaphor Core, Blurred Lines

V. Conclusion: Reflecting on the Metaphor

A. Assessing the Analogy: Insights Gained and Potential Pitfalls

The comparison between the Battle of Little Round Top and the internal civil war of addiction, particularly within the context of Kensington, yields significant insights while demanding cautious application. The metaphor effectively illuminates the strategic nature of recovery, framing it not merely as a matter of willpower but as a campaign requiring defensive tactics (coping skills), offensive maneuvers (seeking treatment, changing environments), logistical support (resources like housing and healthcare), and timely reinforcements (social and professional support). It highlights the critical importance of "terrain," both the internal neurobiological landscape altered by substance use and the hostile external environment of a neighborhood like Kensington, saturated with triggers and lacking resources. The intensity of the battle, the moments of crisis demanding decisive action (like Chamberlain's charge or a crucial choice in recovery), the devastating human costs, and the sheer desperation and resilience involved are powerfully echoed across both contexts. Perhaps most significantly, the metaphor helps visualize the concept of an internal conflict, where the adversary arises, at least in part, from within the individual's own altered biology and psychology.

However, the analogy is imperfect and carries potential pitfalls. Comparing addiction to a heroic military stand risks glorifying a condition characterized by immense suffering and loss, potentially obscuring the grim realities faced daily in Kensington. It could also be perceived as trivializing the unique historical significance and sacrifice associated with the Civil War and battles like Gettysburg. Furthermore, the metaphor might oversimplify the complex etiology of addiction, potentially downplaying the profound role of systemic factors—poverty, racism, lack of opportunity, inadequate healthcare systems, historical trauma—that are particularly relevant in Kensington. While the battle metaphor captures the acute struggle, it may less effectively convey the chronic, often lifelong nature of recovery for many individuals, which involves ongoing maintenance rather than a single decisive victory.

B. Ethical Considerations: Responsibility in Comparison

Using such a charged metaphor necessitates a high degree of ethical responsibility. The language employed must consistently prioritize empathy and respect for the profound human suffering inherent in both historical warfare and contemporary addiction. It is crucial to avoid terminology that could further stigmatize individuals with substance use disorders, reinforcing harmful stereotypes of weakness or moral failure. The goal must be understanding, not judgment or sensationalism. Consideration must be given to the potential interpretations by diverse audiences: veterans and those personally affected by military conflict might find the comparison inappropriate or diminishing, while individuals in recovery, their families, and residents of communities like Kensington might find it either illuminating or potentially offensive, depending on its framing. The analysis must remain grounded in factual evidence from both history and addiction science, using the metaphor as a tool for insight rather than as a literal equivalence or a source of dramatic effect.

C. Enduring Conflicts: Final Thoughts on History, Addiction, and Human Resilience

The Battle of Little Round Top serves as a potent reminder of the enduring nature of human conflict, the capacity for both extraordinary courage and devastating loss, and the ways in which specific places become imbued with historical weight. The ongoing crisis in Kensington represents a different kind of enduring conflict—a public health emergency intertwined with deep social and economic wounds, demanding urgent and comprehensive responses. While the battlefields differ vastly, the underlying human drama shares common threads: the struggle against overwhelming forces, the critical need for support and resources, the devastating impact of loss, and the remarkable resilience required to simply survive, let alone prevail. Understanding the internal "Gettysburg" faced by individuals battling addiction, illuminated perhaps by the stark clarity of the historical battle, underscores the complexity of their fight and the necessity of compassionate, informed, and sustained efforts—from individuals, communities, and institutions—to support them in their struggle for peace and recovery. The fight on the slopes in 1863 ended, but the siege within and the struggle on the streets of places like Kensington continue, demanding our attention and action.

