GDG- Killing Lincoln
CWMHTours at aol.com
CWMHTours at aol.com
Wed Jan 18 18:49:47 CST 2012
If you are talkiung about Lafaytette Baker and not Luther the man comes of
in Steers and Kaufman, etc., as extremely suspect, deceptive, duplicitive,
and not honest.
He just might have told the the truth but it would be wise to regard
anything he had to as unreliable unless you can get a verification from some
I don't like him.
"Just the facts, ma'am."
Your Most Obediant Servant
In a message dated 1/18/2012 4:45:46 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
jlawrence at kc.rr.com writes:
Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
----- Original Message -----
From: <Batrinque at aol.com>
To: <gettysburg at arthes.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: GDG- Killing Lincoln
> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
> In a message dated 1/18/2012 10:01:06 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> jlawrence at kc.rr.com writes:
> Like redaing a book on book on Atlantis, Bigfoot, UFO's, Area 51 etc.
> there is very limited primary material so the read what others have
> Only in this case, there was a host of primary material available.
> Indeed there is. One of the most fascinating collections of primary
> material is to be found in "The Lincoln Assassination: The Evidence" by
> Edwards and Ed Steer. It's an expensive volume, but full of documents
> Government files collected at the time. Much of it is irrelevant (such as
> letters from crackpots) or trivial (memos of a wholly administrative
> but there are a some gems, and it yields an excellent impression of how
> the investigation was carried out. I have just spent much of last
> and this morning plowing through the stuff in search of enlightenment
> minor point of the Booth escape story and now feel reasonably confident
> have finally figured out the right answer through using statements
> within days of the events from secondary players.
> Bruce Trinque
> Amston, CT
Really good points Bruce.
Baker's 'United States secret Service", Baker, a primary source if there
ever was one, the protagagonist in the Dugard's book, addresses mostly
liquor smuggling, Female spies, Canadian Activities, traitors and schemes,
ad nauseum in his book.
When he gets around to how he singlehandedly ran down Booth, he starts off
with, he starts off with Caesar, King James, Marat and Alexander, until he
get's around to Lincoln. He starts this off by going back to a mass of
anonymous threats against Lincoln in 1861 and continues to the
assassination. There is no mention of the inauguration.
There is however, a nugget of information about the protection system
surrounding Lincoln. In short, there is mostly the "irrelevant"
you cite above.
Multiply this dozens of times and one can see how a pop "history" novel
would rather rely on a handful of sources, none primary.
As we all know, first tier history books are amalgams of primary and
secondary sources with both interpretative and narrative themes.
Codington and Pfanz come to mind.
(Laino uses primary sources and period maps with no inerpretation, the
finest pureest of first tier in my mind).
Second tier books rely on first tier sources and third tier books
reinterpret second tier sources.
Third tier history books speak for themselves.
A member recently mentioned a book on WWI, with "The Backs To The Wall
Victory And defeat In 1918.
this book cites many secondary sources, but ir also incorporates much
information based on studies by the belligerents after the war.
It cites, aong other things, an analysis of the peacefull use of nitrates
for fertilizer as opposed to ammonition. As a better way to continue the
As it did,
It will take me weeks to digest this book, but to me this is an example of
history book that reduces the Dugard/O'Reilly to third tier ?(pap).
http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
More information about the Gettysburg