Tom:

I have a copy of Pa at Antietam.  I have had it for a few years.  I just did a
search for it on one of the "antique" book sellers and that is how I purchased
it.  I have also seen them at museums/historical societies, but it is hit or
miss.

Paula

-------------- Original message --------------
You can get them at old book stores if you want them or on ebay.  They are
monument dedications for that state at Antietam.  If you are familiar with NY or
PA at Gettysburg, they are the same content.
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: rotbaron@...
   To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 11:56 AM
   Subject: [TalkAntietam] Books like OHIO AT ANTIETAM, etc


   I often see references to books entitled OHIO AT ANTIETAM, PENNSYLVANIA AT
ANTIETAM, and NEW YORK AT ANTIETAM.

   Can anyone comment on their content?
   Where is cheapest place to acquire them?
   Are they available at NPS Library at Antietam for our use?
   Any other states that I missed?

   Tom Shay






         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
               ADVERTISEMENT





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Yahoo! Groups Links

     a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/

     b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT






Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Are there any memorials at Antietam to New Hampshire units (tablets, markers,
monuments)? I am having hard time tracking moves of 6th and 9th NH east of the
creek. More on that later.

I'm almost done my summary of the action east of Burnside's Bridge, and I do
appreciate the great assistance I've been given by this group.

One question remains unanswered: what two companies of the 11th Ohio opened the
fight?

Tom Shay

No there are no NH monumnets at Antietam, YET!  The state is pushing legislation
and has plans to erect a new monument near Burnside Bridge.  Myself, along with
the majority of the Directors of SHAF, think it is a terrible idea to put new
monuments on the any battlefield.  I'll keep you posted.


Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
Professor of History
Hagerstown Community College



>>> rotbaron@... 3/3/2005 10:25:46 AM >>>

Are there any memorials at Antietam to New Hampshire units (tablets, markers,
monuments)? I am having hard time tracking moves of 6th and 9th NH east of the
creek. More on that later.

I'm almost done my summary of the action east of Burnside's Bridge, and I do
appreciate the great assistance I've been given by this group.

One question remains unanswered: what two companies of the 11th Ohio opened the
fight?

Tom Shay









Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT






Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

If the New Hampshire monument is allowed it will unfortunately be followed
by other monuments. Perhaps many more. There are a good dozen or more groups
who are planning to push for their own monuments so this isn't just about
one monument but perhaps a score more for Gettysburg, Antietam and other
battlefields.

The problem is the political trap that this proposal is putting politicians
in. Nobody wants to be seen at voting against a memorial. Looks bad when
your opponent can say "and my opponent voted against allowing a memorial to
honor the sacrifice of our good men in uniform".

We've had discussions on this in the Gettysburg Discussion Group. These
monuments are often called Hobby Monuments but I prefer to call them
graffiti by monument. People want to get their favorite
regiment/state/soldier/whathaveyou a monument on their favorite battlefield.
However I always like to use the line from the third Indiana Jones film that
goes "Do you seek the grail for his glory or for yours". Unfortunately I
think in the case of the New Hampshire monument like many other proposals
it's more of a case of wanting the thrill of placing a monument on their
favorite battlefield that can never be removed. They feel it gives them a
closer connection to the field. Graffiti by monument.

The job of this and future generations is not to decide that the veterans of
the battle didn't do a good enough job putting memorials on the battlefield
so we have to add our own. Our job is to preserve the battlefields as they
were left to us. We can preserve and restore but we should never have the
ego to think that we have the right to add. There is a saying in cave
exploring. Leave nothing but footprints. Take nothing but pictures. Future
generations should see Gettysburg, Antietam and other battlefields as close
as we can to how the veterans intended and not even know we were ever there.

Brian


>
> No there are no NH monumnets at Antietam, YET!  The state is pushing
legislation and has plans to erect a new monument near Burnside Bridge.
Myself, along with the majority of the Directors of SHAF, think it is a
terrible idea to put new monuments on the any battlefield.  I'll keep you
posted.
>
>
> Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
> Professor of History
> Hagerstown Community College
>
>
>
> >>> rotbaron@... 3/3/2005 10:25:46 AM >>>
>
> Are there any memorials at Antietam to New Hampshire units (tablets,
markers, monuments)? I am having hard time tracking moves of 6th and 9th NH
east of the creek. More on that later.
>
> I'm almost done my summary of the action east of Burnside's Bridge, and I
do appreciate the great assistance I've been given by this group.
>
> One question remains unanswered: what two companies of the 11th Ohio
opened the fight?
>
> Tom Shay
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hear, hear!!! Well said. Time for everyone to come back to earth.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Brian,

AMEN!

Very respectfully,
G E "Gerry" Mayers
Confederate Signal Corps,
Longstreet's Corps



----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Morris" <ironbrigade@...>
To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 2:22 PM
Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] NH at Antietam:


> If the New Hampshire monument is allowed it will unfortunately be followed
> by other monuments. Perhaps many more. There are a good dozen or more
> groups
> who are planning to push for their own monuments so this isn't just about
> one monument but perhaps a score more for Gettysburg, Antietam and other
> battlefields.
>
> The problem is the political trap that this proposal is putting
> politicians
> in. Nobody wants to be seen at voting against a memorial. Looks bad when
> your opponent can say "and my opponent voted against allowing a memorial
> to
> honor the sacrifice of our good men in uniform".
>
> We've had discussions on this in the Gettysburg Discussion Group. These
> monuments are often called Hobby Monuments but I prefer to call them
> graffiti by monument. People want to get their favorite
> regiment/state/soldier/whathaveyou a monument on their favorite
> battlefield.
> However I always like to use the line from the third Indiana Jones film
> that
> goes "Do you seek the grail for his glory or for yours". Unfortunately I
> think in the case of the New Hampshire monument like many other proposals
> it's more of a case of wanting the thrill of placing a monument on their
> favorite battlefield that can never be removed. They feel it gives them a
> closer connection to the field. Graffiti by monument.
>
> The job of this and future generations is not to decide that the veterans
> of
> the battle didn't do a good enough job putting memorials on the
> battlefield
> so we have to add our own. Our job is to preserve the battlefields as they
> were left to us. We can preserve and restore but we should never have the
> ego to think that we have the right to add. There is a saying in cave
> exploring. Leave nothing but footprints. Take nothing but pictures. Future
> generations should see Gettysburg, Antietam and other battlefields as
> close
> as we can to how the veterans intended and not even know we were ever
> there.
>
> Brian
>
>
>>
>> No there are no NH monumnets at Antietam, YET!  The state is pushing
> legislation and has plans to erect a new monument near Burnside Bridge.
> Myself, along with the majority of the Directors of SHAF, think it is a
> terrible idea to put new monuments on the any battlefield.  I'll keep you
> posted.
>>
>>
>> Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
>> Professor of History
>> Hagerstown Community College
>>
>>
>>
>> >>> rotbaron@... 3/3/2005 10:25:46 AM >>>
>>
>> Are there any memorials at Antietam to New Hampshire units (tablets,
> markers, monuments)? I am having hard time tracking moves of 6th and 9th
> NH
> east of the creek. More on that later.
>>
>> I'm almost done my summary of the action east of Burnside's Bridge, and I
> do appreciate the great assistance I've been given by this group.
>>
>> One question remains unanswered: what two companies of the 11th Ohio
> opened the fight?
>>
>> Tom Shay
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>> ADVERTISEMENT
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>> TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>>
>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>>
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>            ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>  a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
>  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
>
>  b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>  c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>

On Thursday, March 3, 2005, at 02:22 PM, Brian Morris wrote:

> We can preserve and restore but we should never have the
> ego to think that we have the right to add. There is a saying in cave
> exploring. Leave nothing but footprints. Take nothing but pictures.
> Future
> generations should see Gettysburg, Antietam and other battlefields as
> close
> as we can to how the veterans intended and not even know we were ever
> there.
>

Tom Clemens wrote:

> Myself, along with the majority of the Directors of SHAF, think it is a
> terrible idea to put new monuments on the any battlefield.

