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

re: laissez faire

Expand Messages
  • Dave
    I think Gerry might be referring to an attitude where Lee would let things unfold, not changing his plans whether Pope or Mac was in charge of the army. I
    Message 1 of 14 , Sep 18, 2008
      I think Gerry might be referring to an attitude where Lee would let
      things unfold, not changing his plans whether Pope or Mac was in charge
      of the army. I think he thought he knew each of them well enough to
      know their tendencies. But, as Harsh points out, he was caught a
      little short, perhaps.

      But what a great question of how those Baltimore papers got to Lee so
      fast. I've wondered about that for a long time. Thanks for all the
      great discussion, please keep it up!

      Dave


      What is meant by laissez faire attitude?

      --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      <mailto:TalkAntietam%40yahoogroups.com>, "G E Mayers" <gerry1952@.

      ..>
      wrote:
      >
      > Dear Harry,
      >
      > I wonder if he started the campaign thinking Pope was in command
      > of the AoP? That might explain his almost laissez faire
      > attitude.....
      >
      > When did he know for sure Mac was his opponent?
      >
      > 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
    • Harry Smeltzer
      Personally, I m not sure the papers did get to Lee, and even if they did, they were contradictory and also held a lot of bad info. I think Lee was acting in an
      Message 2 of 14 , Sep 18, 2008
        Personally, I'm not sure the papers did get to Lee, and even if they did,
        they were contradictory and also held a lot of bad info.

        I think Lee was acting in an intel vacuum, exacerbated by Stuart's crappy
        performance. Lee had no idea where the Union army was when he determined to
        make the movements on Martinsburg and Harper's Ferry. It was that day,
        Sept. 9, which doomed his campaign to failure.

        Harry



        -----Original Message-----
        From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com] On
        Behalf Of Dave
        Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 4:33 PM
        To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [TalkAntietam] re: laissez faire



        I think Gerry might be referring to an attitude where Lee would let
        things unfold, not changing his plans whether Pope or Mac was in charge
        of the army. I think he thought he knew each of them well enough to
        know their tendencies. But, as Harsh points out, he was caught a
        little short, perhaps.

        But what a great question of how those Baltimore papers got to Lee so
        fast. I've wondered about that for a long time. Thanks for all the
        great discussion, please keep it up!

        Dave

        What is meant by laissez faire attitude?

        --- In TalkAntietam@ <mailto:TalkAntietam%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com

        <mailto:TalkAntietam%40yahoogroups.com>, "G E Mayers" <gerry1952@.

        ..>
        wrote:
        >
        > Dear Harry,
        >
        > I wonder if he started the campaign thinking Pope was in command
        > of the AoP? That might explain his almost laissez faire
        > attitude.....
        >
        > When did he know for sure Mac was his opponent?
        >
        > 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





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Thomas Clemens
        Larry will, no doubt, chime in, but it interests me that the day after Stuart s outposts are probed, while he was dancing in Urbana, Lee decides to split the
        Message 3 of 14 , Sep 18, 2008
          Larry will, no doubt, chime in, but it interests me that the day after Stuart's outposts are probed, while he was dancing in Urbana, Lee decides to split the army. Either Stuart did not report the probe to Lee, or Lee dismissed its seriousness. Neither consequence reflects well on either person.

          Dr. Thomas G. Clemens
          Professor of History
          Hagerstown Community College




          >>> "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@...> 9/18/2008 3:37 PM >>>

          Personally, I'm not sure the papers did get to Lee, and even if they did,
          they were contradictory and also held a lot of bad info.

          I think Lee was acting in an intel vacuum, exacerbated by Stuart's crappy
          performance. Lee had no idea where the Union army was when he determined to
          make the movements on Martinsburg and Harper's Ferry. It was that day,
          Sept. 9, which doomed his campaign to failure.

          Harry

          -----Original Message-----
          From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com] On
          Behalf Of Dave
          Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 4:33 PM
          To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [TalkAntietam] re: laissez faire

          I think Gerry might be referring to an attitude where Lee would let
          things unfold, not changing his plans whether Pope or Mac was in charge
          of the army. I think he thought he knew each of them well enough to
          know their tendencies. But, as Harsh points out, he was caught a
          little short, perhaps.

          But what a great question of how those Baltimore papers got to Lee so
          fast. I've wondered about that for a long time. Thanks for all the
          great discussion, please keep it up!

          Dave

          What is meant by laissez faire attitude?

          --- In TalkAntietam@ <mailto:TalkAntietam%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com

          <mailto:TalkAntietam%40yahoogroups.com>, "G E Mayers" <gerry1952@.

