• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

A Sad Sight from the Civil War

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by jen-s View Post
    Yes, I realize that, but I would expect the pile to be on the ground, not halfway out/suspended. It just seemed...odd. That's why I wondered if it might be prolapse either instead of or in addition to a pile that hasn't dropped.

    I felt rather gauche asking what to me seems an academic question that to someone else might be deemed horribly insensitive, but in light of the criticism of the photographer, I feel a bit less awkward questioning the staging of the scene.

    I wanted to ask the same question Glad you did first
    Draumr Hesta Farm
    "Wenn Du denkst es geht nicht mehr, kommt von irgendwo ein kleines Licht daher"
    Member of the COTH Ignorant Disrepectful F-bombs!*- 2Dogs Farm

    Comment


    • #22
      My Grandmother was an Army nurse in France during WWI. She had some pretty horrific photos in her album of piles of dead horses and soldiers.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by Nootka View Post
        I wanted to ask the same question Glad you did first
        Glad I could take one for the team.
        Flip a coin. It's not what side lands that matters, but what side you were hoping for when the coin was still in the air.

        You call it boxed wine. I call it carboardeaux.

        Comment


        • #24
          That is how my horse looked after he died, too. The hind-end thing, that is.

          "Yes, I realize that, but I would expect the pile to be on the ground, not halfway out/suspended. It just seemed...odd. That's why I wondered if it might be prolapse either instead of or in addition to a pile that hasn't dropped.

          I felt rather gauche asking what to me seems an academic question that to someone else might be deemed horribly insensitive, but in light of the criticism of the photographer, I feel a bit less awkward questioning the staging of the scene."

          Comment


          • #25
            Knowing he staged scenes one might assume he removed the manure pile, leaving only the prolapsed rectum w/ or w/o any remaining manure inside, who knows exactly what we're seeing.

            It's what happens.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by katarine View Post
              Knowing he staged scenes one might assume he removed the manure pile, leaving only the prolapsed rectum w/ or w/o any remaining manure inside, who knows exactly what we're seeing.

              It's what happens.
              Many historical photos were "staged." Or, if you prefer, "posed." The early photographers often thought as "artists" vice "reporter." So what you see is a version of reality, but it's often highly filtered through the eyes of the photographer.

              IIRC Mathew Brady favored using an almost "story board" approach with a series of photos of a battlefield or event. He was as much an "author" as a "reporter." We might think of him as one of the first "photo journalists."

              This is even more pronounced in photos of individual soldiers. Many re-enactors look for high levels of "authenticity." They study the regulations of their era and then look to photos to see how those rules were put into practice. Often there is quite a "disconnect." The person spending a significant sum to get photographed (and it was not a cheap thing in those days) thought in terms of putting their best foot forward. Civilians dressed in their "Sunday best" and soldiers in their best uniform. If they wanted to present a "martial" appearance they would carry as many weapons as they could reasonably fit in. Sometimes the weapons were owned by the photographer and used as "props."

              Photos of groups of officers (often paid for by the senior officer) are probably a bit more "realistic", particularly if they are "in the field." Studio photos are likely to be more "posed." Photos of groups of enlisted personnel in the field will be even more realistic (i.e., less "posed"). These photos are often quite "spontaneous" and there was little time to "primp" for the picture. This makes them particularly valuable as a historical reference.

              Photos of parades or inspections might be the least realistic in some cases in terms of what people did on a day to day basis. They are very valuable if they are photos of horses, mules, and their use. Lots of folks here complain about their inability to make their horse do something or another. When you see of photo of dozens, or sometimes even hundreds, of horses in formation without signs of ill-behavior it puts a new light on those complaints.

              G.
              Mangalarga Marchador: Uma Raça, Uma Paixão

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by katarine View Post
                Knowing he staged scenes one might assume he removed the manure pile, leaving only the prolapsed rectum w/ or w/o any remaining manure inside, who knows exactly what we're seeing.

                It's what happens.
                Many historical photos were "staged." Or, if you prefer, "posed." The early photographers often thought as "artists" vice "reporter." So what you see is a version of reality, but it's often highly filtered through the eyes of the photographer.

                IIRC Mathew Brady favored using an almost "story board" approach with a series of photos of a battlefield or event. He was as much an "author" as a "reporter." We might think of him as one of the first "photo journalists."

