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

Re: [TalkAntietam] Article about Hoods Texans

Expand Messages
  • NJ Rebel
    David, That is a good question indeed. However, the information I have read speaks of a slight plateau along with the left wing of the Texas Brigade had
    Message 1 of 27 , Aug 22, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      David,

      That is a good question indeed. However, the information I have
      read speaks of a slight plateau along with the left wing of the
      Texas Brigade had anchored itself. Perhaps this was how the
      Federal troops near the Turnpike on the western side were able to
      fire into the Hampton Legion and the Eighteenth Georgia. Also,
      remember the two units began to take battery fire from Campbell's
      battery. Perhaps member Todd Livesy can assist with the
      typographical features of the area and explain whether such
      Federal action was possible or not;

      Hope this helps!

      Your humble servant,
      Gerry Mayers
      Co. B, "Tom Green Rifles",
      Fourth Regiment, Texas Volunteer Infantry

      "I know of no fitter resting-place for a soldier than the field
      on which he has nobly laid down his life." --General Robert
      Edward Lee


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "David Lutton" <dunkerch@...>
      To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 7:41 PM
      Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Article about Hoods Texans


      Gerry,

      I have one question concerning the account of Hood's troops at
      Antietam. In
      it Hampton's Legion and the 18th Georgia began to take fire on
      their left
      flank causing them to change front to the west along the pike
      fence. But
      the nearest Union troops (that I am aware of) were situated along
      the"ledge"
      area. If you go to the ledge area today and look east you
      cannot see
      anything beyond the turnpike fence. I am not aware of any
      physical changes
      to the landscape in that area since the war so how could fire
      from it be so
      severe as to cause a change in front of a moving line???

      David Lutton
    • Mark A. Pflum
      ... Howdy Gerry! Excellent article, Sir! I do, however, have two comments that border on nit-pickin . ;-) First off, you say: Union general George B.
      Message 2 of 27 , Aug 22, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In TalkAntietam@y..., "NJ Rebel" <gerry1952@e...> wrote:
        > Group:
        >
        > This is going to be a long post, but I think the message should
        > be able to handle it.
        >
        > Comments are welcomed, as this group has been very very sleepy
        > lately!
        >
        > Your humble servant,
        > Gerry Mayers
        > Co. B, "Tom Green Rifles",
        > Fourth Regiment, Texas Volunteer Infantry


        Howdy Gerry!

        Excellent article, Sir! I do, however, have two comments that border
        on nit-pickin'. ;-)

        First off, you say:

        "Union general George B. McClellan (commanding the Federal force
        comprised of units from the Army of the Potomac, the former Army of
        Virginia which Lee defeated at 2nd Manassas, the Ninth Army Corps
        under Ambrose Burnside from North Carolina and the Kanawha Division
        from the western portion of Virginia)"

        The Ninth Army Corps was formed just before 2nd Bull Run and saw its
        first action under that name in that fight. They were, I believe,
        part of the Army Of Virginia that you mentioned earlier in the quote.

        Secondly, and this one hits even closer to my home (literally):

        "<Snip> named for a brother of Daniel Boone of Kentucky fame during
        the Revolutionary War period <snip>"

        I know you are simply saying Dan'l was of Kentucky fame, but it may
        give the missinformed the impression that he was actually FROM
        Kentucky. We all know, of course, he was born and raised near
        Reading, Pennsylvania and his folks were friends of the ancestors of
        a guy named Abraham Lincoln. ;-)

        Elsewise a very informative piece of work, my greyback friend!

        Mark A. Pflum
        Just fighting for two entities that I care deeply about! :-)
      • TR Livesey
        Gerry, Good question. I have provided links to two images. Image 1 (http://www.enteract.com/~westwood/hl1.gif) shows the elevation in the region of interest. I
        Message 3 of 27 , Aug 22, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Gerry,

          Good question.

          I have provided links to two images.

          Image 1 (http://www.enteract.com/~westwood/hl1.gif) shows
          the elevation in the region of interest. I have also
          drawn the approximate location of Union troops (7 WI/19 IND)
          and Confederate troops (18 GA,H.L.,4 TX) as according to
          plate 4 of the Antietam Battlefield Atlas.

          Image 2 (http://www.enteract.com/~westwood/hl2.gif) shows
          an analytical estimation of what each point from the Union
          position can see of the Confederate position. Each point in
          the Union position is color coded as to what percentage of
          the Confederate position is visible (red - highest visibility,
          blue, green, yellow worst). This chart summarizes the numbers:

          |---------------------------------------------------------|
          | Category Information | % |
          | #|description | cover|
          |---------------------------------------------------------|
          | 0|no data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 3.82|
          | 1| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 27.42|
          | 2| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.01|
          | 3| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.36|
          | 4| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 0.61|
          | 5| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.57|
          | 6| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 0.70|
          | 7| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.35|
          | 8| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.31|
          | 9| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.59|
          |10| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 0.52|
          |11| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.41|
          |12| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.31|
          |13| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.17|
          |14| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.69|
          |15| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.48|
          |16| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.64|
          |17| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.34|
          |18| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.58|
          |19| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.41|
          |20| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 3.28|
          |21| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.34|
          |22| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.81|
          |23| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.64|
          |24| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 0.70|
          |25| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.06|
          |26| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.11|
          |27| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.58|
          |28| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.17|
          |29| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.64|
          |30| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.59|
          |31| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.17|
          |32| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.87|
          |33| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.31|
          |34| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 3.51|
          |35| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.99|
          |36| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.29|
          |37| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.36|
          |38| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.07|
          |39| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.12|
          |40| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.80|
          |41| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 0.47|
          |42| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 0.23|
          |43| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 0.23|
          |45| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.13|
          |48| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 0.23|
          |---------------------------------------------------------|
          |TOTAL |100.00|
          +---------------------------------------------------------+

          What this chart says is that 3.82% of the Union position can
          see nothing of the Confederate position. 27.42% of the Union
          position can see greater than 0% but no more than 1% of the
          Confederate position. 2.01% of the Union position can see
          more than 1% but no more than 2% of the Confederate
          position, etc. Note that the best spot on the Union position
          can see about 48% of the Confederate position, which is really
          quite good. In all, almost 60% of the Union troops can see 10%
          or more of the Confederate position.

          In all, I think it is safe to conclude that Union troops at
          'the ledge' can fire into Confederate troops east of the
          turnpike.

          Hope that helps.

          Regards,
          Todd Livesey
          westwood@...

