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

RE: [TalkAntietam] Re: AoP Cavalry on Maryland Campaign

Expand Messages
  • Harry Smeltzer
    An erroneous conclusion to be sure, but also understandable given the contents of SO 191. ... From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
    Message 1 of 16 , Jan 8, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      An erroneous conclusion to be sure, but also understandable given the
      contents of SO 191.



      -----Original Message-----
      From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com] On
      Behalf Of flagflop
      Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2006 11:09 PM
      To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: AoP Cavalry on Maryland Campaign



      Harry,
      In Ed Fishel's 1996 "Secret War for the Union," (p. 234), Fishel
      wrestled with the basis for Mac's (erroneous) conclusion that
      Jackson had arrived on the field at Sharpsburg on 15 Sep. He
      suggested that it may have been due simply to Mac's hearing the
      cheers at Sharpsburg (over news of the fall of HF), mis-interpreting
      that as arrival of major reenforcement, asking himself (based on SO
      191) which force that would likely be, and assuming Jackson...for
      Jackson was not concerned with HF, but Martinsburg, and thus most
      likely to have finished his task and rejoined Lee. Fishel describes
      this as "Of all the erroneous conclusions about enemy movements and
      positions that McClellan made after acquiring Lee's order, this one
      was the most damaging." I tend to agree with that: in other words,
      Mac accepted that (per SO 191) the reduction of HF was the primary
      task of McLaws' guns on Md Hgts, with a modest assist from Walker to
      block down-stream exit. He was unaware of Jackson's arrival there to
      invest the post and the delay in SO 191's time-table.
      Dave Gaddy


      --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@c...>
      wrote:
      >
      > Dave,
      >
      >
      >
      > This leads me to ask a question to which I have never received an
      adequate
      > response:
      >
      >
      >
      > Given that SO 191 placed Jackson's command at Martinsburg and
      under no
      > circumstance directed him to Harper's Ferry, and given the lack of
      > communication between HF and McClellan as you have described, what
      was the
      > earliest McClellan could have been aware of Jackson's - not
      McLaws', not
      > Walker's, but Jackson's - presence at HF, and how did he receive
      that
      > information?
      >
      >
      >
      > Harry
      >
      >
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com] On
      > Behalf Of flagflop
      > Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 8:51 PM
      > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: AoP Cavalry on Maryland Campaign
      >
      >
      >
      > Mac had no telegraphic communication with HF, and the small signal
      unit
      > posted on Md Hgts withdrew ("on their own"), effectively denying
      visual
      > signal communication to the east at the very time its was most
      needed. (I've
      > found no indication that signal communication was attempted
      between McLaws
      > and D.H. Hill, Longstreet, or GHQ either.)
      >
      > Maybe I should save this for "Harpers Ferry on the Web"!
      >
      > Dave Gaddy
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > SPONSORED LINKS
      >
      >
      > Civil
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
      t=ms&k=Civil+war+history&w1=Civil+war+history&
      >
      w2=Civil+war+battles&w3=Civil+war&c=3&s=61&.sig=M8mjKWQfCOoomJUxcwVT2
      g> war
      > history
      >
      > Civil
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
      t=ms&k=Civil+war+battles&w1=Civil+war+history&
      >
      w2=Civil+war+battles&w3=Civil+war&c=3&s=61&.sig=KUuQ3QIWEfplrXjsZ8AXx
      Q> war
      > battles
      >
      > Civil
      > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
      t=ms&k=Civil+war&w1=Civil+war+history&w2=Civil
      > +war+battles&w3=Civil+war&c=3&s=61&.sig=BbC2G-g28wRDSuP_hgFILA>
      war
      >
      >
      >
      > _____
      >
      > 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]
      >













      _____

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