A Bohemian Brigade
The Civil War Correspondents
James M. Perry11/11/2007 9:07 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Good evening everyone, and welcome to our FOURTH session of BOOK CHAT, on “A BOHEMIAN BRIGADE: THE CIVIL WAR CORRESPONDENTS, MOSTLY ROUGH, SOMETIMES READY,” by James M. Perry.
This chat took place in the Civil War Home Chatroom on 11/11/07 and covered Chapters 7 & 8
11/11/2007 9:08 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Last week we discussed some of the differences between the Eastern Theater of the war, and the Western Theater. We also discussed some errors in the book, dates, and what seemed to be some questionable research. Much of Chapter 5 involved the rough nature of the individual correspondents.11/11/2007 9:08 pm (et) amhistoryguy: In Chapter 6, we examined the reporting of Bradley Osbon, THE naval correspondent. Almost always in the right place at the right time. Is there anything that needs to be added to our chat of last week?
11/11/2007 9:10 pm (et) amhistoryguy: I should just add to last week, I think that while those correspondents were "rough," so were the farmers, soldiers, and even the women of that time and place.11/11/2007 9:10 pm (et) Susansweet: I am sure they were it was the frontier.
11/11/2007 9:11 pm (et) amhistoryguy: CHAPTER SEVEN - A VERY ANGRY GENERAL Reporting on the insanity of General Sherman was certainly no way to gain the cooperation of the general, but that’s what was done by the Cincinnati Commercial. Not surprising that Sherman hated reporters. And even more understandable when you consider that Sherman had a prewar incident that gave him a disposition unfavorable towards reporters and newspapers. Comments on this?11/11/2007 9:11 pm (et) bluelady: I would say that a reason for the west being "rougher" would be the nature of the people that lived there. They were taming the frontier. Just as the colonists did 200 years earlier
11/11/2007 9:12 pm (et) secret squirrel: Sherman's insanity. He predicted how many troops woudl be needed to defeat the rebels, it was printed in the paper and he was said to be a little crazy.11/11/2007 9:12 pm (et) Susansweet: I had not known that the William in Sherman's name was added at a later time than his birth
11/11/2007 9:12 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Exactly bluelady - the nature of the frontier, and its hardships.11/11/2007 9:13 pm (et) amhistoryguy: IIRC, his mother insisted on a "christian" name, insisting William be added.
11/11/2007 9:13 pm (et) bluelady: What happened earlier...that would have angered him to the press?11/11/2007 9:14 pm (et) bluelady: Never mind I found it
11/11/2007 9:14 pm (et) ks: I was a little surprised that in the banking incident Sherman supposedly threatened to throw the editor out his 3rd story window. To think he felt that way about newsmen so early on...or maybe he felt that was consistently. ;)11/11/2007 9:14 pm (et) amhistoryguy: While banking in California, a newspaper....ok.
11/11/2007 9:15 pm (et) mobile_96: Thought the banker was smart with his moving11/11/2007 9:15 pm (et) secret squirrel: That banking episode seems a little unreasonable, but the insanity thing... i can understand.
11/11/2007 9:15 pm (et) bluelady: I wonder if by today's standards one could consider Sherman paranoid?11/11/2007 9:15 pm (et) amhistoryguy: The power the newspaper had to make or break was recognized by Sherman as dangerous. I think that is why he was so distrusting of the newspapers.
11/11/2007 9:15 pm (et) secret squirrel: I think he was absolutely right.11/11/2007 9:15 pm (et) bluelady: When it came to the press anyway.
11/11/2007 9:16 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Men like Whitelaw Reid held a great deal of power over public opinion. Do you think that the correspondents themselves were aware of this?11/11/2007 9:17 pm (et) secret squirrel: Those reporters were giving away positions and plans, calling for removal of generals, all from young men with no military experience.
11/11/2007 9:17 pm (et) bluelady: He was smart for sure. And knew that this was a different kind of war...from ALL angles11/11/2007 9:17 pm (et) Susansweet: I think men like Reid did realize their power.
