civilwarwest : Messages : 46839-46868 of 47301

Messages: Show Message Summaries Sort by Date

#46839 From: DPowell334@...
Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 7:37 am
Subject: CCNMP Study Group 2011 dpowell334
Send Email

Friends,

Here is the announcement for the 2011 CCNMP Study Group seminar. Please feel free to share it, post it, or pass it on to any who might be interested. This information will also be available at www.chickamaugablog.com

CCNMP Study Group 2011 Seminar in the Woods.

Mission Statement: The purpose of the CCNMP Study Group is to create a forum to bring students of the American Civil War together to study and explore those events in the fall of 1863 that led ultimately to the creation of the Chickamauga-Chattanooga National Military Park. The intent is to use the indispensable resource of the park itself as an outdoor classroom to promote learning and study of the battles for Chattanooga, and to build interest for an annual gathering that will in time examine all aspects of the Campaigns for Chattanooga. Additionally, we hope to bring students and serious scholars, both professional and amateur, to the field for to share insights and knowledge about the battles.

Tour Leaders: Jim Ogden, Park Historian, and Dave Powell

Date: Friday, March 11, and Saturday, March 12, 2011

Note: Friday’s tours will involve a tour bus. We will be charging a small fee for use of the bus. See below.

Friday All Day: 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Mclemore's Cove

By Bus, we will explore the near-battle of McLemore’s Cove, or Davis’ Crossroads. We will trace both Union and Confederate actions between September 9th and 11th that led to two Union divisions being exposed to disaster in McLemore’s Cove, and how they escaped. We will explore the Confederate decisions of the time, and the strained command relationships that let this opportunity slip through Bragg’s fingers. We will also explore how a significant defeat in McLemore’s Cove might have effected subsequent Union movements, and whether or not the battle of Chickamauga would have been fought at all.

We will arrange for a box lunch

Start and end at the Visitor's Center parking lot.

Saturday Morning: 8:30 to Noon. Viniard Field

Between 1:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. on September 19th, 1863, a desperate struggle surged back and forth in and around the Viniard Farmstead. Elements of seven Union and five Confederate brigades struggled for control of the woods and fields in this sector, producing some of the most confused and bloodiest fighting of the entire Battle of Chickamauga. Tracking this swirling action can be extremely difficult, and interpretations vary on the exact sequence of events.

We intend to take the group through the action step-by-step, explaining why the fighting unfolded as it did, in an attempt to see the fight through the eyes of the various commanders attempting to manage it.

Car caravan from Visitor's Center

Saturday Afternoon: 1:30 to 5:00 p.m. Mendenhall forms a line

In the late morning of September 20th, just before disaster struck the Union lines at the Brotherton Farmstead, Major John Mendenhall assembled a line of Union cannon atop a ridge overlooking Dyer Field. Mendenhall was the Union XXI Corps chief of artillery, and had already won notable fame for his used of massed guns at Stones River. There his cannon effectively shattered a Confederate attack on January 2nd, 1863, winning him a reputation as a heroic, even visionary gunner.

On September 20th, Mendenhall’s guns would not fare as well. Lacking infantry support and forced into a last-ditch effort to stop the Confederate breakthrough, many of Mendenhall’s guns would fall into Confederate hands that day. Several of the batteries involved were the same ones whose tales we told of their fight in Viniard Field in our morning walk.

We will discuss not only the formation of this line and the tactical outcome, but spend some time exploring the larger implications it raises in trying to determine William Starke Rosecrans’ intentions for his army’s constantly shifting right flank.

Car caravan from Visitor's Center

Cost: Beyond the fee for Friday’s Bus, there is no cost for tour participation. Meals lodging, transportation, and incidentals, however, are the individual’s responsibility.

Tour Departures: All tours will meet at the Chickamauga Visitor’s Center at the designated start time, and will depart from there after some brief overview discussion. We will board the bus or car caravan to the designated parking area, and from there, we will be on foot. We will be on foot for up to three hours, so dress and prepare accordingly. Tours will depart rain or shine. Participants are responsible for their own transportation, and should plan accordingly. All tours are designed to be self-contained, so participants who cannot attend the full schedule are still welcome to join us for any portion of the weekend.

Lodging and Meals: Everyone is responsible for their own lodging and meals. There are many hotels in the greater Chattanooga area, for any price range. The closest are in Fort Olgethorpe, Georgia, with the least expensive in Ringgold. Each tour is designed to leave at least 90 minutes for lunch, and there are several family and fast food restaurants within minutes of the battlefield. There are designated picnic areas near the Visitor’s Center, for those who wish to bring a lunch and eat on the field.

What to bring: Each tour will involve extensive walking. Proper clothing and especially footgear is essential. Dress in layers, wear sturdy, broken-in walking shoes or boots, and be prepared for some rain, as spring can be quite wet in North Georgia. We will be walking on dirt and gravel trails, uncut fields, and through stretches of woods. The ground will be wet and muddy in places. Bring your own water and snacks.

Reading up on the subject: Many people like to prepare in advance for these kinds of events. I suggest the following works might be of help.

Cozzens, Peter. This Terrible Sound. University of Illinois, 1992. The best modern study of the battle.

Powell, David with Cartography by Dave Friedrichs, The Maps Of Chickamauga. Savas-Beatie, 2009.

Powell, David. Failure In The Saddle: Nathan Bedford Forrest, Joe Wheeler, and the Confederate Cavalry in the Chickamauga Campaign. Savas-Beatie, 2010.

Woodworth, Stephen E. Six Armies In Tennessee: The Chickamauga And Chattanooga Campaigns. Lincoln, Nebraska. University of Nebraska Press, 1998. An excellent overview campaign study.

-------------------, A Deep Steady Thunder: The Battle Of Chickamauga. Abilene, Texas. McWhiney Foundation Press, 1998. Concise but very useful account of the battle, designed as an introduction to the action. 100 pages, very readable.

Note: Friday’s Tours will be by Bus, as we move from site to site. While the tour itself is free, we do have to pay for the bus.

Pre-registration Fee: $35 Due by February 1st, 2011

Send to:

FRANK CRAWFORD

34664 ORANGE DRIVE

PINELLAS PARK, FLORIDA 33781

Frank will hold your payments. If you pay by check, note that Frank will not cash those checks until we have sufficient entries, so that if we have to refund, Frank will simply send your checks back to you.

Please also note that this fee is NON-REFUNDABLE after February 1st, 2011. Once we are committed to the bus, we will be charged the booking fee.

On-site Sign up Fee: $40

We MUST have 20 attendees registered and Paid by Feb 1st, or we cannot reserve the bus. Once we confirm the minimum, you will be able to join the tour the day we depart, for late add-ons. If we do not meet the minimum, we will car-caravan for Friday’s tours.

Final note: Last year we raised a sizable amount of money over and above the cost of the bus, and were able to contribute a number of new titles to the CCNMP research library, mostly regimental histories of recent vintage. The park currently does not have operating funds allocated for these kinds of acquisitions, and depends entirely on donations to fund library additions. I feel that this is an ideal use for any excess funds we raise, in keeping with the "study group" mission

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#46840 From: "Frankie" <frankie@...>
Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:51 am
Subject: NEW website for Marilla Civil War Days frankiebe98
Send Email

Hello All;

Well we are just finishing up the NEW website for Marilla Civil War Days. We just have add a few little things, other than that it seems to be working pretty well. If you would like to check it out, its located at http://marillacivilwardays.tripod.com/
This year, since we were able to secure the date for June 2011 we are getting a head start on promotions. We are also hearing that a significant amount of re-enactors are interested in attending in 2011. To help us plan our event, please visit the NEW website and answer some questions on our web poll. Thanks for your help, and looking forward to 2011.

Best Wishes
Frank Blonski

frankie@...

Please visit us on the web.

Marilla Civil War Days
http://marillacivilwardays.tripod.com/

94th New York Co. H
www.94nyh.com

Eastern Reenactors Association
http://era-ny.tripod.com

94th New York Co H
c/o Frank Blonski
P.O. Box 158
Cheektowaga NY 14225

Reply | Messages in this Topic (2)

#46841 From: "Frankie" <frankie@...>
Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 1:02 am
Subject: NEW website for Marilla Civil War Days frankiebe98
Send Email

Hello All;

Best Wishes
Frank Blonski

frankie@...

Please visit us on the web.

