Talk:John B. Gordon

Barlow - Gordon incident

Note that while many historians indeed dismiss the Barlow - Gordon incident as an embellishment on the part of Gordon, recent research by Georgia author Gregory C. White has revealed that the earliest records on this subject are from Northern sources, predating Gordon's speaking tours and his memoirs.

Scott Mingus

I was wondering about that. If the story is true, then it isn't apocryphal. Bubba73 00:17, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

PS, since it is in Gordon's book as a fact, instead of being a friend-of-a-friend tale, I think it should be called "possibly apocryphal". I tend to believe that it is not apocryphal. Bubba73 22:56, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

If you don't buy 'apocryphal', how about 'ridiculous'? Barlow and Gordon were division commanders in opposing armies through 1864-65. The chance that Gordon didn't know Barlow was alive after 1863 is absurd. Hal Jespersen 23:11, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Hal, you should read Greg White's research. He traces the origin of the story to Barlow, years before Gordon's speaking tour, where he popularized the story and certainly embellished it quite a bit. White' premise is that Gordon and Barlow did indeed meet on the field after the battle. I still have a tough time buying the part about not knowing each other was alive, but there are some who totally dismiss the fact that the two generals did indeed meet. I have found in carefully studying Gordon for my upcoming book that he tended to exaggerate often, but there is a kernel of truth in virtually all his other stories. Scott Mingus 00:16, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

Well, provide a citation and I'll think about it. I think that the meet-on-the-battlefield part of the story is arguable, but uninteresting. (There's also the matter of whether Barlow's wife actually met with Gordon in Gettysburg and I tend to doubt that, too.) The meet-in-Washington story is fascinating, but bogus, IMHO. Hal Jespersen 02:06, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

I emailed Greg White and he gave me a lot of details - contemporary newspaper accounts, other sources, etc. He said that his research was published "a few years ago" in Blue & Gray magazine as a response to an article written by Gettyburg historian Gary Kross, and that his research wasn't contradicted by the author of the original article. I can't give a citation, but someone with B&G could look it up. I think he also mentioned that it might be in a future book. I'm out of here. Bubba73 16:03, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

The article by Kross and White's response are now in the references. The story was told first by Garlow and later by Gordon. It was reported in several newspapers in March 1879, from a reporter for the Boston Transcript. It was in the National Tribune, the Dublin Post, and others. It was in the New York Times on July 4, 1888. White emailed me that he has found several other sources and references since his response was published, and it is to be in his book "Georgia at Gettysburg" in a few years.Bubba73 (talk), 19:03, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Past lives

Just in case nobody's seen this, it might make an interesting addition to the article.

http://www.confederateyankee.net/

http://usa-civil-war.com/Books/books_general.html

Mithridates 14:36, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't think it's relevant for this article, but maybe Jeffrey Keene is interesting enough to have his own article, since he's been on tv-shows and written a published book. Then a "see also" link can be added to link the two articles. Jiiimbooh (talk) 01:32, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Wife in congress?

The article said "Gordon married Fanny Haralson, daughter of Hugh Anderson Haralson, in 1854. She represented Georgia in Congress for many years after the Civil War." (emphasis added)

I found nothing about her being in congress. This website doesn't mention it: Fanny, so I'm changing "she" to "he" unless someone knows that she was in congress. Bubba73 [[User_talk:Bubba73|(talk)]] 03:08, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Relationship with Longstreet

Why no section on Gen. Gordon's well-known feud with Gen. Longstreet regarding Gordon's belief that Longstreet failed to follow Lee's orders at Gettysburg? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.105.97.214 (talk) 03:52, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

If you have sources, then be bold and write it.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 04:04, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

my great great grandpa

John Gordon is my Great Great Grandpa :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kennedygordon (talk • contribs) 03:27, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Memoirs

Perhaps there could be some reference to his memoirs 'Reminiscences of the Civil War'. These were one of the most vivid and readable accounts of the conflict, but critics have found them to be unreliable. Valetude (talk) 13:29, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Brown Gordon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930210926/http://www.historynet.com/magazines/american_civil_war/3029021.html to http://www.historynet.com/magazines/american_civil_war/3029021.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:35, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

External links

His memoirs are downloadable at Project Gutenberg. I'm not sure how to add this item to the list of links. Valetude (talk) 20:21, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Requested Move

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to John B. Gordon as the most succinct of the less problematic means of disambiguation. The original suggestion is a non-starter due to there being multiple generals named "John Gordon" or the like. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:47, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

---

John Brown Gordon → John Gordon (general) – Per Wikipedia:Article Titles#Use commonly recognizable names. 2600:1700:6180:6290:60CB:CA76:257F:41DC (talk) 15:38, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:NATURAL. When disambiguation is necessary, as here, a person's natural name is preferable, as long as it's not obscure. He is called John Brown Gordon in reliable sources such as NPS and New Georgia Encyclopedia and others. Not to mention there are at least two other generals named John Gordon on the dab page (who are similarly naturally disambiguated). Station1 (talk) 21:01, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

  Additional comment: I have no objection to John B. Gordon, as suggested below, only to the original proposal. Station1 (talk) 18:50, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

• Support per WP:COMMONNAME, I don't think Brown is used often enough for NATURAL to apply.--Ortizesp (talk) 18:13, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

  John Gordon is extremely uncommon. Virtually every source I've seen refers to him as John B. Gordon or John Brown Gordon. Station1 (talk) 02:52, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose as proposed. We obviously can't use John Gordon (general), as there are two other generals by that name. As both are British, we could use John Gordon (American general). It is certainly not true that we use a name that was not commonly used just for natural disambiguation. In fact, John B. Gordon looks to be the commonest form of his name and that already redirects here, so may be the best bet. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:24, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
• Support move to John B. Gordon per Necrothesp's reasoning. As natural a disambiguation as we are likely to find. Favonian (talk) 17:50, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.