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

Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: how it really happened

Expand Messages
  • richard@rcroker.com
    As to the way it really happened conversation -- here s my view. That is true of almost EVERYTHING we know about individuals in history. Did the Robert E.
    Message 1 of 6 , Jun 21, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      As to "the way it really happened" conversation -- here's my view. That is true of almost EVERYTHING we know about individuals in history. Did the Robert E. Lee/Robert E. Lee, Jr. story really happen? It sounds contrived to me. But so much does. While researching my second book, I came across the story of the color guard private who lost a hand at Fredericksburg, and didn't drop the flag. He just shifted it to his "remaining" hand and continued up Marye's Heights. Then he lost that hand as well and clutched the staff against his chest and continued up Marye's Heights, eventually asking his CO's permission to return to the rear for medical assistance. Sound contrived? Uh -- yeah. Until you see the photograph of the bold and handless kid -- then it takes on some credibility.

      But so much of what was written -- even after action reports -- take on such an attitude of vainglorious self aggrandizement as to make much of what we "know" doubtful. Even if it is verified by additional sources we have to be careful. If Fitz John Porter says something good about McClellan or bad about Pope, we still have to consider the source. Both sides had effective and sophisticated propoganda machines as well. This is why I write "history as fiction." It is my contention that to a certain extent all history is flavored with fiction.

      In closing -- a quotation. I was once a documentary filmmaker working on a TLC project about ancient Rome. I asked a scholar, "How much of what we hear about the truly degenerate emperors of Rome are we to believe?" This is what he said -- (imagine a THICK, aristocratic, British accent -- it's far more entertaining that way.)

      History is NOT an objective reportage of the facts. The history of Rome was written by the aristocracy and the aristocracy had an interest in belittling the emperors. Well, you can't belittle an emperor while he's living -- so you belittle him -- WHILE HE'S DEAD.

      Just an observation (and a bit of a "rant.")

      Richard

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: <bdowney@...>
      To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 10:48 PM
      Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Armistead


      > Thanks Teej,
      >
      > This is just the kind of thing I needed. It clears up the apparent conflict nicely. Thanks
      > also for popping this one to the surface Mr Croker.
      >
      > Brian
      >
      > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
      > From: "Teej Smith" <teej@...>
      > Date sent: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:09:29 -0400
      > Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Armistead was] Re: West Point @ Antietam
      > Send reply to: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > > Brian,
      > >
      > > In his monograph titled "Trust in God and Fear Nothing" : Gen. Lewis A.
      > > Armistead, CSA, Wayne Motts wrote, "Emboldened by his success at Second
      > > Manassas, Lee launched an offensive into Maryland that culminated in the
      > > Battle of Sharpsburg (Antietam to northerners), but here again, Armistead
      > > saw limited action. In early September, while serving in the Confederate
      > > division commanded by Major General Richard H. Anderson, Armistead was
      > > appointed Provost Marshal of the Army of Northern Virginia. He served on
      > > this assignment until September 26, 1862., and from all accounts, his
      > > brigade remained with him as his guard for the task. Brought in at
      > > Sharpsburg, his brigade arrived on the field on the morning of September 17,
      > > but instead of joining their division near the sunken road were held back in
      > > support of McLaw's Division near the Dunker Church. Here the troops of the
      > > Union Second Army Corps had been beaten off, and Armistead's men were needed
      > > to shore up the Confederate defenses in the area. Uncomfortable at being
      > > held in reserve, Armistead stood in front of the brigade anxiously awaiting
      > > the call for battle. Incredibly, a stray cannon ball rolled over the hill
      > > and struck him on the foot, thereby putting him out of action. Although not
      > > seriously injured he was compelled to relinquish his command to Colonel
      > > James G. Hodges and leave the field."...."During the Maryland campaign
      > > Armistead's five regiments reported only thirty-five casualties."
      > >
      > > Regards,
      > > Teej
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Harry Smeltzer
      What I was referring to regarding Hill/McClellan is the popular story that Hill wished to extract some sort of revenge on McClellan. If Hill was looking for
      Message 2 of 6 , Jun 21, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        What I was referring to regarding Hill/McClellan is the popular story that
        Hill wished to extract some sort of revenge on McClellan. If Hill was
        looking for revenge against anybody, it would have been Mac's chief-of-staff
        and father-in-law, Marcy, or more probably his wife. The issue was not one
        of preference by Mary Ellen between Mac and Powell, but rather her parents
        and their disapproval of Hill.