                This is even more pronounced in photos of individual soldiers. Many re-enactors look for high levels of "authenticity." They study the regulations of their era and then look to photos to see how those rules were put into practice. Often there is quite a "disconnect." The person spending a significant sum to get photographed (and it was not a cheap thing in those days) thought in terms of putting their best foot forward. Civilians dressed in their "Sunday best" and soldiers in their best uniform. If they wanted to present a "martial" appearance they would carry as many weapons as they could reasonably fit in. Sometimes the weapons were owned by the photographer and used as "props."

                Photos of groups of officers (often paid for by the senior officer) are probably a bit more "realistic", particularly if they are "in the field." Studio photos are likely to be more "posed." Photos of groups of enlisted personnel in the field will be even more realistic (i.e., less "posed"). These photos are often quite "spontaneous" and there was little time to "primp" for the picture. This makes them particularly valuable as a historical reference.

                Photos of parades or inspections might be the least realistic in some cases in terms of what people did on a day to day basis. They are very valuable if they are photos of horses, mules, and their use. Lots of folks here complain about their inability to make their horse do something or another. When you see of photo of dozens, or sometimes even hundreds, of horses in formation without signs of ill-behavior it puts a new light on those complaints.

                G.
                Mangalarga Marchador: Uma Raça, Uma Paixão

                Comment


                • #28
                  Sadly that picture is mild. There are far more horrific photos out there of men and horses.

                  The Civil War was a classic case of stupidity, as is the present conflict in the Middle East.
                  Some riders change their horse, they change their saddle, they change their teacher; they never change themselves.

                  Remember the horse does all the work, we just sit there and look pretty.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by merrygoround View Post
                    Sadly that picture is mild. There are far more horrific photos out there of men and horses.
                    For me, the power of this picture comes from it looking almost natural. In some ways it is more horrific than those depicting mutilated carcasses lying in the mud.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by fburton View Post
                      For me, the power of this picture comes from it looking almost natural. In some ways it is more horrific than those depicting mutilated carcasses lying in the mud.
                      it is natural.
                      War isn't.
                      Originally posted by BigMama1
                      Facts don't have versions. If they do, they are opinions
                      GNU Terry Prachett

                      Comment


                      • #31
                        Originally posted by Guilherme View Post
                        Many historical photos were "staged." Or, if you prefer, "posed." The early photographers often thought as "artists" vice "reporter." So what you see is a version of reality, but it's often highly filtered through the eyes of the photographer.

                        IIRC Mathew Brady favored using an almost "story board" approach with a series of photos of a battlefield or event. He was as much an "author" as a "reporter." We might think of him as one of the first "photo journalists."

                        This is even more pronounced in photos of individual soldiers. Many re-enactors look for high levels of "authenticity." They study the regulations of their era and then look to photos to see how those rules were put into practice. Often there is quite a "disconnect." The person spending a significant sum to get photographed (and it was not a cheap thing in those days) thought in terms of putting their best foot forward. Civilians dressed in their "Sunday best" and soldiers in their best uniform. If they wanted to present a "martial" appearance they would carry as many weapons as they could reasonably fit in. Sometimes the weapons were owned by the photographer and used as "props."

                        Photos of groups of officers (often paid for by the senior officer) are probably a bit more "realistic", particularly if they are "in the field." Studio photos are likely to be more "posed." Photos of groups of enlisted personnel in the field will be even more realistic (i.e., less "posed"). These photos are often quite "spontaneous" and there was little time to "primp" for the picture. This makes them particularly valuable as a historical reference.

                        Photos of parades or inspections might be the least realistic in some cases in terms of what people did on a day to day basis. They are very valuable if they are photos of horses, mules, and their use. Lots of folks here complain about their inability to make their horse do something or another. When you see of photo of dozens, or sometimes even hundreds, of horses in formation without signs of ill-behavior it puts a new light on those complaints.

                        G.
                        I was just addressing her question about where the poop went

                        Comment


                        • #32
                          Originally posted by Alagirl View Post
                          it is natural.
                          War isn't.

                          War is natural. Fighting is natural. It's ugly, but it's natural.

                          Comment


                          • #33
                            I really don't think this picture is staged. It looks like someone was getting the tack off of the horse as it was dying. Have you ever tried to move a dead horses legs let alone the whole body? Once rigamortis sets in it is hard to try to pose a body.
                            Derby Lyn Farms Website

                            Derby Lyn Farms on Facebook!

