43442Re: McPherson's Flanking Movement at Port Gibson
- Apr 15, 2007I really dont fully understand the motives of many writers. In this
case there seems to me to be some scholarly laziness and also a habit
of embracing a previous author's narrative without question.
In the case of the way Tim Smith describes Port Gibson in his book on
Champion Hill, I would not call it an effort to discredit McPherson but
rather a lack of effort to fully describe and understand the battle.
The description of Port Gibson in Ballard's book on the Vicksburg
campaign is much better.
--- In email@example.com, "Carl Williams" <carlw4514@...>
> geez, how the heck did I do that?
> anyway, care to comment? My question was, what conceivable motive
> would there be to discredit McPherson? Is this a case of Bearss'
> interpretation becoming gospel, and many other historians following in
> unquestioning lock-step?
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>