Amen, guys.  What strategies, if any, do you feel we all can adopt to
counter these
monumental (sorry!) assaults on our battlefields?  Letters to
congressmen and
senators?  Phone calls?  Others?

Tony Turner

May I "amen" the amen????

Richard
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Morris" <ironbrigade@...>
To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 2:22 PM
Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] NH at Antietam:


>
> If the New Hampshire monument is allowed it will unfortunately be followed
> by other monuments. Perhaps many more. There are a good dozen or more
groups
> who are planning to push for their own monuments so this isn't just about
> one monument but perhaps a score more for Gettysburg, Antietam and other
> battlefields.
>
> The problem is the political trap that this proposal is putting
politicians
> in. Nobody wants to be seen at voting against a memorial. Looks bad when
> your opponent can say "and my opponent voted against allowing a memorial
to
> honor the sacrifice of our good men in uniform".
>
> We've had discussions on this in the Gettysburg Discussion Group. These
> monuments are often called Hobby Monuments but I prefer to call them
> graffiti by monument. People want to get their favorite
> regiment/state/soldier/whathaveyou a monument on their favorite
battlefield.
> However I always like to use the line from the third Indiana Jones film
that
> goes "Do you seek the grail for his glory or for yours". Unfortunately I
> think in the case of the New Hampshire monument like many other proposals
> it's more of a case of wanting the thrill of placing a monument on their
> favorite battlefield that can never be removed. They feel it gives them a
> closer connection to the field. Graffiti by monument.
>
> The job of this and future generations is not to decide that the veterans
of
> the battle didn't do a good enough job putting memorials on the
battlefield
> so we have to add our own. Our job is to preserve the battlefields as they
> were left to us. We can preserve and restore but we should never have the
> ego to think that we have the right to add. There is a saying in cave
> exploring. Leave nothing but footprints. Take nothing but pictures. Future
> generations should see Gettysburg, Antietam and other battlefields as
close
> as we can to how the veterans intended and not even know we were ever
there.
>
> Brian
>
>
> >
> > No there are no NH monumnets at Antietam, YET!  The state is pushing
> legislation and has plans to erect a new monument near Burnside Bridge.
> Myself, along with the majority of the Directors of SHAF, think it is a
> terrible idea to put new monuments on the any battlefield.  I'll keep you
> posted.
> >
> >
> > Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
> > Professor of History
> > Hagerstown Community College
> >
> >
> >
> > >>> rotbaron@... 3/3/2005 10:25:46 AM >>>
> >
> > Are there any memorials at Antietam to New Hampshire units (tablets,
> markers, monuments)? I am having hard time tracking moves of 6th and 9th
NH
> east of the creek. More on that later.
> >
> > I'm almost done my summary of the action east of Burnside's Bridge, and
I
> do appreciate the great assistance I've been given by this group.
> >
> > One question remains unanswered: what two companies of the 11th Ohio
> opened the fight?
> >
> > Tom Shay
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > ADVERTISEMENT
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> > To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Dear Richard,

Please contact me privately. Thanks.

Very respectfully,
G E "Gerry" Mayers
Confederate Signal Corps,
Longstreet's Corps



----- Original Message -----
From: <richard@...>
To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 3:01 PM
Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] NH at Antietam:


> May I "amen" the amen????
>
> Richard
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Morris" <ironbrigade@...>
> To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 2:22 PM
> Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] NH at Antietam:
>
>
>>
>> If the New Hampshire monument is allowed it will unfortunately be
>> followed
>> by other monuments. Perhaps many more. There are a good dozen or more
> groups
>> who are planning to push for their own monuments so this isn't just about
>> one monument but perhaps a score more for Gettysburg, Antietam and other
>> battlefields.
>>
>> The problem is the political trap that this proposal is putting
> politicians
>> in. Nobody wants to be seen at voting against a memorial. Looks bad when
>> your opponent can say "and my opponent voted against allowing a memorial
> to
>> honor the sacrifice of our good men in uniform".
>>
>> We've had discussions on this in the Gettysburg Discussion Group. These
>> monuments are often called Hobby Monuments but I prefer to call them
>> graffiti by monument. People want to get their favorite
>> regiment/state/soldier/whathaveyou a monument on their favorite
> battlefield.
>> However I always like to use the line from the third Indiana Jones film
> that
>> goes "Do you seek the grail for his glory or for yours". Unfortunately I
>> think in the case of the New Hampshire monument like many other proposals
>> it's more of a case of wanting the thrill of placing a monument on their
>> favorite battlefield that can never be removed. They feel it gives them a
>> closer connection to the field. Graffiti by monument.
>>
>> The job of this and future generations is not to decide that the veterans
> of
>> the battle didn't do a good enough job putting memorials on the
> battlefield
>> so we have to add our own. Our job is to preserve the battlefields as
>> they
>> were left to us. We can preserve and restore but we should never have the
>> ego to think that we have the right to add. There is a saying in cave
>> exploring. Leave nothing but footprints. Take nothing but pictures.
>> Future
>> generations should see Gettysburg, Antietam and other battlefields as
> close
>> as we can to how the veterans intended and not even know we were ever
> there.
>>
>> Brian
>>
>>
>> >
>> > No there are no NH monumnets at Antietam, YET!  The state is pushing
>> legislation and has plans to erect a new monument near Burnside Bridge.
>> Myself, along with the majority of the Directors of SHAF, think it is a
>> terrible idea to put new monuments on the any battlefield.  I'll keep you
>> posted.
>> >
>> >
>> > Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
>> > Professor of History
>> > Hagerstown Community College
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > >>> rotbaron@... 3/3/2005 10:25:46 AM >>>
>> >
>> > Are there any memorials at Antietam to New Hampshire units (tablets,
>> markers, monuments)? I am having hard time tracking moves of 6th and 9th
> NH
>> east of the creek. More on that later.
>> >
>> > I'm almost done my summary of the action east of Burnside's Bridge, and
> I
>> do appreciate the great assistance I've been given by this group.
>> >
>> > One question remains unanswered: what two companies of the 11th Ohio
>> opened the fight?
>> >
>> > Tom Shay
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>> > ADVERTISEMENT
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> > To visit your group on the web, go to:
>> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
>> >
>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>> > TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>> >
>> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>> >
>> >
>> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>            ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>  a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
>  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
>
>  b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>  c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>

If the truth be known, I'm in a minority here.  It may even be a minority of
one.  I generally don't like monuments at all.  I wish they had all been
grouped together in the beginning -- like in a Hall of Monuments, rather
than spread (many times haphazardly) all over the hallowed field.  I want to
stand on a field and see what the men saw immediately prior to the
commencement of hostilities, and it's hard to do with monoliths and needles
and generally pretty horrible statues scattered about.

