I’m with you, guys.

Eric

On point I have had several furious conversations about Gettysburg Day 3 brought on by the fact that several otherwise distinguished writers have decided that they can complete the staff process of Lee’s HQs in the absence of any historical record. “Lee must have done this because it’s the rational process for command and control implied by what people suggest they knew of their orders. ” Baloney. Where’s the evidence that nails down Lee’s command and intent?

Haven’t read it. I was going by what was on Dimitri’s blog. Candidly, I doubt I will, either. I have too much piled up on my nightstand already.

Eric

Drew

I’m just curious (because I haven’t read the book and I don’t plan to), but how do Dimitri and yourself know that this conversation was made up? Does Kearns mention that she does this in the book, or is a source not mentioned? Or do you know it is made up for some other reason?

Brett S.

However, that’s not Dimitri’s point and it’s also not my point, either.

My point is that making things up–inventing conversations that never took place, as one example–is intellectually dishonest and that I cannot condone such conduct.

That was my point.

Eric

That said, I know that wasn’t the point of Mr. Rotov’s post and doesn’t justify the usage in question, but just thought I’d throw it out there anyway.

Thanks again for your posts. I read ’em all.
Vince Slaugh