I Used To Think...

Stryker65

Captain
Joined
Jun 5, 2023
Location
William & Mary
Like my other whimsy-related thread, Funny Research Finds, this thread is mostly for fun, and would rely on audience (your) participation. I saw this in a YouTube video once, and I thought it could be applied here -- what is something you used to think when you were first starting out with research, and learned it was not so later on?

I used to think a "12-pounder" meant that the cannon weighed only twelve pounds. Embarrassing that I even considered it.
 
I thought Abrahm Lincoln was president when my mother was a little girl. As a 5- or 6-year-old, I understood nothing about time beyond yesterday, today, and tomorrow. With no older siblings to help me learn concepts like "the past" or "history" I probably seemed especially clueless to my mother, who grew up with older and wiser sisters and brothers. I also didn't understand historical fiction, movies, or acting, which contributed to my ignorance while watching a Shirley Temple movie on TV. In one scene, Shirley was talking with President Lincoln. I don't recall whether Mom watched that scene with me, but at some point she said, "I used to watch Shirley Temple when I was a little girl." A charming childhood memory for her. I immediately spoiled it by asking, "Was Abraham Lincoln president when you were a little girl?" You should have seen the look she gave me! (Side note: I think our conversation after that was when I learned Lincoln had been assassinated.) The movie, "The Littlest Rebel," is probably best known for Shirley's tap-dance with Bill "Bojangles" Robinson. But I remember it best for her meeting Abraham Lincoln!

1754581806840.png
 
I never understood how casualties weren't higher. They were high but I thought in terms of walking shoulder with modern weapons with modern marksmanship and no smoke

Even understanding the weapons involved, it took me awhile to appreciate the psychology of warfare. The idea that units would rout simply because they were flanked, or that most failed assaults stopped well before massive casualties were inflicted.

Similarly, the importance of reinforcements at the tactical level, especially to sustain a breakthrough or counterattack one.
 
I never understood how casualties weren't higher. They were high but I thought in terms of walking shoulder with modern weapons with modern marksmanship and no smoke
Exactly. I've thought about that many times. Geez, even I - a moderately good shot - with a modern pistol and three magazines could easily hit thirty guys at, say, 50 yards. Five guys with ARs could take out most of a regiment (well, at least later war regiments).

I still wonder why casualties weren't higher. Even with single-shot black powder weapons massed shooters would have delivered a lot of lead against massed defenders. You know, look at those old photos showing how shot up all the vegetation was - e.g. tree trunks shot apart. Seems even if half those shooting barely understood how to do so more would have been hit at the most common ranges. Sometimes I wonder if it wasn't more common than thought for men to purposely shoot high or low so as to avoid a moral dilemma of sorts.

Of course, there's also the problem of knowing the actual death numbers due to many not dying until some time after being hit. I've read many a report of men dying years later from old war wounds. Records weren't all that good either to start with. As some historians are saying now I'd guess the old 720,000 number is at least a 100,000 too low.
 
I thought Abrahm Lincoln was president when my mother was a little girl. As a 5- or 6-year-old, I understood nothing about time beyond yesterday, today, and tomorrow. With no older siblings to help me learn concepts like "the past" or "history" I probably seemed especially clueless to my mother, who grew up with older and wiser sisters and brothers. I also didn't understand historical fiction, movies, or acting, which contributed to my ignorance while watching a Shirley Temple movie on TV. In one scene, Shirley was talking with President Lincoln. I don't recall whether Mom watched that scene with me, but at some point she said, "I used to watch Shirley Temple when I was a little girl." A charming childhood memory for her. I immediately spoiled it by asking, "Was Abraham Lincoln president when you were a little girl?" You should have seen the look she gave me! (Side note: I think our conversation after that was when I learned Lincoln had been assassinated.) The movie, "The Littlest Rebel," is probably best known for Shirley's tap-dance with Bill "Bojangles" Robinson. But I remember it best for her meeting Abraham Lincoln!