                            Comment


                            • #34
                              Originally posted by katarine View Post
                              War is natural. Fighting is natural. It's ugly, but it's natural.
                              not bombs being hurled at living flesh tho.
                              Originally posted by BigMama1
                              Facts don't have versions. If they do, they are opinions
                              GNU Terry Prachett

                              Comment


                              • #35
                                I had to look it up because I only knew that rigor mortis is a short term thing, wiki says depending on the temperature up to 72 hours in people, so theoretically the carcass could have been posed once it had decayed enough. It's more likely that it got put up on its brisket by somebody removing the tack, so before rigor set in.
                                I've seen an animal that had been hit by car and traveled before expiring from internal bleeding, and it went down in a befuddling, artificial looking manner. Just how it was moving at the time of death and how the legs wound up.
                                Courageous Weenie Eventer Wannabe
                                Incredible Invisible

                                Comment


                                • #36
                                  We just have to disagree on that, Al, There's not much point in throwing stuff at dead flesh, unless it's a marinade.

                                  Comment


                                  • #37
                                    Originally posted by Alagirl View Post
                                    well, the north had a constant influx of Irish...so much so they did not need to exchange prisoners with the south to keep their ranks filled.

                                    (but seriously, while the armies were volunteers, once signed up, they had no say so as to where to go. War is a matter of old men telling young men where to go and die. Truth be told on either side they would rather go out for a beer than kill each other. Naturally this is not true for current conflicts as they are so far off the chart)
                                    Speaking of the Irish and volunteers... A lot of times, people arriving in America from overseas (mostly from Ireland) would get off the boat, walk down the gangplank, be granted citizenship, and immediately drafted into the Federal army. So these poor guys were literally shipped off to the front lines to fight in a war that they had no stake in, much less understood what the hell was going on.

                                    Comment


                                    • #38
                                      Originally posted by realrush89 View Post
                                      Speaking of the Irish and volunteers... A lot of times, people arriving in America from overseas (mostly from Ireland) would get off the boat, walk down the gangplank, be granted citizenship, and immediately drafted into the Federal army. So these poor guys were literally shipped off to the front lines to fight in a war that they had no stake in, much less understood what the hell was going on.
                                      I doubt this ever happened. If you've got a reference I'd be glad to look at it.

                                      What DID happen (and continued into the early 1880s) was that immigrants would land with no money and be met by recruiting agents that would give them $20 cash if they enlisted. They were then sent to the regiments that paid the agents. During the ACW desertion was a problem but could be handled. During the IW period desertion rates in some regiments were 60%. Some deserters would enlist multiple times (getting multiple bonus payments) and then desert multiple times. Record keeping was pretty bad and as long as you didn't run into anybody who knew you it was OK!

                                      Yes, Katherine, I did run on. But why write a short story when you can write a novel?!?!?!?

                                      "The Civil War was a classic case of stupidity, as is the present conflict in the Middle East."

                                      I guess the writer of this thought would agree with the Copperhead Democrats that we'd have been better off the let the Secessionist states go. And we're better off if we just allow the extremists to impose their violent vision upon all who won't accept it peacefully. I hope they've already purchased their hajib.

                                      G.
                                      Mangalarga Marchador: Uma Raça, Uma Paixão

                                      Comment


                                      • #39
                                        Originally posted by Guilherme View Post

                                        Yes, Katherine, I did run on. But why write a short story when you can write a novel?!?!?!?

                                        "The Civil War was a classic case of stupidity, as is the present conflict in the Middle East."

                                        I guess the writer of this thought would agree with the Copperhead Democrats that we'd have been better off the let the Secessionist states go. And we're better off if we just allow the extremists to impose their violent vision upon all who won't accept it peacefully. I hope they've already purchased their hajib.

                                        G.
                                        Well said, and I appreciate the accurate historical narratives, greater length adds greater detail on a subject I am not well versed in.

                                        Comment


                                        • #40
                                          I work in academia so I am used to the intellectual exercise of dissecting an image. So have it, those of you of that bent at the moment.

                                          However, I look at any of these images, of the dead horse(s) and people and I just feel great loss and waste. Could be the song I am listening to at the moment, but just great loss. And gratitude for my own life and the lives of all things. I just feel an overwhelming sense of the great gift of it all and sorrow for the abuse of it.

                                          Chastened for those times I am not as grateful as I should be, I'm going riding.
                                          http://www.camstock.net/

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X