        Harry



        -----Original Message-----
        From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com] On
        Behalf Of richard@...
        Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 8:52 AM
        To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: how it really happened



        As to "the way it really happened" conversation -- here's my view. That is
        true of almost EVERYTHING we know about individuals in history. Did the
        Robert E. Lee/Robert E. Lee, Jr. story really happen? It sounds contrived
        to me. But so much does. While researching my second book, I came across
        the story of the color guard private who lost a hand at Fredericksburg, and
        didn't drop the flag. He just shifted it to his "remaining" hand and
        continued up Marye's Heights. Then he lost that hand as well and clutched
        the staff against his chest and continued up Marye's Heights, eventually
        asking his CO's permission to return to the rear for medical assistance.
        Sound contrived? Uh -- yeah. Until you see the photograph of the bold and
        handless kid -- then it takes on some credibility.

        But so much of what was written -- even after action reports -- take on such
        an attitude of vainglorious self aggrandizement as to make much of what we
        "know" doubtful. Even if it is verified by additional sources we have to be
        careful. If Fitz John Porter says something good about McClellan or bad
        about Pope, we still have to consider the source. Both sides had effective
        and sophisticated propoganda machines as well. This is why I write "history
        as fiction." It is my contention that to a certain extent all history is
        flavored with fiction.

        In closing -- a quotation. I was once a documentary filmmaker working on a
        TLC project about ancient Rome. I asked a scholar, "How much of what we
        hear about the truly degenerate emperors of Rome are we to believe?" This
        is what he said -- (imagine a THICK, aristocratic, British accent -- it's
        far more entertaining that way.)

        History is NOT an objective reportage of the facts. The history of Rome was
        written by the aristocracy and the aristocracy had an interest in belittling
        the emperors. Well, you can't belittle an emperor while he's living -- so
        you belittle him -- WHILE HE'S DEAD.

        Just an observation (and a bit of a "rant.")

        Richard

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: <bdowney@...>
        To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 10:48 PM
        Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Armistead


        > Thanks Teej,
        >
        > This is just the kind of thing I needed. It clears up the apparent
        conflict nicely. Thanks
        > also for popping this one to the surface Mr Croker.
        >
        > Brian
        >
        > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
        > From: "Teej Smith" <teej@...>
        > Date sent: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:09:29 -0400
        > Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Armistead was] Re: West Point @
        Antietam
        > Send reply to: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > > Brian,
        > >
        > > In his monograph titled "Trust in God and Fear Nothing" : Gen. Lewis
        A.
        > > Armistead, CSA, Wayne Motts wrote, "Emboldened by his success at Second
        > > Manassas, Lee launched an offensive into Maryland that culminated in the

        > > Battle of Sharpsburg (Antietam to northerners), but here again,
        Armistead
        > > saw limited action. In early September, while serving in the Confederate

        > > division commanded by Major General Richard H. Anderson, Armistead was
        > > appointed Provost Marshal of the Army of Northern Virginia. He served on

        > > this assignment until September 26, 1862., and from all accounts, his
        > > brigade remained with him as his guard for the task. Brought in at
        > > Sharpsburg, his brigade arrived on the field on the morning of September
        17,
        > > but instead of joining their division near the sunken road were held
        back in
        > > support of McLaw's Division near the Dunker Church. Here the troops of
        the
        > > Union Second Army Corps had been beaten off, and Armistead's men were
        needed
        > > to shore up the Confederate defenses in the area. Uncomfortable at being

        > > held in reserve, Armistead stood in front of the brigade anxiously
        awaiting
        > > the call for battle. Incredibly, a stray cannon ball rolled over the
        hill
        > > and struck him on the foot, thereby putting him out of action. Although
        not
        > > seriously injured he was compelled to relinquish his command to Colonel
        > > James G. Hodges and leave the field."...."During the Maryland campaign
        > > Armistead's five regiments reported only thirty-five casualties."
        > >
        > > Regards,
        > > Teej
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]









        _____

        Yahoo! Groups Links

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


        * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        <mailto:TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>


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



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Teej Smith
        ... I agree with you, Harry, mostly because everything I ve read indicates that the marriage between Hill and Kitty was a happy one. However, at the same
        Message 3 of 6 , Jun 21, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Harry Smeltzer wrote:


          > What I was referring to regarding Hill/McClellan is the popular story that
          > Hill wished to extract some sort of revenge on McClellan. If Hill was
          > looking for revenge against anybody, it would have been Mac's
          > chief-of-staff
          > and father-in-law, Marcy, or more probably his wife. The issue was not
          > one
          > of preference by Mary Ellen between Mac and Powell, but rather her parents
          > and their disapproval of Hill.

