Re: Rosey's Bio
- I think if you read Lamers' book and Cozzens' books you will have a
pretty good grasp of Rosey's personality.
I too think Hooker is underrated. However, I think Grant was correct
when he said that Fighting Joe was an able general but was not to be
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Tom Mix" <tmix@...> wrote:
> I was thinking the similarity with Hooker earlier today too. Hooker came
> west and rehabilitated his image and reputation to a degree but less he
> deserves. I think he is highly underrated. I felt, for no particular
> educated reason, that Rosecrans could have been done same. If he had
> Corps later I think he may have been effective. But I don't that
> his personality to defend that. That is one reason I was wondering
> book, I would to learn about the man and his personality. Does the
bio do an
> adequate job of this?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com
> Behalf Of sputnik842002
> Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 2:41 PM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Rosey's Bio
> --- In email@example.com, "Tom Mix" <tmix@> wrote:
> > What is your take on the bio of Rosecrans by William M. Lamers
> > Glory". Such a perfect title for Rosey.
> > Tom
> I think Lamers was a little too forgiving of Rosecrans' actions at
> Chickamauga but otherwise I liked the book. Grant doesn't come off in
> a positive light though.
> I think Rosecrans and Hooker were similar. Both were skilled generals
> but couldn't keep their mouth shut.
> Yahoo! Groups Links