I've seen this image before; its not too uncommon. There is another one,
same person (who I think is the sculptor), full length, not close up.

Todd

Tom Clemens wrote:
>
> Bill,
> I had not seen it before either.  Are you bidding on it?
>
>
> gwjchris@... wrote:
>
> > Folks,
> >
> > Here's an Antietam related image that I've not see before.
> >
> > Bill Christen
> >
> > Title of item:  Antietam Cemetery Soldiers' Monument
> > Seller: ravenview
> > Starts: May-16-01 18:26:15 PDT
> > Ends:   May-23-01 18:26:15 PDT
> > Price:  Starts at $9.99
> > To bid on the item, go to:
> > http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1146062842
> >
> > Item Description:
> >
> > ANTIETAM CEMETERY SOLDIERS' MONUMENT!
> > Stereoview titled Granite Statue, the Volunteer. This is the
> > Soldiers' Monument for Antietam Cemetery, Md. It was constructed at
> > the R.I. Granite Works, in Westerly, Rhode Island. This is likely on
> > exhibit at the Centennial Expo. From other images of this statue I
> > believe that the man in the image is the sculptor or the designer of
> > the work, I forget which.
> >
> > Terms: Buyer pays postage and insurance. Insurance is charged on
> > items selling for $20 or more. Insurance is always optional but
> > items shipped without insurance are at purchaser?s risk. NYS
> > residents must add sales tax appropriate to their county or provide
> > a completed resale/exemption certificate. Domestic payments must be
> > received within 10 calendar days of auction closing; within 14 days
> > for international payments. Money orders, personal checks, credit
> > cards through Paypal or Bidpay, or cash, are accepted for domestic
> > payments. Personal checks may be held for clearance before item is
> > shipped at seller?s discretion. Canadian buyers  must pay with a
> > Canadian Postal Money Order in U.S. dollars, by a U.S. dollar check
> > drawn on a U.S. bank that has appropriate routing numbers at the
> > bottom, by credit card, or by cash.  All other International buyers
> > must  pay by an International Money Order in U.S. dollars from
> > American Express or Western Union, by a U.S. dollar check drawn on!
> >  a U.S. bank that has appropriate routing numbers at the bottom, by
> > credit card if payments from your country are accepted by the
> > services indicated, or by cash. We reserve the right to reject and
> > cancel bids from anyone with a negative feedback rating or anyone
> > with 4 or more negative feedbacks. Your bid is acknowledgment that
> > you agree to these terms.
> >
> >  Please visit our website to view Images and Books for sale:
> > Jeffrey Kraus Antique Photographica. New Items are regularly being
> > added! Visit regularly to check out the new listings!
> >
> > PayPal payments accepted!
> >
> > BidPay - the original online auction payment service.
> >  Click on our banner to pay for your auction instantly!
> >
> > www.BidPay.com
> >
> >         Visit eBay, the world's largest Personal Trading Community
> > at http://www.ebay.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>                    Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
> [Image]                                    www.
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

I am having problems with my e-mail -- I seem to be able to send but not
receive. Hopefully it is fixed now. :>)

You needed reply to this -- if I see my test, then I will know all is well.
If I don't, then I won't see your responses either! :>(

Take care,

Bob

Judy and Bob Huddleston
10643 Sperry Street
Northglenn, CO  80234-3612
303.451.6276   Adco@...

Tom Clemens wrote:

> Bill,
> I had not seen it before either.  Are you bidding on it?

No, If you need "help" getting it, I'd be glad to contribute.

Bill

Morning All,

	 I thought some of you might enjoy this excerpt that comes from the
SHSP. I'm totally unfamiliar with the Black Eagle Company. Perhaps
someone on the group knows something about them.

Regards,
Teej

"A GOOD MAN.

