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

Re: [TalkAntietam] NH at Antietam:

Expand Messages
  • Brian Morris
    One of the witness houses in Gettysburg that s on the battlefield is for sale. I forget which one but the house is assessed at something like $200K but the
    Message 1 of 49 , Mar 7, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      One of the witness houses in Gettysburg that's on the battlefield is for
      sale. I forget which one but the house is assessed at something like $200K
      but the family is asking for somewhere in the area of $3 million for it. The
      park won't/can't pay that much for it so it sits there.

      Mind you there have been some success stories in recent years.
      Chancellorsville for the most part. Harpers Ferry if all goes well. Mine
      Creek here in Kansas was thankfully saved after the entire battlefield was
      almost lost (Thank you CWPT!). However new threats are constantly rising up
      such as Wilson's Creek. Once thought to be an example of a preserved Civil
      War battlefield, it is now under major threat and on this year's top 10 list
      of endangered battlefields. Antietam is very well preserved for the moment
      but what happens when someone comes along and decides to build a nice 2,500
      house subdivision and a few strip malls on land the NPS hasn't been able to
      purchase yet right next to the battlefield?

      Brian

      >
      > Of course we all lament the lost lands. Marye's Heights is unrecoverable.
      > Most of the Battle of Atlanta sites (other than Kennesaw Mountain) are
      > sky-scrapers, parking lots or freeways. Chantilly Plantation is gone and
      > the list goes on. As you have pointed out, some of this land is
      > prohibitively expensive and some over-inflated. We must do what we can.
      > The people who got their hands on parts of Chancellorsville are heroes.
      > That part of "Occupied Northern Virginia" from D.C. south to Richmond --
      the
      > Manassas area especially -- is under invasion from urban sprawlers and our
      > Wal-Mart economy is salivating over every undeveloped five-acre plot of
      land
      > along the entire I-95 (75 & 85 as well for that matter) corridor.
      > I'm not adding anything to the conversation here, so just count this as a
      > "rant." Preaching to the choir. Can I have an "Amen?" Every victory is
      a
      > big one -- When Wal-Mart gets their hands on it, it's gone forever.
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: "robert blama" <civilwar1@...>
      > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
      > Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 10:13 PM
      > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] NH at Antietam:
      >
      >
      > >
      > > A lot of after battle reports are exagerated. It does not alter the
      fact
      > that he wanted to place a monument or table on the rock where his brother
      > fell. If I recall correctly he wrote Chamerlain and even he did not come
      > out against Oates request.
      > >
      > > But this is besides the point, and I definitely approve of preservation.
      > We must buy the land to preserve these battlefields. But if you wanted to
      > use a twisted kind of logic the veterans did not buy up battlefields and
      the
      > people of the day sold the battlefield land for whatever. Should we
      > preserve their wishes and not preserve the battlefiels like Franklin which
      > is all but gone?
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: Brian Morris
      > > To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
      > > Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 12:36 AM
      > > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] NH at Antietam:
      > >
      > >
      > > 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
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > 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
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Scott Mingus
      ... Steve, I live in York County, PA, and work not far from Hanover. There s not much left there to preserve. Since much of the fighting occurred in the town s
      Message 49 of 49 , Mar 16, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        > > Steve Bockmiller wrote:

        > > > Falling Waters, WV (currently in the local news)
        > > > Hanover, PA (if someone was inclined to try)
        > > > Shepherdstown, WV (currently subject of


        Steve,

        I live in York County, PA, and work not far from Hanover. There's not
        much left there to preserve. Since much of the fighting occurred in
        the town's streets or in fields immediately adjacent to Hanover,
        almost all the open land that saw combat is gone (long since
        swallowed up by houses on streets named Stuart Avenue, etc.). One
        last vista from the Keller farm where the horse artillery lobbed
        shells at Hanover is now gone as of last summer (new construction).
        Even the small ditch that Stuart and Blackford leaped on horseback is
        in the backyards of private homes. Some of the routes that Stuart
        took to manuever are still pastoral, but I question how many more
        years this will be true.

        Mt. Olive Cemetery (CSA gun position and Hampton's line) is
        surrounded by houses, the Union gun positions north of town on the
        heights are indiscernible from the rows of houses, and the Rice farm
        is no longer a farm, nor is the Forney farm.

        Downtown, there is a nice statue (The Picket), a couple cannons
        (including Parrott gun tube #1), some other ACW displays and plaques,
        and a couple state historical markers. One wall plaque honors Custer.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.