Marilla Civil War Days
http://marillacivilwardays.tripod.com/

94th New York Co. H
www.94nyh.com

Eastern Reenactors Association
http://era-ny.tripod.com

94th New York Co H
c/o Frank Blonski
P.O. Box 158
Cheektowaga NY 14225

Reply | Messages in this Topic (2)

#46842 From: "maryblue1975" <tboner1@...>
Date: Mon Dec 6, 2010 12:19 am
Subject: Important announcement for civilwarhome chatroom muster maryblue1975
Send Email

On Friday December 10 there will be an important announcement made in the
civilwarhome chatroom that has a direct bearing on the June muster at Shiloh. If
you plan to attend muster and want to here first hand what this new and exciting
news may be, be in the chatrrom at that time. If you are not a registered member
of that chatroom, email ks for registration details.

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#46843 From: "Rick Moody" <r_moody@...>
Date: Sat Dec 11, 2010 1:08 pm
Subject: Failure in the Saddle r_moody
Send Email

Looking forward to Dave's new book. Santa, don't fail me now!

Reply | Messages in this Topic (3)

#46844 From: "maryblue1975" <tboner1@...>
Date: Sat Dec 11, 2010 9:31 pm
Subject: chat room announcement maryblue1975
Send Email

The announcement made in the civilwar home chat room last evening was the
announcement of our friends Colleen Mohr (CWgal) and Steve Lieberum (60th GA,
formerly slnj)Wedding this summer. They asked to be married at muster this year
and we were able to make that part of our muster plan. They "met" in this forum
over 10 years ago and over the years became part of our chat room family. We
look forward to sharing this special time with them at the old Shiloh Church!

Here is a text portion of the announcement. If I knew html I would post it so
you cold see the picture as well.

Colleen Mohr and Steve Lieberum

(CWgal) (60thGA)

Would like to announce their

UPCOMING WEDDING

To be held on

Friday June 17, 2011

At the

Old Shiloh United Methodist Church

5:30 PM

All of our Civil War muster family is invited to share this special time with
us.

Congrats to our friends!

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#46845 From: chris bryant <paladinsf@...>
Date: Sat Dec 11, 2010 10:49 pm
Subject: Books paladinsf
Send Email

Been pretty slow since I subscribed;maybe everybody's on vacation?Thought I'd ask:what books do you particularly recommend on the war in the west?I like Thomas Lawrence Connelly;he had a lot to do with my interest in the west and I'm convinced that he was right about the relative importance of the theater and the small minded outlook of R.E.LEE.I've read some other books and articles but thought I'd like to hear if this list recommends anyone.

Chris Bryant

Oklahoma City

Reply | Messages in this Topic (3)

#46846 From: DPowell334@...
Date: Sun Dec 12, 2010 6:16 am
Subject: Re: Failure in the Saddle dpowell334
Send Email

I am pleased to announce that I have received my copies, as well as a bunch of copies to sign and ship, so I feel confident that the book is finally starting to roll out.

Dave

In a message dated 12/11/2010 7:08:36 A.M. Central Standard Time, r_moody@... writes:

Looking forward to Dave's new book. Santa, don't fail me now!

Reply | Messages in this Topic (3)

#46847 From: "pete@..." <pete@...>
Date: Sun Dec 12, 2010 3:45 pm
Subject: RE: Books pete@...
Send Email

Wiley Sword and Larry Daniels' books on Shiloh
Connelly ARMY OF THE HEARTLAND and AUTUMN OF GLORY
Castel DECISION IN THE WEST THE ATLANTA CAMPAIGN
Peter Cozzens books on Stones River (Murfreesboro) and Iuka & Corinth
Horn THE DECISIVE BATTLE OF NASHVILLE
Davis SHERMAN'S MARCH TO THE SEA
Miers THE WEB OF VICTORY (Vicksburg)
Horn THE ARMY OF TENNESSEE
Woodworth NOTHING BUT VICTORY THE ARMY OF THE TENNESSEE
Sherman and Grant's MEMOIRS

Along with Chris' question, what thoughts does the group have on WAR LIKE THE
THUNDERBOLT?



------- Original Message -------
From    : chris bryant[mailto:paladinsf@...]
Sent    : 12/11/2010 5:49:02 PM
To      : civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
Cc      :
Subject : RE: [civilwarwest] Books












       Been pretty slow since I subscribed;maybe everybody's on vacation?Thought
I'd ask:what books do you particularly recommend on the war in the
west?I like Thomas Lawrence Connelly;he had a lot to do with my interest in the
west and I'm convinced that he was right about the relative
importance of the theater and the small minded outlook of R.E.LEE.I've read some
other books and articles but thought I'd like to hear if this list
recommends anyone.
                               Chris Bryant
                                Oklahoma City

Reply | Messages in this Topic (69)

#46848 From: "Mary Hawthorne" <tboner1@...>
Date: Sun Dec 12, 2010 5:34 pm
Subject: Re: Books maryblue1975
Send Email

War Like the Thunderbolt helped me understand the whole siege of Atlanta better. I thought for all the "who went where and how and why", it was an easy read. Also his book on the Andrews Raid was outstanding as well.

bluelady

----- Original Message -----

From: pete@...

To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2010 10:45 AM

Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] Books

Wiley Sword and Larry Daniels' books on Shiloh
Connelly ARMY OF THE HEARTLAND and AUTUMN OF GLORY
Castel DECISION IN THE WEST THE ATLANTA CAMPAIGN
Peter Cozzens books on Stones River (Murfreesboro) and Iuka & Corinth
Horn THE DECISIVE BATTLE OF NASHVILLE
Davis SHERMAN'S MARCH TO THE SEA
Miers THE WEB OF VICTORY (Vicksburg)
Horn THE ARMY OF TENNESSEE
Woodworth NOTHING BUT VICTORY THE ARMY OF THE TENNESSEE
Sherman and Grant's MEMOIRS

Along with Chris' question, what thoughts does the group have on WAR LIKE THE THUNDERBOLT?

------- Original Message -------
From : chris bryant[mailto:paladinsf@...]
Sent : 12/11/2010 5:49:02 PM
To : civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
Cc :
Subject : RE: [civilwarwest] Books

Been pretty slow since I subscribed;maybe everybody's on vacation?Thought I'd ask:what books do you particularly recommend on the war in the
west?I like Thomas Lawrence Connelly;he had a lot to do with my interest in the west and I'm convinced that he was right about the relative
importance of the theater and the small minded outlook of R.E.LEE.I've read some other books and articles but thought I'd like to hear if this list
recommends anyone.
Chris Bryant
Oklahoma City

Reply | Messages in this Topic (69)

#46849 From: "Rick Moody" <r_moody@...>
Date: Mon Dec 13, 2010 10:51 pm
Subject: Books r_moody
Send Email

I wouldn't want to list all the books and articles that I have read on the western theater. The ones that I read that I don't put too much weight to are the rah-rah for my guy books. Bios that don't criticize the subject don't have reality in mind. There isn't a General that can't be criticized. I have long felt that we tend to give too much credit and discredit to generals for everything that happens on the battlefield. The good ones find a way to succeed though.
Rick

Reply | Messages in this Topic (69)

#46850 From: chris bryant <paladinsf@...>
Date: Mon Dec 13, 2010 10:53 pm
Subject: Re: Books paladinsf
Send Email

Agreed,but are there any you particularly recommend?

--- On Mon, 12/13/10, Rick Moody <r_moody@...> wrote:

From: Rick Moody <r_moody@...>
Subject: [civilwarwest] Books
To: "civilwarwest" <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Monday, December 13, 2010, 2:51 PM

I wouldn't want to list all the books and articles that I have read on the western theater. The ones that I read that I don't put too much weight to are the rah-rah for my guy books. Bios that don't criticize the subject don't have reality in mind. There isn't a General that can't be criticized. I have long felt that we tend to give too much credit and discredit to generals for everything that happens on the battlefield. The good ones find a way to succeed though.
Rick

Reply | Messages in this Topic (69)

#46851 From: Philip Callen <p3callen@...>
Date: Fri Dec 17, 2010 12:42 am
Subject: hello .........W p3callen
Send Email

hello:
I have good news for you. Merry Christmas! Last week
I have Order china 16 Products Apple iPhone 4 HD 32 GB
I  completed  bank transfer payments,I have received the product!
w e b:www.hospols.com
It's amazing! The item is original, brand new and has high quality,
but it's muc cheaper. I'm pleased to share this good news with you!
I believe you will find what you want there and have an good experience
on shopping from them
Regards!




























XXC4SC  DF DF            埂蹿

Reply | Messages in this Topic (1)

#46852 From: "hank9174" <clarkc@...>
Date: Fri Dec 17, 2010 8:41 pm
Subject: yesterday in history hank9174
Send Email

146 years ago George H. Thomas created his magnum opus, his masterpiece, his
pi�ce de r�sistance: the battle of nashville.

If any event truly sealed the fate of the CSA it was the virtual destruction of
the AoT...


