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

Re: Snake Creek Gap

Expand Messages
  • sdwakefield@prodigy.net
    Carl- Actually I think Joe Johnston had been in command for nearly 5 months at the time he was surprised by the Snake Creek Gap move. As I recall the CS Army
    Message 1 of 198 , Jul 1, 2001
      Carl-
      Actually I think Joe Johnston had been in command for nearly 5 months
      at the time he was surprised by the Snake Creek Gap move. As I recall
      the CS Army Chief of Staff Mackall's diary gives strong evidence that
      Joe Wheeler was primarily responsible for the terrible mistake of not
      having the gap adequately defended. If this was true -well it was
      just another example Joe Wheeler being a pretty crummy chief of
      cavalry.
      Although I think that there is also some pretty strong evidence that
      Joe Johnston flat did not know of the exsistence of the gap!
      Certainly if this was true , it was totally inexcusable.
      I confess that with the more I study about the Army of Tennessee the
      less of a Joe Johnston fan I become...
      Wakefield

      --- In civilwarwest@y..., carlw4514@y... wrote:
      > BTW the map in the Back of Foote's 3rd volume (RR to Appo), if it
      is
      > accurate, illustrates the sit. quite shockingly.... also shows
      > clearly McPherson coming up separately. Humor my ignorance (and
      lazy
      > bones) and tell me if Johnston had just taken over from Bragg, that
      > might explain why he had the gap unguarded, possibly; you know
      > Johnston had a reputation for NOT being caught off guard in this
      way.
      > carl
      > --- In civilwarwest@y..., sdwakefield@p... wrote:
      > > Carl-
      > > A great point! At least in my opinion but it seems to me that
      the
      > > risk of detection is much less if only a corps is used..and not
      the
      > > whole Army of the Cumberland. I still have a suspicion that the
      > REAL
      > > fly in the ointment to doing this was that by military protocol
      (?)
      > > McPherson might not have been the senior officer and thus the
      > > commander of the column-- as I have said this is just my 'cracked-
      > > pot' idea I could be wrong-
      > > Wakefield
      > >
    • GnrlJEJohnston@aol.com
      In a message dated 9/4/2005 10:37:14 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, dan6764@yahoo.com writes: An 1866 document produced by laborers locating bodies on the
      Message 198 of 198 , Sep 4, 2005
        In a message dated 9/4/2005 10:37:14 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, dan6764@... writes:
        An 1866 document produced by laborers locating bodies on the battlefield stated that the heaviest concentrations of dead lay on the eastern and western sections of the field and that the dead were fairly light in the center where the Hornets Nest was located.. 
        This may be true Dan, but remember, as soon as the battle ended, Union troops started gathering up their dead as well as Confederate dead.  Those that might have been found after the war was over, were most likely those that were killed in the brush and bramble of the battlefield, whereas, the Hornet's Nest was quite open and bodies were easily found there following the battle.
        Just a thought of common sense with only documentation of them finding and burying the dead following the battle.  IIRC, Grant denied Beauregard  access to Confederate dead, since they already had been gathered up and buried.
         
        JEJ
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.