1874Re: [TalkAntietam] Hagerstown Fence
- Apr 6, 2005I was out there today taking photos of that exact fence, trying got
recreate the historical photo. Personally, I think the new fence is a
good thing. I guess you could make a case that it should've been
six-rail, but then you'd have to macadamize the road and switch the
phone lines for telegraph lines.
On Wednesday, April 6, 2005, at 07:05 PM, david lutton wrote:
> I recall some postings concerning the new fence installed along the
> Hagerstown pike. I was recently in Sharpsburg and was curious to see
> how this work progressed.
> I was really saddened to see the results. Not only is the fence
> inaccurate (if I can recall the Gardner photos, the fence in this
> area of the field was six rails high not five), but the new fence is
> not in its proper location. I understand that traffic in this area
> presents a special problem but if I recall there are fences on both
> sides of the road around the Mumma farm. So my basic question is if
> the fence could not be placed in it's historic location why put a
> fence there at all??
> With so many period fence lines and stone walls on the field that
> need attention why waste funds on a historically inaccurate project
> like this? Are Park Service funds so plentiful as to permit this
> cosmetic project? What was the rational for it? I think that those
> of us who are opposed to any new additions to the field such as new
> monuments should be equally opposed to any frivolous additions like
> this new fence.
> Battery B, 4th US played a significant role in this phase of the
> contest and this new "fence" placed litterly in front of one of the
> muzzles of the battery guns does them no service.
> Any comments?
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>