View attachment 556841
My brother had me as an older sister. But I must not have helped him much. He hero-worshipped Lincoln when he was six and asked my mom the same question. It wasn't quite as bad as later on, though, when he asked our grandmother if she had been old enough during Washington's presidency to remember him 🤪.
 
Never understood how legless Dan and the enticing Theresa Sickles patched up the marriage after ol' Dan blew her lover attorney Phillip Key into the dawn's early light. Some clue might be that the jury found him not guilty by reason of having having temporarily lost his reason.
I understand that that case was the first successful insanity defense. His attorney was Stanton.
When I was young I would see the occasional tourist from up north and wonder HTH his great grand dad could whip mine. My first trip to NYC put that to rest. I was standing at the corner of 42st, and Broadway at 1:30 in the morning and could see more folks there than lived in the town I grew up in.
 
It took me a while to understand that casualties weren't all KIA.....and the realization came slowly. Even after I knew that about 7000 men were killed at Gettysburg and the other 43000 were wounded or missing it took some time to translate that to other battles. For a long time I thought that Chancellorsville caused way more KIA than Gettysburg
 
It took me a while to understand that casualties weren't all KIA.....and the realization came slowly. Even after I knew that about 7000 men were killed at Gettysburg and the other 43000 were wounded or missing it took some time to translate that to other battles. For a long time I thought that Chancellorsville caused way more KIA than Gettysburg
Still snares quite many people today. More than a few equate "casualty" to "killed".
 
I remember when I first read that a Civil War soldier, "saw the elephant for the first time," I thought there was a circus where they were marching.

I remember being surprised that Pickett wasn't the only general commanding troops at the July 3rd charge in Gettysburg.

I remember being surprised that there was a whole western theatre of war and I still don't believe there was fighting beyond the Mississippi River; certainly not in New Mexico!!! LOL

Then, there is a whole bunch of these...

I remember being shocked to discover that the American Civil War was not Slave States vs Free States.

That emancipating the slaves was not a pre-war "cause" of the Union.

That the only sea captain ever executed for trading in slaves was from Maine.

I still find it shocking that Lincoln was still asking African American leaders to leave the US and colonize in another Country as late as August of 1862! (I should never have purchased that set of "The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln." I thought he stopped believing in that back in the 1830's or something - but there it was in August of 1862)

And, after getting access to many of the southern state secession convention minutes and the secession commissioner letters to other slave states asking them to join in, I was shocked that there were not really many other reasons than slavery for the first seven states seceding.
 
I remember when I first read that a Civil War soldier, "saw the elephant for the first time," I thought there was a circus where they were marching.

I remember being surprised that Pickett wasn't the only general commanding troops at the July 3rd charge in Gettysburg.

I remember being surprised that there was a whole western theatre of war and I still don't believe there was fighting beyond the Mississippi River; certainly not in New Mexico!!! LOL

Then, there is a whole bunch of these...

I remember being shocked to discover that the American Civil War was not Slave States vs Free States.

That emancipating the slaves was not a pre-war "cause" of the Union.

That the only sea captain ever executed for trading in slaves was from Maine.

I still find it shocking that Lincoln was still asking African American leaders to leave the US and colonize in another Country as late as August of 1862! (I should never have purchased that set of "The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln." I thought he stopped believing in that back in the 1830's or something - but there it was in August of 1862)

And, after getting access to many of the southern state secession convention minutes and the secession commissioner letters to other slave states asking them to join in, I was shocked that there were not really many other reasons than slavery for the first seven states seceding.
Yes no one ever talks about Liconia!!
IMG_2826.jpeg
 

Learn About Us
About CivilWarTalk
Contact the Webmaster
Meet the Staff
Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
Register
Browse Forums
View Today's Discussions
Search the Forum
Get Help
FAQ
Student Guide
Forum Rules & Etiquette
Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top