Yes, agree.---Lee and John wilkes Booth, (there are others), but these should be on any list.
OT: History Channel Miniseries "Grant"
- Thread starter ao5884
- Start date
Robert Toombs, in 1864, planted a full crop of cotton in response to a Davis proclamation calling on planters to switch to food crops. That’d show him.
That{SHOWED}him OR That's{SHOWING}him.
Only slightly better than your (bite me) comment after professing being civil towards one another.
Just pointing your hypocrisy sir.
I got ya good!
Along with not appreciating being told what to do.
Last edited:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.collinsdictionary.com/us/amp/english/thatdThat{SHOWED}him OR That's{SHOWING}him.
Only slightly better than your (bite me) comment after professing being civil towards one another.
Just pointing your hypocrisy sir.
I got ya good!
https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/that'd
“That’d show him” = “That would show him.”
I thought the jist of what people were saying about Texas was more about their entry. I am not even going to try to be at a level of "expertise" as some of you guys. Some of you guys have very impressive knowledge on this subject. My own interpretation & understanding about Texas in the CW was that they went into it very split and begrudgingly. Maybe the strongest voice/personality in Texas at the time was Sam Houston and he was very opposed to Texas taking sides and participating at all in the CW. The vote to enter in the CW was passed by a slim margin in Texas.... at least that is my understanding.
Reading the thread, from what I was reading was that no one really debated that Texas fought in the CW for the South, but Texas was not fully on board and was split about entering.
Very interesting, and I have no answer for you. Back on page 4 Hotshoe recommended
https://uncpress.org/book/9781469631561/theater-of-a-separate-war/
as a good book on the war west of the Mississippi and I suspect the answer might be here.
True however that DIDN"T show him because I doubt very much that he would care (he'd) about the planting.
Longer correct UN-contracted is proper/better.
I’ve been on this board for twenty years and never once have I corrected any poster’s English, not even if it were technically wrong. (“You should do it the proper/better way.”
) Why are you stalking me? This thread is about the Civil War and it’s a great thread. Let’s try to keep it that way.
Last edited:
Earlier in thread you recommended "Battle Cry of Freedom" by James McPherson. Questions... I see that it is part of a series. Can I read that book as a stand-alone volume, or would I need to read the entire series? And, does it read mostly as a text book??
Stand-alone. It is fantastic- second only to Shelby Foote trilogy,
I read it as a stand-alone book. I dabble.
And, hell no, it doesn’t read as a textbook. You can take my word for it, it’s a great read.
McPherson is great at setting the scene so that you can see what’s going to happen before it does. (Of course, he’s taking advantage of the fact that anyone who picks up his book is already somewhat literate on the Civil War, but, still...) I’ve misplaced my copy but can clearly recall that the first thing he talks about is that the Union and Confederacy had their own, different, versions of the song “Battle Cry of Freedom.” That was a great way to start the book. And, as Hotshoe insinuated, he’s less about the actual battles than the lead-up to and aftermath of the battles. He doesn’t skim over the battles but he doesn’t go into them in the detail Foote, for example, does.
Last edited:
Thanks appreciate it. Going to beach in about 3 weeks and time to pick up my beach reading book. Sounds like a good choice.
I would be remiss if I did not use this thread to acknowledge a wonderful former Penn State Professor of Civil War History, Warren W. Hassler, Jr. .. Professor Hassler inspired me, rekindled my interest in the Civil War, and wrote a recommendation that helped me get into law school. A great man, he died in 2012. This is from his obituary. Rest in Peace Professor.
Warren W. Hassler, Jr., a distinguished professor emeritus of Civil War History at the Pennsylvania State University, died on July 12, 2012, in La Jolla, Ca., after a brief illness. He served in the 7th US Army Air Corps at the end of World War II. In 1954, Hassler joined the faculty of Penn State after earning his Ph.D. in U.S. military history from The Johns Hopkins University. He remained at Penn State until his retirement in 1989, except for two years as Distinguished Visiting Professor at the U.S. Military Academy, West Point, and at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College. Hassler authored numerous scholarly articles and five books on the Civil War and American Military History, including studies of the commanders of the Army of the Potomac and Major General George B. McClellan. An endowment was established in his name with the Richards Civil War Era Center for encouraging graduate studies on the period.
Warren W. Hassler, Jr., a distinguished professor emeritus of Civil War History at the Pennsylvania State University, died on July 12, 2012, in La Jolla, Ca., after a brief illness. He served in the 7th US Army Air Corps at the end of World War II. In 1954, Hassler joined the faculty of Penn State after earning his Ph.D. in U.S. military history from The Johns Hopkins University. He remained at Penn State until his retirement in 1989, except for two years as Distinguished Visiting Professor at the U.S. Military Academy, West Point, and at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College. Hassler authored numerous scholarly articles and five books on the Civil War and American Military History, including studies of the commanders of the Army of the Potomac and Major General George B. McClellan. An endowment was established in his name with the Richards Civil War Era Center for encouraging graduate studies on the period.
Last edited:
Me too. I would not stake my life on it, but "Professor Hassler" sure seems familiar. Pretty sure I had him about the same time period. Would have been 83-84. The name seems familiar. I thoroughly enjoyed the classes. Learned a ton of info and was presented and taught very well.
