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

Re: [TalkAntietam] Re: Fords: Botelers, Blackford, Packhorse

Expand Messages
  • Stephen Recker
    I say that we all get together this summer and walk across the ford when it is low!? Stephen
    Message 1 of 9 , Apr 27, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      I say that we all get together this summer and walk across the ford
      when it is low!?

      Stephen

      On Sunday, April 27, 2008, at 07:12 PM, eighth_conn_inf wrote:

      > Thanks Stephen,
      >
      > I know most books say that these names (and others) are all for the
      > same ford at the cement mill but at this point I remain unconvinced
      > that there is only one useable ford in the Sheperdstown area since
      > both Stuart and Hampton apparently used other fords on the 18th-19th.
      > I saw in Dennis's book that statement on page 64. As we know, when
      > the river is low, one may cross at many points but walking across is
      > different than taking horses and wagons along.
      >
      > Larry
    • Thomas Clemens
      Larry, IIRC, the ford Hampton used was difficult and the water level was high, too high to be used by infantry. Too often the term ford and a place where a
      Message 2 of 9 , Apr 28, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Larry,
        IIRC, the "ford" Hampton used was difficult and the water level was high, too high to be used by infantry. Too often the term "ford" and a place where a body of water can be waded are conflated into the same thing. They are quite different. A ford for military usage must possess at least three distinct characteristics: shallow enough for infantry to cross without endangering wetting their cartridge boxes, and moderate current so as not to sweep them off their feet; a firm bottom, bedrock is best, but boulders will obstruct wagons injure horses, sand or mud will allow vehicles to become stuck; and banks low enough to provide ease of entrance and egress for infantry and horse-drawn vehicles. These are what makes a ford usable. There are otehr shallow places where men on horseback, or even on foot can, in small groups wade a stream or river, but that does not make it a ford. Fords were located where much civilian traffic crossed streams and rivers. I agree with Dennis and many other sources that there was one ford, approx. 1.4 miles south of Shepherdstown, but that there may be other places to wade the river.
        Steve, if you and others decide to wade at the ford, do not repeat the mistake of many people, who think that the remains of the Cement Mill dam is the ford, it is not. The ford is several hundred yards downstream.



        Dr. Thomas G. Clemens
        Professor of History
        Hagerstown Community College




        >>> "eighth_conn_inf" <eighth_conn_inf@...> 4/27/2008 7:12 PM >>>

        Thanks Stephen,

        I know most books say that these names (and others) are all for the
        same ford at the cement mill but at this point I remain unconvinced
        that there is only one useable ford in the Sheperdstown area since
        both Stuart and Hampton apparently used other fords on the 18th-19th.
        I saw in Dennis's book that statement on page 64. As we know, when
        the river is low, one may cross at many points but walking across is
        different than taking horses and wagons along.

        Larry

        --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, Stephen Recker <recker@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > In Dennis Frye's book he says they are all the same ford. IIRC it
        was
        > called different things depending on which side of the river you
        were
        > on or during which historic period.
        >
        > Stephen
        >
        >
        > On Sunday, April 27, 2008, at 10:05 AM, eighth_conn_inf wrote:
        >
        > > I have a Potomac River map from GMCO Pro Series of the Upper
        Potomac
        > > River from Dam 4 to Great Falls. Its Shepherdstown section shows
        two
        > > fords, one called "Blackford Ford" at the Rumsey Bridge and the
        second
        > > named "Packhorse Ford" about 6,000' (1 mi. +) below the Rumsey
        Bridge.
        > > It also shows an "Old Cement Mill" about 11,000' (c. 2 mi.) below
        the
        > > bridge across the Potomac from Millers Sawmill Road.
        > >
        > > Were there three fords there in use in 1862: Blackfords at the
        bridge,
        > > Packhorse a mile downstream and Botelers three miles downstream?
        Or is
        > > this map wrong?
        > >
        > > I remember reading recently that Stuart and some of his troopers
        when
        > > they crossed on the 19th into Maryland crossed at a different
        ford from
        > > the rest of the army closer to Shepherdstown because of
        congestion—
        > > perhaps they crossed at Packhorse? I assume that the obscure ford
        which
        > > Blackford found at which Hampton crossed was described as being
        above
        > > Shepherdstown was none of these--where was it?
        > >
        > > Larry F.
        > >
        > >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >




        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • eighth_conn_inf
        Thanks Tom, The map showing the other fords then is obviously wrong but maybe their locations as shallow areas is correct. They may be as you suggest just
        Message 3 of 9 , Apr 28, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Thanks Tom,

          The map showing the other "fords" then is obviously wrong but maybe
          their locations as shallow areas is correct. They may be as you
          suggest just shallow areas suitable for wading but not passing an
          army. So there are shallow places at the bridge and downstream before
          the "real" ford at the mill which troops and troopers used. If we
          have another dry summer, it would be instructive to do them all, yes?

