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

"Let's assume".

Expand Messages
  • Larry Lozon
    From: PEGGY Mathews ... assumption. ... nitpick ... .......... Mon Ami Assuming is good, but if Original Documentation is avail re:
    Message 1 of 4 , Dec 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      From: "PEGGY Mathews" <ciefranche21e@...>



      > And yet any and all research must begin with a hypothesis or an
      assumption.
      > i.e. "Assuming there was a battle fought at Lundy's Lane..." So to
      nitpick
      > over establishing a parameter (standard length of musket) is just, well,
      > nitpicking IMHO.
      ..........

      Mon Ami'

      Assuming is good, but if Original Documentation is avail re:
      Lundy's Lane,
      assuming is not necessary ...... as if would of, could of, ..... well you
      know.

      Example: "What uniform is needed"

      "Archives reports-" Returns for the Regt. state they wore
      ....

      Your friend

      Larry
      (Wore out the movie yet?)
    • John-Paul Johnson
      Mr Lozon, Relying entirely on documentation, even first person accounts, is a sloppy research technique as even the most reliable sources can contradict
      Message 2 of 4 , Dec 1, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Mr Lozon,

        Relying entirely on documentation, even first person accounts, is a
        sloppy research technique as even the most "reliable" sources can
        contradict one another. One only has to look at a more recent conflict
        - The Battle of Britain - to see an example of this. Neither side were
        able to keep accurate records of victories and losses - even their own.
        According so some German sources, the RAF Fighter Command had losses
        enough to wipe it out several times over.

        George Ferguson might have scarcely noticed his wound (adrenaline is
        funny stuff) but Shadrach Byfield certainly felt his neck wound. The
        impact knocked him down with force enough to make others think he'd been
        killed outright (not to mention accidently bayoneting a fellow soldier)
        and, even after regaining his senses, had to crawl and his hands and
        knees back to find help. He'd complained about the loss of use of his
        arm and shoulder as well. But even this is a first person account that
        was written well after the event.

        On the other hand, in conversations I've had with the much maligned
        Gord Laco, he talked about firing cannon down at a range in the States
        in preparation for the movie and how some of the "common knowledge"
        about how bar and chain shot turned out to be wrong. While not
        intentionally an experiment, situations like that can add to our
        understanding of "how they did it".

        Look at a series like "Battlefield Detectives" where that use modern
        scientific methods as well as supporting documents to confirm or debunk
        what we think we know about famous battles. The episode last night
        about "The Charge of the Light Brigade" for example, showed that some
        parts of what we think is true actually is, but other things like far
        from the Brigade being decimated but rather less that 100 casualties out
        of "The Six Hundred" were discovered. Or how, in the episode on
        Agincourt, it was discovered that the much celebrated archers would have
        had little effect on the French Knights as the iron bodkin arrows could
        not have penetrated plate armour. This could have only been discovered
        through hands on research.

        Now my little back of the envelope calculations relied on certain
        conditions that are less than real world. Fine. My intent was to get a
        handle on whether a character in a movie reacted properly after being
        shot. Do my assumptions approach reality, maybe, maybe not. If you
        think I'm wrong, show me why you think so. Just don't sit there and
        criticize without bringing anything to the table except a need to feel
        superior through putting others down (and an insatiable need to have the
        last word)

        I, remain, Sir, Your Humble and Obedient Servent,

        J-P Johnson
        Bulger's Co, RNR

        Larry Lozon wrote:

        >From: "John-Paul Johnson" <jpjohnsn@...>
        >
        >Let's assume assume a a perfect musket with a barrel length
        >of 48 in (1.2 m) accelerating .........
        >
        >..........
        >
        >Mr Johnson et al,
        >
        > The operative words are "Let's assume".
        >Thus
        >
        >From: "Ray Hobbs" <ray.hobbs@...>
        >
        >
        >"One of the ways of finding out is to listen to those who were actually
        >hit by musket balls during the conflict. One, George Ferguson,(Light
        >Company, 100th Regt. of Foot) was wounded .."
        >
        >As Mr. Williams has stated, assuming does not count, we must go to
        >original documents if we want to know what really happened.
        >
        >Yrs,
        >Larry
        >
        >PS: The verdict is out whether your cousin's boyfriend's uncle's barber's
        >descriptions can be used as documentation! :^)
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >The War of 1812: In Europe, thousands fought over the fate of hundreds of square miles: in North America, hundreds determined the fate of THOUSANDS of square miles...
        >
        >Unit Contact information for North America:
        > ---------------------------------
        >Crown Forces Unit Listing:
        >http://1812crownforces.tripod.com
        >
        >American Forces Unit Lisiting
        >http://usforces1812.tripod.com
        >
        >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.