+- Lincoln Discussion Symposium (https://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussionSymposium)
+-- Forum: Lincoln Discussion Symposium (/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Assassination (/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Correcting History (/thread-585.html)
RE: Correcting History - J. Beckert - 01-03-2013 09:26 PM
That's a good point, Jim. By the time he made that entry in his diary, Booth had probably read the newspaper reports. I think Ferguson's account is one of the most detailed.
RE: Correcting History - Jim Garrett - 01-03-2013 09:39 PM
(01-03-2013 09:26 PM)J. Beckert Wrote: That's a good point, Jim. By the time he made that entry in his diary, Booth had probably read the newspaper reports. I think Ferguson's account is one of the most detailed.
Bingo! When I examined Rathbones clothing, there was no evidence that the sleeves on the uniform coats had ever been cut, repaired, replaced, etc. That doesn't mean he wasn't in uniform, it just means he wasn't wearing either of those uniforms. However, the black evening shawl collared vest does have the heavy heavy dark stains on the lining. Combine that with Ferguson, who from his seat had an excellent view into the box......Good Enuff fer me.
RE: Correcting History - Seward - 01-03-2013 10:15 PM
Good point, however Ferguson is only one witness. But why mention "colonel" at all??
RE: Correcting History - J. Beckert - 01-03-2013 10:19 PM
I really like Ferguson's account. He detailed the muzzle flash, Lincoln's reaction, the flag tear and was the only one to add that Booth said "I have done it!" as he neared the wings. Because of the detail he remembered, I give his account a lot of credence. I'm thinking Booth got the Col. reference from the newspaper reports.
RE: Correcting History - Gene C - 01-03-2013 10:31 PM
(01-03-2013 10:15 PM)Seward Wrote: But why mention "colonel" at all??
I think the presence of a military officer adds a little more perceived bravery to Booth's actions
RE: Correcting History - Jim Garrett - 01-04-2013 07:29 AM
(01-03-2013 10:31 PM)Gene C Wrote:(01-03-2013 10:15 PM)Seward Wrote: But why mention "colonel" at all??
I think the presence of a military officer adds a little more perceived bravery to Booth's actions
Good point Gene. Either Booth read that a colonel was with the President or Thomas Jones may have mentioned it to him. You hit it right on that the colonel bolsters Booth's bravado.
RE: Correcting History - LincolnMan - 01-04-2013 09:50 PM
All that being said, I just wonder if it would have been odd for a military officer in that day-still in active service-to not be wearing his uniform-especially knowing that he would be attending an evening with his Commander in Chief. Seems strange he would be in civilian clothing-or no?
RE: Correcting History - RJNorton - 01-05-2013 06:14 AM
I have mentioned Thomas Mallon's book before, and I share with the forum Mr. Mallon's opinion with the full realization that his book is historical fiction. Yet I know he did a lot of research, and I understand that the folks who heard him speak at the Surratt Conference were definitely impressed with his work.
I only came across one sentence in the book that deals with how Henry was dressed. While the couple is waiting for the presidential carriage to pick them up, Clara looks at Henry sitting across the parlor from her and thinks, "how wonderful it was to see him out of uniform, in shoes instead of boots."
RE: Correcting History - Jim Garrett - 01-05-2013 07:59 AM
Several other officers in the audience were in "Civies". Leale was in civilian clothes because he didn't want to be noticed as a medical man. I guess he wanted to be completely off duty. I think that for many men, they had spent the last four years in uniform (pretty much non-stop in uniform). While the war may not have been officially over, peace was at hand. It was time to relax.
RE: Correcting History - Rsmyth - 01-05-2013 08:58 AM
Regarding Rathbones clothes, Former Fords Director, Gloria Swift said the only articles they have that they are sure he had with him that evening were the gloves Jim pictured earlier. The donor is anonymous and may have supplied the information Fords has on the clothes.
RE: Correcting History - LincolnMan - 01-05-2013 10:31 AM
I suppose Rathbone didn't ever made mention what he was wearing? At least as far as any historical document?
RE: Correcting History - RJNorton - 01-05-2013 11:05 AM
Good question, Bill. Personally, I have never seen it if he did.