Blog 4 History

Some historians and wanna be historians love to do the “I told you so” in regards to American history. They love to point out how Lincoln was not the Great Emancipator, Washington did tell lies, and that Jefferson not only owned a bunch of slaves, he fathered children by one of those slaves. Indeed, all of the above observations are mostly true and have been corrected as such by social historians during the past several decades. For as we know, though Lincoln played a role in emancipation, he cannot be given much credit, Washington loved to tell lies and during the Revolutionary War he depended on telling as many lies as possible, and finally, Jefferson and Sally indeed had a sexual relationship that probably included rape. All of this is cause enough, for some, to remove them from their pedestal and probably remove them as being worthy of much study.

[I am not a fan of the phrase "politically correct" whatever, but no one can prove to me it does not exist. Therefore, the question here is valid until someone can prove otherwise. I am not proclaiming that the so-called "political correct" nature of history is necessarily a part of this topic.]

For some the past is a usable device to shape the present (memory) and possibly make up for past injustices. J.H. Plumb wrote in 1969 that “True history… [was] basically destructive… For by its very nature it dissolves those simple, structural generalizations by which our forefathers interpreted the purpose of life in historical terms.”

As Gordon S. Wood has noted recently, “During the past generation historical scholarship apparently has fulfilled its destructive role only too well.”

And in many respects this “destruction” has been a positive as numerous myths have been corrected. Such things as the Lost Cause myth, slavery and racism, and many other mistakes and tragedies of our past.

However, these same historians and teachers are sometimes slow to point out myths or falsehoods still taught; I wish I knew why? I could suggest a few ideas but…

For example, I remember a few weeks ago during Constitution Day some blogs and a couple of news stories promoted the idea that the Iroquois Confederacy greatly influenced and shaped our American Constitution. After all, MAYBE, this made us feel better when considering the bad things Whites did to Indians.

Evidence: there have been over the last few years our own government, newspapers like the New York Times, colleges and universities, and those dreaded history blogs, Blogs, Blogs, Blogs [UPDATE: American Creation just deals with the issue and does not promote it] that have promoted this myth. Why is this myth acceptable to anyone? I don’t know. All I know is there is not a shred of evidence that backs up this myth, yet it still exists in many areas of academia.

A week or so ago the Pew Global Attitudes Project released a study titled “The Pulse of Europe 2009: 20 Years After the Fall of the Berlin Wall” that centered on the attitudes in Eastern Europe and Russia about the collapse of Communism. The results are fascinating and led me to consider something after reading this short op-ed piece by Karlyn Bowman.

The report describes the “long-existing transatlantic divide,” a divide that suggests what? Well let’s look at the data. The study revealed that “fewer people [in eastern Europe] today than in 1991 think that people should be free to pursue their life’s goals without interference from the state.” This is of course a pretty clear difference to what is typical of an American belief system, and one that some suggest is “exceptional” in its individualism and freedoms. Indeed, as the study clearly found, “Americans remain far more individualistic than Europeans.”

Interesting data indeed. We can just say that the survey tells us nothing more than we are different, big deal, being different does not suggest exceptionalism. But is it more than that, do the values that we uphold on individualism and freedoms make us exceptional? I hope so. Do we always live up to those ideals, of course not, our history is right there and reveals our failures. However, failure at times to always follow by those values does not mean there is nothing there to celebrate, that there is nothing there exceptional.

Follow up: President Obama feels the same way according to this quote: “that we have a core set of values that are enshrined in our Constitution, in our body of law, in our democratic practices, in our beliefs in free speech and equality, that, though imperfect, are exceptional.” [source]

I have found out today that my efforts to start an early American History survey course has been approved. Some of you who already have such a thing might be saying, “So What.” Thus, allow me to explain.

Starting next year, here in our School District in Colorado, U.S. History A and B will start post-Reconstruction with the Gilded Age. No more early American history. I made a proposal to keep this time period, up to 1877, as a “U.S. History Studies” class as they wanted to call it. Well it has been approved and I have a few weeks to write a description and propose a list of essentials! I look forward to this and to teaching the class next fall!

I recieved from Oxford University Press a couple of new books. This Mighty Scourge: Perspectives on the Civil War and Stand Firm Ye Boys from Maine: The 20th Maine and the Gettysburg Campaign. This Mighty Scourge is the new paperback edition and Stand Firm the 15th Anniversary reprint. I have not read Stand Firm, but will do so soon. I have read some great reviews concering Thomas A. Desjardin and his book. I was assigned part of McPherson’s book for my Civil War graduate class last Spring and read part of it, I will finish the rest and post some comments soon.

