A New Yorker's Verse

The Cosmic America files are filled with Civil War era poetry. Some epic, some heroic, but much of it banal, trite. Now and again, little snippets of poetry resound with meaning - a few lines crystallize what the war was about in verse...at least for some who shouldered muskets and marched off to fight for a cause.

In terms of emancipation - few in the north enlisted with that in mind. It was only after the war that the destruction of the institution rang true as the moral equivalent of Union. Retrospectively, veterans included emancipation as a fundamental component of their cause.

In 1905, an aging New York veteran recalled such sentiment at a Grand Army of the Republic meeting in Brooklyn. Recorded in the post's minute book, these few short lines tidily joined the twin themes of Union and emancipation.

In God’s name let us march to the mutinous South
       I shall fall, as will many of you
But halt not till slavery’s rebellion shall cease –
       Till the Father of Waters shall flow
Unviewed by a slave form Itasca Lake
       To the far Gulf of Mexico


Striking a tone of moralizing self-righteousness, this short piece nevertheless indicated that an emancipationist memory lived on with the veterans who had determined that the Union should survive - ultimately, without slavery.

K

Union Veterans Reflect on Robert E. Lee

Robert E. Lee: American hero, icon... and traitor.

After the Civil War, the renown of Robert E. Lee spread far beyond the borders of the former Confederacy. He was respected and praised in the North for his virtues, his fighting prowess, and his conciliation in defeat. Historians such as Alan T. Nolan have noted that the North, whose people “had to acknowledge the honor of the South,” fully embraced the Lee tradition. “Revisionism,” especially in terms of Lost Cause interpretations of the war where Lee figured centrally, argues Nolan, “could not become part of the Civil War legend without northern acceptance, and the North did accept the South’s rewriting of the record.”

While some in the North may have been retrospectively kind to the former Rebel general, Nolan has made far too great a generalization. Union veterans, for example, were hardly generous in their assessment of Lee. To them, Lee was a traitor. In 1891, the Grand Army Record passionately objected to the “saintly slopping over Robert E. Lee,” and others agreed. In fact, GAR protests against Lee helped create a lasting thread in northern commemorative literature. In 1910, one Union veteran wrote, essentially expressing in the same breath how some might find Lee both virtuous and reprehensible: “Though in his Confederate uniform [Lee] may possess all the culture and personal worthiness he had before he thus clothed himself, this badge of disloyalty – of rebellion – so characterizes him that by it he must be judged.” As late as 1922, a variety of groups continued to honor the veterans’ legacy by protesting in “unmeasured terms” the organizations that celebrated the Rebel chief, arguing that treason should never be forgotten, much less rewarded. “No Grand Army man,” offered one Union veteran, “can honorably lend his name to any movement which shall dignify to posterity the name of the traitor Robert E. Lee, or shall make him the equal of the loyal, victorious Grant.”

Union veterans remained determined to praise only the Union heroes who saved the country, rather than a Rebel who had tried to destroy it. The praise allotted to the rebel chieftain wore Grand Army veterans particularly thin. One Collier’s Weekly article citing Lee as America’s most “noble citizen” especially drew fire from the GAR’s patriotic instructor, Robert Kissick of Iowa. “If Lee was all you claim, then the men I represent were wrong in fighting to preserve the nation he fought to destroy.” Further arguing that “Lee did not follow his state out of the Union,” but rather, “his state followed him,” Kissick lambasted the Confederate hero and heaped much of the blame for upper South secession on Lee’s shoulders. As decades passed, few Union veterans could stomach the praise of Robert E. Lee. In 1922, when the American Legion attempted to honor Lee’s birthday, veterans of the Pennsylvania GAR shuddered at the idea that anyone would “place a premium on Disloyalty to the Flag and our Country.”

Although adulation of the Rebel general found a place among northern civilians who perhaps sentimentalized or romanticized the gentile south and all that the Lee family embodied, Lee’s standing among Union veterans never reached the heights the general obtained in the South.

K

Union Veterans Recall the Burning of Chambersburg

Because the war unfolded almost entirely on southern soil, nearly all incidences of the destruction of civilian property took place in the Confederacy. Former Confederates possessed a wealth of evidence from which to recount stories of looting, destruction, and the general abuse of civilians. But they did not hold a monopoly on stories of "uncivilized" warfare.

The burning of Chambersburg, Pennsylvania on July 30, 1864 reminded loyal citizens of the United States that Confederate civilians were perhaps not the only victims of war they so often claimed to be. When citizens of Chambersburg could not, or would not, pay a hefty ransom demanded by Confederate general Jubal A. Early, the cantankerous Rebel ordered the town fired. Union veterans described the violent scene. Confederates kicked in doors, stole private property, and threatened the townspeople with weapons. Many claimed that Rebels executed their orders with glee, destroying the town while in a drunken state of rage. In June 1905, one GAR veteran described the aftermath of the Rebel invasion.