          ..>
          wrote:
          >
          > Dear Harry,
          >
          > I wonder if he started the campaign thinking Pope was in command
          > of the AoP? That might explain his almost laissez faire
          > attitude.....
          >
          > When did he know for sure Mac was his opponent?
          >
          > 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

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




          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Dave
          I m mystified why Lee would trust Stuart as much as he did. Makes me wonder if they weren t medicating Lee for his hands. Even Jeff Davis was getting
          Message 4 of 14 , Sep 18, 2008
            I'm mystified why Lee would trust Stuart as much as he did. Makes me
            wonder if they weren't medicating Lee for his hands. Even Jeff Davis
            was getting parallel reports of Lee's actions through Pendleton, as any
            competent CEO would do.

            And Harry is right, there is no citation for the newspaper reading in
            Harsh, merely one referring to the papers themselves. Where did this
            come from?

            Since this is foreign word day, perhaps we may want to consider "hubris"
            for Lee.

            Dave



            Larry will, no doubt, chime in, but it interests me that the day after
            Stuart's outposts are probed, while he was dancing in Urbana, Lee
            decides to split the army. Either Stuart did not report the probe to
            Lee, or Lee dismissed its seriousness. Neither consequence reflects well
            on either person.

            Dr. Thomas G. Clemens
            Professor of History
            Hagerstown Community College


            >>> "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@... <mailto:hjs21%40comcast.net>>
            9/18/2008 3:37 PM >>>

            Personally, I'm not sure the papers did get to Lee, and even if they did,
            they were contradictory and also held a lot of bad info.

            I think Lee was acting in an intel vacuum, exacerbated by Stuart's crappy
            performance. Lee had no idea where the Union army was when he determined to
            make the movements on Martinsburg and Harper's Ferry. It was that day,
            Sept. 9, which doomed his campaign to failure.

            Harry
          • eighth_conn_inf
            Perhaps since Lee/Stuart expected little action from the DC direction, neither felt it necessary to aggresively probe thru Parr s Ridge. Anyway, they also
            Message 5 of 14 , Sep 18, 2008
              Perhaps since Lee/Stuart expected little action from the DC
              direction, neither felt it necessary to aggresively probe thru Parr's
              Ridge. Anyway, they also believed based on the last three months,
              Lee's army could handle anything McClellan or Pope or Burnside or
              Halleck or Hitchcock could throw at them.

              While Lee had only been in command of the AONV for a short time, he
              knew Stuart, Longstreet, et al from the old army so likely trusted
              them. Indeed, as Harsh points out, at this time invading MD and then
              PA was the best alternative Lee had and as McPherson points out,
              could have forced the North to the barganing table if England/France
              intervened. Besides, Lee wanted the Union troops to come out and
              chase him then once they were west of South Mountain, demolish them
              as he wanted to do on the Peninsula and at Second Bull Run but could
              not. This not to just cause bloodshed, but to influence the 1862
              elections and the European powers. Lee knew he had to win the war
              ASAP or it was just a matter of time. The Northern public was a major
              factor in Lee's thinking, I think.

              Larry F.

              --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, Dave <gewehr@...> wrote:
              >
              > I'm mystified why Lee would trust Stuart as much as he did. Makes
              me
              > wonder if they weren't medicating Lee for his hands. Even Jeff
              Davis
              > was getting parallel reports of Lee's actions through Pendleton, as
              any
              > competent CEO would do.
              >
              > And Harry is right, there is no citation for the newspaper reading
              in
              > Harsh, merely one referring to the papers themselves. Where did
              this
              > come from?
              >
              > Since this is foreign word day, perhaps we may want to
              consider "hubris"
              > for Lee.
              >
              > Dave
              >
              >
              >
              > Larry will, no doubt, chime in, but it interests me that the day
              after
              > Stuart's outposts are probed, while he was dancing in Urbana, Lee
              > decides to split the army. Either Stuart did not report the probe
              to
              > Lee, or Lee dismissed its seriousness. Neither consequence reflects
              well
              > on either person.
              >
              > Dr. Thomas G. Clemens
              > Professor of History
              > Hagerstown Community College
              >
              >
              > >>> "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@... <mailto:hjs21%40comcast.net>>
              > 9/18/2008 3:37 PM >>>
              >
              > Personally, I'm not sure the papers did get to Lee, and even if
              they did,
              > they were contradictory and also held a lot of bad info.
              >
              > I think Lee was acting in an intel vacuum, exacerbated by Stuart's
              crappy
              > performance. Lee had no idea where the Union army was when he
              determined to
              > make the movements on Martinsburg and Harper's Ferry. It was that
              day,
              > Sept. 9, which doomed his campaign to failure.
              >
              > Harry
              >
            • G E Mayers
              Tom, How much did Lee s injuries incurred during the close of 2nd Manassas campaign detract from his performance in Maryland? I think this is a factor also
              Message 6 of 14 , Sep 18, 2008
                Tom,

                How much did Lee's injuries incurred during the close of 2nd
                Manassas campaign detract from his performance in Maryland? I
                think this is a factor also often overlooked. IIRC Harsh does
                give this some discussion in TATF.