By the way -- have any of you noticed the privately-erected statue of Marse
Robert?  It's actually a pretty nice statue as statues go, but Lee is
holding his field glasses in this one -- and we ALL know, on Sept 17 was
wasn't able to due to his wrist injuries.  {sigh}
----- Original Message -----
From: "Anthony W Turner" <awturner@...>
To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Grafitti by Monument


>
>
> On Thursday, March 3, 2005, at 02:22 PM, Brian Morris wrote:
>
> > We can preserve and restore but we should never have the
> > ego to think that we have the right to add. There is a saying in cave
> > exploring. Leave nothing but footprints. Take nothing but pictures.
> > Future
> > generations should see Gettysburg, Antietam and other battlefields as
> > close
> > as we can to how the veterans intended and not even know we were ever
> > there.
> >
>
> Tom Clemens wrote:
>
> > Myself, along with the majority of the Directors of SHAF, think it is a
> > terrible idea to put new monuments on the any battlefield.
>
> Amen, guys.  What strategies, if any, do you feel we all can adopt to
> counter these
> monumental (sorry!) assaults on our battlefields?  Letters to
> congressmen and
> senators?  Phone calls?  Others?
>
> Tony Turner
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

It's a double edged sword. One of the things I like about Gettysburg are the
monuments. I find them to be a connection to the past. To the men who fought
there and then erected the monuments. On the other hand, one of the things I
like about Antietam is how pristine the battlefield is. It's in many ways as
it was at the time of the battle.

The monuments as they stand now are historical. They were placed by the men
who fought there to remember fallen comrades. It was how they wanted the
battlefield to be remembered. Monuments we place will not be historical
since those erecting them have no true connection to the battle that took
place there.

I do disagree that monuments were placed haphazardly though. At both
Gettysburg and Antietam there were monument commissions who oversaw and
approved the design and placement of monuments. Great care was taken to make
sure that they were placed in as appropriate a location as possible.
Mistakes were made of course but in general they did a good job I think.
Most times as well the monuments have a specific story to tell in their
placements. At Gettysburg for example the 20th Indiana marks the location
where it's commander Colonel Wheeler was mortally wounded. The 143rd Pa on
McPherson's Ridge marks the spot where Color Sergeant Ben Crippen shook his
fist in defiance at the oncoming Confederates and the 4th Michigan marks the
location in the Wheatfield where the fight for their colors took place on
July 2nd.

I do see your point however. There is something about seeing a battlefield
preserved and as it was the day the battle took place.

Brian

>
> If the truth be known, I'm in a minority here.  It may even be a minority
of
> one.  I generally don't like monuments at all.  I wish they had all been
> grouped together in the beginning -- like in a Hall of Monuments, rather
> than spread (many times haphazardly) all over the hallowed field.  I want
to
> stand on a field and see what the men saw immediately prior to the
> commencement of hostilities, and it's hard to do with monoliths and
needles
> and generally pretty horrible statues scattered about.
>
> By the way -- have any of you noticed the privately-erected statue of
Marse
> Robert?  It's actually a pretty nice statue as statues go, but Lee is
> holding his field glasses in this one -- and we ALL know, on Sept 17 was
> wasn't able to due to his wrist injuries.  {sigh}
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Anthony W Turner" <awturner@...>
> To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 2:55 PM
> Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Grafitti by Monument
>
>
> >
> >
> > On Thursday, March 3, 2005, at 02:22 PM, Brian Morris wrote:
> >
> > > We can preserve and restore but we should never have the
> > > ego to think that we have the right to add. There is a saying in cave
> > > exploring. Leave nothing but footprints. Take nothing but pictures.
> > > Future
> > > generations should see Gettysburg, Antietam and other battlefields as
> > > close
> > > as we can to how the veterans intended and not even know we were ever
> > > there.
> > >
> >
> > Tom Clemens wrote:
> >
> > > Myself, along with the majority of the Directors of SHAF, think it is
a
> > > terrible idea to put new monuments on the any battlefield.
> >
> > Amen, guys.  What strategies, if any, do you feel we all can adopt to
> > counter these
> > monumental (sorry!) assaults on our battlefields?  Letters to
> > congressmen and
> > senators?  Phone calls?  Others?
> >
> > Tony Turner
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I seem to have misplaced yur pricate email....
----- Original Message -----
From: "G E Mayers" <gerry1952@...>
To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 3:49 PM
Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] NH at Antietam:


>
> Dear Richard,
>
> Please contact me privately. Thanks.
>
> Very respectfully,
> G E "Gerry" Mayers
> Confederate Signal Corps,
> Longstreet's Corps
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <richard@...>
> To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 3:01 PM
> Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] NH at Antietam:
>
>
> > May I "amen" the amen????
> >
> > Richard
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Brian Morris" <ironbrigade@...>
> > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 2:22 PM
> > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] NH at Antietam:
> >
> >
> >>
> >> If the New Hampshire monument is allowed it will unfortunately be
> >> followed
> >> by other monuments. Perhaps many more. There are a good dozen or more
> > groups
> >> who are planning to push for their own monuments so this isn't just
about
> >> one monument but perhaps a score more for Gettysburg, Antietam and
other
> >> battlefields.
> >>
> >> The problem is the political trap that this proposal is putting
> > politicians
> >> in. Nobody wants to be seen at voting against a memorial. Looks bad
when
> >> your opponent can say "and my opponent voted against allowing a
memorial
> > to
> >> honor the sacrifice of our good men in uniform".
> >>
> >> We've had discussions on this in the Gettysburg Discussion Group. These
> >> monuments are often called Hobby Monuments but I prefer to call them
> >> graffiti by monument. People want to get their favorite
> >> regiment/state/soldier/whathaveyou a monument on their favorite
> > battlefield.
> >> However I always like to use the line from the third Indiana Jones film
> > that
> >> goes "Do you seek the grail for his glory or for yours". Unfortunately
I
> >> think in the case of the New Hampshire monument like many other
proposals
> >> it's more of a case of wanting the thrill of placing a monument on
their
> >> favorite battlefield that can never be removed. They feel it gives them
a
> >> closer connection to the field. Graffiti by monument.
> >>
> >> The job of this and future generations is not to decide that the
veterans
> > of
> >> the battle didn't do a good enough job putting memorials on the
> > battlefield
> >> so we have to add our own. Our job is to preserve the battlefields as
> >> they
> >> were left to us. We can preserve and restore but we should never have
the
> >> ego to think that we have the right to add. There is a saying in cave
> >> exploring. Leave nothing but footprints. Take nothing but pictures.
> >> Future
> >> generations should see Gettysburg, Antietam and other battlefields as
> > close
> >> as we can to how the veterans intended and not even know we were ever
> > there.
> >>
> >> Brian
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> > No there are no NH monumnets at Antietam, YET!  The state is pushing
> >> legislation and has plans to erect a new monument near Burnside Bridge.
> >> Myself, along with the majority of the Directors of SHAF, think it is a
> >> terrible idea to put new monuments on the any battlefield.  I'll keep
you
> >> posted.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
> >> > Professor of History
> >> > Hagerstown Community College
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > >>> rotbaron@... 3/3/2005 10:25:46 AM >>>
> >> >
> >> > Are there any memorials at Antietam to New Hampshire units (tablets,
> >> markers, monuments)? I am having hard time tracking moves of 6th and
9th
> > NH
> >> east of the creek. More on that later.
> >> >
> >> > I'm almost done my summary of the action east of Burnside's Bridge,
and
> > I
> >> do appreciate the great assistance I've been given by this group.
> >> >
> >> > One question remains unanswered: what two companies of the 11th Ohio
> >> opened the fight?
> >> >
> >> > Tom Shay
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> >> > ADVERTISEMENT
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >> >
> >> > To visit your group on the web, go to:
> >> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
> >> >
> >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >> > TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >> >
> >> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> >            ADVERTISEMENT
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >  a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> >  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
> >
> >  b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >  TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >  c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

You mean that lovely statue with the immortal inscription "Lee was not in
favor of succession" (OWTTE)?