He [his commander] got there the next morning in time to see the results of that cowardly and uncalled for burning of the homes of women and children. He saw, as did all who where there, the horrors of that terrible scene. Oh, it was something to be remembered as long as life lasts. That little town, beautiful, as you know, was laid in ashes; the people there without homes wandering in the streets, the dead unburied, the sick lying on the sidewalk. It reminded me then and does now as I look upon it, like a terrible dream.

This incident certainly incensed Union soldiers. Later in the nineteenth century, veterans would note the Rebel atrocities as the spark that ignited the final push against Confederate forces in the Valley. “The boys in blue,” suggested one Union veteran in 1881, “frenzied by the sight of homeless, weeping women and children, again charged upon the foe, never allowing them to stop for a moment.”

In the hands of former Federal soldiers, the Chambersburg story grew in intensity by the twentieth century. While no where near as angering as the Andersonville and other prison stories, Chambersburg nevertheless numbered among the many “rebel atrocities,” “increasing acts of barbarity,” and “deliberate acts of vandalism” perpetrated by their former foe. Veterans acknowledged that during the war the incident caused a “considerable civilian panic” and “attracted the anxious attention of the whole country.” Most remained aggravated by the “destruction…caused by a public enemy,” and recalled the acts of “insolence, theft, and violence” alongside the Union battle cry: “Remember Chambersburg!”

Albert Woolson - GAR

Greetings Cosmic Americans!

Today, still keeping with the veteran theme, I offer some video footage (unfortunately sans interview) of Albert Woolson, claimed to be the last surviving GAR veteran (he died in August 1956).

Now, I have heard that there may be more to the story...that he might not have been a combat veteran or that he may not have served in the army at all. This is all hearsay, of course - if anybody wants to chip in their two cents, I am all ears (um....hello Barb Gannon).

He did get a monument at Gettysburg...so that must mean something. I am embarrassed to say that I know little about him.

Peace,
Keith

Union, Emancipation, and the Observance of Lincoln's Birthday

Greetings Cosmic Americans!

There are those among us who persist in decrying Union veterans for whitewashing Civil War commemoration in the name of reconciliation. I have provided a number of examples to the contrary right here on Cosmic America - but from time to time feel the need to add another voice to illustrate what I have been arguing for some time: Union veterans commemorated emancipation right alongside Union as a virtuous cause.

Of course, they did so after the war - between 1861-65 Union was paramount, and the extrication of slavery helped in the effort to further this cause. So, as the war progressed, more and more soldiers agreed that destroying the institution was a good idea.

Does this mean that white soldiers embraced black people as equals? No it most certainly does not. Racism prevailed among nearly all white people in the nineteenth century. But to many, the war illustrated that the Union was on the right side of history - that despotism was on the way out (worldwide) and that freedoms promised by the "last best hope of earth" and secured by Union victory proved emancipation was the right move.

So was slavery and emancipation written out of Civil War memory? Not if the GAR could help it. Here is a short excerpt from a 1909 celebration of their commander-in-chief's 100th birthday:

He was inspired of God, as Moses was inspired; that was why he could see clear through the maze, and select the very means which would extricate slavery and division and renew union and prosperity. Knowing he was right, he never changed his principles or policies. The whole gigantic problem was solved exactly as he predicted. The house ceased to be divided; the Union was forever welded together, and the sign was lifted up high on the wall, which tells all usurpers what it will cost if one class ever attempts to enslave any portion of the American people. Lincoln made Liberty of the people immortal. Had Lincoln's foresight betrayed him, the autocrats of Europe would have become more despotic. The victory which Lincoln achieved for the people has marched on like 'John Brown's soul,' dimming every sceptre, undermining every throne. That victory of the people over oligarchy means eventually exile for all autocrats. Lincoln has nailed to the sky where all the world reads, 'The right of the people everywhere to govern themselves.'

Union and Emancipation dominated postwar commemoration in the North, despite racist attitudes.

Peace,

Keith

Descendents of Union Veterans...Clear Your Calendars for August 9-11!

Greetings Cosmic Americans!

I was poking around on the Internet last night researching records and newspapers relating to the Grand Army of the Republic in California (especially in Los Angeles and San Francisco) and look what I found. The GAR Allied Orders will be holding their National Encampment this summer right in my very own City of Angels!

To attend, you have to belong to one of the associated groups. Since my ancestors fought for the Confederacy, I had to enlist the help of my friends and Facebook....and it looks like I can join a SUVCW camp as an associate member and go.

