RE: [civilwarwest] Re: Bragg Vs Forrest
A hockey puck.
A histrionic display.
A hard day’s night.
A history book.
From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of DPowell334@...
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 7:03 AM
Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Re: Bragg Vs Forrest
In a message dated 3/31/2006 10:25:47 P.M. Central Standard Time, pw541301@... writes:
Truth comes from many sources but adds up to the same, B.S. comes
from many sources and is B.S. The sources seem to be the
key.J.B.Cowan was with him and said so- Done Deal.
I'm curious, Paul, if you have ever heard of the famous Barlow-Gordon Incident at Gettysburg. It was a "done deal" for many years, because Gordon said so.
From a(n) ((hi harry)) historian's POV, Cowan is not reliable enough to consider it a done deal.
1) as I pointed out, there are many unexplained problems with the account - not the least of which was that Forrest was about 150 miles away at the time. How did he get there?
2) As Lee posted, there are a number of clear inconsistancies with other things Cowan wrote (which I had not seen before, thanks Lee) that suggest he is not reliable.
3) Cowan is the only source, and it appears in 1898. The vary detailed and usually reliable Jordan and Pryor book - which is the closest thing Forrest's own account of his career we have, since he reviewed the mss - mentions nothing about it, though Jordan and Pryor discuss the various other problems Forrest had with Wheeler, the Lt. Gould knife fight, etc. Jordan and Pryor appeared in 1868, much closer to the "incident."
4) no other source corroborates it, especially no other source contemporaneous to the event. A "done deal" from any historian's POV, would require a minimum of two sources.
4) no other
- Bob, Compliments Sir,
I'm sorry for not getting back to you sooner, I just happen to
notice your inquiry-I appogize(SP).
Although I have a very "child like mind" I rarely make quotes that I
can't back up and if my bluff is called I either acknowledge my
screw up or own up to it.
The actual quote which reads as follows:"A man I have never
seen,Sir. His name is Forrest"
I have seen this same qutoe in several publications but will give
you the easiest one to document, if this does not suffice please let
me know and I will give further documentation.
Title: "May I qoute you General Lee" Randall Bedwell, Gramecy Books,
Nashville, ISBN 0-517-21992-1, Pg.#54
Your Humble Servant,
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, huddleston.r@... wrote:
> I do not think so. I would like to see a source for that quotation.
> Take care,
> Judy and Bob Huddleston
> 10643 Sperry Street
> Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: "pvtjessett" <pw541301@...>
> General Lee when asked after the war by a reporter who his best
> was answered " A man I have never met named Forrest", A
> competent "Gen. Officer", well someone thought so
> --- In email@example.com, huddleston.r@ wrote:
> > At the bottom of this argument is that what the Forrest
> are arguing is that Forrest is not competent to be a General
> > Paragraph One of the Army Regulations, both US and CS:
> > â1. ALL inferiors are required to obey strictly, and to
> execute with alacrity and good faith, the lawful orders of the
> superiors appointed over them.â
> > --
> > Take care,
> > Bob
> > Judy and Bob Huddleston
> > 10643 Sperry Street
> > Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
> > huddleston.r@
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> Visit your group "civilwarwest" on the web.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of