          I agree with you, Harry, mostly because everything I've read indicates
          that the marriage between Hill and Kitty was a happy one. However, at the
          same time, I don't doubt the story that those facing Hill did call out, "Why
          didn't you marry him, Nell?"

          Teej
        • richard@rcroker.com
          I believe the quote is, If my daughter marries you she will lead a life of poverty, exile and depravation. By the tinme Antietam rolled around, Little
          Message 4 of 6 , Jun 21, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            I believe the quote is, "If my daughter marries you she will lead a life of
            poverty, exile and depravation." By the tinme Antietam rolled around,
            Little Powell was very happy with his own wife and hopelessly devoted to
            Nettie (I believe), his toddling daughter (who Hill was informed died as he
            prepared for action on Dec 13, '62). Actually, if Powell arrived on the
            field with an attitude that day, it was to prove something not to Mary Ellen
            or Mac or Marcy...It was Stonewall...
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@...>
            To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 10:00 AM
            Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] Re: how it really happened


            > What I was referring to regarding Hill/McClellan is the popular story that
            > Hill wished to extract some sort of revenge on McClellan. If Hill was
            > looking for revenge against anybody, it would have been Mac's
            chief-of-staff
            > and father-in-law, Marcy, or more probably his wife. The issue was not
            one
            > of preference by Mary Ellen between Mac and Powell, but rather her parents
            > and their disapproval of Hill.
            >
            >
            >
            > Harry
            >
            >
            >
            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com]
            On
            > Behalf Of richard@...
            > Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 8:52 AM
            > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: how it really happened
            >
            >
            >
            > As to "the way it really happened" conversation -- here's my view. That
            is
            > true of almost EVERYTHING we know about individuals in history. Did the
            > Robert E. Lee/Robert E. Lee, Jr. story really happen? It sounds contrived
            > to me. But so much does. While researching my second book, I came across
            > the story of the color guard private who lost a hand at Fredericksburg,
            and
            > didn't drop the flag. He just shifted it to his "remaining" hand and
            > continued up Marye's Heights. Then he lost that hand as well and clutched
            > the staff against his chest and continued up Marye's Heights, eventually
            > asking his CO's permission to return to the rear for medical assistance.
            > Sound contrived? Uh -- yeah. Until you see the photograph of the bold
            and
            > handless kid -- then it takes on some credibility.
            >
            > But so much of what was written -- even after action reports -- take on
            such
            > an attitude of vainglorious self aggrandizement as to make much of what we
            > "know" doubtful. Even if it is verified by additional sources we have to
            be
            > careful. If Fitz John Porter says something good about McClellan or bad
            > about Pope, we still have to consider the source. Both sides had
            effective
            > and sophisticated propoganda machines as well. This is why I write
            "history
            > as fiction." It is my contention that to a certain extent all history is
            > flavored with fiction.
            >
            > In closing -- a quotation. I was once a documentary filmmaker working on
            a
            > TLC project about ancient Rome. I asked a scholar, "How much of what we
            > hear about the truly degenerate emperors of Rome are we to believe?" This
            > is what he said -- (imagine a THICK, aristocratic, British accent -- it's
            > far more entertaining that way.)
            >
            > History is NOT an objective reportage of the facts. The history of Rome
            was
            > written by the aristocracy and the aristocracy had an interest in
            belittling
            > the emperors. Well, you can't belittle an emperor while he's living -- so
            > you belittle him -- WHILE HE'S DEAD.
            >
            > Just an observation (and a bit of a "rant.")
            >
            > Richard
            >
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: <bdowney@...>
            > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
            > Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 10:48 PM
            > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Armistead
            >
            >
            > > Thanks Teej,
            > >
            > > This is just the kind of thing I needed. It clears up the apparent
            > conflict nicely. Thanks
            > > also for popping this one to the surface Mr Croker.
            > >
            > > Brian
            > >
            > > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
            > > From: "Teej Smith" <teej@...>
            > > Date sent: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:09:29 -0400
            > > Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Armistead was] Re: West Point @
            > Antietam
            > > Send reply to: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
            > >
            > > > Brian,
            > > >
            > > > In his monograph titled "Trust in God and Fear Nothing" : Gen.
            Lewis
            > A.
            > > > Armistead, CSA, Wayne Motts wrote, "Emboldened by his success at
            Second
            > > > Manassas, Lee launched an offensive into Maryland that culminated in
            the
            >
            > > > Battle of Sharpsburg (Antietam to northerners), but here again,
            > Armistead
            > > > saw limited action. In early September, while serving in the
            Confederate
            >
            > > > division commanded by Major General Richard H. Anderson, Armistead was
            > > > appointed Provost Marshal of the Army of Northern Virginia. He served
            on
            >
            > > > this assignment until September 26, 1862., and from all accounts, his
            > > > brigade remained with him as his guard for the task. Brought in at
            > > > Sharpsburg, his brigade arrived on the field on the morning of
            September
            > 17,
            > > > but instead of joining their division near the sunken road were held
            > back in
            > > > support of McLaw's Division near the Dunker Church. Here the troops of
            > the
            > > > Union Second Army Corps had been beaten off, and Armistead's men were
            > needed
            > > > to shore up the Confederate defenses in the area. Uncomfortable at
            being
            >
            > > > held in reserve, Armistead stood in front of the brigade anxiously
            > awaiting
            > > > the call for battle. Incredibly, a stray cannon ball rolled over the
            > hill
            > > > and struck him on the foot, thereby putting him out of action.
            Although
            > not
            > > > seriously injured he was compelled to relinquish his command to
            Colonel
            > > > James G. Hodges and leave the field."...."During the Maryland campaign
            > > > Armistead's five regiments reported only thirty-five casualties."
            > > >
            > > > Regards,
            > > > Teej
            > > >
            > > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Yahoo! Groups Links
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > _____
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            > * To visit your group on the web, go to:
            > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
            >
            >
            > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            > <mailto:TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
            >
            >
            > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
            > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Service.
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
          • G E Mayers
            Richard, I believe you are correct. Also, IIRC, didn t Stonewall put him under arrest just before Cedar Mountain? Very respectfully, G E Gerry Mayers
            Message 5 of 6 , Jun 21, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Richard,