Jesse Barker, the counterpart as a soldier, was of humble and obscure
parentage, possessing no earthly comforts unless it was the battered and
faded Confederate uniform which wrapped his body, serving as a winding
sheet for his burial, he having been buried where he fell.
Jesse Barker had seen more than a score of his comrades killed and
wounded carrying the flag of his regiment. He saw Boston killed at
Williamsburg, Va. He saw the entire color guard, consisting of a
sergeant and eight corporals killed and wounded at Gaines' Mill, Va. He
witnessed the same fatality among his comrades four days afterwards at
Frayser's Farm, Va., when the entire color guard was again shot down. He
saw the head of Garland Sydnor, of Lunenburg county, Va., one of the
noblest soldiers in the army, crushed to a pulp with a cannon shot,
bearing aloft this same emblem of liberty and love. With these facts
before him, knowing, as he did, that to be the standard hearer of the
regiment made his killing or wounding inevitable, <shv37_57>yet when a
volunteer ensign was called for, Jesse Barker offered his services.
The test came at Sharpsburg, Md. It became necessary to change the
position of the regiment, then in action. Major George C. Cabell, of
Danville, Va., commanding the regiment at that time, than whom no truer
patriot or braver soldier ever drew a sword in defense of a country,
gave the command, "Color and general guides post," which meant that the
color sergeant should advance fifteen paces to the front of the
regiment.

A SAD AFFAIR.

In the din and confusion of battle Barker did not hear the command and
did not advance. Major Cabell, seeing his orders disregarded, and
supposing Barker was hesitating about it, reprimanded him, called him a
coward, and asked that same brave soldier take the flag and go forward
with it. Barker heard that and told Major Cabell he was no coward and
was ready then to make as much sacrifice for the cause as any soldier in
the army, and, if ordered to do so, he would advance with his flag as
far toward the enemy as any other soldier would do, and asked that the
order be repeated. Major Cabell again gave his order. Barker quickly
advanced the fifteen paces to the front and stood waving the flag he
loved so well in the face of the enemy till he fell a corpse.
While Jesse Barker was poor in purse, he was rich in patriotic devotion.
He was as true patriot, as fearless and intrepid a soldier as ever faced
an enemy, and as proud of being a volunteer soldier in the Confederate
ranks as if he had been commander in chief of the Army."

--- In TalkAntietam@y..., TR Livesey <westwood@e...> wrote:
> I've seen this image before; its not too uncommon. There is another
one, same person (who I think is the sculptor), full length, not close
up.
> Todd

You are correct, Sir!

I have the one that you mention, but not this one!  So .  .  . I put a
bid on this one in the hopes of creating a happy reunion.

Thanks for the "heads up," Bill!

Mark  A. Pflum
(a great fan of Mr. Simon Pure)

Am I not receiving TalkAntietam transmissions or have we gone into
hibernation?

I have a suggestion if the latter is true.

Tony Turner

"Anthony W. Turner" wrote:
>
> Am I not receiving TalkAntietam transmissions or have we gone into
> hibernation?
>
> I have a suggestion if the latter is true.

Tony,

	 Yours is the first post I've received in quite some time. What's your
suggestion?

Regards,
Teej

Might we have a book discussion, say one chapter per week, on _Taken At
The Flood_?

Tony Turner

--- In TalkAntietam@y..., "Anthony W. Turner" <awturner@m...> wrote:
> Might we have a book discussion, say one chapter per week, on
_Taken At
> The Flood_?
>
> Tony Turner

Ray Ortensie has already suggested that for his "morecivilwar" group.
why be redundant?
I think you should find an active group. This one is not hibernating
it is dead. Only 55 messages the whole month of May so far. Pathetic.
I was told this group had all the "important" people. I doubt it.

You might try morecivil war. Fewer people but 124 messages this month
over twice the number here. Or the other Antietam group, almost the
same number of people but 248 messages.
The best I belong to is the history discussion group. 371 messages
this month on anything from Lincoln to Henry VIII and his many wives.
It is a female cabal though, so be carefull of the ladies.

SW

This might get some responses from "talkantietam" I know it will elicit some
response from the history group. At least the title should get some people's
attention.

The Irish have always been a mystery to me. The seem to say one thing but do
the direct opposite. Their participation in the American Civil War is a prime
example. And their actions during both the first and second world wars is
again something that would confuse any civilized person.

Because this will encompass both I have cross posted to both groups.