Sounds like Richard Dreyfuss was a complete bomb today at Kevin Levin’s private school in Virginia. Levin and his school had the unfortunate pleasure (I guess) to have this Hollywood actor/ historian (?) as a guest speaker. Levin titled his blog story today as The Richard Dreyfuss Show, very catchy! I like it.

I will agree with Levin, that based on his description, Dreyfuss indeed did not know the audience he was addressing and did not, as it sounds, stay on message that was appropriate for that audience. I do not know, I was not there.

So who was in the audience besides Levin? This is a private school, St. Anne’s at Belfield School, Charlottesville, Virginia, and while I don’t know anything about this school, I would bet they are an expensive school and, well, SOME might consider them elite. Whatever! All I know is that their school website is sweet and would make most simple public schools look embarrassingly bad. I would post the link to ours, but, well, sadly, though not for lack of effort, it cannot compete.

One thing that does concern me is this, Levin wrote, “From the beginning Dreyfuss … alienated much of his audience when he asked for a volunteer to cite the Bill of Rights.

Not sure how asking those students for a volunteer to recite a cornerstone document of our country was a problem or “alienated” those students? Was it because they could not do so? Was it his asking them to do so that offended? Clearly few students at any school would be able to do so, thus I assume that was the issue? As I said, I was not there. If that is the case, Dreyfuss blundered clearly. But with that said, I appreciate his intentions, we as citizens need to better appreciate and understand the Constitution and the Bill of Rights! Perhaps his point is well taken though impracticable?

Regardless, I am not defending Dreyfuss, it does sound like he clearly had no idea what he was stepping into and he got what he deserved!

Recently Clint Eastwood, famed Hollywood actor and now director / producer, was interviewed for a cover story by GQ Magazine. When asked about America today, he had some rather “pointed” [ha, ha] comments. I have enjoyed his recent films: Flags of our Fathers; Letters from Iwo Jima, Million Dollar Baby, ect. I don’t know what his political affliliation is and I don’t particularily care. I will always follow his work.

His new movie is called “Invictus,” and is the true story of Nelson Mandela.  During the interview he had this to say:

“The world needs this kind of story nowadays,” Eastwood said. “It’s just…everybody’s so screwed up. It seems like our country’s in kind of a morbid mood, because of the recession or whatever.”

We’re “becoming more juvenile as a nation,” he said. “The guys who won World War II and that whole generation have disappeared, and now we have a bunch of teenage twits.” [Read more]

Now when he says, “teenage twits,” I would assume (due to his advanced age) he is speaking of those 40 and 50 year olds (both Democrat and Republican)  now running the country!?

The attack on Fort Blakely during the late afternoon hours (5:30pm) of April 9th 1865 had no impact on the outcome of the war, yet the fighting was as viscous as any had been. In the post war years accusations of atrocities committed by black troops on white Confederates surfaced. The eye witness accounts were uneven and at times disputed. Even to this day, the degree of atrocities, if any, are still in dispute.

A 1998 article in America’s Civil War by Thomas G. Rodgers titled, “Last Stand at Fort Blakely,” the author skirts, for the most part, the racial aspects of the fight. Rodgers simply noted that the black troops charged as they yelled “Remember Fort Pillow” and that the Confederates were fearful of these former slaves. Some Confederates were bayoneted the author admits,  and 2 white officers killed while trying to restrain the Negroes. But for the most part Rodgers stays away from the more controversial aspects of the fight, even at one point ending a quote prematurely. He quotes a Union officer who recalled a Confederate officer yell out, “Lay low and mow the ground…” Only Rodgers leaves out the most explosive part, as the entire quote was “Lay low and mow the ground—the damned Niggers are coming!” The battle started and ended as its own private race war/conflict.

In Fox’s Regimental Losses, it is meekly mentioned that “the closing battle of the war–the victorious assault on Fort Blakely, Ala., April 9, 1865–a colored division bore a conspicuous and honorable part.” Which is not a surprise, however, most accounts tend to follow suit and steer clear of the controversial and racial aspects of this fight.  In a way, it was the first race conflict of the post-Civil War era. All participants involved knew the war was in its final stages, each wanting to wage its own private war.