          NJ Rebel wrote:
          >
          > David,
          >
          > That is a good question indeed. However, the information I have
          > read speaks of a slight plateau along with the left wing of the
          > Texas Brigade had anchored itself. Perhaps this was how the
          > Federal troops near the Turnpike on the western side were able to
          > fire into the Hampton Legion and the Eighteenth Georgia. Also,
          > remember the two units began to take battery fire from Campbell's
          > battery. Perhaps member Todd Livesy can assist with the
          > typographical features of the area and explain whether such
          > Federal action was possible or not;
          >
          > Hope this helps!
          >
          > Your humble servant,
          > Gerry Mayers
          > Co. B, "Tom Green Rifles",
          > Fourth Regiment, Texas Volunteer Infantry
          >
          > "I know of no fitter resting-place for a soldier than the field
          > on which he has nobly laid down his life." --General Robert
          > Edward Lee
          >
          > ----- Original Message -----
          > From: "David Lutton" <dunkerch@...>
          > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
          > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 7:41 PM
          > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Article about Hoods Texans
          >
          > Gerry,
          >
          > I have one question concerning the account of Hood's troops at
          > Antietam. In
          > it Hampton's Legion and the 18th Georgia began to take fire on
          > their left
          > flank causing them to change front to the west along the pike
          > fence. But
          > the nearest Union troops (that I am aware of) were situated along
          > the"ledge"
          > area. If you go to the ledge area today and look east you
          > cannot see
          > anything beyond the turnpike fence. I am not aware of any
          > physical changes
          > to the landscape in that area since the war so how could fire
          > from it be so
          > severe as to cause a change in front of a moving line???
          >
          > David Lutton
          >
          >
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        • NJ Rebel
          Mark; Thank you for the two additional sidebar comments. I just want to tell you that I had no intention of disparaging old Daniel, but wanted to not write a
          Message 4 of 27 , Aug 23, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            Mark;

            Thank you for the two additional sidebar comments. I just want to
            tell you that I had no intention of disparaging old Daniel, but
            wanted to not write a complete subparagraph of about where Daniel
            was really from....your comment handled that quite nicely!

            Hope to be able to see you again soon.
            "Or when I breast the cannon's blaze and bemoan my comrades
            dead..."

            Let's see if you can pick up which song that line belongs to!!!
            :=)

            Your humble servant,
            Gerry Mayers
            Co. B, "Tom Green Rifles",
            Fourth Regiment, Texas Volunteer Infantry

            "I know of no fitter resting-place for a soldier than the field
            on which he has nobly laid down his life." --General Robert
            Edward Lee


            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Mark A. Pflum" <ringgold_redleg@...>
            To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 12:45 AM
            Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Article about Hoods Texans


            > --- In TalkAntietam@y..., "NJ Rebel" <gerry1952@e...> wrote:
            > > Group:
            > >
            > > This is going to be a long post, but I think the message
            should
            > > be able to handle it.
            > >
            > > Comments are welcomed, as this group has been very very
            sleepy
            > > lately!
            > >
            > > Your humble servant,
            > > Gerry Mayers
            > > Co. B, "Tom Green Rifles",
            > > Fourth Regiment, Texas Volunteer Infantry
            >
            >
            > Howdy Gerry!
            >
            > Excellent article, Sir! I do, however, have two comments that
            border
            > on nit-pickin'. ;-)
            >
            > First off, you say:
            >
            > "Union general George B. McClellan (commanding the Federal
            force
            > comprised of units from the Army of the Potomac, the former
            Army of
            > Virginia which Lee defeated at 2nd Manassas, the Ninth Army
            Corps
            > under Ambrose Burnside from North Carolina and the Kanawha
            Division
            > from the western portion of Virginia)"
            >
            > The Ninth Army Corps was formed just before 2nd Bull Run and
            saw its
            > first action under that name in that fight. They were, I
            believe,
            > part of the Army Of Virginia that you mentioned earlier in the
            quote.
            >
            > Secondly, and this one hits even closer to my home (literally):
            >
            > "<Snip> named for a brother of Daniel Boone of Kentucky fame
            during
            > the Revolutionary War period <snip>"
            >
            > I know you are simply saying Dan'l was of Kentucky fame, but it
            may
            > give the missinformed the impression that he was actually FROM
            > Kentucky. We all know, of course, he was born and raised near
            > Reading, Pennsylvania and his folks were friends of the
            ancestors of
            > a guy named Abraham Lincoln. ;-)
            >
            > Elsewise a very informative piece of work, my greyback friend!
            >
            > Mark A. Pflum
            > Just fighting for two entities that I care deeply about! :-)
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
            > ADVERTISEMENT
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
            Service.
            >
            >
          • David Lutton
            Todd, Thanks for the information concerning the ledge area of the field. I do have one question though. On both of your terrain maps I believe you are
            Message 5 of 27 , Aug 25, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              Todd,

              Thanks for the information concerning the ledge area of the field. I do
              have one question though. On both of your terrain maps I believe you are
              showing the Texas Brigade position as it ultimately became, that is on the
              eastern side of the turnpike fence facing west returning fire from the ledge
              and Battery B.

              But their original movement was of course north with their left flank
              anchored on the turnpike fence. Could Patrick's and Gibbon's men see
              anything east of the turnpike fence? Or am I mistaked and your calculation
              is based on what they could see of the movement of the Texas Brigade as it
              moved in a northerly direction?

              The reason I even asked the question was that I had walked most of the ledge
              area and I really could not see anything past the post and rail fence as I
              looked east. I was under the impression that some of Starke's troops moving
              on the west side of the turnpike fence accompanying the Texans on their
              northward advance were the troops that Patrick and Gibbon's troops
              targeted. But I cannot recall where I got that information.

              I'll have to trek that area again sometime during the Anniversary Days next
              month. Thanks again, Todd.

              David Lutton
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: TR Livesey <westwood@...>
              To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 1:09 AM
              Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Article about Hoods Texans


              > Gerry,
              >
              > Good question.
              >
              > I have provided links to two images.
              >
              > Image 1 (http://www.enteract.com/~westwood/hl1.gif) shows
              > the elevation in the region of interest. I have also
              > drawn the approximate location of Union troops (7 WI/19 IND)
              > and Confederate troops (18 GA,H.L.,4 TX) as according to
              > plate 4 of the Antietam Battlefield Atlas.
              >
              > Image 2 (http://www.enteract.com/~westwood/hl2.gif) shows
              > an analytical estimation of what each point from the Union
              > position can see of the Confederate position. Each point in
              > the Union position is color coded as to what percentage of
              > the Confederate position is visible (red - highest visibility,
              > blue, green, yellow worst). This chart summarizes the numbers:
              >
              > |---------------------------------------------------------|
              > | Category Information | % |
              > | #|description | cover|
              > |---------------------------------------------------------|
              > | 0|no data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 3.82|
              > | 1| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 27.42|
              > | 2| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.01|
              > | 3| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.36|
              > | 4| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 0.61|
              > | 5| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.57|
              > | 6| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 0.70|
              > | 7| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.35|
              > | 8| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.31|
              > | 9| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.59|
              > |10| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 0.52|
              > |11| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.41|
              > |12| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.31|
              > |13| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.17|
              > |14| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.69|
              > |15| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.48|
              > |16| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.64|
              > |17| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.34|
              > |18| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.58|
              > |19| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.41|
              > |20| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 3.28|
              > |21| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.34|
              > |22| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.81|
              > |23| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.64|
              > |24| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 0.70|
              > |25| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.06|
              > |26| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.11|
              > |27| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.58|
              > |28| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.17|
              > |29| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.64|
              > |30| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.59|
              > |31| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.17|
              > |32| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.87|
              > |33| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.31|
              > |34| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 3.51|
              > |35| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.99|
              > |36| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 2.29|
              > |37| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.36|
              > |38| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.07|
              > |39| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.12|
              > |40| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.80|
              > |41| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 0.47|
              > |42| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 0.23|
              > |43| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 0.23|
              > |45| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 1.13|
              > |48| . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 0.23|
              > |---------------------------------------------------------|
              > |TOTAL |100.00|
              > +---------------------------------------------------------+
              >
              > What this chart says is that 3.82% of the Union position can
              > see nothing of the Confederate position. 27.42% of the Union
              > position can see greater than 0% but no more than 1% of the
              > Confederate position. 2.01% of the Union position can see
              > more than 1% but no more than 2% of the Confederate
              > position, etc. Note that the best spot on the Union position
              > can see about 48% of the Confederate position, which is really
              > quite good. In all, almost 60% of the Union troops can see 10%
              > or more of the Confederate position.
              >
              > In all, I think it is safe to conclude that Union troops at
              > 'the ledge' can fire into Confederate troops east of the
              > turnpike.
              >
              > Hope that helps.
              >
              > Regards,
              > Todd Livesey
              > westwood@...
              >
              > NJ Rebel wrote:
              > >
              > > David,
              > >
              > > That is a good question indeed. However, the information I have
              > > read speaks of a slight plateau along with the left wing of the
              > > Texas Brigade had anchored itself. Perhaps this was how the
              > > Federal troops near the Turnpike on the western side were able to
              > > fire into the Hampton Legion and the Eighteenth Georgia. Also,
              > > remember the two units began to take battery fire from Campbell's
              > > battery. Perhaps member Todd Livesy can assist with the
              > > typographical features of the area and explain whether such
              > > Federal action was possible or not;
              > >
              > > Hope this helps!
              > >
              > > Your humble servant,
              > > Gerry Mayers
              > > Co. B, "Tom Green Rifles",
              > > Fourth Regiment, Texas Volunteer Infantry
              > >
              > > "I know of no fitter resting-place for a soldier than the field
              > > on which he has nobly laid down his life." --General Robert
              > > Edward Lee
              > >
              > > ----- Original Message -----
              > > From: "David Lutton" <dunkerch@...>
              > > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
              > > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 7:41 PM
              > > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Article about Hoods Texans
              > >
              > > Gerry,
              > >
              > > I have one question concerning the account of Hood's troops at
              > > Antietam. In
              > > it Hampton's Legion and the 18th Georgia began to take fire on
              > > their left
              > > flank causing them to change front to the west along the pike
              > > fence. But
              > > the nearest Union troops (that I am aware of) were situated along
              > > the"ledge"
              > > area. If you go to the ledge area today and look east you
              > > cannot see
              > > anything beyond the turnpike fence. I am not aware of any
              > > physical changes
              > > to the landscape in that area since the war so how could fire
              > > from it be so
              > > severe as to cause a change in front of a moving line???
              > >
              > > David Lutton
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
              http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              >
              >
            • rotbaron@aol.com
              Message 6 of 27 , Aug 25, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                <<The reason I even asked the question was that I had walked most of the ledge area and I really could not see anything past the post and rail fence as I looked east. >>

