+- Lincoln Discussion Symposium (https://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussionSymposium)
+-- Forum: Lincoln Discussion Symposium (/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Assassination (/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Otto Eisenschiml's background (/thread-3837.html)
Otto Eisenschiml's background - Steve - 09-11-2018 06:51 PM
After some recent posts, I've decided to look more into Eisenschiml's background. According to this page, from the Lincoln library, Otto claimed his father was a member of the 55th Illinois Infantry during the Civil War before later returning to Vienna in the 1870's:
http://alplm-cdi.com/chroniclingillinois/items/show/199
But searching the Civil War Soldiers and Sailor's Database I can't find an Alexander Eisenschiml as a Union soldier. I also couldn't find him in this list of soldiers from the 55th Illinois:
https://archive.org/stream/storyoffiftyfift00illi#page/n923
Does anybody know any information about Alexander Eisenschiml's time in the U.S.? Or if he served in the Army under an assumed name?
RE: Otto Eisenschiml's background - mikegriffith1 - 09-22-2018 03:52 PM
Eisenschiml was a legitimate scientist and a careful scholar. He earned advanced degrees in chemistry and was well published in the chemical and oil industries. He worked as an industrial chemist for the Scientific Oil Compounding Company and eventually became the president of the company. Along the way, he developed a deep interest in American history.
Advocates of the military commission's version of the assassination have long tended to dismiss and apply pejorative labels to any scholar or author who substantively rejects the official version. But Eisenschiml was a careful scholar and a skilled researcher.
Eisenschiml used a number of research assistants and regularly consulted with professional historians and serious scholars, such as Professor R. Gerald McMurtry of Lincoln Memorial University; James Wilkerson, a long-time student of Booth's activities; W. H. Cathcart, Director of the Western Reserve Historical Society in Cleveland; and Herbert A. Kellar of the McCormick Historical Association.
Like any other author, Eisenschiml did make a few mistakes in his writing, but they were few and far between. In reading the critiques of Eisenschiml's research on the Lincoln assassination, I have noticed that they highlight his few errors, repeatedly use appeals to authority, and fail to deal with the vast majority of his evidence and arguments.
If anything, at times Eisenschiml was too cautious, such as his ultimate rejection of the considerable evidence that Booth was not the man who was shot in Garrett's barn. I believe that if Eisenschiml were alive today and read the research on this issue by Neff, Guttridge, and Arnold, he would change his mind.
RE: Otto Eisenschiml's background - Gene C - 09-22-2018 05:10 PM
(09-22-2018 03:52 PM)mikegriffith1 Wrote: I believe that if Eisenschiml were alive today and read the research on this issue by Neff, Guttridge, and Arnold, he would change his mind.
Neff was also a chemist and his research papers are at the Indiana State University. Neff was also involved in the book "The Lincoln Conspiracy" by Balsiger and Seller
http://library.indstate.edu/about/units/rbsc/neff/neff-idx.html
As for the research of Neff, Guttridge and Arnold, the last article on the link provided might be of some interest. Neff also was involved in the infamous book "The Lincoln Conspiracy by Balsiger and Seller.
RE: Otto Eisenschiml's background - L Verge - 09-22-2018 06:33 PM
(09-22-2018 05:10 PM)Gene C Wrote:(09-22-2018 03:52 PM)mikegriffith1 Wrote: I believe that if Eisenschiml were alive today and read the research on this issue by Neff, Guttridge, and Arnold, he would change his mind.
Neff was also a chemist and his research papers are at the Indiana State University. Neff was also involved in the
http://library.indstate.edu/about/units/rbsc/neff/neff-idx.html
As for the research of Neff, Guttridge and Arnold, the last article on the link provided might be of some interest. Neff also was involved in the infamous book "The Lincoln Conspiracy by Balsiger and Seller.
Dr, Edward Steers of this forum will be discussing the Neff-Guttridge issue at the 2019 conference of the Surratt Society in April. Ed and Joan Chaconas of our museum staff made a special trip to Indiana to examine this questionable collectiion and to speak with Mr. Neff.
RE: Otto Eisenschiml's background - mikegriffith1 - 10-30-2018 05:41 AM
(09-22-2018 05:10 PM)Gene C Wrote:(09-22-2018 03:52 PM)mikegriffith1 Wrote: I believe that if Eisenschiml were alive today and read the research on this issue by Neff, Guttridge, and Arnold, he would change his mind.
Neff was also a chemist and his research papers are at the Indiana State University. Neff was also involved in the
http://library.indstate.edu/about/units/rbsc/neff/neff-idx.html
As for the research of Neff, Guttridge and Arnold, the last article on the link provided might be of some interest. Neff also was involved in the infamous book "The Lincoln Conspiracy by Balsiger and Seller.
The Lincoln Conspiracy is an unfortunate mix of a fair amount of valid information ruined by lots of absurd speculation, distortion, and outright fabrication. How was Neff "involved" with Balsiger and Seller's work? As a consultant? Consultants usually can't control the final product and might not agree with much of what the final product says. It is in the same sad category as Finnis Bates' book The Escape and Suicide of John Wilkes Booth.
Guttridge and Neff's Dark Union is a serious work of solid scholarship based on years of research, and there is no comparison between it and Balsiger and Seller's book or Bates' book.
As for Eisenschiml, readers might want to read his reply to his critics:
Reviewers Reviewed: A Challenge to Historical Critics
https://archive.org/details/reviewersreviewe00eise
RE: Otto Eisenschiml's background - Gene C - 11-28-2018 04:17 PM
(10-30-2018 05:41 AM)mikegriffith1 Wrote: Guttridge and Neff's Dark Union is a serious work of solid scholarship based on years of research, and there is no comparison between it and Balsiger and Seller's book or Bates' book.
If you think there is no comparison to Balsiger and Seller's book, "The Lincoln Conspiracy" you are sadly mistaken.
The B & S book was published in 1977 and Ray Neff's in 2003.
Ray Neff makes no reference in his book Dark Union to any "absurd speculation, distortion, or outright fabrication" in the Lincoln Conspiracy book.
Are you aware of any written statements Neff made to distance himself specifically from any statements made in the the B & S book?
He certainly had plenty of opportunity (25+ years) to do so.