                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: "Thomas Clemens" <clemenst@...>
                To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 4:53 PM
                Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] re: laissez faire


                > Larry will, no doubt, chime in, but it interests me that the
                > day after Stuart's outposts are probed, while he was dancing in
                > Urbana, Lee decides to split the army. Either Stuart did not
                > report the probe to Lee, or Lee dismissed its seriousness.
                > Neither consequence reflects well on either person.
                >
                > Dr. Thomas G. Clemens
                > Professor of History
                > Hagerstown Community College
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >>>> "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@...> 9/18/2008 3:37 PM >>>
                >
                > Personally, I'm not sure the papers did get to Lee, and even if
                > they did,
                > they were contradictory and also held a lot of bad info.
                >
                > I think Lee was acting in an intel vacuum, exacerbated by
                > Stuart's crappy
                > performance. Lee had no idea where the Union army was when he
                > determined to
                > make the movements on Martinsburg and Harper's Ferry. It was
                > that day,
                > Sept. 9, which doomed his campaign to failure.
                >
                > Harry
                >
                > -----Original Message-----
                > From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
                > [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com] On
                > Behalf Of Dave
                > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 4:33 PM
                > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
                > Subject: [TalkAntietam] re: laissez faire
                >
                > I think Gerry might be referring to an attitude where Lee would
                > let
                > things unfold, not changing his plans whether Pope or Mac was
                > in charge
                > of the army. I think he thought he knew each of them well
                > enough to
                > know their tendencies. But, as Harsh points out, he was caught
                > a
                > little short, perhaps.
                >
                > But what a great question of how those Baltimore papers got to
                > Lee so
                > fast. I've wondered about that for a long time. Thanks for all
                > the
                > great discussion, please keep it up!
                >
                > Dave
                >
                > What is meant by laissez faire attitude?
                >
                > --- In TalkAntietam@ <mailto:TalkAntietam%40yahoogroups.com>
                > yahoogroups.com
                >
                > <mailto:TalkAntietam%40yahoogroups.com>, "G E Mayers"
                > <gerry1952@.
                >
                > ..>
                > wrote:
                >>
                >> Dear Harry,
                >>
                >> I wonder if he started the campaign thinking Pope was in
                >> command
                >> of the AoP? That might explain his almost laissez faire
                >> attitude.....
                >>
                >> When did he know for sure Mac was his opponent?
                >>
                >> 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
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
                >
              • William H Keene
                ... did, ... I would add that I dont think the name of the commander made a difference to Lee. ... crappy ... determined to ... day, ... Could you expand on
                Message 7 of 14 , Sep 18, 2008
                  --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Personally, I'm not sure the papers did get to Lee, and even if they
                  did,
                  > they were contradictory and also held a lot of bad info.

                  I would add that I dont think the name of the commander made a
                  difference to Lee.

                  > I think Lee was acting in an intel vacuum, exacerbated by Stuart's
                  crappy
                  > performance. Lee had no idea where the Union army was when he
                  determined to
                  > make the movements on Martinsburg and Harper's Ferry. It was that
                  day,
                  > Sept. 9, which doomed his campaign to failure.

                  Could you expand on this point. In my opinion he had to clear out the
                  US forces in the lower valley in order to establish a connection to a
                  base at Winchester. Should he have moved the whole army to HF?
                • Harry Smeltzer
                  I think that the actual proximity of the enemy to Lee s army on, and the speed of its movements up to, the 9th (as opposed to where he thought it was and how
                  Message 8 of 14 , Sep 18, 2008
                    I think that the actual proximity of the enemy to Lee's army on, and the
                    speed of its movements up to, the 9th (as opposed to where he thought it was
                    and how fast he thought it was moving) made the success of the Martinsburg
                    and Harper's Ferry expeditions (as planned) unlikely. It may have been time
                    for Lee to rethink everything, not just the two garrisons.

