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

Re: What is Logan’s connection to the greatest American novel?

Expand Messages
  • Carl Williams
    I certainly felt I should not give the answer to this, since I was involved the first time the question came up in our little group. No one else has answered,
    Message 1 of 28 , Jul 15, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      I certainly felt I should not give the answer to this, since I was
      involved the first time the question came up in our little group. No
      one else has answered, I see, but then again the question is phrased a
      little cryptically.

      Here's a hint: Mark Twain wrote that novel.

      --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Huddleston"
      <huddleston.r@...> wrote:

      [...]

      >
      >
      > Ironically (and I say this as a Black Jack Fan) after Sherman passed him
      > over for command of the AotT, arguing that Logan was too political,
      Black
      > Jack promptly took leave and went back to Illinois to campaign!
      >
      >
      >
      > Question for the day: what is Logan's connection to the greatest
      American
      > novel?
    • Tony Gunter
      ... in ... From the moment he picked up a musket and fought as a citizen at First Bull Run, Logan was sold on military life. He loved being in the field and
      Message 2 of 28 , Jul 15, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "Carl Williams" <carlw4514@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > Finished the book "Black Jack: John A. Logan and Southern Illinois
        in
        > the Civil War Era" I Recommend it.
        >
        > The author discusses whether Logan was unjustly passed over as a
        > replacement for McPherson when he was KIA. Interestingly, he gave
        > Sherman's views on what he didnt like about "political generals."
        > Seems that there is more to it than unthinking prejudice. I
        > loaned the book to someone, so can't quote from it, but
        > basically Sherman just felt that these guys typically just weren't
        > full time. He was especially resentful when they would go
        > home to campaign for reelection just as things were critical
        > in the field.

        From the moment he picked up a musket and fought as a citizen at
        First Bull Run, Logan was sold on military life. He loved being in
        the field and would have remained in the field. It was only a direct
        request from the POTUS himself that sent Logan home to campaign.

        I think there's a lot of smoke and misdirection when it comes to
        Sherman's decision ... didn't Sherman blame it on Thomas? Another
        Sherman correspondence, IIRC, claimed that Logan didn't pay close
        enough attention to logistics. I'm not sure I have ever seen an
        analysis that supports any of these assertions sufficiently.

        Just my opinion, I believe Logan was mentored by the best in the
        business (McPherson) and deserved a shot at army command.
      • Harry Smeltzer
        In the interest of full disclosure, Logan fought at Blackburn s Ford on July 19, two days before First Bull Run. He helped evacuate wounded from that affair
        Message 3 of 28 , Jul 15, 2008
        • 0 Attachment

          In the interest of full disclosure, Logan fought at Blackburn’s Ford on July 19, two days before First Bull Run.  He helped evacuate wounded from that affair and was in in Washington on the 21st.  You can read about it here:

          http://bullrunnings.wordpress.com/2007/04/19/ecelbarger-on-logan/

          Harry

          -----Original Message-----
          From: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com [mailto:civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tony Gunter
          Sent:
          Tuesday, July 15, 2008 10:39 AM
          To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Was Logan dissed for higher command?

           

          --- In civilwarwest@ yahoogroups. com, "Carl Williams" <carlw4514@. ..>
          wrote:

          >
          > Finished the book "Black Jack: John A. Logan and Southern Illinois
          in
          > the Civil War Era" I Recommend it.
          >
          > The author discusses whether Logan was unjustly passed over as a
          > replacement for McPherson when he was KIA. Interestingly, he gave
          > Sherman's views on what he didnt like about "political
          generals."
          > Seems that there is more to it than unthinking prejudice. I
          > loaned the book to someone, so can't quote from it, but
          > basically Sherman just felt that these guys typically just weren't
          > full time. He was especially resentful when they would go
          > home to campaign for reelection just as things were critical
          > in the field.

          From the moment he picked up a musket and fought as a citizen at
          First Bull Run, Logan was sold on military life. He loved being in
          the field and would have remained in the field. It was only a direct
          request from the POTUS himself that sent Logan home to campaign.

          I think there's a lot of smoke and misdirection when it comes to
          Sherman's decision ... didn't Sherman blame it on Thomas? Another
          Sherman correspondence, IIRC, claimed that Logan didn't pay close
          enough attention to logistics. I'm not sure I have ever seen an
          analysis that supports any of these assertions sufficiently.

          Just my opinion, I believe Logan was mentored by the best in the
          business (McPherson) and deserved a shot at army command.

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