Conference smurf::civil_war

The history conference has several topics on the Civil War. There is alot
of good information there and  some Little Mac bashing :-)

But i've no time to list them ...
dave

    
    RE: 14.2
    	      Ian
    
    If the Charles I versus parliament was 'The Second British Civil War'
    waht do you consider to be the first ????
    
    Aidan
    

    The Wars of the Roses, between the houses of Lancaster and York
    (1455-85) could be seen as the First English Civil War.  However, this
    was not a true civil war but a power struggle between two great
    families.  The armies consisted of faithful retainers who fought out
    of loyalty to their lord, not civil liberty, freedom, etc.
    
    Though the Wars of the Roses (a title given to the struggle by the
    Victorians) was actively fought between the dates above, the
    Yorkist-Lancastrian struggle had been going on since the death of
    Edward III 1377 and did not end until the throne was usurped by the
    Tudors after the battle of Bosworth in 1485. 

               <<< Note 3.3 by TRUCKS::STIMSON "Mike Stimson" >>>
                             -< Wars of the Roses >-

    >The Wars of the Roses, between the houses of Lancaster and York
    >(1455-85) could be seen as the First English Civil War.  However, this
    >was not a true civil war but a power struggle between two great
    >families.  The armies consisted of faithful retainers who fought out
    >of loyalty to their lord, not civil liberty, freedom, etc.
    
    That was my point..that it was not a British civil war, not even an
    English one for that matter..basically a dynastic struggle.
    
    >Though the Wars of the Roses (a title given to the struggle by the
    >Victorians) was actively fought between the dates above, the
    >Yorkist-Lancastrian struggle had been going on since the death of
    >Edward III 1377 and did not end until the throne was usurped by the
    >Tudors after the battle of Bosworth in 1485. 

    Uh..not quite. The seeds were sown when Richard II (The Black Prices
    son) became King as a boy. The regent was John of Gaunt his Uncle.
    Richard was a foolish lad who grew to be an idiotic King. He exiled
    John of Gaunts oldest son Henry (Bolingbroke) who returned,deposed him
    and had him killed..usurping the throne for himself.
    I cant remember when this took place but it was considerably later
    that 1377.
    The house of York,as Richard died without issue, was the 'senior
    house' and rightfully should have provided the next king.
    However there wwre no problems either during Henry IV's reign or for
    that matter Henry V's and probably would have been none if Henry VI had
    bee a capable King but he was 'mentally challenged'.
    so it was fairly late in Henry's Grandsons reign that the war got
    going and his wife was (apparently) largely to blame because she was 
    scared that Richard of York would raise rebellion against her mad
    husband. 
    Ironically it was the attempts to destroy Richard that led to
    the 'rebellion' Of course Warwick Kingmaker had a hand as well.
    So the actual war started with Richard of York (who was middle-aged by
    that time) and Henry VI and ended with the death of Richards youngest 
    son, Richard III, at Bosworth field and the usurpation of the throne
    by Tudor (Henry VII).
    
    Of course Ian may well have had something else in mind.
    
    Aidan
    
    
    
     
    

    
    On rereading my previous note I realised this bit could cause confusion
    
    >so it was fairly late in Henry's Grandsons reign that the war got
    >going and his wife was (apparently) largely to blame because she was 
    >scared that Richard of York would raise rebellion against her mad
    >husband. 
    
    Henry's grandson being Henry VI and the wife being Henry VI's wife
    Margaret.
    
    Aidan
    

    
    Re. 28.11
    
    Not to rathole such a good notefile, but,
    
    		....Hang Jeff Davis from a sour apple tree..???
    
    Them's  a'fightin' words in my neck of the woods, Sah!!
    	Prepare to defend thy Honor! Pistol's or Sabers!  :^)
    
    					The Alabama Slammer

    
    First thrust in the duel of note 28.11
     
    A living death is being buried in a Hahhvahd dorm wiv a bunch of blue-
    bloodied nerdnicks who won't let you hang your Reb flag out the window!
    
    						:^)
    
    					The Alabama Slammer

    So.  Being the challenged, I get the choice of weapons.  However,
    the gentleman from the South makes the first move with his sabre.
    (Good thing I didn't turn my back.)  This must be the famous Southern
    Chivelry I've heard tell about.  
    
    Riposte:  No sense getting arrested for defacing school property.
    
    						Don(,n.  To put on.)

Put away your sword, Slammer, for the nonce!

Nobody cuts or shoots until we have evidence that each principal has
seconds, nor either until we have a judge and a surgeon present.  You
boys gonna duel on my turf, you do it right, huh?

Slammer, I should be honoured to serve as your second, Sir.  It is my
opinion that Mr Davis, although I consider him to have been misguided,
was doing the honorable thing by his lights.

Now then, have we a second for Mr Rudman?

-d

     
    I'm honored Sah to have you for my second.
    
    I will honor the rules of chivalry. What Southern Gentleman wouldn't?
    
    As soon as a second steps forward to secure the honor of my Northern
    adversary, he may choose his choice of weapons.
    
    Till we meet upon the field of honor, I remain your obedient servant,
    
    					The Alabama Slammer
    
    		Long Live Jeff Davis and the South!! 

        Re: 32.8
    I couldn't imagine why you would recommend that one Ziff!?
    
    The funny thing about that is, my great-great-grandfather served in
    the 57 Mass. Regiment, from the Fitchburg, Ma. area. The book that is
    out titled "Mother May You Never See The Sights I've Seen" is about the
    57 Ma. Reg. written by a Fitchburg native now living in Florida. Of 
    course a copy sits on my bookshelve, along side his tin-type photo
    and his war and medical records.
    
    But, my prejudice viewpoint rests with the book on the 5th Alabama
    Batt.!  What else!?
    
    					The Alabama Slammer 

    
    Re: 17.24
    
    	Blame it on third shift foggies after a long holiday weekend!?
    		It wasn't Bragg, it was Hood that faced Sherman!
    			But Bragg still doesn't compare to A.S. Johnston!
    
    				The (red-faced)Alabama Slammer

    Dear Slamma,
    True, we will never know how ole' A.S. would have managed during the
    war. His reputation coming into the war gave huge expectations as to
    his overall ability. Anything less than Wellingtonesque would cause
    a general disappointment. Plus ole' Jeff Davis was always a droolin'
    over him and I think I recall reading that there were some grumblings
    from local Western Reb commanders about him during his brief command.
    Thus my overrated stamp, whether it be just or not. Educate me.
    
    Your humble servant,
    MikeL
    

Slammer, permit me.

Wherever A.S. Johnston appeared, he did remarkably well with the forces
at his disposal, once we consider their quality and condition.

Jeff Davis was fanatically loyal to Johnston because Johnston was loyal
to Davis; Davis' invariable practice was to return loyalty for
loyalty.  Davis was first and foremost a military man, having done well
in the Mexican War of 1847-48 and having been Secretary of War in the
'50s.  It is probably safe to say that he was a fair judge of
"horseflesh" and was unlikely to have been completely misled about the
capability of A.S. Johnston, whom, as I say, he knew, respected, and
trusted.

-d

    28.21's "Dixie's Land" is written in the colloquial words of the 
    Negro slave.  (The version I've seen in print is in much better
    english; this version hints at the song being originated by slaves.)
    The song itself, as written, is a condemnation of slavery, avowing 
    the illiterate slaves would stand up for the South and live or die 
    in Dixie, rather than words of a free patriot willing to fight for 
    freedom.  Civil War Confederate propaganda, if you will.
    
    						Don

    Hey Wess, great to see you back!  I never got a chance to trade words
    over the tube with you before, but your contributions have been sorely
    missed.  I'm glad we'll be able to hear from another un-reconstructed
    Rebel besides the Slammer (no insult intended Slammer, it's just nice 
    to have two viewpoints).
    
    Ziff
    

    
    Re: 2.51
    	Well by Gawd! If it ain't the ole' Sarge that walked me off the
    field at Appomattox! It has been a long time ther' Sarge! I haven't
    set eyes on you since Fredericksburg in 90'. Oh, by the way, I've 
    still got some of those egg's and vension left if any of ya'll
    Texas boys (and females) are still hungry! Old Tom R. is still
    alive and kicking and sometimes jots a few lines in here. Drop me
    a line outta here on the net and I'll give ya'll a run down on whats
    been going on with me.
    		Welcome Sarge! Its been a long time, it almost seems
    like old home week!
    
    				Ken (The Alabama Slammer)Ricker

    Re: 3.16
    
    	No insult taken, ya Irish Brigadier you! I'm just glad to have the
    help of the Texas Sergeant to help defend the Southern Honor! I've been
    stemming the tide against the Yankee horde long enough! :^) And yes,
    it will be nice to have two viewpoints.
    
    	See ya'll down my barrel of my Enfield at Monmouth!! :^)
    
    Here's a little dity I dug up for ya'll:
    
    	"In Company I, 8th Alabama, 104 of the 109 men were Irish born,
    and the men wore dark green uniforms; their banner was a Confederate
    battle flag on one side with a full-length figure of George Washington
    in the center. The reverse was green, with a harp, shamrocks, and the
    slogans, "Erin-go-bragh" and "Faugh-a-ballagh."
    