BTW, the sculptor is not the only person to ignore Lee's injuries at the
time.  Some famous chroniclers of the battle have made the same mistake,
with the attendant mistakes resulting from that ignorance - for instance,
lending any credence to Walkers cockamamie account.



Harry



-----Original Message-----
From: richard@... [mailto:richard@...]
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 5:15 PM
To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Grafitti by Monument




By the way -- have any of you noticed the privately-erected statue of Marse
Robert?  It's actually a pretty nice statue as statues go, but Lee is
holding his field glasses in this one -- and we ALL know, on Sept 17 was
wasn't able to due to his wrist injuries.  {sigh}



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Harry Smeltzer wrote:


<Snip>
>
> BTW, the sculptor is not the only person to ignore Lee's injuries at the
> time.  Some famous chroniclers of the battle have made the same mistake,
> with the attendant mistakes resulting from that ignorance - for instance,
> lending any credence to Walkers cockamamie account.

     I have a copy of a letter written by Lee in Oct. 1862 to Markie Williams
in which he tells her one of his hands was still giving him problems and so
he was still using a sling.

Regards,
Teej



>
>
>
>

<snip>> By the way -- have any of you noticed the privately-erected statue
of Marse
> Robert?  It's actually a pretty nice statue as statues go, but Lee is
> holding his field glasses in this one -- and we ALL know, on Sept 17 was
> wasn't able to due to his wrist injuries.  {sigh}

Dear Richard,

I have seen the statue and pictures of it. It is rather nice as statues go,
but there are three glaring errors with it.

One is as you have pointed out, Marse Robert was in no condition to hold
Field Glasses on September 17th due to the injuries sustained to his wrists.

The second is that Marse Rovert never actually set foot on the ground where
the statue is! (He might possibly have passed by the property on the
Boonsboro Turnpike, but elements of the ANV were never there.)

Third, the word "secession" is mis spelt on the plaque on the statue base!

Very respectfully,
G E "Gerry" Mayers
Confederate Signal Corps,
Longstreet's Corps

Dear TJ,

IIRC, one of Marse Rovert's hands was actually badly sprained rather than
broken. If so, such an injury would take much longer to properly heal than a
simple fracture, no?

Very respectfully,
G E "Gerry" Mayers
Confederate Signal Corps,
Longstreet's Corps



----- Original Message -----
From: "Teej Smith" <teej@...>
To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 6:38 PM
Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Grafitti by Monument


>
> <Snip>
>>
>    I have a copy of a letter written by Lee in Oct. 1862 to Markie
> Williams
> in which he tells her one of his hands was still giving him problems and
> so
> he was still using a sling.
>
> Regards,
> Teej
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>            ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>  a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
>  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
>
>  b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>  c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>

be vigilant, follow up rumors.  Write federal elected officials and let
them know you care about it.  As far as I know there is no bill yet, but
there is a commission from NH working very strenuously to do this.
Tom Clemens

Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
Professor of History
Hagerstown Community College


>>> richard@... 03/03/05 5:15 PM >>>

Dr. Tom,

That is a great idea! Can CWPT be made aware of this need?

Also, could you please contact me privately? Thanks!

Very respectfully,
G E "Gerry" Mayers
Confederate Signal Corps,
Longstreet's Corps



----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Clemens" <clemenst@...>
To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 9:43 PM
Subject: [TalkAntietam] What can be done?


> be vigilant, follow up rumors.  Write federal elected officials and let
> them know you care about it.  As far as I know there is no bill yet, but
> there is a commission from NH working very strenuously to do this.
> Tom Clemens
>
> Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
> Professor of History
> Hagerstown Community College
>
>
>>>> richard@... 03/03/05 5:15 PM >>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>            ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>  a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
>  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
>
>  b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>  c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>

Currently there is a moratorium on monuments on NPS Civil War battlefields
until I think 2007. This was in part a result of the 11th Mississippi and
North Carolina monuments in Gettysburg. Here's a few websites dealing with
the idea of new monuments and the official bill proposing the lifting of the
moratorium.
http://www.civilwarnews.com/archive/articles/monument_policy_change.htm
http://hometown.aol.com/cwrtnh/
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:S.2651:

I think it is likely that this monument and others are inevitable. I
actually talked to my local Congressman who is planning to support more
monuments because he feels it's politically unwise not to. He was running
against a Desert Storm veteran (almost lost) and felt he couldn't be shown
to be anti veteran. This will likely be the case for many politicians who
don't want to hand their opponents a nice little weapon come re-election.
Unfortunately once we see a New Hampshire monument we will likely see many
others as civil war groups go "Hey, how come there's no monument to the
(insert regiment here) at Antietam".

When the 11th Mississippi monument was placed near the Bryan's Farm in
Gettysburg it broke precedence. In the past the general rule was "no
regimental monuments in forward or transient positions". This was the rule
set by the Civil War veterans committees in the 1880s covering monument
placing. Then came the North Carolina and 11th Mississippi monuments which
are placed near the Angle in Gettysburg thanks to some arm bending by a few
Senators in Washington. The North Carolina one is placed perhaps 100 yards
south of the sport where the Tar Heels actually hit the wall but the
tourists would never see it so instead it was placed inside the angle and
purposely farther up slope than the Armistead marker (Yes the fight over who
got farther still rages on but that's another story).

Like I said, if this goes through you are going to see not just a few but a
lot of new monuments. You are going to see re-enactment groups who feel the
unit they're recreating isn't properly represented and get their Senator to
do some arm twisting to get the NPS to let them put it where ever they want.
You'll see round table groups wanting their hometown hero to have a marker
or monument to mark where they fought. Do we really want to see more
monuments at the Angle, LRT or the Sunken Road? I don't but I have a feeling
that we will.

Brian

>
> Dr. Tom,
>
> That is a great idea! Can CWPT be made aware of this need?
>
> Also, could you please contact me privately? Thanks!
>
> Very respectfully,
> G E "Gerry" Mayers
> Confederate Signal Corps,
> Longstreet's Corps
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Thomas Clemens" <clemenst@...>
> To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 9:43 PM
> Subject: [TalkAntietam] What can be done?
>
>
> > be vigilant, follow up rumors.  Write federal elected officials and let
> > them know you care about it.  As far as I know there is no bill yet, but
> > there is a commission from NH working very strenuously to do this.
> > Tom Clemens
> >
> > Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
> > Professor of History
> > Hagerstown Community College
> >
> >
> >>>> richard@... 03/03/05 5:15 PM >>>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> >            ADVERTISEMENT
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >  a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> >  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
> >
> >  b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >  TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >  c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Below is info on a fantastic conference.  I have gone to 8 of the 9 conferences
and the only reason I missed one was because my son was graduating from college!
All profits from these conferences are donated to Civil War preservation.  If
you need additional info after reading the web site or have trouble with the web
site, please let me know.

BTW, the first conference was held at Antietam and one of our guides was a
TalkAntietam member Tom Clemens.   Hi Tom! <g>  I know you probably don't
remember my son semi-video taping some of that - he was just a kid and I will
have to tell you a story about that video.  But to point out how long ago that
was - that kid is getting married!

Paula



9th Annual Civil War Forum Battlefield Conference
************ First & Second Manassas ************

When: March 31 to April 3, 2005
Where: HQ -- Hampton Inn, Manassas, VA

There are still some seats available on the tour bus for the CW Forum
Battlefield tour & conference. Click on the link below for full
schedule and complete registration details.

