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

Re: [TalkAntietam] re Moxley Sorrel and September 16th (Night)

Expand Messages
  • G E Mayers
    Dave, Apparently your first answer with the link to the work cited did not come through here. So, is it a consensus that Priest is again wrong? Yr. Obt. Svt. G
    Message 1 of 31 , Apr 3, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Dave,

      Apparently your first answer with the link to the work cited did
      not come through here.

      So, is it a consensus that Priest is again wrong?

      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: <DPowell334@...>
      To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Friday, April 03, 2009 11:26 AM
      Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] re Moxley Sorrel and September 16th
      (Night)


      > two things - other sources talk about a company acting as HQ
      > guard for
      > Stuart, so it is possible that Sorrell is talking about them
      > and not the main body
      > of the regiment, and two, Rowland doesn't really say when they
      > broke away to
      > rejoin Stuart.
      >
      > But at face value, Rowland does seem to corroborate your point,
      > not
      > Sorrell's account.
      >
      > Anyone picked up Hopkins' Book; "the Little Jeff" to see what
      > he says?
      > Supposed to be a pretty complete regimental, or so I've heard.
      > I have an interest
      > in their old commander, Will Martin, but I can't really justify
      > the purchase
      > of an eastern unit regimental for what would likely be a couple
      > of pages of
      > biblio references.
      >
      > Dave Powell
      >
      >
      > In a message dated 4/3/2009 9:11:05 A.M. Central Standard Time,
      > d.essig@... writes:
      >
      > Saw that one Dave, sure doesn't put the Legion anywhere near
      > the West
      > Woods on the 16th, though. Moving from Birkettsville to follow
      > McLaws
      > to the field (and Richard Anderson, for that matter) places
      > them
      > south, maybe well south, of the ford at dawn.
      >
      >
      > **************Worried about job security? Check out the 5
      > safest jobs in a
      > recession.
      > (http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare00000003)
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
    • eighth_conn_inf
      And we can t forget the raincoat Stonewall had on the night he was shot; it is at the VMI museum and a picture is on their website. It has the two bullet holes
      Message 31 of 31 , Apr 10, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        And we can't forget the raincoat Stonewall had on the night he was shot; it is at the VMI museum and a picture is on their website. It has the two bullet holes in the left sleeve.

        http://www4.vmi.edu/museum/Jackson.html

        Larry

        --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, Dave <gewehr@...> wrote:
        >
        > For what it's worth, even though it was very early in the war, when CSA
        > Gen Felix Zollicoffer was killed in the battle of Mill Springs in KY on
        > Jan 19, 1862, he was wearing either a "white rubber" or "light drab
        > overcoat buttoned to the chin." Due to the rain and hanging smoke, he
        > managed to ride right through the Federal lines unmolested and was only
        > shot when he spoke to a US officer on his way back out. One of the
        > accounts said that a US Lt. Col was wearing a similar coat, so nobody
        > thought anything about it.
        >
        > Dave McGowan
        >
        > Thomas Clemens wrote:
        > >
        > > To parse terms with you for a moment, officers purchase all of their
        > > own clothing and equipment and although guidelines are published, a
        > > certain lattitude is in what they wear and use. Lee's talma and
        > > overalls were likely rubberized and privately purchased. Jackson was
        > > wearing a rubberized coat when he was shot.
        > >
        > > Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
        > > Professor of History
        > > Hagerstown Community College
        > >
        > > >>> "Teej Smith" <teej@... <mailto:teej%40nc.rr.com>> 04/04/09
        > > 1:01 PM >>>
        > >
        > > Larry wrote:
        > >
        > > Teej,
        > >
        > > I see only Sorrel mentioning this--do you have other sources
        > > mentioning raingear?
        > >
        > > Sorry, no I don't. In fact the only other place I've "over-alls"
        > > mentioned was in connection with a Union soldier at Ball's Bluff.
        > > Sorrel wrote, "It had rained and he (Lee) was wearing a rubber poncho
        > > and over-alls, his body and legs being thus well protected." I suppose
        > > they could be the canvas wear you described in your message but that
        > > wouldn't be much protection from the rain. But perhaps from the mud?
        > > Whatever they were, they must have been loose fitting because later
        > > Sorrel wrote that while reaching for his bridle, Lee "tripped in his
        > > over-alls and fell forward, not prone, but catching on his hands."
        > >
        > > Sorrel then went on to describe the nature of Lee's injuries and to
        > > note word of his being hurt reached the Northern newspapers which went
        > > into great detail as to the nature of his injury. Their report was Lee
        > > had been seriously wounded and even went so far as to describe how Lee
        > > received his wound. Would like to see that newspaper report. Sorrel
        > > confirmed Lee was able to ride a little by the time of Antietam.
        > > However, I have seen a letter written by Lee in April 1863 in which he
        > > said he was still having problems with one of his hands.
        > >
        > > Regards,
        > > Teej
        > >
        > >
        > > .
        > >
        > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > >
        > >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.