11/11/2007 9:18 pm (et) bluelady: yes AMHG..which is why they walked and talked with a certain kind of arrogance.11/11/2007 9:18 pm (et) ks: Reid didn't realize his power? Why do you think that, Susan. Not disagreeing, merely curious.
11/11/2007 9:19 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Right SS, Without military training or background of any kind, were the correspondents right to be critical of the military leadership? How about being critical of soldiers who were “skulkers huddled under the bluffs,” at Shiloh?11/11/2007 9:19 pm (et) bluelady: Especially if they were with an "important" paper.
11/11/2007 9:19 pm (et) Susansweet: I said did , Ks. I he knew exactly how powerful his words were.11/11/2007 9:19 pm (et) secret squirrel: Yes, they were giving units and commands a bad name, bad press.
11/11/2007 9:19 pm (et) ks: Misread.... *Emily Litella voice* Never mind... ;)11/11/2007 9:20 pm (et) secret squirrel: They left out important facts, like about forrest cutting the telegraph line and Sherman going in blind!
11/11/2007 9:20 pm (et) Susansweet: I can just see them swaggering in to a room , Reid from the Gazette.11/11/2007 9:20 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Realizing that you have that kind of power, might make it pretty easy to abuse that power, to wage your own little battle against leaders who were supposed to have powerful positions. Major ego feeding frenzy.
11/11/2007 9:21 pm (et) bluelady: Easy to be critical if you are not one of them...even today.. look at all the nay sayers...none of who I believe were never near the front.11/11/2007 9:21 pm (et) secret squirrel: Agree guy.
11/11/2007 9:21 pm (et) bluelady: Absolutely...and the more influence you have the bigger the ego!11/11/2007 9:22 pm (et) amhistoryguy: So now generals not only had to deal with the Confederacy, but with newsmen undermining their authority.
11/11/2007 9:22 pm (et) secret squirrel: I say, court-martial them!11/11/2007 9:22 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Makes being a general even more difficult.
11/11/2007 9:23 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Did it bother anyone else that Perry refers to the man introduced to us as the “Worlds Greatest War Correspondent” William Howard Russell, as “Billy Russell,” in this chapter?11/11/2007 9:23 pm (et) amhistoryguy: I don’t know why that bothered me, but it did. In the first two chapters, devoted largely to Russell, Perry never, not once, refers to him as “Billy.” Now we’re close enough to use our own nicknames for the man. Just bugged me. I had to stop and think for a moment, “who the heck is “Billy.”
11/11/2007 9:24 pm (et) bluelady: SS you are getting ahead of the game here! ;)11/11/2007 9:24 pm (et) Babs: I wondered if he was called Billy back then.
11/11/2007 9:24 pm (et) mobile_96: First time I ever heard him called that.11/11/2007 9:24 pm (et) secret squirrel: oops
11/11/2007 9:24 pm (et) Susansweet: That and there was something else that was too freewheeling with names too, can't remember what it was.11/11/2007 9:24 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Seems a bit disrespectful.
11/11/2007 9:25 pm (et) mobile_96: Agree amh11/11/2007 9:25 pm (et) amhistoryguy: I'm sure it's not on the same level, but I can't imagine an author referring to George Washington as Georgy.
11/11/2007 9:25 pm (et) Babs: I guess since Perry considers himself one of them, he can be informal. :^)11/11/2007 9:26 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Glad to hear others noticed that too. I thought I was just being picky, but it didn't seem right.
11/11/2007 9:26 pm (et) bluelady: LOL. He must have written that part after having too much red cat while in the finger lakes.11/11/2007 9:26 pm (et) ks: Perry...oh, you mean Jimmy-boy, Babs? ;)
11/11/2007 9:27 pm (et) amhistoryguy: That must be it Babs : )11/11/2007 9:27 pm (et) Babs: Yup Jimbo.
11/11/2007 9:27 pm (et) mobile_96: On the other hand, Perry never Met him.11/11/2007 9:27 pm (et) bluelady: I will stick with too much red cat.
11/11/2007 9:28 pm (et) bluelady: A local wine.11/11/2007 9:28 pm (et) amhistoryguy: An important point does come out, in that it was impossible for a single reporter to file a story that covered a battle as extensive as Shiloh. And that the reporters recognized that.