                David,
                While walking the ledge with a Ranger, I too felt that it certainly didn't seem to offer much of a "killing zone" for the Union infantry. But I stated, to his amusement, (joking of course) that those Texans were noted for being rather tall.

                Tom Shay
              • David Lutton
                Tom, Them fellas weren t that tall! Again the events that occurred after the movement to the fence are understandable. But what caused its necessity? David
                Message 7 of 27 , Aug 26, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  Tom,

                  Them fellas weren't that tall!
                  Again the events that occurred after the movement to the fence are
                  understandable. But what caused its necessity?

                  David Lutton
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: <rotbaron@...>
                  To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2001 12:16 AM
                  Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Article about Hoods Texans


                  > <<The reason I even asked the question was that I had walked most of the
                  ledge area and I really could not see anything past the post and rail fence
                  as I looked east. >>
                  >
                  > David,
                  > While walking the ledge with a Ranger, I too felt that it certainly didn't
                  seem to offer much of a "killing zone" for the Union infantry. But I stated,
                  to his amusement, (joking of course) that those Texans were noted for being
                  rather tall.
                  >
                  > Tom Shay
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                  >
                  >
                • TR Livesey
                  David, Yes, I am showing Hoods troops after they had turned to meet union troops on their left. As for what could be seen, there are a variety of ways to try
                  Message 8 of 27 , Aug 26, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    David,

                    Yes, I am showing Hoods troops after they had turned to meet union
                    troops
                    on their left.

                    As for what could be seen, there are a variety of ways to try to
                    visualize that.

                    I have created a 3rd map

                    http://www.enteract.com/~westwood/hl4.gif

                    which shows the region of interest with a blue zone of Union troops and
                    a red zone of potential Confederate troops. A (grossly exaggerated)
                    profile
                    map is inset on the lower left. I have shown a yellow line in the main
                    image to indicate the alignment of the profile. I have assumed that
                    both the Union and Confederate troops have an 'eye level' of 5 feet
                    above the ground. In the profile, you can see the discontinuity
                    of the red and blue zones - this is the 5 foot vantage point.

                    If you place a straight edge on the profile, you should be able to see
                    that you can touch the blue zone and the red zone without cutting
                    through any intervening ground - that demonstrates a line of sight
                    between the two zones along this line. Furthermore, if you hold
                    the straight edge at the peak of the blue zone, and at the level
                    of the clover where the clover meets the red zone, you can see the
                    line cuts fairly deeply into the red zone, certainly to about the
                    peak of the high ground south of the cornfield, demonstrating that
                    you should be able to see somewhat into the red zone from the
                    blue zone (along this line).

                    Of course, a field expedition should be used to back these predictions
                    up, but the evidence suggests that troops in these positions should
                    be able to see one another.

                    TRL
                    -------------------------------------------------
                    David Lutton wrote:
                    Todd,

                    Thanks for the information concerning the ledge area of the field. I do
                    have one question though. On both of your terrain maps I believe you
                    are
                    showing the Texas Brigade position as it ultimately became, that is on
                    the
                    eastern side of the turnpike fence facing west returning fire from the
                    ledge
                    and Battery B.

                    But their original movement was of course north with their left flank
                    anchored on the turnpike fence. Could Patrick's and Gibbon's men see
                    anything east of the turnpike fence? Or am I mistaked and your
                    calculation
                    is based on what they could see of the movement of the Texas Brigade as
                    it
                    moved in a northerly direction?

                    The reason I even asked the question was that I had walked most of the
                    ledge
                    area and I really could not see anything past the post and rail fence as
                    I
                    looked east. I was under the impression that some of Starke's troops
                    moving
                    on the west side of the turnpike fence accompanying the Texans on their
                    northward advance were the troops that Patrick and Gibbon's troops
                    targeted. But I cannot recall where I got that information.

                    I'll have to trek that area again sometime during the Anniversary Days
                    next
                    month. Thanks again, Todd.

                    David Lutton
                  • David Lutton
                    Todd, Again many thanks for your analysis and expertise. I am always willing to make a field study in Sharpsburg, even when there really isn t anything to
                    Message 9 of 27 , Aug 26, 2001
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Todd,

                      Again many thanks for your analysis and expertise. I am always willing to
                      make a field study in Sharpsburg, even when there really isn't anything to
                      study! Just another good excuse to make that 2 hour drive down Route 70!!
                      Your map 3 does intrigue me though. When viewing the ground from the ledge,
                      I was always looking directly east. Perhaps a view to the southeast would
                      be instructive. I will let you know of the results.