--------        http://tinyurl.com/6towo        --------

Some of the highlights (included in registration cost):

*** 3 full evening programs featuring talks  by historians William
Miller, Scott Patchan, and Brian Pohanka. Includes catered dinner of
Virginia barbecue all three nights; display (Thurs.) of Civil War
muskets and bayonets, and book signing for Miller's newly released
"Great Maps of the Civil War" -- http://tinyurl.com/6awfk
*** guided tour of Civil War sites in Loudoun County, in the heart of
Mosby's Confederacy, with historian Stevan Meserve.
*** guided tours of First and Second Manassas/Bull Run with author &
historian Scott Patchan
*** Arlington cemetery tours of the graves of Civil War notables, and
Arlington House

The Civil War Forum is one of the country's oldest on-line Civil War
discussion groups, one that has survived and thrived on the basis of
its dedication to polite and intelligent exploration of the Civil War
era in a moderated and cordial format. Each year about 30-50 of us meet
in person, long-time members and first-timers, to traverse hallowed
ground.

Every March we endeavor to put together a program of top-flight guides
and speakers, with good food and comfortable facilities, while keeping
registration costs as low as possible. All income over expenses --
usually derived from donated raffle items and book sales -- goes to a
Civil War preservation organization. Join us at Manassas for a
memorable and informative weekend.

Even if you can't make it to the conference, you're welcome anytime to
visit and participate in the Forum's message boards. You can do that
here:
           http://community.netscape.com/civilwar

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

My second book is about Fredericksburg -- talk about still fighting over who
got closest to the wall!!!!!  To this day you risk losing a friend if you
suggest that Meagher got closer than Howard.  And speaking of Howard AND
monuments...he and Richard (The Angel of the Battlefield) Kirkland are the
only statues on Marye's Heights.  That's a bit of a travesty in my view.

BTW (WARNING -- shameless plug to follow) -- To Make Men Free is now out in
paperback.  The Fredericksburg book is scheduled for March, Oh Six.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Morris" <ironbrigade@...>
To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 11:24 PM
Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] What can be done?


>
> Currently there is a moratorium on monuments on NPS Civil War battlefields
> until I think 2007. This was in part a result of the 11th Mississippi and
> North Carolina monuments in Gettysburg. Here's a few websites dealing with
> the idea of new monuments and the official bill proposing the lifting of
the
> moratorium.
> http://www.civilwarnews.com/archive/articles/monument_policy_change.htm
> http://hometown.aol.com/cwrtnh/
> http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:S.2651:
>
> I think it is likely that this monument and others are inevitable. I
> actually talked to my local Congressman who is planning to support more
> monuments because he feels it's politically unwise not to. He was running
> against a Desert Storm veteran (almost lost) and felt he couldn't be shown
> to be anti veteran. This will likely be the case for many politicians who
> don't want to hand their opponents a nice little weapon come re-election.
> Unfortunately once we see a New Hampshire monument we will likely see many
> others as civil war groups go "Hey, how come there's no monument to the
> (insert regiment here) at Antietam".
>
> When the 11th Mississippi monument was placed near the Bryan's Farm in
> Gettysburg it broke precedence. In the past the general rule was "no
> regimental monuments in forward or transient positions". This was the rule
> set by the Civil War veterans committees in the 1880s covering monument
> placing. Then came the North Carolina and 11th Mississippi monuments which
> are placed near the Angle in Gettysburg thanks to some arm bending by a
few
> Senators in Washington. The North Carolina one is placed perhaps 100 yards
> south of the sport where the Tar Heels actually hit the wall but the
> tourists would never see it so instead it was placed inside the angle and
> purposely farther up slope than the Armistead marker (Yes the fight over
who
> got farther still rages on but that's another story).
>
> Like I said, if this goes through you are going to see not just a few but
a
> lot of new monuments. You are going to see re-enactment groups who feel
the
> unit they're recreating isn't properly represented and get their Senator
to
> do some arm twisting to get the NPS to let them put it where ever they
want.
> You'll see round table groups wanting their hometown hero to have a marker
> or monument to mark where they fought. Do we really want to see more
> monuments at the Angle, LRT or the Sunken Road? I don't but I have a
feeling
> that we will.
>
> Brian
>
> >
> > Dr. Tom,
> >
> > That is a great idea! Can CWPT be made aware of this need?
> >
> > Also, could you please contact me privately? Thanks!
> >
> > Very respectfully,
> > G E "Gerry" Mayers
> > Confederate Signal Corps,
> > Longstreet's Corps
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Thomas Clemens" <clemenst@...>
> > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 9:43 PM
> > Subject: [TalkAntietam] What can be done?
> >
> >
> > > be vigilant, follow up rumors.  Write federal elected officials and
let
> > > them know you care about it.  As far as I know there is no bill yet,
but
> > > there is a commission from NH working very strenuously to do this.
> > > Tom Clemens
> > >
> > > Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
> > > Professor of History
> > > Hagerstown Community College
> > >
> > >
> > >>>> richard@... 03/03/05 5:15 PM >>>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > >            ADVERTISEMENT
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >  a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > >  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
> > >
> > >  b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > >  TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > >
> > >  c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I think you mean Humphreys.



Harry



-----Original Message-----
From: richard@... [mailto:richard@...]
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 7:31 AM
To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] What can be done?



My second book is about Fredericksburg -- talk about still fighting over who
got closest to the wall!!!!!  To this day you risk losing a friend if you
suggest that Meagher got closer than Howard.  And speaking of Howard AND
monuments...he and Richard (The Angel of the Battlefield) Kirkland are the
only statues on Marye's Heights.  That's a bit of a travesty in my view.

BTW (WARNING -- shameless plug to follow) -- To Make Men Free is now out in
paperback.  The Fredericksburg book is scheduled for March, Oh Six.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I just logged on to correct myself!  You beat me to it (as I knew you
would).  Either way...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@...>
To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 7:42 AM
Subject: RE: [TalkAntietam] What can be done?


>
> I think you mean Humphreys.
>
>
>
> Harry
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: richard@... [mailto:richard@...]
> Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 7:31 AM
> To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] What can be done?
>
>
>
> My second book is about Fredericksburg -- talk about still fighting over
who
> got closest to the wall!!!!!  To this day you risk losing a friend if you
> suggest that Meagher got closer than Howard.  And speaking of Howard AND
> monuments...he and Richard (The Angel of the Battlefield) Kirkland are the
> only statues on Marye's Heights.  That's a bit of a travesty in my view.
>
> BTW (WARNING -- shameless plug to follow) -- To Make Men Free is now out
in
> paperback.  The Fredericksburg book is scheduled for March, Oh Six.
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Paula,
That was while ago. The conference looks like fun.  If you go, please give my
regards to Brian P.


>>> 128thpa@... 3/4/2005 6:34:17 AM >>>

Below is info on a fantastic conference.  I have gone to 8 of the 9 conferences
and the only reason I missed one was because my son was graduating from college!
All profits from these conferences are donated to Civil War preservation.  If
you need additional info after reading the web site or have trouble with the web
site, please let me know.

BTW, the first conference was held at Antietam and one of our guides was a
TalkAntietam member Tom Clemens.   Hi Tom! <g>  I know you probably don't
remember my son semi-video taping some of that - he was just a kid and I will
have to tell you a story about that video.  But to point out how long ago that
was - that kid is getting married!

Paula



9th Annual Civil War Forum Battlefield Conference
************ First & Second Manassas ************

When: March 31 to April 3, 2005
Where: HQ -- Hampton Inn, Manassas, VA

There are still some seats available on the tour bus for the CW Forum
Battlefield tour & conference. Click on the link below for full
schedule and complete registration details.

