Rosenstock photo "debunked"?

I do think it is pretty clear they are halted in the street and not slowly walking as several men (one clearly visible in the center) have the stocks of their rifles resting on the ground.

The photo is beyond fascinating, I really wish we could have a high resolution version to pour over.

I thought it was obvious they were halted, otherwise there would be no picture. At least they were 'stuck in traffic' long enough for relatively clear exposure. Am I missing something?

I do agree that I would very much like to see a super high resolution version of this picture. Does anyone know if the negatives are still around to allow this?
 
Besides the practical uses I believe the bayonet, as part of a stand of arms and the commander could be charged monitarily for it. So every morning when you fall your company in and go through that ritual of "shoulder arms, right shoulder shift arms" etc the commander is inspecting for presence.
 
Yes, I believe it is very obvious as well they are halted. What I should have stated is that in some analysis I have read there was argument at one point that the men were slowly ambling along, which makes no sense.

I would say that sometimes "experts" over complicate the simple to justify their "expertise" when the facts are very clear to the layman. I think this whole bayonet thing is a perfect example of that.
 
What is interesting to me is the men sitting on the sidewalks. From what I see it looks like they all have equipment on but no rifles, except for what may be a sentry at the corner. Who are they I wonder? The one on the left side of the steps appears to have something long in his hands but it could be a trick of light.

It also looks to me that the one sitting on the edge is being talked to (fussed at maybe?) by the man standing over him looking down.

These types of details fascinate me.
 
Back
Top