                      David Lutton

                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: TR Livesey <westwood@...>
                      To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                      Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2001 6:54 PM
                      Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Article about Hoods Texans


                      > David,
                      >
                      > Yes, I am showing Hoods troops after they had turned to meet union
                      > troops
                      > on their left.
                      >
                      > As for what could be seen, there are a variety of ways to try to
                      > visualize that.
                      >
                      > I have created a 3rd map
                      >
                      > http://www.enteract.com/~westwood/hl4.gif
                      >
                      > which shows the region of interest with a blue zone of Union troops and
                      > a red zone of potential Confederate troops. A (grossly exaggerated)
                      > profile
                      > map is inset on the lower left. I have shown a yellow line in the main
                      > image to indicate the alignment of the profile. I have assumed that
                      > both the Union and Confederate troops have an 'eye level' of 5 feet
                      > above the ground. In the profile, you can see the discontinuity
                      > of the red and blue zones - this is the 5 foot vantage point.
                      >
                      > If you place a straight edge on the profile, you should be able to see
                      > that you can touch the blue zone and the red zone without cutting
                      > through any intervening ground - that demonstrates a line of sight
                      > between the two zones along this line. Furthermore, if you hold
                      > the straight edge at the peak of the blue zone, and at the level
                      > of the clover where the clover meets the red zone, you can see the
                      > line cuts fairly deeply into the red zone, certainly to about the
                      > peak of the high ground south of the cornfield, demonstrating that
                      > you should be able to see somewhat into the red zone from the
                      > blue zone (along this line).
                      >
                      > Of course, a field expedition should be used to back these predictions
                      > up, but the evidence suggests that troops in these positions should
                      > be able to see one another.
                      >
                      > TRL
                      > -------------------------------------------------
                      > David Lutton wrote:
                      > Todd,
                      >
                      > Thanks for the information concerning the ledge area of the field. I do
                      > have one question though. On both of your terrain maps I believe you
                      > are
                      > showing the Texas Brigade position as it ultimately became, that is on
                      > the
                      > eastern side of the turnpike fence facing west returning fire from the
                      > ledge
                      > and Battery B.
                      >
                      > But their original movement was of course north with their left flank
                      > anchored on the turnpike fence. Could Patrick's and Gibbon's men see
                      > anything east of the turnpike fence? Or am I mistaked and your
                      > calculation
                      > is based on what they could see of the movement of the Texas Brigade as
                      > it
                      > moved in a northerly direction?
                      >
                      > The reason I even asked the question was that I had walked most of the
                      > ledge
                      > area and I really could not see anything past the post and rail fence as
                      > I
                      > looked east. I was under the impression that some of Starke's troops
                      > moving
                      > on the west side of the turnpike fence accompanying the Texans on their
                      > northward advance were the troops that Patrick and Gibbon's troops
                      > targeted. But I cannot recall where I got that information.
                      >
                      > I'll have to trek that area again sometime during the Anniversary Days
                      > next
                      > month. Thanks again, Todd.
                      >
                      > David Lutton
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                      >
                      >
                    • TR Livesey
                      David, If you look directly east, you get into a different situation: corn. The question arises about how concealing corn will be. The corn was certainly
                      Message 10 of 27 , Aug 26, 2001
                      • 0 Attachment
                        David,

                        If you look directly east, you get into a different situation: corn.
                        The question arises about how concealing corn will be. The corn was
                        certainly taller than troops, so it is possible for it to conceal
                        troops within it. If you look at a modern cornfield, it is very
                        concealing, largely because the stalks are planted so densely.
                        Corn planting patterns were different in 1862, not nearly as
                        dense, with rows being wide enough for a horse to move between.
                        This would imply that the corn will have different degrees of
                        concealment, depending on what angle you are looking at it -
                        if you are looking straight down a row, you may be able to see
                        into the corn field, but if you look obliquely you would be
                        able to see less. For simplicity, I usually assume corn is
                        concealing.

                        I have provided anther map, showing an eastern profile. I assume
                        corn is 8' tall.

                        http://www.enteract.com/~westwood/hl5.gif

                        If corn is concealing, then you should not be able to see Confederate
                        troops in it, otherwise, Confederate troops should be visible.
                        One must also consider how trampled down the corn would be at
                        this time.

                        When you did your investigation last time, did you have someone
                        standing in the Confederate area to judge if they could be seen?
                        If not, then perhaps that is why it would appear that there would
                        not be line of sight.

                        TRL

                        David Lutton wrote:
                        >
                        > Todd,
                        >
                        > Again many thanks for your analysis and expertise. I am always willing to
                        > make a field study in Sharpsburg, even when there really isn't anything to
                        > study! Just another good excuse to make that 2 hour drive down Route 70!!
                        > Your map 3 does intrigue me though. When viewing the ground from the ledge,
                        > I was always looking directly east. Perhaps a view to the southeast would
                        > be instructive. I will let you know of the results.
                        >
                        > David Lutton
                        >
                        > ----- Original Message -----
                        > From: TR Livesey <westwood@...>
                        > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                        > Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2001 6:54 PM
                        > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Article about Hoods Texans
                        >
                        > > David,
                        > >
                        > > Yes, I am showing Hoods troops after they had turned to meet union
                        > > troops
                        > > on their left.
                        > >
                        > > As for what could be seen, there are a variety of ways to try to
                        > > visualize that.
                        > >
                        > > I have created a 3rd map
                        > >
                        > > http://www.enteract.com/~westwood/hl4.gif
                        > >
                        > > which shows the region of interest with a blue zone of Union troops and
                        > > a red zone of potential Confederate troops. A (grossly exaggerated)
                        > > profile
                        > > map is inset on the lower left. I have shown a yellow line in the main
                        > > image to indicate the alignment of the profile. I have assumed that
                        > > both the Union and Confederate troops have an 'eye level' of 5 feet
                        > > above the ground. In the profile, you can see the discontinuity
                        > > of the red and blue zones - this is the 5 foot vantage point.
                        > >
                        > > If you place a straight edge on the profile, you should be able to see
                        > > that you can touch the blue zone and the red zone without cutting
                        > > through any intervening ground - that demonstrates a line of sight
                        > > between the two zones along this line. Furthermore, if you hold
                        > > the straight edge at the peak of the blue zone, and at the level
                        > > of the clover where the clover meets the red zone, you can see the
                        > > line cuts fairly deeply into the red zone, certainly to about the
                        > > peak of the high ground south of the cornfield, demonstrating that
                        > > you should be able to see somewhat into the red zone from the
                        > > blue zone (along this line).
                        > >
                        > > Of course, a field expedition should be used to back these predictions
                        > > up, but the evidence suggests that troops in these positions should
                        > > be able to see one another.
                        > >
                        > > TRL
                        > > -------------------------------------------------
                        > > David Lutton wrote:
                        > > Todd,
                        > >
                        > > Thanks for the information concerning the ledge area of the field. I do
                        > > have one question though. On both of your terrain maps I believe you
                        > > are
                        > > showing the Texas Brigade position as it ultimately became, that is on
                        > > the
                        > > eastern side of the turnpike fence facing west returning fire from the
                        > > ledge
                        > > and Battery B.
                        > >
                        > > But their original movement was of course north with their left flank
                        > > anchored on the turnpike fence. Could Patrick's and Gibbon's men see
                        > > anything east of the turnpike fence? Or am I mistaked and your
                        > > calculation
                        > > is based on what they could see of the movement of the Texas Brigade as
                        > > it
                        > > moved in a northerly direction?
                        > >
                        > > The reason I even asked the question was that I had walked most of the
                        > > ledge
                        > > area and I really could not see anything past the post and rail fence as
                        > > I
                        > > looked east. I was under the impression that some of Starke's troops
                        > > moving
                        > > on the west side of the turnpike fence accompanying the Texans on their
                        > > northward advance were the troops that Patrick and Gibbon's troops
                        > > targeted. But I cannot recall where I got that information.
                        > >
                        > > I'll have to trek that area again sometime during the Anniversary Days
                        > > next
                        > > month. Thanks again, Todd.
                        > >
                        > > David Lutton
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                        > >
                        > >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                      • David Lutton
                        Todd, Actually, I walked the ledge area south of the cornfield. I understood that the order to protect the left flank was given about 200 yards south of the
                        Message 11 of 27 , Aug 27, 2001
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Todd,

                          Actually, I walked the ledge area south of the cornfield. I understood that
                          the order to protect the left flank was given about 200 yards south of the
                          cornfield. Hence the destructive fire must have hit Hood's troops in the
                          area south of present day Starke Ave. The 4th Texas being the first
                          regiment to change front to the pike fence. I agree as you move north along
                          the ledge from Starke Ave. you can see further into the area east of the
                          pike.

