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

Re: [civilwarwest] Re: aot1952 - Stones River Question

Expand Messages
  • andyburden@aol.com
    IIRC, the interpretive sign at McFadden s ford claims that 1400 CSA troops fell there. Don t have my books close at hand, but surely more than 1200 men were
    Message 1 of 11 , Jul 1 6:39 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      IIRC, the interpretive sign at McFadden's ford claims that 1400 CSA troops
      fell there. Don't have my books close at hand, but surely more than 1200 men
      were in Breck's division. Perhaps Cozzens was referring to the Orphans?


      In a message dated 6/30/02 3:16:25 PM Central Daylight Time,
      lilsteve68@... writes:

      << In Peter Cozzens - No better place to die "the battle of stones River" he
      states nearly one third of the twelve hundred engaged on the Jan 2nd
      failed to return ..

      Which leaves the remaining loses of the 1332 to go to the losses on the
      31st
      in which Adams, Palmer and Preston brigades out of Breckinridges Divison
      participated in.. >>
    • lilsteve68@aol.com
      In a message dated 7/1/02 8:39:45 AM Central Daylight Time, ... Yeah he must have been .. I been to the ford many of times .. real peacefull there .. Amazing
      Message 2 of 11 , Jul 1 12:41 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        In a message dated 7/1/02 8:39:45 AM Central Daylight Time, andyburden@... writes:


        IIRC, the interpretive sign at McFadden's ford claims that 1400 CSA troops
        fell there.  Don't have my books close at hand, but surely more than 1200 men
        were in Breck's division.  Perhaps Cozzens was referring to the Orphans?


        Yeah he must have been .. I been to the ford many of times  .. real peacefull there ..  Amazing the number of  causualties in about a hours time that occured  on that part of the battle  in the sleet and freezing rain.. 

        Steven
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.