First the quandary during the Civil War.
The Irish fought on both sides but more Irishmen fought on the side of the
Union. I have been told or I read somewhere that General Meagher (SP?) wanted
to train the Irish Brigade so he could take them back to Ireland and fight
for the "independence" of Ireland. That is what confuses me. How could he and
his brigade fight against the secession of the Confederacy from the Union yet
have this burning desire to see Ireland secede from England? Is that not a
contradiction?  You can't be for and against something at the same time. And
don't tell me that Ireland is or was a separate country. Dublin is much
closer to London than New Orleans is to New York. Yes, the culture and
heritage of Ireland and England are different but the same could be said
about the North and the South.

Now for the part pertinent to the HDG;

During both world wars the Irish and Ireland allied themselves with Germany.
I know Kaiser Wilhelm was not the despot that was Hitler so siding with him
against England would make sense.
But how does any one with a just and fair mind justify the alliance with the
most despicable being to ever draw a breath? The Irish openly aided German
spies and allowed Nazis to set up radio stations in Ireland to track Allied
shipping and report same to German U-boats. Am I not also correct in saying
the German equivalent to "Tokyo Rose" was an Irishmen. Don't know his real
name but I think he used Lord Ha Ha as a moniker.
How does that square with the picture the Irish paint of a "kind and freedom
loving people"?

Or am I simply being too harsh on them? I don't mean to offend. I simply
would like some answers and perhaps some open discussion.

SW

>> The Irish have always been a mystery to me. The seem to say one thing but do
the direct opposite. <<

Scotty, if you’re asking members to share their judgments of people by
nationality or ethnicity, I wish you'd not ask here.

Tony Turner

The new civil war group is up and off to a fast start at morecivilwar.
  Future plans are for a monthly book discussion so don't set back and
be left out.  Join at morecivilwar-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Amen......me Irish forefathers would be very upset!
Bud

At 09:24 AM 5/26/01 -0500, you wrote:
>>> The Irish have always been a mystery to me. The seem to say one thing
but do the direct opposite. <<
>
>Scotty, if you’re asking members to share their judgments of people by
>nationality or ethnicity, I wish you'd not ask here.
>
>Tony Turner
>
>
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

The Irish never considered themselves part of  England.  Theirs was a
conquered land.  The treatment of the conquerors was at times severe.  The
response of the British government during the potato famine, and the
degrading 2nd class citizen status given the Irish by the English did not
sit well with the Irish spirit. The fires of nationalism burned strongly in
the hearts of most Irishmen.  Meagher's hope of retuning home to fight the
English would have been a view shared by a majority of the transplanted
Irish-Americans even those that fought for the south.

By contrast the southerners voluntary joined the union and were rightfully
proud to be called  Americans.  Those who fought with Meagher at the Sunken
Road showed the metal of  Irish determination as they would do on many a
bloody battlefield from Fredericksburg to Franklin.

By the way, less someone misunderstand, my family is of Yorkshire stock!  So
admiration of a brave fighting heart need not look at the nationality!  I
hope this is not too far field of the parameters of the groups purpose.

David Lutton
Hollidaysburg Pa


From: <scotty90900@...>
To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: <hdg@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2001 3:16 AM
Subject: [TalkAntietam] Irish Brigade - Patriots or hypocrits?