    	At least some Irishmen fought for the right side! :^)
    
    					The Alabama Slammer

    That's interesting about the 8th Alabama.  Yes indeedy, the Irish had
    a big impact on both sides in the war.  There was a saying down in
    Texas which was used alot after the Battle of (I don't remember the
    name off-hand, but it was the port right across the Rio Grande from
    Matagorda), in which a few hundred Irish Rebs defeated an invasion of
    by couple thousand Yanks aimed at closing the port.  It went something
    to the effect of: "Saint Patrick drove the snakes out of Ireland, and
    the Irish drove the Yankees out of Texas".
    
    By the way, might you have some more of those eggs and venison for a
    hungry Yank who just might "accidentally" wander into the camp of the
    5th Alabama Battallion down at Monmouth?  We'll see you there...
    
    Ziff

    
    Re: 3.13
    	With all honesty, Sah, my knowledge on the Western Theater of the
    War is quite limited. But, I'm working on that.
    	As was quite eloquently written in Re: 3.14 by the mysterouis -d,
    Davis was a good judge of "horseflesh" concerning A.S. Johnston. True,
    he my have been fanatically loyal to Johnston, but, I believe he had
    reason to be.
    	As you stated, yes, he did have one heck of a good reputation
    coming into the conflict. He earned in the Mexican War, as did most of
    the generals of the War. I mean look what he had to work with. Up to
    that point in time the Army of Tennessee was basically an untested
    army. True, the AoT got the hind-tit so to say in supplies, etc., to
    the ANV, but, I do believe he caught ole' Sam Grant back on his heels.
    	When the AoT came rolling out of the woods that dawn, he caught
    them napping. In my opinion Shiloh (Place of Peace, odd name for one of
    the bloodiest battles to that point in the War)could have been an out-right
    victory for the AoT.
    	From what I've read about Shiloh, the advantage was lost when some
    of the Rebels stopped to raid the Yankee encampment for lack of basic
    supplies, and plunder. I mean some of the Rebs stopped to eat the 
    breakfast that was still on the fires cooking.
    	I admit, a mistake was made in stopping and dealing with the Yanks
    in the Hornet's Nest. Such a small pocket of resistance allowed U.S.
    Grant to recover from the shock of such a surprise assault, rally his
    demoralized troops and recieve reinforcements from Buell, I believe?
    	My opinion of A.S. Johnston had he not been mortally wounded, would
    have changed the course of fighting in the Western Theater. True, he
    had grumblings from his commanders, professional jealously? Who knows?
    But what commander never had problems with his corp. commanders?
    	At that point he had managed a rag tag, under-supplied, sometimes
    unruly army and caught the Yanks offguard. True he had Davis's undying
    support, but, that does not win battles. I believe he had the brains
    and brawn to wield that AoT into a fighting force that would have given
    ole' Sam Grant all could have handled in the Western Theater. Who
    knows, maybe a enough of a problem where ole' Grant might have never
    come East?
    	Ya'll have peeked my interest even further on A.S. Johnston. I will
    parry further with you a little later. I must retreat back into my
    catacombs of books, but, I will be back, Sah! :^)
    
    					The Alabama Slammer 

    
    Re: 3.16
    
    	Mister Rudman, sah;
    
    		I too also have the version, as you put it, in much better
    English. The version I posted is the more popular tune that everyone
    associates with the South.
    	I posted the song in 28.21, and if it will answer any questions
    that you might have, I will post the Southern response "version" also
    if it would interest anyone.
    
    					The Alabama Slammer

    
    Re: 3.19
    
    	I just might be able to russle up some supplies if ya'll behave
    yourself ther' Yank. No guaratee'n the venision, but, we'll have 
    something kicking around camp. Just bring ya'll's tin plate and we'll
    see what we all can do fer ya'. Just look for the 5th Alabama and ask
    for Cpl. Noah Little.
    
    			Meet ya'll in the Cornfield!!!
    
    						The Alabama Slammer

Re: .20

Slammer, I think it was necessary to take out the Hornets Nest at
Shiloh.  Even a very small force, especially one as determined as
the Yanks there, could wreak havoc in the enemy's rear; Johnston
could not afford to let them stay there if he wanted to ensure a
solod footing on which to fight his way farther northeast, up toward
Pittsburg Landing.

-d

    Thank you both,gentlemen, on educating me further on A.S.
    My understanding of his history and role is nowhere near as deep
    as y'alls. I must retreat myself to the books for further education.
    However, the jury still is and always shall be out, as far as A.S.
    goes.
    
    Thanks,
    MikeL
     

    Re: 35.1
    
    The Confederate government did not, not even once, censor a newspaper,
    speech, or any other public pronouncement made against the Cause.
    
    The Union government suspended habeas corpus, shut down newspapers, and
    arrested in excessl of 15,000 named individuals on suspicion of
    Southern sentiments.
    
    -d

    I thought this topic would be the best place for something I'd like
    to bring up.  It sprang from remarks made in the PBS Television
    Series topic.  Someone said that everyone slants things.
    
    I would agree that slanted interpretations are very common.  I would
    agree that slanting is one of the easiest traps to fall into.  However,
    I do not agree that everyone slants everything.
    
    There are facts in history that can be absolutely verified.  There
    are other matters that can be verified within some percentage of
    certainty.  There are still other matters that can only be guessed
    at, or theorized upon.
    
    There are a number of books on the market that claim to tell, "The
    Southern History of the War," or some such matter.  I repudiate
    most of these.  In fact, I repudiate just about ANY history that
    has an adjective in front of it.  This includes, Northern history,
    Southern history, Black history, Women's history, and so on and
    on.
    
    If the phrase means, "The History of the [Adjective]" then it may
    be valid.  For example, if by "Black History" you mean a history
    of the black race, the phase is valid.
    
    If, however, by "Black History" you mean history as interpreted
    by blacks, I object.  This goes for all the other [Adjective] histories
    on the market, too, and not just the example I used here.
    
    There is history.  Then there is opinion, fantasy, theory, and
    supposition.  If it is factual, it is history.  If it is slanted,
    it is something else.  Histories of the War Between the States that
    propose to tell, "The Northern History," or "The Southern History,"
    are in the latter category.
    
    The histories of the war with which I grew up were PARTIAL histories.
    They told some of the facts, but not all.  For example, without
    exception they failed to mention Elmira.  I never heard of Elmira
    until I read Bruce Catton.  When I bring up Elmira and offer a more
    complete set of facts than I had in school, I'm not telling, "The
    Southern History of the War."  I'm just telling facts that were
    left out of most other narratives.
    
    You see, Elmira was not a "Southern" fact.  It was a FACT, *PERIOD*.
    A book that leaves it out is at best incomplete history.  A book
    that denies it is an outright fraud - a fantasy not worthy of the
    name, "History."  If Jeff Davis was telling the truth about his
    letters to Lincoln on the subject of Andersonville, then his memoir
    is not "A Southern History."  It is "A History."  Period.  If Davis
    was not telling the truth, his memoir is *STILL* not "A Southern
    History."  It is a lie.  Lies are not history, no matter who tells
    them.  (Mistakes are not history, either, but may be less reprehensible
    than lies.)
    
    The most common manner in which I encounter the theory that slanted
    views are stil history is in conversations like this:
    
    TV watcher: 
    "The Emancipation Proclamation freed the slaves in the United States."
    
    Me:
    "The Emancipation Proclamation did NOT free the slaves.  The 13th
    Ammendment freed the slaves."
    
    Watcher:
    "Well, you are only interested in the Southern history of the war."
    
    You see, the first statement is NOT history - not a statement of
    either a Northern or a Southern fact.  It is a contemptible
    lie.  The second statement is one of documented, verifiable fact.
    It is neither a Southern fact nor a Northern fact.  It is an historical
    fact.  Period.
    
    There is a way to use point of view in history.  You simply say,
    "This is from the perspective of so-and-so."  Even this is not a
    Southern fact or a Northern fact.  If the statement accuratley reflects
    the perspective of so-and-so, then it is a fact that it accurately
    reflects the perspective of so-and-so.  Now so-and-so may have been
    full of beans, but that is not the issue.  If you clearly state
    that you are offering one person's viewpoint, you are well within
    the bounds of ethics.  For example, I might say, "A considerable
    percentage of the Southern clergy held slavery to be a positive
    good."  Whether slavery is or is not a positive good is not the
    point of this statement.  It simply offers the viewpoint of a group
    of people from history.  We can aruge whether the clergy were right
    or wrong, but that is a different discussion.
    
    I have no problem at all with opinions; I have a zillion of them,
    myself!  I always try to label them, though, and if I miss one,
    I hope my correspondents in the notesfile will call my attention
    to the error.
    
