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

Re: SCG epilogue

Expand Messages
  • wh_keene
    ... With the exception of Political helpmate (whatever that is), the same list applies to the relationship of Sherman and Thomas, with the added twist that
    Message 1 of 179 , May 1 11:19 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      > Your choice:
      > Friend,
      > Commander,
      > Political helpmate,
      > Supporter,
      > etc.


      With the exception of "Political helpmate" (whatever that is), the
      same list applies to the relationship of Sherman and Thomas, with the
      added twist that each served at one time as the commander of the
      other whereas Grant was always the commander not the commanded.
      Though Thomas's life was cut short, the friendship of Sherman and
      Thomas seemed to survive the peace, whereas the friendship of Grant
      and Sherman did not. Just as you claim that Grant and Sherman "chose
      each other and helped, used, and supported each other", the same
      could be said for Thomas and Sherman. Your view of the different
      treatment of friends and enemies is something I don't share. Anyway,
      I still don't see why you say Sherman would choice Grant over
      Thomas.
    • wh_keene
      Hi Dave. I never have subscribed to it though I have picked up occassional issues at the bookstore when the lead story grabs me. I know of a used bookstore
      Message 179 of 179 , May 16 4:04 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Dave.

        I never have subscribed to it though I have picked up occassional
        issues at the bookstore when the lead story grabs me. I know of a
        used bookstore that stocks old issues--will look for the one you
        mentioned

        --- In civilwarwest@y..., David Woodbury <woodbury@s...> wrote:
        > At 9:18 PM +0000 4/30/02, wh_keene wrote:
        > >I agree that our discussion was "getting a tad unwieldy." My work
        > >situation has changed, so I haven't been able to follow this board
        as
        > >closely as I used to. Only today could I catch up. The thread had
        > >become so unwieldy that it seemed to have become about what I said
        > >about what you said about what I said about what you said and it
        was
        > >hard to make sense of it without going back and starting over.
        >
        > Will,
        >
        > Haven't been able to keep up with the discussions lately -- things
        > like work, classes, Giants baseball, two small children, and the
        > opening of the trout season all combined to push Snake Creek Gap
        far
        > into the background. I did want to say, however, that I wasn't
        > ignoring your last missive on the subject.
        >
        > I've subsequently come across the March 2001 issue of "North &
        > South," with Steven H. Newton's article, "What Really Happened at
        > Snake Creek Gap?" I've just started through it, and will try to
        > convey the main points here. I'm curious to see if he brings
        anything
        > new to the discussion, or summarizes the conflicting views much as
        we
        > have done. Based on the subtitle, he may be more sympathetic to
        your
        > view:
        >
        > "The conventional account of the opening of the
        > 1864 Georgia Campaign is that William T. Sherman
        > swiftly bamboozled Joseph E. Johnston. There is another
        > interpretation."
        >
        > Do you, by chance, subscribe to and keep back issues of "North &
        South"?
        >
        > David
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.