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

Re: [TalkAntietam] No Greater Courage

Expand Messages
  • richard@rcroker.com
    While understanding the you guys are definately NOT my target audience, I nonetheless thought you might like to know...Available now at fine bookstores
    Message 1 of 4 , Mar 4 6:08 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      While understanding the you guys are definately NOT my target audience, I nonetheless thought you might like to know...Available now "at fine bookstores everywhere."


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: <richard@...>
      To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 11:28 AM
      Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Sears on Mc


      > No question -- he didn't fabricate the numbers for purely excusatory
      > reasons. He genuinely believed them. And you couldn't possibly be
      > "righter." A hugely complex personality. In the recent debate, I must say
      > that I occupy the middle ground. I neither admire nor revile the man. He
      > was what he was. It was, in fact, a MUCH more difficult chore to deal with
      > the "why's" of Burnside at Fredericksburg than with Mac at Antietam. I had
      > to jump through some serious hoops to figure out how Ambrose justified that
      > one.
      >
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: "Thomas Clemens" <clemenst@...>
      > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
      > Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 6:48 PM
      > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Sears on Mc
      >
      >
      > > Richard,
      > > I hope you do not think I spanked you, that was certainly not my intent.
      > > I just offered what I think is a more accurate assessment. I will
      > > quote Ezra Carman, Antietam's official historian, a source not consulted
      > > by Williams and (appraently) ignored by Sears.
      > >
      > > "On the 2nd of September McClellan was assigned to the command of
      > > the forces for the defense of Washington, on the 3rd he was ordered to
      > > prepare an army for active operations in the field. By the evening of
      > > the 5th, in less than four days, the defeated, disorganized and
      > > partially demoralized army lying around Washington was ready for the
      > > field. On the morning of the 6th McClellan was verbally assigned to the
      > > command of the army in the field; on the morning of the 19th, after
      > > marching seventy miles and fighting the battles of Crampton's Gap,
      > > Turner's Gap and Antietam, he telegraphed to Halleck: "I have the honor
      > > to report that Maryland is entirely free from the presence of the enemy
      > > who have been driven across the Potomac."
      > >
      > > I would add to that asessment that he was told repeatedly that he was
      > > outnumbered, yet made these attacks anyway. How does that square with
      > > "timidity and moral cowardice?" Also, if he was such a poor general,
      > > why does Lee, after the war, pronounce him the most able general he
      > > faced? Clearly the man was more complex than the caricature that Sears
      > > & Williams created.
      > >
      > > Although it was not written when you did your book, I think you should
      > > read Rafuse's "McClellan's War" as an alternative view to Williams and
      > > Sears. It is the best portrayal of the man, warts and all. Not as
      > > adulutory as Warren Hassler's "Sword and Shield of the Union" which I
      > > guess you did not read, nor as damning as Sears. I highly recommend
      > > it.
      > > Tom Clemens
      > >
      > > Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
      > > Professor of History
      > > Hagerstown Community College
      > >
      > >
      > > >>> richard@... 02/24/06 3:54 PM >>>
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • richard@rcroker.com
      Forgot this page won t allow attachments... trust me -- it looks REAL nice. ... From: To: Sent: Saturday,
      Message 2 of 4 , Mar 4 6:20 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Forgot this page won't allow attachments...

        trust me -- it looks REAL nice.


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: <richard@...>
        To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 9:08 PM
        Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] No Greater Courage