I'll be in San Francisco the week prior running a marathon and checking out some GAR records at Berkeley for a few days, so I will be back in LA in just enough time to dig deep into some Civil War commemorative activity. I hope to meet and speak with SUVCW members from western posts and find out as much as I can about their GAR comrade ancestors who moved to the West Coast. This, of course, is the subject of my next book.

Hope to see you there!

Keith

 

Lucius Fairchild and GAR Patriotic Instruction

Greetings Cosmic Americans!

This morning, one of my youngest readers, Andrew, creator of the blog Civil War Kids, reminded me of the very troubling fact that many grade school children have no grasp of even the most fundamental Civil War history.

As disheartening as this is to me - as I am sure it is to you -  it would have been all the more so to the veterans of the Grand Army of the Republic. GAR veterans were resolutely determined to insure that children knew their Civil War history, what had been at stake, what Union soldiers had sacrificed, and what had caused the conflict. Naturally, their history had a decidedly Union bent - children of Confederate veterans were not so keen on Union history...and neither were their parents. But more on that later.

Today we look at Lucius Fairchild. He was quite the accomplished fellow, with an impressive vita. He served as an officer in the storied Iron Brigade, rising to the rank of brigadier general, did a stint as the Secretary of State, President Grant appointed him consul to England, and then France, he was elected governor of Wisconsin and served three consecutive terms, and he was elected Commander-in-Chief of the Department of Wisconsin, GAR. And I thought I was busy.

Fairchild's work with the GAR also included what the organization termed "patriotic instruction." Veterans took an active role in education to make certain that their voices were heard (and remembered). Part of this included a series of essays written about the war by school children. I have included a few snippets from the 1890s that I found particularly illuminating - the collection is housed at the Wisconsin Veterans Museum in Madison, should you ever care to check it out.

– Frank Toby, age 12, sums up the history of the war in two concise sentences.

“About this time there were negro slaves in the south owned by southern planters. Abraham Lincoln set them free by the War.”

- Charlie Baumel, age 10, had this to share regarding slavery and secession:

“The people in the cotton growing states believed that by this election that the North were going to pass laws to deprive them of their slaves so six of the southern states withdrew from the Union.”

- Esther Komitsch, age 12 wrote this homage to Lincoln and the Union soldiers:

Our flag is red, white, and blue
Abraham Lincoln was brave and true,
He freed the slaves,
To the southern peoples’ amaze,
And was honored by the boys in blue.
The Boys in blue,
Were very brave too,
They fought with all their might,
Some lost their lives,
And some lost their sight
To free the southern slaves.

Through these children's papers, we can see how the Fairchild's efforts to incorporate the slavery issue in to patriotic instruction worked. Years after Fairchild's death, others who had taken up the task of instructing school children would continue to stress the importance of this work. In 1906, instructor Edward Cronon would offer these words to his comrades:

We have saved the Union; those who come after us must be taught to preserve it. this is not mere sentiment; it is a duty which we owe to those who come after us, and who are to take our places as citizens when we are gone. if they are properly instructed, as I am sure they will be, then our mission will have been accomplished.

And in 1915, he would again speak to his instructor brethren and this time color his words with hues of reconciliation, while nevertheless remembering the Union cause:

While I am not in favor of flaunting our victory in the faces of the brave old comrades who felt it their duty to fight on the other side, it is well worth while for us in the jubilee year to recall in a public manner the high courage and patriotic devotion that saved our country from disunion, kept all the stars on our flag and made it in fact as well as in song – the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Peace,
Keith

Where Do All the Big Guns Come From?

Greetings Cosmic Americans!

Over the past two weeks, I have been spending a lot of time at Rosedale Cemetery in Los Angeles. First, it was to find Gone With the Wind star Hattie McDaniel's grave, then I was there to look up a very prominent Union Civil War veteran, Allen Allensworth. One of the cemetery's dominating features is the big cannon guarding the entrance to the soldiers' plot. Although heavily damaged from years of exposure, neglect, and vandalism, the gun still strikes an imposing posture before the graves of the nation's men at arms.

If you have visited cemeteries with special sections for soldiers, you have certainly seen  a gun or two. If the cemetery is old enough, it will probably be the final resting place for Civil War soldiers - and the gun will more than likely date to the Civil War era. But have you ever wondered how the gun got there? I was especially intrigued by this one. Los Angeles was a long way from the action during the war, but there is a Civil War cannon here nonetheless.

I took a few pictures, noted the various markings, and sent them to fellow Civil War blogger Craig Swain for further information. Craig got back to me in short order with more details than I had expected. This 10-inch Rodman probably served as part of network of seacoast defensive fortifications in the northeast. How can he tell? A postwar rifling insert indicates that the gun was modified from its original casting as a smoothbore - the markings on this insert give precise dates and other details. This one was converted by South Boston Foundry in 1877 (where most of the guns from the northeast wound up) - it was the 36th conversion made in the series. It was inspected by Cullen Bryant and weighed 16090 pounds.