No doubt, the Battle of Shiloh (also called the Battle of Pittsburg Landing) is a very good example of that - read this piece which is written by the foremost experts on this specific battle:
https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/battle-shiloh-shattering-myths
Somebody came on here claiming most of these myths to denigrate Grant.... and also tried to claim that Grant possessed a huge numerical advantage (this is also completely false, when Shiloh started, Grant was missing the entire Army of the Ohio, Buell's Army and also about a third of his own command, the Army of the Tennessee - two of Grant's Divisions were stationed well northeast of him towads Nashville. Grant initially wanted to avoid a battle, if he could, but once hostilities started, his intent was to trade land for time fully intending a full-frontal counterattack once his reinforcements were nearby. Grant was a masterful tactician in the heat of battle as Shiloh demonstrated - what he had planned at very start of the battle worked beautifully as the results very clearly demonstrated - the rebs broke rank and went into full retreat once Grant's Army's counterattacked.).
I thought the series was excellent. At first I was on the fence about watching it, but half way through the first episode I knew I was hooked. I learned a lot and even got choked up at the end when they read the letter to Grant from the Confederate soldier which showed that his generous terms of surrender actually worked for some of the Confederates. At the time I'm sure many thought Grant was too generous with his terms of surrender.
As someone who grew up in the North, I was always pretty ambivalent about him. He clearly played to win and that caused a lot of bloodshed but it may have been necessary and, actually, ended up causing less bloodshed in the long run. I did not like his tactic of ruining citizen's lives, march to the sea, which wasn't western war acceptable at the time. Regardless, his terms are what made me see him in a much better light. I believe he and Lee respected eachother greatly.
I’ve been on this board for twenty years and never once have I corrected any poster’s English, not even if it were technically wrong. (“You should do it the proper/better way.”
Stalking you?
No sir.
All the best sir.
Go Liverpool. Let's finally secure that Trophy sir.
Big fan of Longstreet. He wasn’t given the credit he deserved. He had 3 crushing flank attacks of his own. If he had the numbers on the right at Gettysburg or if Anderson was still under his command, blunder of lee to give hill so many Corp, then the second day of Gettysburg would have been different. The battle though may have turned out similar as the amount of reinforcements that Meade had in just a weeks times made up for the devastation the union army had at Gettysburg.
They said grant was beloved by southerners. I’m not really sure about that. Longstreet was treated poorly because he was trying to help grant after the war.
Several on this thread have referenced the writing of history following the end of the Civil War. One person noted that today the media is clustered on the coasts and would never advance the notion of the "Lost Cause". And as of today that is true. However after the civil war this was not the case. A prime example is the D.W. Griffin film "Birth of a Nation". This silent movie was an epic for its time. It shows the KKK as heroic. The film traces the tale of two families, one north and one south. Both are portrayed as upright, patriotic and moral. Blacks in the film (mostly done by whites in blackface) are show as sneaky and deceitful. In the film after the war the northern hero reunites with his southern friend and together then defeat the KKK from molesting white women. Woodrow Wilson (who grew up in Virginia) stated this film was "history written with lighting".
On another note I took 2 courses from Professor Hassler and agreed he was an excellent teacher.
On another note I took 2 courses from Professor Hassler and agreed he was an excellent teacher.
Longstreet did take jobs with the administration, and did lead black soldiers to quell a riot in New Orleans over Northern occupation, so there were reasons. But his abilities as a general were attacked, interestingly by other generals, who just a short time before considered him a star.
Watch the scene from the Jolson blackface movie The Wonder Bar where he sings Going to Heaven. This is 1934 in "modern hollywood" and is amazing that such a scene could be written, shot and put out into theaters. It's demeaning to everyone, but it was indicative of the times and fairly far removed from the Civil War. I guess it was acceptable at that time which is amazing. Watch it, you'll fall out of your chair.
bwifan
Well-Known Member
She was the CEO of the American Civil War Museum I believe, and she was comparing Grant to Washington as Washington was loved my many for being the top general to lead and save our country and Washington later became president to help rebuild the country after the war. Much like Grant path and was being asked to do.
There's no bias in this one. It's pure reality. If you want, I'll tell ya a little story regarding Dr. Cutrer, Shelby Foote, and a little know guy called Ken Burns and "The Civil War."
Oh, not wise, just a very interesting story. Ken Burns still looks about 20 to this day.
So Dr. Cutrer was asked to narrate The Civil War as was Shelby Foote. They were good friends and both from the South. Thomas, Dr. Cutrer, turned it down as did Shelby, or so Thomas was told by Shelby. They're at Ken's presentation of The Civil War at an American Historical Society meeting. Ken was a young pup and looked even younger. The film starts, and there's Shelby narrating. Tom always laughed about it, but it made Shelby famous. If you read their writings, there's little comparison in regards to historical documentation. Tom simply didn't push an agenda, Shelby definitely did. Both served, Shelby, WWII, Thomas, Vietnam. It changed his life. His undergrad is in literature, his advanced degrees from LSU and A&M, are in American history. He has an amazing perspective coming out of Vietnam going forward.
A side note regarding James McPherson. He's a Princeton guy and I inappropriately spoke regarding Penn State. I was thinking Gary. My apologies. Both are fantastic historians and better men. Thomas is now back in Texas, has an incredible family, and is a fly fishing machine. I have never known or met a better man. Another great professor I had the honor of being taught by, was Dr. John Corrigan. He literally wrote the book, Religion in America with Winthrop Hudson. If you don't know the history of religion, you cannot know America. Fabulous read, an even better man. He has taught from Oxford to ASU and FSU, as well as Harvard. I was incredibly fortunate in my academic studies of history and that's a huge understatement.