          Same thing in WPort--one main "real" ford and some shallow places?
          Larry F.

          --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Thomas Clemens" <clemenst@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > Larry,
          > IIRC, the "ford" Hampton used was difficult and the water level was
          high, too high to be used by infantry. Too often the term "ford" and
          a place where a body of water can be waded are conflated into the
          same thing. They are quite different. A ford for military usage
          must possess at least three distinct characteristics: shallow enough
          for infantry to cross without endangering wetting their cartridge
          boxes, and moderate current so as not to sweep them off their feet; a
          firm bottom, bedrock is best, but boulders will obstruct wagons
          injure horses, sand or mud will allow vehicles to become stuck; and
          banks low enough to provide ease of entrance and egress for infantry
          and horse-drawn vehicles. These are what makes a ford usable. There
          are otehr shallow places where men on horseback, or even on foot can,
          in small groups wade a stream or river, but that does not make it a
          ford. Fords were located where much civilian traffic crossed streams
          and rivers. I agree with Dennis and many other sources that there
          was one ford, approx. 1.4 miles south of Shepherdstown, but that
          there may be other places to wade the river.
          > Steve, if you and others decide to wade at the ford, do not repeat
          the mistake of many people, who think that the remains of the Cement
          Mill dam is the ford, it is not. The ford is several hundred yards
          downstream.
          >
          >
          >
          > Dr. Thomas G. Clemens
          > Professor of History
          > Hagerstown Community College
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > >>> "eighth_conn_inf" <eighth_conn_inf@...> 4/27/2008 7:12 PM >>>
          >
          > Thanks Stephen,
          >
          > I know most books say that these names (and others) are all for the
          > same ford at the cement mill but at this point I remain unconvinced
          > that there is only one useable ford in the Sheperdstown area since
          > both Stuart and Hampton apparently used other fords on the 18th-
          19th.
          > I saw in Dennis's book that statement on page 64. As we know, when
          > the river is low, one may cross at many points but walking across
          is
          > different than taking horses and wagons along.
          >
          > Larry
          >
          > --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, Stephen Recker <recker@>
          > wrote:
          > >
          > > In Dennis Frye's book he says they are all the same ford. IIRC it
          > was
          > > called different things depending on which side of the river you
          > were
          > > on or during which historic period.
          > >
          > > Stephen
          > >
          > >
          > > On Sunday, April 27, 2008, at 10:05 AM, eighth_conn_inf wrote:
          > >
          > > > I have a Potomac River map from GMCO Pro Series of the Upper
          > Potomac
          > > > River from Dam 4 to Great Falls. Its Shepherdstown section
          shows
          > two
          > > > fords, one called "Blackford Ford" at the Rumsey Bridge and the
          > second
          > > > named "Packhorse Ford" about 6,000' (1 mi. +) below the Rumsey
          > Bridge.
          > > > It also shows an "Old Cement Mill" about 11,000' (c. 2 mi.)
          below
          > the
          > > > bridge across the Potomac from Millers Sawmill Road.
          > > >
          > > > Were there three fords there in use in 1862: Blackfords at the
          > bridge,
          > > > Packhorse a mile downstream and Botelers three miles
          downstream?
          > Or is
          > > > this map wrong?
          > > >
          > > > I remember reading recently that Stuart and some of his
          troopers
          > when
          > > > they crossed on the 19th into Maryland crossed at a different
          > ford from
          > > > the rest of the army closer to Shepherdstown because of
          > congestion—
          > > > perhaps they crossed at Packhorse? I assume that the obscure
          ford
          > which
          > > > Blackford found at which Hampton crossed was described as being
          > above
          > > > Shepherdstown was none of these--where was it?
          > > >
          > > > Larry F.
          > > >
          > > >
          > >
          > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        • Thomas Clemens
          Probably so, but I have not looked at the river in depth (please pardon that awful pun). It would be fun to do some wading in late summer when the water is
          Message 4 of 9 , Apr 28, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            Probably so, but I have not looked at the river in depth (please pardon that awful pun). It would be fun to do some wading in late summer when the water is low and also warmer. Be sure to wear water shoes, some of the rocks are sharp, to say nothing of the trash that liters the bottom.


            >>> "eighth_conn_inf" <eighth_conn_inf@...> 4/28/2008 12:06 PM >>>

            Thanks Tom,

            The map showing the other "fords" then is obviously wrong but maybe
            their locations as shallow areas is correct. They may be as you
            suggest just shallow areas suitable for wading but not passing an
            army. So there are shallow places at the bridge and downstream before
            the "real" ford at the mill which troops and troopers used. If we
            have another dry summer, it would be instructive to do them all, yes?

            Same thing in WPort--one main "real" ford and some shallow places?
            Larry F.