But how did it get to California? In the late 1860s, Irvin McDowell, the Union general who lost at Manassas, was in command of the department of the West. He requested that these guns be shipped to California for use in coastal defenses. This Rodman more than likely made its way west after 1877 - it would not have been cost effective (the Army was tightening its belt in those days after a protracted war) to ship it east for rifling and then ship it west once again.

So my best guess is that this gun has never fired a shot in anger. In 1908, the Stanton Post, GAR procured the gun (somehow...I am going to figure that out next) then dedicated it as a monument to their comrades buried at Rosedale. And now it sits rusting, covered with graffiti and filled with garbage in a seldom-visited cemetery that suffers from neglect. If you're ever in the West Adams neighborhood of Washington and Normandie - stop by for a visit.

Peace,

Keith

Lt. Colonel Allen Allensworth - a Significant First

Greetings Cosmic Americans!

Allen Allensworth was born into slavery in Kentucky in 1842. Like many others, the Civil War brought an opportunity to escape to Union lines. Allensworth took this opportunity and joined with the Union hospital Corps after escaping to an encampment of the 44th Illinois Volunteer Regiment - a unit camped near Louisville. In 1863, he joined the US Navy, where he was soon promoted to Captain's Steward serving on the Gunboat Queen's City.

After the war, he pursued a life of preaching, married, and eventually returned to the Army as the Chaplain of the 24th Infantry Regiment - the Buffalo Soldiers - holding the rank of Captain, he was among the few black officers in the Army. By the time of his retirement in 1906, he had reached the rank of Lt. Colonel - the first black man to do so.

Allensworth is quickly becoming a point of great interest to me. After his retirement, he moved to Los Angeles, California and worked to develop a black community north of Bakersfield. The town of Allensworth, founded in 1908, was meant to be entirely self sufficient - free from racism, and free from the travails of the post Reconstruction South. Sadly, the town failed. The problem - no water. Allensworth returned to Los Angeles where, in 1914,  he was ingloriously killed in a motorcycle accident. He is buried in the GAR plot at Rosedale Cemetery in Los Angeles. 

Allensworth is among several men in my current study of Union veterans who moved west after the war. Did Allensworth develop an identity as a westerner? What sort of identities was he dealing with in a post-Union victory United States that helped inform a possible western outlook? Several identity layers may indeed surface - racial, sectional, gender, class. We shall see - I am planning several trips to the archives including a road trip to the remnants of what was once Allensworth, California.

One thing that is great about this project - it turns out that Los Angeles has a much richer Civil War connection than I had previously thought.

Peace,
Keith

The (International) Grand Army of the Republic

Greetings Cosmic Americans!

Scott MacKenzie at Slaveholders' War posted an interesting tidbit today concerning GAR veterans in the Great White North. I suppose I should not be surprised that a number of Union veterans made there way to Canada after 1865 and naturally, considering their tendency to organize, I should not be surprised that they formed GAR posts. Scott listed the posts on record - you never know...there may be more.

I have to admit that I am embarrassed on my lack of knowledge of international GAR veterans. My own research stopped at the borders, so to speak. Scott points out that little, if any research has been done on these guys and wonders about things such as national origin, ethnic identity, and how their presence affected their communities.

If anyone has any insight, chime in. While the overwhelming majority of Union veterans returned to their homes or relocated to places in the United States, some surely left for international locales. Hmmmm - maybe an ambitious historian out there should break some new ground. My current project concerns Union veterans who migrated to California - maybe I'll tackle the Canadians next. Unless, of course, somebody beats me to it!

Peace,
Keith

John Neff's Honoring the Civil War Dead (his take on) the Problem of Reconciliation

Greetings Cosmic Americans!

And what a perfect morning it is - the sun is shining, the birds are chirping, and the helicopters are circling overhead. It is a beautiful day in Los Angeles.

Given my tendency to reflect on my work of the past several years, I thought it appropriate to discuss one of my favorite books on the issue of national reconciliation in the wake of civil war (sheesh - that would make a great book subtitle!).

John R. Neff is one of the few (and I mean few) who go against the grain by suggesting that all was not so benignly reconciliationist (for better or worse) during the post war decades - especially in terms of commemoration. Sure, as he admits, there were a great deal of spread-eagle, but alas, issue-free reconciliatory efforts/movements/gestures...or whatever you choose to call them...

...but what of those who persistently reminded citizens of the more troubling memories of the war years? What of those memories that did not fold neatly within the confines of the current understanding of reconciliation? Where do they fit in the commemorative ethos? Neff’s book, Honoring the Civil War Dead: Commemoration and the Problem of Reconciliation examines those outside the reconciliation framework defined by most scholars. Basking in the light of the “cause victorious,” Neff argues, many of the Union veterans mourning their fallen comrades harbored bitter resentment toward their former enemies.

