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

Re: [TalkAntietam] RE: Jackson, D.H. Hill, and Longstreet Who's posting here?

Expand Messages
  • TR Livesey
    Teej Smith wrote: Which would seemingly indicate that at least on ... It seems to me that (if true) the incident only reinforce the degree of respect that Lee
    Message 1 of 6 , May 28, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Teej Smith wrote:
      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.
      > Thoughts?
      >
      > Regards,
      > Teej
      >
      >
      >

      It seems to me that (if true) the incident only reinforce the degree
      of respect that Lee and Jackson had for each other, in that even
      is disagreement, Lee still trusted Jackson to carry out the plan,
      and Jackson trusted Lee enough to go through with it. Although I
      am not very familiar with the Chancellorsville campaign, I understand
      that Jackson opposed Lee's plan to move on Hooker's right; nonetheless,
      after the 'Last Parting' Jackson executed the plan whole-heartedly.

      I fail to see how anyone could enter SO 191 without reservations, even
      Jackson. As Dr Harsh points out, it was not until Lee wanted to
      recross the Antietam at Williamsburg after the battle of the 17th
      that the ANV command structure started to break down, and that Lee's
      wishes would no longer translate into action. The point is that
      Lee enjoyed a very unusual degree of loyalty, regardless of reservations
      actually felt by his lieutenants.

      Regards,
      TR Livesey
      westwood@...
    • NJ Rebel
      Todd-- In Charles Marshall s book published in paperback by Bison Books on his being an Aide to Lee, Marshall mentions this very disagreement between Lee and
      Message 2 of 6 , May 28, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Todd--

        In Charles Marshall's book published in paperback by Bison Books
        on his being an Aide to Lee, Marshall mentions this very
        disagreement between Lee and Jackson regarding the
        Chanceillorsville operation. Marshall also then added a curious
        comment about that whatever disagreements Jackson had with Lee's
        opinions or tactical thoughts, once ordered to perform a certain
        operation, Jackson embraced the operation as if it were his own.
        Longstreet, however, on the other hand continued to dissent and
        disagree.

        I can find the actual quote if you do not have the book and would
        like to see it. (But not tonight...maybe tomorrow.............)

        Your humble servant,
        Gerry Mayers
        Co. B, "Tom Green Rifles",
        Fourth Regiment, Texas Volunteer Infantry

        "I know of no fitter resting-place for a soldier than the field
        on which he has nobly laid down his life." --General Robert
        Edward Lee


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "TR Livesey" <westwood@...>
        To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 11:32 AM
        Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] RE: Jackson, D.H. Hill, and
        Longstreet Who's posting here?


        > Teej Smith wrote:
        > 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.
        > > Thoughts?
        > >
        > > Regards,
        > > Teej
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        > It seems to me that (if true) the incident only reinforce the
        degree
        > of respect that Lee and Jackson had for each other, in that
        even
        > is disagreement, Lee still trusted Jackson to carry out the
        plan,
        > and Jackson trusted Lee enough to go through with it. Although
        I
        > am not very familiar with the Chancellorsville campaign, I
        understand
        > that Jackson opposed Lee's plan to move on Hooker's right;
        nonetheless,
        > after the 'Last Parting' Jackson executed the plan
        whole-heartedly.
        >
        > I fail to see how anyone could enter SO 191 without
        reservations, even
        > Jackson. As Dr Harsh points out, it was not until Lee wanted to
        > recross the Antietam at Williamsburg after the battle of the
        17th
        > that the ANV command structure started to break down, and that
        Lee's
        > wishes would no longer translate into action. The point is that
        > Lee enjoyed a very unusual degree of loyalty, regardless of
        reservations
        > actually felt by his lieutenants.
        >
        > Regards,
        > TR Livesey
        > westwood@...
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
        Service.
        >
        >
      • hjs21@aol.com
        In a message dated 5/28/01 10:56:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, ... Actually, in this book it was not really Marshall who made this observation. It was rather
        Message 3 of 6 , May 28, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          In a message dated 5/28/01 10:56:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
          gerry1952@... writes:


          Marshall also then added a curious
          comment about that whatever disagreements Jackson had with Lee's
          opinions or tactical thoughts, once ordered to perform a certain
          operation, Jackson embraced the operation as if it were his own.
          Longstreet, however, on the other hand continued to dissent and
          disagree.



          Actually, in this book it was not really Marshall who made this observation.  
          It was rather the editor, Frederick Maurice, who shows in his writong that he
          bought the Lost Cause position on Longstreet hook, line, and sinker.   
          Specifically, the sentences run like this: " He [Marshall] says that whenever
          Jackson disagreed with a plan of Lee's, he said so; but having stated his
          objection, he always deferred to Lee's decision and executed his orders with
          as much zeal and energy as if he designed the plan himself.  Longstreet, on
          the other hand, when he disagreed with Lee, always maintained that his own
          plan was best, and to the last moment of action endeavored to get his plan
          adopted."  Notice the second sentence does not state that it is Marshall's
          opinion.  Very clever.

          The Chancellorsville section of the book is curious in that it is made up
          primarily of the editor's opinion of what Marshall was trying to say in other
          letters/writings, not reproduced.  It is neat to read, though.  Maurice, like
          Krick, always works in some snide remark about Longstreet even when it is not
          gremaine to the topic.

          Harry
        • hjs21@aol.com
          Sorry, I meant germane. Harry
          Message 4 of 6 , May 28, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            Sorry, I meant germane.

            Harry
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.