                          Also I will take you advise and commandeer someone to walk the area of the
                          advance of Hood's men while I observe from the Ledge!

                          Do I need a life or what?!!!!

                          David Lutton l
                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: TR Livesey <westwood@...>
                          To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                          Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2001 11:14 PM
                          Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Article about Hoods Texans


                          > David,
                          >
                          > If you look directly east, you get into a different situation: corn.
                          > The question arises about how concealing corn will be. The corn was
                          > certainly taller than troops, so it is possible for it to conceal
                          > troops within it. If you look at a modern cornfield, it is very
                          > concealing, largely because the stalks are planted so densely.
                          > Corn planting patterns were different in 1862, not nearly as
                          > dense, with rows being wide enough for a horse to move between.
                          > This would imply that the corn will have different degrees of
                          > concealment, depending on what angle you are looking at it -
                          > if you are looking straight down a row, you may be able to see
                          > into the corn field, but if you look obliquely you would be
                          > able to see less. For simplicity, I usually assume corn is
                          > concealing.
                          >
                          > I have provided anther map, showing an eastern profile. I assume
                          > corn is 8' tall.
                          >
                          > http://www.enteract.com/~westwood/hl5.gif
                          >
                          > If corn is concealing, then you should not be able to see Confederate
                          > troops in it, otherwise, Confederate troops should be visible.
                          > One must also consider how trampled down the corn would be at
                          > this time.
                          >
                          > When you did your investigation last time, did you have someone
                          > standing in the Confederate area to judge if they could be seen?
                          > If not, then perhaps that is why it would appear that there would
                          > not be line of sight.
                          >
                          > TRL
                          >
                          > David Lutton wrote:
                          > >
                          > > Todd,
                          > >
                          > > Again many thanks for your analysis and expertise. I am always willing
                          to
                          > > make a field study in Sharpsburg, even when there really isn't anything
                          to
                          > > study! Just another good excuse to make that 2 hour drive down Route
                          70!!
                          > > Your map 3 does intrigue me though. When viewing the ground from the
                          ledge,
                          > > I was always looking directly east. Perhaps a view to the southeast
                          would
                          > > be instructive. I will let you know of the results.
                          > >
                          > > David Lutton
                          > >
                          > > ----- Original Message -----
                          > > From: TR Livesey <westwood@...>
                          > > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                          > > Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2001 6:54 PM
                          > > Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Article about Hoods Texans
                          > >
                          > > > David,
                          > > >
                          > > > Yes, I am showing Hoods troops after they had turned to meet union
                          > > > troops
                          > > > on their left.
                          > > >
                          > > > As for what could be seen, there are a variety of ways to try to
                          > > > visualize that.
                          > > >
                          > > > I have created a 3rd map
                          > > >
                          > > > http://www.enteract.com/~westwood/hl4.gif
                          > > >
                          > > > which shows the region of interest with a blue zone of Union troops
                          and
                          > > > a red zone of potential Confederate troops. A (grossly exaggerated)
                          > > > profile
                          > > > map is inset on the lower left. I have shown a yellow line in the main
                          > > > image to indicate the alignment of the profile. I have assumed that
                          > > > both the Union and Confederate troops have an 'eye level' of 5 feet
                          > > > above the ground. In the profile, you can see the discontinuity
                          > > > of the red and blue zones - this is the 5 foot vantage point.
                          > > >
                          > > > If you place a straight edge on the profile, you should be able to see
                          > > > that you can touch the blue zone and the red zone without cutting
                          > > > through any intervening ground - that demonstrates a line of sight
                          > > > between the two zones along this line. Furthermore, if you hold
                          > > > the straight edge at the peak of the blue zone, and at the level
                          > > > of the clover where the clover meets the red zone, you can see the
                          > > > line cuts fairly deeply into the red zone, certainly to about the
                          > > > peak of the high ground south of the cornfield, demonstrating that
                          > > > you should be able to see somewhat into the red zone from the
                          > > > blue zone (along this line).
                          > > >
                          > > > Of course, a field expedition should be used to back these predictions
                          > > > up, but the evidence suggests that troops in these positions should
                          > > > be able to see one another.
                          > > >
                          > > > TRL
                          > > > -------------------------------------------------
                          > > > David Lutton wrote:
                          > > > Todd,
                          > > >
                          > > > Thanks for the information concerning the ledge area of the field. I
                          do
                          > > > have one question though. On both of your terrain maps I believe you
                          > > > are
                          > > > showing the Texas Brigade position as it ultimately became, that is on
                          > > > the
                          > > > eastern side of the turnpike fence facing west returning fire from the
                          > > > ledge
                          > > > and Battery B.
                          > > >
                          > > > But their original movement was of course north with their left flank
                          > > > anchored on the turnpike fence. Could Patrick's and Gibbon's men see
                          > > > anything east of the turnpike fence? Or am I mistaked and your
                          > > > calculation
                          > > > is based on what they could see of the movement of the Texas Brigade
                          as
                          > > > it
                          > > > moved in a northerly direction?
                          > > >
                          > > > The reason I even asked the question was that I had walked most of the
                          > > > ledge
                          > > > area and I really could not see anything past the post and rail fence
                          as
                          > > > I
                          > > > looked east. I was under the impression that some of Starke's troops
                          > > > moving
                          > > > on the west side of the turnpike fence accompanying the Texans on
                          their
                          > > > northward advance were the troops that Patrick and Gibbon's troops
                          > > > targeted. But I cannot recall where I got that information.
                          > > >
                          > > > I'll have to trek that area again sometime during the Anniversary Days
                          > > > next
                          > > > month. Thanks again, Todd.
                          > > >
                          > > > David Lutton
                          > > >
                          > > >
                          > > >
                          > > >
                          > > >
                          > > >
                          > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                          > > >
                          > > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                          >
                          >
                        • oliverg25@hotmail.com
                          ... Not So! Once the corn is planted a horse never goes into the field. Plowing and planting is usually done with a team of horses, not one. after planting
                          Message 12 of 27 , Aug 27, 2001
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In TalkAntietam@y..., TR Livesey <westwood@e...> wrote:
                            > David,
                            >
                            > > Corn planting patterns were different in 1862, not nearly as
                            > dense, with rows being wide enough for a horse to move between.
                            > This would imply that the corn will have different degrees of
                            > concealment,

                            Not So!
                            Once the corn is planted a horse never goes into the field. Plowing
                            and planting is usually done with a team of horses, not one. after
                            planting there is no need for a horse to go back into the field. Also
                            a horse does not damage the top soil as much as a tractor wheel

                            Amish farmers in PA still use horses and mules and their rows are
                            tighter than those of farmers using tractors. Their fields are so
                            tight you can not look down a row.