11/11/2007 9:28 pm (et) amhistoryguy: They did have a tough job, no doubt about that.11/11/2007 9:29 pm (et) ks: It does surprise me to read of the reporters getting together and comparing stories before filing.
11/11/2007 9:30 pm (et) bluelady: Maybe by Shiloh they were figuring they could get the story closer to "right" if the confired with each other..but I still think that they were just spying on each other.11/11/2007 9:30 pm (et) amhistoryguy: The small papers with no reporters on the field may have had the best position, they just took the stories and re printed them.
11/11/2007 9:30 pm (et) bluelady: Because they still raced to see who would be in print first.11/11/2007 9:31 pm (et) Susansweet: When Reid describes Buell's men arriving I loved the phrase There was little of the vulgar vanity of valor. The alliteration is so well done.
11/11/2007 9:31 pm (et) amhistoryguy: That is a very good line Susan.11/11/2007 9:32 pm (et) Susansweet: When Villard talks about General Nelson was a veritable Orlando Furioso I had to look that one up.
11/11/2007 9:33 pm (et) amhistoryguy: The practice of publishing letters to the editor, from soldiers in the field, stood a good chance of having more info than the reporters collected. News interesting to the folks back home. New York Sunday Mercury did this.11/11/2007 9:34 pm (et) mobile_96: There were quite a few papers that did that.
11/11/2007 9:34 pm (et) amhistoryguy: If you based your history of the war entirely on what the newspapers wrote, you would come up with an entirely different history no doubt.11/11/2007 9:35 pm (et) ks: I didn't look it up. Who was Orlando Furioso?
11/11/2007 9:35 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Staples edited the collection of Mercury letters into a book, "Writing and Fighting the Civil War." Good read.11/11/2007 9:36 pm (et) Babs: Susan, I meant to look up Orlando. What does it mean?
11/11/2007 9:36 pm (et) Susansweet: He is the hero of a 16th century Italian romantic epic poem11/11/2007 9:37 pm (et) Susansweet: He is the best of Charlemangne Paladins.
11/11/2007 9:37 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Anything more on chapter seven ?11/11/2007 9:37 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Thanks for looking that up Susan - I meant to.
11/11/2007 9:37 pm (et) Susansweet: This is the sequel to Romance of Orlando, this one means the Frenzy of Orlando in their battle with the Saracen Army when the Saracens were invading Europe11/11/2007 9:38 pm (et) Babs: You know if we weren't in the middle of a book chat using the word Palidin would make us burst into song.
11/11/2007 9:38 pm (et) Susansweet: You think it didn't ?11/11/2007 9:39 pm (et) amhistoryguy: I was singing.
11/11/2007 9:39 pm (et) amhistoryguy: CHAPTER EIGHT - THE COURT MARTIAL - Often it seems as though the reporters are waging their own war against the military commands. Cries for the removal of commanders etc. If the public could be moved to believe these reports, how effective do you think they were in forming the opinions of politicians? Lincoln had to be pretty careful about what he would believe, and how he would act.11/11/2007 9:40 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Comments?
11/11/2007 9:40 pm (et) bluelady: I think Lincoln was smart to the ways of the press and was always very calculating when dealing with them.11/11/2007 9:41 pm (et) amhistoryguy: You are right bluelady, he knew how to use them to his advantage as well.
11/11/2007 9:41 pm (et) mobile_96: And usually managed to use them to His advantage, more so than their advantage.11/11/2007 9:41 pm (et) Susansweet: His reply to the call for a reversal of the court martial is so classic Lincoln.
11/11/2007 9:42 pm (et) bluelady: And when they wrote about his generals...he always seemed to have a comeback to them.11/11/2007 9:42 pm (et) amhistoryguy: But it had to be difficult to follow the press and not panic at some ot the stuff they wrote. He couldn't have just ignored it all.
