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

Re: [TalkAntietam] Interrogating a witness tree

Expand Messages
  • Brian Morris
    I might be wrong on that. Looking at the pictures that I took of the bridge and that tree from my trip last April, the tree definately looks much older than I
    Message 1 of 9 , Jun 30, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      I might be wrong on that. Looking at the pictures that I took of the bridge
      and that tree from my trip last April, the tree definately looks much older
      than I remember and how it looks in the photo on the website.

      Brian

      > Found this website recently that purports to show witness trees to certain
      > Civil War battles. Some I know are correct such as the Baltimore St.
      > Sycamores and Locust tree in the Cemetery in Gettysburg but the website
      also
      > makes claims about the White Oaks at the Copse of Trees which I know are
      not
      > old enough to be witness trees.
      > http://www.bivouacbooks.com/bbv2i1s4.htm
      >
      > For the Antietam Battlefirld they show a picture of the Sycamore that sits
      > alongside the Burnside Bridge and then show a picture taken shortly after
      > the battle that shows a tree in that same area. OK, I'm not a big tree
      > expert here but I've stood next to that tree by the Burnside Bridge and it
      > does not strike me as a 140+ year old tree. Just because there was a tree
      in
      > that general location in 1862 doesn't make the one there in 2004 the very
      > same tree.
      >
      > Is that tree next to the bridge a witness tree or do we have someone
      jumping
      > to conclusions here based off of two trees being in a similar area 140
      years
      > apart?
      >
      > Brian
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • tjrhys62
      Hi Brian, Looks like the Burnside s Bridge sycamore may very well be a witness tree, judging by specs found at http://www.2020site.org/trees/sycamore.html Have
      Message 2 of 9 , Jun 30, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Brian,

        Looks like the Burnside's Bridge sycamore may very well be a witness
        tree, judging by specs found at
        http://www.2020site.org/trees/sycamore.html Have a look.

        However, documenting such things seems impossible aside from locale.
        The tree depicted in the postwar (Forbes?) engraving, compared to
        current size and breadth, strongly suggests a logical growth
        progession.

        Suffice it to say that odds are more in favor of it being the real
        thing. If it could only talk... despite recent injury.

        Tim

        --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Morris"
        <ironbrigade@k...> wrote:
        > Found this website recently that purports to show witness trees to
        certain
        > Civil War battles. Some I know are correct such as the Baltimore
        St.
        > Sycamores and Locust tree in the Cemetery in Gettysburg but the
        website also
        > makes claims about the White Oaks at the Copse of Trees which I
        know are not
        > old enough to be witness trees.
        > http://www.bivouacbooks.com/bbv2i1s4.htm
        >
        > For the Antietam Battlefirld they show a picture of the Sycamore
        that sits
        > alongside the Burnside Bridge and then show a picture taken
        shortly after
        > the battle that shows a tree in that same area. OK, I'm not a big
        tree
        > expert here but I've stood next to that tree by the Burnside
        Bridge and it
        > does not strike me as a 140+ year old tree. Just because there was
        a tree in
        > that general location in 1862 doesn't make the one there in 2004
        the very
        > same tree.
        >
        > Is that tree next to the bridge a witness tree or do we have
        someone jumping
        > to conclusions here based off of two trees being in a similar area
        140 years
        > apart?
        >
        > Brian
      • Brian Morris
        Here s a better and closer picture of the tree. This is a section cut out of one of the pictures I took of the bridge (I take high resolution pictures and then
        Message 3 of 9 , Jun 30, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Here's a better and closer picture of the tree. This is a section cut out of
          one of the pictures I took of the bridge (I take high resolution pictures
          and then resize them down later) in April.
          http://www.kswader.com/judi/civilwar/witnesstree.jpg

          As you can see, the tree looks much older than it does in any of the other
          pictures. I'm tending to think this one could very well be a witness tree
          now that I'm looking at these pictures I took with the tree in them.