                            This might come through twice when Hotmail gets its act together.

                            O.G.
                          • TR Livesey
                            O.G., I am going to immediately admit that I am not an expert in this field (heh-heh). My statements were based on questions I have put to general historians,
                            Message 13 of 27 , Aug 27, 2001
                            • 0 Attachment
                              O.G.,

                              I am going to immediately admit that I am not an expert
                              in this field (heh-heh). My statements were based
                              on questions I have put to general historians, none of
                              whom claimed to be agricultural experts.

                              I would not, however, base any conclusions on practices
                              of modern, albeit primitive, farmers. Just because they
                              don't use tractors does not mean that they do it the
                              same way as was done 100 years ago.

                              When you look at a modern cornfield, it is so dense
                              that it provides excellent concealment.

                              Although I'm not certain how a 19th century cornfield
                              would look, but, as I stated, I assume that it also
                              provides a certain degree of concealment as well.

                              Do you have any source particular to 19th century
                              corn farming? I would very much like to hear an
                              authoritative source on the subject.

                              Thanks for your comment -

                              TRL
                              oliverg25@... wrote:
                              >
                              > --- In TalkAntietam@y..., TR Livesey <westwood@e...> wrote:
                              > > David,
                              > >
                              > > > Corn planting patterns were different in 1862, not nearly as
                              > > dense, with rows being wide enough for a horse to move between.
                              > > This would imply that the corn will have different degrees of
                              > > concealment,
                              >
                              > Not So!
                              > Once the corn is planted a horse never goes into the field. Plowing
                              > and planting is usually done with a team of horses, not one. after
                              > planting there is no need for a horse to go back into the field. Also
                              > a horse does not damage the top soil as much as a tractor wheel
                              >
                              > Amish farmers in PA still use horses and mules and their rows are
                              > tighter than those of farmers using tractors. Their fields are so
                              > tight you can not look down a row.
                              >
                              > This might come through twice when Hotmail gets its act together.
                              >
                              > O.G.
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                            • NJ Rebel
                              Todd; If you ask Tom Shay about the videos from one of the Antietam anniversary ranger tours, there is a tape he has in which Keith Snyder talks about how
                              Message 14 of 27 , Aug 27, 2001
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Todd;

                                If you ask Tom Shay about the videos from one of the Antietam
                                anniversary ranger tours, there is a tape he has in which Keith
                                Snyder talks about how cornfields were planted in the mid-19th
                                Century.

                                Hope this helps.

                                Your humble servant,
                                Gerry Mayers
                                Co. B, "Tom Green Rifles",
                                Fourth Regiment, Texas Volunteer Infantry

                                "I know of no fitter resting-place for a soldier than the field
                                on which he has nobly laid down his life." --General Robert
                                Edward Lee


                                ----- Original Message -----
                                From: "TR Livesey" <westwood@...>
                                To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                                Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 8:49 PM
                                Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Article about Hoods Texans


                                > O.G.,
                                >
                                > I am going to immediately admit that I am not an expert
                                > in this field (heh-heh). My statements were based
                                > on questions I have put to general historians, none of
                                > whom claimed to be agricultural experts.
                                >
                                > I would not, however, base any conclusions on practices
                                > of modern, albeit primitive, farmers. Just because they
                                > don't use tractors does not mean that they do it the
                                > same way as was done 100 years ago.
                                >
                                > When you look at a modern cornfield, it is so dense
                                > that it provides excellent concealment.
                                >
                                > Although I'm not certain how a 19th century cornfield
                                > would look, but, as I stated, I assume that it also
                                > provides a certain degree of concealment as well.
                                >
                                > Do you have any source particular to 19th century
                                > corn farming? I would very much like to hear an
                                > authoritative source on the subject.
                                >
                                > Thanks for your comment -
                                >
                                > TRL
                                > oliverg25@... wrote:
                                > >
                                > > --- In TalkAntietam@y..., TR Livesey <westwood@e...> wrote:
                                > > > David,
                                > > >
                                > > > > Corn planting patterns were different in 1862, not nearly
                                as
                                > > > dense, with rows being wide enough for a horse to move
                                between.
                                > > > This would imply that the corn will have different degrees
                                of
                                > > > concealment,
                                > >
                                > > Not So!
                                > > Once the corn is planted a horse never goes into the field.
                                Plowing
                                > > and planting is usually done with a team of horses, not one.
                                after
                                > > planting there is no need for a horse to go back into the
                                field. Also
                                > > a horse does not damage the top soil as much as a tractor
                                wheel
                                > >
                                > > Amish farmers in PA still use horses and mules and their rows
                                are
                                > > tighter than those of farmers using tractors. Their fields
                                are so
                                > > tight you can not look down a row.
                                > >
                                > > This might come through twice when Hotmail gets its act
                                together.
                                > >
                                > > O.G.
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                >
                                > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                > ADVERTISEMENT
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                                Service.
                                >
                                >
                              • David Lutton
                                GO In your opinion then the corn would have been more tense than today? But we must remember that before Hood s troops stepped off roughly a hour after the
                                Message 15 of 27 , Aug 27, 2001
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  GO
                                  In your opinion then the corn would have been more tense than today? But
                                  we must remember that before Hood's troops stepped off roughly a hour after
                                  the battle started what would this area look like to Hood's troops?. What
                                  would be the effect of 1 hour of combat be to this relatively small area?
                                  Hooker's often quoted remark comes to mind.

                                  If the original command to protect the flank came south of the cornfield,
                                  what was happening to Hood's troops started south of the cornfield? What do
                                  you think?

                                  David Litton
                                  ----- Original Message -----
                                  From: <oliverg25@...>
                                  To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                                  Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 8:18 PM
                                  Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Article about Hoods Texans


                                  > --- In TalkAntietam@y..., TR Livesey <westwood@e...> wrote:
                                  > > David,
                                  > >
                                  > > > Corn planting patterns were different in 1862, not nearly as
                                  > > dense, with rows being wide enough for a horse to move between.
                                  > > This would imply that the corn will have different degrees of
                                  > > concealment,
                                  >
                                  > Not So!
                                  > Once the corn is planted a horse never goes into the field. Plowing
                                  > and planting is usually done with a team of horses, not one. after
                                  > planting there is no need for a horse to go back into the field. Also
                                  > a horse does not damage the top soil as much as a tractor wheel
                                  >
                                  > Amish farmers in PA still use horses and mules and their rows are
                                  > tighter than those of farmers using tractors. Their fields are so
                                  > tight you can not look down a row.
                                  >
                                  > This might come through twice when Hotmail gets its act together.
                                  >
                                  > O.G.
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                  >
                                  >
                                • NJ Rebel
                                  David, If you have read Mike Priest s book on the battle, IIRC, the area of The Cornfield has already been trampled down due to the attacks and counter attacks
                                  Message 16 of 27 , Aug 27, 2001
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    David,

                                    If you have read Mike Priest's book on the battle, IIRC, the area
                                    of The Cornfield has already been trampled down due to the
                                    attacks and counter attacks back and forth through "the corn".
                                    There probably would have been some areas in which more of the
                                    corn would have been standing than others. The famous painting
                                    about the charge of the First Texas in The Cornfield done by
                                    Troiani comes to mind. Perhaps that might give you an idea, as
                                    Don Troiani is very meticulous about the details in his
                                    paintings.

