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

RE: [TalkAntietam] Wings

Expand Messages
  • Harry Smeltzer
    Tom, Then why was Burnside still acting as wing commander, and Cox as 9th Corps commander? Harry ... From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
    Message 1 of 25 , Aug 16, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Tom,



      Then why was Burnside still acting as wing commander, and Cox as 9th Corps
      commander?



      Harry



      -----Original Message-----
      From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com] On
      Behalf Of Thomas Clemens
      Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 7:51 AM
      To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Wings



      Steve,
      The "wings" order was made offiical on Sept. 14, by Special Order. See
      p. 290, OR, Vol. 19 pt. 2. It was suspended on Sept. 15, see p. 297,
      op. cit.
      The best summary of casualtires by location that I have seen is one made
      up by the interp staff and I carry in my notebook. I'll be happy to
      make a copy for you, or talk to Keith.
      Tom

      Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
      Professor of History
      Hagerstown Community College


      >>> recker@... 08/15/05 5:02 PM >>>









      _____

      YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



      * Visit your group "TalkAntietam
      <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam> " on the web.


      * 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!
      <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.



      _____



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Stephen Recker
      It is interesting that taking one of two corps out of a wing could be considered a detachment. I smell intrigue. I ve heard the the Burnside, in his
      Message 2 of 25 , Aug 16, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        It is interesting that taking one of two corps out of a wing could be
        considered a detachment. I smell intrigue.

        I've heard the the Burnside, in his supernumary (sp?) position was
        either in his tent most of the morning or standing next to Cox
        intimidating him. Which was it? Thanks.

        Stephen

        On Monday, August 15, 2005, at 05:14 PM, Harry Smeltzer wrote:

        > I don't think the Wing structure was dissolved. In fact, Burnside was
        > still
        > a wing commander - Hooker was detached. This left Burnside with only
        > one
        > corps in his wing, 9th Corps. Cox was in direct command of 9th Corps.
        > Burnside really served no useful purpose in this case, though orders
        > from
        > army command were still filtered through his staff to Cox. This
        > situation
        > has been described as contributing to the troubles at the Lower Bridge.
        >
      • Stephen Recker
        Interesting thought. Stephen
        Message 3 of 25 , Aug 16, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Interesting thought.

          Stephen

          On Monday, August 15, 2005, at 10:52 PM, G E Mayers wrote:

          > Could it possibly be due to the fact that Mansfield had "no" combat
          > experience prior to being given command of the 12th Corps?
        • Stephen Recker
          Gerry, Thanks for this recommendation. I think they have this at the Antietam bookstore. I ll check it out. Stephen
          Message 4 of 25 , Aug 16, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Gerry,

            Thanks for this recommendation. I think they have this at the Antietam
            bookstore. I'll check it out.

            Stephen

            On Monday, August 15, 2005, at 10:53 PM, G E Mayers wrote:

            > Dear Stephen,
            >
            > I am not sure, but John Nelson has an excellent CD detailing the
            > Federal
            > casualties and a listing of all the Field Hospitals. Would this be
            > helpful?
            >
            > Very respectfully,
            > G E "Gerry" Mayers
          • Stephen Recker
            Tom, Thanks for pointing me to this. I have a stack of park brochures and found it in there. It is really helpful. Actually I never really looked through this
            Message 5 of 25 , Aug 16, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Tom,

              Thanks for pointing me to this. I have a stack of park brochures and
              found it in there. It is really helpful.

              Actually I never really looked through this stack of brochures, but
              there is some really great stuff in hear. The Antietam bookstore sells
              the whole bunch for about $1. What a great deal.

              Stephen



              On Tuesday, August 16, 2005, at 08:51 AM, Thomas Clemens wrote:

              > The best summary of casualtires by location that I have seen is one
              > made
              > up by the interp staff and I carry in my notebook. I'll be happy to
              > make a copy for you, or talk to Keith.
              > Tom
            • Stephen Recker
              Excellent. I ll look these up. Thanks. There is a sad irony in the second note - Brig. Gen. J. K. F. Mansfield is TEMPORARILY assigned to the command of
              Message 6 of 25 , Aug 16, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                Excellent. I'll look these up. Thanks.

                There is a sad irony in the second note - "Brig. Gen. J. K. F.
                Mansfield is TEMPORARILY assigned to the command of Bank's (12) corps."