                    Harry



                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com [mailto:TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com] On
                    Behalf Of William H Keene
                    Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 10:21 PM
                    To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: laissez faire



                    --- In TalkAntietam@ <mailto:TalkAntietam%40yahoogroups.com>
                    yahoogroups.com, "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Personally, I'm not sure the papers did get to Lee, and even if they
                    did,
                    > they were contradictory and also held a lot of bad info.

                    I would add that I dont think the name of the commander made a
                    difference to Lee.

                    > I think Lee was acting in an intel vacuum, exacerbated by Stuart's
                    crappy
                    > performance. Lee had no idea where the Union army was when he
                    determined to
                    > make the movements on Martinsburg and Harper's Ferry. It was that
                    day,
                    > Sept. 9, which doomed his campaign to failure.

                    Could you expand on this point. In my opinion he had to clear out the
                    US forces in the lower valley in order to establish a connection to a
                    base at Winchester. Should he have moved the whole army to HF?





                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • William H Keene
                    ... the ... it was ... Martinsburg ... I disagree. The speed of the US army was slow up to that point. Lee s mistake was in using the speed of the 4th - 8th
                    Message 9 of 14 , Sep 19, 2008
                      --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > I think that the actual proximity of the enemy to Lee's army on, and
                      the
                      > speed of its movements up to, the 9th (as opposed to where he thought
                      it was
                      > and how fast he thought it was moving) made the success of the
                      Martinsburg
                      > and Harper's Ferry expeditions (as planned) unlikely.

                      I disagree. The speed of the US army was slow up to that point.
                      Lee's mistake was in using the speed of the 4th - 8th as a basis for
                      decision making about the 9th - 13th.
                    • G E Mayers
                      Whey did the AoP marching speed increase on the 9th? IIRC the AoP speed if you want to call it that really did not increase...and maybe by not much...until
                      Message 10 of 14 , Sep 19, 2008
                        Whey did the AoP marching speed increase on the 9th? IIRC the AoP
                        "speed" if you want to call it that really did not increase...and
                        maybe by not much...until the 13th/14th.

                        There is, of course, no way Lee could have foreseen that the
                        Martinsburg US garrison would retreat to HF and that the combined
                        garrison would make a stand at HF rather than retreating....when
                        he decided to issue SO 191.

                        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: "William H Keene" <wh_keene@...>
                        To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                        Sent: Friday, September 19, 2008 11:15 AM
                        Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: laissez faire


                        --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@...>
                        wrote:
                        >
                        > I think that the actual proximity of the enemy to Lee's army
                        > on, and
                        the
                        > speed of its movements up to, the 9th (as opposed to where he
                        > thought
                        it was
                        > and how fast he thought it was moving) made the success of the
                        Martinsburg
                        > and Harper's Ferry expeditions (as planned) unlikely.

                        I disagree. The speed of the US army was slow up to that point.
                        Lee's mistake was in using the speed of the 4th - 8th as a basis
                        for
                        decision making about the 9th - 13th.
                      • William H Keene
                        ... Becuase McClellan was ready to lunge forward.
                        Message 11 of 14 , Sep 19, 2008
                          --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "G E Mayers" <gerry1952@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Whey did the AoP marching speed increase on the 9th?

                          Becuase McClellan was ready to lunge forward.
                        • Harry Smeltzer
                          While you make think it was slow, it was a lot faster than Lee thought. The reports he was getting from Stuart were nowhere near accurate. Here s some stuff
                          Message 12 of 14 , Sep 19, 2008
                            While you make think it was slow, it was a lot faster than Lee thought. The reports he was getting from Stuart were nowhere near accurate. Here's some stuff I put together a long time ago on the 7th to the 9th:

                            September 7:

                            In a letter to Davis written this day, Lee summarized the enemy's activities, stating that he believed they were still in the Washington defenses awaiting attack. While also recognizing a force at Darnestown, 12 miles from DC, it appears he felt that this full division was merely a reconnaissance in force. The truth was, the enemy had only moved halfway to Darnestown. He also notes in this dispatch that Banks had command of one of the divisions, while he was in fact at the head of Pope's 2nd Corps. Lee also failed to note that Poolesville had been occupied by Federal cavalry that afternoon. All of this points to an unclear understanding of the position, structure and intentions of his opponent.

                            The operations on this day are the first indications that Lee would have difficulty getting the kind of info necessary to make his turning movement (which is what the invasion was) successful. All of this was dependent upon the diligence and persistence of Stuart. But the reports and memoirs of Southern cavalry depict his day as quiet. Von Borcke was spending most of his time arranging a dance. One staff member recalled "There was nothing to do but await the advance".