    Wess

    
    	On St. Patrick's Day of 1863, in the lull before the campaign of
    Chancellorsville-Gettysburg, the Irish Brigade of the Union Army staged
    a celebration worthy of the occasion.
    	Quartermaster's imported liquors and meat from Washington; they
    served thirty-five hams, half of an ox, chicken, duck, and small game.
    The spectators enjoyed eight buckets of champagne, ten gallons of rum,
    twenty-two gallons of whiskey.
    	More than 30,000 men and women watched the Irish Sweepstakes for a
    $500 prize, with army riders on six famed horses going over ditches
    and hurdles. General Joseph Hooker watched as General Meagher's gray
    won - but this was followed by "Olympic Games", featuring greased pig
    races, wheelbarrow and sack races, and a tournament for Irish dancers.
    
    	Where can I trade my gray coat for an Irish blue one!?  :^)
    
    					The Alabama Slammer

    Ah yes...one of the reasons Meaghers men were so fanatically loyal to 
    him.  He was known for always putting on one H*LL of a St. Patty's day
    party!  I just wish our commisary sargeant could put on such a spread
    at our events!  Ah well, one can always dream...
    
    Ziff

    re 3.26
    
    >>If Jeff Davis was telling the truth about his
    >>letters to Lincoln on the subject of Andersonville,........
    
    Wess, I confess I have never heard of these letters. Coiuld you please
    let me in on what the letters supposedly contained?
    
    Thanks,
    
    Rich
    

Re: .26

But, Wess, there is a further quibble.  Facts are not facts.  Allow,
first, a quotation from the Curmudgeon's Dictionary, by Simon Gruff.
It's basically like Ambrose Bierce's Devil's Dictionary.  (Bierce was,
by the way, at Chickamauga.)

	Fact, n.  Information which is ephemerally correct, at least
	according to the individuals with whose opinion it coincides.

	   Don't tell me of facts, I never believe facts; you know
	   Canning said nothing was so fallacious as facts, except
	   figures.

			- Sydney Smith, _Lady Holland's Memoir_

Now, permit, second, an analysis of your fact in re: the 13th Amendment.

The Emancipation Proclamation freed the slaves, in the eyes of the US
government, in all territories that were in open rebellion against the
US as of January 1, 1863.  These individuals could not, for the most
part, exercise their newly-granted freedom; but it was nevertheless
real in a legal sense.

At the end of the Civil War, since the US government had triumphed by
force of arms over the so-called illegal government of the territories
that were deemed to be in rebellion, US authority was established over
those territories and the citizens thereof, *including* the persons
declared free by the Emancipation Proclamation.  Those said persons were
thereupon truly free citizens despite the failure of the system to work
out how their freedom was to be exercised or ensured.

The 13th Amendment, passed on January 31, 1865, did not *free* the
former slaves discussed above.  It did ensure their freedom under the
law, and when it was ratified on December 6, 1865, it freed any slaves
still held in bondage in parts of the country not covered by the
Emancipation Proclamation.

Therefore, the statement that the Emancipation Proclamation freed the
slaves is neither fact nor fallacy; it is half-truth.  The statement
that the 13th Amendment freed the slaves is similarly half-truth.  The
complete truth is the the Civil War motivated the events that freed the
slaves and that both the Emancipation proclamation and the 13th
Amendment were the expression of those events.

-d

    re: 15.11
    
    Just happen to have the ole CWD (p226) handy here...
    
    "Jefferson Columbus Davis.  Union General. 
    Indiana (B:1828, D:1879)
    Mexican War, Pvt.
    1st Lt. 1st US Arty. at Ft.Sumter when it was shelled.
    Prom. Capt. 14 May, 1861
    Prom. Col. 1 Aug. 1861, of the 22d Indiana Inf.
    Led 3d Div. at Pea Ridge and commanded the 4th Div., Army of the
    Mississippi 24 Apr.-12 Aug.'62)
    May, 1862, named B.G. USV, to date from 18 Dec., 1861.
    Upset over a reprimand from his commanding officer, William Nelson,
    Davis accosted Nelson in a Loiusiana Hotel lobby where Nelson slapped
    Davis.  Davis returned with a revolver and mortally wounded Nelson as
    he passed through the hall.  He was never punished and shortly was
    returned to active duty, due to the politacal ties of Gov. Oliver P.
    Morton. Assumed command of 1st Div. Right Wing, XIV, Cumberland until
    9 Oct. '63. Also commanded 2d Div., XIV, Cumberland 10 Oct.'63-22 Aug.'64.
    and the XIV corps 22 Aug. '64 - 1 Aug. '65.  He was Breveted for Pea
    Ridge, Resaca, Rome Ga., Kenesaw Mt., Jonesboro.  He lastly served in
    Alaska and in the Modoc War."
    
    
    

    RE .31:
    
    For those who don't know, the O.P. Morton who had such political clout
    was the governor of Indiana.  He managed, by a series of actions that
    had a nodding acquaintance with legality, to keep Indiana firmly in the
    Union despite a somewhat pro-Southern Democratic majority in the state
    legislature.
    
    Washington had to have Indiana to win the war, and so they needed
    Morton, which meant that Jefferson C. Davis did not receive even a slap
    on the wrist for killing a superior officer. (to paraphrase Bruce
    Catton).
    
    MikeR
    

    re: .30  (I wrote an answer to this yesterday, but lost comm. before
    I could post it.)
    
    Now wait a minute.  You say that facts are not facts, and offer
    two quotes that dispute, categorically, the validity and even the
    concept of facts, and yet argue with me.  You can't have it both
    ways, friend.  If there are no facts, then you have nothing to say
    about my statements on the EP.  (I have nothing to say about your
    statements, either, of course.)  If, on the other hand, you wish
    to take me to task on what I've said, then you jolly well have to
    put some credibility in facts, beforehand.
          
    The EP *MUST* have said what it said, and those words *MUST* be
    factually verifiable.  Otherwise, we could not even begin to debate
    the effect of the document.
    
    Skepticism is self-refuting.
    
    re: the EP, itself
    
    Your comments on what the EP actually did are valid enough, though
    they illustrate perfectly what I was talking about in regard to
    facts and interpretation.  Slaves were NOT freed in the South by
    the Emancipation Proclamation.  It was widely regarded, even in
    the Yankee congress, as an unconstitutional act of desperation on
    Lincoln's part.  It had about as much applicability to the real
    world as would our Congress' passing a minimum wage law for Iraq
    today.  Mr. Moderator, by your leave I will open a topic for discussion
    of this fascinating document.
            
    Wess

Re: .33

Wess, you've misunderstood my use of the Curmudgeon's Dictionary item
in re: facts.  It was for the purpose of injecting a little humor into
things, that's all.  Facts are obviously verifiable.  It is only in the
categorical verification of assertions put forth as fact that we
stumble.  My .30 was to point out that the EP and the 13th Amendment
are not necessarily as flatly *this or that* as you said.

Hell, arguing jots and tittles is fun, Wess.  Ain't it...?

:-)

-d

    re: .33
    
    Oh!  I didn't realize we were having fun!   ;-)
    
    We are in agreement on the importance of keeping facts and opinion
    in perspective, then.
    
    One last comment, if I may?  When a position that has been long
    considered a fact is disproven, it does not invalidate the concept
    of facts.  It actually validates it.  The old position does not
    become "a fact that is not true."  (Oxymoron deliberate)  It becomes
    an idea that was once mistakenly thought to be true.
    
    Okay?  Boy, this was a FUN rathole!
    
    
    Wess

     re .27:
    
    >	Where can I trade my gray coat for an Irish blue one!?  :^)
    >
    >					The Alabama Slammer

     :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
     :-)                                                         :-)
     :-) I knew it!, I KNEW it!...at heart, a galvanized yankee! :-)  
     :-)                                                         :-)
     :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

    
    But seriously, I hadn't seen the colloquial version of "Dixie".  
    Ever.  I guess Northern (Yankee) presses preferred not to use that
    version.  The question now is: Which version cam first?
    
    						Don

 Re: .36
    	(stealing a glance over my right shoulder, stealing a glance over
    my left shoulder)
    
    	Don't let it all get out now, but I'd do for the food!!  :^)
    
    		But when the shootin' started agin' I'd be wearing
    				the gray!!  
    
    	:^)  I admit it, a galvanized Yankee! Through my stomach! :^)
    
    					The Alabama ( BURP!) Slammer
    
    P.S. If I remember, I'll bring and write the Southern version of Dixie.
    	 The mistral version was the first one out. The Southerners just
    	 changed the words a mite.

    
    Re: Note. 41.0
    
    	Right shoulder shift! Order Arms! Support Arms! Shoulder Arms!
    In each rank count two! Ground arms! (Only Yanks do that! :^)) By the
    files Right! By the files Left! Right about face! Counter march by the
    files right! Counter march by the files left! Right wheel! Left wheel!
    Trail arms! Route step, arms at will!
    	And my all time favorite, Break ranks! Break!  :^)
    
    Wess, ya'll call this man a genius? I have nightmares of drilling two
    days before an event! :^)  Can you'all imagine drilling for four hours
    a day, then Dress Parade at night! I'm glad I'm only reenacting the
    soldiers life. It sounds to much like the real Army!
    
