Regular readers know that I am a deep admirer of not only President Lincoln but also Union Army General Ulysses S. Grant who also became President. Read about this exchange of letters between Grant of the North and Lee of the South. This was in 1864 when there was some political interaction regarding possibilities of peace between Lincoln and the Confederacy, but they fell through due to the South's insistence on retaining slaves. Meanwhile on the battlefield there were also negotiations:
The Confederate answer came from General Lee a few weeks later. He proposed to Grant an exchange of prisoners captured by each side in a Union attack and Confederate counterattack ten miles southeast of Richmond on September 28-30. Several black regiments participated, and some of their men were captured. Grant agreed to the exchange so long as the black soldiers were included. But Lee replied that "Negroes belonging to our citizens are not considered subject of exchange and were not included in my proposition." That was unfortunate, responded Grant, because the U.S. "Government is bound to secure to all persons received into her armies the rights due to soldiers." Lee's refusal to honor this obligation therefore "induces me to decline making the exchanges you ask." (p. 248).
From "Tried by War: Abraham Lincoln as Commander in Chief" by James M. McPherson, The Penguin Press, 2008.
Showing posts with label American Civil War. Show all posts
Showing posts with label American Civil War. Show all posts
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Friday, January 23, 2009
More about freed slaves burying Union dead
Here is more about the photograph of the freed slaves disinterring and reburying with dignity the remains of the Union soldiers.
First, here is the background of the battle depicted in the picture. This is from the book “A. Lincoln: A Biography” by Ronald C. White, Jr:
Lincoln could see the cost of the battle in the streets of Washington as the wounded arrived throughout the day and night. Attorney General Edward Bates wrote in his diary on May 15, 1864, “For the last 8 or 10 days, the most terrible battles of the war have occurred in Virginia. The carnage has been unexampled.” After so much bloodshed, questions began to rise about the price of victory. Grant and Meade had suffered [my emphasis in bold letters here:] SIXTY THOUSAND CASUALTIES IN ONE MONTH OF FIGHTING, almost the size of Lee’s entire army. [My comment: again, compare that the USA has lost three to four thousand troops in all of Iraq and Afghanistan; the Union army lost sixty thousand in one month in the war against slavery].
The carnage increased as Grant attacked the crossroads called Cold Harbor at the beginning of June. Lee, for whom Grant had increasing respect, was turning this war into a war of attrition, and so Grant decided to mount a massive assault. On the morning of June 3, 1864, hundreds of troops pinned their names and addresses to their uniforms in a premonition of what lay ahead. In the next hours, Union soldiers charged forward and were met by a withering hail of bullets. Grant lost 7,000 men, while Lee, fighting from trenches, suffered 1,500 casualties. At the end of the day Grant stopped the attack, admitting defeat. The Union army learned that day what European armies would learn a half a century later in World War I: the deadly horrors of trench warfare. General George Mead wrote to his wife, “I think Grant has had his eyes opened, and is willing to admit now that Virginia and Lee’s army is not Tennessee and Bragg’s army.”
The public began to turn against Grant, but Lincoln did not. The president told Noah Brooks, “I wish when you write and speak to people you would do all you can to correct the impression that the war in Virginia will end right off victoriously.” He continued, “To me the most trying thing in al this war is that people are too sanguine; they expect too much at once.” Lincoln, who would not make predictions, told Brooks, “As God is my judge, I shall be satisfied if we are over with the fight in Virginia within a year” (p. 632).
So I went back to the bookstore today after lunch and bought the book where I had seen this tremendously moving photograph that I described in the previous day’s blogging. The book is “Tried by War: Abraham Lincoln as Commander in Chief” by James M. McPherson. Here is the caption to the two photographs that I described:
The grim harvest of war is illustrated by these two photographs. The one on the left was taken at Gettysburg on July 5, 1863, two days after the battle, showing the bloated corpses of Union soldiers killed there. The other photograph depicts freed slaves after the war disinterring the remains of Union soldiers who had been killed at Cold Harbor, Virginia, for the reburial in the national military cemetery established there. Those killed at Gettysburg were also reinterred in one of the first such cemeteries, where on November 19, 1863, Lincoln consecrated “these honored dead” and resolved that they “shall not have died in vain.” Seventy-two national cemeteries were ultimately created as the final resting places for Union soldiers who died in the Civil War-and also for later veterans of the U.S. armed forces. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS (photographs located between pages 174-175).
Thus by cross referencing two books I found a description of the dreadful battle and Union soldiers toll with the photograph of the freed slaves disinterring the Union bodies and taking them to the new national cemeteries for honorable burial.
The photograph shows four freed slaves in the background digging with shovels into the ground to unearth the bodies. In the foreground a freed slave is crouched next to a simple stretcher upon which they have been piling the remains of the Union soldiers. There are five skulls visible among a pile of their bones and uniforms, and a leg with a boot dangles over the side. It is a remarkable and unforgettable photograph, one of the many treasures of the Library of Congress.
So there are two things we can think about. One is that in Washington, as President Obama was inaugurated, we all thought of how Washington was built by slaves. But we should also remember that Abraham Lincoln saw a constant inflow of the dead and wounded Union soldiers on that very same ground, who had fought and died to free the slaves. In one Virginia battle the dead Union soldiers were piled five deep.
I am making much of this point because young Afro-Americans have grown up only knowing one side of the equation, those who considered them less than human, less than objects and chattel. However, I believe that the self esteem of young Afro-Americans would have been raised if they understood the magnitude of the other side, which is that there were 600,000 Union casualties, dead and wounded, as the Union soldiers fought for the freedom of the slaves. To feel that no one but Abraham Lincoln cared about your ancestors is to forget that hundreds of thousands of people cared with their lives.
So my second thing that you can think about is that those who live near or pass by Cold Harbor, Virginia can stop and contemplate a real moment of history and Afro-American pride. That is in knowing that the Union soldiers who died by the thousand were not left to rot on the battlefield, but were disinterred by the freed slaves and buried in places of honor established by Lincoln and the government. That is something I’d want to tell my children about, and I guess I am now.
While researching this item I came across this passage from the book “Tried by War:”
When the news of Richmond’s fall reached the North, wild celebrations broke out. Lincoln felt the same way, but his response was more restrained. He met with Grant in Petersburg on April 3 and discussed the pursuit of Lee, which would bring him to bay at Appomattox six days later. Meanwhile Lincoln returned to Adm. David D. Porter’s flagship USS Malvern, anchored in the James River, and told Porter: “Thank God I have lived to see this! It seems to me that I have been dreaming a horrid dream for four years, and now the nightmare is gone. I want to see Richmond.”