          Brian



          > Hi Brian,
          >
          > Looks like the Burnside's Bridge sycamore may very well be a witness
          > tree, judging by specs found at
          > http://www.2020site.org/trees/sycamore.html Have a look.
          >
          > However, documenting such things seems impossible aside from locale.
          > The tree depicted in the postwar (Forbes?) engraving, compared to
          > current size and breadth, strongly suggests a logical growth
          > progession.
          >
          > Suffice it to say that odds are more in favor of it being the real
          > thing. If it could only talk... despite recent injury.
          >
          > Tim
          >
          > --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Morris"
          > <ironbrigade@k...> wrote:
          > > Found this website recently that purports to show witness trees to
          > certain
          > > Civil War battles. Some I know are correct such as the Baltimore
          > St.
          > > Sycamores and Locust tree in the Cemetery in Gettysburg but the
          > website also
          > > makes claims about the White Oaks at the Copse of Trees which I
          > know are not
          > > old enough to be witness trees.
          > > http://www.bivouacbooks.com/bbv2i1s4.htm
          > >
          > > For the Antietam Battlefirld they show a picture of the Sycamore
          > that sits
          > > alongside the Burnside Bridge and then show a picture taken
          > shortly after
          > > the battle that shows a tree in that same area. OK, I'm not a big
          > tree
          > > expert here but I've stood next to that tree by the Burnside
          > Bridge and it
          > > does not strike me as a 140+ year old tree. Just because there was
          > a tree in
          > > that general location in 1862 doesn't make the one there in 2004
          > the very
          > > same tree.
          > >
          > > Is that tree next to the bridge a witness tree or do we have
          > someone jumping
          > > to conclusions here based off of two trees being in a similar area
          > 140 years
          > > apart?
          > >
          > > Brian
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • tjrhys62
          I think you have a winner. Next time I m over there (15 minutes away) I ll take a closer look. Tim ... cut out of ... pictures ... the other ... witness tree
          Message 4 of 9 , Jun 30, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            I think you have a winner. Next time I'm over there (15 minutes
            away) I'll take a closer look.

            Tim

            --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Morris"
            <ironbrigade@k...> wrote:
            > Here's a better and closer picture of the tree. This is a section
            cut out of
            > one of the pictures I took of the bridge (I take high resolution
            pictures
            > and then resize them down later) in April.
            > http://www.kswader.com/judi/civilwar/witnesstree.jpg
            >
            > As you can see, the tree looks much older than it does in any of
            the other
            > pictures. I'm tending to think this one could very well be a
            witness tree
            > now that I'm looking at these pictures I took with the tree in
            them.
            >
            > Brian
            >
            >
            >
            > > Hi Brian,
            > >
            > > Looks like the Burnside's Bridge sycamore may very well be a
            witness
            > > tree, judging by specs found at
            > > http://www.2020site.org/trees/sycamore.html Have a look.
            > >
            > > However, documenting such things seems impossible aside from
            locale.
            > > The tree depicted in the postwar (Forbes?) engraving, compared to
            > > current size and breadth, strongly suggests a logical growth
            > > progession.
            > >
            > > Suffice it to say that odds are more in favor of it being the
            real
            > > thing. If it could only talk... despite recent injury.
            > >
            > > Tim
            > >
            > > --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Morris"
            > > <ironbrigade@k...> wrote:
            > > > Found this website recently that purports to show witness
            trees to
            > > certain
            > > > Civil War battles. Some I know are correct such as the
            Baltimore
            > > St.
            > > > Sycamores and Locust tree in the Cemetery in Gettysburg but the
            > > website also
            > > > makes claims about the White Oaks at the Copse of Trees which I
            > > know are not
            > > > old enough to be witness trees.
            > > > http://www.bivouacbooks.com/bbv2i1s4.htm
            > > >
            > > > For the Antietam Battlefirld they show a picture of the
            Sycamore
            > > that sits
            > > > alongside the Burnside Bridge and then show a picture taken
            > > shortly after
            > > > the battle that shows a tree in that same area. OK, I'm not a
            big
            > > tree
            > > > expert here but I've stood next to that tree by the Burnside
            > > Bridge and it
            > > > does not strike me as a 140+ year old tree. Just because there
            was
            > > a tree in
            > > > that general location in 1862 doesn't make the one there in
            2004
            > > the very
            > > > same tree.
            > > >
            > > > Is that tree next to the bridge a witness tree or do we have
            > > someone jumping
            > > > to conclusions here based off of two trees being in a similar
            area
            > > 140 years
            > > > apart?
            > > >
            > > > Brian
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Yahoo! Groups Links
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
          • Rawlings, Kevin
            Tim and Brian, It is a witness tree as it has been in (a tree witness protection program, haha, could not resist)a historic tree program (I can t recall the
            Message 5 of 9 , Jun 30, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              Tim and Brian,

              It is a witness tree as it has been in (a tree witness protection program,
              haha, could not resist)a historic tree program (I can't recall the proper
              name right off the bat, but I was working for the Civil War Trust at the
              time.)that they have made seedlings from. Some years back I was involved in
              a promotional picture with Tom Clemens and Tom Lively as Union and
              Confederate soldiers planting a new "cloned" tree for this historical tree
              prgram that also featured treelings from other historic sites, civil war and
              earlier eras. I have a flier from that program buried in my files somewhere.

              Kevin Rawlings

              -----Original Message-----
              From: tjrhys62 [mailto:tjreesecg@...]
              Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 3:25 PM
              To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Interrogating a witness tree


              I think you have a winner. Next time I'm over there (15 minutes
              away) I'll take a closer look.