    		  				The Alabama Slammer

    
    	Where did everybody go?  Did everyone get laid off!!????
    			Did Lee surrender yet!?
    
    					The Alabama Slammer

    RE .39:
    
    	I have heard it said that Lee never actually surrendered.  When he
    entered the MacLean house, he thought the rather shabby individual
    waiting there was the butler, and handed him his sword to put away. 
    When Lee found out it was Grant, he was too much a gentleman to cause
    embarrassment by asking for it back.
    
    :^)
    
    
    	If you'd like another one, there is a wonderful little spoof of
    American history called "Say Uncle", by a couple of Canadians named
    Whalley and Nichol.  In discussing the Civil War, the authors state
    "... Lee surrendered victoriously...".
    	Actually, I think that's true - the nature of that surrender was
    probably the biggest victory of the war.
    
    
    MikeR
    

Lee's surrender wasn'\t quite so victorious as that of the Japanese and
Germans at the end of WWII.  That defeat was arguably the greatest
victory ever won!

-d

    
    	What's going on? I can't access this file after Midnight? 
    What else do I have to do during third shift? I have a mission to keep
    all ya'll Yankees on your toes! Mod, if ya'll could send me a mail
    message to the above mail node and let me whats going on, please?
    	Because I won't be able to READ IT HERE after Midnight!
    
    		Thanx,
    			The Alabama Slammer

    Don't you realize what's going on?  It's all part of DEC's
    Reconstruction, Reb!  No more midnight notes-raiding for you...
    
    Ziff

Ther actual midnight raid involved here was one executed by the lab
people here.  They reloaded SMURF's system disk incorrectly from the
backup, and *nobody* could access SMURF at all for a good long while,
like most of yesterday.

-dick

Re: 45.3

>         1863 	   The first pedal-powered bicycle is invented.

Not so.  The first pedal-powered bicycle was built in 1838 by a Scot
named Kirkpatrick MacMillan.  The pedal mechanism was similar to the
lever-driven back-and-forth pedal motion that is currently seen on
some children's rider toys.  I've seen photos of the bike, and its
date is documented.

We now return you to our regularly scheduled bellicose rathole.

-dick

    Being a member of the recreated 28th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry
    I might be able to furnish you with a list.  Let me make a few phone
    calls to my captain and first sargeant and I'll try and get back to 
    you in a few days with any info I can dig up.  Just out of curiosity,
    what is your interest in the 28th?  
    
    Ziff

    You can get the full list from a set of volumes called "Massachusetts
    Soldiers, Sailors and Marines in the Civil War".  Most larger libraries
    in Mass should have them....Lowell does for sure.

    I am checking out my husband's side of the family.  They came over
    during the potato famine, I though it strange that none of them seems
    to have been in the war, it would be interesting to check this
    regiment.  Thanks for your help.
    
    Pat
    

    Re: 18.25
    
    Phil Sheridan engaged in some counter-snipering in a small way in the
    Battle of Missionary Ridge.  He and a captain were on the plain below
    the ridge.  The captain offered Sheridan a drink from a silver flask,
    whcih Sheridan raised in tribute to his troops on the heights.  A
    coupel of Confederate gunners saw him, and popped off a round or two
    that kicked up dirt on him.  Sheridan started forward, vowing to take
    those guns personally.  When the battle was pretty much over, he did
    exactly that, hopping astride one of them and cheering the troops on. 
    A nother officer sat on the other one, but it burned him, and he
    couldn't sit a horse for two weeks.
    
    -dick

excuse any type-o's, I was trying to enter this quickly
    
    
copied from:	
Regimental Losses in the Am. Civil War  1861-1865; Fox, 1889

    
    
	"In the War of 1812, Genaral Jackson issued a proclamation authorizing 
the formation of black regiments, and, subsequently, in an address to the 
colored troops thus enlisted, acknowleded their services in unstinted praise.

	At the time of the civil war, the negro was closely associated in 
the public mind with the political causes of the strife.  The prejudice and 
opposition against the use of colored troops was so strong that the war was 
half finished before they were organized to any extent.

	The first appearance of the negro in the military operations of that 
period occured, September, 1862, in Cincinnati, at the time of the threatened 
invasion by Morgans raiders.  A so-called Black Brigade of three regiments was 
then organized, and assigned to duty in constructing the fortifications and 
earthworks about Cincinnati.  These men gave their services voluntarily, but 
were unarmed and without uniforms.  Their organization, such as it was, existed 
for only three weeks, and had no connection with the movement of enlisting 
colored troops.

	About this time, Gen. Butler took the initiative in the enlistment of 
colored men as soldiers, by organizing in New Orleans the regiments known as 
the Louisiana Native Guards, one of which completed its organization in August, 
1862, and was mustered into service on the 27th of the following month.  It was 
designated the First Louisiana Native Guard, and was the first black regiment 
to join the Union Army.  The Second L.N.G was mustered in, October 12, 1862; 
the Third, on Nov. 24, 1862.  The other Regiments of the Guard, or Corps 
d'Afrique as it was called, completed their organizations within a few months 
later.

	At this time, also in 1862, recruiting for a colored regiment was 
commenced in Kansas, and over 600 men were soon mustered in.  The regiment, 
however, was not mustered into service until January 13, 1863.  It was 
designated the First Kansas Colored Volunteers, but its name changed in 
December, 1864 to the 79th United States Colored Infantry.

	Recruiting for a black regiment had also been undertaken in South 
Carolina by General hunter, and an officer, Sergeant C.T. Trowbridge, had been 
detailed for that purpose as early as May 7, 1862.  The recruiting progressed 
slowly, and was attended with so many dificulties and discouragements that a 
complete regimental organization was not in effect until Jan. 31, 1863.  Some 
of the companies, however, organized at an earlier date.  Trowbridge was made 
Captain of the first company organized, and subsequently promoted to the 
Lieutenant-Colonelcy.  This regiment, the First South Carolina, was the first 
slave regiment organized, the Louisiana Native Guard having been recruited 
largely from free blacks.  The designation of the 1st South Carolina was 
changed by the war Dept., in Feb., 1864, to the 33d U.S. Colored infantry.

	Recruiting for the 54th Mass. commenced Feb, 1863, and its ten 
    companies were full by May.  It was the first colored regiment raised a
    Northern State, the First Kansas having been recruited largely in 
    Missouri, and partly from enslaved blacks.  The 54th was composed mostly 
    of free men, and its recruits came from all the Northern States, it being 
    their first oportunity to enlist.

	By this time the movement had become general, and before the war closed 
the colored troops embraced 145 regiments of infantry, 7 of cavalry, 12 of 
heavy artillery, 1 of light artillery, and 1 of engineers; total, 166.  Of 
these, about 60 were brought into action on the battlefield, the others having 
been assigned to post or garrison duty.

	Of the regiments brought into action, only a few engaged in more than 
one battle; the war was half over, and so the total of killed does not appear 
as great as it otherwise would have done.  The total number kiled or mortally 
wounded in the colored troops was 143 officers, and 2,751 men.  The officers 
were whites.  Though participating only in the latter campaigns of the war, the 
black regiments made a noble record, and if, at times, they failed to win 
victories, it was no fault of theirs.

	The first action in which colored troops were engaged was an affair at 
Island Mounds, Mo., October 28, 1862, in which a detachment of the First Kansas 
was attacked by a superior number of Confederates under the command of Colonel 
Cockerel.  Although outnumbered, they made a successful resistance and scored a 
victory.  Their loss was 10 killed, including a Captain, and 12 wounded.  The 
First Kansas, also, lost 16 men kiled on May 18, 1863, in a minor engagement at 
Sherwood, Mo.

	In the assault on Port Hudson, La., May 27, 1863, colored troops were 
used for the first time in a general engagement.   The 19th Army Corps, during 
its besiegement of that stronghold, included several colored regiments in its 
organization.  There were the 1st & 3rd Louisiana Native Guards; The 1st 
Louisiana Engineers; and the 6,7,8,9,10th Infantry, Corp d'Afrique.  During the 
siege the First Louisiana Native Guards lost 2 officers and 32 men killed, and 
3 officers and 92 men wounded (including mortally wounded); total, 129.  But 
few regiments in the 19th Corps sustained a greater loss.  The other regiments 
of the Corps d'Afrique were actively engaged, but with fewer casualties.  The 
First Louisiana Native Guard was attached to Augur's 1st Division, and 
participated in the assaults of May 27th and June 14th, in which its principal 
loss occured, its dead lying among those nearest the enemy's works.  This 
regiment should not be confused with the First Louisiana Infantry, also of 
Augur's Division, - a white regiment which, also, sustained a severe loss at 
Port Hudson.  ..."

It goes on with statistical information and losses per engagement, battles 
fought, highlights of particular regiments, etc..  Not enough time to type
it in at this moment...