Porter was dubious about taking the president to see the still-burning enemy capital two days after it fell. But Lincoln insisted, so they went. With an escort of just ten sailors, he walked the streets while thousands of freed slaves crowded to see the Moses they believed had led them to freedom. “I know that I am free,” shouted one woman, “for I have seen father Abraham and felt him.” To one black man who fell on his knees before him, an embarrassed Lincoln said: “Don’t kneel to me. That is not right. You must kneel to God only and thank him for the liberty you will hereafter enjoy.” The president was profoundly moved by these encounters (p. 261).
By the way, notice that this reference to who and who is not God is on page 261. I’ve written before about how the media is infested with Antichrist obsessed people with weak mental and moral capabilities, who manipulate significant text in even textbooks to occur on what they consider a mystical number of the Antichrist and the beast, 126, 261 and 621. You can read more about this subliminal pushing of occult Antichrist agenda by following the labels I include on this post. It has ruined my enjoyment of media, such as books, for many years now. If I were Afro-American I would also be embarrassed and enraged to be pawns in these dispensationalist and cultists’ manipulation, by the way. It’s quite an insult to be used that way when Afro-Americans have traditionally been the most faithful to pure Christianity and their God. Lincoln would be mortified that his words and deeds have been exploited by those who manipulate for occult purposes.
I have in front of me the Memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant, which I have quoted from before. I will close this blogging with the first note that he wrote to Robert E. Lee after the fall of Richmond. In a future blog posting I might group all the correspondence together so you can read and enjoy it as I have. I include it because General Grant was quite stoic about the incredible loss of life, and it is here as he urges Lee to surrender (which Lee rejects) that Grant refers to the carnage.
Headquarters Armies of the U.S., 5 P.M., April 7, 1865
General R. E. Lee, Commanding C.S.A.
The results of the last week must convince you of the hopelessness of further resistance on the part of the Army of Northern Virginia in this struggle. I feel that it is so, and regard it as my duty to shift from myself the responsibility of any further effusion of blood, by asking of you the surrender of that position of the Confederate States army known as the Army of Northern Virginia.
U.S. GRANT,
Lieut.-General
First, here is the background of the battle depicted in the picture. This is from the book “A. Lincoln: A Biography” by Ronald C. White, Jr:
Lincoln could see the cost of the battle in the streets of Washington as the wounded arrived throughout the day and night. Attorney General Edward Bates wrote in his diary on May 15, 1864, “For the last 8 or 10 days, the most terrible battles of the war have occurred in Virginia. The carnage has been unexampled.” After so much bloodshed, questions began to rise about the price of victory. Grant and Meade had suffered [my emphasis in bold letters here:] SIXTY THOUSAND CASUALTIES IN ONE MONTH OF FIGHTING, almost the size of Lee’s entire army. [My comment: again, compare that the USA has lost three to four thousand troops in all of Iraq and Afghanistan; the Union army lost sixty thousand in one month in the war against slavery].
The carnage increased as Grant attacked the crossroads called Cold Harbor at the beginning of June. Lee, for whom Grant had increasing respect, was turning this war into a war of attrition, and so Grant decided to mount a massive assault. On the morning of June 3, 1864, hundreds of troops pinned their names and addresses to their uniforms in a premonition of what lay ahead. In the next hours, Union soldiers charged forward and were met by a withering hail of bullets. Grant lost 7,000 men, while Lee, fighting from trenches, suffered 1,500 casualties. At the end of the day Grant stopped the attack, admitting defeat. The Union army learned that day what European armies would learn a half a century later in World War I: the deadly horrors of trench warfare. General George Mead wrote to his wife, “I think Grant has had his eyes opened, and is willing to admit now that Virginia and Lee’s army is not Tennessee and Bragg’s army.”
The public began to turn against Grant, but Lincoln did not. The president told Noah Brooks, “I wish when you write and speak to people you would do all you can to correct the impression that the war in Virginia will end right off victoriously.” He continued, “To me the most trying thing in al this war is that people are too sanguine; they expect too much at once.” Lincoln, who would not make predictions, told Brooks, “As God is my judge, I shall be satisfied if we are over with the fight in Virginia within a year” (p. 632).
So I went back to the bookstore today after lunch and bought the book where I had seen this tremendously moving photograph that I described in the previous day’s blogging. The book is “Tried by War: Abraham Lincoln as Commander in Chief” by James M. McPherson. Here is the caption to the two photographs that I described:
The grim harvest of war is illustrated by these two photographs. The one on the left was taken at Gettysburg on July 5, 1863, two days after the battle, showing the bloated corpses of Union soldiers killed there. The other photograph depicts freed slaves after the war disinterring the remains of Union soldiers who had been killed at Cold Harbor, Virginia, for the reburial in the national military cemetery established there. Those killed at Gettysburg were also reinterred in one of the first such cemeteries, where on November 19, 1863, Lincoln consecrated “these honored dead” and resolved that they “shall not have died in vain.” Seventy-two national cemeteries were ultimately created as the final resting places for Union soldiers who died in the Civil War-and also for later veterans of the U.S. armed forces. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS (photographs located between pages 174-175).
Thus by cross referencing two books I found a description of the dreadful battle and Union soldiers toll with the photograph of the freed slaves disinterring the Union bodies and taking them to the new national cemeteries for honorable burial.
The photograph shows four freed slaves in the background digging with shovels into the ground to unearth the bodies. In the foreground a freed slave is crouched next to a simple stretcher upon which they have been piling the remains of the Union soldiers. There are five skulls visible among a pile of their bones and uniforms, and a leg with a boot dangles over the side. It is a remarkable and unforgettable photograph, one of the many treasures of the Library of Congress.
So there are two things we can think about. One is that in Washington, as President Obama was inaugurated, we all thought of how Washington was built by slaves. But we should also remember that Abraham Lincoln saw a constant inflow of the dead and wounded Union soldiers on that very same ground, who had fought and died to free the slaves. In one Virginia battle the dead Union soldiers were piled five deep.
I am making much of this point because young Afro-Americans have grown up only knowing one side of the equation, those who considered them less than human, less than objects and chattel. However, I believe that the self esteem of young Afro-Americans would have been raised if they understood the magnitude of the other side, which is that there were 600,000 Union casualties, dead and wounded, as the Union soldiers fought for the freedom of the slaves. To feel that no one but Abraham Lincoln cared about your ancestors is to forget that hundreds of thousands of people cared with their lives.