HankC

p.s. I kind of miss old joseph rose ;)

Reply | Messages in this Topic (14)

#46853 From: "Ronald black" <rblack0981@...>
Date: Fri Dec 17, 2010 8:49 pm
Subject: Re: yesterday in history tarafoxie
Send Email

What about Joseph Rose?

Ron

----- Original Message -----

From: hank9174

To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 3:41 PM

Subject: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history

146 years ago George H. Thomas created his magnum opus, his masterpiece, his pi�ce de r�sistance: the battle of nashville.

If any event truly sealed the fate of the CSA it was the virtual destruction of the AoT...

HankC

p.s. I kind of miss old joseph rose ;)

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 1435/3321 - Release Date: 12/17/10

Reply | Messages in this Topic (14)

#46854 From: jlawrence@...
Date: Fri Dec 17, 2010 8:57 pm
Subject: Re: yesterday in history jlawrence@...
Send Email

Well said.
Regards,
Jack
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message-----
From: "hank9174" <clarkc@...>
Sender: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 20:41:44
To: <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
Reply-To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history

146 years ago George H. Thomas created his magnum opus, his masterpiece, his
pi�ce de r�sistance: the battle of nashville.

If any event truly sealed the fate of the CSA it was the virtual destruction of
the AoT...

HankC

p.s. I kind of miss old joseph rose ;)

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

Reply | Messages in this Topic (14)

#46855 From: chris bryant <paladinsf@...>
Date: Fri Dec 17, 2010 10:39 pm
Subject: Re: yesterday in history paladinsf
Send Email

I'd say it was pretty well sealed before that;any other opinions?

Chris Bryant
--- On Fri, 12/17/10, hank9174 <clarkc@...> wrote:

From: hank9174 <clarkc@...>
Subject: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history
To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, December 17, 2010, 12:41 PM

146 years ago George H. Thomas created his magnum opus, his masterpiece, his pièce de résistance: the battle of nashville.

If any event truly sealed the fate of the CSA it was the virtual destruction of the AoT...

HankC

p.s. I kind of miss old joseph rose ;)

Reply | Messages in this Topic (14)

#46856 From: chris bryant <paladinsf@...>
Date: Fri Dec 17, 2010 10:44 pm
Subject: RE: Books paladinsf
Send Email

Glad to see you seem to agree with me on some titles but please tell me what it is you like about these books.What specific virtues does each book have that you like?Please eleaborate a bit.Do I need to read Horn if since I've read Connelly?Give me a little more,please.

Chris Bryant

--- On Sun, 12/12/10, pete@... <pete@...> wrote:

From: pete@... <pete@...>
Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] Books
To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, December 12, 2010, 7:45 AM

Wiley Sword and Larry Daniels' books on Shiloh
Connelly ARMY OF THE HEARTLAND and AUTUMN OF GLORY
Castel DECISION IN THE WEST THE ATLANTA CAMPAIGN
Peter Cozzens books on Stones River (Murfreesboro) and Iuka & Corinth
Horn THE DECISIVE BATTLE OF NASHVILLE
Davis SHERMAN'S MARCH TO THE SEA
Miers THE WEB OF VICTORY (Vicksburg)
Horn THE ARMY OF TENNESSEE
Woodworth NOTHING BUT VICTORY THE ARMY OF THE TENNESSEE
Sherman and Grant's MEMOIRS

Along with Chris' question, what thoughts does the group have on WAR LIKE THE THUNDERBOLT?

------- Original Message -------
From : chris bryant[mailto:paladinsf@...]
Sent : 12/11/2010 5:49:02 PM
To : civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
Cc :
Subject : RE: [civilwarwest] Books

Been pretty slow since I subscribed;maybe everybody's on vacation?Thought I'd ask:what books do you particularly recommend on the war in the
west?I like Thomas Lawrence Connelly;he had a lot to do with my interest in the west and I'm convinced that he was right about the relative
importance of the theater and the small minded outlook of R.E.LEE.I've read some other books and articles but thought I'd like to hear if this list
recommends anyone.
Chris Bryant
Oklahoma City

Reply | Messages in this Topic (69)

#46857 From: Bob Taubman <rtaubman@...>
Date: Fri Dec 17, 2010 11:45 pm
Subject: Re: yesterday in history stafftca
Send Email

He is still around. He was/is a true supporter of GHT, along with some other like minded people, myself included.

From: hank9174 <clarkc@...>
To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, December 17, 2010 3:41:44 PM
Subject: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history

146 years ago George H. Thomas created his magnum opus, his masterpiece, his pi�ce de r�sistance: the battle of nashville.

If any event truly sealed the fate of the CSA it was the virtual destruction of the AoT...

HankC

p.s. I kind of miss old joseph rose ;)

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/civilwarwest/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/civilwarwest/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
civilwarwest-digest@yahoogroups.com
civilwarwest-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
civilwarwest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply | Messages in this Topic (14)

#46858 From: Bob Taubman <rtaubman@...>
Date: Fri Dec 17, 2010 11:57 pm
Subject: Re: Books stafftca
Send Email

I really liked Sherman's Horsemen, by Evans along with those you have mentioned. Castel's Decision in the West is an excellent read as is Embrace an Angry Wind, The Confederacy's Last Hurrah: Spring Hill, Franklin, and Nashville by Wiley Sword.

From: "pete@..." <pete@...>
To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, December 12, 2010 10:45:14 AM
Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] Books

Wiley Sword and Larry Daniels' books on Shiloh
Connelly ARMY OF THE HEARTLAND and AUTUMN OF GLORY
Castel DECISION IN THE WEST THE ATLANTA CAMPAIGN
Peter Cozzens books on Stones River (Murfreesboro) and Iuka & Corinth
Horn THE DECISIVE BATTLE OF NASHVILLE
Davis SHERMAN'S MARCH TO THE SEA
Miers THE WEB OF VICTORY (Vicksburg)
Horn THE ARMY OF TENNESSEE
Woodworth NOTHING BUT VICTORY THE ARMY OF THE TENNESSEE
Sherman and Grant's MEMOIRS

Along with Chris' question, what thoughts does the group have on WAR LIKE THE THUNDERBOLT?

------- Original Message -------
From : chris bryant[mailto:paladinsf@...]
Sent : 12/11/2010 5:49:02 PM
To : civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
Cc :
Subject : RE: [civilwarwest] Books

Been pretty slow since I subscribed;maybe everybody's on vacation?Thought I'd ask:what books do you particularly recommend on the war in the
west?I like Thomas Lawrence Connelly;he had a lot to do with my interest in the west and I'm convinced that he was right about the relative
importance of the theater and the small minded outlook of R.E.LEE.I've read some other books and articles but thought I'd like to hear if this list
recommends anyone.
Chris Bryant
Oklahoma City

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/civilwarwest/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/civilwarwest/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
civilwarwest-digest@yahoogroups.com
civilwarwest-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
civilwarwest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply | Messages in this Topic (69)

#46859 From: Bob Huddleston <huddleston.r@...>
Date: Sat Dec 18, 2010 1:53 am
Subject: Re: yesterday in history huddlestonus
Send Email

In our discussion of the importance of George Thomas, the statement is
made that he is unique because he destroyed a Civil War army. Leaving
aside the thought that if that is the sign of greatness, then John Bell
Hood should be considered the greatest general of all time :>) I did
some checking in the various secondary sources on the two battles of
Franklin and Nashville. What I found, and please correct me if my
figures are wrong, was that the destruction of the AoT was done at
Franklin and that it would appear that the Rebels at Nashville were
hardly destroyed, not if they had twenty something thousand when Thomas
attacked and still had 20,000 a month or so later.

At Franklin:

Schofield:23,939

Hood started north with about approximately 40,000 maximum, but only had
about 29,000 left at Franklin (there are no decent Confederate numbers)

Losses at Franklin, November 30, 1864:

Schofield:2326

Hood:6200

At Nashville, December 15-16, 1864:

Thomas: 52,000-60,000 (I am startled at the disagreement over the number
of men Thomas had available!)

Hood:22,000-25,000

Casualties:

Thomas: 3,061 killed, wounded and missing.

Hood: No reports – but there is agreement that Thomas captured 4462
Confederates and that, when the Army of Tennessee reached Tupelo at the
beginning of 1865, it had about 20,000 men.

Take care,

Bob

Judy and Bob Huddleston
10643 Sperry Street
Northglenn, CO  80234-3612
Huddleston.r@...

“There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were generals
fighting it, and, of the two groups, the historians are the more belligerent.”
David Donald, “Refighting the Civil War,” Lincoln Reconsidered (New York,
1956), 82.