                Stephen

                On Tuesday, August 16, 2005, at 08:51 AM, Thomas Clemens wrote:

                > The "wings" order was made offiical on Sept. 14, by Special Order. See
                > p. 290, OR, Vol. 19 pt. 2. It was suspended on Sept. 15, see p. 297,
                > op. cit.
              • Harry Smeltzer
                Is that the set that comes in a zip-lock baggie? I think I have that as well. Harry ... From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
                Message 7 of 25 , Aug 16, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  Is that the set that comes in a zip-lock baggie? I think I have that as
                  well.



                  Harry



                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com] On
                  Behalf Of Stephen Recker
                  Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 8:33 AM
                  To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Wings



                  Tom,

                  Thanks for pointing me to this. I have a stack of park brochures and
                  found it in there. It is really helpful.

                  Actually I never really looked through this stack of brochures, but
                  there is some really great stuff in hear. The Antietam bookstore sells
                  the whole bunch for about $1. What a great deal.

                  Stephen



                  On Tuesday, August 16, 2005, at 08:51 AM, Thomas Clemens wrote:

                  > The best summary of casualtires by location that I have seen is one
                  > made
                  > up by the interp staff and I carry in my notebook. I'll be happy to
                  > make a copy for you, or talk to Keith.
                  > Tom









                  _____

                  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



                  * Visit your group "TalkAntietam
                  <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam> " on the web.


                  * 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!
                  <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.



                  _____



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Stephen Recker
                  I am trying to get a handle on the number of casualties in the Morning Phase of the battle of Antietam. In the NPS pamphlet called Casualties of Battle it
                  Message 8 of 25 , Aug 24, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I am trying to get a handle on the number of casualties in the Morning
                    Phase of the battle of Antietam. In the NPS pamphlet called "Casualties
                    of Battle" it states that there were 13,860 casualties in the morning
                    phase. In the Cornfield Trail pamphlet it states that 'as many as 8,000
                    men were killed or wounded from dawn until 9:00 am'.

                    I have seen this range stated in a number of places. Is there a
                    distinction that I am missing between the two numbers? Thanks.

                    Stephen Recker
                  • Thomas Clemens
                    It sounds until 9:00 does not include the West Woods action. That would account for at least some of the disparity. I will look at Carman s chart tonight
                    Message 9 of 25 , Aug 24, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      It sounds "until 9:00" does not include the West Woods action. That
                      would account for at least some of the disparity. I will look at
                      Carman's chart tonight and get back to you.
                      Tom Clemens

                      >>> recker@... 8/24/2005 11:00:05 AM >>>

                      I am trying to get a handle on the number of casualties in the Morning

                      Phase of the battle of Antietam. In the NPS pamphlet called "Casualties

                      of Battle" it states that there were 13,860 casualties in the morning
                      phase. In the Cornfield Trail pamphlet it states that 'as many as 8,000

                      men were killed or wounded from dawn until 9:00 am'.

                      I have seen this range stated in a number of places. Is there a
                      distinction that I am missing between the two numbers? Thanks.

                      Stephen Recker








                      SPONSORED LINKS
                      Civil war history Civil war battles Civil war
                      YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

                      Visit your group "TalkAntietam" on the web.
                      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.






                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Stephen Recker
                      Thanks, Tom. And the lower number doesn t seem to include captures, although that number is less than one thousand. Stephen Recker
                      Message 10 of 25 , Aug 25, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Thanks, Tom. And the lower number doesn't seem to include captures,
                        although that number is less than one thousand.

                        Stephen Recker

                        On Wednesday, August 24, 2005, at 11:33 AM, Thomas Clemens wrote:

                        >
                        > It sounds "until 9:00" does not include the West Woods action. That
                        > would account for at least some of the disparity. I will look at
                        > Carman's chart tonight and get back to you.
                        > Tom Clemens
                      • rotbaron@aol.com
                        Stephen, Antietam casualties are broken out on the NPS webpage at: http://www.nps.gov/anti/casualty.htm Tom Shay - Cresssona, PA [Non-text portions of this
                        Message 11 of 25 , Aug 25, 2005
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Stephen,

                          Antietam casualties are broken out on the NPS webpage at:
                          http://www.nps.gov/anti/casualty.htm

                          Tom Shay - Cresssona, PA



                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Stephen Recker
                          Thanks. These statistics make Tom Clemens case that the pamphlet I was looking at did not include the West Woods. Awesome. Thanks to both Toms. Stephen
                          Message 12 of 25 , Aug 25, 2005
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Thanks. These statistics make Tom Clemens' case that the pamphlet I was
                            looking at did not include the West Woods. Awesome. Thanks to both Toms.