Reasoning that veterans could in no way imagine the memories of their fallen comrades apart from the contentions of war, he suggests their sentiments represent the key challenge to reconciliatory efforts in the late-nineteenth century. This compelling study does more to expose the lingering bitterness than any of its predecessors.

Yet it oversimplifies antagonisms by reinforcing a dichotomy of reconciled versus unreconciled veterans. Analyzing these individuals in terms of stark opposition – those who were committed to reconciliation and those who were not – may indeed be a dead end.

It is this over simplification that I find so troubling - and what I also find to be the hardest thing to overcome when considering this era. But riddle me this - Can one favor....even embrace reconciliation on antagonistic terms? It seems that yes indeed, one can - especially if you were a Civil War veteran.

I have fired more than one warning shot right here on Cosmic America - and have written a (soon to be published) book on the subject. So stay tuned...there will be more to follow.

Peace,

Keith

D. W. Griffith's The Birth of a Nation - an Unfavorable ContemporaryReport

Greetings Cosmic Americans!

I have received a few questions lately from CA readers about the unfavorable reports of D. W. Griffith's epic 1915 film about the Civil War and Reconstruction, The Birth of a Nation. So often, modern scholars suggest that this film stood for the broad consensus at the time of its premiere. Granted, a fair number of Americans North and South saw this film as accurate history - that the well worn Lost Cause narrative and the travails of Reconstruction rang true in this film adaptation of Thomas Dixon' s novels, The Leopard's Spots and The Clansman.

But despite the film's popularity and a certain level of acceptance for the film's analytical bent, others did not take so warmly to Grifith's "sensational photoplay" at all...especially Union veterans. The clip above is one of the film's most notorious - it depicts a legislative session in the South Carolina statehouse during the Reconstruction period. Here we witness what some would claim was the absurdity of Black legislators. The racist stereotypes are all there - black lawmakers, shoeless, intoxicated, eating chicken and leering at white women. The hall erupts in near riotous fervor at the passing of a bill allowing interracial marriage - what white South Carolinians feared most.

To underscore reactions by those who had fought for, and thus celebrated Union and Emancipation, I have included a report from the magazine, The Moving Picture World - dated August, 1915.

A state-wide fight on "The Birth of a Nation" is urged by Col. J. M. Snyder, of Canton, 111., who is department commander of the Grand Army of the Republic In Illinois. Three reasons are offered for Its suppression, one of which is that it is not fair to the Union soldiers.
A copy of a resolution passed by a Chicago post has been sent to every post in Illinois with a request from the state commander that a similar resolution be adopted. The resolution is as follows:
"The George H. Thomas Post, No. 5, Department of Illinois. G. A. R., protests against the exhibition called 'The Birth of a Nation.'
"First. Because It contains slanderous representations as to the soldiers who fought to preserve the Union, and caricatures the history of the war.
"Second. It represents the infamous Ku Klux Klun as a society of patriotic and chivalrous men.
"Third. Its whole Influence Is to excite and Intensify hatred of the negro race and to perpetuate sectional bitterness."

The GAR were hardly impressed by this film, which is not hard to imagine.

Peace,
Keith

Grover Cleveland and the Confederate Flag Controversy

Greetings Cosmic Americans!

With all the whoop-dee-do about Confederate flags these days I thought I might revisit an episode in the flag saga writ large. No, we are not dealing with Rebel flags flying above statehouses in the South, or kids wearing Confederate t-shirts to school.

This story has to do with the president of the United States returning captured Confederate battle flags to their previous owners - former Rebels who many considered traitors. Here's a snippet from my upcoming book on Civil War veterans regarding this troubling affair:

The plan, spearheaded in 1887 by President Grover Cleveland, the only Democrat elected to the White House between Lincoln’s election in 1860 and the election of Virginia-born Woodrow Wilson in 1912, suggested a reconciliatory gesture on the part of the federal government. Cleveland was already at odds with Union veterans – especially with the comrades of the GAR. Having avoided military service by purchasing a substitute – a Polish immigrant named George Brinski – Cleveland spent the war years practicing law safely in Buffalo, New York. This did not sit well with veterans who had faced death on the battlefield. Further, suspecting corruption within the veterans’ pension lobby, Cleveland vetoed a number of allegedly dubious pension bills, actions that did not win him support from the veterans of the GAR, MOLLUS or any other Union veterans’ organizations.

But nothing rankled the veterans more than Cleveland’s proposal to return Rebel flags to the South. Members of the GAR, including Commander-in-Chief Lucius Fairchild, turned vicious. Cleveland even received threats of physical violence. In June 1887 a group of Ohioan veterans resolved that the order to return Confederate flags was “a Dastard outrage and Disgrace to all Patriotic American citizens.” Although Cleveland eventually reconsidered his plans, he could not turn back the clock. Quite possibly, considering the narrow election results in 1888 and the number of voting GAR comrades, Cleveland’s actions in this regard might have cost him reelection.