On 12/17/2010 3:39 PM, chris bryant wrote:
>
>
> I'd say it was pretty well sealed before that;any other opinions?
>                       Chris Bryant
> --- On *Fri, 12/17/10, hank9174 /<clarkc@...>/* wrote:
>
>
>     From: hank9174 <clarkc@...>
>     Subject: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history
>     To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
>     Date: Friday, December 17, 2010, 12:41 PM
>
>
>     146 years ago George H. Thomas created his magnum opus, his
>     masterpiece, his pièce de résistance: the battle of nashville.
>
>     If any event truly sealed the fate of the CSA it was the virtual
>     destruction of the AoT...
>
>     HankC
>
>     p.s. I kind of miss old joseph rose ;)
>
>
>

Reply | Messages in this Topic (14)

#46860 From: "Jack Lawrence" <jlawrence@...>
Date: Sat Dec 18, 2010 2:39 pm
Subject: Re: yesterday in history jlawrence@...
Send Email

This is an old argument.

No one says cannae when talking about Thomas.

But he had a habit of turning back assaults and then pursuing a retreating
enemy ( under modern doctrine this is de rigor) to the point that it was
rendered combat ineffective to the point that it had to be reconstituted and
rearmed.

That's what Thomas did. No matter how many survivors, the opposing force was
destroyed.

Regards,

Jack

Amateur military historians study units an numbers. Professional military
historians study battles.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Huddleston" <huddleston.r@...>
To: <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 7:53 PM
Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history


>
> In our discussion of the importance of George Thomas, the statement is
> made that he is unique because he destroyed a Civil War army. Leaving
> aside the thought that if that is the sign of greatness, then John Bell
> Hood should be considered the greatest general of all time :>) I did
> some checking in the various secondary sources on the two battles of
> Franklin and Nashville. What I found, and please correct me if my
> figures are wrong, was that the destruction of the AoT was done at
> Franklin and that it would appear that the Rebels at Nashville were
> hardly destroyed, not if they had twenty something thousand when Thomas
> attacked and still had 20,000 a month or so later.
>
> At Franklin:
>
> Schofield:23,939
>
> Hood started north with about approximately 40,000 maximum, but only had
> about 29,000 left at Franklin (there are no decent Confederate numbers)
>
> Losses at Franklin, November 30, 1864:
>
> Schofield:2326
>
> Hood:6200
>
> At Nashville, December 15-16, 1864:
>
> Thomas: 52,000-60,000 (I am startled at the disagreement over the number
> of men Thomas had available!)
>
> Hood:22,000-25,000
>
> Casualties:
>
> Thomas: 3,061 killed, wounded and missing.
>
> Hood: No reports – but there is agreement that Thomas captured 4462
> Confederates and that, when the Army of Tennessee reached Tupelo at the
> beginning of 1865, it had about 20,000 men.
>
> Take care,
>
> Bob
>
> Judy and Bob Huddleston
> 10643 Sperry Street
> Northglenn, CO  80234-3612
> Huddleston.r@...
>
> “There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were generals
> fighting it, and, of the two groups, the historians are the more
> belligerent.” David Donald, “Refighting the Civil War,” Lincoln
> Reconsidered (New York, 1956), 82.
>
>
> On 12/17/2010 3:39 PM, chris bryant wrote:
>>
>>
>> I'd say it was pretty well sealed before that;any other opinions?
>>                       Chris Bryant
>> --- On *Fri, 12/17/10, hank9174 /<clarkc@...>/* wrote:
>>
>>
>>     From: hank9174 <clarkc@...>
>>     Subject: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history
>>     To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
>>     Date: Friday, December 17, 2010, 12:41 PM
>>
>>
>>     146 years ago George H. Thomas created his magnum opus, his
>>     masterpiece, his pièce de résistance: the battle of nashville.
>>
>>     If any event truly sealed the fate of the CSA it was the virtual
>>     destruction of the AoT...
>>
>>     HankC
>>
>>     p.s. I kind of miss old joseph rose ;)
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Reply | Messages in this Topic (14)

#46861 From: keeno2@...
Date: Mon Dec 20, 2010 12:55 am
Subject: Re: yesterday in history keeno2@...
Send Email

Hood: No reports – but there is agreement that Thomas captured 4462 Confederates and that, when the Army of Tennessee reached Tupelo at the beginning of 1865, it had about 20,000 men.

Hood likely picked up those extra men on the way back from those he dropped off on the way north.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Huddleston <huddleston.r@...>
To: civilwarwest <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Fri, Dec 17, 2010 7:55 pm
Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history


In our discussion of the importance of George Thomas, the statement is made that he is unique because he destroyed a Civil War army. Leaving aside the thought that if that is the sign of greatness, then John Bell Hood should be considered the greatest general of all time :>) I did some checking in the various secondary sources on the two battles of Franklin and Nashville. What I found, and please correct me if my figures are wrong, was that the destruction of the AoT was done at Franklin and that it would appear that the Rebels at Nashville were hardly destroyed, not if they had twenty something thousand when Thomas attacked and still had 20,000 a month or so later.
At Franklin:
Schofield:23,939
Hood started north with about approximately 40,000 maximum, but only had about 29,000 left at Franklin (there are no decent Confederate numbers)
Losses at Franklin, November 30, 1864:
Schofield:2326
Hood:6200
At Nashville, December 15-16, 1864:
Thomas: 52,000-60,000 (I am startled at the disagreement over the number of men Thomas had available!)
Hood:22,000-25,000
Casualties:
Thomas: 3,061 killed, wounded and missing.
Hood: No reports – but there is agreement that Thomas captured 4462 Confederates and that, when the Army of Tennessee reached Tupelo at the beginning of 1865, it had about 20,000 men.
Take care,
Bob
Judy and Bob Huddleston
10643 Sperry Street
Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
Huddleston.r@...
“There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were generals fighting it, and, of the two groups, the historians are the more belligerent.” David Donald, “Refighting the Civil War,” Lincoln Reconsidered (New York, 1956), 82.
On 12/17/2010 3:39 PM, chris bryant wrote:
>
>
> I'd say it was pretty well sealed before that;any other opinions?
> Chris Bryant
> --- On *Fri, 12/17/10, hank9174 /<clarkc@...>/* wrote:
>
>
> From: hank9174 <clarkc@...>
> Subject: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history
> To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Friday, December 17, 2010, 12:41 PM
>
>
> 146 years ago George H. Thomas created his magnum opus, his
> masterpiece, his pièce de résistance: the battle of nashville.
>
> If any event truly sealed the fate of the CSA it was the virtual
> destruction of the AoT...
>
> HankC
>
> p.s. I kind of miss old joseph rose ;)
>
>
> ------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/civilwarwest/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/civilwarwest/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
civilwarwest-digest@yahoogroups.com civilwarwest-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
civilwarwest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply | Messages in this Topic (14)

#46862 From: Bob Huddleston <huddleston.r@...>
Date: Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:07 am
Subject: Re: yesterday in history huddlestonus
Send Email

Thomas commanded in only two battles: Mill Springs, a small (4,500
Federals to about 5900 Rebels) action where the total casualties were
about 246 Union to 533 Confederate. Hardly much of a battle, since
Thomas was forced to fall back after it was over. Thomas commanded some
ten regiments and Crittenden eight; roughly two divisions fighting it
out. Thomas casualties were low – but then so were Crittenden’s.

  From Mill Springs, January 19, 1862, until Nashville, almost exactly
three years later, Thomas was never in command of a single battle; he
was always in the position of having someone immediately over him, as
the commander – and the one responsible for the victory or the defeat.

I already posted the box score for Nashville.

Take care,

Bob

Judy and Bob Huddleston
10643 Sperry Street
Northglenn, CO  80234-3612
Huddleston.r@...

“There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were generals
fighting it, and, of the two groups, the historians are the more
belligerent.” David Donald, “Refighting the Civil War,” Lincoln
Reconsidered (New York, 1956), 82.