>
> This might get some responses from "talkantietam" I know it will elicit
some
> response from the history group. At least the title should get some
people's
> attention.
>
> The Irish have always been a mystery to me. The seem to say one thing but
do
> the direct opposite. Their participation in the American Civil War is a
prime
> example. And their actions during both the first and second world wars is
> again something that would confuse any civilized person.
>
> Because this will encompass both I have cross posted to both groups.
>
> First the quandary during the Civil War.
> The Irish fought on both sides but more Irishmen fought on the side of the
> Union. I have been told or I read somewhere that General Meagher (SP?)
wanted
> to train the Irish Brigade so he could take them back to Ireland and fight
> for the "independence" of Ireland. That is what confuses me. How could he
and
> his brigade fight against the secession of the Confederacy from the Union
yet
> have this burning desire to see Ireland secede from England? Is that not a
> contradiction?  You can't be for and against something at the same time.
And
> don't tell me that Ireland is or was a separate country. Dublin is much
> closer to London than New Orleans is to New York. Yes, the culture and
> heritage of Ireland and England are different but the same could be said
> about the North and the South.
>
> Now for the part pertinent to the HDG;
>
> During both world wars the Irish and Ireland allied themselves with
Germany.
> I know Kaiser Wilhelm was not the despot that was Hitler so siding with
him
> against England would make sense.
> But how does any one with a just and fair mind justify the alliance with
the
> most despicable being to ever draw a breath? The Irish openly aided German
> spies and allowed Nazis to set up radio stations in Ireland to track
Allied
> shipping and report same to German U-boats. Am I not also correct in
saying
> the German equivalent to "Tokyo Rose" was an Irishmen. Don't know his real
> name but I think he used Lord Ha Ha as a moniker.
> How does that square with the picture the Irish paint of a "kind and
freedom
> loving people"?
>
> Or am I simply being too harsh on them? I don't mean to offend. I simply
> would like some answers and perhaps some open discussion.
>
> SW
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

In a message dated 5/26/2001 6:58:16 AM Pacific Daylight Time, gwilk@...
writes:

<<
  >Scotty, if you’re asking members to share their judgments of people by
  >nationality or ethnicity, I wish you'd not ask here.
  >
  >Tony Turner
  > >>


I only allowed one person to ever call me Scotty and she is no longer with
us. The name is Scott.

I am not asking anyone to share any opinion based on nationality or ethnic
background. That's why I never use any racial slurs. I do not like to be
called a "wetback" so I don't judge people by the color of their skin. Black,
white brown or yellow.

SW

In a message dated 5/26/01 7:27:43 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
dunkerch@... writes:

<< The Irish never considered themselves part of  England.  Theirs was a
  conquered land.  The treatment of the conquerors was at times severe.  The
  response of the British government during the potato famine, and the
  degrading 2nd class citizen status given the Irish by the English did not
  sit well with the Irish spirit. The fires of nationalism burned strongly in
  the hearts of most Irishmen.  Meagher's hope of retuning home to fight the
  English would have been a view shared by a majority of the transplanted
  Irish-Americans even those that fought for the south.

  By contrast the southerners voluntary joined the union and were rightfully
  proud to be called  Americans.  Those who fought with Meagher at the Sunken
  Road showed the metal of  Irish determination as they would do on many a
  bloody battlefield from Fredericksburg to Franklin. >>



Thank you for your intelligent and thughtfull response. I seem to have been
misinformed about Irish history. Much better to get an explanation than an
abrupt and discourteous reply like Tony Turner.
I will endeavor to learn more about the Irish.

Since I crossposted this I will also do the same when replying

SW

From:  Barry Crompton
Date:  Sat May 26, 2001  5:29 pm
Subject:  Re: [hdg] Irish Brigade - Patriots or hypocrits?


You bring up some very good questions. When Thomas Francis meagher had been
sentenced to be transported to Australia, amongst the group of men he was
with another of the irish leaders was John Mitchel. They became good
friends and both managed to escape Tasmania in the 1850's - meagher went to
New York and Micthels ettled in Knoxville, Tennessee, eevnetually moving to
Richmond, Virginia. He continued to serve the South, edited the Richmodn
Examiner during the war and all three sons served in the Confederate army
while Meagher was a bigwig in the New York Irish brigade. I guess that it
proves they all had separate conscious thoughts for whatever path they
wanted to follow. Meagher didn't last long after the war but Mitchel
continued to push for irish freedom and was involved in Fenian uprisings
after the war.

Barry

  So the Irish that wee on the side of the Rebels stayed true to form.

This and the next post is an example of the reason I like the HDG more than
any other board. Never judgmental of the original poster.

SW

From:  "Yolanda de Jong"
Date:  Sat May 26, 2001  9:16 am
Subject:  Re: [hdg] Irish Brigade - Patriots or hypocrits?