11/11/2007 9:43 pm (et) bluelady: No but he really knew how much to "believe" and how much was ...well11/11/2007 9:43 pm (et) Susansweet: I liked what Perry said , "never forget that Lincoln was a Lawyer "
11/11/2007 9:43 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Mention is made of reporters speculating in cotton. Reporters were involved in deals selling mules and horses to the army, as well as collecting fees for procuring cotton passes for others. The war provided an opportunity for quick money for many reporters, outside of their reporting duties.11/11/2007 9:43 pm (et) bluelady: And that he knew the court martial was not legal.
11/11/2007 9:43 pm (et) Babs: I think he probably compared it to the official reports he was given and figured the truth was somewhere in between.11/11/2007 9:44 pm (et) Susansweet: One reporter made enough to buy his family a home in Germany and retire from reporting the war.
11/11/2007 9:44 pm (et) bluelady: Good point babs.11/11/2007 9:44 pm (et) mobile_96: Thought that was from cotton speculating.
11/11/2007 9:45 pm (et) Susansweet: Yep I think it was Mobile.11/11/2007 9:45 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Many of them seem less than noble, but then being noble was not their job. In their position though, they were dangerous men.
11/11/2007 9:46 pm (et) amhistoryguy: They were involved in a lot of "Outside" financial ventures mobile.11/11/2007 9:46 pm (et) Susansweet: When Wilkie was complaining about his mail being censored I though wonder how he would have dealt with WW2.
11/11/2007 9:46 pm (et) bluelady: Another reason Sherman did not like them.11/11/2007 9:46 pm (et) amhistoryguy: When charges were brought against Knox, the personal battle between Sherman and Knox cam to a head. Comments on this conflict?
11/11/2007 9:47 pm (et) bluelady: I thought the same thing Susan.11/11/2007 9:47 pm (et) Susansweet: I can see why Sherman did it even it he shouldn't have been able to try a civilian.
11/11/2007 9:48 pm (et) mobile_96: Right along with a lot of generals amh.11/11/2007 9:48 pm (et) Susansweet: It was the principle of the thing.
11/11/2007 9:48 pm (et) amhistoryguy: It seemed to me that Perry was saying that the dispute between Knox and Grant was Journalists vs. Military. Do you think this was the case, or was it personal.11/11/2007 9:48 pm (et) Susansweet: Knox was not going to stop , he needed extreme measures.
11/11/2007 9:48 pm (et) secret squirrel: Had to laugh that other papers or correspondents were finally non-commental on a subject!11/11/2007 9:49 pm (et) bluelady: I think that Knox went a tad too far for Sherman...and Sherman wanted to make an example out of him.
11/11/2007 9:49 pm (et) Susansweet: I think it was both at the same time.11/11/2007 9:49 pm (et) amhistoryguy: That was very interesting SS.
11/11/2007 9:49 pm (et) mobile_96: And by bringing a reporter to trial he was trying to prove his point to the danger reporters could pose.11/11/2007 9:49 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Was it really an attempt by the military, “to suppress journalists and the newspapers they represented,” as Perry claims, or was it a case of two men who did not care for each other using every means at their disposal to hurt the other?
11/11/2007 9:50 pm (et) secret squirrel: Probably a little of both....but an example had to be made.11/11/2007 9:50 pm (et) amhistoryguy: IMO, Sherman was trying to shut Knox up, and not necessarily suppress journalists.
11/11/2007 9:50 pm (et) Susansweet: I think it was more the second statement than the first but I think there was some of the need to suppress the journalist too.11/11/2007 9:51 pm (et) Susansweet: I am amazed that Knox just didn't get it.
11/11/2007 9:51 pm (et) amhistoryguy: What about Lincoln’s response to the Knox verdict, and Grant’s response? It does seem, IMO, that Lincoln recognized the conflict as a personal one, and not really a constitutional issue.11/11/2007 9:51 pm (et) secret squirrel: He got it alright. he WAS SCARED!
11/11/2007 9:51 pm (et) Susansweet: As Perry said when Knox appeared before Sherman he was unaccountably cocky.11/11/2007 9:52 pm (et) mobile_96: Too far into his War with Sherman to Think about the causes.
11/11/2007 9:52 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Without the measures that Sherman took, Knox would have just kept it up I'm sure.11/11/2007 9:53 pm (et) amhistoryguy: I was a bit surprised that so much time and effort was diverted from the war to take care of it.
