I would like to see this kind of penetrating analysis by Simpson on Ulysses S. Grant. It would be a major revisionist work.

The captain looks awfully well turned-out for 1862, doesn’t he?

Mort Kunstler offers a very detailed explanation of the painting that is worth reading, especially in the assumptions it incorporates. You’ll find that in Kevin’s original link.

Why such detail, I wondered? And what of the assumptions of the people interpreting the piece? Was the artist, in fact, determined to make use of those unexamined assumptions and offer an explanation that would throw us off the track? I suspect that such might be the case.

Look at the female character. She is looking away from the Confederate officer. She has walked away from her house. She’s standing on a brick crcle that looks like a big manhole cover.

Clearly this is a woman that is escaping notions of domesticity (away from the house) to express her own notion of duty and honor (loyalty to the Union) by also turning away from the officer (who represents a Confederacy that is doomed to death, as the officer portrayed actually was) as she strides forward into the future as she stands above the top of the place where she conceals escaped slaves (the entrance to the hideaway is concealed by the nearby bushes). She’s looking southward (see the shadows … remember, it’s morning) to make sure no fugitives come forward while the Confederates are present.

She’s a southern Unionist … who turns away from her husband’s choice of the Confederacy … to find herself on solid ground.

Why you couldn’t see any of this … well, I don’t know what to say. Kunstler’s text is merely a clever diversion.

Yes, that is exactly who I am thinking of. From the parts of the autobiography that I have read so far, Wise was so steeped in stereotypes of both black men and women and mountain men and women, that he is quite credible as a representative of his class and tells the tale of black men and women and white southern men and women of the mountains–as seen by a member of his class–quite well through those stereotypical depictions. In other words, he tells the reader what he really thinks, which makes what he then recounts of his actions understandable. (I originally thought the piece was from a diary. The fact that it was meant for publication makes Wise’s observations even more revealing, in the sense that he must have had enough faith in the acceptance of his point of view to want to publish his thoughts.) Interesting. Whether or not some of the mountain men and women were Unionists is an area for in depth study pursued by historians, and it is a very important area for study, as you, Robert, and other historians obviously know very well. For me, the point is important as well, but almost immaterial, when the thoughts and reflections of a Confederate officer concerning black men and women who were slaves, and the white men who might have served under him are considered, and what that says about Wise’s character. The passage to which I referred is classic. I don’t know what your thoughts are on Wise, but so far I have zero sympathy for him. That might change, though. I haven’t read the entire autobiography yet. I’ll keep reading. Thanks for your response, Ken, and thanks also for the suggestions for further reading. I always enjoy your comments.

Thanks, Kevin, Sherree

Meanwhile, Robert, I believe you’re thinking of my fellow Hokie Rand Dotson. He went on to write a very good article on Floyd County for the Virginia Magazine of History and Biography. I grew up next door to Floyd in Montgomery County, went to school with several descendants of the leading Unionist family, and wrote about it in my first book. In general, Dotson takes the accounts of organized “Red String” Unionism in southwest Virginia more seriously than I do–I think the government’s evidence was flawed and subjective–but his work is good scholarship nonetheless.

Yes, Floyd was heavy with Unionists. A few years back, a masters thesis was written about it and (from what I recall), when he made a presentation about his findings, it went over like a ton of bricks with some of the locals… most especially, the UDC. I think his thesis is online. I want to say he graduated from Virginia Tech.

It’s interesting, because this county was also a major source of men for the 1st Stuart Horse Artillery.

In an article that included portions of an online diary of a Confederate officer, I came upon an entry in which the officer described an expedition of sorts into Floyd County, Virginia, not to fight Union soldiers but to track down Confederate deserters. According to the officer, there was apparently a lot of “Unionist” sentiment in Floyd County, along with a lot of deserters. Whether the soldiers deserted because they were disaffected, tired of fighting, or true Union sympathizers, I don’t know. The Confederate officer details with apparent relish the way the deserters and dissenters were tracked, however. You may already know of this, but I will send you the information to add to your data. Thanks, Robert, and thanks Kevin.