GDG- ISusquehanna River

Wed Jan 25 22:27:06 CST 2012

Greetings

During the war there were 4 bridges that had to be considered by Lee that crossed the Sus.

The Southern most was The Conowingo Bridge at Port Deposit Md.  This was a covered bridge.

The next bridge going north would be at Wrightsville Pa.  This bridge would be burned during the evening of June 28, 1863.

Harrisburg would be the furtherst point we need to look at.  I believe the city had 2 crossing one railroad and one general.

The camal back bridge was the general purpose bridge.  The present day Walnut Street Bridge spans the river today at its old location.

The Marysvillie RR bridge, this was also a covered bridge.

 Namaste

Jeff Burk

>________________________________
> From: "CWMHTours at aol.com" <CWMHTours at aol.com>
>To: gettysburg at arthes.com 
>Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 9:23 PM
>Subject: Re: GDG- ISusquehanna River
>  
>Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>Entirely agree George,  you make good  points.
>
>Yes, there was military and political value to capturing  Harrisburg.
>
>And despite Couch and the militia I think Lee cudda walked  right in.  And 
>there'd be plenty of value to start shipping back  south.  Ar Camp Curtain 
>there probly was gunpowder for the guns, etc. if  the Yanks didn't destroy it.
>
>Lee being Lee, tho, I am sure he never lost sight that his  goal was to 
>destroy the AoP.
>
>And for once, when you are digging your hole out you didn't  throw your 
>dirt into my hole.
>
>Good.  There may be hope yet.
>
>;-{)   !!!!!
>
>Jeff Burke-  what bridges were there over the Susq R  during the war (This 
>guy knows everything up there)?   Was that stone  4-track bridge there then? 
>
>
>A  Loyal Neo-Anti Unionist,
>Peter  
>
>
>In a message dated 1/25/2012 9:14:28 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
>georgeconnell at mac.com writes:
>
>Esteemed  GDG Member Contributes:
>Peter,
>
>Capturing the useful military items  in and around Harrisburg and 
>destroying its capability to support the war  would be great military goals, but 
>think of the main reason for going there as  political, not military. Imagine 
>the domestic and international reaction when  it became known Lee had just 
>captured the capital of Pennsylvania! Lee was  very attuned to political  
>events.
>
>Regards,
>
>George
>26ª11'56"N    81ª48'19W"
>
>On Jan 25, 2012, at 8:14 PM, CWMHTours at aol.com  wrote:
>
>> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>> George-
>>  
>> Ha ha....
>> 
>> My friend...
>> 
>> Sometimes I  think we both dig holes and we wind up throwing  each 
>other's 
>>  shovels full of dirt into each other's hole.
>> 
>> I don't dispute  that Lee wanted to get into Harrisburg-   I think it was 
>>  bait to get the AoP under that maniac Hooker to come out and   fight.  
>But 
>> Harrisburg as a military goal?
>>  
>> Can you see Lee sitting around west of Fredericksburg with his   mouth 
>> watering at the thought of capturing Harrisburg?  I   can't.
>> 
>> Lee's job was to destroy the AoP if possible- not risk  sucking  his army 
>up 
>> into occupying a weeny little state  capital.
>> 
>> Hey!  You just threw that shovelfull into my  hair,  dammit! 
>> 
>> A  Loyal Neo-Anti Unionist,
>>  Peter  
>> 
>> 
>> In a message dated 1/25/2012 6:03:42  P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
>> georgeconnell at mac.com  writes:
>> 
>> Esteemed  GDG Member Contributes:
>>  Peter,
>> 
>> "I can't see him putting the bulk of  his army on  the wrong  side of the 
>> river.
>> 
>> I think all the  talk  about Harrisburg was just that, talk put  out t 
>>  distract  people."
>> 
>> This is ridiculous. He told two of  his corps commanders he  wanted them 
>on 
>> the east side of the  river. That, without question, is the bulk  of his 
>> army. And he  told them with some degree of secrecy attached, not in the  
>>  "Philadelphia Enquirer" for heaven sakes!
>> 
>> You're  digging  again!
>> 
>> George
>> 26ª11'56"N    81ª48'19W"
>> 