11/11/2007 9:53 pm (et) Susansweet: Not when he said to Sherman you are the enemy of the of our set and we must in self defense write you down.11/11/2007 9:53 pm (et) bluelady: I think he saw that but still deferred to Grant.
11/11/2007 9:54 pm (et) bluelady: Well look when it happened...Not much was going on after Vicksburg...for a while anyway.11/11/2007 9:55 pm (et) amhistoryguy: That's true bluelady. With Sherman's men, as Perry notes, on the board, how surprised was Sherman at the outcome. Kind of shows at least he had not tampered with the board.
11/11/2007 9:56 pm (et) Susansweet: I don't understand the last line of the chapter. I may be trying to read more than is there. Who is the man on horseback?11/11/2007 9:56 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Funny you should ask Susan -The last line of the chapter, “William Tecumseh Sherman sometimes sounded, terrifyingly, like the man on horseback.” What is he talking about, who is the man on horseback?
11/11/2007 9:57 pm (et) Susansweet: That is what I am wondering ?11/11/2007 9:57 pm (et) Susansweet: Unless it is the Sherman on Horseback on the March causing death and destruction in a 60 mile wide path all the way to the sea?
11/11/2007 9:58 pm (et) Susansweet: But it comes out of the blue with no other reference.11/11/2007 9:58 pm (et) secret squirrel: That's what I was thinking Susan, either that or his namesake.
11/11/2007 9:58 pm (et) Babs: Some literary allusion (like Orlando) that we are unaware of?11/11/2007 9:58 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Tecumseh ? Forrest ? Van Dorn ? I have no idea what the heck he is talking about.
11/11/2007 9:58 pm (et) secret squirrel: Not that i know anything about his namesake.11/11/2007 9:58 pm (et) bluelady: Is it foreshadowing? somehow I don't think newspapermen would think of using those kinds of literary tools.
11/11/2007 9:59 pm (et) ks: Namesake is what I was thinking. Not that there's any evidence of that being a correct interpretation.11/11/2007 9:59 pm (et) mobile_96: Maybe the horseman......."Death"
11/11/2007 9:59 pm (et) Susansweet: Blue it's Perry talking.11/11/2007 9:59 pm (et) amhistoryguy: What was that Red ----- talking ?
11/11/2007 10:00 pm (et) bluelady: I know...is he leading up to a future chapter?11/11/2007 10:00 pm (et) Babs: Mobile, I think that's a good guess. One of the four horsemen.
11/11/2007 10:01 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Without Perry here to answer, we can each answer that for ourselves.11/11/2007 10:01 pm (et) mobile_96: Wasn't one War?
11/11/2007 10:02 pm (et) Babs: War, pestulence, famine, and something.11/11/2007 10:02 pm (et) bluelady: Next time I get up to Dundee in the summer, I'll have to see if he is around and ask I guess! ;)
11/11/2007 10:02 pm (et) secret squirrel: So we are thinking this is a biblical reference?11/11/2007 10:02 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Still don't think the four horsemen fits. They didn't "sound" like anything I remember. But I can't say you are not correct.
11/11/2007 10:02 pm (et) Susansweet: Pestilence, War, Famine, and Death.11/11/2007 10:03 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Think he might have meant Tecumseh.
11/11/2007 10:03 pm (et) Susansweet: They usually aren't referred to singularly.11/11/2007 10:03 pm (et) Babs: SS, We're just brainstoming.
11/11/2007 10:04 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Stupid line without a connection. IMO.11/11/2007 10:04 pm (et) secret squirrel: You guys pick up alot!
11/11/2007 10:04 pm (et) mobile_96: Will agree with that amh.11/11/2007 10:04 pm (et) bluelady: But where would you get that idea from AMHG?
11/11/2007 10:05 pm (et) mobile_96: Wasn't Tecumseh a 'fierce" warrior11/11/2007 10:05 pm (et) bluelady: Certainly there are other men on horseback in history that would fit...how about Ichabod Crane?
