Before The Seven Days - The Advance to the Chickahominy.

It even shows the improvised bridge(log) across the Chickahominy! Is that a troll I see under it?
It also proves, to my chagrin, that he did not, in fact, return to exactly the same spot he left from. :frown:
 
but is "from Richmond to Richmond, necessarily incorrect

Yes because it does not accurately describe the parameters of the operation being discussed. Where Stuart took a bath (hopefully) after the mission is of no consequence to the details of the actual mission.
 
Dan, I'm sure you're correct, your post above reveals a very technical military perspective, but is "from Richmond to Richmond, necessarily incorrect, for us laymen, those of us without the knowledge of this technical "military speak?"


Orders were cut at Lees HQ, Stuart recived them there, completed his mission, and returned to Lees HQ and gave his report again back in Lee HQ.

His command disperesed back to there camps after completing the misiion, which occured at New market where the individual elements dispersed back to respective camps, after safely comming back within CS held ground.

McPherson isa non mil type and prone to not understanding what commanders are doing in battles, getting something as tehcnical as this in BCF is simply beyond him, and to be fair, not even fitting for a general history.

Both acounts are correct, it just depends on the readers knowedge base, as to what is being recointed, actually means.
 
but is "from Richmond to Richmond, necessarily incorrect

Yes because it does not accurately describe the parameters of the operation being discussed. Where Stuart took a bath (hopefully) after the mission is of no consequence to the details of the actual mission.
May I ask what difference it makes, what the context of your objection is, and what your point in raising this technical detail is, as far as concerns whatever your initial objection to Stuart's performance may have been?
 
May I ask what difference it makes, what the context of your objection is, and what your point in raising this technical detail is, as far as concerns whatever your initial objection to Stuart's performance may have been?

I was asked a question and answered it. Clarification is always useful. If we are going to discuss something then we should have a common perception of exactly what it is. Where he started the mission and finished it goes a long way to indentifying how much of it was unnecessary. My point along is that he did too much for no good reason.
 
I have read it. I'm not inclined to take it as the absolute truth just because Stuart wrote his report to support his move. This was his plan from the very beginning and he executed regardless of the circumstances. No real value was gained by it. It was unnecessary.
 
It's the only obvious conclusion if you assume Stuart is lying. Otherwise, you might take him at his word, or something.
 
Nor should it be assumed that because Stuart is giving an explanation for what he did and you think it was unjustifiable that its just further proof he was doing something unjustifiable.
 
Was Lee happy? Yes. Was Davis happy? Yes. Was it a morale builder? Yes. Was it successful as far as accomplishing his mission? Yes. Did he go straight there and back? No. Did he accumulate considerable information? Yes. Did he make the Federal forces look like incapable dimwits? Pretty much. Sounds good to me.
 
So far nobody has answered my question of whether local patrolling could have gotten as much , if not more information than did Stuart. Maybe they did
 
Sorry, prroh. Missed that question.
\

The question of why such an elaborate cavalry patrol was necessary has always puzzled me. Surely Lee must have known that the AoP was divided by a major river. Local patrols, mounted or otherwise, would have defined the dispositions pretty clearly.
 
Pat
I feel quite certain that the necessary intelligence could have been gathered in several other fashions. The elaborateness of Stuart's ride probably was dictated by his plan to execute the ride around if it was necessary or not.
Dan
 
Back
Top