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

RE: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee and McClellan -- My bad

Expand Messages
  • Harry Smeltzer
    I did miss that one. In fact, I missed a bunch because I didn t notice there were more pages. But yes, I think the 9th is the earliest mention of Mac in the
    Message 1 of 53 , Sep 18, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      I did miss that one. In fact, I missed a bunch because I didn't notice
      there were more pages. But yes, I think the 9th is the earliest mention of
      Mac in the field.

      I think we have a case of working backwards from a diagnosis. Certain
      authors desperately want to demonstrate Lee's superiority and Mac's
      ineptitude by insisting that Lee's movements were based on his assessment of
      his opponent, because (perhaps) evidence that Lee's supposed opinion mirrors
      that of the author lends their theories gravitas. Then, any little thing
      that can be said to support that theory is trucked out to imply that the
      facts lead to the conclusion, rather than the other way around.

      Harry



      -----Original Message-----
      From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com] On
      Behalf Of William H Keene
      Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 9:54 AM
      To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee and McClellan -- My bad



      --- In TalkAntietam@ <mailto:TalkAntietam%40yahoogroups.com>
      yahoogroups.com, "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@...> wrote:
      >
      > That's OK, Will. The long and short of it seems to be that, if Lee
      was
      > using the NYT for his info, he would not have known that Mac was in
      command
      > of an army in the field until the 12th ....

      See my other posting. I have a different take on some of the articles,
      but I think the first clear indication that Mac was in the field could
      have come on the 9th. I think we agree that this had no bearing on the
      writing of the SO.





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • eighth_conn_inf
      Looking at Brown pp. 241 and 325 LT Miner occupied SL on 9/3 and sent his last message on 9/5. See also OR s vol. 19/1 p. 117 et seq, and 19/2 p. 184/186. If
      Message 53 of 53 , Sep 19, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Looking at Brown pp. 241 and 325 LT Miner occupied SL on 9/3 and sent
        his last message on 9/5. See also OR's vol. 19/1 p. 117 et seq, and
        19/2 p. 184/186. If anyone finds anything more re messages to/from
        Miner, pls let me know.

        Larry F.


        --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "G E Mayers" <gerry1952@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > They might have either successfully gotten a message off about
        > shutting down or, since IIRC according to Willard Brown's book,
        > they were told to keep reporting as long as possible, were caught
        > before they could shut down?
        >
        > Yr. Obt. Svt.
        > G E "Gerry" Mayers
        >
        > To Be A Virginian, either by birth, marriage, adoption, or even
        > on one's mother's side, is an introduction to any state in the
        > Union, a passport to any foreign country, and a benediction from
        > the Almighty God. --Anonymous
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: "eighth_conn_inf" <eighth_conn_inf@...>
        > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
        > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 5:27 PM
        > Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee and McClellan -- The Baltimore
        > Sun
        >
        >
        > Now there is a twist. What if just after the Rebs took Sugarloaf,
        > a
        > Union station closer to DC signaled to Sugarloaf station re
        > McClellan. But I think that the SL Station told everyone that
        > they
        > were shutting down since the Rebs were close.
        >
        > Larry F.
        >
        > --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "G E Mayers" <gerry1952@>
        > wrote:
        > >
        > > This begs another question... how "leaky" was the Federal
        > > communications system? IIRC, the Confederates captured Sugar
        > > Loaf
        > > Mountain, where there was a Federal signal station, not too
        > > long
        > > upon their entrance into Maryland. If there were any messages
        > > to
        > > the Signal Station implying Mac was "back in the saddle", would
        > > not those messages have made their way to Lee?
        > >
        > > Yr. Obt. Svt.
        > > G E "Gerry" Mayers
        > >
        > > To Be A Virginian, either by birth, marriage, adoption, or even
        > > on one's mother's side, is an introduction to any state in the
        > > Union, a passport to any foreign country, and a benediction
        > > from
        > > the Almighty God. --Anonymous
        > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > From: "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@>
        > > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
        > > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 2:10 PM
        > > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee and McClellan -- The
        > > Baltimore Sun
        > >
        > >
        > > >I don't know, Teej. It seems to me any of these stories would
        > > >be originating in DC. So, we would have telegraphs from DC to
        > > >Baltimore, or DC to New York. I don't think Stuart had any of
        > > >his cavalrymen along the lines between those places.
        > > >
        > > > Ahh, coeds.
        > > >
        > > > Harry
        > > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > > From: Teej
        > > > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
        > > > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 11:38 AM
        > > > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee and McClellan -- The
        > > > Baltimore Sun
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Harry wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Also, how exactly do we think Lee got his hands on these
        > > > papers?
        > > > They were IIRC all printed in the cities of their origin -
        > > > how
        > > > did they get
        > > > to and through the Confederate pickets and vedettes?
        > > >
        > > > One thought to consider. How did the newspapers get their
        > > > stories from their journalists? Telegraph. While I know it's
        > > > a
        > > > stretch, isn't it possible that if Lee had access to any of
        > > > these news items he got them from the wires via his
        > > > fun-loving
        > > > cavalry chieftan?
        > > >
        > > > BTW, Harry, the next time I take you to UNC it will be in
        > > > the
        > > > dead of winter and all those pretty coeds you admired so much
        > > > last time will be wearing OVERCOATS! There, I feel sooooooo
        > > > much better.
        > > >
        > > > Teej
        > > >
        > > > Harry
        > > >
        > > > -----Original Message-----
        > > > From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
        > > > [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com] On
        > > > Behalf Of William H Keene
        > > > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 10:08 AM
        > > > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
        > > > Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Lee and McClellan -- The
        > > > Baltimore
        > > > Sun
        > > >
        > > > I've been looking at the Baltimore Sun articles from the
        > > > time
        > > > in
        > > > question. Through the Boston Public Library online I can
        > > > access a
        > > > database called 'America's Historical Newspapers.' One has
        > > > to
        > > > have a a
        > > > BPL card tp get in the way I did, but I wonder if others can
        > > > access the
        > > > same thing through their own libraries.
        > > >
        > > > On the 4th the Sun reported that McCellan had "assumed
        > > > command
        > > > of the
        > > > entire federal forces in and around Washington."
        > > >
        > > > On the 8th the Sun reported that "McClellan will take the
        > > > field
        > > > immediately."
        > > >
        > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > >
        > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.