11/11/2007 10:05 pm (et) Babs: Squirrel, That's what's so cool about the book chats.11/11/2007 10:05 pm (et) Susansweet: I don't see Techuseh on horseback.
11/11/2007 10:05 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Because he uses Sherman's full name - and leaves it at that, just a guess like everyone else.11/11/2007 10:06 pm (et) Susansweet: I still thing the best idea is still the Sherman on the March
11/11/2007 10:06 pm (et) Susansweet: War is Hell11/11/2007 10:06 pm (et) amhistoryguy: I don't think he even knows what the heck he wrote. Sounded dramatic, so he went with it. : )
11/11/2007 10:06 pm (et) bluelady: A lot of people used Sherman's full name when referring to him11/11/2007 10:07 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Anything else on tonight's chat.
11/11/2007 10:07 pm (et) bluelady: I like the headless horseman reference myself...hehe.11/11/2007 10:07 pm (et) Susansweet: He is one of those kind of men isn't he.
11/11/2007 10:07 pm (et) Babs: I do. I don't call him Billy.11/11/2007 10:07 pm (et) Susansweet: I vote with Blue.
11/11/2007 10:07 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Doesn't know the difference between a 39 year old and a 60 year old. : )11/11/2007 10:08 pm (et) bluelady: Nothing here.
11/11/2007 10:08 pm (et) secret squirrel: In the passage proceeding this sentence, Sherman is defending martial law and the protection the military offers and the ties to a real government.11/11/2007 10:08 pm (et) mobile_96: We have to research this material more than it appears Perry did in some areas.
11/11/2007 10:08 pm (et) secret squirrel: Must be Sherman on the march.11/11/2007 10:09 pm (et) Susansweet: Think so SS.
11/11/2007 10:09 pm (et) Basecat: Tecumseh ("Panther in the Sky") is believed to have been born in 1768 just outside the current town of Xenia. His father was Pucksinwah, a Shawnee warrior who was killed at the Battle of Point Pleasant. His mother was named Methoataske. Tecumseh was raised as a warrior by his older brother, Cheeksuakal11/11/2007 10:09 pm (et) bluelady: Really mobile.. like I said earlier he must have spent too much of his vacation time with red cat in hand.
11/11/2007 10:09 pm (et) Basecat: Tecumseh eventually settled in what is now Greenville, Ohio, the home of his younger brother Tenskwatawa (formerly Lowawluwaysica) ("One With Open Mouth or The Open Door"), also known as The Prophet.11/11/2007 10:09 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Anyone interested in further reading on the subject of CW correspondents should try, "Bule & Gray in Black & White," by Brayton Harris.
11/11/2007 10:09 pm (et) secret squirrel: Both this Sherman and Sherman on the march were putting down a rebellion!11/11/2007 10:10 pm (et) ks: Huh. I don't know. Wiki has a specific entry on "The Man on Horseback" See:
11/11/2007 10:10 pm (et) mobile_96: Or he was working while his hands, and mind were on vacation.11/11/2007 10:10 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Blue
11/11/2007 10:10 pm (et) Basecat: In 1805, a nativist religious revival led by Tenskwatawa emerged. Tenskwatawa urged natives to reject the ways of the whites, and to refrain from ceding any more lands to the United States. Opposing Tenskwatawa was the Shawnee leader Black Hoof, who was working to maintain a peaceful relationship with the United States. By 1808, tensions with white settlers and Black Hoof's Shawnees compelled Tenskwatawa and Tecumseh to move further northwest and establish the village of Prophetstown near the confluence of the Wabash and Tippecanoe Rivers (near present-day Battle Ground, Indiana).11/11/2007 10:10 pm (et) ks: Got an extra symbol in there. Try:
11/11/2007 10:10 pm (et) Basecat: Tenskwatawa's religious teachings became widely known as did his predictions based on information supplied by Tecumseh. Many of these were based on readings from white mens' books,in particular astronomy books (see Galloway). Tecumseh would eventually emerge as the leader of this confederation, it was built upon a foundation established by the religious appeal of his younger brother. Relatively few of these followers were Shawnees; although Tecumseh is often portrayed as the leader of the Shawnees, most Shawnees in fact had little involvement with Tecumseh or the Prophet, and chose instead to move further west or to remain at peace with the United States.11/11/2007 10:11 pm (et) Basecat: A number of places have been named in honour of Tecumseh, including Tecumseh, Kansas, Tecumseh, Michigan, Tecumseh, Missouri, Tecumseh, Nebraska, Tecumseh, Oklahoma, Tecumseh, Ontario, the town and township of New Tecumseth, Ontario, and Mount Tecumseh in New Hampshire. The US Civil War Union general William Tecumseh Sherman, like Tecumseh also born in Ohio, was named "Tecumseh Sherman" at birth, but his foster parents insisted on adding a more conventional "Christian name". By coincidence (before Sherman was famous), Judy Garland's grandfather was also given the names William Tecumseh. Many organizations and ships have been named for Tecumseh as well. This includes the naval reserve unit (HMCS Tecumseh) based in Calgary, Alberta.
