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

Re: Article about Hoods Texans

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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 9 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 10 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 11 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 12 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 13 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 14 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.