Kentucky Derby Cavalier.
First Sergeant
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2019
If you've studed the Civil War for any amount of time you've proably heard the reference "old men and young boys." The aforementioned line refers to the fact that quite a few youngsters and men over 40 found their way into the ranks of either army (more so the Confederate army, but you get what I'm saying.) I want to examine something I found interesting about some of the age demographics during the conflict, and its mainly that I believe older men were under utilized where as young boys fighting was just a tragedy.
Imagine you're 65 years old, you figure you've seen the world and know what it's about, accomplished the things you've wanted to accomplish. At least you're not a 15 year old drummer boy. One day your country calls on you to serve do you turn it down, or do you answer the call? The first thing you'll proably be told is something like "you're not as fast as you used to be," but I would argue against that, I don't think the drop off for older men in strength and stamina is that great, at least at is applies to the Civil War. The biggest struggle I see would be marching at pace and with packs on, I still don't think that would be to big of deal though, and even if it was could'nt they put advanced age men in Artillery units where the load might not have been as heavy? I'd argue people back in 1860 might have been just as healthy or even healthier than we are today. Most of the employment of that era included tough manual labor that could where someone down over life time so I could see how that, that might be an issue. State forces and home guards could be a good fit for the elders, I know When John Morgan invaded Ohio there we're old men that in pursuit of his cavaly, the same thing happend against Sherman in the Atlanta compaign.
I'll give some examples of older dudes that fought in various conflicts through out history.
Famous Revolutionary war hero Samuel Whittemore Famously dispatched three Red Coats at the battle of Lexington and Concord. He was 78 at the time.
John Burns fought at Gettysburg, he was 69 at the time.
Nikolai Morozov fought at the siege of LeninGrad in 1942, he was in his early 80s at the time.
And just for fun I'll throw in a modern story of a man in his late 50s reenlisting in the army.
So, I tend to think that older men should've fought instead of younger men, It just makes more sense to me. At any rate, these are just passing thoughts I have, what do you think?
Thoughts?
Imagine you're 65 years old, you figure you've seen the world and know what it's about, accomplished the things you've wanted to accomplish. At least you're not a 15 year old drummer boy. One day your country calls on you to serve do you turn it down, or do you answer the call? The first thing you'll proably be told is something like "you're not as fast as you used to be," but I would argue against that, I don't think the drop off for older men in strength and stamina is that great, at least at is applies to the Civil War. The biggest struggle I see would be marching at pace and with packs on, I still don't think that would be to big of deal though, and even if it was could'nt they put advanced age men in Artillery units where the load might not have been as heavy? I'd argue people back in 1860 might have been just as healthy or even healthier than we are today. Most of the employment of that era included tough manual labor that could where someone down over life time so I could see how that, that might be an issue. State forces and home guards could be a good fit for the elders, I know When John Morgan invaded Ohio there we're old men that in pursuit of his cavaly, the same thing happend against Sherman in the Atlanta compaign.
I'll give some examples of older dudes that fought in various conflicts through out history.
Famous Revolutionary war hero Samuel Whittemore Famously dispatched three Red Coats at the battle of Lexington and Concord. He was 78 at the time.
John Burns fought at Gettysburg, he was 69 at the time.
Nikolai Morozov fought at the siege of LeninGrad in 1942, he was in his early 80s at the time.
And just for fun I'll throw in a modern story of a man in his late 50s reenlisting in the army.
So, I tend to think that older men should've fought instead of younger men, It just makes more sense to me. At any rate, these are just passing thoughts I have, what do you think?
Thoughts?