Any indications that Confederate flags, considered treasonous emblems by many Union veterans, would be returned to southern states fueled bitter opposition. A few disparaged the flags’ very existence. One Union veteran even suggested destroying the treasonous banners. “I confess a regret that we did not burn them up 40 years ago,” he lamented, “They are about as valuable as confederate money.” Early in the twentieth century, when President Theodore Roosevelt and reconciliationist members of Congress once again proposed reuniting former Confederates with their captured colors, GAR men and other veterans fired away with bitter rancor. One collection of post minutes suggest discussions in unanimous agreement concerning what many considered no less than a diabolical scheme to honor treason. Reporting on an address given to Brooklyn Post, 233, Department of New York, by department commander Alan C. Baker, the post recording officer noted in March 1905 that the congressional bill supporting the return of Confederate flags “was in every way a most reprehensible thing to carry out.” For an organization where “No discussion or controversy of partisan political character, or of nature to impair harmony [was] permitted,” veterans took a decidedly partisan stance.

So, as you can see...the whole flag controversy thing has been around for quite a while. And I don't see it going anywhere soon.

Peace,

Keith

Californians Are Just So Freakin' Nice

Greetings Cosmic Americans!

Gotta love the West! Especially here in California - we're just so nice and generous and caring. Well...not really. But back in the 1880s, when some good folks were planning a home for destitute Civil War veterans, the idea was to suggest that something was different about the proposed home here in the Bear Republic. In my quest to determine what Union veterans thought about the West, I have begun to uncover a few things. Here is what one San Jose newspaper had to say about the idea of a home -

The plan, as we understand it, is a wider and even more humane one than that of those excellent “Soldiers’ Homes” in the East, where in one large building the veterans are gathered into a male colony, to receive the benefits of which they must be separated form their families. There is something very shocking in this idea, which originated with the English Poor Law Unions, of separating in their old age husbands and wives because they are guilty if the single crime of poverty. An institution will be provided for the single veterans and small cottages, each with a little tract of land, will be allotted to those veterans who are still blessed with the society of their wives whose hearts used to grow faint and their eyes dim as after some great battle they scanned the list of “killed, wounded, and missing."

So are the people of California thinking that those back East are somehow colder, more callous, less sensitive to the needs of those who saved the Union? This is actually a very intriguing question but one at this point I am unable to answer. Let's just say this. It certainly seems from other things that I have been reading that Union veterans who settled West are tending to think of themselves as westerners - and are interpreting and commemorating Union from a western perspective. At least some of them are.

In the nineteenth-century sectional reorientation that recast a nation divided between old and new...East and West, veterans who found their way to California suddenly found themselves with lots to talk about. Aren't you interested in what they might say next??

Peace,

Keith

To Bind Up the Nation's Wounds: Reconciliation Reconsidered (redux)

Greetings Cosmic Americans!

Reconciliation is a topic that has been very close to my heart for the last decade. Just to open things up, I want to say a few words about the intersection between national reconciliation and the veterans' efforts to commemorate the war.

Commemorative themes have intrigued historians for decades. Their conclusions can best be described by what I have called the reconciliation premise. The premise, in a nutshell, goes something like this: The overwhelming majority of Civil War veterans moved on from the war and let bygones be bygones. The commemorated the war essentially free from controversy and instead, celebrated the mutual valor of all participants. Civil War commemorations were about remembering bravery and fortitude and forgetting divisive issues such as treason and slavery.

Historian David Blight has proposed that reunion rested on the solid ground of shared racism. In short, being able to write the vexing issues of slavery and emancipation out of Civil War memory allowed the veterans to quickly forgive one another and commemorate the war on "southern terms."

Hmmmmm. Well, I can't deny that Civil War veterans, by our standards, shared the racist assumptions of most people in the 19th century. But is this what reconciliation boiled down to? While Blight and his legion of followers make a compelling argument, I believe that they obscure what was really going on.

Reading through the historical records, one can quickly see that veterans left behind a wide range of opinions on the nation, the war, and their former enemies. The proponents of the reconciliation premise would argue that any individual stirring up a sectional fuss was either an Unreconstructed Rebel or a Bloody Shirt Yank - and definitely an anachronism during the reconciliation era.

But here's the problem. Some of the most vehement, the most vocal, and yes...the most sectional, claimed to be reconciliationists at heart. Reconcilationists talked at length about treason, tyranny, slavery, and oppression. And as it turns out, their commemorative efforts were loaded with highly controversial expressions after all.

