 |
| Posted: Mon Jul 13th, 2009 10:07 am |
|
61st Post |
5fish
Member
|
Did you all notice that Jackson's staff that was with him was almost 30 members? It is no wonder the 18th NC. thought that Jackson staff was union cavalry just by its mere size. A note Jackson was struck by three bullets which means that three men form the 18th shot Jackson.
a thought..
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 13th, 2009 11:46 pm |
|
62nd Post |
t4tillerman
Member
|
I knew he was shot by several men but hinks for clearing up my question as who it was that did the shooting. For some time I had it in my mind it was the 19th and not the 18th.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 14th, 2009 07:48 pm |
|
63rd Post |
5fish
Member
|
t4tillerman wrote: I knew he was shot by several men but hinks for clearing up my question as who it was that did the shooting. For some time I had it in my mind it was the 19th and not the 18th.
Welcome, Did you read post 60# of this thread it gives a brief detail of the incident.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 15th, 2009 12:22 am |
|
64th Post |
t4tillerman
Member
|
I did any another member let me know how many men were involved on Stonewall's foray. It gives me a better understanding.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 17th, 2009 11:18 am |
|
65th Post |
Naim Peress
Member
|
I'm afraid I only know that they were North Carolina troops. Besides, who would admit to it? I wouldn't.
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 17th, 2009 03:47 pm |
|
66th Post |
ole
Member
|
Is it technically correct to say that Stonewall was mortally wounded? I thought he died of pneumonia. Although it is true that he contracted pneumonia because he was weakened by his wounds and amputation, can it be said that he died of his wounds?
Just a thought.
Ole
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 17th, 2009 04:24 pm |
|
67th Post |
susansweet3
Member
|
It's a good thought , Ole, as he was recovering from his wounds when he became ill.
Miss Susan
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 17th, 2009 04:40 pm |
|
68th Post |
19bama46
Member
|
susansweet3 wrote: It's a good thought , Ole, as he was recovering from his wounds when he became ill.
Miss Susan
In my humble opinion, the wound caused the illness which in turn caused the death.. remove the wound and the sequence falls apart..
He died of his wounds..
he however was not a casualty as casualties are counted only if you succommed to wounds the day of the battle IIRC.. it was a way to keep the death rate down... govt was managing that sort of thing even back then...
Ed
|
|
Back To Top
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 17th, 2009 04:44 pm |
|
69th Post |
susansweet3
Member
|
Ed, I agree without the wound he would not have been treated in a manner that caused him to become ill which lead to his death. So he died of illiness caused by treatment of his wounds.
Miss Susan
|
|
Back To Top
|
OpdykeTiger
Member
|
And speaking of "Stonewall" how about the "Stonewall of the West"? The minie ball that killed Pat Cleburne that dark November day in 1864 came from which Federal regiment? Does anyone have any idea?
|
|
Back To Top
|
Current time is 05:20 pm | Page:   1 2 3 4 |
|
|
|