Works cited

1. Little Round Top | Gettysburg Battlefield Tours, https://www.gettysburgbattlefieldtours.com/little-round-top-steadfast-bulwark-in-the-defense-of-gettysburg/ 2. Gettysburg Battle Facts and Summary | American Battlefield Trust, https://www.battlefields.org/learn/civil-war/battles/gettysburg 3. Kensington's Drug and Opioid Epidemic: Evaluating Influences, Policy, and Community Based Responses Abbigail Selnick SUNY New, https://soar.suny.edu/bitstream/20.500.12648/15023/1/Selnick_Honors.pdf 4. Kensington Opioid Epidemic: Why You Should Care About It - Vanity Wellness Center, https://vanitywellnesscenter.com/confronting-the-shadows-kensingtons-opioid-epidemic-uncovered/ 5. Philadelphia in Crisis: Kensington Devastated by 'Tranq' (Xylazine) Epidemic and Homelessness - Cornerstone Healing Center, https://www.cornerstonehealingcenter.com/resource/kensington-tranq-xylazine-epidemic/ 6. Philadelphia's Skid Row: Shocking video captures city's homeless crisis with dozens camped out along 'largest open-air drug market on the East Coast', https://sp2.upenn.edu/press/philadelphias-skid-row-shocking-video-captures-citys-homeless-crisis-with-dozens-camped-out-along-largest-open-air-drug-market-on-the-east-coast/ 7. The Savior of Little Round Top: GK Warren at Gettysburg - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, https://www.usace.army.mil/About/History/Army-Engineers-in-the-Civil-War/battles/warren-at-gettysburg/ 8. Little Round Top, http://gdg.org/Research/OOB/Union/Little%20Round%20Top/oblrt.html 9. Little Round Top - HistoryNet, https://www.historynet.com/little-round-top/ 10. Little Round Top - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Round_Top 11. Gettysburg Requiem: The Life and Lost Causes of Confederate Colonel William C. Oates - Amazon.com, https://www.amazon.com/Gettysburg-Requiem-Confederate-Colonel-William/dp/0195174585 12. William C. Oates | American Battlefield Trust, https://www.battlefields.org/learn/biographies/william-c-oates 13. Little Round Top | Dead Confederates, A Civil War Era Blog, https://deadconfederates.com/tag/little-round-top/ 14. Stand To It and Give Them Hell: Gettysburg as the Soldiers ..., https://www.savasbeatie.com/stand-to-it-and-give-them-hell-gettysburg-as-the-soldiers-experienced-it-from-cemetery-ridge-to-little-round-top-july-2-1863/ 15. Little Round Top - Gettysburg National Military Park (U.S. National ..., https://www.nps.gov/gett/learn/historyculture/little-round-top.htm 16. Substance Use Disorder defined by NIDA and SAMHSA:, https://wyoleg.gov/InterimCommittee/2020/10-20201105Handoutfor6JtMHSACraig11.4.20.pdf 17. The Brain in Recovery, https://www.recoveryanswers.org/recovery-101/brain-in-recovery/ 18. The Neurobiology of Drug Addiction, https://nida.nih.gov/sites/default/files/1922-the-neurobiology-of-drug-addiction.pdf 19. Drugs, Brains, and Behavior: The Science of Addiction - National Institute on Drug Abuse, https://nida.nih.gov/publications/drugs-brains-behavior-science-addiction/drugs-brain 20. How to Reduce Drug Use and Cravings - Positive Sobriety Institute, https://www.positivesobrietyinstitute.com/how-to-reduce-drug-use-and-cravings/ 21. Common Relapse Triggers and How to Avoid Them - Gateway Foundation, https://www.gatewayfoundation.org/blog/triggers-in-addiction-recovery/ 22. Managing Cravings in Substance Abuse Disorders - Ethos Wellness, https://ethoswellness.com/cravings-in-substance-abuse/ 23. Addiction Relapse Prevention - StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK551500/ 24. The Five Stages of Addiction Recovery | RACNJ, https://www.racnj.com/the-five-stages-of-addiction-recovery/ 25. Opioid Crisis: No Easy Fix to Its Social and Economic Determinants - PMC - PubMed Central, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5846593/ 26. Philadelphia