RE: Jackson, D.H. Hill, and Longstreet Who's posting here?
- Brian Downey wrote:
> That said, I encourage more people to post items for discussion.OK, lets see if we can get the ball rolling with this one. Came across
> That's why the group is here. It has been rather too quiet, but
> please try to stay on track - Antietam - okay?
an interesting reference the other day that concerns Jackson, his
brother in law, D.H. Hill and indirectly Pete Longstreet. Most sources
agree that Jackson was all in favor of Lee's dividing the army in order
to invest Harper's Ferry. However D.H. Hill related in a letter he wrote
to one of Jackson's staff members in 1864 that in Dec. of 1862 Jackson
told Hill "At the council held at Frederick I opposed the separation of
our forces in order to capture Harper's Ferry. I urged that we should
all be kept together." Which would seemingly indicate that at least on
this occasion Stonewall was in agreement with Pete. And if this is so
that Lee flew in the face of the advice from both his corps commanders.
- In a message dated 5/27/01 9:36:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
Most sources agree that Jackson was all in favor of Lee's dividing the army
to invest Harper's Ferry.
Very few of these sources are first hand. Interestingly, one of the only
first hand sources that show this is that of Longstreet himself. Now, either
Pete recalled it correctly, recalled it incorrectly, or, as he asserts he was
against the move, and felt it was a mistake, perhaps he said Jackson was in
agreement to cast an aspersion. Hmmmm......