-John

    Yep, as somebody mentioned earlier, I went to my local library and
    looked in "Massachusetts' Soldiers, Sailors, and Marines" and found
    a complete company-by-company roster of soldiers in the 28th.  It
    gave a town residence where one was available, a muster-in date,
    muster-out date, and a small service record for each soldier.  This
    should be a start for you anyhow.  If your local library doesn't have
    a copy of this work, let me know; and I'll try to furnish you with
    whatever information you may need.
    
    Ziff

    re 50.5
    
    Among those 12,000 soldiers with T. W. Sherman was me darlin' fightin'
    28th, Slammer!
    
    Ziff

    
    	Right fine fellow's them dere fightin' 28th!  They sure made purdy
    target's with them ther'green sprig's in their cap's and that there 
    purdy, big, fancy flag's they was a'tottin'.  To bad them had to go and
    mess them them thar' purdy uniform's in the Carolina mud a'duckin them
    minnie balls!  :^)
    
    						The Alabama Slammer

    They weren't ducking from those minie-balls Slammer, they were falling
    down laughing at what lousy shots the rebs were: I saw your newsletter!
    ;-}
    
    Ziff

    re 40.9
    
    Actually, the bayonet charge of the 33d Virginia, one of the "Stonewall
    Regiments" on the order of Jackson was the turning point of the battle
    for the Henry House Hill.  He waited until he knew that the union
    assault was spent and committed his force at the exact right moment.
    Had he committed them earlier they would have been broken on the crest
    of the union wave.  There's a right time to hold and a right time to
    attack, and done at the wrong time both will prove disastrous.
    
    Ziff

    A fine, in-depth understanding of the bayonet and its
    use is one of the greatest incentives to practice one's
    marksmanship.
    
    You may quote me!   ;-)
    
    
    Wess

    
    Re: 40.10
    
    		I just happen to have my own personalized Ben "The Beast"
    Butler chamber pot, complete with picture that I carry in my haversack
    on reenactments. It gives me a warm feeling everytime I use it. :^)
    
    						The Alabama Slammer

Butler was also called "Spoons" Butler, after an allegation that he pilfered
the silver from  the New Orleans house where he billeted.

He spent many months of the war bottled up in a bend of the James river
called "Bermuda Hundred," along with 50,000 (?) of the Union's finest. Seems
the Rebs had taken 10,000 (?) men and closed the narrow neck of the bend. He
only got out when the Rebs were withdrawn for the defense of Richmond.

				- bruce

    Well folks, it'll soon be time for me to say goodbye to all of you.  We
    got the word tonight that all of us temps here in Shrewsbury, Ma. are
    out of here as of next thursday.  You've all made many a loooooooooong
    third shift tolerable.  I'm really going to miss learning new twists
    and stories, and exchanging views with you.  Take care all, it's been
    a fun experience.
    
    Ziff
    
    p.s.  Wess and Slammer, I'll be looking down the sights of my enfield
          for you at some of the 130th events this year.  Except, that is,
          when I fall in with the 5th Alabama Battallion.  That's right
          folks, you all heard properly, I've taken to part-time rebellion
          since meeting Ken Ricker/Alabama Slammer here in notes.  I'm
          still an Irishman first, but on occasion I'll be taking up with
          those fine lads from Alabama when the 28th isn't at an event.

    
    	Ah, tis true! The fine Irishman Ziff from the 28th Mass., part of
    the Irish Brigade has finally seen the light! :^) He has given up his
    evil ways (at least part-time!) of wearing Yankee blue! Hopefully some-
    day he may shun his evil ways and wear the gray full time! Welcome
    aboard Ziff!!
    	But, seriously, Ziff it has been a pleasure a'makin' y'alls 
    aquaintance, both threw the Notesfile and upon the field of battle.
    And I will be looking for y'all down the barrel on my Enfield looking
    for those loud Irishmen marching across the field under that there
    purdy green flag! It will seem a little strange when y'all join the
    ranks of the mighty little 5th Alabama Batt., who will I shoot at!?
    	So from one of the nightcrawlers on that looooooooooooong third
    shift! Till we meet after the battle around the campfire and tip a
    tin cup of cheer! Best of luck and keep in touch!
    
    	A tip of the slouch hat, it has been a pleasure Sah!
    
    Sgt. Noah Little/The Alabama Slammer
    
    P.S. I can't wait to get y'all in the ranks to drill y'all's butt off
         there Blue Belly!!!!  :^) 

    
    
    	I have heard more than one rebel sympathizer say that Southerners
    would not have been as bitter about the outcome of the war if it had
    not been for the atrocities of the Reconstruction.  I am not really
    sure what that means (though it sounds convincing).  All I have ever
    heard, is that Lincoln would have been a "kinder, gentler" President
    than Johnson was.  
    	Is it reasonable to argue that Northern capital sped the recovery 
    of the South beyond what it could have attained on its' own?  What
    about the infusion of cash from the military installations that were
    established in the South?  Can it be compared to Post War Germany,
    Japan, Korea?
    	If you fellows have any suggested reading, I'd like to educate
    myself on this aspect of the ACW.
    
     2
    R

    RE 54.10:
    
    A high casualty rate, by itself (and especially one developed over many
    battles), should not be taken as indicating incompetent command.  There
    are too many times when a commander and a unit have no good choice of
    action.  It may be that retreat will spell disaster for the rest of an
    army - so one unit trades lives for time.  It may even be that retreat
    becomes impossible, through no fault of the unit, and they have to hang
    on until relieved.  It may, of course, happen that a unit takes high
    casualties because of some higher officer's incompetence, but that does
    not reflect on the leaders of the unit.
    
    In the ACW, units tended to stay in line until some level of loss or
    some level of confusion caused the survivors to decide to retire for
    awhile from the field - with or without orders from their officers. 
    Units that were well-led, with high morale, would stay fighting longer
    than badly-led, inexperienced (maybe), or poor units, which meant that
    they would take a higher percentage of casualties.
    
    No question that poor leaders could make casualties worse than the
    situation demanded, but the circumstances need to be studied in order
    to decide the issue, not just the casualty list.
    
    MikeR
    

During Reconstruction, a little old lady fell in the street in 
Richmond.  A Union officer saw her fall and rushed to help her up.  
After she was up again, she looked to see who helped her and saw 
the blue uniform.  She replied "Thank you, young man.  If there's a 
cool spot in hell, I hope you get it." 

Scott

    	I have heard, usually in a church Thanksgiving sermon, that
    the Thanksgiving Day Holiday owes it's origins to Abraham Lincoln.
    Is there any truth to this?  If so, what is the background?
    
    Happy Thanksgiving,
    
     2
    R

    The first recorded Thanksgiving was observed by the Massachusetts
    Pilgrims in the fall of 1621, when governor William Bradford appointed
    a day for feasting and thanksgiving.
    
    There were probably irregular observances between then and 1863, when
    Lincoln in September issued a proclamation calling on the citizens "to
    set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next, as a day of
    thanksgiving and praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the
    Heavens...in the midst of a civil war of unequaled magnitude and
    severity."  The holiday was intended as a reminder for people to be
    grateful and also for them to "implore the interposition of the
    Almighty Hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it, as
    soon as may be consistent with the Divine purpose, to the full
    enjoyment of peace, harmony, and Union."
    
    Lincoln's action was the "imprimatur" that made Thanksgiving an
    official annual U.S. holiday, so in that sense the answer is yes, it
    ows its origins to him.
    
    -dick

    Having lived in Massachusetts for most of my life, I always believed
    that the first Thanksgiving occurred in Plymouth in 1621. However,
    having lived in Virginia for the past year, it has been brought to my
    attention that the first organized feast to thank the Almighty occured
    in 1619 on the grounds of Berkley Plantation. 
    
    Rich
    

Re: long marches as described in topic 55

In another time and place, namely Italy in the time of Gaius Iulius
Casear, this kind of long march was the ordinary thing, at least in
Caesar's legions.  Caesar's customary march was 25 miles a day, in
full gear - including scale body armor, greaves, and helmet, with pack.

Miles in those days were only 5000 feet, so it's really only 23.7 miles,
but they did it all in the morning.  It was Caesar's invariable custom
in hostile country to complete the 25 miles by midday and then to build
a surveyed, rectangular fortified camp, with a 6-foot ditch and a
palisade consisting of the entrenched earth with man-high pointed stakes
sunk in it.

I can only imagine that they were a different breed of men.

-dick

    
    		"All quiet along the Potomac tonight"
    
    	May the good Lord bless you and your household this holiday
    season. May your fires be burning bright and your tables overflow
    with the bounty of the good Earth.
    
    		      "Merry Christmas to all"
    
    						The Alabama Slammer

    Wishing y'all good foraging, light duty, and heavy blankets this
    Christmas.  
    
    
    Wess

    
    	On this date on of the most infamous Civil War Generals was born.
    
    				Robert E. Lee
    
    
    						The Alabama Slammer

    RE .70:
    
    I assume you meant to have a smiley face ( :^} ) on "infamous".  I can
    think of few generals who can _less_ validly be charged with infamy
    than R.E. Lee.
    