        > While understanding the you guys are definately NOT my target audience, I
        nonetheless thought you might like to know...Available now "at fine
        bookstores everywhere."
        >
        >
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: <richard@...>
        > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
        > Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 11:28 AM
        > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Sears on Mc
        >
        >
        > > No question -- he didn't fabricate the numbers for purely excusatory
        > > reasons. He genuinely believed them. And you couldn't possibly be
        > > "righter." A hugely complex personality. In the recent debate, I must
        say
        > > that I occupy the middle ground. I neither admire nor revile the man.
        He
        > > was what he was. It was, in fact, a MUCH more difficult chore to deal
        with
        > > the "why's" of Burnside at Fredericksburg than with Mac at Antietam. I
        had
        > > to jump through some serious hoops to figure out how Ambrose justified
        that
        > > one.
        > >
        > >
        > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > From: "Thomas Clemens" <clemenst@...>
        > > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
        > > Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 6:48 PM
        > > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Sears on Mc
        > >
        > >
        > > > Richard,
        > > > I hope you do not think I spanked you, that was certainly not my
        intent.
        > > > I just offered what I think is a more accurate assessment. I will
        > > > quote Ezra Carman, Antietam's official historian, a source not
        consulted
        > > > by Williams and (appraently) ignored by Sears.
        > > >
        > > > "On the 2nd of September McClellan was assigned to the command of
        > > > the forces for the defense of Washington, on the 3rd he was ordered to
        > > > prepare an army for active operations in the field. By the evening of
        > > > the 5th, in less than four days, the defeated, disorganized and
        > > > partially demoralized army lying around Washington was ready for the
        > > > field. On the morning of the 6th McClellan was verbally assigned to
        the
        > > > command of the army in the field; on the morning of the 19th, after
        > > > marching seventy miles and fighting the battles of Crampton's Gap,
        > > > Turner's Gap and Antietam, he telegraphed to Halleck: "I have the
        honor
        > > > to report that Maryland is entirely free from the presence of the
        enemy
        > > > who have been driven across the Potomac."
        > > >
        > > > I would add to that asessment that he was told repeatedly that he was
        > > > outnumbered, yet made these attacks anyway. How does that square with
        > > > "timidity and moral cowardice?" Also, if he was such a poor general,
        > > > why does Lee, after the war, pronounce him the most able general he
        > > > faced? Clearly the man was more complex than the caricature that
        Sears
        > > > & Williams created.
        > > >
        > > > Although it was not written when you did your book, I think you should
        > > > read Rafuse's "McClellan's War" as an alternative view to Williams and
        > > > Sears. It is the best portrayal of the man, warts and all. Not as
        > > > adulutory as Warren Hassler's "Sword and Shield of the Union" which I
        > > > guess you did not read, nor as damning as Sears. I highly recommend
        > > > it.
        > > > Tom Clemens
        > > >
        > > > Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
        > > > Professor of History
        > > > Hagerstown Community College
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > >>> richard@... 02/24/06 3:54 PM >>>
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      • NJ Rebel
        Dear Richard, Ask Tom Clemens to announce it on the CWDG.. .it is very relevant there! Yr. Obt. Svt. G E Gerry Mayers ....the powers granted under the
        Message 3 of 4 , Mar 5 12:28 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Richard,

          Ask Tom Clemens to announce it on the CWDG.. .it is very relevant
          there!

          Yr. Obt. Svt.
          G E "Gerry" Mayers

          "....the powers granted under the Constitution, being derived from the
          people of the United States, may be resumed by them, whenever the same
          shall be perverted to their injury or oppression;.."
          Act of State of Virginia adopting the Federal Constitution, 26 June
          1788

          ----- Original Message -----
          From: <richard@...>
          To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 9:20 PM
          Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] No Greater Courage