Maybe then, reconciliation was something altogether different from what historians have led us to believe. I won't give it all away here - you'll just have to stay tuned. But for now, just think of the reconciliationist commemorative ethos as a heated competition.

Most veterans saw reconciliation as a fact. Nothing less. The Union cause had been about reconciling from the very beginning - preserving the Union explicitly demanded it. Former Confederates had little choice in the matter. But the terms of this reconciliation - and how the reunited nation and the world would remember the war - were highly contested. In some ways, this winner of this battle has not yet been determined.

While many historians insist that reconciliaiton was really about forgetting, I disagree. Reconciliation was about remembering - preserving the memories that led them to war in the first place.

Peace,
Keith

For a couple of books that support the reconciliation premise (books that I argue against), see:
Race and Reunion by David Blight
Ghosts of the Confederacy by Gaines Foster

The Commemoration of Emancipation - In Case You Missed It

Greetings Cosmic Americans!

Yesterday, I had a few words to say about an important Philadelphia landmark - the GAR museum. In keeping with the Philly theme, today I want to talk briefly about a Civil War monument – and the veterans who stood behind its message.

Union veterans held fast to their cause and commemorated their fight to restore the Union and end slavery. Well into the twentieth century, long after Americans were supposed to have marginalized the slavery issue, veterans still deemed their fight a moral rectitude. One significant example of Union veterans’ commemorative efforts during the last days of organized Civil War veteran activity ensconced the meaning of the war from a Union perspective in a very public site of historical memory.

Late in the 1920s, the few surviving members of GAR posts in and around Philadelphia witnessed the dedication of the Keystone State’s Soldiers and Sailors Memorial. Completed in 1927, Hermon Atkins MacNeil’s twin 40-foot pylons were intended as a gateway to Philadelphia’s Parkway Gardens. Eventually moved, they now serve as the ceremonial entrance to the upper Benjamin Franklin Parkway.

Conspicuously, although strangely overlooked by scholars, the inscription on one tower recalls a virtuous fight to grant freedom to a race in chains. Looking from the south side of the Parkway, west of 20^th Street, the inscription reads: “In giving freedom to the slave we assure freedom for the free.” In the late 1920s, a clearer message could not be found anywhere in the country. Union veterans did not forget the emancipationist cause. And for those who care to look, they continue to remind Americans of their fight on a daily basis.

So if you happen to be heading up the Parkway on the way to the Museum of Art to have a go at recreating the epic scene from Rocky, slow down a bit and have a look at this magnificent memorial.

Peace,

Keith

Philadelphia's Grand Army of the Republic Museum

Greetings Cosmic Americans!

An exceptionally smart friend of mine shared an interesting article with me the other day. It was all about eccentricity giving way to uniformity in the world of art museums. So it seems that some of the most unique museums around the country are - shall we say - enhancing their identities. The effort is on one hand, good for revenue, but on the other, an unfortunate downgrade to conformity. The museum experience, the author suggested, was reduced to a check on the tourist's to-do list.

It got me thinking about my favorite museum in the whole world - the Grand Army of the Republic Museum in Philadelphia. I did a bit of research there when I was in grad school. The museum - located in a less than desirable neighborhood in Northeast Philadelphia - is a three story brick house built by Dr. John Ruan in 1796. For the longest time, the building was home to the GAR post #2 of Philadelphia and the GAR Department of Pennsylvania. Back in the heyday of Civil War commemoration - the good veterans of Philly took especial care in collecting all kinds of artifacts. They kept and attempted preservation of everything from stuffed Civil War era eagles to a cloth stained with Lincoln's blood. And tons of personal and official papers - tons.

The sad thing is, the museum is in a state of disarray. When I was there a few years back, I found evidence of roosting pigeons in archival materials and a USCT flag just laying exposed on a table. They are in desperate need of money, help, and organization. But what if they get it? In all honesty I am afraid of what might happen.

Once upon a time I thought what a grand idea it would be to spearhead a campaign (with the help of people who knew how to do these sorts of things) to rebuild the GAR Museum - to relocate it to a nice neighborhood and give it that "state of the art" look and feel. Not so much any more. Oh sure - I would love to someday help raise the money to further preserve the museum's artifacts, catalog its holdings, and create some kind of searchable user-friendly database for researchers and students.

But I would never move nor change the feel of the place. As a grad student, I had not fully appreciated my visits - I just got what I needed and felt bad that the place was in such shape. But in retrospect and with an even greater nostalgic admiration for all things veteran related, I can see that on an experiential level - my trips to the Ruan House added clarity and perhaps even credibility to my work.

There is a lot to be said for researching in a GAR meeting hall that still pretty much looks like a GAR meeting hall. Hell, the chairs are still set up and the Post colors are in place. When the time is right, I am on board to make something happen at the museum - but not at the expense of the experience.