Just read your message and I will try and give you an answer in the Irish
question. I am from the Netherlands but for a couple of years I
corresponded with a young man from Belfast who claimed to have connections
with the IRA. The liberty-discussion came up a couple of times and he
explained it as follows: When Ireland was invaded the English used brutal
force, Sherman's march through Georgia was a picknick compared to that, and
they continued to use such force over the centuries. The Irish have been
made to feel inferior in ways I cannot imagine. For example, in the English
countryside you'll sometimes see signs on the door of pubs saying: no
blacks, dogs or Irishmen allowed..... the signs have dissapeared but the
attitude has not. Well, in some parts of England anyway. This young man
also told me that the love for Ireland and the need of their own government
is imbedded in the mind same as the hate for the English. I find it hard to
understand and even harder to explain because I haven't been through this
but he told me that he was raised with the idea that all English are scum
and he could see the proof every day. Does this make sense in any way? As
for the alliance with Germany, it's easy now to say they were despicable
because we know what Hitler and his cronies were up to but you have to
remember also that quite a few countries in Europe praised Germany and
their strong leader to the heavens. And a people who want their freedom
might sometimes stop caring what means they use to get there. Hope this has
helped a little bit.

Yolanda

  Unfortunately the whole world knew something bad was happening to the Jews
in Germany. But they ignored it.
I think it was more a case of "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" than any
desire to help Hitler.

SW

We can argue about the generals who should have gone here and there. And
who started the war and who really lost or won a battle.

But in the process, we forget the 630,000 young men who would never grow
old.

One member of the Ninth Indiana, Ammens' Brigade, Nelson's Division of
Buell's Army of the Ohio never forgot or his first view of the terrors
of war, going into line on the morning of April 7, 1862 at Shiloh:

"In a few moments we had passed out of the singular oasis that had so
marvelously escaped the desolation of battle, and now the evidences of
the previous day's struggle were present in profusion. The ground was
tolerably level here, the forest less dense, mostly clear of
undergrowth, and occasionally opening out into small natural meadows.
Here and there were small pools – mere discs of rainwater with a tinge
of blood. Riven and torn with cannon-shot, the trunks of the trees
protruded bunches of splinters like hands, the fingers above the wound
interlacing with those below. Large branches had been lopped, and hung
their green heads to the ground, or swung critically in their netting of
vines, as in a hammock.

"Many had been cut clean off and their masses of foliage seriously
impeded the progress of the troops. The bark of these trees, from the
root upward to a height of ten or twenty feet, was so thickly pierced
with bullets and grape that one could not have laid a band on it without
covering several punctures. None had escaped. How the human body
survives a storm like this must be explained by the fact that it is
exposed to it but a few moments at a time, whereas these grand old trees
had had no one to take their places, from the rising to the going down
of the sun. Angular bits of iron, concavo-convex, sticking in the sides
of muddy depressions, showed where shells had exploded in their furrows.
Knapsacks, canteens, haversacks distended with soaken and swollen
biscuits, gaping to disgorge, blankets beaten into the soil by the rain,
rifles with bent barrels or splintered stocks, waist-belts, hats and the
omnipresent sardine-box – all the wretched debris of the battle still
littered the spongy earth as far as one could see, in every direction.
Dead horses were everywhere; a few disabled caissons, or limbers,
reclining on one elbow, as it were; ammunition wagons standing
disconsolate behind four or six sprawling mules. Men? There were men
enough; all dead apparently, except one, who lay near where I had halted
my platoon to await the slower movement of the line – a Federal
sergeant, variously hurt, who had been a fine giant in his time. He lay
face upward, taking in his breath in convulsive rattling snorts, and
blowing it out in sputters of froth which crawled creamily down his
cheeks, piling itself alongside his neck and ears. A bullet had clipped
a groove in his skull, above the temple; from this the brain protruded
in bosses, dropping off in flakes and strings. I had not previously
known one could get on, even in this unsatisfactory fashion, with so
little brain. One of my men whom I knew for a womanish fellow, asked if
he should put his bayonet through him. Inexpressibly shocked by the
cold-blooded proposal, I told him I thought not; it was unusual, and too
many were looking."

Take care,

Bob

Judy and Bob Huddleston
10643 Sperry Street
Northglenn, CO  80234-3612
303.451.6276   Adco@...