    ( Despite what Harper's Weekly of April 15, 1865 had to say about
    him... :^} )
    
    MikeR
    

    
    	I seem to be heavily outflanked! Just a purely bias Southern
    viewpoint. :^)  
    	Okay, if not "infamous" how about most recognizable? Respected?
    Adored? Admired?........ :^)
    
    						The Alabama Slammer
    
    

    RE .72:
    
    Well, let's see...  :^)
    
    	Most recognizable?   Possibly, though Grant, Sherman, and Jackson
    might have equal "name recognition" among the general public.
    
    	Most respected?  Debatable.  (We had an extensive one in HISTORY,
    as I recall.)  He does place in the top five, I believe, on almost
    anyone's list.
    
    	Most adored?   Almost certainly; few other officers inspired
    anything close to the affection that Lee did.  The closest I can think
    of was McClellan.  Grant was respected by his troops, but not loved in
    the way Lee was.  [ Though Grant probably gets the prize for drawing
    the biggest enthusiastic response in the strangest circumstance.  After
    the Wilderness, when the AoP was pulling itself together along the road
    in the evening, a small group of horsemen rode past - Grant and his
    staff, heading _south_.  The soldiers had expected (based on past
    performances) that the AoP would retreat, rest, refit, and then head
    out again.  When they saw Grant heading south, (as Catton describes it)
    the whole corps blew up in the wildest cheer in its history - the
    officers tried to quiet the men so the Confederates would not guess
    something was going on - because they knew they were headed directly
    for _more_ fighting. ]
    
    	Most admired?	Not sure.  Lee may be admired by more people on
    _both_ sides than any other general, since Grant and Sherman suffer a
    bit south of the Mason-Dixon Line. :^)  But many folks, North and
    South, have put some other general first on their list.
    
    	He _certainly_ has the shortest last name!  8^}
    
    MikeR
    

    
    Ready!..Aim!...Fire!  :^)
    
    	Most recognizable...Most definitely, in most of the school classes
    that I've had the pleasure of giving a demostration/lecture ( in
    Civil War garb ) the most recognized picture is Bobby Lee. With Grant
    coming in second. Jackson and Sherman hardly ever known, at least till
    their names mentioned. I don't think I'd carry a picture of Sherman
    around Atlanta... :^) Though I'm sure his name is recognized.. :^)
    
    	Most respected...maybe it is debatable, but IMHO (bias I'm sure
    :^)...) General Lee ranks number one in my book. I don't know of any
    other General to take such an hopeless cause (militarily speaking)
    and stretch it for 4 long years. To do so much with so little, still
    amazes me. I can't say I've read the HISTORY file (red-faced :^)..)
    
    	Most adored....I agree, McClellan was the closest in adoration
    from his men compared to Lee. To bad he didn't have the guts to use
    the Army to his advantage. His men would have followed him to the
    Gates of H*ll..He could have finished the war at either "The Seven Days
    Battles" or "Sharpsburg" ( Antietam for ya'll Yanks..:^)..)
    	True, Grant had more respect from his men than love. It would take
    raw courage and respect for the man to make a man get up and follow
    him south after the "Wilderness Campaign".. I read the same story by
    Catton. Awe inspiring to say the least....
    
    	Most admired...He was almost a God south of the Mason-Dixon.
    He was feared above the line. Grant and Sherman reputations suffer
    a little down South? Well maybe a little....:^)
    
    	A short last name? agreed, but it sure makes a great University
    name with another famous Virginian....Did I miss the University's with
    either Sherman's or Grants name??......:^)
    
    
    						The Alabama Slammer   

    
    	I added some notes to the 130 Years Ago early, as I will be in
    school next week. Ya'll have a good week. I is on mini-vacation so
    to speak....
    
    					The Alabama (Hahhvahd) Slammer

    Well, after a 2 month hiatus I've returned from the ranks of the
    unemployed to DEC in Shrewsbury, Ma.  No small feat, considering
    the condition of things in this state ;-)!  Still a temp, but hey:
    a paycheck is a paycheck.  I only had to wait a month for an
    account, but now I can catch up on the back-log of notes in here.
    Now on to see what kind of biased and lopsided drivel that Ken
    Ricker, i.e. the Alabama Slammer, i.e. Sgt. Noah Little has been
    filling your heads with while I've been gone and unable to control
    him with my own unbiased and even-handed replies (Lots of smilies,
    Slammer!  I know that you realize this is all tongue FIRMLY in 
    cheek, but others might not!)  GAWD I missed this file...
    
    Ziff

    Re: .36
    
    	Egad! That no good Irish Brigadier has snuck back in!
    
    		Drivel Huh? Biased opinion, Huh!?  :^)
    
    			Somebody's got to do it!  :^)
    
    		Welcome back, I think!!???............
    
    					The Alabama Slammer
    

    
    	Once again I'm off to school for DEC. They are once again trying
    to educate this here poor, Southern boy! They keep trying, but, they
    will never change my Southern viewpoint!
    	That's why I added a few dates early in Note .50...
    
    			Now ya'll Yanks behave yourselfs while I'm gone
    						ya hear?
    
    					The Alabama Slammer

    I don't believe it, Slammer!  YOU calling the CSS Virginia "the
    Merrimack"  ???    8^}
    
    I thought only Yankees were that ignorant... ;^)
    
    MikeR
    

    
    	I had too! Ya'll Yankees wouldn't know it by the name of CSS
    VIRGINIA.  :^)
    
    	Course, I could always blame it on third shift foggies?????
    
    					The Alabama Slammer

    Jackson leaving Winchester, huh?  Won't be much longer before we read
    about Kernstown and the opening of the famous Valley Campaign in your
    130 years ago today topic, will it Slammer?
    
    Ziff

    
    Re: 2.67
    
    		Might I suggest this Bookstore...They have just about
    every type of book ya'll are looking for....
    
    			Olde Soldier Books
    			18779B North Frederick Road
    			Gaithersburg, MD  20879
    
    	Sorry I can't remember the phone number.....
    
    					The Alabama Slammer

    RE 50.109:
    
    Ziff, are you sure that Jackson _intended_ the attack on Shields would
    make Washington think he was stronger than he was?  I thought Jackson
    had had poor information on Shields' strength, and was "surprised" at
    how many men he had - so that the deduction made by Washington was very
    useful to the South, but was not a goal of Jackson's.  (I know he
    intended to "shake things up", but I don't think he had the _specific_
    result he achieved in mind.)
    
    MikeR
    

    It's true that Jackson was surprised at Shields' strength.  He thought
    that more of his troops were on the march out of the Valley to join
    McDowell.  I'm not sure that he realized how big an impact on
    Washington he would make, but that was his objective.  This is para-
    phrased, but a bit after the battle somebody gave him a "gee, too bad
    you lost that one" comment.  His reply was something to the affect of
    "on the contrary, I didn't lose.  Just by fighting I've achieved my
    aims."  Also, very soon after the fight began he learned how strong
    Shields actually was, and still had half of his "army" in reserve in
    order to retire behind a strong rearguard.  Instead, he redoubled his
    efforts, and pulled off a masterful flank march to fall on the federal
    right with most of that reserve.  I think he knew what he was doing,
    but didn't realize just how large the effect would be.  His orders
    were to hold Shields' command in the Valley; and this achieved that 
    end quite well.  McDowell being held at Fredericksburg was a bonus.
    
    Ziff

    Sorry there, Slammer: the challenged party has the choice of weapons.
    I'd be more than happy to second you, as long as Mike doesn't choose
    a double-load of cannister.  In that case I'll bring a squeegie and
    a mop ;-).
    
    Ziff

    
    	Re: .-1
    
    		Thanks for the vote of confidence, I think?
    	But if I should fall in battle, scoop my remains up, burn them,
    		    and spread them in front of the
    			  Alabama Monument
    			   at Gettysburg
    
    			The Alabama Slammer  

    
    	Look out for this man! He may look like a regular guy but he isn't.
    He represents a grave threat to your work place. Why? Because he sneaks
    out early Friday and skulks in late on Monday. He daydreams about
    'reenacting'. He will infect your good employees with his illness, as
    he tells his stories at the water cooler. HE IS A MENACE!!
    
    		   LOOK FOR THESE "TELL-TALE" SIGNS:
    
    	1.) Bleary bloodshot eyes from lack of sleep, (especially on
    Monday's)
    	2.) Wears long sleeve shirts out of season to cover poison ivy,
    mosquito bites, briar scratches, etc.
    	3.) He may smell of gun powder, camp fire smoke, moldy canvas,
    wet wool or horses (if cavalry)
    	4.) May use military jargon in ordinary speech.
    	5.) May borrow money from co-workers to support hi habit.
    	6.) May limp from blisters, or sit on cushions to relieve 
    hemorhoidal pain (if cavalry)
    	7.) May exhibit strange burns, bruises or other injuries.
    	8.) May attempt to "stack arms" with pencils for hours on end.
    	9.) May suffer from a progressive loss of hearing.
    	10.) He will only follow orders if preceeded by "Attention Company"
    
    
    	Borrowed without permission from the "Camp Chase Gazette"
    
    						The Alabama Slammer  

    
    Are you trying to tell us what some have expected all along: that the
    Alabama Slammer is full of fertilizer :-)?!  Of course, I'll take any
    excuse to visit the Holy Land; even if it's to carry out the final
    wishes (sniff, sniff) of my dear, departed, and beloved (even if only
    part-time ;-)) 2nd sargent.  Yeah, yeah, I know: I just volunteered
    to be Permanent Latrine Orderly!  So what else is new?  How about
    you Mike?  Any last requests just in case my long shot for promotion
    fails and Slammer wins?
    