So my second thing that you can think about is that those who live near or pass by Cold Harbor, Virginia can stop and contemplate a real moment of history and Afro-American pride. That is in knowing that the Union soldiers who died by the thousand were not left to rot on the battlefield, but were disinterred by the freed slaves and buried in places of honor established by Lincoln and the government. That is something I’d want to tell my children about, and I guess I am now.
http://www.cem.va.gov/CEM/cems/nchp/coldharbor.asp
While researching this item I came across this passage from the book “Tried by War:”
When the news of Richmond’s fall reached the North, wild celebrations broke out. Lincoln felt the same way, but his response was more restrained. He met with Grant in Petersburg on April 3 and discussed the pursuit of Lee, which would bring him to bay at Appomattox six days later. Meanwhile Lincoln returned to Adm. David D. Porter’s flagship USS Malvern, anchored in the James River, and told Porter: “Thank God I have lived to see this! It seems to me that I have been dreaming a horrid dream for four years, and now the nightmare is gone. I want to see Richmond.”
Porter was dubious about taking the president to see the still-burning enemy capital two days after it fell. But Lincoln insisted, so they went. With an escort of just ten sailors, he walked the streets while thousands of freed slaves crowded to see the Moses they believed had led them to freedom. “I know that I am free,” shouted one woman, “for I have seen father Abraham and felt him.” To one black man who fell on his knees before him, an embarrassed Lincoln said: “Don’t kneel to me. That is not right. You must kneel to God only and thank him for the liberty you will hereafter enjoy.” The president was profoundly moved by these encounters (p. 261).
By the way, notice that this reference to who and who is not God is on page 261. I’ve written before about how the media is infested with Antichrist obsessed people with weak mental and moral capabilities, who manipulate significant text in even textbooks to occur on what they consider a mystical number of the Antichrist and the beast, 126, 261 and 621. You can read more about this subliminal pushing of occult Antichrist agenda by following the labels I include on this post. It has ruined my enjoyment of media, such as books, for many years now. If I were Afro-American I would also be embarrassed and enraged to be pawns in these dispensationalist and cultists’ manipulation, by the way. It’s quite an insult to be used that way when Afro-Americans have traditionally been the most faithful to pure Christianity and their God. Lincoln would be mortified that his words and deeds have been exploited by those who manipulate for occult purposes.
I have in front of me the Memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant, which I have quoted from before. I will close this blogging with the first note that he wrote to Robert E. Lee after the fall of Richmond. In a future blog posting I might group all the correspondence together so you can read and enjoy it as I have. I include it because General Grant was quite stoic about the incredible loss of life, and it is here as he urges Lee to surrender (which Lee rejects) that Grant refers to the carnage.
Headquarters Armies of the U.S., 5 P.M., April 7, 1865
General R. E. Lee, Commanding C.S.A.
The results of the last week must convince you of the hopelessness of further resistance on the part of the Army of Northern Virginia in this struggle. I feel that it is so, and regard it as my duty to shift from myself the responsibility of any further effusion of blood, by asking of you the surrender of that position of the Confederate States army known as the Army of Northern Virginia.
U.S. GRANT,
Lieut.-General
Look at photo of Afro-American Civil war soldiers
Photograph from the main eastern theater of war, the Army of the James, June 1864-April 1865. Shows forty African American soldiers sitting and standing on a slight hill.
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/I?cwar:1:./temp/~ammem_OAeo::displayType=1:m856sd=cwpb:m856sf=02031:@@@
This is from a great online collection by the Library of Congress of around 1000 Civil War photographs.
Here is one that I like, showing General Ulysses S. Grant leaning over Gen. Meade to look at a map.
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/I?cwar:3:./temp/~ammem_XOlj::displayType=1:m856sd=cwpb:m856sf=01191:@@@
Just by web surfing one can find accurate and factual depictions of what happened and what it looked like, even so far back as the Civil War.
Here is the main page for this Civil War collection of photographs.
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/cwphtml/cwphome.html
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/I?cwar:1:./temp/~ammem_OAeo::displayType=1:m856sd=cwpb:m856sf=02031:@@@
This is from a great online collection by the Library of Congress of around 1000 Civil War photographs.
Here is one that I like, showing General Ulysses S. Grant leaning over Gen. Meade to look at a map.
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/I?cwar:3:./temp/~ammem_XOlj::displayType=1:m856sd=cwpb:m856sf=01191:@@@
Just by web surfing one can find accurate and factual depictions of what happened and what it looked like, even so far back as the Civil War.
Here is the main page for this Civil War collection of photographs.
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/cwphtml/cwphome.html
Another thought on the race meditation
When I was growing up in the radical 1960's, there was one aspect of the most radical of the black power views that disturbed and saddened me. This was their lack of respect for the armed forces of America based on their feeling disenfranchised, which they were indeed, due to racism.
So their feeling of alienation from the American armed forces was quite understandable and not what bothered me (though I felt it to be counterproductive at the time, though that too was some of the Vietnam era zeitgeist).
What bothered me is that there is no heritage among Afro-Americans of honoring the Union war dead.
Here are the casualties of Union soldiers who fought to eliminate slavery:
364,511 Dead
281,881 Wounded
646,392 Total
I was always saddened that Afro-Americans did not, to my knowledge, develop a custom of honoring the Union dead, even if they were doing so to make a pointed commentary toward contemporary Armed forces who were discriminatory.
Honestly, if over three hundred thousand people died freeing my ancestors from slavery, I think I'd visit a few graves and lay a few wreaths, if for no other reason than to teach my children the sacrifice that was made for them by people over a hundred years ago AND as a counterpoint to modern day racism and indifference.
If, for example, someone provoked me with displaying the Confederate flag (as a provocative and not a cultural act) I'd go and lay more wreaths and flowers on the Union graves, forgotten and overgrown, in response. I think that, by the way, resonates with Afro-Americans whose own cemeteries have a sad history of neglect and disrespect by white communities. Likewise I often feel that Afro-Americans have forgotten the Union dead.
It's a subject that is near to my heart because, as I said, not only do I find slavery to be abhorrent, but also my father's family had a Civil War veteran reside with them in their family country hotel in the latter years of his life, so it is not a matter of abstract history to me. I like to think that my grandmother cooked him some great meals and that his beer was free.
When there were over six hundred thousand casualties (wounds were no light matter then, as they are not today in Iraq, for example), it is not giving one's children a full and accurate picture to make it like no one cared about slaves "back then." Over six hundred thousand (again, compare that to our Iraq conflict) showed how much they cared by dying or being dreadfully wounded. I'd like to see their memory and sacrifice recalled by more people today, if you know what I mean.
So their feeling of alienation from the American armed forces was quite understandable and not what bothered me (though I felt it to be counterproductive at the time, though that too was some of the Vietnam era zeitgeist).
What bothered me is that there is no heritage among Afro-Americans of honoring the Union war dead.
Here are the casualties of Union soldiers who fought to eliminate slavery:
364,511 Dead
281,881 Wounded
646,392 Total
I was always saddened that Afro-Americans did not, to my knowledge, develop a custom of honoring the Union dead, even if they were doing so to make a pointed commentary toward contemporary Armed forces who were discriminatory.