11/11/2007 10:11 pm (et) ks: "The man on horseback is the predominant figure of history. In the final analysis it is cold, brutal physical force that gives vitality to ideas."11/11/2007 10:12 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Thanks ks - that would seem to answer the question.
11/11/2007 10:12 pm (et) bluelady: And the first sentence of the wiki passage: The hand that holds the sword rules the world.11/11/2007 10:13 pm (et) amhistoryguy: And, it makes sense in the context of that sentence.
11/11/2007 10:13 pm (et) Susansweet: Geeze he just throws these things in to the middle of his writing.11/11/2007 10:13 pm (et) bluelady: That does seem to answer the question..good job ks!
11/11/2007 10:13 pm (et) Susansweet: And I think that is the answer.11/11/2007 10:13 pm (et) bluelady: And I have to agree with susan...he could have given us a little more about the man on horseback!
11/11/2007 10:14 pm (et) Susansweet: A military man with such influence and power over the people as to be, or seem to be, able to seize control and rule as a dictator.11/11/2007 10:14 pm (et) ks: I tend to believe it's the answer as well. But it sure would have been nice if Perry had given us a clue in his book. This "the man on horseback" bit is all new to me.
11/11/2007 10:14 pm (et) amhistoryguy: That he could have. Or a footnote.11/11/2007 10:14 pm (et) Susansweet: It was so obscure to me I didn't think to look it up as it didn't have quotes around it.
11/11/2007 10:15 pm (et) bluelady: You stated it better than I did ks..agreed.11/11/2007 10:15 pm (et) Babs: I remember that phrase being used to refer to Charles DeGalle in some history class a few decades ago.
11/11/2007 10:15 pm (et) amhistoryguy: I thought it was something he made up.11/11/2007 10:16 pm (et) Susansweet: Book Title: The Man on Horseback: The Role of the Military in Politics. Contributors: S. E. Finer - author. Publisher: Pall Mall Press. Place of Publication: London. Publication Year: 1962. Page Number: iii.
11/11/2007 10:16 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Not trying to rush anyone, but anything else on tonight's readings ?11/11/2007 10:16 pm (et) Susansweet: I did too.
11/11/2007 10:17 pm (et) Babs: He does a lot of quoting. Don't think he made anything up. Just assembled what was already written.11/11/2007 10:17 pm (et) ks: Susan, I too found that book reference. And it was seeing it as a title that led me to Wiki it. Amazing how we now Google and Wiki things. ;)
11/11/2007 10:17 pm (et) Susansweet: Google is my friend , and so is Wiki.11/11/2007 10:18 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Perry does a lot of making up too : )
11/11/2007 10:18 pm (et) mobile_96: And forgetting.11/11/2007 10:18 pm (et) Susansweet: Good one Mobile.
11/11/2007 10:19 pm (et) amhistoryguy: Thanks everyone for participating. The assigned reading for next week will be THREE chapters - again, that’s THREE chapters NOT two. CHAPTERS NINE, TEN AND ELEVEN, about 46 pages. - Chapters NINE, TEN, and Eleven. Hope to have everyone here again next week.
GO TO BOOK CHAT FOR CHAPTERS 9, 10, AND 11
RETURN TO INTRO PAGE