          > Forgot this page won't allow attachments...
          >
          > trust me -- it looks REAL nice.
          >
          >
          > ----- Original Message -----
          > From: <richard@...>
          > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
          > Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 9:08 PM
          > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] No Greater Courage
          >
          >
          >> While understanding the you guys are definately NOT my target
          >> audience, I
          > nonetheless thought you might like to know...Available now "at fine
          > bookstores everywhere."
          >>
          >>
          >> ----- Original Message -----
          >> From: <richard@...>
          >> To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
          >> Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 11:28 AM
          >> Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Sears on Mc
          >>
          >>
          >> > No question -- he didn't fabricate the numbers for purely
          >> > excusatory
          >> > reasons. He genuinely believed them. And you couldn't possibly
          >> > be
          >> > "righter." A hugely complex personality. In the recent debate,
          >> > I must
          > say
          >> > that I occupy the middle ground. I neither admire nor revile the
          >> > man.
          > He
          >> > was what he was. It was, in fact, a MUCH more difficult chore to
          >> > deal
          > with
          >> > the "why's" of Burnside at Fredericksburg than with Mac at
          >> > Antietam. I
          > had
          >> > to jump through some serious hoops to figure out how Ambrose
          >> > justified
          > that
          >> > one.
          >> >
          >> >
          >> > ----- Original Message -----
          >> > From: "Thomas Clemens" <clemenst@...>
          >> > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
          >> > Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 6:48 PM
          >> > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Sears on Mc
          >> >
          >> >
          >> > > Richard,
          >> > > I hope you do not think I spanked you, that was certainly not
          >> > > my
          > intent.
          >> > > I just offered what I think is a more accurate assessment. I
          >> > > will
          >> > > quote Ezra Carman, Antietam's official historian, a source not
          > consulted
          >> > > by Williams and (appraently) ignored by Sears.
          >> > >
          >> > > "On the 2nd of September McClellan was assigned to the
          >> > > command of
          >> > > the forces for the defense of Washington, on the 3rd he was
          >> > > ordered to
          >> > > prepare an army for active operations in the field. By the
          >> > > evening of
          >> > > the 5th, in less than four days, the defeated, disorganized and
          >> > > partially demoralized army lying around Washington was ready
          >> > > for the
          >> > > field. On the morning of the 6th McClellan was verbally
          >> > > assigned to
          > the
          >> > > command of the army in the field; on the morning of the 19th,
          >> > > after
          >> > > marching seventy miles and fighting the battles of Crampton's
          >> > > Gap,
          >> > > Turner's Gap and Antietam, he telegraphed to Halleck: "I have
          >> > > the
          > honor
          >> > > to report that Maryland is entirely free from the presence of
          >> > > the
          > enemy
          >> > > who have been driven across the Potomac."
          >> > >
          >> > > I would add to that asessment that he was told repeatedly that
          >> > > he was
          >> > > outnumbered, yet made these attacks anyway. How does that
          >> > > square with
          >> > > "timidity and moral cowardice?" Also, if he was such a poor
          >> > > general,
          >> > > why does Lee, after the war, pronounce him the most able
          >> > > general he
          >> > > faced? Clearly the man was more complex than the caricature
          >> > > that
          > Sears
          >> > > & Williams created.
          >> > >
          >> > > Although it was not written when you did your book, I think you
          >> > > should
          >> > > read Rafuse's "McClellan's War" as an alternative view to
          >> > > Williams and
          >> > > Sears. It is the best portrayal of the man, warts and all.
          >> > > Not as
          >> > > adulutory as Warren Hassler's "Sword and Shield of the Union"
          >> > > which I
          >> > > guess you did not read, nor as damning as Sears. I highly
          >> > > recommend
          >> > > it.
          >> > > Tom Clemens
          >> > >
          >> > > Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
          >> > > Professor of History
          >> > > Hagerstown Community College
          >> > >
          >> > >
          >> > > >>> richard@... 02/24/06 3:54 PM >>>
          >> > >
          >> > >
          >> > >
          >> > >
          >> > >
          >> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >> > >
          >> > >
          >> > >
          >> > >
          >> > >
          >> > >
          >> > >
          >> > >
          >> > >
          >> > >
          >> >
          >> >
          >> >
          >> >
          >> >
          >> >
          >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >> >
          >> >
          >> >
          >> >
          >> >
          >> >
          >> >
          >> >
          >> >
          >>
          >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >> Yahoo! Groups Links
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
          >
          > a.. Visit your group "TalkAntietam" on the web.
          >
          > 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
          Cool -- I shall. ... From: NJ Rebel To: Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2006 3:28 PM Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam]
          Message 4 of 4 , Mar 5 2:23 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            Cool -- I shall.
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "NJ Rebel" <gerry1952@...>
            To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2006 3:28 PM
            Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] No Greater Courage