--------        http://tinyurl.com/6towo        --------

Some of the highlights (included in registration cost):

*** 3 full evening programs featuring talks  by historians William
Miller, Scott Patchan, and Brian Pohanka. Includes catered dinner of
Virginia barbecue all three nights; display (Thurs.) of Civil War
muskets and bayonets, and book signing for Miller's newly released
"Great Maps of the Civil War" -- http://tinyurl.com/6awfk
*** guided tour of Civil War sites in Loudoun County, in the heart of
Mosby's Confederacy, with historian Stevan Meserve.
*** guided tours of First and Second Manassas/Bull Run with author &
historian Scott Patchan
*** Arlington cemetery tours of the graves of Civil War notables, and
Arlington House

The Civil War Forum is one of the country's oldest on-line Civil War
discussion groups, one that has survived and thrived on the basis of
its dedication to polite and intelligent exploration of the Civil War
era in a moderated and cordial format. Each year about 30-50 of us meet
in person, long-time members and first-timers, to traverse hallowed
ground.

Every March we endeavor to put together a program of top-flight guides
and speakers, with good food and comfortable facilities, while keeping
registration costs as low as possible. All income over expenses --
usually derived from donated raffle items and book sales -- goes to a
Civil War preservation organization. Join us at Manassas for a
memorable and informative weekend.

Even if you can't make it to the conference, you're welcome anytime to
visit and participate in the Forum's message boards. You can do that
here:
           http://community.netscape.com/civilwar

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT






Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

<<That was while ago. The conference looks like fun.  If you go, please give my
regards to Brian P.>>
I will Tom! I am looking forward to the conference.
Paula

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

As Nagle's Brigade moved forward toward the bridge, they crossed the plowed
hill that is southeast of the bridge. The 2nd Maryland encountered a fence and
needed to tear down a section to get thru in column. The crowding at the gap
caused them some nasty casualties. Which fence was this?

Tucker states "Then they encountered the split-rail fence that ran along the
creek to the bridge" (page 100). Yet most other accounts and maps indicate it
was the fence that ran along the Rohrbach road (i.e. road coming down from
Rohrbach farm).

Carman states: "The Rohrbach road was fenced with stout chestnut posts and
rails, and was quite high. The officers ran ahead, soon removed a short
panel..."

Priest states this about the 2nd MD: "The regiment was pinned between the
road and a very well constructed fence section along Rohrbach's southern lane."
(page 225)

Tom Shay


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Unfortunately I may be the one in the minority.  I think the monuments help tell
the story of the action on the battlefields.  A lot of states and veteran groups
could not affort to put up a monument after the war.  This is not to say the
veterans that fought there would not have erected one to honor their deeds.  I
think the vets would have wanted to located their place in battle for future
generations.  This is not to say make Antietan or Gettysburg acres of granite
but alot of these monuments were erected in the early 1900's when a lot of vets
were already gone.

There is also controversy about placing and locating Confederate monuments at
Gettysburg.  Even Oates wanted to pay for a tablet to honor his fallen brother
and could not do it.  Seems like the committee did not want to show that the
Confederates had gotten behind the Union line.  Sounds political to me just like
the argument of placing monuments today.  The relatively recent Maryland
monument is wonderful as monuments go and just by looking it brings home the
impact of brother vs brother, neighbor vs neighbor. Too bad its in a bad place
and should be on Culp's hill.

well I'll probably get blasted for this message but sometimes you must bend a
little.  The more people that visit the battlefield the more interest and
donations that are received to purchase more land like around Antietam.  The
vets put up the monuments to be viewed by all, not by just those with an
interest in the war, and monuments bring them to the field.
   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Brian Morris
   To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 2:22 PM
   Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] NH at Antietam:


   If the New Hampshire monument is allowed it will unfortunately be followed
   by other monuments. Perhaps many more. There are a good dozen or more groups
   who are planning to push for their own monuments so this isn't just about
   one monument but perhaps a score more for Gettysburg, Antietam and other
   battlefields.

   The problem is the political trap that this proposal is putting politicians
   in. Nobody wants to be seen at voting against a memorial. Looks bad when
   your opponent can say "and my opponent voted against allowing a memorial to
   honor the sacrifice of our good men in uniform".

   We've had discussions on this in the Gettysburg Discussion Group. These
   monuments are often called Hobby Monuments but I prefer to call them
   graffiti by monument. People want to get their favorite
   regiment/state/soldier/whathaveyou a monument on their favorite battlefield.
   However I always like to use the line from the third Indiana Jones film that
   goes "Do you seek the grail for his glory or for yours". Unfortunately I
   think in the case of the New Hampshire monument like many other proposals
   it's more of a case of wanting the thrill of placing a monument on their
   favorite battlefield that can never be removed. They feel it gives them a
   closer connection to the field. Graffiti by monument.

   The job of this and future generations is not to decide that the veterans of
   the battle didn't do a good enough job putting memorials on the battlefield
   so we have to add our own. Our job is to preserve the battlefields as they
   were left to us. We can preserve and restore but we should never have the
   ego to think that we have the right to add. There is a saying in cave
   exploring. Leave nothing but footprints. Take nothing but pictures. Future
   generations should see Gettysburg, Antietam and other battlefields as close
   as we can to how the veterans intended and not even know we were ever there.

   Brian


   >
   > No there are no NH monumnets at Antietam, YET!  The state is pushing
   legislation and has plans to erect a new monument near Burnside Bridge.
   Myself, along with the majority of the Directors of SHAF, think it is a
   terrible idea to put new monuments on the any battlefield.  I'll keep you
   posted.
   >
   >
   > Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
   > Professor of History
   > Hagerstown Community College
   >
   >
   >
   > >>> rotbaron@... 3/3/2005 10:25:46 AM >>>
   >
   > Are there any memorials at Antietam to New Hampshire units (tablets,
   markers, monuments)? I am having hard time tracking moves of 6th and 9th NH
   east of the creek. More on that later.
   >
   > I'm almost done my summary of the action east of Burnside's Bridge, and I
   do appreciate the great assistance I've been given by this group.
   >
   > One question remains unanswered: what two companies of the 11th Ohio
   opened the fight?
   >
   > Tom Shay
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
   > ADVERTISEMENT
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   > Yahoo! Groups Links
   >
   > To visit your group on the web, go to:
   > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
   >
   > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   > TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
   >
   > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
   >
   >
   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   > Yahoo! Groups Links
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >







         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
               ADVERTISEMENT





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Yahoo! Groups Links

     a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/

     b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

     c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I won't blast you but I will disagree on several points.

Oates unfortunately was a man prone to exaggeration. In his official report
after the battle he claimed that he was force to retreat after being flanked
by two regiments that atacked him on his right when in fact it was only the
men of Company B and a handful of Berdan's sharpshooters. He also later to
the Gettysburg Battlefield Commission made the rather absurd claim that he
broke through the 20th Maine's lines and attacked the rear of the 83rd
Pennsylvania.

The rules of monument placement on battlefields were made by the men who
fought there. They earned that right. To disregard their wishes simply
because they are now dead is simply wrong in my opinion.

As for Civil War preservationists bending a little, I much disagree.
Everytime Civil War preservationists bend more battlefield land is turned
into strip malls and fast food resteraunts.