              I believe you are correct. Also, IIRC, didn't Stonewall put him under arrest
              just before Cedar Mountain?

              Very respectfully,
              G E "Gerry" Mayers
              Confederate Signal Corps,
              Longstreet's Corps



              ----- Original Message -----
              From: <richard@...>
              To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 11:44 AM
              Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: how it really happened


              >I believe the quote is, "If my daughter marries you she will lead a life of
              > poverty, exile and depravation." By the tinme Antietam rolled around,
              > Little Powell was very happy with his own wife and hopelessly devoted to
              > Nettie (I believe), his toddling daughter (who Hill was informed died as
              > he
              > prepared for action on Dec 13, '62). Actually, if Powell arrived on the
              > field with an attitude that day, it was to prove something not to Mary
              > Ellen
              > or Mac or Marcy...It was Stonewall...
              > ----- Original Message -----
              > From: "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@...>
              > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
              > Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 10:00 AM
              > Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] Re: how it really happened
              >
              >
              >> What I was referring to regarding Hill/McClellan is the popular story
              >> that
              >> Hill wished to extract some sort of revenge on McClellan. If Hill was
              >> looking for revenge against anybody, it would have been Mac's
              > chief-of-staff
              >> and father-in-law, Marcy, or more probably his wife. The issue was not
              > one
              >> of preference by Mary Ellen between Mac and Powell, but rather her
              >> parents
              >> and their disapproval of Hill.
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >> Harry
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >> -----Original Message-----
              >> From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com]
              > On
              >> Behalf Of richard@...
              >> Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 8:52 AM
              >> To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
              >> Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: how it really happened
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >> As to "the way it really happened" conversation -- here's my view. That
              > is
              >> true of almost EVERYTHING we know about individuals in history. Did the
              >> Robert E. Lee/Robert E. Lee, Jr. story really happen? It sounds
              >> contrived
              >> to me. But so much does. While researching my second book, I came
              >> across
              >> the story of the color guard private who lost a hand at Fredericksburg,
              > and
              >> didn't drop the flag. He just shifted it to his "remaining" hand and
              >> continued up Marye's Heights. Then he lost that hand as well and
              >> clutched
              >> the staff against his chest and continued up Marye's Heights, eventually
              >> asking his CO's permission to return to the rear for medical assistance.
              >> Sound contrived? Uh -- yeah. Until you see the photograph of the bold
              > and
              >> handless kid -- then it takes on some credibility.
              >>
              >> But so much of what was written -- even after action reports -- take on
              > such
              >> an attitude of vainglorious self aggrandizement as to make much of what
              >> we
              >> "know" doubtful. Even if it is verified by additional sources we have to
              > be
              >> careful. If Fitz John Porter says something good about McClellan or bad
              >> about Pope, we still have to consider the source. Both sides had
              > effective
              >> and sophisticated propoganda machines as well. This is why I write
              > "history
              >> as fiction." It is my contention that to a certain extent all history is
              >> flavored with fiction.
              >>
              >> In closing -- a quotation. I was once a documentary filmmaker working on
              > a
              >> TLC project about ancient Rome. I asked a scholar, "How much of what we
              >> hear about the truly degenerate emperors of Rome are we to believe?"
              >> This
              >> is what he said -- (imagine a THICK, aristocratic, British accent -- it's
              >> far more entertaining that way.)
              >>
              >> History is NOT an objective reportage of the facts. The history of Rome
              > was
              >> written by the aristocracy and the aristocracy had an interest in
              > belittling
              >> the emperors. Well, you can't belittle an emperor while he's living --
              >> so
              >> you belittle him -- WHILE HE'S DEAD.
              >>
              >> Just an observation (and a bit of a "rant.")
              >>
              >> Richard
              >>
              >> ----- Original Message -----
              >> From: <bdowney@...>