    Ziff

    
    	Remember Private Pearson, Chester is just around the corner...
    		            I'm watching you....
    
    					Sgt. Alabama Slammer

    Yeah, but Bensalem is next weekend.  Got to practice being a Boston 
    Irish Yank before I'm due to shovel latrines as an Alabama Reb.  You
    may be watching, Sarge; but I'll be shooting AT you before I shoot
    WITH you.  Keep yer head down, Reb!
    
    Ziff

    RE various:
    
    Slammer, you better be nice to Ziff; remember, as your second _he_ gets
    to agree on the terms of the "meeting"!   8^}
    
    (I wonder what the rules say if the challenger's second shoots the
    challenger in a skirmish before the duel...?)
    
    
    Choice of weapons, eh?   Hmmmm....
    
    I propose Terrible Swift Sword at tabletop width.  [ Terrible Swift
    Sword is a regimental-level simulation of the battle of Gettysburg, for
    those not familiar with war gaming. ]  Slammer gets to be Meade, and
    I'll be Lee.
    
    (Heh, heh! :^}  Can't lose on this deal - either Slammer will never
    _dare_ to play well enough to beat Marse Robert, or the psychological
    pressure caused by engineering a Southern defeat will destroy him! )
    
    Seconds can be Longstreet, Ewell, Hill, Reynolds, Hancock, Sickles,
    Sykes, Sedgewick, Howard, and Slocum...
    
    MikeR
    

    Where do you live Mike?  I own that one (along with "A Gleam of
    Bayonets" and "Rebel Sabres") and have been itching to play against 
    a live opponent for a while.  Winning ain't no fun when you keep
    losing to yourself ;-).
    
    Ziff

    Ziff and Mike,
    
    Have you ever considered playing by mail?  I don't know the game - is
    it something that you could set up, describe to each other, and thaen
    play through the net?
    
    -dick

    
    	Re: 3.91
    
    		No wonder ya'll Yanks won the war!! Ya'll cheat!!!
    	Me Meade????  Perish the thought Suh!! The very idea makes my
    	blood run cold through my veins!!!....
    				I think I'm going to be ill!!!  :^)
    
    	Sounds interesting though....Give me more details on the game.
    
    		I'm leaving for Alabama Tuesday night, but, I will be
    	back to defend the Southern Honor, Sah....
    
    						The Alabama Slammer

    
    	Ya'll are probably wonderin' if the Bama' Slamma' has lost it...
    Not! I'm just ciphering a few notes in the "130 Years Ago" because I'm
    going home to Alabama for an reenactment till the 20th of April.
    	Now ya'll Yankees behave yourself now!! See ya'll in 2 weeks...
    
    					The Alabama Slammer

Mr. Slammer, did I see in one of your 130 years ago posting that you refered
to the Confederate's ironclad, the Merrimack? 

I sure hope that you were transcribing some Yankee fiction :-)

    Not fair: kicking a man when he's not here to defend himself ;-)!
    The Slammer is on his way "home" to Alabama even as you're reading
    this.  He won't be back for a few weeks.  
    
    On the other hand, you are right.  When he does get back we should 
    make sure and give him all the hassle he so richly deserves!  After
    all, "Private Pearson" can't get into any more trouble with him than
    he already has :-).
    
    Ziff

    RE .93:
    
    	Thanks for the idea, Dick, but since TSS is a game that uses a
    "phased" turn (meaning it is not an "I move then you move" type game),
    I think it would be cumbersome to play by mail.  And you've got about a
    zillion counters to keep track of...
    
    RE .92:
    
    	I live in Winchester, Mass.  Let's not leave Slammer out (unless he
    opts out), but arranging a suitable time/place would be fun.  I've
    never played TSS with a live opponent, either.
    
    RE .94:
    
    	"Terrible Swift Sword" is a military simulation game.  That term
    means it is an attempt to realistically represent the characteristics
    of movement and combat of the forces involved in a particular battle,
    so that a player can see what "would have happened" if _they_ had been
    in command.  Such games exist at various levels of complexity, scope,
    and (related) realism.
    
    	TSS recreates the battle of Gettysburg.  Every infantry regiment or
    separate company, every cavalry regiment, and every artillery battery
    that participated in the battle is represented by a counter.  (That's
    what "regimental-level" means; there are simulations of Gettysburg that
    use a division or brigade as the smallest counter.)  There are rules to
    try and account for different formations (line or column), limbering/
    unlimbering artillery, mounted or dismounted cavalry, ranges of weapon
    types, movement over different types of terrain in different
    formations, ammunition supply, lines of sight, fortifications, troop
    quality (e.g. the Stonewall Brigade and Iron Brigade units are affected
    differently by some combat situations than "lower quality" units), and
    leadership by individual generals.  This latter is done by having
    counters that represent all army, corps, and division commanders (by
    name), and most brigade commanders, with factors corresponding to
    leadership quality.  (This means the Federal player is stuck with Dan
    Sickles!  ;^} )
    
    	TSS is a _highly_ complex game, attempting to be as realistic a
    simulation as possible of the conditions of warfare in 1863 - so that
    us "arm chair generals" can see whether Lee _could_ have won!  :^)  It
    really lets you see that getting a brigade out of marching formation
    and into fighting formation was no easy task.
    
    	If'n y'all are interested, Slammer, we might even let you be on the
    Confederate side... :^)
    
    MikeR
    

    Count me in on that one Mike.  Contact me off conference and maybe we
    can get Slammer involved.  I'd have to reread most of the rules, but
    for this it'll be worth it.
    
    Ziff

>>    Not fair: kicking a man when he's not here to defend himself ;-)!
>>    The Slammer is on his way "home" to Alabama even as you're reading
>>    this.  He won't be back for a few weeks.  

We had better not pick on LIttle Mac anymore :-) At least Slammer gets a chance
for rebuttle!

:-) :-)

    re .85:  Figures he jumped for a peaceable method of dueling, since
             he never responded to my challenge earlier in this note.
    
    re .80, .96  He just overlooked "Merrimack" as he was copying the book.
                 And its not the only book that does it--they'll carefully
                 tell you how it was rebuilt and renamed CSS Virginia and
                 then refer to it as the Merrimack the rest of the book.
    
    Re .0(I forget) BTW, Slammer, there were *two* CSS Virginias...
    
    							Don 

    
    	That's right, I'm back... It was hard coming back to this nest of
    vipers and abolitionist's, but somebody has got to defend the Southern
    cause in this lop-sided view of history... :^) I see ya'll have been
    busy....Hmmmmmmmm, where to begin.....
    
    Re: 3.96  Yes, I was transcribing Yankee fiction, besides all them
    	yanks out there wouldn't know what I was talking about if I typed
    	the CSS VIRGINIA. The winner usually writes the history book. :^)
    
    Re: 3.97  Ya'll started out right nice there "Private Pearson" sticking
    	up for your Sargeant and all, but, on the other hand, so to quote,
    	ya'll didn't end it quite right. The hassle I richly deserve?
    	See ya at Chester, Private!!!  :^)
    
    Re: 3.98,99  Sounds interesting, let's see if we can set up an date and
    	work out from there. We'll talk using mail, okay?  Besides, where
    is Winchester?
    
    Re: 3.100   Little Mac deserves it. He's the only man that scared 
    	Marse Robert....
    
    Re: 3.101  I never responded to your challenge?? I don't seem to recall
    	being challenged? Peaceable method of duelling? Is there such a
        thing?  :^) Enlighten me on the challenge once again.....
    
    	I never denied copying the information from a book..I couldn't keep
    	that much fact locked up in my head. Once again, if I had called it
    	by it's correct name the CSS VIRGINIA, I'm sure alot of people
        would say, HUH? There again the winner writes the history books.
    
    		My trip home to my adopted state was well worth it! 
    	The highlight was going to the State Archives and actually being
    	able to touch the banner that the 5th Alabama fought under.
    		But that's another story, I don't want to trash up the
    	Rathole... :^)
    
    						The Alabama Slammer
    

    Did I accidentally type "hassle"?  What I REALLY meant to type (pardon
    my clumsy fingers) was "huzzah".  Funny how you can accidentally hit
    the wrong keys!  Not buying it, huh?  Oh well, I've got my shovel all
    ready for Chester, Sarge: but remember I'll be looking for you over my
    sights at Monmouth...
    
    Ziff

    
    	I hope ya'll got a big shovel there Private, there's always alot of
    		crap coming out of the Yankee camp....  :^)
    
    
    						The Alabama Slammer

    That makes sense; the way your retorts faded away like that.  I
    figured you'd gave up.
    
