Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
Advanced Search
Special notice only

1,729 results from messages in civilwarwest

Advanced Search
  • good to hear from you, Hank
    carlw4514 Jul 21, 2010
  • [responding snip style] --- In civilwarwest@^$1, "First" wrote: > > Although I do not disagree with the assertion that > the battle was > full of inconsistencies, I do not think that Seymour > should be > maligned as the sole engineer of his own downfall. I agree with you here, although maybe not for the same reasons. Thanks for your interest in this. It should be noted that I have...
    carlw4514 Jul 20, 2010
  • Here's what I got out of the actual battle, assisted by further study of course. Seymour, the federal commander of the area, perhaps on his own initiative decided it was time to start subjugating Florida. It struck me that the Federals blundered into a hornet's nest in this battle due to bad Intel. For one thing, there was little reason to suspect resistance to be light as they did...
    carlw4514 Jul 18, 2010
  • Fetching Sponsored Content...
  • i will describe the battle. I make the case that the Yankees, at least locally, had really bad Intel
    carlw4514 Jul 17, 2010
  • I toured this battlefield during a recent vacation in Florida. There were some indications that there wasn't much to see, but a couple of us went anyway. I have to warn anyone who is thinking of going there that this is indeed not the place for the casual Civil War tourist. For such a person there just isn't that much to see. The museum many would consider a waste of time. They do...
    carlw4514 Jul 17, 2010
  • ...rifle muskets" and this held up through the time of the ACW. source: "Weapons of the Civil War" by Hogg. --- In civilwarwest@^$1, "carlw4514" wrote: > > Why were the infantry rifles of the period called "rifle muskets" and not just "rifles"? for extra credit, who is the...
    carlw4514 Jul 17, 2010
  • Why were the infantry rifles of the period called "rifle muskets" and not just "rifles"? for extra credit, who is the British General that insisted on this and what was he thinking?
    carlw4514 Jul 11, 2010
  • of course all of this from Shotgun confirms it, I should have mentioned. I think so much of the Hogg book that I wanted to find something there too. --- In civilwarwest@^$1, "Dick Weeks" wrote: > > Tim, maybe I can shed a little light on this subject. The write-up on my website referring to a .69 caliber minie ball came from The Civil War Society's "Encyclopedia of the Civil War...
    carlw4514 Jul 11, 2010
  • It would appear from these sites Rob cited that the .69 Minie was indeed a fact, some Minie balls being even bigger; I likely saw one at the museum alright. Continuing to re-check Hogg, I still do not find any mention of a .69 or larger *rifle musket* manufactured as such. HOWEVER I finally found this from Hogg: "early in the war... many smoothbore muskets were brought out of...
    carlw4514 Jul 11, 2010
  • thanks I am sure all who have responded so far know this, but for some I'm sure there is a little confusion, so, *the term "ball" in those days did not necessarily mean "round ball" but just "bullet" *a smoothbore musket would fire round balls and high caliber above .58 was common, such as .69 * btw .69 means 69 hundredths of an inch in diameter, huge! .72 is even a bigger wow *to...
    carlw4514 Jul 10, 2010