Peace,

Keith

The Search for Civil War Veterans in Los Angeles Is On!

Greetings Cosmic Americans!

Now - since I have made the decision to write about veterans in the West, I suppose it would be a good idea to find some to write about. First step...cemeteries. I thought I would go after a couple of hard ones first. I found a few at the Hollywood Forever Cemetery in, you guessed it, Hollywood (resting place of Cecil B. DeMille, Douglas Fairbanks, Rudolph Valentino and lots of other super famous people). There is at least one more at the Westwood Village Memorial Park (resting place of Marilyn Monroe, Jack Lemmon, Merv Griffin...really - the list goes on and on). I have got their names, states, and units in order - next step...search the archives and see if they turn up anywhere.

Perhaps the more obvious spot - slated for a trip next week - is the National Cemetery in West Los Angeles. This is on the grounds of the Old Soldiers' Home - aka the Sawtelle Veterans' Home, established in 1887. This cemetery is the resting place of many more Civil War (Union) veterans and a Civil War monument to boot. No kidding. I had lived in LA for decades before I knew there was a Civil War monument here.

Stick around - I'll keep you posted and if you have any leads...I am all ears - especially when it comes to former Confederates. I am certain that some made it here, but few have turned up so far.

Peace,

Keith

The Next Project - Civil War Veterans and Westward Expansion

Greetings Cosmic Americans!

After careful consideration I have decided on the next major project. There were many to choose from, including an analysis of the public reaction to the film The Birth of a Nation, and that one is still on deck.

But I have been thinking about Civil War veterans in the West since my early days in graduate school - when I was concentrating on vets in the East.

So on we go. Those of you who read this blog regularly know that I speak of veterans, national reconciliation, and celebrations of section embedded in their national commitment. In short - northern and southern veterans embraced reunion on respective terms. Any idea that the issues of war were swept under the rug because of some shared racism are simply nonsense (confused? See this post).

My principal question: what happens when we situate these veterans (or perhaps anybody who lived through the war) within a new nationalist context - one that unfolded in the West?

Westward expansion really picked up steam in the latter third of the nineteenth century - former soldiers and their families made their way into this "pristine" part of the country in extraordinarily large numbers. When they made it - they did what you might expect. The talked about their experiences, set up soldiers' homes, built monuments and national cemeteries. I wonder how (or even if) the fact that they were out West made a difference.

For many, the great expanse that was the West of the late-nineteenth century defines America of that age and indeed informs our nationalist culture today. Expressions of nationalism took on a whole new look, feel, and sensibility. I am after the veterans experiential level as the country moved from a North/South to an East/West orientation. What were veterans' contributions to this shift?

Peace,

Keith

John Neff's Honoring the Civil War Dead - (his take on) the Problem With Reconciliation

Greetings Cosmic Americans!

And what a perfect morning it is - the sun is shining, the birds are chirping, and the helicopters are circling overhead. It is a beautiful day in Los Angeles.

Given my tendency to reflect on my work of the past several years, I thought it appropriate to discuss one of my favorite books on the issue of national reconciliation in the wake of civil war (sheesh - that would make a great book subtitle!).

John R. Neff is one of the few (and I mean few) who go against the grain by suggesting that all was not so benignly reconciliationist (for better or worse) during the post war decades - especially in terms of commemoration. Sure, as he admits, there were a great deal of spread-eagle, but alas, issue-free reconciliatory efforts/movements/gestures...or whatever you choose to call them...

...but what of those who persistently reminded citizens of the more troubling memories of the war years? What of those memories that did not fold neatly within the confines of the current understanding of reconciliation? Where do they fit in the commemorative ethos? Neff’s book, Honoring the Civil War Dead: Commemoration and the Problem of Reconciliation, examines those outside the reconciliation framework defined by most scholars. Basking in the light of the “cause victorious,” Neff argues, many of the Union veterans mourning their fallen comrades harbored bitter resentment toward their former enemies.

Reasoning that veterans could in no way imagine the memories of their fallen comrades apart from the contentions of war, he suggests their sentiments represent the key challenge to reconciliatory efforts in the late-nineteenth century. This compelling study does more to expose the lingering bitterness than any of its predecessors.

Yet it oversimplifies antagonisms by reinforcing a dichotomy of reconciled versus unreconciled veterans. Analyzing these individuals in terms of stark opposition – those who were committed to reconciliation and those who were not – may indeed be a dead end.

It is this over simplification that I find so troubling - and what I also find to be the hardest thing to overcome when considering this era. But riddle me this - Can one favor....even embrace reconciliation on antagonistic terms? It seems that yes indeed, one can - especially if you were a Civil War veteran.

I have fired more than one warning shot right here on Cosmic America - and have written a (soon to be published) book on the subject. So stay tuned...there will be more to follow.

Peace,

Keith