The battle continues over a proposed Wal-Mart, which will be placed on the Wilderness Battlefield just off the intersection of routes 20 and 3. Awhile back I was asked by the Civil War Preservation Trust to endorse a letter to be sent to the CEO of the company. Click here to read the letter and here to see who else signed it. It’s an impressive list that I don’t think will make a damn bit of difference to the suits in charge. [Note: both are pdf files.]
It is with great excitement that I unveil the new design for Civil War Memory. Thanks to Dino Latoga with E.Webscapes for his help with the design and format of the blog. He was very patient with me and I especially dig the banner he came up with, which captures many of the central themes on this site. I’ve also uploaded a Beta Version of WordPress 2.7. The final version is scheduled to be released any day now, but I wanted to check out the new interface and some of the new features. I am very excited about the threaded comments feature, which will allow you to respond directly to specific comments. Hopefully, this will allow for more extended discussions and make it easier for readers to follow various threads. Because this is a Beta version of 2.7 there may be a few glitches. Please let me know if there are any visual problems depending on your browser or any other problems you notice. We may make a few more changes over the next few days so your comments are very much appreciated.
Update: I decided to go with a single sidebar. One of the glitches I am dealing with is the inability to move the various elements in the sidebar. This has prevented me from including widgets such as Library Thing. These changes are forthcoming. Bob Pollock inquired into why Lee, rather than Grant, is stuck between Lincoln and Douglass. He’s probably right about that, and to be honest I didn’t give it much thought other than that I wanted Lee prominently featured on the banner.
I plan on sharing my favoite Civil War titles before the end of the year. [Fellow blogger and NPS historian John Hoptak has already published his “best of” list for 2008.] In the meantime I am interested to know what you found worthwhile from this year’s offerings. I don’t mind at all if you want to cite something published in 2007 that you only got around to reading this year.
I love those little bursts of creativity that I occasionally have in the classroom. With my commemoration talk scheduled for Sunday in Fredericksburg and my Civil War Memory classes focused on the analysis of soldier monuments, their inscriptions, as well as dedication talks, I decided to place them in the position of speaker and come up with their own presentation. Actually, they had to focus on the individual themes that they would include in the speech rather than write it out. Without telling them that I am the one scheduled to give the talk I described the setting beginning with a brief description of the battle, the Kirkland Memorial, and cemetery as well as the schedule for the ceremony. I referenced the wreath-laying, which will be carried out by the Sons of Confederate Veterans, Sons of Union Veterans, and Daughters of the Confederacy and described the purpose of the ceremony itself.
The goal was a class discussion and it turned out to be one of the more engaging of the semester thus far. In both sections students suggested beginning with the Kirkland Memorial as a way of emphasizing the theme of brotherhood, reunion, and bravery. We talked a bit about the importance of honoring the fallen and why we find a need to do so.
What I found interesting, however, was the level of disagreement surrounding the referencing of themes that go beyond the battlefield. For instance, in both sections it didn’t take long for a student to suggest the importance of emancipation and the end of slavery as important factors for a commemoration talk. Students took very strong positions on this distinction. For those who agreed it was a matter of acknowledging what the war accomplished while those who disagreed saw little but division. From one perspective it came down to a disagreement over the proper time frame for the talk: Should it cover 1861-1865 and stick to the battlefield specifically or should it reach beyond not only the battlefield, but the war years itself? At least one student in each class suggested referencing the recent election of our nation’s first black president, while others thought that this would also prove to be problematic. It turned out to be problematic on two levels; on the one hand it threatens the bonds of affection and heroic traits found in the broader theme of reunion as well as the setting [Kirkland Memorial] for the ceremony.
The discussion moved to the question of who the commemoration is for. Is it for the Civil War generation, the living, or both? There seemed to be little agreement on this question. A number of students kept coming back to the distinction between Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address and Woodrow Wilson’s 1913 speech on the 50th anniversary of the battle. They were drawn to the way Lincoln connected the meaning of the battle to the founding ideals in Declaration of Independence as well as the way he reminded his audience and future generations of their obligations to ensure that “these men shall not have died in vain.” Others appreciated Wilson’s focus on the veterans in attendance in 1913 and understood the overall theme of “the quarrel forgotten” even though they acknowledged the racial backdrop of Jim Crow.
