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

Re: Confederate Attack Plan and Suicide Missions

Expand Messages
  • bjer50010 <bjewell@iastate.edu>
    ... that ... the ... That s what Daniel says, but he didn t provide a source, as far as I can tell. But he also stated that the fact wasn t relevant, as ASJ
    Message 1 of 6 , Jan 23, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Will <wh_keene@y...>"
      <wh_keene@y...> wrote:
      > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "bjer50010 <bjewell@i...>"
      > <bjewell@i...> wrote:
      > > ...
      > > Thanks for providing the cite. I vaguely recalled a message to
      > > effect. It certainly seems that defense was a consideration, at
      > > least early on. But ISTM that considering that Lick Creek was
      > > considered impassable, except to cavalry (OR X Pt. II, 385) on
      > April
      > > 2, that it may well have seemed an impenetrable barrier several
      > weeks
      > > earlier. By April 5, however, the creek was supposedly shallow
      > > enough to be readily forded by infantry. Similar considerations
      > > probably applied to both Owl Creek and Snake Creek.
      > >
      > The April 2 report by Chalmers only referred to the crossings of
      > creek along the routes from Hamburg. Was it readily fordable by
      > infantry in that area on the 5th?
      > ~Will

      That's what Daniel says, but he didn't provide a source, as far as I
      can tell. But he also stated that the fact wasn't relevant, as ASJ
      didn't know about it and it never really mattered as far as the plan
      of attack was concerned. My only point in stating this is to show
      how the terrain was altered with time, so Sherman's original
      justification for choosing the site based on it's defensibility may
      not have been relevant three weeks later.

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