Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

3475Re: Question

Expand Messages
  • James W. Durney
    May 30, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "T. R. Livesey" <tlivesey@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > From my experience, including elevation markings is always a
      > challenge, especially if you want to zoom out and show a broader
      > expanse of area. The downside, of course, is that you end up with
      > maps that look like the way Sears' text reads: there is no way to
      > really understand how the terrain affects the situation. For
      example,
      > in the maps of all three of these books, the reader cannot
      appreciate
      > the situation in the 40 acre cornfield: how can the 4RI get `lost'?
      > How can A.P. Hill come up out of nowhere on Burnside's left? I
      think
      > a serious argument can be made that the elevation information is
      more
      > important than the ground cover information (woods vs. corn vs.
      > clover, etc.).


      I think Anitetam cannot be understood w/o elevation markings. My
      first chance to walk the battlefield was a revelation that I will
      never forget. Neither Sears, Priest or Harsh had told me how much
      elevation impacts the battle.

      James
    • Show all 30 messages in this topic