Part of what makes Antietam so wonderful today is it is so well preserved.
The purpose of our National Battlefield Parks are to preserve our history
for future generations. Preservation does not mean adding things to them or
making them into better tourist attractions. They are not there to be the
toys of modern day politicians trying to get their names in the paper or
civil war groups who feel that their favorite regiment of the war didn't get
the monument they think they should have 120 years ago. They are a part of
our history to be preserved as best we can. To me the putting up of new
monuments at Antietam and other battlefields, especially in violation of the
rules set up by the men who fought there, is the equivelent to someone
carving their initials into the Apollo 11 Capsule. It is nothing but fancy
goverment approved graffiti.

Brian

> There is also controversy about placing and locating Confederate monuments
at Gettysburg.  Even Oates wanted to pay for a tablet to honor his fallen
brother and could not do it.  Seems like the committee did not want to show
that the Confederates had gotten behind the Union line.  Sounds political to
me just like the argument of placing monuments today.  The relatively recent
Maryland monument is wonderful as monuments go and just by looking it brings
home the impact of brother vs brother, neighbor vs neighbor. Too bad its in
a bad place and should be on Culp's hill.
>
> well I'll probably get blasted for this message but sometimes you must
bend a little.  The more people that visit the battlefield the more interest
and donations that are received to purchase more land like around Antietam.
The vets put up the monuments to be viewed by all, not by just those with an
interest in the war, and monuments bring them to the field.
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Brian Morris
>   To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 2:22 PM
>   Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] NH at Antietam:
>
>
>   If the New Hampshire monument is allowed it will unfortunately be
followed
>   by other monuments. Perhaps many more. There are a good dozen or more
groups
>   who are planning to push for their own monuments so this isn't just
about
>   one monument but perhaps a score more for Gettysburg, Antietam and other
>   battlefields.
>
>   The problem is the political trap that this proposal is putting
politicians
>   in. Nobody wants to be seen at voting against a memorial. Looks bad when
>   your opponent can say "and my opponent voted against allowing a memorial
to
>   honor the sacrifice of our good men in uniform".
>
>   We've had discussions on this in the Gettysburg Discussion Group. These
>   monuments are often called Hobby Monuments but I prefer to call them
>   graffiti by monument. People want to get their favorite
>   regiment/state/soldier/whathaveyou a monument on their favorite
battlefield.
>   However I always like to use the line from the third Indiana Jones film
that
>   goes "Do you seek the grail for his glory or for yours". Unfortunately I
>   think in the case of the New Hampshire monument like many other
proposals
>   it's more of a case of wanting the thrill of placing a monument on their
>   favorite battlefield that can never be removed. They feel it gives them
a
>   closer connection to the field. Graffiti by monument.
>
>   The job of this and future generations is not to decide that the
veterans of
>   the battle didn't do a good enough job putting memorials on the
battlefield
>   so we have to add our own. Our job is to preserve the battlefields as
they
>   were left to us. We can preserve and restore but we should never have
the
>   ego to think that we have the right to add. There is a saying in cave
>   exploring. Leave nothing but footprints. Take nothing but pictures.
Future
>   generations should see Gettysburg, Antietam and other battlefields as
close
>   as we can to how the veterans intended and not even know we were ever
there.
>
>   Brian
>
>
>   >
>   > No there are no NH monumnets at Antietam, YET!  The state is pushing
>   legislation and has plans to erect a new monument near Burnside Bridge.
>   Myself, along with the majority of the Directors of SHAF, think it is a
>   terrible idea to put new monuments on the any battlefield.  I'll keep
you
>   posted.
>   >
>   >
>   > Thomas G. Clemens D.A.
>   > Professor of History
>   > Hagerstown Community College
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > >>> rotbaron@... 3/3/2005 10:25:46 AM >>>
>   >
>   > Are there any memorials at Antietam to New Hampshire units (tablets,
>   markers, monuments)? I am having hard time tracking moves of 6th and 9th
NH
>   east of the creek. More on that later.
>   >
>   > I'm almost done my summary of the action east of Burnside's Bridge,
and I
>   do appreciate the great assistance I've been given by this group.
>   >
>   > One question remains unanswered: what two companies of the 11th Ohio
>   opened the fight?
>   >
>   > Tom Shay
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>   > ADVERTISEMENT
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > Yahoo! Groups Links
>   >
>   > To visit your group on the web, go to:
>   > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
>   >
>   > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>   > TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>   >
>   > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>   >
>   >
>   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > Yahoo! Groups Links
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>               ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>   Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>     a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
>     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/
>
>     b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>     TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>     c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Brian,
   I can not speak for all monuments on all battlefields
but the monuments at Gettysburg were I believe set in
line of battle by then John Bachelder, Park Historian,
not by all of the Veteran regimental survivor associations
or those that fought there. There may be some examples at
Gettysburg that may go against this as the 72nd PVI went
to court as to the placement of their monument at/near the
wall. They felt that Mr. Bachelder was placing the monument
in the wrong spot, hence the court battle. Again I am not sure
if this is true on some , most or all CW battlefields and if
the same approach was followed.
   This topic was raised after Scott Hartwig gave a talk to
us at the G.A.R. Museum Dinner. His talk was on the Philadelphia
Brigade.

My best to you,

Eric J. Schmincke

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Morris" <ironbrigade@...>
To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] NH at Antietam:
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 23:36:46 -0600