                                    Your humble servant,
                                    Gerry Mayers
                                    Co. B, "Tom Green Rifles",
                                    Fourth Regiment, Texas Volunteer Infantry

                                    "I know of no fitter resting-place for a soldier than the field
                                    on which he has nobly laid down his life." --General Robert
                                    Edward Lee


                                    ----- Original Message -----
                                    From: "David Lutton" <dunkerch@...>
                                    To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                                    Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 9:00 PM
                                    Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Article about Hoods Texans


                                    > GO
                                    > In your opinion then the corn would have been more tense than
                                    today? But
                                    > we must remember that before Hood's troops stepped off roughly
                                    a hour after
                                    > the battle started what would this area look like to Hood's
                                    troops?. What
                                    > would be the effect of 1 hour of combat be to this relatively
                                    small area?
                                    > Hooker's often quoted remark comes to mind.
                                    >
                                    > If the original command to protect the flank came south of the
                                    cornfield,
                                    > what was happening to Hood's troops started south of the
                                    cornfield? What do
                                    > you think?
                                    >
                                    > David Litton
                                    > ----- Original Message -----
                                    > From: <oliverg25@...>
                                    > To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                                    > Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 8:18 PM
                                    > Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Article about Hoods Texans
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > > --- In TalkAntietam@y..., TR Livesey <westwood@e...> wrote:
                                    > > > David,
                                    > > >
                                    > > > > Corn planting patterns were different in 1862, not nearly
                                    as
                                    > > > dense, with rows being wide enough for a horse to move
                                    between.
                                    > > > This would imply that the corn will have different degrees
                                    of
                                    > > > concealment,
                                    > >
                                    > > Not So!
                                    > > Once the corn is planted a horse never goes into the field.
                                    Plowing
                                    > > and planting is usually done with a team of horses, not one.
                                    after
                                    > > planting there is no need for a horse to go back into the
                                    field. Also
                                    > > a horse does not damage the top soil as much as a tractor
                                    wheel
                                    > >
                                    > > Amish farmers in PA still use horses and mules and their rows
                                    are
                                    > > tighter than those of farmers using tractors. Their fields
                                    are so
                                    > > tight you can not look down a row.
                                    > >
                                    > > This might come through twice when Hotmail gets its act
                                    together.
                                    > >
                                    > > O.G.
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                                    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                    > ADVERTISEMENT
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                                    Service.
                                    >
                                    >
                                  • NJ Rebel
                                    ... saw its ... believe, ... quote. ... Mark, did not the Ninth Army Corps comprise the bulk of the Federal expeditionary force that attacked and captured New
                                    Message 17 of 27 , Aug 27, 2001
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Mark Plfum wrote earlier:
                                      > The Ninth Army Corps was formed just before 2nd Bull Run and
                                      saw its
                                      > first action under that name in that fight. They were, I
                                      believe,
                                      > part of the Army Of Virginia that you mentioned earlier in the
                                      quote.
                                      >

                                      Mark, did not the Ninth Army Corps comprise the bulk of the
                                      Federal expeditionary force that attacked and captured New Burn
                                      in North Carolina after landing near Cape Hatteras? I seem to
                                      recall reading somewhere that this was pretty much the case, as
                                      old Burnside was the commander of that amphibious expedition.

                                      > I know you are simply saying Dan'l was of Kentucky fame, but it
                                      may
                                      > give the missinformed the impression that he was actually FROM
                                      > Kentucky. We all know, of course, he was born and raised near
                                      > Reading, Pennsylvania and his folks were friends of the
                                      ancestors of
                                      > a guy named Abraham Lincoln. ;-)
                                      >
                                      Your comment about Dan'l Boone is well taken. BTW, what was the
                                      name of Dan'l's brother?

                                      Your humble servant,
                                      Gerry Mayers
                                      Co. B, "Tom Green Rifles",
                                      Fourth Regiment, Texas Volunteer Infantry

                                      "I know of no fitter resting-place for a soldier than the field
                                      on which he has nobly laid down his life." --General Robert
                                      Edward Lee
                                    • oliverg25@hotmail.com
                                      ... Neither am I. I live in Harrisburg. Not too many farms in this city. ... The tractor has evolved over the years. The last time I looked horses were still
                                      Message 18 of 27 , Aug 27, 2001
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        --- In TalkAntietam@y..., TR Livesey <westwood@e...> wrote:
                                        > O.G.,
                                        >
                                        > I am going to immediately admit that I am not an expert
                                        > in this field (heh-heh). My statements were based
                                        > on questions I have put to general historians, none of
                                        > whom claimed to be agricultural experts.
                                        >

                                        Neither am I. I live in Harrisburg. Not too many farms in this city.

                                        > I would not, however, base any conclusions on practices
                                        > of modern, albeit primitive, farmers. Just because they
                                        > don't use tractors does not mean that they do it the
                                        > same way as was done 100 years ago.
                                        >

                                        The tractor has evolved over the years. The last time I looked horses
                                        were still the smae as the original model. I don't know any Amish
                                        farmers personlly but I fail to see where they could possible be any
                                        different in their farming practices than those of the 19th Century.
                                        Considering they are using the same equipment.

                                        >
                                        > Do you have any source particular to 19th century
                                        > corn farming? I would very much like to hear an
                                        > authoritative source on the subject.

                                        You want me to reincarnate a 19th Century farmer or go knocking on
                                        doors in South-Central PA?

                                        One thing you seem to have forgotten is that Hooker ordered the
                                        cornfield to be raked with canister before any assult began. I don't
                                        think there was much cover left by the time th texans got there

                                        Ollie
                                      • David Lutton
                                        Ollie, Exactly my point. At this point of the battle the cornfield would have been defestated. Hence the corn would have been a non factor. David Lutton ...
                                        Message 19 of 27 , Aug 27, 2001
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Ollie,

                                          Exactly my point. At this point of the battle the cornfield would have been
                                          defestated. Hence the corn would have been a non factor.

                                          David Lutton
                                          ----- Original Message -----
                                          From: <oliverg25@...>
                                          To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                                          Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 9:16 PM
                                          Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Article about Hoods Texans


                                          > --- In TalkAntietam@y..., TR Livesey <westwood@e...> wrote:
                                          > > O.G.,
                                          > >
                                          > > I am going to immediately admit that I am not an expert
                                          > > in this field (heh-heh). My statements were based
                                          > > on questions I have put to general historians, none of
                                          > > whom claimed to be agricultural experts.
                                          > >
                                          >
                                          > Neither am I. I live in Harrisburg. Not too many farms in this city.
                                          >
                                          > > I would not, however, base any conclusions on practices
                                          > > of modern, albeit primitive, farmers. Just because they
                                          > > don't use tractors does not mean that they do it the
                                          > > same way as was done 100 years ago.
                                          > >
                                          >
                                          > The tractor has evolved over the years. The last time I looked horses
                                          > were still the smae as the original model. I don't know any Amish
                                          > farmers personlly but I fail to see where they could possible be any
                                          > different in their farming practices than those of the 19th Century.
                                          > Considering they are using the same equipment.
                                          >
                                          > >
                                          > > Do you have any source particular to 19th century
                                          > > corn farming? I would very much like to hear an
                                          > > authoritative source on the subject.
                                          >
                                          > You want me to reincarnate a 19th Century farmer or go knocking on
                                          > doors in South-Central PA?
                                          >
                                          > One thing you seem to have forgotten is that Hooker ordered the
                                          > cornfield to be raked with canister before any assult began. I don't
                                          > think there was much cover left by the time th texans got there
                                          >
                                          > Ollie
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                          >
                                          >
                                        • oliverg25@hotmail.com
                                          ... have been ... David; Precisely! I think someone else also said the cornfield had been trampled before Hood got there. So the corn, or what remained,
                                          Message 20 of 27 , Aug 27, 2001
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            --- In TalkAntietam@y..., "David Lutton" <dunkerch@c...> wrote:
                                            > Ollie,
                                            >
                                            > Exactly my point. At this point of the battle the cornfield would
                                            have been
                                            > defestated. Hence the corn would have been a non factor.
                                            >
                                            > David Lutton

                                            David;

                                            Precisely!