              >> To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
              >> Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 10:48 PM
              >> Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Armistead
              >>
              >>
              >> > Thanks Teej,
              >> >
              >> > This is just the kind of thing I needed. It clears up the apparent
              >> conflict nicely. Thanks
              >> > also for popping this one to the surface Mr Croker.
              >> >
              >> > Brian
              >> >
              >> > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
              >> > From: "Teej Smith" <teej@...>
              >> > Date sent: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:09:29 -0400
              >> > Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Armistead was] Re: West Point @
              >> Antietam
              >> > Send reply to: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
              >> >
              >> > > Brian,
              >> > >
              >> > > In his monograph titled "Trust in God and Fear Nothing" : Gen.
              > Lewis
              >> A.
              >> > > Armistead, CSA, Wayne Motts wrote, "Emboldened by his success at
              > Second
              >> > > Manassas, Lee launched an offensive into Maryland that culminated in
              > the
              >>
              >> > > Battle of Sharpsburg (Antietam to northerners), but here again,
              >> Armistead
              >> > > saw limited action. In early September, while serving in the
              > Confederate
              >>
              >> > > division commanded by Major General Richard H. Anderson, Armistead
              >> > > was
              >> > > appointed Provost Marshal of the Army of Northern Virginia. He served
              > on
              >>
              >> > > this assignment until September 26, 1862., and from all accounts, his
              >> > > brigade remained with him as his guard for the task. Brought in at
              >> > > Sharpsburg, his brigade arrived on the field on the morning of
              > September
              >> 17,
              >> > > but instead of joining their division near the sunken road were held
              >> back in
              >> > > support of McLaw's Division near the Dunker Church. Here the troops
              >> > > of
              >> the
              >> > > Union Second Army Corps had been beaten off, and Armistead's men were
              >> needed
              >> > > to shore up the Confederate defenses in the area. Uncomfortable at
              > being
              >>
              >> > > held in reserve, Armistead stood in front of the brigade anxiously
              >> awaiting
              >> > > the call for battle. Incredibly, a stray cannon ball rolled over the
              >> hill
              >> > > and struck him on the foot, thereby putting him out of action.
              > Although
              >> not
              >> > > seriously injured he was compelled to relinquish his command to
              > Colonel
              >> > > James G. Hodges and leave the field."...."During the Maryland
              >> > > campaign
              >> > > Armistead's five regiments reported only thirty-five casualties."
              >> > >
              >> > > Regards,
              >> > > Teej
              >> > >
              >> > >
              >> >
              >> >
              >> >
              >> >
              >> >
              >> >
              >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >> >
              >> >
              >> >
              >> >
              >> >
              >> >
              >> >
              >> >
              >> >
              >>
              >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >> _____
              >>
              >> Yahoo! Groups Links
              >>
              >> * To visit your group on the web, go to:
              >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
              >>
              >>
              >> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              >> TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >> <mailto:TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
              >>
              >>
              >> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
              >> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Service.
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >> Yahoo! Groups Links
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
              > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
              >
              > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              > TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
              >
              >
            • richard@rcroker.com
              I don t think he arrested home before Cedar Mountain. He yelled at him, but didn t arrest him. The arrest was after 2nd Manassas. ... From: G E Mayers
              Message 6 of 6 , Jun 21, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                I don't think he arrested home before Cedar Mountain. He yelled at him, but
                didn't arrest him. The arrest was after 2nd Manassas.
                ----- Original Message -----
                From: "G E Mayers" <gerry1952@...>
                To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 11:53 AM
                Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: how it really happened


