|
Post by wild on Jan 19, 2018 19:55:54 GMT -6
Just looking in dave..cant imagine there are any new battles to be fought. Best Richard
|
|
|
Post by keithpatton on Jan 7, 2021 10:49:15 GMT -6
Thank you werry much. Could you tell me name of Book? The book mentioned by Fox and Scott with the large map in the back pocket that is referenced but not reproduced in his subsequent books is Archeological Insights into the Custer Battle: an assessment of the 1984 field season. Subsequent students of the battle most notably Greg Michno have shown that there were problems with the map projection of the map and that some of the marked locations do not jibe with those he personally surveyed in the field for his book, Mystery of E Troop. There are several comparison maps in that book that show the location of markers that should be removed based on Fox and Scott's work and his own. The maps deal primarily with the "south skirmish line" area as that is the focus of the book.
|
|
|
Post by keithpatton on Jan 7, 2021 10:58:56 GMT -6
It is interesting to note that the park service isn't amenable to removing the spurious and erroneous markers from the field. They contend that it is "part of the battlefield" history. Good thing those clowns only have control over a few square miles of park land. That kind of thinking has led generations of students of the battle to draw wrong impressions and even more erroneous conclusions. I'm wondering if their resistance is more because it would call into question their capricious attitude toward moving the markers willy nilly whenever it suits their whim. I've been to the "park" and that is what it is, and it is anything but a memorial to the hallowed dead. No more than the WWII memorial would be if we put up monuments to the German and Japanese dead there too. Political correctness had run amok.
It can be well established that many of the markers inside the fenced area have no business being there. Some were moved tens to hundreds of yards into the enclosure. Moreover a good number of the markers down along the pedestrian trail are spurious and those along the Calhoun loop have been moved to improve the viewing pleasure of the motoring public. So as I said, it is a park, not a monument. The new casino will add a much needed Disneyland touch.
|
|
|
Post by noggy on Jan 8, 2021 16:13:00 GMT -6
The new casino will add a much needed Disneyland touch. Is this for real, are they putting up a casino? Noggy
|
|
|
Post by bryanaustin on Mar 13, 2021 9:59:08 GMT -6
Thank you werry much. Could you tell me name of Book? The book mentioned by Fox and Scott with the large map in the back pocket that is referenced but not reproduced in his subsequent books is Archeological Insights into the Custer Battle: an assessment of the 1984 field season. Subsequent students of the battle most notably Greg Michno have shown that there were problems with the map projection of the map and that some of the marked locations do not jibe with those he personally surveyed in the field for his book, Mystery of E Troop. There are several comparison maps in that book that show the location of markers that should be removed based on Fox and Scott's work and his own. The maps deal primarily with the "south skirmish line" area as that is the focus of the book. View AttachmentI have also noted the plotting problems. I have this book and chart hanging on my wall. I opened google earth and dropped markers on the stone markers then referenced the locations on the chart. Many were close. Basically the same thing with the artifacts map on the other side. This is the map that got me interested in plotting on google earth for a more interactive experience. I am still working on this project. Once 1,000 icons have been placed on google earth, and changes must be made to each individual icon and it is a royal pain. I have since changed the icons of the grave markers and made them smaller and a bit more transparent. Most of my files are too big so I cant post them.
|
|