Re: Cozzens, Sherman and November 24, 1863
While I eagerly await your additions to this discussion, the quote
below was posted not by me, but by Will Keene, IINM. I tend to agree
generally with his comments, but it will be up to the knowledgable
Mr Keen to defend the specifics.
--- In civilwarwest@y..., FLYNSWEDE@A... wrote:
> Hello theme_music@y...,
> In reference to your comment:
> è I know this has been discussed a lot in the past, but I
> è need to vent > my frustration with the way
> è Sherman's action on November 24th, 1863 > are
> è portrayed in Cozzens' book Shipwreck of Their Hopes.
> è > > Cozzens criticizes Sherman extensively (he
> è seems to seek out any > opportunity to do so
> è throughout the book). The major criticisms of >
> è Sherman seems to be that he delayd before moving
> è forward from the > crossing point, he was slow in
> è moving and his disposiitons at the end > of the day
> è were bad.
> Just got back from Mayo Clinic a while ago and am to dang tired to
type out a
> lengthy response to this tonight, but this week-end, I will type
> actually occured from the diary of Sgt E. Hart, Co. E, 40th
- Sunday, June 2nd @ 8pm(ET)
Turner Network Television (TNT) continues its rich tradition of presenting
Original Western films as Emmy® -nominated actor Patrick Stewart stars in
KING OF TEXAS, a dramatic Western twist on the great Shakespearean tragedy
King Lear. KING OF TEXAS will premiere on TNT on Sunday, June 2, at 8 p.m.
(ET/PT). KING OF TEXAS also stars Oscar® winner Marcia Gay Harden as Lear's
oldest daughter, Susannah, Lauren Holly as Lear's middle daughter, Rebecca,
and Julie Cox as Lear's loyal youngest daughter, Claudia.
- --- In civilwarwest@y..., "josepharose" <josepharose@y...> wrote:
> Yes. If Sherman had moved more quickly and forcefully, and hedidn't
> stop too soon, he would have been solidly on Bragg's flanks. Thatridge
> would have been a much more effective attack than going at the
> head-on as Thomas' soldiers did and could lead to the crushing ofOh, so its just a hypothesis that he had a potential opportunity to
> Bragg's army.
be in a better position that could lead to crushing Bragg's army in
some subsequent attack. I don;t find it very convincing.
--- In civilwarwest@y..., "dmercado" <dmercado@w...> wrote:
> He may have meant that General Cleburne was not in position until
> late on the 24th. He had to work all night to get his defense
> If Sherman had hit Tunnel Hill as planned, Bragg was in trouble.
Why would Bragg be in trouble? Even though Celburne was not yet in
place at Tunnel Hill, Gist was in place just to the south, so Sherman
did not have an open path, so I am just unclear on why BRagg would be
in such trouble?