Honestly, if over three hundred thousand people died freeing my ancestors from slavery, I think I'd visit a few graves and lay a few wreaths, if for no other reason than to teach my children the sacrifice that was made for them by people over a hundred years ago AND as a counterpoint to modern day racism and indifference.
If, for example, someone provoked me with displaying the Confederate flag (as a provocative and not a cultural act) I'd go and lay more wreaths and flowers on the Union graves, forgotten and overgrown, in response. I think that, by the way, resonates with Afro-Americans whose own cemeteries have a sad history of neglect and disrespect by white communities. Likewise I often feel that Afro-Americans have forgotten the Union dead.
It's a subject that is near to my heart because, as I said, not only do I find slavery to be abhorrent, but also my father's family had a Civil War veteran reside with them in their family country hotel in the latter years of his life, so it is not a matter of abstract history to me. I like to think that my grandmother cooked him some great meals and that his beer was free.
When there were over six hundred thousand casualties (wounds were no light matter then, as they are not today in Iraq, for example), it is not giving one's children a full and accurate picture to make it like no one cared about slaves "back then." Over six hundred thousand (again, compare that to our Iraq conflict) showed how much they cared by dying or being dreadfully wounded. I'd like to see their memory and sacrifice recalled by more people today, if you know what I mean.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
A photographic meditation on race
I went to a bookstore this evening just to get out of the apartment and do some browsing. I noticed a book about Abraham Lincoln and picked it up to flip through it. I don't want to mention the book nor did I buy it, not because it's not a great book, but because I don't want to distract from the core of what I am going to describe to you.
I flipped to the pictures section and was totally moved and stopped in my tracks by a black and white pair of photographs from the Civil War. One is well known and I had seen before, and the other I did not know had left a photographic record.
On the left side was a photograph of the carnage of the Battle of Gettysburg, showing the bodies of Union soldiers two days after the battle, lying densely through a field. That is the picture that I had seen before, among others, recording the terrible sights of the battle dead. The caption explained that eventually people could be found to bury the dead in the battlefield where their bodies lay.
On the right side was a photograph of the bodies being dug up again so they could be moved and interred into the national cemeteries that Lincoln designated. Who was doing the work of digging up the Union soldiers who had died battling slavery? Freed slaves.
I could not easily stop gazing with wonder on that picture. Would you not have liked to have been able to ask the freed slaves how they felt, unearthing the Union soldiers who had died to free them, putting their bodies on the carts, and moving them to honorable cemeteries?
Much has been made of how the White House and the Capitol were built with slave labor, and that is important to realize and to never forget.
But I have also blogged that one must never forget the dignity of the slaves themselves and how they lived and dealt with those times. They were not unaware children who were being exploited and fought over; they were adults with educations and awareness of the nuance of what was occurring. And so less than one hundred years after slave labor built Washington, newly freed slaves dug up the mortal remains of the Union soldiers who had died to free them, and respectfully moved them, as best as could be done in those times, to the cemeteries of honor that Lincoln had designated.
I mention this so that in particular Afro-Americans have an understanding that the contemporaries of their time, the slaves who witnessed the Civil War, worked to honor in their time those who had paid the ultimate price, the fallen Union soldiers. I think that this is something to be very proud of, and so I thought to mention it as a meditation tonight on race relationships. Many today think, understandably, that there is a notion of reparations and atonement for slavery and I'm not here to argue that one way or the other. However, one must have an understanding that slaves knew that Union soldiers were fighting for them, and freed slaves honored the fallen Union soldiers by doing what is admittedly one of the most difficult of charities, which is to unearth their decomposing bodies and transport them to respectful national cemeteries. That is a profound dignity that I think most people do not realize took place at that very time, and I'm so glad that I saw the photograph tonight to share it with you and my thoughts.
It also is an example of what I was speaking about before, which is how does one capture a past historic experience in the view of the contemporaries, those actual participants alive at the time? What a value a single photograph can provide in that regard!
I flipped to the pictures section and was totally moved and stopped in my tracks by a black and white pair of photographs from the Civil War. One is well known and I had seen before, and the other I did not know had left a photographic record.
On the left side was a photograph of the carnage of the Battle of Gettysburg, showing the bodies of Union soldiers two days after the battle, lying densely through a field. That is the picture that I had seen before, among others, recording the terrible sights of the battle dead. The caption explained that eventually people could be found to bury the dead in the battlefield where their bodies lay.
On the right side was a photograph of the bodies being dug up again so they could be moved and interred into the national cemeteries that Lincoln designated. Who was doing the work of digging up the Union soldiers who had died battling slavery? Freed slaves.
I could not easily stop gazing with wonder on that picture. Would you not have liked to have been able to ask the freed slaves how they felt, unearthing the Union soldiers who had died to free them, putting their bodies on the carts, and moving them to honorable cemeteries?
Much has been made of how the White House and the Capitol were built with slave labor, and that is important to realize and to never forget.
But I have also blogged that one must never forget the dignity of the slaves themselves and how they lived and dealt with those times. They were not unaware children who were being exploited and fought over; they were adults with educations and awareness of the nuance of what was occurring. And so less than one hundred years after slave labor built Washington, newly freed slaves dug up the mortal remains of the Union soldiers who had died to free them, and respectfully moved them, as best as could be done in those times, to the cemeteries of honor that Lincoln had designated.
I mention this so that in particular Afro-Americans have an understanding that the contemporaries of their time, the slaves who witnessed the Civil War, worked to honor in their time those who had paid the ultimate price, the fallen Union soldiers. I think that this is something to be very proud of, and so I thought to mention it as a meditation tonight on race relationships. Many today think, understandably, that there is a notion of reparations and atonement for slavery and I'm not here to argue that one way or the other. However, one must have an understanding that slaves knew that Union soldiers were fighting for them, and freed slaves honored the fallen Union soldiers by doing what is admittedly one of the most difficult of charities, which is to unearth their decomposing bodies and transport them to respectful national cemeteries. That is a profound dignity that I think most people do not realize took place at that very time, and I'm so glad that I saw the photograph tonight to share it with you and my thoughts.
It also is an example of what I was speaking about before, which is how does one capture a past historic experience in the view of the contemporaries, those actual participants alive at the time? What a value a single photograph can provide in that regard!
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Read this: from Grant's first inaugural address
President Ulysses S. Grant
First Inaugural Address
Thursday, March 4, 1869
...The country having just emerged from a great rebellion, many questions will come before it for settlement in the next four years which preceding Administrations have never had to deal with. In meeting these it is desirable that they should be approached calmly, without prejudice, hate, or sectional pride, remembering that the greatest good to the greatest number is the object to be attained.
This requires security of person, property, and free religious and political opinion in every part of our common country, without regard to local prejudice. All laws to secure these ends will receive my best efforts for their enforcement.
