This is coolbert:
From the Chicago Tribune today that flashback of reporting as was done originally one hundred fifty years ago:
"THE CIVIL WAR 150 years ago"
"Antietam: 'Miles of dead men to bury'"
Referred to as America's bloodiest day. At least on the battlefield it has been so.
"the Battle of Antietam remains the bloodiest day in American military history. Newsiest 23,000 Union and Confederate soldiers were killed of wounded."
Those original headlines from the Tribune of the time reporting the event:
"THE VERY LATEST NEWS,"
MONDAY, 3 O'CLOCK A.M.
"THE ARMY OF THE POTOMAC."
"THE HARPER'S FERRY SURRENDER."
"WHICH OFFICER IS TO BLAME."
"ABOUT THE REBEL ARMY ACROSS THE POTOMAC."
"SHARP SKIRMISHING ON THE VIRGINIA SIDE."
"Gallantry of the Fourth Michigan."
"THOMAS FRANCES MEAGHER NEITHER KILLED NOR WOUNDED."
"Dangerous Condition of Gen. Hooker."
"VARIUOS [sic] RUMORS AND REPORTS."
Antietam generally conceded to be a draw, neither side able to prevail over the other.
And those casualties as reported and accurate, 23,000 troops dead or wounded from merely one day of fighting. America's bloodiest day on the battlefield and remains so to this day?
Meagher that commander of the Irish Brigade [Federal]. Irish immigrants to the U.S. organized into fighting units and seeing service on BOTH sides during the American Civil War. "Fighting Joe" Hooker at that point in time commanding the Army of the Potomac [Federal]. The Fourth Michigan a regiment of which I am totally unfamiliar.
The Chicago Tribune should be given high marks for this type of "flashback" reporting. Places history and current events in the proper context. Bravo Tribune, credit earned is credit due. It is like it could been only yesterday.