                                            I think someone else also said the cornfield had been trampled before
                                            Hood got there. So the corn, or what remained, provided very little
                                            cover.

                                            Ollie
                                          • TR Livesey
                                            Ollie, oliverg25@hotmail.com wrote: ... Hooker s account is unreliable. He makes it sound like he mowed down a whole regiment waiting hidden in
                                            Message 21 of 27 , Aug 27, 2001
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              Ollie,

                                              oliverg25@... wrote:
                                              <general snip>
                                              >
                                              > One thing you seem to have forgotten is that Hooker ordered the
                                              > cornfield to be raked with canister before any assult began. I don't
                                              > think there was much cover left by the time th texans got there
                                              >
                                              > Ollie

                                              Hooker's account is unreliable. He makes it sound like he mowed down
                                              a whole regiment waiting hidden in the cornfield. In fact, when
                                              the I corps moved out, there were no significant Confederates in
                                              the corn, they were in line south of it.

                                              Furthermore, I doubt that Hooker could have possibly irradicated an
                                              entire 30 acre cornfield, no matter how much canister he used.
                                              Anyway, we are interested here in the southern end of it.

                                              TRL
                                            • Oliver Gamble
                                              ... From: TR Livesey To: TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2001 11:14 PM Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Article about Hoods Texans David, Corn
                                              Message 22 of 27 , Aug 27, 2001
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                 
                                                ----- Original Message -----
                                                Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2001 11:14 PM
                                                Subject: Re: [TalkAntietam] Article about Hoods Texans

                                                David,

                                                Corn planting patterns were different in 1862, not nearly as
                                                dense, with rows being wide enough for a horse to move between.
                                                 
                                                Not So!
                                                Once the corn is planted a horse never goes into the field. Plowing and planting is usually done with a team of horses, not one.
                                                 
                                                Amish farmers in PA still use horses and mules and their rows are tighter than those of farmers using tractors.
                                                 
                                                 O.G.
                                              • Tom Clemens
                                                In the 19th Century, they used hills of corn, and check-row pattern allowed a lot of traffic in the cornfields. Think of it and a checkerboard where every
                                                Message 23 of 27 , Aug 27, 2001
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  In the 19th Century, they used hills of corn, and check-row pattern allowed a
                                                  lot of traffic in the cornfields. Think of it and a checkerboard where every
                                                  corner is a hill of corn. It was usually hand planted, not with horses and
                                                  machine planters. Bill Christen knows much about it than I do, ask him.


                                                  oliverg25@... wrote:

                                                  > --- In TalkAntietam@y..., TR Livesey <westwood@e...> wrote:
                                                  > > David,
                                                  > >
                                                  > > > Corn planting patterns were different in 1862, not nearly as
                                                  > > dense, with rows being wide enough for a horse to move between.
                                                  > > This would imply that the corn will have different degrees of
                                                  > > concealment,
                                                  >
                                                  > Not So!
                                                  > Once the corn is planted a horse never goes into the field. Plowing
                                                  > and planting is usually done with a team of horses, not one. after
                                                  > planting there is no need for a horse to go back into the field. Also
                                                  > a horse does not damage the top soil as much as a tractor wheel
                                                  >
                                                  > Amish farmers in PA still use horses and mules and their rows are
                                                  > tighter than those of farmers using tractors. Their fields are so
                                                  > tight you can not look down a row.
                                                  >
                                                  > This might come through twice when Hotmail gets its act together.
                                                  >
                                                  > O.G.
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                                • Tom Clemens
                                                  Squire Boone.
                                                  Message 24 of 27 , Aug 27, 2001
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    Squire Boone.

                                                    NJ Rebel wrote:

                                                    > Your comment about Dan'l Boone is well taken. BTW, what was the
                                                    > name of Dan'l's brother?
                                                    >
                                                    > Your humble servant,
                                                    > Gerry Mayers
                                                    > Co. B, "Tom Green Rifles",
                                                    > Fourth Regiment, Texas Volunteer Infantry
                                                    >
                                                    > "I know of no fitter resting-place for a soldier than the field
                                                    > on which he has nobly laid down his life." --General Robert
                                                    > Edward Lee
                                                    >
                                                    >
                                                    >
                                                    >
                                                    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                                  • NJ Rebel
                                                    Group; If you have a Preview option on your email program, I recommend you use it. It will allow you to see what attachments are attached before you open the
                                                    Message 25 of 27 , Apr 28, 2002
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      Group;

                                                      If you have a Preview option on your email program, I recommend
                                                      you use it. It will allow you to see what attachments are
                                                      attached before you open the email! If you see anything ending
                                                      with .pif or .bat as an attachment or .exe, DELETE it
                                                      immediately! (Many viruses come with either of the three
                                                      extensions.)

                                                      Also, run Trend Micro Antivirus web based scanning, Norton Anti
                                                      Virus or any similar program to locate any virus infections you
                                                      might have and then clean.

                                                      The KLEZ-G variant worm virus has been running amuck in this
                                                      group, and already caused one member to have his account delisted
                                                      by the moderator.

                                                      Your humble servant,
                                                      Gerry Mayers
                                                      Co. B, "Tom Green Rifles",
                                                      Fourth Regiment, Texas Volunteer Infantry

                                                      A Proud American by Birth, Southern by Choice!

                                                      "I know of no fitter resting-place for a soldier than the field
                                                      on which he has nobly laid down his life." --General Robert
                                                      Edward Lee


                                                      ----- Original Message -----
                                                      From: <oliverg25@...>
                                                      To: <TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com>
                                                      Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 8:18 PM
                                                      Subject: [TalkAntietam] Re: Article about Hoods Texans


                                                      > --- In TalkAntietam@y..., TR Livesey <westwood@e...> wrote:
                                                      > > David,
                                                      > >
                                                      > > > Corn planting patterns were different in 1862, not nearly
                                                      as
                                                      > > dense, with rows being wide enough for a horse to move
                                                      between.
                                                      > > This would imply that the corn will have different degrees of
                                                      > > concealment,
                                                      >
                                                      > Not So!
                                                      > Once the corn is planted a horse never goes into the field.
                                                      Plowing
                                                      > and planting is usually done with a team of horses, not one.
                                                      after
                                                      > planting there is no need for a horse to go back into the
                                                      field. Also
                                                      > a horse does not damage the top soil as much as a tractor wheel
                                                      >
                                                      > Amish farmers in PA still use horses and mules and their rows
                                                      are
                                                      > tighter than those of farmers using tractors. Their fields are
                                                      so
                                                      > tight you can not look down a row.
                                                      >
                                                      > This might come through twice when Hotmail gets its act
                                                      together.
                                                      >
                                                      > O.G.
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                                      > ADVERTISEMENT
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                                                      Service.
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.