- Oct 4, 2008--- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, Dave <gewehr@...> wrote:
> Ok, then, can it be said by most that Priest is, in some cases,
> unreliable as a guide to the tactical movements of the battle
> How then does a newbie to studying this battle go about tracingget
> movements of brigades (and in some cases regiments) so that I can
> them into my head? I mean, is there a reliable work, like Pfanzfor
> Gettysburg, that spends a lot of time on actual battle movements?weeks?
> Harsh, Murfin, Sears et.al. don't seem (to me) to offer the kind of
> detail that Priest does. The campaign I have a grasp on, it's the
> battle itself that is foggy.
> That's also why I've been asking about the value of Carman.
> Or, maybe I just need a battlefield guide for 3 hours in a few
>I'm not sure that what we "know" is what happened. During combat,
few people check details like time or try to determine where they are
in the woods, fileds or hills. The majority are trying to stay alive
while trying to kill someone. After it is all over, in sime cases
years later, they "remember" these details for histories.
While not Antietam, Oliver Norton's "Attack and Defense of Little
Round Top" is the best example of how history is made that I know of.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>