GDG- Winter Stomp

[Laurence D. Schiller]

Good evening all:
>
>
>>
>  >> You must consider ALL the evidence (snip my stuff)
>
>I fully agree. That is an important point. Surprisingly, most modern
>histories of this part of the action seem not to consider the Conferate
>accounts.

Yes, that would be surprising - so what you are saying is that 
Coddingham, Pfantz, etc. deliberately ignored Confederate evidence 
that was available to them? That is a pretty serious accusation 
against historians who have been shown to be very thorough in their 
research. Is it possible they didn't ignore this but interpreted it 
differently than you based on context and Federal accounts? Have you 
proof that these historians didn't consider these accounts?

>
>>>  it is very dangerous to make an assumption that something concrete
>>happened because there is no
>>evidence that it didn't.
>
>
>Also a good point. In the sector on question, between the Copse and the
>Brien homestead, there is an unfortunate lack of accounts from those
>positioned there (Cushing and Arnold's Batteries) that clarify what
>happened. But, as I have mentioned, references from Carroll's, Rowley's, and
>Stannard's Brigades (all of which were moving in the direction of that
>position, are revealing that something was indeed going on.
>
>>>it is far more likely that nothing of significance happened north of the
>copse, thus accounting for the
>paucity of accounts.
>
>There I disagree. The accounts we do have from that sector do reference five
>regiments moving under musketry fire and two other regiments rushing to save
>batteries.

I have seen evidence and reports from the regiments you cite 
specifically disputing your interpretation here - especially, as I 
recall, Stannards. These were previously posted. Can you please deal 
with these before yet again asserting the above?

>  Thomas Reichart of Arnold's Battery wrote in his diary *"one time
>it seemed as if we were all surrounded."*

Again - the total context of this report makes it quite clear to me 
that he was talking about the noise of the battle coming from the 
east at Culp's hill. The fact that FEDERAL batterymen turned their 
pieces to the rear absolutely demonstrates that fact.  Note he says 
'it SEEMED as if we were surrounded'. That is a far cry from 'we were 
surrounded and fighting for our battery. I think it very clear you 
are misinterpreting this statement. The intent of the words here is 
very clear.

>
>>>  Even more to the point, if there are alternate theories... a credible
>historian MUST address these and show why his/her theory is a better/more
>valid case
>
>That is a crucial point. There appear to be three alternate theories
>swirling. The first is that Wright's Brigade was stopped short of the main
>Federal line. I find this unlikely because there are so many Rebel and
>Yankee accounts to the contrary. The second is that Wright's Brigade did
>indeed penetrate the line somewhere south of the Copse. I find this unlikely
>because there are so many Yankee accounts to the contrary.
>
>I would appreciate hearing anyone make the case for alternatives one or two.

Would those who have said that please post again - I thought I had 
already had read pretty good support for the first.

>
>
>The third alternative (that Wright penetrated north of the Copse)  is the
>one I espouse, partly because it accepts the essence of most of the
>first-person accounts.

Chuck - forgive me, but I have seen very little that says this. In 
fact, quite the reverse.

>
>BTW, I'll pass at the moment on revisiting the action for July 3, despite
>the disparaging remarks.

That's fine, but I'm still waiting for you to actually address my and 
other people's remarks. There is, BTW, nothing disparaging in 
challenging you to address the numerous and very significant points 
that were made in that discussion nor have I done anything but give a 
frank and critical evaluation of your method in that argument. To say 
it is disparaging is an easy way of directing the conversation to the 
victimization level. If you want to be an academic, then you will 
have to deal with hard academic questions and method - don't hide 
behind, poor me is being attacked. That gets an F on the term paper 
real fast.

Laurie Schiller
-- 
Dr. Laurence Dana Schiller
Maitre d'Armes
Head Fencing Coach
Department of History
Northwestern University
Commissioner, Midwest Fencing Conference
Midwest VP, US Fencing Coaches' Association
Vice-Chair USFA Illinois Division
Lds307 at northwestern.edu
847-491-4654
FAX 847-467-1406
Official Sports site: http://nusports.ocsn.com/
Student web site: http://groups.northwestern.edu/fencing/