                > Richard,
                >
                > I believe you are correct. Also, IIRC, didn't Stonewall put him under
                arrest
                > just before Cedar Mountain?
                >
                > Very respectfully,
                > G E "Gerry" Mayers
                > Confederate Signal Corps,
                > Longstreet's Corps
                >
                >
                >
                > ----- Original Message -----
                > From: <richard@...>
                > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                > Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 11:44 AM
                > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: how it really happened
                >
                >
                > >I believe the quote is, "If my daughter marries you she will lead a life
                of
                > > poverty, exile and depravation." By the tinme Antietam rolled around,
                > > Little Powell was very happy with his own wife and hopelessly devoted to
                > > Nettie (I believe), his toddling daughter (who Hill was informed died as
                > > he
                > > prepared for action on Dec 13, '62). Actually, if Powell arrived on the
                > > field with an attitude that day, it was to prove something not to Mary
                > > Ellen
                > > or Mac or Marcy...It was Stonewall...
                > > ----- Original Message -----
                > > From: "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@...>
                > > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                > > Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 10:00 AM
                > > Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] Re: how it really happened
                > >
                > >
                > >> What I was referring to regarding Hill/McClellan is the popular story
                > >> that
                > >> Hill wished to extract some sort of revenge on McClellan. If Hill was
                > >> looking for revenge against anybody, it would have been Mac's
                > > chief-of-staff
                > >> and father-in-law, Marcy, or more probably his wife. The issue was not
                > > one
                > >> of preference by Mary Ellen between Mac and Powell, but rather her
                > >> parents
                > >> and their disapproval of Hill.
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >> Harry
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >> -----Original Message-----
                > >> From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
                [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com]
                > > On
                > >> Behalf Of richard@...
                > >> Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 8:52 AM
                > >> To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
                > >> Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: how it really happened
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >> As to "the way it really happened" conversation -- here's my view.
                That
                > > is
                > >> true of almost EVERYTHING we know about individuals in history. Did
                the
                > >> Robert E. Lee/Robert E. Lee, Jr. story really happen? It sounds
                > >> contrived
                > >> to me. But so much does. While researching my second book, I came
                > >> across
                > >> the story of the color guard private who lost a hand at Fredericksburg,
                > > and
                > >> didn't drop the flag. He just shifted it to his "remaining" hand and
                > >> continued up Marye's Heights. Then he lost that hand as well and
                > >> clutched
                > >> the staff against his chest and continued up Marye's Heights,
                eventually
                > >> asking his CO's permission to return to the rear for medical
                assistance.
                > >> Sound contrived? Uh -- yeah. Until you see the photograph of the bold
                > > and
                > >> handless kid -- then it takes on some credibility.
                > >>
                > >> But so much of what was written -- even after action reports -- take on
                > > such
                > >> an attitude of vainglorious self aggrandizement as to make much of what
                > >> we
                > >> "know" doubtful. Even if it is verified by additional sources we have
                to
                > > be
                > >> careful. If Fitz John Porter says something good about McClellan or
                bad
                > >> about Pope, we still have to consider the source. Both sides had
                > > effective
                > >> and sophisticated propoganda machines as well. This is why I write
                > > "history
                > >> as fiction." It is my contention that to a certain extent all history
                is
                > >> flavored with fiction.
                > >>
                > >> In closing -- a quotation. I was once a documentary filmmaker working
                on
                > > a
                > >> TLC project about ancient Rome. I asked a scholar, "How much of what
                we
                > >> hear about the truly degenerate emperors of Rome are we to believe?"
                > >> This
                > >> is what he said -- (imagine a THICK, aristocratic, British accent --
                it's
                > >> far more entertaining that way.)
                > >>
                > >> History is NOT an objective reportage of the facts. The history of
                Rome
                > > was
                > >> written by the aristocracy and the aristocracy had an interest in
                > > belittling
                > >> the emperors. Well, you can't belittle an emperor while he's living --
                > >> so