isn't prepared to help people struggling with addiction and homelessness, but that isn't slowing down Mayor Parker's plans to end Kensington's open-air drug market - Grid Magazine, https://gridphilly.com/blog-home/2024/08/01/philadelphia-isnt-prepared-to-help-people-struggling-with-addiction-and-homelessness-but-that-isnt-slowing-down-mayor-parkers-plans-to-end-kensingtons-open-air-dru/ 27. Xylazine | National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), https://nida.nih.gov/research-topics/xylazine 28. What is Tranq Dope? | Purpose Healing Center | Get Support, https://purposehealingcenter.com/what-is-tranq-dope/ 29. Poll Shows Impact of Opioid Crisis on Philadelphians and Their Neighborhoods, https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2019/08/06/poll-shows-impact-of-opioid-crisis-on-philadelphians-and-their-neighborhoods 30. Circumstances of Overdose Among Street-Involved, Opioid-Injecting Women: Drug, Set, and Setting - PMC, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7302961/ 31. Preventing Drug Overdose and Supporting Recovery in Faith and Community Settings | HHS.gov, https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/preventing-drug-overdose-and-supporting-recovery-in-faith-and-community-settings.pdf 32. Memories of Little Round Top - National Park Service: Gettysburg Seminar Papers — Gettysburg 1895-1995: The Shaping of an American Shrine, https://npshistory.com/series/symposia/gettysburg_seminars/4/essay5.htm 33. Tragic Heroes of Little Round Top | The Inglorius Padre Steve's World, https://padresteve.com/2015/07/01/tragic-heroes-of-little-round-top/ 34. Health Update, https://hip.phila.gov/document/3154/PDPH-HAN_Update_13_Xylazine_12.08.2022.pdf/ 35. How Philadelphia is responding to the overdose crisis in 2023 | Managing Director's Office, https://www.phila.gov/2023-04-26-how-philadelphia-is-responding-to-the-overdose-crisis-in-2023/ 36. Facts on Homelessness - Philadelphia - Project HOME, https://www.projecthome.org/homelessness-facts 37. Philadelphia Records More than 1400 Overdose Deaths in 2022; Deaths among Black Residents Rose Nearly 20% | Department of Public Health, https://www.phila.gov/2023-10-02-philadelphia-records-more-than-1400-overdose-deaths-in-2022-deaths-among-black-residents-rose-nearly-20/ 38. Gettysburg National Military Park | LITTLE ROUND TOP |, https://npplan.com/parks-by-state/pennsylvania-national-parks/gettysburg-national-military-park-park-at-a-glance/gettysburg-national-military-park-touring-the-battlefield/gettysburg-national-military-park-little-round-top/ 39. Little Round Top Then and Now - Gettysburg - National Park Service, https://www.nps.gov/gett/learn/photosmultimedia/little-round-top-then-and-now.htm 40. Defense of Little Round Top | American Battlefield Trust, https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/defense-little-round-top 41. The 150th Anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg - The National Guard, https://www.nationalguard.mil/Features/2013/Battle-of-Gettysburg/ 42. Gettysburg: The Controversies - Teaching American History, https://teachingamericanhistory.org/resource/civilwar150/owens/gettysburg1/ 43. Devil's Den & Little Round Top: Then & Now | American Battlefield Trust, https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/devils-den-little-round-top-then-now 44. Gettysburg | Devil's Den & Little Round Top | July 2, 1863 | 4:30 - 5:30 pm, https://www.battlefields.org/learn/maps/gettysburg-devils-den-and-little-round-top-july-2-1863-430pm-530pm 45. Twentieth Maine - The National Guard, https://www.nationalguard.mil/Resources/Image-Gallery/Historical-Paintings/Heritage-Series/Twentieth-Maine/ 46. #7 The Lion of Little Round Top - Stratford Veterans Museum, https://stfdveteransmuseum.org/application/files/8016/5668/9763/7_The_Lion_of_Little_Round_Top.pdf 47. Little Round Top in 78 Seconds #gettysburg - YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9R1clGnjf4 48. Joshua L. Chamberlain - National Museum of the United States Army, https://www.thenmusa.org/biographies/joshua-l-chamberlain/ 49. Joshua Chamberlain - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_Chamberlain 50. Birthday of Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, Hero of Little Round Top, https://npg.si.edu/blog/birthday-joshua-lawrence-chamberlain-hero-little-round-top 51. 