On 12/18/2010 7:39 AM, Jack Lawrence wrote:
> This is an old argument.
>
> No one says cannae when talking about Thomas.
>
> But he had a habit of turning back assaults and then pursuing a retreating
> enemy ( under modern doctrine this is de rigor) to the point that it was
> rendered combat ineffective to the point that it had to be reconstituted
> and
> rearmed.
>
> That's what Thomas did. No matter how many survivors, the opposing force
> was
> destroyed.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jack
>
> Amateur military historians study units an numbers. Professional military
> historians study battles.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bob Huddleston" <huddleston.r@...
> <mailto:huddleston.r%40comcast.net>>
> To: <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com <mailto:civilwarwest%40yahoogroups.com>>
> Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 7:53 PM
> Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history
>
>  >
>  > In our discussion of the importance of George Thomas, the statement is
>  > made that he is unique because he destroyed a Civil War army. Leaving
>  > aside the thought that if that is the sign of greatness, then John Bell
>  > Hood should be considered the greatest general of all time :>) I did
>  > some checking in the various secondary sources on the two battles of
>  > Franklin and Nashville. What I found, and please correct me if my
>  > figures are wrong, was that the destruction of the AoT was done at
>  > Franklin and that it would appear that the Rebels at Nashville were
>  > hardly destroyed, not if they had twenty something thousand when Thomas
>  > attacked and still had 20,000 a month or so later.
>  >
>  > At Franklin:
>  >
>  > Schofield:23,939
>  >
>  > Hood started north with about approximately 40,000 maximum, but only had
>  > about 29,000 left at Franklin (there are no decent Confederate numbers)
>  >
>  > Losses at Franklin, November 30, 1864:
>  >
>  > Schofield:2326
>  >
>  > Hood:6200
>  >
>  > At Nashville, December 15-16, 1864:
>  >
>  > Thomas: 52,000-60,000 (I am startled at the disagreement over the number
>  > of men Thomas had available!)
>  >
>  > Hood:22,000-25,000
>  >
>  > Casualties:
>  >
>  > Thomas: 3,061 killed, wounded and missing.
>  >
>  > Hood: No reports – but there is agreement that Thomas captured 4462
>  > Confederates and that, when the Army of Tennessee reached Tupelo at the
>  > beginning of 1865, it had about 20,000 men.
>  >
>  > Take care,
>  >
>  > Bob
>  >
>  > Judy and Bob Huddleston
>  > 10643 Sperry Street
>  > Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
>  > Huddleston.r@... <mailto:Huddleston.r%40comcast.net>
>  >
>  > “There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were generals
>  > fighting it, and, of the two groups, the historians are the more
>  > belligerent.” David Donald, “Refighting the Civil War,” Lincoln
>  > Reconsidered (New York, 1956), 82.
>  >
>  >
>  > On 12/17/2010 3:39 PM, chris bryant wrote:
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> I'd say it was pretty well sealed before that;any other opinions?
>  >> Chris Bryant
>  >> --- On *Fri, 12/17/10, hank9174 /<clarkc@...
> <mailto:clarkc%40missouri.edu>>/* wrote:
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> From: hank9174 <clarkc@... <mailto:clarkc%40missouri.edu>>
>  >> Subject: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history
>  >> To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com <mailto:civilwarwest%40yahoogroups.com>
>  >> Date: Friday, December 17, 2010, 12:41 PM
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> 146 years ago George H. Thomas created his magnum opus, his
>  >> masterpiece, his pièce de résistance: the battle of nashville.
>  >>
>  >> If any event truly sealed the fate of the CSA it was the virtual
>  >> destruction of the AoT...
>  >>
>  >> HankC
>  >>
>  >> p.s. I kind of miss old joseph rose ;)
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >
>  >
>  > ------------------------------------
>  >
>  > Yahoo! Groups Links
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>
>

Reply | Messages in this Topic (14)

#46863 From: Bob Huddleston <huddleston.r@...>
Date: Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:10 am
Subject: Re: yesterday in history huddlestonus
Send Email

My points about Thomas are not meant to demean or lessen his very real
accomplishments. Here is one:

"The interments [at Chattanooga National Cemetery] are made without
regard to States, as we think justly, though members of same regiments
are kept together as far as practicable, on a good suggestion of a
distinguished Major-General, as we learn, that “there had been [319]
quite enough of State Rights; that these soldiers had died fighting for
the Union, against rebellious States, and now we had better mix them up
and nationalize them a little.” He thought our poor fellows would like
that best, if they could have a voice in the matter, and we heartily
concur in the opinion….

"It stands out a truly Union and national work as far as completed,
simple but grand in its conception and execution; and General Thomas
well deserves high praise and the united thanks of the army and the
country for what has there been done so promptly and appropriately for
our slain and dead soldiery."

James F. Russling, “National Cemeteries,” Harper’s New Monthly Magazine.
Volume 33, Issue 195, (August 1866), pp. 318-319.


Take care,

Bob

Judy and Bob Huddleston
10643 Sperry Street
Northglenn, CO  80234-3612
Huddleston.r@...

“There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were generals
fighting it, and, of the two groups, the historians are the more
belligerent.” David Donald, “Refighting the Civil War,” Lincoln
Reconsidered (New York, 1956), 82.

Reply | Messages in this Topic (14)

#46864 From: "Jack Lawrence" <jlawrence@...>
Date: Mon Dec 20, 2010 12:46 pm
Subject: Re: yesterday in history jlawrence@...
Send Email

And both times he pursued an attacking bforce into disintergation.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Huddleston" <huddleston.r@...>
To: <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2010 11:07 PM
Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history


> Thomas commanded in only two battles: Mill Springs, a small (4,500
> Federals to about 5900 Rebels) action where the total casualties were
> about 246 Union to 533 Confederate. Hardly much of a battle, since
> Thomas was forced to fall back after it was over. Thomas commanded some
> ten regiments and Crittenden eight; roughly two divisions fighting it
> out. Thomas casualties were low – but then so were Crittenden’s.
>
> From Mill Springs, January 19, 1862, until Nashville, almost exactly
> three years later, Thomas was never in command of a single battle; he
> was always in the position of having someone immediately over him, as
> the commander – and the one responsible for the victory or the defeat.
>
> I already posted the box score for Nashville.
>
> Take care,
>
> Bob
>
> Judy and Bob Huddleston
> 10643 Sperry Street
> Northglenn, CO  80234-3612
> Huddleston.r@...
>
> “There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were generals
> fighting it, and, of the two groups, the historians are the more
> belligerent.” David Donald, “Refighting the Civil War,” Lincoln
> Reconsidered (New York, 1956), 82.
>
> On 12/18/2010 7:39 AM, Jack Lawrence wrote:
>> This is an old argument.
>>
>> No one says cannae when talking about Thomas.
>>
>> But he had a habit of turning back assaults and then pursuing a
>> retreating
>> enemy ( under modern doctrine this is de rigor) to the point that it was
>> rendered combat ineffective to the point that it had to be reconstituted
>> and
>> rearmed.
>>
>> That's what Thomas did. No matter how many survivors, the opposing force
>> was
>> destroyed.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Jack
>>
>> Amateur military historians study units an numbers. Professional military
>> historians study battles.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Bob Huddleston" <huddleston.r@...
>> <mailto:huddleston.r%40comcast.net>>
>> To: <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
>> <mailto:civilwarwest%40yahoogroups.com>>
>> Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 7:53 PM
>> Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history
>>
>>  >
>>  > In our discussion of the importance of George Thomas, the statement is
>>  > made that he is unique because he destroyed a Civil War army. Leaving
>>  > aside the thought that if that is the sign of greatness, then John
>> Bell
>>  > Hood should be considered the greatest general of all time :>) I did
>>  > some checking in the various secondary sources on the two battles of
>>  > Franklin and Nashville. What I found, and please correct me if my
>>  > figures are wrong, was that the destruction of the AoT was done at
>>  > Franklin and that it would appear that the Rebels at Nashville were
>>  > hardly destroyed, not if they had twenty something thousand when
>> Thomas
>>  > attacked and still had 20,000 a month or so later.
>>  >
>>  > At Franklin:
>>  >
>>  > Schofield:23,939
>>  >
>>  > Hood started north with about approximately 40,000 maximum, but only
>> had
>>  > about 29,000 left at Franklin (there are no decent Confederate
>> numbers)
>>  >
>>  > Losses at Franklin, November 30, 1864:
>>  >
>>  > Schofield:2326
>>  >
>>  > Hood:6200
>>  >
>>  > At Nashville, December 15-16, 1864:
>>  >
>>  > Thomas: 52,000-60,000 (I am startled at the disagreement over the
>> number
>>  > of men Thomas had available!)
>>  >
>>  > Hood:22,000-25,000
>>  >
>>  > Casualties:
>>  >
>>  > Thomas: 3,061 killed, wounded and missing.
>>  >
>>  > Hood: No reports – but there is agreement that Thomas captured 4462
>>  > Confederates and that, when the Army of Tennessee reached Tupelo at
>> the
>>  > beginning of 1865, it had about 20,000 men.
>>  >
>>  > Take care,
>>  >
>>  > Bob
>>  >
>>  > Judy and Bob Huddleston
>>  > 10643 Sperry Street
>>  > Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
>>  > Huddleston.r@... <mailto:Huddleston.r%40comcast.net>
>>  >
>>  > “There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were
>> generals
>>  > fighting it, and, of the two groups, the historians are the more
>>  > belligerent.” David Donald, “Refighting the Civil War,” Lincoln
>>  > Reconsidered (New York, 1956), 82.
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > On 12/17/2010 3:39 PM, chris bryant wrote:
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >> I'd say it was pretty well sealed before that;any other opinions?
>>  >> Chris Bryant
>>  >> --- On *Fri, 12/17/10, hank9174 /<clarkc@...
>> <mailto:clarkc%40missouri.edu>>/* wrote:
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >> From: hank9174 <clarkc@... <mailto:clarkc%40missouri.edu>>
>>  >> Subject: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history
>>  >> To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
>> <mailto:civilwarwest%40yahoogroups.com>
>>  >> Date: Friday, December 17, 2010, 12:41 PM
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >> 146 years ago George H. Thomas created his magnum opus, his
>>  >> masterpiece, his pièce de résistance: the battle of nashville.
>>  >>
>>  >> If any event truly sealed the fate of the CSA it was the virtual
>>  >> destruction of the AoT...
>>  >>
>>  >> HankC
>>  >>
>>  >> p.s. I kind of miss old joseph rose ;)
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > ------------------------------------
>>  >
>>  > Yahoo! Groups Links
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Reply | Messages in this Topic (14)