--- In TalkAntietam@y..., scotty90900@c... wrote:
...
> I think you should find an active group. This one is not
hibernating
> it is dead. Only 55 messages the whole month of May so far.
>Pathetic.

Group,

I hope we're not dead.  Quantity is more important than quality.
Personally, 'though I love a good discussion, I'd rather no traffic
than junk.

That said, I encourage more people to post items for discussion.
That's why the group is here. It has been rather too quiet, but
please try to stay on track - Antietam - okay?

Thanks,

Brian

--- In TalkAntietam@y..., "Brian Downey" <brdowney@m...> wrote:
>
> Group,
>
> I hope we're not dead.  Quantity is more important than quality.
> Personally, 'though I love a good discussion, I'd rather no traffic
> than junk.
>
> That said, I encourage more people to post items for discussion.
> That's why the group is here. It has been rather too quiet, but
> please try to stay on track - Antietam - okay?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Brian

Depends on what you call "quality". I would say discussion of Tudor
English History (Henry VII and Cromwell), FDR compared to Lincoln,
Victorian treatment of women, Coral Sea, Midway, Stonewall Jackson,
and U.S. Grant to be much more quality than an advertisement for E-
Bay, various test messages about someone's e-mail bouncing and
another ad for a tour.

I repeat. This group is dead. I tried creating a controversial thread
and got two garbage replies here and one intelligent one. On the HDG
with the same message I received 5 intelligent well thought out
replies.


SW

Brian Downey wrote:

<Snip>

> That said, I encourage more people to post items for discussion.
> That's why the group is here. It has been rather too quiet, but
> please try to stay on track - Antietam - okay?

	 OK, lets see if we can get the ball rolling with this one. Came across
an interesting reference the other day that concerns Jackson, his
brother in law, D.H. Hill and indirectly Pete Longstreet. Most sources
agree that Jackson was all in favor of Lee's dividing the army in order
to invest Harper's Ferry. However D.H. Hill related in a letter he wrote
to one of Jackson's staff members in 1864 that in Dec. of 1862 Jackson
told Hill "At the council held at Frederick I opposed the separation of
our forces in order to capture Harper's Ferry. I urged that we should
all be kept together." Which would seemingly indicate that at least on
this occasion Stonewall was in agreement with Pete. And if this is so
that Lee flew in the face of the advice from both his corps commanders.
Thoughts?

Regards,
Teej

Harry writes:
>
> Very few of these sources are first hand.  Interestingly, one of the only
> first hand sources that show this is that of Longstreet himself.  Now, either
> Pete recalled it correctly, recalled it incorrectly, or, as he asserts he was
> against the move, and felt it was a mistake, perhaps he said Jackson was in
> agreement to cast an aspersion.  Hmmmm......

	 Not sure I'm following you here. Are you saying Pete said Jackson
agreed with him in order to cast aspersions on Lee? If so, why did
Harvey Hill concur?

Teej

Then why don't you just leave?!  Unsubscribe....that shouldn't
be a difficult task.

At 12:49 AM 5/28/01 -0000, SW wrote:
>
>
>I repeat. This group is dead. I tried creating a controversial thread
>and got two garbage replies here and one intelligent one. On the HDG
>with the same message I received 5 intelligent well thought out
>replies.
>
>
>SW

Harry wrote:

> No.  Peter's recollections were that Jackson was in favor of the division of
> forces.  Either Longstreet's recollection was correct, or it was faulty, or
> it may have been deliberately false in order to cast aspersions on Jackson.
> By saying Stonewall agreed with Lee in what Longstreet felt at the time was a
> bad move, and that history bore out that it was a bad move, Pete would be
> diminishing Jackson.  I feel this is unlikely, though.
>
> I have read the Hill biography, and am familiar with the incident you are
> referring to.  I just don't know who to believe.

	 Not to insinuate that Pete would fib, but my money would be on Hill's
account. Evidently it was not unusual for the usually taciturn Jackson
to share his feelings with his brothers in law as he did disclose his
Black Flag Policy to his other brother in law, Rufus Barringer.

Teej