Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [TalkAntietam] Hartwig's talk on Iron Brigade

Expand Messages
  • david lutton
    Tom, The time question aside. If I may, did Scott touch on Battery B s participation in the cornfield action? David Lutton Hollidaysburg Pa ... From:
    Message 1 of 7 , Feb 7, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Tom,

      The time question aside. If I may, did Scott touch on Battery B's
      participation in the cornfield action?

      David Lutton
      Hollidaysburg Pa
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: <rotbaron@...>
      To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 10:17 AM
      Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Hartwig's talk on Iron Brigade


      > In a message dated 02/07/2003 9:52:11 AM EST, gerry1952@... writes:
      > << However, the time of when the Iron Brigade began advancing seems a
      little
      > odd to me, particularly when most accounts state the Federal advance
      > began at first light, which would be between 5.30 and 6.00 am. >>
      >
      > Perhaps he meant that they began their hurried assembly into formation at
      > that time and not necesarily took their first steps towards the south?
      Scott
      > noted that when the troops encamped, they had no idea as to their
      surrounding
      > geography. The troops were wet but so exhausted that many references
      comment
      > on their deep sleep. Their early awakening was initiated by officers who
      were
      > notified that Reb batteries were spotted on Nicodemus Hts and they were
      > in-range.
      >
      > FYI..for the past 8+ years, I've parked at the Cornfield around 6 AM and
      > walked along the pike to the North Woods to join the 7 AM anniversary
      hikes.
      > I recall that one can see fairly well by 6:30 AM (if there is no fog), so
      > wouldn't be 5:30 AM in 1862 timekeeping?
      >
      > Of course we all know that any time references to hours/minutes during
      battle
      > are commonly inaccurate.
      >
      > Tom Shay
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
      >
    • rotbaron@aol.com
      In a message dated 2/7/03 8:05:47 PM Eastern Standard Time, ... David, Indeed, Scott did mention the battery, but nothing beyond the standard history as told
      Message 2 of 7 , Feb 7, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        In a message dated 2/7/03 8:05:47 PM Eastern Standard Time,
        dunkerch@... writes:
        > If I may, did Scott touch on Battery B's participation in the cornfield
        > action?

        David,

        Indeed, Scott did mention the battery, but nothing beyond the standard
        history as told by Sears and other authors. He noted the battery deployed on
        a rise near Miller Farm and then Stewart's section was ordered forward to the
        next rise (to the astonishment of the gunners, as that spot was amid the
        infantry firefight). The forward position is where the guns sit today. As the
        Rebs approached the section, they began preparing to limber. Gibbon saw this
        and ordered them to continue firing (he realized the Reb would shoot the
        horses and their retreat was doomed). Scott recounted their use of
        double-canister and Gibbon's adjusting of the gun (alas, no mention of
        MOH-winnner Johnny Cook).

        I'm sure you await Scott's book with as much eagerness as I do!

        Tom Shay




        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.