            > Dear Richard,
            >
            > Ask Tom Clemens to announce it on the CWDG.. .it is very relevant
            > there!
            >
            > Yr. Obt. Svt.
            > G E "Gerry" Mayers
            >
            > "....the powers granted under the Constitution, being derived from the
            > people of the United States, may be resumed by them, whenever the same
            > shall be perverted to their injury or oppression;.."
            > Act of State of Virginia adopting the Federal Constitution, 26 June
            > 1788
            >
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: <richard@...>
            > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
            > Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 9:20 PM
            > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] No Greater Courage
            >
            >
            > > Forgot this page won't allow attachments...
            > >
            > > trust me -- it looks REAL nice.
            > >
            > >
            > > ----- Original Message -----
            > > From: <richard@...>
            > > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
            > > Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 9:08 PM
            > > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] No Greater Courage
            > >
            > >
            > >> While understanding the you guys are definately NOT my target
            > >> audience, I
            > > nonetheless thought you might like to know...Available now "at fine
            > > bookstores everywhere."
            > >>
            > >>
            > >> ----- Original Message -----
            > >> From: <richard@...>
            > >> To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
            > >> Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 11:28 AM
            > >> Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Sears on Mc
            > >>
            > >>
            > >> > No question -- he didn't fabricate the numbers for purely
            > >> > excusatory
            > >> > reasons. He genuinely believed them. And you couldn't possibly
            > >> > be
            > >> > "righter." A hugely complex personality. In the recent debate,
            > >> > I must
            > > say
            > >> > that I occupy the middle ground. I neither admire nor revile the
            > >> > man.
            > > He
            > >> > was what he was. It was, in fact, a MUCH more difficult chore to
            > >> > deal
            > > with
            > >> > the "why's" of Burnside at Fredericksburg than with Mac at
            > >> > Antietam. I
            > > had
            > >> > to jump through some serious hoops to figure out how Ambrose
            > >> > justified
            > > that
            > >> > one.
            > >> >
            > >> >
            > >> > ----- Original Message -----
            > >> > From: "Thomas Clemens" <clemenst@...>
            > >> > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
            > >> > Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 6:48 PM
            > >> > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Sears on Mc
            > >> >
            > >> >
            > >> > > Richard,
            > >> > > I hope you do not think I spanked you, that was certainly not
            > >> > > my
            > > intent.
            > >> > > I just offered what I think is a more accurate assessment. I
            > >> > > will
            > >> > > quote Ezra Carman, Antietam's official historian, a source not
            > > consulted
            > >> > > by Williams and (appraently) ignored by Sears.
            > >> > >
            > >> > > "On the 2nd of September McClellan was assigned to the
            > >> > > command of
            > >> > > the forces for the defense of Washington, on the 3rd he was
            > >> > > ordered to
            > >> > > prepare an army for active operations in the field. By the
            > >> > > evening of
            > >> > > the 5th, in less than four days, the defeated, disorganized and
            > >> > > partially demoralized army lying around Washington was ready
            > >> > > for the
            > >> > > field. On the morning of the 6th McClellan was verbally
            > >> > > assigned to
            > > the
            > >> > > command of the army in the field; on the morning of the 19th,
            > >> > > after
            > >> > > marching seventy miles and fighting the battles of Crampton's
            > >> > > Gap,
            > >> > > Turner's Gap and Antietam, he telegraphed to Halleck: "I have
            > >> > > the
            > > honor
            > >> > > to report that Maryland is entirely free from the presence of
            > >> > > the
            > > enemy
            > >> > > who have been driven across the Potomac."
            > >> > >
            > >> > > I would add to that asessment that he was told repeatedly that
            > >> > > he was
            > >> > > outnumbered, yet made these attacks anyway. How does that
            > >> > > square with
            > >> > > "timidity and moral cowardice?" Also, if he was such a poor
            > >> > > general,
            > >> > > why does Lee, after the war, pronounce him the most able
            > >> > > general he
            > >> > > faced? Clearly the man was more complex than the caricature
            > >> > > that
            > > Sears
            > >> > > & Williams created.
            > >> > >
            > >> > > Although it was not written when you did your book, I think you
            > >> > > should
            > >> > > read Rafuse's "McClellan's War" as an alternative view to
            > >> > > Williams and
            > >> > > Sears. It is the best portrayal of the man, warts and all.
            > >> > > Not as
            > >> > > adulutory as Warren Hassler's "Sword and Shield of the Union"
            > >> > > which I
            > >> > > guess you did not read, nor as damning as Sears. I highly
            > >> > > recommend
            > >> > > it.
            > >> > > Tom Clemens
            > >> > >
            > >> > > Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
            > >> > > Professor of History
            > >> > > Hagerstown Community College
            > >> > >
            > >> > >
            > >> > > >>> richard@... 02/24/06 3:54 PM >>>
            > >> > >
            > >> > >
            > >> > >
            > >> > >
            > >> > >
            > >> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
            > >> > >
            > >> > >
            > >> > >
            > >> > >
            > >> > >
            > >> > >
            > >> > >
            > >> > >
            > >> > >
            > >> > >
            > >> >
            > >> >
            > >> >
            > >> >
            > >> >
            > >> >
            > >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
            > >> >
            > >> >
            > >> >
            > >> >
            > >> >
            > >> >
            > >> >
            > >> >
            > >> >
            > >>
            > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            > >>
            > >>
            > >>
            > >>
            > >>
            > >> Yahoo! Groups Links
            > >>
            > >>
            > >>
            > >>
            > >>
            > >>
            > >>
            > >>
            > >>
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
            > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
            ------
            > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
            > >
            > > a.. Visit your group "TalkAntietam" on the web.
            > >
            > > 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.