                            see TATF pp 116-117

                            September 8:

                            In another dispatch to the President, Lee noted "As far as I can learn the enemy are not moving in this direction, but continue to concentrate about Washington." By this time, the right wing of the AoP (1st & 9th Corps under Burnside) had advanced to Brookeville, 10 miles north of Leesborough. This extended the army's front to cover Baltimore. At the close of the day, the AoP had 66,000 men in a 16 mile wide battle line an average of 12 miles from the fortifications of Washington.

                            Somehow, Stuart missed this, as well as failed to report the considerable increase in Federal cavalry activity - Pleasonton had established a cav line from south to north Poolesville-Clarksburg-Damascus-Unity.

                            TATF pp 121-122

                            September 9:

                            In his morning dispatch to Davis, Lee declared that "nothing of interest" had occurred. Then he stated: "From reports that have reached me, I believe that the enemy are pushing a strong column up the River by Rockville and Darnestown, and by Poolesville towards Seneca Mills [strangely, Poolesville is 10 miles WEST of Seneca Mills]. I hear that the commands of Sumner, Sigel, Burnside and Hooker are advancing in the direction above mentioned."

                            Lee saw nothing alarming in the fact that 4 corps had reached Poolesville, only 15 miles from Lee's position. Harsh says here that Lee "failed to grasp, or Stuart failed to provide him with the information that would allow him to grasp, the fact that the Federal advance had become serious within the last two days".

                            There are a lot of problems with Lee's dispatch, including the misunderstanding of where Poolesville was. Lee also stated that the enemy was hugging the river. But by the 9th the right flank of the AoP extended 15 miles to the NW (Middlebrook and Brookeville), and Union cavalry was at Damascus, even further north.

                            TATF pp 120-130

                            Sept 9, part deux:

                            At this point Lee had composed SO 191, committing the critical mistake that would cause him to divide his army the next day. In addition to being wrong in his belief that the garrison at Harper's Ferry would flee, and in his assumption that the movement could be completed by the 12th, Lee was also wrong about the position of the Federal army. "Either Lee misinterpreted the information he was receiving from his cavalry chief, or Stuart was supplying faulty intelligence."

                            Nothing indicates that Stuart, on the 9th, was under the impression that the enemy's advance was "pressing in a menacing way". His staff rose late after the celebrations of the previous evening, and, according to Von Borcke, an early skirmish did not keep the staff from spending a leisurely and serenade filled afternoon and evening with the Cockey family in Urbana. No sense of urgency whatsoever in Stuart's actions.

                            But Lee's perception of the Federal position was that they were about one third of the way to Frederick, or about 12 miles from Washington. In fact, they were 17 miles from Washington, halfway to Frederick. Lead elements of the AoP were only 10 miles from the Confederates at Moncacy.

                            TATF p165




                            ----- Original Message -----
                            From: William H Keene
                            To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
                            Sent: Friday, September 19, 2008 11:15 AM
                            Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: laissez faire


                            --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > I think that the actual proximity of the enemy to Lee's army on, and
                            the
                            > speed of its movements up to, the 9th (as opposed to where he thought
                            it was
                            > and how fast he thought it was moving) made the success of the
                            Martinsburg
                            > and Harper's Ferry expeditions (as planned) unlikely.

                            I disagree. The speed of the US army was slow up to that point.
                            Lee's mistake was in using the speed of the 4th - 8th as a basis for
                            decision making about the 9th - 13th.





                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • William H Keene
                            ... the divisions, while he was in fact at the head of Pope s 2nd Corps. You do realize that Pope had been relieved of command by that point?
                            Message 13 of 14 , Sep 19, 2008
                              --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@...> wrote:
                              > ...
                              > September 7:
                              > ... He also notes in this dispatch that Banks had command of one of
                              the divisions, while he was in fact at the head of Pope's 2nd Corps.

                              You do realize that Pope had been relieved of command by that point?
                            • Harry Smeltzer
                              Yes, just differentiating between the two 2nd Corps. ... From: William H Keene To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, September 19, 2008 10:52 PM
                              Message 14 of 14 , Sep 19, 2008
                                Yes, just differentiating between the two 2nd Corps.
                                ----- Original Message -----
                                From: William H Keene
                                To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
                                Sent: Friday, September 19, 2008 10:52 PM
                                Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Pope on Sept 7


                                --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@...> wrote:
                                > ...
                                > September 7:
                                > ... He also notes in this dispatch that Banks had command of one of
                                the divisions, while he was in fact at the head of Pope's 2nd Corps.

                                You do realize that Pope had been relieved of command by that point?





                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.