>> On Jan 25,  2012, at 5:47 PM,  CWMHTours at aol.com wrote:
>> 
>>> Esteemed GDG Member   Contributes:
>>> Jim-
>>> 
>>> You make good  points.
>>> 
>>> I have problems tho with the idea of Lee  moving his whole army   into 
>>> Harrisburg and sitting  there.
>>> 
>>> Granted there was  some military value to  the state capital but  Lee's 
>> ace 
>>> was   manueverabilty which he would lose if he occupies a town and then  
>
>> has to  
>>> defend it.  I can see him sending in a  detachment to destroy  any  
>> military 
>>> goods but  Harrisburg was pretty much a pipsqueak  town back  then.
>>>  
>>> Plus I can't see him putting the bulk  of his army on the  wrong  side 
>of 
>> the 
>>> river.
>>> 
>>>  I  think all the talk about Harrisburg was just that, talk put  out  t  
>>> distract people.
>>> 
>>> I can't see him  taking Baltimore  either.  What are you  going to do 
>with  
>> it 
>>> once you got  it?
>>> 
>>>  A  Loyal Neo-Anti Unionist,
>>> Peter  
>>>  
>>> 
>>> In a message dated 1/25/2012 9:37:30 A.M.  Eastern  Standard Time,  
>>> cameron2 at optimum.net  writes:
>>> 
>>> Esteemed  GDG Member  Contributes:
>>> <<   If Lee  intended to  move  Ewell's Corps and Hill's Corps across 
>the 
>>> river (as he  stated) it's a pretty  safe bet he wasn't going to leave  
>>> Longstreet's on the other side of a water  barrier. I think  it's  not 
>> unreasonable to 
>>> speculate that Lee, the  most  audacious  commander of the war, might 
>have 
>>> been  willing to fight the AoP  east  of the Susquehanna. There are some 
>
>> caveats, 
>>> however. He  would need all his   cavalry with him; detailed information 
>> on 
>>> the locations  of the various Union  corps; and the confidence that the  
>>  AoP 
>>> corps were exhausted, strung out by a  rushed pursuit,  and  not in 
>> position to 
>>> provide meaningful support  to one   another.  >>
>>> 
>>> Which is  quite a few caveats, and a  lot of  stuff he didn't have, and  
>>> wasn't likely to get.   And if he does cross the   Susquehanna, getting 
>> back over 
>>> now  involves the  far shore still being hostile  territory, not VA.    
>>> Still, I do think he intended to cross a major  force,  if  possible.  I 
>>> wonder, though, if his preference  wouldn't  have  been to continue to 
>> maneuver, 
>>>  and maybe fight against any  isolated Union force  he might  encounter, 
>> rather 
>>> than risk a  general engagement  under such  circumstances.  Although I 
>> can't  
>>> say I've ever devoted much thought to  the matter, since  it  never did 
>>> happen.  
>>> Just as a thought,  while it   wouldn't have been something he could 
>have 
>>>  anticipated at the time,  the  post-battle rains which made crossing  
>back 
>> into 
>>> VA so  difficult could have  created  an extremely critical situation 
>for 
>> Lee  
>>> if he need  to recross the  Susquehanna in a hurry after a  reverse on 
>the  
>>> eastern side of the river and  had no bridges   available.  
>>> 
>>> Jim  Cameron
>>>  
>>  
>----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com
>>>   -to unsubscribe
>>>  http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/  for   Archives
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>  
>----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com   -to unsubscribe
>>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/  for  Archives
>> 
>> 
>>  
>----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com
>>   -to unsubscribe
>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/  for  Archives
>> 
>>  
>----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com  -to unsubscribe
>> http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for  Archives
>
>
>----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com
>  -to unsubscribe
>http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for  Archives
>
>----------------http://www.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg_arthes.com -to unsubscribe
>http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
>
>
>   