            --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "Thomas Clemens" <clemenst@...>
            wrote:
            >
            > Larry,
            > IIRC, the "ford" Hampton used was difficult and the water level was
            high, too high to be used by infantry. Too often the term "ford" and
            a place where a body of water can be waded are conflated into the
            same thing. They are quite different. A ford for military usage
            must possess at least three distinct characteristics: shallow enough
            for infantry to cross without endangering wetting their cartridge
            boxes, and moderate current so as not to sweep them off their feet; a
            firm bottom, bedrock is best, but boulders will obstruct wagons
            injure horses, sand or mud will allow vehicles to become stuck; and
            banks low enough to provide ease of entrance and egress for infantry
            and horse-drawn vehicles. These are what makes a ford usable. There
            are otehr shallow places where men on horseback, or even on foot can,
            in small groups wade a stream or river, but that does not make it a
            ford. Fords were located where much civilian traffic crossed streams
            and rivers. I agree with Dennis and many other sources that there
            was one ford, approx. 1.4 miles south of Shepherdstown, but that
            there may be other places to wade the river.
            > Steve, if you and others decide to wade at the ford, do not repeat
            the mistake of many people, who think that the remains of the Cement
            Mill dam is the ford, it is not. The ford is several hundred yards
            downstream.
            >
            >
            >
            > Dr. Thomas G. Clemens
            > Professor of History
            > Hagerstown Community College
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > >>> "eighth_conn_inf" <eighth_conn_inf@...> 4/27/2008 7:12 PM >>>
            >
            > Thanks Stephen,
            >
            > I know most books say that these names (and others) are all for the
            > same ford at the cement mill but at this point I remain unconvinced
            > that there is only one useable ford in the Sheperdstown area since
            > both Stuart and Hampton apparently used other fords on the 18th-
            19th.
            > I saw in Dennis's book that statement on page 64. As we know, when
            > the river is low, one may cross at many points but walking across
            is
            > different than taking horses and wagons along.
            >
            > Larry
            >
            > --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, Stephen Recker <recker@>
            > wrote:
            > >
            > > In Dennis Frye's book he says they are all the same ford. IIRC it
            > was
            > > called different things depending on which side of the river you
            > were
            > > on or during which historic period.
            > >
            > > Stephen
            > >
            > >
            > > On Sunday, April 27, 2008, at 10:05 AM, eighth_conn_inf wrote:
            > >
            > > > I have a Potomac River map from GMCO Pro Series of the Upper
            > Potomac
            > > > River from Dam 4 to Great Falls. Its Shepherdstown section
            shows
            > two
            > > > fords, one called "Blackford Ford" at the Rumsey Bridge and the
            > second
            > > > named "Packhorse Ford" about 6,000' (1 mi. +) below the Rumsey
            > Bridge.
            > > > It also shows an "Old Cement Mill" about 11,000' (c. 2 mi.)
            below
            > the
            > > > bridge across the Potomac from Millers Sawmill Road.
            > > >
            > > > Were there three fords there in use in 1862: Blackfords at the
            > bridge,
            > > > Packhorse a mile downstream and Botelers three miles
            downstream?
            > Or is
            > > > this map wrong?
            > > >
            > > > I remember reading recently that Stuart and some of his
            troopers
            > when
            > > > they crossed on the 19th into Maryland crossed at a different
            > ford from
            > > > the rest of the army closer to Shepherdstown because of
            > congestion—
            > > > perhaps they crossed at Packhorse? I assume that the obscure
            ford
            > which
            > > > Blackford found at which Hampton crossed was described as being
            > above
            > > > Shepherdstown was none of these--where was it?
            > > >
            > > > Larry F.
            > > >
            > > >
            > >
            > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            > >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >




            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Stephen Recker
            We won t make that mistake because you re coming with us, right!? Stephen
            Message 5 of 9 , Apr 28, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              We won't make that mistake because you're coming with us, right!?

              Stephen

              On Monday, April 28, 2008, at 10:09 AM, Thomas Clemens wrote:

              > Steve, if you and others decide to wade at the ford, do not repeat the
              > mistake of many people, who think that the remains of the Cement Mill
              > dam is the ford, it is not. The ford is several hundred yards
              > downstream.
            • Thomas Clemens
              Yeah, if the timing works out, I d like to. Maybe even see if Bomber can wade across too. ... We won t make that mistake because you re coming with us,
              Message 6 of 9 , Apr 28, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                Yeah, if the timing works out, I'd like to. Maybe even see if Bomber can wade across too.


                >>> Stephen Recker <recker@...> 4/28/2008 5:10 PM >>>

                We won't make that mistake because you're coming with us, right!?

                Stephen

                On Monday, April 28, 2008, at 10:09 AM, Thomas Clemens wrote:

                > Steve, if you and others decide to wade at the ford, do not repeat the
                > mistake of many people, who think that the remains of the Cement Mill
                > dam is the ford, it is not. The ford is several hundred yards
                > downstream.




                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.