A great debt has been contracted in securing to us and our posterity the Union. The payment of this, principal and interest, as well as the return to a specie basis as soon as it can be accomplished without material detriment to the debtor class or to the country at large, must be provided for. To protect the national honor, every dollar of Governmental indebtedness should be paid in gold, unless otherwise expressly stipulated in the contract. Let it be understood that no repudiator of one farthing of our public debt will be trusted in public place, and it will go far toward strengthening a credit which ought to be the best in the world, and will ultimately enable us to replace the debt with bonds bearing less interest than we now pay. To this should be added a faithful collection of the revenue, a strict accountability to the Treasury for every dollar collected, and the greatest practicable retrenchment in expenditure in every department of Government...
Doesn't alot of this sound familiar to us today?
Like Washington, Grant had to be the military commander, then the President (after Johnson who took over when Lincoln was assassinated) after a difficult war and, in Grant's case, the country was left in huge debt due to the cost of the Civil War. Further, Johnson undid a lot of the progress toward emancipation and equality achieved by the efforts of Lincoln and the blood of the Civil War, so Grant had to put good will and equality back on track also. He is another under appreciated American President.
Anyway, I thought with our financial crisis and focus on equality and so forth that you'd find a very interesting parallel in his words and our times.
First Inaugural Address
Thursday, March 4, 1869
...The country having just emerged from a great rebellion, many questions will come before it for settlement in the next four years which preceding Administrations have never had to deal with. In meeting these it is desirable that they should be approached calmly, without prejudice, hate, or sectional pride, remembering that the greatest good to the greatest number is the object to be attained.
This requires security of person, property, and free religious and political opinion in every part of our common country, without regard to local prejudice. All laws to secure these ends will receive my best efforts for their enforcement.
A great debt has been contracted in securing to us and our posterity the Union. The payment of this, principal and interest, as well as the return to a specie basis as soon as it can be accomplished without material detriment to the debtor class or to the country at large, must be provided for. To protect the national honor, every dollar of Governmental indebtedness should be paid in gold, unless otherwise expressly stipulated in the contract. Let it be understood that no repudiator of one farthing of our public debt will be trusted in public place, and it will go far toward strengthening a credit which ought to be the best in the world, and will ultimately enable us to replace the debt with bonds bearing less interest than we now pay. To this should be added a faithful collection of the revenue, a strict accountability to the Treasury for every dollar collected, and the greatest practicable retrenchment in expenditure in every department of Government...
Doesn't alot of this sound familiar to us today?
Like Washington, Grant had to be the military commander, then the President (after Johnson who took over when Lincoln was assassinated) after a difficult war and, in Grant's case, the country was left in huge debt due to the cost of the Civil War. Further, Johnson undid a lot of the progress toward emancipation and equality achieved by the efforts of Lincoln and the blood of the Civil War, so Grant had to put good will and equality back on track also. He is another under appreciated American President.
Anyway, I thought with our financial crisis and focus on equality and so forth that you'd find a very interesting parallel in his words and our times.
Another thought about American Presidents
I have the feeling that many readers enjoyed my blogging about the religion of the American Presidents and why certain faiths are so represented historically. I also have the feeling that by grouping the Presidents in sets of ten, showing that we have had four sets of tens Presidents, plus four, that readers, especially the young, have a better feeling for the span of our history as a country. It is both a mature nation and a very young one.
I've always been a visual learner myself and teacher. I find that grouping information in certain ways helps give a quick and rich insight into what might otherwise be obscured by a lot of detailed text. For example, let's look at the grouping of ten Presidents in sequence again for another couple of insights.
If ten Presidents had only one four year term, a group of ten Presidents in a row represents only forty years. If a few of them have two four year terms that bumps the span of ten Presidents to forty eight or fifty two years. Think about that: a group of ten Presidents is well within a lifespan of an observer. Traditionally the phrase "one generation" refers to thirty years. So a group of ten Presidents could be thought of that way, in terms of generations, but isn't the idea that it's between forty and sixty years kind of interesting? It makes it more real because now you can imagine someone who lives a good long life as seeing over a fourth of the Presidents that we have ever had in our history. That helps you to understand how young our country really is, and it is far too soon and inappropriate to feel all old and jaded about the USA. I like that President Obama seems to view it that way too.
I've mentioned this before on my blog but now in this context this small story from my own family is even more interesting. My grandparents on my dad's side owned a small hotel in upstate New York, near the border with Canada. Thus it was a real country inn kind of place but the way it used to be not the quaint image people have today. Thus is was a saloon, a place to get home cooked meals, and lodging for my family and rooms for those who needed, for example, the single elderly.
Think about this. When my dad was a young man in the hotel there was a Civil War veteran who lived there, who went by the name "Pappy." Yep, you read that right. My father (who was born in 1903) personally knew a Civil War veteran and that veteran lived in my grandparents hotel, since he was a single and elderly gentleman. My dad died when I was a young child, so I did not have a chance to have conversations about such things, but my cousin who was much older than me told me about Pappy. I think that my cousin also met Pappy, but I'm not sure as Pappy would have had to have lived to quite a long age. However, what is significant is that between me and my father, one generation, we reach back to someone of the time of Lincoln and the Civil War. How cool is that?
This gives you another way to look at history, doesn't it? It shows that even though a struggle for something so crucial as Civil Rights seems to take so long, with decades of sweat and blood, on the other hand such a radical and amazing change as we have seen can take place in three generational jumps: Pappy, my father, me. Lincoln was the 16Th President. Thus Pappy to my father to me spans Presidents 16 to now President Obama, who is number 44.
So young people, do not think that your parents and your grandparents are boring and have nothing interesting to tell. Ask them to tell you about the earliest President they remember, for example, and try to get some stories from them. So many of my father's generation the "World War II" generation have died and it's sad that many of their kids and grand kids just were not interested in history or their family stories. I think that President Obama is stirring more relevance, pride and interest in American history and that's one of the implications of his presidency I find thrilling and very hopeful for rejuvenating the American spirit.
Again, think about my example... I was born during President "Ike" Eisenhower's first term so I remember him as President very well. While of course I was not yet born when his predecessor President Truman was in office, I remember him as having been current and just recently stepped down from the Presidency so he was a figure of great stability and honor along with "Ike." So just in my relative youth (ha) I have memory of (Truman), Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, GHW Bush, Clinton, GW Bush...one of those "group of ten" Presidents, twelve if you count Truman and now President Obama!
I remember Eisenhower governing and I remember, and even watched part of, the famous Kennedy-Nixon debate. My dad, a Catholic, lived to see Kennedy win and become President, but my dad died of a heart attack well before President Kennedy was assassinated. So I've been alive for and very aware of our Presidents and national and world events for just about one fourth of the Presidents our country have had!