20th Maine Infantry Regiment Monument - National Park Service, https://www.nps.gov/places/20th-maine-monument.htm 52. Storming Little Round Top: The 15th Alabama and Their Fight for the High Ground, July 2, 1863, https://repository.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1699&context=cwbr 53. William C. Oates - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_C._Oates 54. Official Report of Colonel William C. Oates - Gettysburg National ..., https://www.nps.gov/gett/learn/historyculture/official-report-of-colonel-william-c-oates.htm 55. Medal of Honor Monday: Army Maj. Gen. Joshua Chamberlain - Department of Defense, https://www.defense.gov/News/Feature-Stories/story/Article/2086560/medal-of-honor-monday-army-maj-gen-joshua-chamberlain/ 56. He Was Full of Pluck! - Warfare History Network, https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/article/he-was-full-of-pluck/ 57. Treatment of Stimulant Use Disorders | SAMHSA Library, https://library.samhsa.gov/sites/default/files/pep20-06-01-001.pdf 58. Re-directing the 50-Year-Long War on Drugs in the United States: Safe Injection Sites as the Necessary Weapons, https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3203&context=hlr 59. AnEvaluation oftheCityof Philadelphia's Kensington Encampment ResolutionPilot, https://www.phila.gov/media/20190312102914/Encampment-Resolution-Pilot-Report.pdf 60. After Kensington encampment sweep, what's next for Philly's addiction crisis plans? - WHYY, https://whyy.org/articles/philadelphia-kensington-encampment-sweep-opioid-epidemic-next-steps/ 61. The Growing Threat of Xylazine and its Mixture with Illicit Drugs - DEA.gov, https://www.dea.gov/sites/default/files/2022-12/The%20Growing%20Threat%20of%20Xylazine%20and%20its%20Mixture%20with%20Illicit%20Drugs.pdf 62. Xylazine (Tranq): What you need to know about the new street drug taking over Philly., https://www.substanceusephilly.com/tranq 63. Map OUD - Thomas Jefferson University, https://www.jefferson.edu/content/dam/academic/skmc/departments/family-medicine/MAPOUD.pdf 64. Xylazine appears to worsen the life-threatening effects of opioids in rats, https://nida.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/2023/06/xylazine-appears-to-worsen-the-life-threatening-effects-of-opioids-in-rats 65. The Opioid Crisis - The Philadelphia Inquirer, https://www.inquirer.com/health/opioid-addiction/ 66. Philadelphia sees a decline in drug overdose deaths among residents for the first time in 5 years, data show - WHYY, https://whyy.org/articles/philadelphia-overdose-deaths-decline/ 67. Kensington's Drug and Opioid Epidemic: Evaluating Influences, Policy, and Community Based Responses Abbigail Selnick SUNY New - CORE, https://core.ac.uk/download/638991443.pdf 68. Harm Reduction in Pennsylvania: Policies, Needs, and Services, https://www.pa.gov/content/dam/copapwp-pagov/en/ddap/documents/documents/seow/2024%20harm%20reduction%20in%20pa.pdf 69. New plan for opioid crisis in Philadelphia's Kensington section offers treatment instead of jail, https://dbhids.org/news/new-plan-for-opioid-crisis-in-philadelphias-kensington-section-offers-treatment-instead-of-jail/ 70. Aubrey Whelan - The Philadelphia Inquirer, https://www.inquirer.com/archive/aubrey_whelan/?page=1