#46865 From: Bob Taubman <rtaubman@...>
Date: Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:24 pm
Subject: Re: yesterday in history stafftca
Send Email

Here we go again . Thomas, according to Mr. Huddleston, is "forced to fall back". I wonder why he would be forced to fall back when in fact "After it was clear that the enemy had abandoned his entrenchments in great haste....", General George H. Thomas, the Idomitable Warrior, p.180, author; Wilbur Thomas. Also, p.179, "A large quantity of ammunition, commissary stores, camp tools, and garrsion eqiupment, in addition to six Confederate flags, were also found by the victors." Also, p.179, "Although the Confederates escaped, the opposite bank displayed evidence of their flight by the number of wagons left behind; and since the boats use in crossing were destroyed, an immediate chase was impossible, although during the day the Fourteenth Ohio succeeded in effecting a crossing for reconnaissance purposes and to collect enemy property left behind."

Mr. Huddleston has in previous correspondence on this topic, used the term "retreated" in relation to Thomas's actions at Mill Springs. Now the wording is "forced to fall back." Why would he have been forced to fall back when the enemy had abandoned the field; Thomas's forces were able to examine the enemy's entrenchments, and even crossed the river "for reconnaissance purposes and to collect enemy property left behind."

ISTM leaving the field of battle after successfully routing the enemy, hardly qualifies as a "retreat" or being "forced to fall back." How many days, months, etc was he to remain at Mill Springs field of battle?

Some collaboration of a "retreat" or "forced to fall back" situation would be appreciated.

From: Bob Huddleston <huddleston.r@...>
To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, December 20, 2010 12:07:36 AM
Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history

Thomas commanded in only two battles: Mill Springs, a small (4,500
Federals to about 5900 Rebels) action where the total casualties were
about 246 Union to 533 Confederate. Hardly much of a battle, since
Thomas was forced to fall back after it was over. Thomas commanded some
ten regiments and Crittenden eight; roughly two divisions fighting it
out. Thomas casualties were low – but then so were Crittenden’s.

From Mill Springs, January 19, 1862, until Nashville, almost exactly
three years later, Thomas was never in command of a single battle; he
was always in the position of having someone immediately over him, as
the commander – and the one responsible for the victory or the defeat.

I already posted the box score for Nashville.

Take care,

Bob

Judy and Bob Huddleston
10643 Sperry Street
Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
Huddleston.r@...

“There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were generals
fighting it, and, of the two groups, the historians are the more
belligerent.” David Donald, “Refighting the Civil War,” Lincoln
Reconsidered (New York, 1956), 82.

On 12/18/2010 7:39 AM, Jack Lawrence wrote:
> This is an old argument.
>
> No one says cannae when talking about Thomas.
>
> But he had a habit of turning back assaults and then pursuing a retreating
> enemy ( under modern doctrine this is de rigor) to the point that it was
> rendered combat ineffective to the point that it had to be reconstituted
> and
> rearmed.
>
> That's what Thomas did. No matter how many survivors, the opposing force
> was
> destroyed.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jack
>
> Amateur military historians study units an numbers. Professional military
> historians study battles.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bob Huddleston" <huddleston.r@...
> <mailto:huddleston.r%40comcast.net>>
> To: <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com <mailto:civilwarwest%40yahoogroups.com>>
> Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 7:53 PM
> Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history
>
> >
> > In our discussion of the importance of George Thomas, the statement is
> > made that he is unique because he destroyed a Civil War army. Leaving
> > aside the thought that if that is the sign of greatness, then John Bell
> > Hood should be considered the greatest general of all time :>) I did
> > some checking in the various secondary sources on the two battles of
> > Franklin and Nashville. What I found, and please correct me if my
> > figures are wrong, was that the destruction of the AoT was done at
> > Franklin and that it would appear that the Rebels at Nashville were
> > hardly destroyed, not if they had twenty something thousand when Thomas
> > attacked and still had 20,000 a month or so later.
> >
> > At Franklin:
> >
> > Schofield:23,939
> >
> > Hood started north with about approximately 40,000 maximum, but only had
> > about 29,000 left at Franklin (there are no decent Confederate numbers)
> >
> > Losses at Franklin, November 30, 1864:
> >
> > Schofield:2326
> >
> > Hood:6200
> >
> > At Nashville, December 15-16, 1864:
> >
> > Thomas: 52,000-60,000 (I am startled at the disagreement over the number
> > of men Thomas had available!)
> >
> > Hood:22,000-25,000
> >
> > Casualties:
> >
> > Thomas: 3,061 killed, wounded and missing.
> >
> > Hood: No reports – but there is agreement that Thomas captured 4462
> > Confederates and that, when the Army of Tennessee reached Tupelo at the
> > beginning of 1865, it had about 20,000 men.
> >
> > Take care,
> >
> > Bob
> >
> > Judy and Bob Huddleston
> > 10643 Sperry Street
> > Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
> > Huddleston.r@... <mailto:Huddleston.r%40comcast.net>
> >
> > “There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were generals
> > fighting it, and, of the two groups, the historians are the more
> > belligerent.” David Donald, “Refighting the Civil War,” Lincoln
> > Reconsidered (New York, 1956), 82.
> >
> >
> > On 12/17/2010 3:39 PM, chris bryant wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> I'd say it was pretty well sealed before that;any other opinions?
> >> Chris Bryant
> >> --- On *Fri, 12/17/10, hank9174 /<clarkc@...
> <mailto:clarkc%40missouri.edu>>/* wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> From: hank9174 <clarkc@... <mailto:clarkc%40missouri.edu>>
> >> Subject: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history
> >> To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com <mailto:civilwarwest%40yahoogroups.com>
> >> Date: Friday, December 17, 2010, 12:41 PM
> >>
> >>
> >> 146 years ago George H. Thomas created his magnum opus, his
> >> masterpiece, his pièce de résistance: the battle of nashville.
> >>
> >> If any event truly sealed the fate of the CSA it was the virtual
> >> destruction of the AoT...
> >>
> >> HankC
> >>
> >> p.s. I kind of miss old joseph rose ;)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/civilwarwest/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/civilwarwest/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
civilwarwest-digest@yahoogroups.com
civilwarwest-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
civilwarwest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply | Messages in this Topic (14)

#46866 From: Bob Huddleston <huddleston.r@...>
Date: Mon Dec 20, 2010 7:09 pm
Subject: Re: yesterday in history huddlestonus
Send Email

See Einholf, George Thomas: Virginian for the Union, p. 120-124 for an
analysis of what Thomas did at Mill Springs and the fact that Thomas
failed to follow up the victory, allowing Zollicoffer to escape. When
Speed Fry asked Thomas why he did not send a demand for the Confederates
to escape, “Thomas thought for a moment and then replied, ‘Hang it, Fry!
I never once thought of it!” (p. 120) See also Larry Daniel, Days of
Glory, pp. 54-56, where he points out that Buell was pushing Thomas to
pursue and Thomas was stalling..

Mind you, I am not saying that Thomas did not win and win impressively,
but he did not destroy Zollicoffer, nor did he pursue him. Instead he
“fell back” or “retreated,” pick your word. He was, BTW,, in my opinion,
doing the correct thing – the hills of Appalachia were a nightmare to
maneuver in during the Civil War and Thomas was right to “fall back”.
But let’s don’t call it “destruction of an enemy army”: whatever
destruction occurred to Zollicoffer occurred because he was also trying
to retreat through a hostile environment, not because Thomas was pursuing.

Mill Springs was, to repeat, a small battle, even by January 1862
standards. Compare the few men Thomas – and Zollicoffer – had with the
forces, on both sides, the next month at Donelson.

Also remember, whatever the value of Thomas’ justifications for refusing
to accept army command until after Chickamauga, the fact remains that he
did not command in another battle for almost three years, and that
against an already defeated foe.