              Tim

              --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Morris"
              <ironbrigade@k...> wrote:
              > Here's a better and closer picture of the tree. This is a section
              cut out of
              > one of the pictures I took of the bridge (I take high resolution
              pictures
              > and then resize them down later) in April.
              > http://www.kswader.com/judi/civilwar/witnesstree.jpg
              >
              > As you can see, the tree looks much older than it does in any of
              the other
              > pictures. I'm tending to think this one could very well be a
              witness tree
              > now that I'm looking at these pictures I took with the tree in
              them.
              >
              > Brian
              >
              >
              >
              > > Hi Brian,
              > >
              > > Looks like the Burnside's Bridge sycamore may very well be a
              witness
              > > tree, judging by specs found at
              > > http://www.2020site.org/trees/sycamore.html Have a look.
              > >
              > > However, documenting such things seems impossible aside from
              locale.
              > > The tree depicted in the postwar (Forbes?) engraving, compared to
              > > current size and breadth, strongly suggests a logical growth
              > > progession.
              > >
              > > Suffice it to say that odds are more in favor of it being the
              real
              > > thing. If it could only talk... despite recent injury.
              > >
              > > Tim
              > >
              > > --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Morris"
              > > <ironbrigade@k...> wrote:
              > > > Found this website recently that purports to show witness
              trees to
              > > certain
              > > > Civil War battles. Some I know are correct such as the
              Baltimore
              > > St.
              > > > Sycamores and Locust tree in the Cemetery in Gettysburg but the
              > > website also
              > > > makes claims about the White Oaks at the Copse of Trees which I
              > > know are not
              > > > old enough to be witness trees.
              > > > http://www.bivouacbooks.com/bbv2i1s4.htm
              > > >
              > > > For the Antietam Battlefirld they show a picture of the
              Sycamore
              > > that sits
              > > > alongside the Burnside Bridge and then show a picture taken
              > > shortly after
              > > > the battle that shows a tree in that same area. OK, I'm not a
              big
              > > tree
              > > > expert here but I've stood next to that tree by the Burnside
              > > Bridge and it
              > > > does not strike me as a 140+ year old tree. Just because there
              was
              > > a tree in
              > > > that general location in 1862 doesn't make the one there in
              2004
              > > the very
              > > > same tree.
              > > >
              > > > Is that tree next to the bridge a witness tree or do we have
              > > someone jumping
              > > > to conclusions here based off of two trees being in a similar
              area
              > > 140 years
              > > > apart?
              > > >
              > > > Brian
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Yahoo! Groups Links
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >






              Yahoo! Groups Links
            • James Madison
              Thanks for the information guys. I ll be there next week somtime and be sure to give that tree a little more attention. Outside of the general topography of
              Message 6 of 9 , Jun 30, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                Thanks for the information guys. I'll be there next week somtime and
                be sure to give that tree a little more attention. Outside of the
                general topography of the of the battle grounds are their any other
                significent natural features that remain?
              • robert blama
                That is the same tree A tree 140 yrs old does not have to be that big ... From: Brian Morris To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2004
                Message 7 of 9 , Jun 30, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  That is the same tree A tree 140 yrs old does not have to be that big
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: Brian Morris
                  To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 2:33 PM
                  Subject: [TalkAntietam] Interrogating a witness tree


                  Found this website recently that purports to show witness trees to certain
                  Civil War battles. Some I know are correct such as the Baltimore St.
                  Sycamores and Locust tree in the Cemetery in Gettysburg but the website also
                  makes claims about the White Oaks at the Copse of Trees which I know are not
                  old enough to be witness trees.
                  http://www.bivouacbooks.com/bbv2i1s4.htm

                  For the Antietam Battlefirld they show a picture of the Sycamore that sits
                  alongside the Burnside Bridge and then show a picture taken shortly after
                  the battle that shows a tree in that same area. OK, I'm not a big tree
                  expert here but I've stood next to that tree by the Burnside Bridge and it
                  does not strike me as a 140+ year old tree. Just because there was a tree in
                  that general location in 1862 doesn't make the one there in 2004 the very
                  same tree.

                  Is that tree next to the bridge a witness tree or do we have someone jumping
                  to conclusions here based off of two trees being in a similar area 140 years
                  apart?

                  Brian







                  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]
                • richard@rcroker.com
                  Speaking of witness trees -- I live close the the Kennesaw Mountain National Battlefield Park where they tell you to look high in the trees and you can see odd
                  Message 8 of 9 , Jun 30, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Speaking of witness trees -- I live close the the Kennesaw Mountain National
                    Battlefield Park where they tell you to look high in the trees and you can
                    see odd branching -- where it has split into four or five limbs where you
                    might only expect to see two. They say that the deformity is a result of
                    being struck by cannon fire at a very young age.

                    Richard Croker
                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: "James Madison" <jamesmadison_1999@...>
                    To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                    Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 4:05 PM
                    Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Interrogating a witness tree


                    > Thanks for the information guys. I'll be there next week somtime and
                    > be sure to give that tree a little more attention. Outside of the
                    > general topography of the of the battle grounds are their any other
                    > significent natural features that remain?
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Yahoo! Groups Links
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.