Chaos reigns supreme during any battle, but this one took on a sharper edge as Confederates began to flee from the lines in fear of capture. Chaos turned into desperation at times, both for those who fled and those who stayed and fought to the death.  “Rebels in front of the colored troops rushed towards the center for surrender as the cry of Fort Pillow with a red flannel rag on the end of a musket of the colored troops was not very encouraging for the Rebel chivalry, and to the credit of the colored troops, be it said General Hawkins Division did as well as any,” thus wrote Henry Carl Ketzle of the 37th Illinois Volunteer Infantry after the “last” great charge of the Civil War at Fort Blakely, Alabama.

A Confederate survivor described the fighting as the “Yankee Fort Pillow.” Reports of bayoneting and executing Confederate prisoners are not uncommon even by some Federal white troops who witnessed the events.

However, time and again the Negro troops are described by their white counterparts as having “distinguished themselves” with one going so far as to say they did the most “by capturing much of Fort Blakely.” By far most accounts by white Federal soldiers were ones praising the fighting of the black soldiers. One in particular after noting their fighting prowess and the atrocities declared, “who can blame them [the former slaves].”  They were seeking to lay some deed at the alter of slavery.

But still, those positive reports cannot diminish the bloody nature of the fighting that day. After being captured a soldier with 62nd Alabama Volunteers noted years later, “We were guaraded by negro troops, most of them being from the South. They cursed us and called us by all vulgar names they could think of, even calling us ——— and we had to take it or be shot.” He was lucky to have survived. Many, fearful of those former slaves now armed in blue, either fought to the death, fled to the river and drowned, were shot down, or executed when captured.

The fighting was short, but intense and emotions ran high for both white and black Union soldiers. The Confederates had buried landmines in front of the fort and along the roads leading to the fort that for days before the fight randomly went off and killed dozens and caused much disgruntlement for both white and black soldier. Tensions were high and numerous white troops noted as such in their letters. When the 119th Illinois Infantry entered the fort after a hailstorm of fire and explosions from landmines, “Capt. Henry Cross, who had just seen his chum, John Myers, torn to pieces with a grape shot, greased his bayonet with the fattest of the gunners. ” [link]. White soldier’s easily lost their cool and were not immune to murdering prisoners and it is not hard to imagine the same from their black counterparts.

Just earlier this year an article in the Alabama Heritage magazine (Winter) by Jim Noles dealt with the “Fall of Fort Blakely.” Once again the subject of race and warfare was sidestepped for the most part. The highly charged quotes that could have been used were ignored. Noles does do a far better job than Rodgers, however, writing that “the allegation of captured Confederate troops being murdered by vengeful Union troops, particularly USCT soldiers” would plague the battle for most of the post-war period.

It should be noted that both Rodger’s and Noles’ focus was not on the nature of the fighting, but the events that led up to the fight and the outcome of the fight.

The fighting at Fort Blakely was a fairly rare event in Civil War history as the taking of the fort was determined mainly by hand-to-hand combat. Most Civil War combat was from a distance of several hundred yards and when charged, lines often broke and soldier’s fled [See Brent Nosworthy's The Bloody Crucible of Courage: Fighting Methods and Combat Experience of the Civil War, (2005), 587-589; Also, 95% of all wounds reported during the Civil War were from bullets, see "Effects of Battle: Wounds, Death, and Medical Care in the Civil War," by Bruce A. Evans, M.D., Battle: The Nature and Consequences of Civil War Combat, (University of Alabama, 2008), 68-89]. In some parts of Fort Blakely the fighting raged for 10 to 15 bloodied minutes as Yankee and Confederate troops wanted more than ever to get one last lick in before the war was over. For indeed, all involved knew the war was winding down — just earlier in the day (though unbeknownst to the participants at Blakely) Robert E. Lee had surrender to Ulysses S. Grant. The war had been 4 long and bloody years and many regiments involved like the 11th Wisconsin, had participated in all four years of fighting. That revenge was on the minds of some, both black and white, is not hard to imagine.

[Note: I am not sharing a lot of citations as I am in the process of writing an article on Fort Blakely. I have already extensively researched this battle due to the involvement of the 11th Wisconsin, whom I wrote about several years ago.]

For more information on book: Empire of Liberty: A History of the Early Republic, 1789-1815 (Oxford History of the United States).

I can’t wait to get a chance to read  Gordon S. Wood’s latest book. I am a huge fan and once my semester ends I will enjoy this book during the holidays.

Well last night I spent several hours downloading, installing, and upgrading my WordPress so I could use one of the newer themes that required the newer version of WordPress. So the blog was down last night for some time and if you visited you would have seen several different looks and lots of confusion. Anyway, not done completely updating and tweaking this new look, but I like it. I like to keep the look consistent, but eventually a new look is refreshing and appealing. I hate sites that change every other week.