                            Stephen

                            On Thursday, August 25, 2005, at 11:59 AM, rotbaron@... wrote:

                            >
                            > Stephen,
                            >
                            > Antietam casualties are broken out on the NPS webpage at:
                            > http://www.nps.gov/anti/casualty.htm
                            >
                            > Tom Shay - Cresssona, PA
                          • dickeyr46
                            Stephen, just as reinforcement to the two Toms conclusions, Dr. Harsh in Taken at the Flood also addresses casualties up to 9 am and then the total for the
                            Message 13 of 25 , Aug 25, 2005
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Stephen, just as reinforcement to the two Toms' conclusions, Dr. Harsh
                              in "Taken at the Flood" also addresses casualties up to 9 am and then
                              the total for the "Morning Phase." Addressing up to 9 am (the
                              Cornfield and East Woods), on p. 376, Dr. Harsh writes, "In all,
                              during the three hours, 27,000 men had struggled over the same 160
                              acres and 8,700 (32.2 percent) had fallen." I believe I can accounted
                              for 604 missing from units engaged up to this time. If you subtract
                              the missing, that comes very close to the "Cornfield Trail" pamphlet
                              statement of "as many as 8,000 men were killed or wounded."

                              Dr. Harsh concluded on p. 394 that 4,481 caualties occured during the
                              fighting in the West Woods and around the Dunker Church. This includes
                              casualties suffered by Col. Irwin's brigade in the vicinity of the
                              Dunker Church, less those of the 7th Maine. On p. 395, he gives 13,179
                              for the total "Morning Phase". Again, very close to the NPS morning
                              phase casualty number.

                              Dr. Harsh references Section K of Chapter 9 of "Sounding the Shallows"
                              to address allocating casualties for units when divisions and even
                              regiments could be split between phases.

                              Ron Dickey

                              --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, Stephen Recker <recker@v...> wrote:
                              > Thanks. These statistics make Tom Clemens' case that the pamphlet I was
                              > looking at did not include the West Woods. Awesome. Thanks to both Toms.
                              >
                              > Stephen
                            • Stephen Recker
                              Great stuff. Thanks. Stephen
                              Message 14 of 25 , Aug 25, 2005
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Great stuff. Thanks.

                                Stephen

                                On Thursday, August 25, 2005, at 05:15 PM, dickeyr46 wrote:

                                > Stephen, just as reinforcement to the two Toms' conclusions, Dr. Harsh
                                > in "Taken at the Flood" also addresses casualties up to 9 am and then
                                > the total for the "Morning Phase." Addressing up to 9 am (the
                                > Cornfield and East Woods), on p. 376, Dr. Harsh writes, "In all,
                                > during the three hours, 27,000 men had struggled over the same 160
                                > acres and 8,700 (32.2 percent) had fallen." I believe I can accounted
                                > for 604 missing from units engaged up to this time. If you subtract
                                > the missing, that comes very close to the "Cornfield Trail" pamphlet
                                > statement of "as many as 8,000 men were killed or wounded."
                                >
                                > Dr. Harsh concluded on p. 394 that 4,481 caualties occured during the
                                > fighting in the West Woods and around the Dunker Church. This includes
                                > casualties suffered by Col. Irwin's brigade in the vicinity of the
                                > Dunker Church, less those of the 7th Maine. On p. 395, he gives 13,179
                                > for the total "Morning Phase". Again, very close to the NPS morning
                                > phase casualty number.
                                >
                                > Dr. Harsh references Section K of Chapter 9 of "Sounding the Shallows"
                                > to address allocating casualties for units when divisions and even
                                > regiments could be split between phases.
                                >
                                > Ron Dickey
                                >
                                > --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, Stephen Recker <recker@v...>
                                > wrote:
                                >> Thanks. These statistics make Tom Clemens' case that the pamphlet I
                                >> was
                                >> looking at did not include the West Woods. Awesome. Thanks to both
                                >> Toms.
                                >>
                                >> Stephen
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.