                > >> you belittle him -- WHILE HE'S DEAD.
                > >>
                > >> Just an observation (and a bit of a "rant.")
                > >>
                > >> Richard
                > >>
                > >> ----- Original Message -----
                > >> From: <bdowney@...>
                > >> To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                > >> Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 10:48 PM
                > >> Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Armistead
                > >>
                > >>
                > >> > Thanks Teej,
                > >> >
                > >> > This is just the kind of thing I needed. It clears up the apparent
                > >> conflict nicely. Thanks
                > >> > also for popping this one to the surface Mr Croker.
                > >> >
                > >> > Brian
                > >> >
                > >> > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                > >> > From: "Teej Smith" <teej@...>
                > >> > Date sent: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 18:09:29 -0400
                > >> > Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Armistead was] Re: West Point @
                > >> Antietam
                > >> > Send reply to: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
                > >> >
                > >> > > Brian,
                > >> > >
                > >> > > In his monograph titled "Trust in God and Fear Nothing" : Gen.
                > > Lewis
                > >> A.
                > >> > > Armistead, CSA, Wayne Motts wrote, "Emboldened by his success at
                > > Second
                > >> > > Manassas, Lee launched an offensive into Maryland that culminated
                in
                > > the
                > >>
                > >> > > Battle of Sharpsburg (Antietam to northerners), but here again,
                > >> Armistead
                > >> > > saw limited action. In early September, while serving in the
                > > Confederate
                > >>
                > >> > > division commanded by Major General Richard H. Anderson, Armistead
                > >> > > was
                > >> > > appointed Provost Marshal of the Army of Northern Virginia. He
                served
                > > on
                > >>
                > >> > > this assignment until September 26, 1862., and from all accounts,
                his
                > >> > > brigade remained with him as his guard for the task. Brought in at
                > >> > > Sharpsburg, his brigade arrived on the field on the morning of
                > > September
                > >> 17,
                > >> > > but instead of joining their division near the sunken road were
                held
                > >> back in
                > >> > > support of McLaw's Division near the Dunker Church. Here the troops
                > >> > > of
                > >> the
                > >> > > Union Second Army Corps had been beaten off, and Armistead's men
                were
                > >> needed
                > >> > > to shore up the Confederate defenses in the area. Uncomfortable at
                > > being
                > >>
                > >> > > held in reserve, Armistead stood in front of the brigade anxiously
                > >> awaiting
                > >> > > the call for battle. Incredibly, a stray cannon ball rolled over
                the
                > >> hill
                > >> > > and struck him on the foot, thereby putting him out of action.
                > > Although
                > >> not
                > >> > > seriously injured he was compelled to relinquish his command to
                > > Colonel
                > >> > > James G. Hodges and leave the field."...."During the Maryland
                > >> > > campaign
                > >> > > Armistead's five regiments reported only thirty-five casualties."
                > >> > >
                > >> > > Regards,
                > >> > > Teej
                > >> > >
                > >> > >
                > >> >
                > >> >
                > >> >
                > >> >
                > >> >
                > >> >
                > >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
                > >> >
                > >> >
                > >> >
                > >> >
                > >> >
                > >> >
                > >> >
                > >> >
                > >> >
                > >>
                > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >> _____
                > >>
                > >> Yahoo! Groups Links
                > >>
                > >> * To visit your group on the web, go to:
                > >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
                > >>
                > >>
                > >> * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                > >> TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                > >> <mailto:TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >> * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                > >> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Service.
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >> Yahoo! Groups Links
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >>
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                >
                > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                ------
                > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                > >
                > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
                > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
                > >
                > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                > > TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                > >
                > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                Service.
                > >
                > >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.