Take care,

Bob

Judy and Bob Huddleston
10643 Sperry Street
Northglenn, CO  80234-3612
Huddleston.r@...

“There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were generals
fighting it, and, of the two groups, the historians are the more belligerent.”
David Donald, “Refighting the Civil War,” Lincoln Reconsidered (New York,
1956), 82.


On 12/20/2010 10:24 AM, Bob Taubman wrote:
> Here we go again .  Thomas, according to Mr. Huddleston, is "forced to
> fall back".  I wonder why he would be forced to fall back when in fact
> "After it was clear that the enemy had abandoned his entrenchments in
> great haste....", General George H. Thomas, the Idomitable Warrior,
> p.180, author; Wilbur Thomas.   Also, p.179, "A large quantity of
> ammunition, commissary stores, camp tools, and garrsion eqiupment, in
> addition to six Confederate flags, were also found by the victors."
> Also, p.179, "Although the Confederates escaped, the opposite bank
> displayed evidence of their flight by the number of wagons left
> behind;  and since the boats use in crossing were destroyed, an
> immediate chase was impossible, although during the day the Fourteenth
> Ohio succeeded in effecting a crossing for reconnaissance purposes and
> to collect enemy property left behind."
> Mr. Huddleston has in previous correspondence on this topic,  used the
> term "retreated" in relation to Thomas's actions at Mill Springs.  Now
> the wording is "forced to fall back."  Why would he have been forced
> to fall back when the enemy had abandoned the field;  Thomas's forces
> were able to examine the enemy's entrenchments, and even crossed the
> river "for reconnaissance purposes and to collect enemy property left
> behind."
> ISTM leaving the field of battle after successfully routing the enemy,
> hardly qualifies as a "retreat" or being "forced to fall back."   How
> many days, months, etc was he to remain at Mill Springs field of battle?
> Some collaboration of a "retreat" or "forced to fall back" situation
> would be appreciated.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Bob Huddleston <huddleston.r@...>
> *To:* civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
> *Sent:* Mon, December 20, 2010 12:07:36 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history
>
> Thomas commanded in only two battles: Mill Springs, a small (4,500
> Federals to about 5900 Rebels) action where the total casualties were
> about 246 Union to 533 Confederate. Hardly much of a battle, since
> Thomas was forced to fall back after it was over. Thomas commanded some
> ten regiments and Crittenden eight; roughly two divisions fighting it
> out. Thomas casualties were low – but then so were Crittenden’s.
>
> From Mill Springs, January 19, 1862, until Nashville, almost exactly
> three years later, Thomas was never in command of a single battle; he
> was always in the position of having someone immediately over him, as
> the commander – and the one responsible for the victory or the defeat.
>
> I already posted the box score for Nashville.
>
> Take care,
>
> Bob
>
> Judy and Bob Huddleston
> 10643 Sperry Street
> Northglenn, CO  80234-3612
> Huddleston.r@... <mailto:Huddleston.r@...>
>
> “There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were generals
> fighting it, and, of the two groups, the historians are the more
> belligerent.” David Donald, “Refighting the Civil War,” Lincoln
> Reconsidered (New York, 1956), 82.
>
> On 12/18/2010 7:39 AM, Jack Lawrence wrote:
> > This is an old argument.
> >
> > No one says cannae when talking about Thomas.
> >
> > But he had a habit of turning back assaults and then pursuing a
> retreating
> > enemy ( under modern doctrine this is de rigor) to the point that it was
> > rendered combat ineffective to the point that it had to be reconstituted
> > and
> > rearmed.
> >
> > That's what Thomas did. No matter how many survivors, the opposing force
> > was
> > destroyed.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jack
> >
> > Amateur military historians study units an numbers. Professional
> military
> > historians study battles.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Bob Huddleston" <huddleston.r@...
> <mailto:huddleston.r@...>
> > <mailto:huddleston.r%40comcast.net>>
> > To: <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
> <mailto:civilwarwest%40yahoogroups.com>>
> > Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 7:53 PM
> > Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history
> >
> > >
> > > In our discussion of the importance of George Thomas, the statement is
> > > made that he is unique because he destroyed a Civil War army. Leaving
> > > aside the thought that if that is the sign of greatness, then John
> Bell
> > > Hood should be considered the greatest general of all time :>) I did
> > > some checking in the various secondary sources on the two battles of
> > > Franklin and Nashville. What I found, and please correct me if my
> > > figures are wrong, was that the destruction of the AoT was done at
> > > Franklin and that it would appear that the Rebels at Nashville were
> > > hardly destroyed, not if they had twenty something thousand when
> Thomas
> > > attacked and still had 20,000 a month or so later.
> > >
> > > At Franklin:
> > >
> > > Schofield:23,939
> > >
> > > Hood started north with about approximately 40,000 maximum, but
> only had
> > > about 29,000 left at Franklin (there are no decent Confederate
> numbers)
> > >
> > > Losses at Franklin, November 30, 1864:
> > >
> > > Schofield:2326
> > >
> > > Hood:6200
> > >
> > > At Nashville, December 15-16, 1864:
> > >
> > > Thomas: 52,000-60,000 (I am startled at the disagreement over the
> number
> > > of men Thomas had available!)
> > >
> > > Hood:22,000-25,000
> > >
> > > Casualties:
> > >
> > > Thomas: 3,061 killed, wounded and missing.
> > >
> > > Hood: No reports – but there is agreement that Thomas captured 4462
> > > Confederates and that, when the Army of Tennessee reached Tupelo
> at the
> > > beginning of 1865, it had about 20,000 men.
> > >
> > > Take care,
> > >
> > > Bob
> > >
> > > Judy and Bob Huddleston
> > > 10643 Sperry Street
> > > Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
> > > Huddleston.r@... <mailto:Huddleston.r@...>
> <mailto:Huddleston.r%40comcast.net>
> > >
> > > “There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were
> generals
> > > fighting it, and, of the two groups, the historians are the more
> > > belligerent.” David Donald, “Refighting the Civil War,” Lincoln
> > > Reconsidered (New York, 1956), 82.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 12/17/2010 3:39 PM, chris bryant wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I'd say it was pretty well sealed before that;any other opinions?
> > >> Chris Bryant
> > >> --- On *Fri, 12/17/10, hank9174 /<clarkc@...
> <mailto:clarkc@...>
> > <mailto:clarkc%40missouri.edu>>/* wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> From: hank9174 <clarkc@... <mailto:clarkc@...>
> <mailto:clarkc%40missouri.edu>>
> > >> Subject: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history
> > >> To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
> <mailto:civilwarwest%40yahoogroups.com>
> > >> Date: Friday, December 17, 2010, 12:41 PM
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 146 years ago George H. Thomas created his magnum opus, his
> > >> masterpiece, his pièce de résistance: the battle of nashville.
> > >>
> > >> If any event truly sealed the fate of the CSA it was the virtual
> > >> destruction of the AoT...
> > >>
> > >> HankC
> > >>
> > >> p.s. I kind of miss old joseph rose ;)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
> civilwarwest-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:civilwarwest-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com>
>
>
>

Reply | Messages in this Topic (14)

#46867 From: Bob Taubman <rtaubman@...>
Date: Mon Dec 20, 2010 8:04 pm
Subject: Re: yesterday in history stafftca
Send Email

You have failed to explain why/how Thomas "retreated" or now, was "forced to fall back". Your use of "retreated" or "forced to fall back", are used to intimate some sort of failing on Thomas's part. I see your use of these phrases as empty rhetoric, nothing else. Thomas neither retreated nor was he forced to fall back as you have claimed. Your other arguments are smoke screens for your inability to clarify your words.

Retreat: "When an army retreats, it moves away from enemy forces in order to avoid fighting them." Collins English Dictionary. Methinks you got your northern and southern forces reversed.

Forced to fall back: your definition, with respect to Mill Springs, is anticipated.

From: Bob Huddleston <huddleston.r@...>
To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, December 20, 2010 2:09:41 PM
Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history

See Einholf, George Thomas: Virginian for the Union, p. 120-124 for an
analysis of what Thomas did at Mill Springs and the fact that Thomas
failed to follow up the victory, allowing Zollicoffer to escape. When
Speed Fry asked Thomas why he did not send a demand for the Confederates
to escape, “Thomas thought for a moment and then replied, ‘Hang it, Fry!
I never once thought of it!” (p. 120) See also Larry Daniel, Days of
Glory, pp. 54-56, where he points out that Buell was pushing Thomas to
pursue and Thomas was stalling..

