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

Baird's abortive march: more evidence

Expand Messages
  • josepharose
    Another major piece of circumstantial evidence disproving Grant s claims is Baird s abortive march. Although Thomas was planning on flanking Bragg from the
    Message 1 of 4 , Aug 3, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Another major piece of circumstantial evidence disproving Grant's
      claims is Baird's abortive march.

      Although Thomas was planning on flanking Bragg from the south with
      Hooker and Palmer pivoting on Sheridan, Grant (and the bridgeless
      Chattanooga Creek) helped stop this advance. Grant ordered Baird
      all the way from the right to march behind Granger to support
      Sherman (disregarding, for now, that Sherman didn't need him).

      Grant's memoirs offered the self-serving tripe that: "Baird's
      division was accordingly sent from the right of Orchard Knob. It
      had to march a considerable distance directly under the eye of the
      enemy to reach its position. Bragg at once commenced massing in the
      same direction. This was what I wanted."

      Before, during, and after this time, Grant was trying to assist
      Sherman. Here, instead, he states that he wanted Bragg to mass in
      Sherman's direction.

      Much worse, and what makes it pretty certain that Grant did not
      intend an assault by Thomas up the ridge, is Grant implied that
      Baird's movement pulled troops from Bragg's center so Thomas could
      make a frontal assault (Grant wrote just after that: "But it had now
      got to be late in the afternoon, and I had expected before this to
      see Hooker crossing the ridge in the neighborhood of Rossville and
      compelling Bragg to mass in that direction also."

      But, if Grant was planning an assault by Thomas--and he used the
      orders of the night before where Thomas was to move left or forward
      as evidence of this--why did he send a whole division away from the
      assaulting force? If Baird had orders to return to Thomas, Grant
      might have had a point.

      The only reason Baird returned in time for the assault on the rifle-
      pits was that Sherman had no room/use for him and sent him back.

      Unless one believes that Grant was planning an attack on what seemed
      to be an impregnable position with just eight brigades (when even
      eleven might have seemed insufficient), it assures us that Grant
      intended nothing more than to take the first line of rifle-pits as a
      demonstration.

      Joseph
    • William H Keene
      ... The movement of Baird did not slow Hooker down. ... There are other points where he indicated that getting Bragg to mass against Sherman was a desired
      Message 2 of 4 , Aug 3, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "josepharose" <josepharose@y...>
        wrote:
        > ...
        > Although Thomas was planning on flanking Bragg from the south with
        > Hooker and Palmer pivoting on Sheridan, Grant (and the bridgeless
        > Chattanooga Creek) helped stop this advance. Grant ordered Baird
        > all the way from the right to march behind Granger to support
        > Sherman (disregarding, for now, that Sherman didn't need him).

        The movement of Baird did not slow Hooker down.


        >...
        > Before, during, and after this time, Grant was trying to assist
        > Sherman. Here, instead, he states that he wanted Bragg to mass in
        > Sherman's direction.

        There are other points where he indicated that getting Bragg to mass
        against Sherman was a desired thing. He complements Sherman aftet
        the battle for successfully doing this such that the ridge was easier
        to take in front of Thomas.


        > But, if Grant was planning an assault by Thomas--and he used the
        > orders of the night before where Thomas was to move left or forward
        > as evidence of this--why did he send a whole division away from the
        > assaulting force? If Baird had orders to return to Thomas, Grant
        > might have had a point.

        Becuase Grant did not considered Baird as originally part of the
        assaulting force. Baird was "movable column of one division in
        readiness to move wherever ordered" spoken of in the orders of the
        18th.


        > The only reason Baird returned in time for the assault on the rifle-
        > pits was that Sherman had no room/use for him and sent him back.

        If you say he had no room, why do you criticize him for not using
        more?


        > Unless one believes that Grant was planning an attack on what
        seemed
        > to be an impregnable position with just eight brigades (when even
        > eleven might have seemed insufficient), it assures us that Grant
        > intended nothing more than to take the first line of rifle-pits as
        a
        > demonstration.

        Yet Grant issued orders the night before that Thomas was to assualt
        the ridgem so it seems Grant did intend such an attack.

        -Will
      • josepharose
        Your reply says absolutely nothing about the fact that Grant ordered away a division from his supposed frontal atack on the ridge. That would have been poor,
        Message 3 of 4 , Aug 3, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          Your reply says absolutely nothing about the fact that Grant ordered
          away a division from his supposed frontal atack on the ridge. That
          would have been poor, poor generalship.


          --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "William H Keene"
          <wh_keene@y...> wrote:
          > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "josepharose"
          <josepharose@y...>
          > wrote:
          > > ...
          > > Although Thomas was planning on flanking Bragg from the south
          with
          > > Hooker and Palmer pivoting on Sheridan, Grant (and the
          bridgeless
          > > Chattanooga Creek) helped stop this advance. Grant ordered
          Baird
          > > all the way from the right to march behind Granger to support
          > > Sherman (disregarding, for now, that Sherman didn't need him).
          >
          > The movement of Baird did not slow Hooker down.
          >
          >
          > >...
          > > Before, during, and after this time, Grant was trying to assist
          > > Sherman. Here, instead, he states that he wanted Bragg to mass
          in
          > > Sherman's direction.
          >
          > There are other points where he indicated that getting Bragg to
          mass
          > against Sherman was a desired thing. He complements Sherman aftet
          > the battle for successfully doing this such that the ridge was
          easier
          > to take in front of Thomas.
          >
          >
          > > But, if Grant was planning an assault by Thomas--and he used the
          > > orders of the night before where Thomas was to move left or
          forward
          > > as evidence of this--why did he send a whole division away from
          the
          > > assaulting force? If Baird had orders to return to Thomas,
          Grant
          > > might have had a point.
          >
          > Becuase Grant did not considered Baird as originally part of the
          > assaulting force. Baird was "movable column of one division in
          > readiness to move wherever ordered" spoken of in the orders of the
          > 18th.
          >
          >
          > > The only reason Baird returned in time for the assault on the
          rifle-
          > > pits was that Sherman had no room/use for him and sent him back.
          >
          > If you say he had no room, why do you criticize him for not using
          > more?
          >
          >
          > > Unless one believes that Grant was planning an attack on what
          > seemed
          > > to be an impregnable position with just eight brigades (when
          even
          > > eleven might have seemed insufficient), it assures us that Grant
          > > intended nothing more than to take the first line of rifle-pits
          as
          > a
          > > demonstration.
          >
          > Yet Grant issued orders the night before that Thomas was to
          assualt
          > the ridgem so it seems Grant did intend such an attack.
          >
          > -Will
        • William H Keene
          ... ordered ... So is your opinion. But we knew you felt that way about Grant regardless. -Will
          Message 4 of 4 , Aug 3, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "josepharose" <josepharose@y...>
            wrote:
            >
            >
            > Your reply says absolutely nothing about the fact that Grant
            ordered
            > away a division from his supposed frontal atack on the ridge. That
            > would have been poor, poor generalship.

            So is your opinion. But we knew you felt that way about Grant
            regardless.

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