A few of the students kept pressing me to share my own ideas. It was not until the end of the course when I decided to reveal that I am the one giving the commemoration talk. I promised to allow them the opportunity to critique it on Monday.
Unfortunately, I did not have the time to turn this little exercise into a formal lesson plan. I do think, however, that this can be done in any history class. It forces students to think about what is worth remembering/commemorating and why. Next time, I will definitely ask students to write a formal address as well as deliver it to the rest of the class. One of the things that a classroom address would allow for are images that the student could use to provide a visual setting for the subject of the presentation. In February I will be working with a group of high school teachers on how to teach the Civil War and memory through a TAH Grant. My goal is to introduce a lesson plan based on writing commemorative speeches for this session.
It’s a strange feeling to have to write a commemoration talk when the very thing that deserves to be remembered and reinforced has almost entirely been forgotten. Even I failed to acknowledge that December 6 was the anniversary of the passage of the 13th Amendment, which ended slavery forever. Few Americans would have conceived of this as a possibility in 1861. The battle of Fredericksburg, which was fought on the eve of the Emancipation Proclamation, is part of this story of a “new birth of freedom” and deserves to be acknowledged in a nation that professes to believe in freedom and equality for all.
I believe the commemoration ceremony this coming Sunday is being held next to the Kirkland Statue. It’s a fitting place to hold the ceremony. We all know the story of Sergeant Kirkland of the 2nd South Carolina who gave aid and comfort to wounded Union soldiers at the base of Marye’s Heights. That said, I would much rather be in sight of the soldier’s graves. They force us to ask the difficult questions of what the war means to us as well as what is worth remembering and commemorating. Kirkland’s story is one that all Americans can identify with, and rightly so, but when are we as a nation going to get to a point when emancipation and the end of slavery can be acknowledged as a fitting price for so much death and suffering?
This week my Civil War Memory students will be analyzing early commemorations and memory of the soldiers. We will read an article on the subject by David Blight and analyze early monuments along with their inscriptions and accompanying dedication speeches. I want my students to understand the role that statues played in shaping the memory of the war. Students should understand that the significance and message of the monument depended, in part, on the identity of the sponsor. The power to install and dedicate implied the authority to shape public spaces and define the conduct that deserved to be commemorated. Along with this is the ability to shape and reinforce the meaning and legacy of the war, which worked to reinforce the preferred interpretation of those who organized and dedicated the monument. I put together a slide show presentation for tomorrow and thought you might be interested in two statues in particular.
Some of you may be familiar with the first monument, known affectionately as “Dutchy”, which was unveiled in Elberton County, Georgia on July 15, 1898. There were hundreds of Confederate veterans still living and they declared that the Confederate army never had anything that looked like him or the uniform he wore. It is 22 feet high and the statue is seven feet tall and made of Elbert County granite. The distaste for “Dutchy” grew and on August 14,1900 the people awoke to find that the granite soldier had taken a tumble and was lying on the ground in broken pieces. It is not known to this day who pulled the figure down.
The belief that the statue was “too German” and its eventual destruction suggest that sculptors were expected to portray Civil War soldiers along accepted ethnic lines.
The second monument pictured below, according to Thomas Brown, was the only one constructed in the South by 1920. It is located in West Point Cemetery in Norfolk, Virginia.
This statue points to the gradual disappearance of the “emancipationist legacy” of the war and the service of black soldiers in saving the Union. The difficulty in placing a monument to black Union soldiers in the South had as much to do with limited financial means as it did with the reemergence of white supremacy through Jim Crow legislation.
In terms of my own reading on the subject I’ve relied heavily on Kirk Savage’s Standing Soldiers, Kneeling Slaves (Princeton University Press, 1999).