22465Re: anyone out there
- Nov 7, 2000--- In email@example.com, "Dick Weeks" <shotgun@c...> wrote:
> I just thought I would relay this info on to you folks. SincePaddy
Griffith was the subject of discussion a few emails ago, I decided to
email him. Heck, you never know whether someone will answer you or
not. Anyway, this is what I sent.
>anyone who makes "Military History" a life's work. One of my dear
> My Dear Mr. Griffin,
> Though you do not know me, I have heard of you and admire
Internet friends, before his death, was Dr. Ernest Butner of
Pepperdine University (he was a military historian) and we spent many
a night in a chat room discussing the American Civil War. It was
always a pleasure to chat with someone with so much knowledge. His
knowledge, as yours, was not just in our war but in all wars.
> Your name and your book came up in an email discussiongroup that I maintain that discusses the Western Theater in the
American Civil War. Since I have not read your book, I cannot say
whether I agree or disagree with your thesis about the weapons and
tactics of the late unpleasantness. However, now that it has been
brought up I fully intend to see if I can find it (your book that is)
and see if it really is as good as many in the group say it is. If
find yourself with the time I would like to invite you to join our
group and maybe discuss your views on our war. The address explaining
what the group is about and how to join is located at this URL:
>understand if you cannot, but I felt I should make the offer.
> I fully realize how busy you must be and will well
> Additionally, although I have absolutely no credentialsin
"historical research", I do maintain what is probably the largest and
most visited of the American Civil War sites on the web (Not the
discussion group that I mentioned. That is just a very very small
of it). Last year I averaged (combining the time when school was in
and when it was out) over 50,000 hits a day (got a few with over
90,000) and answered an average of 20-30 questions a day from
students. My busiest time is during our school year is why I made
disclaimer. With your past research into our war I thought you might
find the site interesting. It has a LOT of primary data on it. Here
> Anyway, I just thought that I would write to show you
the "Ultimate Vanity", a personal website, does draw some readers.
take care now ya hear!
>civil war activities: it's always good to hear there are some people
> I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
> Dick (a.k.a. Shotgun)
> This is what I received this morning.
> Waal, just hi thar, Shotgun!
> Thanks for your very interesting account of your
out there who like my book on that war, since there are shure quite a
few who don't! Anyway, I guess the civil war continues to rage
historical interpretations as much as around any other aspect...
> The book, incidentally, has recently been, or is about tobe, issued in paperback for the first time in 12 years. You very
kindly asked if I'd like to join in discussion groups about the war.
Unfortunately I really don't have the time due to other commitments,
and in any case I have had no new arguments to put forward during the
15 years that have passed since I wrote the first set (although the
intervening time has helped to erase my command of the details). I
have seen plenty of ingenious re-workings or counter-arguments, and I
know I got a few points of detail wrong (who doesn't?) but I don't
think any of that has really added up to a major alternative
perspective to the one I originally adopted (and I have also seen
extra supporting evidence). For example some have said that the men
who chose the tactical formations were to blame for getting them
- but I don't buy into that theory. So I am still waiting for some
scholar to come along and take a comprehensive new look at the
subject. Maybe Brent Nosworthy will do it in a new book he is
> Sorry to disappoint, but I find chat rooms difficult tohandle, especially on a subject that I haven't looked at for 15 years!
> But I'm glad that they go on - I'm sure they help the sumof our knowledge.
>someone emails me with a question that I just do not have the hard
> Yours ever, Paddy Griffith
> Anyway, I just thought I would pass this on. Many times when
data to answer with but I know there is a website up there that deals
with it, I will recommend that they go to the site and ask the
"webmaster" there for the data they need. My theory is that if
someone cares enough to put a website up about a particular subject,
the chances are they are interested enough to monitor their email and
respond to questions. I find that "Paddy" just proves my theory :-)
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: D. Andrew Burden, Ph.D. <daburden@m...>
> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2000 9:50 AM
> Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] anyone out there
> > His web site is at
> > www.ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PaddyGriffith/index.htm
> > Bob Huddleston wrote:
> > >
> > > What is Paddy's web site?
> > >
> > > He is a tad controversial. Albert Casteel did a hilarious
of one of
> > > Griffith's books in, IIRC, CW History, chewing him out andspitting out the
> > > pieces!Shotgun,
> > >
> > > Take care,
> > >
> > > Bob
A great letter and, I think,an equally great response.
I have read his work,and I think his evaluation is fair and
honest. There are some parts he get's wrong.On the other hand,I've
not seen a more credible explanation of his theory,or a more viable
explanation of the extraordinary amount of conincidences of
tactic,strategy,and weapon usage either.
My best to everyone-and today being the 7th of
please go out and vote.I'm not telling you who to vote for-
your politics ain't none of my business,I'm merely reminding
everyone that the ballot is one of our most sacred rights as
citizens of this Great Republic,and that democracies -more than
anything else need the participation of it's members. Speech over.
- << Previous post in topic