Just think, my dad was born during the 26Th President, Theodore Roosevelt's, first term. So my dad would have been alive for and witnessed Presidents number 26 through 35, and would have obviously seen a lot more if he had not died at an early age of chronic heart ailments. But think about it: my dad was born just "ten Presidents" after Abraham Lincoln!
See. memorizing lists of Presidents is boring. But thinking about who was President and what the issues were during the time of your grandparents and parents is VERY interesting!
So even though much of the schooling in history is dismal in our schools (and thus I try to plug in some key information for you all whenever I think of something pertinent and interesting) you can make it interesting for yourselves by just sitting down with an almanac or the Internet, of course, and look up the Presidents that correspond to the lives of your family members. Then it would be fun to ask them what they thought and what they remember about each of the earliest ones.
It's not only educational but it is reassuring.
Of course it all goes back to Washington. Regular readers know that he is my favorite President because he was the first to walk the talk. President Washington had to become in reality what was needed, first as the Commander of the Revolutionary Army and then in the new role of President. As time goes on the wonder and marvel of what Washington did only grows, it does not diminish.
Washington's birthday is February 22. Lincoln's birthday is February 12.
I remember when each day was a separate national holiday, before they became mashed together into "President's Day."
I wish they were still two separate holidays, and I think with the election of President Obama you can see why. One was the father of our country, who took the impossible dream and made it honorable and real and his birthday should be celebrated with that in mind. The other fought the great Civil War, held the Union together and emancipated the slaves. Are these not two separate wonderful glowing deeds and men in our country? Should not our kids learn about them and celebrate them on their actual birthdays as national heroes and role models?
Instead President's Day is just a long weekend, a mashing together of "something about the presidents" and endless advertisements for automobiles and their "President's Day sales!"
It was really different when I was young and the days were celebrated separately. Just a little story here. In the 1950's if you did well on a school paper you would get either a sticker, a star or a rubber stamp on the top of your paper. The rubber stamps were of holiday themes, and thus included one stamp of Washington's famous profile for Washington's Birthday and another of Lincoln's profile for Lincoln's Birthday, and kids were thrilled to get one of those stamps on their paper! Kids really cared about and role modeled Washington and Lincoln, they were NOT boring. We loved Lincoln and I'm speaking as someone who grew up in a rural white community.
I blame the schools, society's rampant commercialization, and the secularization of our nation for the degrading of our education of our kids in the Presidency and in particular those two icons and heroes of our nation, Washington and Lincoln. Sigh. Remember, when you "purge" teaching about any history that mentions religion or God you are basically whiting out of discussion and textbooks half of factual human events. Look at how I had to explain why each President was of certain faiths because that is no longer taught in schools.
Anyway, I hope that you have found this more grist for thought! I've listened all day to the Inauguration activities and am very excited and hopeful. (I totally do not understand the "blah" attitude of some news personalities who were not "Obama supporters," I mean, duh, why are they not excited?) I have always been no matter who wins because that is the American way, to "give the new guy a fair shake" to use a classic expression. The snarky partisanship is so wearying and depressive and it really ought to stop. Like I said, I remember when no matter which candidate you voted for, you were still excited and supportive when one of them won and became President, even if he "wasn't your guy." That is one of the sad things about how this country's spirit has changed. I hope that people will regain that fairness and unity of American support for their President. Lord knows I've supported all the Presidents in spirit and dignity even when they have done the most dreadful things!
I've always been a visual learner myself and teacher. I find that grouping information in certain ways helps give a quick and rich insight into what might otherwise be obscured by a lot of detailed text. For example, let's look at the grouping of ten Presidents in sequence again for another couple of insights.
If ten Presidents had only one four year term, a group of ten Presidents in a row represents only forty years. If a few of them have two four year terms that bumps the span of ten Presidents to forty eight or fifty two years. Think about that: a group of ten Presidents is well within a lifespan of an observer. Traditionally the phrase "one generation" refers to thirty years. So a group of ten Presidents could be thought of that way, in terms of generations, but isn't the idea that it's between forty and sixty years kind of interesting? It makes it more real because now you can imagine someone who lives a good long life as seeing over a fourth of the Presidents that we have ever had in our history. That helps you to understand how young our country really is, and it is far too soon and inappropriate to feel all old and jaded about the USA. I like that President Obama seems to view it that way too.
I've mentioned this before on my blog but now in this context this small story from my own family is even more interesting. My grandparents on my dad's side owned a small hotel in upstate New York, near the border with Canada. Thus it was a real country inn kind of place but the way it used to be not the quaint image people have today. Thus is was a saloon, a place to get home cooked meals, and lodging for my family and rooms for those who needed, for example, the single elderly.
Think about this. When my dad was a young man in the hotel there was a Civil War veteran who lived there, who went by the name "Pappy." Yep, you read that right. My father (who was born in 1903) personally knew a Civil War veteran and that veteran lived in my grandparents hotel, since he was a single and elderly gentleman. My dad died when I was a young child, so I did not have a chance to have conversations about such things, but my cousin who was much older than me told me about Pappy. I think that my cousin also met Pappy, but I'm not sure as Pappy would have had to have lived to quite a long age. However, what is significant is that between me and my father, one generation, we reach back to someone of the time of Lincoln and the Civil War. How cool is that?
This gives you another way to look at history, doesn't it? It shows that even though a struggle for something so crucial as Civil Rights seems to take so long, with decades of sweat and blood, on the other hand such a radical and amazing change as we have seen can take place in three generational jumps: Pappy, my father, me. Lincoln was the 16Th President. Thus Pappy to my father to me spans Presidents 16 to now President Obama, who is number 44.
So young people, do not think that your parents and your grandparents are boring and have nothing interesting to tell. Ask them to tell you about the earliest President they remember, for example, and try to get some stories from them. So many of my father's generation the "World War II" generation have died and it's sad that many of their kids and grand kids just were not interested in history or their family stories. I think that President Obama is stirring more relevance, pride and interest in American history and that's one of the implications of his presidency I find thrilling and very hopeful for rejuvenating the American spirit.
Again, think about my example... I was born during President "Ike" Eisenhower's first term so I remember him as President very well. While of course I was not yet born when his predecessor President Truman was in office, I remember him as having been current and just recently stepped down from the Presidency so he was a figure of great stability and honor along with "Ike." So just in my relative youth (ha) I have memory of (Truman), Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, GHW Bush, Clinton, GW Bush...one of those "group of ten" Presidents, twelve if you count Truman and now President Obama!
I remember Eisenhower governing and I remember, and even watched part of, the famous Kennedy-Nixon debate. My dad, a Catholic, lived to see Kennedy win and become President, but my dad died of a heart attack well before President Kennedy was assassinated. So I've been alive for and very aware of our Presidents and national and world events for just about one fourth of the Presidents our country have had!
