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

Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Interrogating a witness tree

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 9 , Jun 30, 2004
    View Source
    • 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 2 of 9 , Jun 30, 2004
      View Source
      • 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 3 of 9 , Jun 30, 2004
        View Source
        • 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 4 of 9 , Jun 30, 2004
          View Source
          • 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 5 of 9 , Jun 30, 2004
            View Source
            • 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 6 of 9 , Jun 30, 2004
              View Source
              • 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.