Mind you, I am not saying that Thomas did not win and win impressively,
but he did not destroy Zollicoffer, nor did he pursue him. Instead he
“fell back” or “retreated,” pick your word. He was, BTW,, in my opinion,
doing the correct thing – the hills of Appalachia were a nightmare to
maneuver in during the Civil War and Thomas was right to “fall back”.
But let’s don’t call it “destruction of an enemy army”: whatever
destruction occurred to Zollicoffer occurred because he was also trying
to retreat through a hostile environment, not because Thomas was pursuing.

Mill Springs was, to repeat, a small battle, even by January 1862
standards. Compare the few men Thomas – and Zollicoffer – had with the
forces, on both sides, the next month at Donelson.

Also remember, whatever the value of Thomas’ justifications for refusing
to accept army command until after Chickamauga, the fact remains that he
did not command in another battle for almost three years, and that
against an already defeated foe.

Take care,

Bob

Judy and Bob Huddleston
10643 Sperry Street
Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
Huddleston.r@...

“There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were generals fighting it, and, of the two groups, the historians are the more belligerent.” David Donald, “Refighting the Civil War,” Lincoln Reconsidered (New York, 1956), 82.

On 12/20/2010 10:24 AM, Bob Taubman wrote:
> Here we go again . Thomas, according to Mr. Huddleston, is "forced to
> fall back". I wonder why he would be forced to fall back when in fact
> "After it was clear that the enemy had abandoned his entrenchments in
> great haste....", General George H. Thomas, the Idomitable Warrior,
> p.180, author; Wilbur Thomas. Also, p.179, "A large quantity of
> ammunition, commissary stores, camp tools, and garrsion eqiupment, in
> addition to six Confederate flags, were also found by the victors."
> Also, p.179, "Although the Confederates escaped, the opposite bank
> displayed evidence of their flight by the number of wagons left
> behind; and since the boats use in crossing were destroyed, an
> immediate chase was impossible, although during the day the Fourteenth
> Ohio succeeded in effecting a crossing for reconnaissance purposes and
> to collect enemy property left behind."
> Mr. Huddleston has in previous correspondence on this topic, used the
> term "retreated" in relation to Thomas's actions at Mill Springs. Now
> the wording is "forced to fall back." Why would he have been forced
> to fall back when the enemy had abandoned the field; Thomas's forces
> were able to examine the enemy's entrenchments, and even crossed the
> river "for reconnaissance purposes and to collect enemy property left
> behind."
> ISTM leaving the field of battle after successfully routing the enemy,
> hardly qualifies as a "retreat" or being "forced to fall back." How
> many days, months, etc was he to remain at Mill Springs field of battle?
> Some collaboration of a "retreat" or "forced to fall back" situation
> would be appreciated.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Bob Huddleston <huddleston.r@...>
> *To:* civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
> *Sent:* Mon, December 20, 2010 12:07:36 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history
>
> Thomas commanded in only two battles: Mill Springs, a small (4,500
> Federals to about 5900 Rebels) action where the total casualties were
> about 246 Union to 533 Confederate. Hardly much of a battle, since
> Thomas was forced to fall back after it was over. Thomas commanded some
> ten regiments and Crittenden eight; roughly two divisions fighting it
> out. Thomas casualties were low – but then so were Crittenden’s.
>
> From Mill Springs, January 19, 1862, until Nashville, almost exactly
> three years later, Thomas was never in command of a single battle; he
> was always in the position of having someone immediately over him, as
> the commander – and the one responsible for the victory or the defeat.
>
> I already posted the box score for Nashville.
>
> Take care,
>
> Bob
>
> Judy and Bob Huddleston
> 10643 Sperry Street
> Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
> Huddleston.r@... <mailto:Huddleston.r@...>
>
> “There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were generals
> fighting it, and, of the two groups, the historians are the more
> belligerent.” David Donald, “Refighting the Civil War,” Lincoln
> Reconsidered (New York, 1956), 82.
>
> On 12/18/2010 7:39 AM, Jack Lawrence wrote:
> > This is an old argument.
> >
> > No one says cannae when talking about Thomas.
> >
> > But he had a habit of turning back assaults and then pursuing a
> retreating
> > enemy ( under modern doctrine this is de rigor) to the point that it was
> > rendered combat ineffective to the point that it had to be reconstituted
> > and
> > rearmed.
> >
> > That's what Thomas did. No matter how many survivors, the opposing force
> > was
> > destroyed.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jack
> >
> > Amateur military historians study units an numbers. Professional
> military
> > historians study battles.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Bob Huddleston" <huddleston.r@...
> <mailto:huddleston.r@...>
> > <mailto:huddleston.r%40comcast.net>>
> > To: <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
> <mailto:civilwarwest%40yahoogroups.com>>
> > Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 7:53 PM
> > Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history
> >
> > >
> > > In our discussion of the importance of George Thomas, the statement is
> > > made that he is unique because he destroyed a Civil War army. Leaving
> > > aside the thought that if that is the sign of greatness, then John
> Bell
> > > Hood should be considered the greatest general of all time :>) I did
> > > some checking in the various secondary sources on the two battles of
> > > Franklin and Nashville. What I found, and please correct me if my
> > > figures are wrong, was that the destruction of the AoT was done at
> > > Franklin and that it would appear that the Rebels at Nashville were
> > > hardly destroyed, not if they had twenty something thousand when
> Thomas
> > > attacked and still had 20,000 a month or so later.
> > >
> > > At Franklin:
> > >
> > > Schofield:23,939
> > >
> > > Hood started north with about approximately 40,000 maximum, but
> only had
> > > about 29,000 left at Franklin (there are no decent Confederate
> numbers)
> > >
> > > Losses at Franklin, November 30, 1864:
> > >
> > > Schofield:2326
> > >
> > > Hood:6200
> > >
> > > At Nashville, December 15-16, 1864:
> > >
> > > Thomas: 52,000-60,000 (I am startled at the disagreement over the
> number
> > > of men Thomas had available!)
> > >
> > > Hood:22,000-25,000
> > >
> > > Casualties:
> > >
> > > Thomas: 3,061 killed, wounded and missing.
> > >
> > > Hood: No reports – but there is agreement that Thomas captured 4462
> > > Confederates and that, when the Army of Tennessee reached Tupelo
> at the
> > > beginning of 1865, it had about 20,000 men.
> > >
> > > Take care,
> > >
> > > Bob
> > >
> > > Judy and Bob Huddleston
> > > 10643 Sperry Street
> > > Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
> > > Huddleston.r@... <mailto:Huddleston.r@...>
> <mailto:Huddleston.r%40comcast.net>
> > >
> > > “There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were
> generals
> > > fighting it, and, of the two groups, the historians are the more
> > > belligerent.” David Donald, “Refighting the Civil War,” Lincoln
> > > Reconsidered (New York, 1956), 82.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 12/17/2010 3:39 PM, chris bryant wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I'd say it was pretty well sealed before that;any other opinions?
> > >> Chris Bryant
> > >> --- On *Fri, 12/17/10, hank9174 /<clarkc@...
> <mailto:clarkc@...>
> > <mailto:clarkc%40missouri.edu>>/* wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> From: hank9174 <clarkc@... <mailto:clarkc@...>
> <mailto:clarkc%40missouri.edu>>
> > >> Subject: [civilwarwest] yesterday in history
> > >> To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
> <mailto:civilwarwest%40yahoogroups.com>
> > >> Date: Friday, December 17, 2010, 12:41 PM
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 146 years ago George H. Thomas created his magnum opus, his
> > >> masterpiece, his pièce de résistance: the battle of nashville.
> > >>
> > >> If any event truly sealed the fate of the CSA it was the virtual
> > >> destruction of the AoT...
> > >>
> > >> HankC
> > >>
> > >> p.s. I kind of miss old joseph rose ;)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
> civilwarwest-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:civilwarwest-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com>
>
>
>

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/civilwarwest/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/civilwarwest/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
civilwarwest-digest@yahoogroups.com
civilwarwest-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
civilwarwest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply | Messages in this Topic (14)

#46868 From: Patricia Swan <pbswan@...>
Date: Mon Dec 20, 2010 8:50 pm
Subject: Retreat and Fall Back swan_pat_est...
Send Email

It may all be a matter of semantics, but it seems to me that this being
the anniversary of Confederate General Earl Van Dorn's raid on Grant's
supply base at Holly Springs, it might be a timely illustration.  After
the raid, Grant could no longer sustain his troops, his supplies at
Holly Springs having been largely destroyed and the railroad down to
Mississippi having been disrupted.  One could say, and some do write,
that Grant retreated. Others say that he was "forced to fall back" to
Tennessee.  Do these terms apply equally well to what Grant did, or is
one or the other more apt?

Reply | Messages in this Topic (30)

Yahoo! Groups

Breaking News Visit Yahoo! News for the latest.

The Yahoo! Groups Product Blog

Check it out!

Group Information

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...

Messages