Just think, my dad was born during the 26Th President, Theodore Roosevelt's, first term. So my dad would have been alive for and witnessed Presidents number 26 through 35, and would have obviously seen a lot more if he had not died at an early age of chronic heart ailments. But think about it: my dad was born just "ten Presidents" after Abraham Lincoln!
See. memorizing lists of Presidents is boring. But thinking about who was President and what the issues were during the time of your grandparents and parents is VERY interesting!
So even though much of the schooling in history is dismal in our schools (and thus I try to plug in some key information for you all whenever I think of something pertinent and interesting) you can make it interesting for yourselves by just sitting down with an almanac or the Internet, of course, and look up the Presidents that correspond to the lives of your family members. Then it would be fun to ask them what they thought and what they remember about each of the earliest ones.
It's not only educational but it is reassuring.
Of course it all goes back to Washington. Regular readers know that he is my favorite President because he was the first to walk the talk. President Washington had to become in reality what was needed, first as the Commander of the Revolutionary Army and then in the new role of President. As time goes on the wonder and marvel of what Washington did only grows, it does not diminish.
Washington's birthday is February 22. Lincoln's birthday is February 12.
I remember when each day was a separate national holiday, before they became mashed together into "President's Day."
I wish they were still two separate holidays, and I think with the election of President Obama you can see why. One was the father of our country, who took the impossible dream and made it honorable and real and his birthday should be celebrated with that in mind. The other fought the great Civil War, held the Union together and emancipated the slaves. Are these not two separate wonderful glowing deeds and men in our country? Should not our kids learn about them and celebrate them on their actual birthdays as national heroes and role models?
Instead President's Day is just a long weekend, a mashing together of "something about the presidents" and endless advertisements for automobiles and their "President's Day sales!"
It was really different when I was young and the days were celebrated separately. Just a little story here. In the 1950's if you did well on a school paper you would get either a sticker, a star or a rubber stamp on the top of your paper. The rubber stamps were of holiday themes, and thus included one stamp of Washington's famous profile for Washington's Birthday and another of Lincoln's profile for Lincoln's Birthday, and kids were thrilled to get one of those stamps on their paper! Kids really cared about and role modeled Washington and Lincoln, they were NOT boring. We loved Lincoln and I'm speaking as someone who grew up in a rural white community.
I blame the schools, society's rampant commercialization, and the secularization of our nation for the degrading of our education of our kids in the Presidency and in particular those two icons and heroes of our nation, Washington and Lincoln. Sigh. Remember, when you "purge" teaching about any history that mentions religion or God you are basically whiting out of discussion and textbooks half of factual human events. Look at how I had to explain why each President was of certain faiths because that is no longer taught in schools.
Anyway, I hope that you have found this more grist for thought! I've listened all day to the Inauguration activities and am very excited and hopeful. (I totally do not understand the "blah" attitude of some news personalities who were not "Obama supporters," I mean, duh, why are they not excited?) I have always been no matter who wins because that is the American way, to "give the new guy a fair shake" to use a classic expression. The snarky partisanship is so wearying and depressive and it really ought to stop. Like I said, I remember when no matter which candidate you voted for, you were still excited and supportive when one of them won and became President, even if he "wasn't your guy." That is one of the sad things about how this country's spirit has changed. I hope that people will regain that fairness and unity of American support for their President. Lord knows I've supported all the Presidents in spirit and dignity even when they have done the most dreadful things!
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Understanding time and war, a poem
This is by Carl Sandburg, my favorite poet. In order to preserve the spacing, since I'm too computer deficient to format properly on this blog, I've added the grass special effects, LOL.
Austerlitz and Waterloo were bloody battles during the Napoleonic Wars, Gettysburg a bloody battle in the American Civil War, and Ypres and Verdun bloody battles of World War I.
Pile the bodies high at Austerlitz and Waterloo.
Shovel them under and let me work -
///////////////////I am the grass; I cover all.
And pile them high at Gettysburg
And pile them high at Ypres and Verdun.
Shovel them under and let me work.
Two years, ten years, and passengers ask the conductor:
///////////////////What place is this?
///////////////////Where are we now?
///////////////////I am the grass.
///////////////////Let me work.
Austerlitz and Waterloo were bloody battles during the Napoleonic Wars, Gettysburg a bloody battle in the American Civil War, and Ypres and Verdun bloody battles of World War I.
Grass
Pile the bodies high at Austerlitz and Waterloo.
Shovel them under and let me work -
///////////////////I am the grass; I cover all.
And pile them high at Gettysburg
And pile them high at Ypres and Verdun.
Shovel them under and let me work.
Two years, ten years, and passengers ask the conductor:
///////////////////What place is this?
///////////////////Where are we now?
///////////////////I am the grass.
///////////////////Let me work.
Saturday, December 6, 2008
History: more about Lincoln by Ulysses Grant
Here is another fascinating excerpt from the Personal Memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant. The time of this excerpt is when he is the General of the Union Army, and hoping to deliver the final defeat of the Army of the Confederacy, led by General Robert E. Lee. They were in the midst of the Appomattox Campaign in Virginia, and had just had a great victory at Petersburg, south of the as yet not fallen Confederate capitol Richmond. Here is what he wrote.
Mr. Lincoln was at City Point at the time, and had been for some days. I would have let him know what I contemplated doing, only while I felt a strong conviction that the move was going to be successful, yet it might not prove so; and then I would have only added another to the many disappointments he had been suffering of the past three years. But when we started out he saw that we were moving for a purpose, and bidding us Godspeed, remained there to hear the result.
The next morning after the capture of Petersburg, I telegraphed Mr. Lincoln asking him to ride out there and see me, while I would await his arrival. I had started all the troops out early in the morning, so that after the National army left Petersburg there was not a soul to be seen, not even an animal in the streets. There was absolutely no one there, except my staff officers and, possibly, a small escort of cavalry. We had selected the piazza of a deserted house, and occupied it until the President arrived.
About the first thing that Mr. Lincoln said to me, after warm congratulations for the victory, and thanks both to myself and to the army which had accomplished it, was: “Do you know, general, that I have had a sort of a sneaking idea for some days that you intended to do something like this.” Our movements had been concealed up to this point, I no longer had any object in concealing from the President all my movements, and the objects I had in view. He remained for some days near City Point, and I communicated with him frequently and fully by telegraph.