    The book is supposed to be an accurate day by day description of the CW
    and there's no reason in this day & age the author can justify using
    the old ship name.  And then you compounded the felony...  Your
    excuse might of held water in the general History file, but those
    who access this file should be a little CW knowledgeable, and/or be
    prepared to be educated.  Correctly.  So snap to attention and say
    "No excuse, Sir!"  :-)
    
    							Don

    
    	I suppose I could fancy myself to a true Southerner: Beaten, yet
    unbroken and proud of who we are. Defeat is not Dishonor!
    
    	Yes, I admit my mistakes, and believe me it won't happen again sir! 
    I agree, people who usually note in this file are knowledgeable, and
    I'm always eager to read some of the entries posted. And yes, they
    should be ready to be educated correctly.
    	I know there are a lot of read only noters out there, I just wish
    they would just jump in and through their $.02 in...it really doesn't
    hurt to make a mistake. There's always someone out there to correct
    ya'll.... :^)  Sputter, Sputter, Cough, Cough, Darn Abolitionists..:^)
    
    		Is that enough snappin' to attention, Sah???....
    
    	Where's old Edmund Ruffin when ya need him????.....
    
    						The Alabama Slammer   

    On a serious note, honor is about the only thing the South brought
    away from the War Between the States; much was lost, and more was yet
    to be lost.  Unfortunately, as with any aftermath of a great conflict 
    in the history of our world, the innocent suffer right along with the 
    ex-combatants.  War is a poor way to accomplish socio-economic changes.
    
    							Don

    
    	My sincere apologies.... What with the event we were running in
    Chester, Ct. and the sudden opportunity to go to classes at PKO last
    week, I sorta got side tracked....
    	I want to thank ELMAGO::JPALLONE for the capable job of filling in
    for the missing Bama'Slamma', thanks again Jim! Ya'll might have a job
    if'in I hit the pavement soon!!!???
    	But, I'm back to harass all the Yanks in this here file!!!....
    One sad note to report though, our Irish Brigadier, Ziff, has been let
    go by DEC, ah, such is life with all of us!!!
    
    						The Alabama Slammer

    
     Thought I'd take a couple questions about Gettysburg re-enactment here
    and out of the movie topic.  
    
    A. Slammer  you said that they do have a re-enactment every year at 
    Gettysburg?  Would you happen to know the dates and If one is hapening
    this year?  I'm thinking about taking some vacation and would like to
    see this.  Is it a mass crowd seen? worth seeing etc.?  Or would maybe
    a fall visit be better?  
    
    Thanks, Dan 

    
    Re: .109
    	What info I got I'll type here...
    July 3,4,5, 1992 - Gettysburg, Pennsylvania
    
    	129th Anniversary Battle of Gettysburg. Two battle reenactments
    plus "Culp's Hill Dawn Tactical". Registration limited to first 1000
    Federal and 1200 Confederate infantry. Artillery and mounted cavarly
    by invitation only. We promise historically accurate scenarios and
    realistic battlefields...
    
    	Contact: The S.G. Marinos Company, P.O. Box 3192  Dept. GR,
    			Gettysburg, Pa. 17325  (717) 334-6749
    
    		From the "Camp Chase Gazette"  June 1992 Issue
    
    	I honestly have not attended one of these reenactments since the
    125th Anniversary Battle. So I could not tell ya'll anything more than
    what I've wrote here. I hope this helps.... One question for you, what
    did ya'll mean by waiting till the Fall...???
    
    						The Alabama Slammer 

    
    Re A. Slammmer
    
         Thanks for the info... What I meant about Fall is if July was a 
    real Zoo or if they didn't have a re-enactment that I may just wait
    until the fall to go down to Gettysburg for a visit.  I imagine
    if would be much quiter then.  
    
       Thanks agian, Dan

    
    	Re: 3.111
    
    		The choice will really be yours. I've done it both ways.
    It is real interesting participating and watching an reenactment and
    I've done the Gettysburg Battlefield after the summer rush in civi's
    and once in uniform coming home after the 125th Anniversary at
    Appomattox. Either way, if your into the study of the CW, it is the 
    Holy Land.....
    
    					The Alabama Slammer

      Re: 31.17
    	 
    	Whew! I know I'll be able to sleep better nights now!  :^)
    
    		By the way Mike, just what side did Ziff pick in the board
    game??  Sorry I missed it....
    
    						The Alabama Slammer

    RE .113:
    
    Ziff chose a side which enabled him to uphold the honor and dignity of
    his affiliations... 8^}
    
    [ Hint:  _He_ didn't get his foot shot off as his historical
    counterpart did. ]
    
    MikeR
    

    
    	Re: .114
    
    	It would seem that he held true to his true affiliations???.... :^)
    
    			I knew he would all along..... :^)
    
    						The Alabama Slammer

    Re: 52.8
    
    At least Richard Mudd is not alone.  The Army's asinine behavior in the
    Mudd case stems from a long British legal tradition that says quite
    explicitly that if you help a rebel you are also guilty of rebellion. 
    No ifs, ands, or buts.  See, for example, the story of the Bloody
    Assizes after the Monmouth rebellion of 1685.  People against whom
    there was no real evidence were executed or transported simply because
    they had provided food and drink to men who were in the Handsome Duke's
    army.
    
    -dick

    
    	Re: 3.116
    
    		What's wrong with helping a Rebel????  :^)
    
    					The Alabama Slammer

    Slammer, it was, and still is, the view of the constituted government
    that rebellion is synonymous with treason.  Narrow-minded of them, but
    there it is.  :-)
    
    Besides, I said rebel, not Rebel.  I'm under the impression that a
    Rebel is a particularly classic variant of the Rambler automobiles
    built by American Motors in the '50s and '60s.  :-)  Hee hee...
    
    -dick

    
    Saw a bumber sticker today:
    
    	1861-1865  Civil War Reenactor
    
    First time I ever noticed one of you guys outside of this conference.
    I'm sure you're everywhere.  You just keep a low profile ; )
    
    R�

    
    	Just where did ya'll see that there bumper sticker??
    
    		If ya'll wandered up'um this away, ya'll would see a 
    parcel of 'em..  Right Tom??
    
    					The Alabama Slammer
    
    	Better yet! Go to Gettysburg in a couple of weeks and ya'll will
    see a whole lot of them!!

    
    re: 3.120
    
    Alpharetta, Georgia 
    
    Near DEC site ALF (Atlanta Customer Support Center).  It was the
    first one I've noticed.
    
    r�
    
    

    
    	Well, I'm off to re-fight the Battle of Gettysburg for Ted Turner.
    The reason I'm writing this here note is, it does not look to good for
    me having a position with DEC upon my arrival back home. I hope that 
    I am not to premature with this here statement, but, it does loom to
    good on the horizon for me.
    	So being the dignified, Southern gentleman that I am... :^) I will
    pause here to say my farewells to one and all. It has been a supreme
    pleasure to have crossed swords with ya'll Yanks.
    	I think what I will miss the most is this here Notes.File. It has
    been a source of pleasure (and something to keep me awake nights! :^* )
    and have meet a parcel of right fine people!
    	Good luck to ya'll in DEC's "Reconstruction Era"! Gee, sounds kinda
    familiar??? If ya'll are ever at some reenacment and see some battle
    flag with an Alabama insignia on it, drop bye and sit a spell.
    
    
    	"Let us cross over the river and rest in the shade of the trees"
    	
    						Stonewall Jackson
    
    
    			"Bonafide, Southern-fried"
    
    						The Alabama Slammer 

    
    
          The anniversary of Lincolns death is tomorrow.... 4-15-1865
      I have a Civil War calendar in my office that has all the dates
    of the battles & birth & deaths of the people involved in it....
    It has some awesome pictures that are really well preserved for
    being so old.... I got it for christmas from my sister.... She
    knows how much I like the Civil War Era.... 
    
         Just for April it has a lot of stuff....  Like 4-3 Richmond
    Falls 1865..... 4-6 Battle of Shiloh begins 1862...... 4-9 the
    Surrender @ Appomattox 1865.....  4-12 Fort Sumter fired on 1861...
    4-27 Ulysses S. Grant born 1822.....
    
        I hope this is in the right spot, if not please feel free to
    move it wherever you think it should go, mods.....
    
               
                    ***** Deadhead Lefty *****
    
    
     
    

    Many Civil War pictures are well preserved because of the technology
    used to make them - collodion plates were a pain to deal with, wet
    emulsion and all, but because they're glass they tend to withstand the
    ravages of time.  Printing paper, too, was long-lasting because it was
    mostly rag paper - the modern methods of making pulp paper using acid
    weren't as widespread.  The image itself, on both negative and print,
    is pure metallic silver, so there's no reason for it to rot, either. 
    :-)
    
    There were so many events in April because it was the month when things
    got moving after the winter - very little warfare was conducted in
    winter, and the generals had lots of time to sit and plan their spring
    offensives.
    
    -dick