<html><body>



<tt>
I won't blast you but I will disagree on several points.<BR>
<BR>
Oates unfortunately was a man prone to exaggeration. In his official report<BR>
after the battle he claimed that he was force to retreat after being flanked<BR>
by two regiments that atacked him on his right when in fact it was only the<BR>
men of Company B and a handful of Berdan's sharpshooters. He also later to<BR>
the Gettysburg Battlefield Commission made the rather absurd claim that he<BR>
broke through the 20th Maine's lines and attacked the rear of the 83rd<BR>
Pennsylvania.<BR>
<BR>
The rules of monument placement on battlefields were made by the men who<BR>
fought there. They earned that right. To disregard their wishes simply<BR>
because they are now dead is simply wrong in my opinion.<BR>
<BR>
As for Civil War preservationists bending a little, I much disagree.<BR>
Everytime Civil War preservationists bend more battlefield land is turned<BR>
into strip malls and fast food resteraunts.<BR>
<BR>
Part of what makes Antietam so wonderful today is it is so well preserved.<BR>
The purpose of our National Battlefield Parks are to preserve our history<BR>
for future generations. Preservation does not mean adding things to them or<BR>
making them into better tourist attractions. They are not there to be the<BR>
toys of modern day politicians trying to get their names in the paper or<BR>
civil war groups who feel that their favorite regiment of the war didn't get<BR>
the monument they think they should have 120 years ago. They are a part of<BR>
our history to be preserved as best we can. To me the putting up of new<BR>
monuments at Antietam and other battlefields, especially in violation of the<BR>
rules set up by the men who fought there, is the equivelent to someone<BR>
carving their initials into the Apollo 11 Capsule. It is nothing but fancy<BR>
goverment approved graffiti.<BR>
<BR>
Brian<BR>
<BR>
> There is also controversy about placing and locating Confederate monuments<BR>
at Gettysburg.  Even Oates wanted to pay for a tablet to honor his fallen<BR>
brother and could not do it.  Seems like the committee did not want to show<BR>
that the Confederates had gotten behind the Union line.  Sounds political to<BR>
me just like the argument of placing monuments today.  The relatively recent<BR>
Maryland monument is wonderful as monuments go and just by looking it brings<BR>
home the impact of brother vs brother, neighbor vs neighbor. Too bad its in<BR>
a bad place and should be on Culp's hill.<BR>
><BR>
> well I'll probably get blasted for this message but sometimes you must<BR>
bend a little.  The more people that visit the battlefield the more interest<BR>
and donations that are received to purchase more land like around Antietam.<BR>
The vets put up the monuments to be viewed by all, not by just those with an<BR>
interest in the war, and monuments bring them to the field.<BR>
>   ----- Original Message -----<BR>
>   From: Brian Morris<BR>
>   To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com<BR>
>   Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 2:22 PM<BR>
>   Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] NH at Antietam:<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
>   If the New Hampshire monument is allowed it will unfortunately be<BR>
followed<BR>
>   by other monuments. Perhaps many more. There are a good dozen or more<BR>
groups<BR>
>   who are planning to push for their own monuments so this isn't just<BR>
about<BR>
>   one monument but perhaps a score more for Gettysburg, Antietam and other<BR>
>   battlefields.<BR>
><BR>
>   The problem is the political trap that this proposal is putting<BR>
politicians<BR>
>   in. Nobody wants to be seen at voting against a memorial. Looks bad when<BR>
>   your opponent can say "and my opponent voted against allowing a memorial<BR>
to<BR>
>   honor the sacrifice of our good men in uniform".<BR>
><BR>
>   We've had discussions on this in the Gettysburg Discussion Group. These<BR>
>   monuments are often called Hobby Monuments but I prefer to call them<BR>
>   graffiti by monument. People want to get their favorite<BR>
>   regiment/state/soldier/whathaveyou a monument on their favorite<BR>
battlefield.<BR>
>   However I always like to use the line from the third Indiana Jones film<BR>
that<BR>
>   goes "Do you seek the grail for his glory or for yours". Unfortunately I<BR>
>   think in the case of the New Hampshire monument like many other<BR>
proposals<BR>
>   it's more of a case of wanting the thrill of placing a monument on their<BR>
>   favorite battlefield that can never be removed. They feel it gives them<BR>
a<BR>
>   closer connection to the field. Graffiti by monument.<BR>
><BR>
>   The job of this and future generations is not to decide that the<BR>
veterans of<BR>
>   the battle didn't do a good enough job putting memorials on the<BR>
battlefield<BR>
>   so we have to add our own. Our job is to preserve the battlefields as<BR>
they<BR>
>   were left to us. We can preserve and restore but we should never have<BR>
the<BR>
>   ego to think that we have the right to add. There is a saying in cave<BR>
>   exploring. Leave nothing but footprints. Take nothing but pictures.<BR>
Future<BR>
>   generations should see Gettysburg, Antietam and other battlefields as<BR>
close<BR>
>   as we can to how the veterans intended and not even know we were ever<BR>
there.<BR>
><BR>
>   Brian<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   > No there are no NH monumnets at Antietam, YET!  The state is pushing<BR>
>   legislation and has plans to erect a new monument near Burnside Bridge.<BR>
>   Myself, along with the majority of the Directors of SHAF, think it is a<BR>
>   terrible idea to put new monuments on the any battlefield.  I'll keep<BR>
you<BR>
>   posted.<BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   > Thomas G. Clemens D.A.<BR>
>   > Professor of History<BR>
>   > Hagerstown Community College<BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   > >>> rotbaron@... 3/3/2005 10:25:46 AM >>><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   > Are there any memorials at Antietam to New Hampshire units (tablets,<BR>
>   markers, monuments)? I am having hard time tracking moves of 6th and 9th<BR>
NH<BR>
>   east of the creek. More on that later.<BR>
>   ><BR>
>   > I'm almost done my summary of the action east of Burnside's Bridge,<BR>
and I<BR>
>   do appreciate the great assistance I've been given by this group.<BR>
>   ><BR>
>   > One question remains unanswered: what two companies of the 11th Ohio<BR>
>   opened the fight?<BR>
>   ><BR>
>   > Tom Shay<BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor<BR>
>   > ADVERTISEMENT<BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   > Yahoo! Groups Links<BR>
>   ><BR>
>   > To visit your group on the web, go to:<BR>
>   > <a
href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/">http://groups.yahoo.com/group\
/TalkAntietam/</a><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<BR>
>   > TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<BR>
>   ><BR>
>   > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.<BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]<BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   > Yahoo! Groups Links<BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
>   ><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
>         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor<BR>
>               ADVERTISEMENT<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
----<BR>
>   Yahoo! Groups Links<BR>
><BR>
>     a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:<BR>
>     <a
href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/">http://groups.yahoo.com/group\
/TalkAntietam/</a><BR>
><BR>
>     b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<BR>
>     TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<BR>
><BR>
>     c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of<BR>
Service.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Yahoo! Groups Links<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
</tt>

<br><br>
<tt>
<BR>
</tt>
<br><br>

<br>

<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->

<table border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFCC>
<td align=center><font size="-1" color=#003399><b>Yahoo! Groups
Sponsor</b></font></td>
</tr>
<tr bgcolor=#FFFFFF>
<td align=center width=470><table border=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0> <tr> <td
align=center><font face=arial size=-2>ADVERTISEMENT</font><br><a
href="http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129qb4bav/M=298184.6018725.7038619.3001176/D=g\
roups/S=1705126278:HM/EXP=1110173961/A=2593423/R=0/SIG=11el9gslf/*http://www.net\
flix.com/Default?mqso=60190075" alt=""><img
src="http://us.a1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/ne/netflix/22305_0205_016_b_300250_a.gi\
f" alt="click here" width="300" height="250" border="0"></a></td></tr></table>
</td>
</tr>
<tr><td><img alt="" width=1 height=1
src="http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.6018725.7038619.3001176/D=groups/S=\
:HM/A=2593423/rand=452557795"></td></tr>
</table>

<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->



<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->

<br>
<tt><hr width="500">
<b>Yahoo! Groups Links</b><br>
<ul>
<li>To visit your group on the web, go to:<br><a
href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkAntietam/">http://groups.yahoo.com/group\
/TalkAntietam/</a><br>
<li>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:<br><a
href="mailto:TalkAntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe">TalkA\
ntietam-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com</a><br>
<li>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <a
href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">Yahoo! Terms of Service</a>.
</ul>
</tt>
</br>

<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->


</body></html>





--
_______________________________________________
Get your free Verizonmail at www.verizonmail.com

Bachelder used extensive interviews, correspondence and field trips with
veterans to establish the positions of the regiments according to the
evidence, commission guidelines, and property owned or available at the
time.  Some of them are "correct", some of them are not.  Some are in fact
"incorrect" with the full knowledge and approval of the veterans, who
sacrificed accuracy for visibility on occasion (see especially the placement
of various 11th Corps markers).  To characterize their placement as having
been set by Bachelder and not the veterans is inaccurate.



Not that it matters, but I tend to agree with many that the 72nd monument is
too far west.  I know that Scott does not agree.  But thank God the 72nd
sued, for as a contingency they bought a small tract of land a little
further west, which thwarted plans to run a trolley line right in front of
the angle.



Harry



-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Schmincke [mailto:eric_schmincke@...]
Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 9:36 AM
To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] NH at Antietam:



Brian,
   I can not speak for all monuments on all battlefields
but the monuments at Gettysburg were I believe set in
line of battle by then John Bachelder, Park Historian,
not by all of the Veteran regimental survivor associations
or those that fought there. There may be some examples at
Gettysburg that may go against this as the 72nd PVI went
to court as to the placement of their monument at/near the
wall. They felt that Mr. Bachelder was placing the monument
in the wrong spot, hence the court battle. Again I am not sure
if this is true on some , most or all CW battlefields and if
the same approach was followed.
   This topic was raised after Scott Hartwig gave a talk to
us at the G.A.R. Museum Dinner. His talk was on the Philadelphia
Brigade.

My best to you,

Eric J. Schmincke





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]