Mr. Lincoln knew that it had been arranged for Sherman to join me at a fixed time, to co-operate in the destruction of Lee’s army. I told him that I had been very anxious to have the Eastern armies vanquish their old enemy who had so long resisted all their repeated and gallant attempts to subdue them or drive them from their capital. The Western armies had been the main successful until they had conquered all the territory from the Mississippi River to the State of North Carolina, and were now almost ready to knock at the back door of Richmond, asking admittance. I said to him that if the Western armies should be even upon the field, operating against Richmond and Lee, the credit would be given to them for the capture, by politicians and non-combatants from the section of country which those troops hailed from. It might lead to disagreeable bickering between members of Congress of the East and those of the West in some of their debates. Western members might be throwing it up to the members of the East that in the suppression of the rebellion they were not able to capture an army, or accomplish much in the way of contributing toward that end, but had to wait until the Western armies had conquered all the territory south and west of them, and then come on to help them capture the only army they had been engaged with. [Note: Imagine that! Grant records how the Union armies provided by the states were in competition to be the greater contributors to the effort in the War against slavery, vying between the Western states and the Eastern states to be allowed to be the captors of at least one of the Confederate armies on the field.]
Mr. Lincoln said he saw that now, but had never thought of it before, because his anxiety was so great that he did not care where the aid came from so the work was done.
The Army of the Potomac has every reason to be proud of its four years’ record in the suppression of the rebellion. The army it had to fight was the protection to the capital of a people which was attempting to found a nation upon the territory of the United States. Its loss would be the loss of the cause. Every energy, therefore, was put forth by the Confederacy to protect and maintain their capital. Everything else would go if it went. Lee’s army had to be strengthened to enable it to maintain its position, no matter what territory was wrested from the South in another quarter.
I never expected any such bickering as I have indicated, between the soldiers of the two sections; and fortunately, there has been one between the politicians. Possibly I am the only one who thought of the liability of such a state of things in advance.
When our conversation was at an end Mr. Lincoln mounted his horse and started on his return to City Point, while I and my staff started to join the army, now a good many miles in advance. Up to this time I had not received the report of the capture of Richmond.
Soon after I left President Lincoln I received a dispatch from General Weitzel which notified me that he had taken possession of Richmond at about 8:15 o’clock in the morning of that day, the 3d, and that he had found the city on fire in two places.
Mr. Lincoln was at City Point at the time, and had been for some days. I would have let him know what I contemplated doing, only while I felt a strong conviction that the move was going to be successful, yet it might not prove so; and then I would have only added another to the many disappointments he had been suffering of the past three years. But when we started out he saw that we were moving for a purpose, and bidding us Godspeed, remained there to hear the result.
The next morning after the capture of Petersburg, I telegraphed Mr. Lincoln asking him to ride out there and see me, while I would await his arrival. I had started all the troops out early in the morning, so that after the National army left Petersburg there was not a soul to be seen, not even an animal in the streets. There was absolutely no one there, except my staff officers and, possibly, a small escort of cavalry. We had selected the piazza of a deserted house, and occupied it until the President arrived.
About the first thing that Mr. Lincoln said to me, after warm congratulations for the victory, and thanks both to myself and to the army which had accomplished it, was: “Do you know, general, that I have had a sort of a sneaking idea for some days that you intended to do something like this.” Our movements had been concealed up to this point, I no longer had any object in concealing from the President all my movements, and the objects I had in view. He remained for some days near City Point, and I communicated with him frequently and fully by telegraph.
Mr. Lincoln knew that it had been arranged for Sherman to join me at a fixed time, to co-operate in the destruction of Lee’s army. I told him that I had been very anxious to have the Eastern armies vanquish their old enemy who had so long resisted all their repeated and gallant attempts to subdue them or drive them from their capital. The Western armies had been the main successful until they had conquered all the territory from the Mississippi River to the State of North Carolina, and were now almost ready to knock at the back door of Richmond, asking admittance. I said to him that if the Western armies should be even upon the field, operating against Richmond and Lee, the credit would be given to them for the capture, by politicians and non-combatants from the section of country which those troops hailed from. It might lead to disagreeable bickering between members of Congress of the East and those of the West in some of their debates. Western members might be throwing it up to the members of the East that in the suppression of the rebellion they were not able to capture an army, or accomplish much in the way of contributing toward that end, but had to wait until the Western armies had conquered all the territory south and west of them, and then come on to help them capture the only army they had been engaged with. [Note: Imagine that! Grant records how the Union armies provided by the states were in competition to be the greater contributors to the effort in the War against slavery, vying between the Western states and the Eastern states to be allowed to be the captors of at least one of the Confederate armies on the field.]
Mr. Lincoln said he saw that now, but had never thought of it before, because his anxiety was so great that he did not care where the aid came from so the work was done.
The Army of the Potomac has every reason to be proud of its four years’ record in the suppression of the rebellion. The army it had to fight was the protection to the capital of a people which was attempting to found a nation upon the territory of the United States. Its loss would be the loss of the cause. Every energy, therefore, was put forth by the Confederacy to protect and maintain their capital. Everything else would go if it went. Lee’s army had to be strengthened to enable it to maintain its position, no matter what territory was wrested from the South in another quarter.
I never expected any such bickering as I have indicated, between the soldiers of the two sections; and fortunately, there has been one between the politicians. Possibly I am the only one who thought of the liability of such a state of things in advance.
When our conversation was at an end Mr. Lincoln mounted his horse and started on his return to City Point, while I and my staff started to join the army, now a good many miles in advance. Up to this time I had not received the report of the capture of Richmond.
Soon after I left President Lincoln I received a dispatch from General Weitzel which notified me that he had taken possession of Richmond at about 8:15 o’clock in the morning of that day, the 3d, and that he had found the city on fire in two places.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Lessons from history (3 of series)
I found a fantastic and interesting example of what I was explaining in the previous posts of this series regarding the importance of learning history, but not assuming that every current situation is exactly like the one faced in past historic times. I pointed out that this is why military academies teach the famous personages, battles and wars to learn the common “wisdom” of the battlefield, but how the general on the ground has to make unique decisions, holding all that knowledge in mind. Here is an example from Grant’s Memoirs. It also demonstrates the great courtesy, even when military commanders disagree and is also another demonstration of the great fairness with which Grant dealt with his superiors, peers and subordinates, and also the enemy soldiers and civilians, both at the time and in later reminiscence. The timing is before the conversations with Lincoln that I previously cited, so Grant was not yet in charge of the entire force of the Union armies, but was in command of one of the armies of vital importance. The setting is Vicksburg, Mississippi, where Grant has attempted a military action to seize the city and having been repelled by the strongly ensconced Confederate defenders, and viewing the casualties as too high for no result, Grant now decides to conduct a siege of the hill and river protected Vicksburg.
This last attack only served to increase our casualties without giving any benefit whatever. As soon as it was dark our troops that had reached the enemy’s line and been obliged to remain there for security all day, were withdrawn; and thus ended the last assault upon Vicksburg.
I now determined upon a regular siege-to “out-camp the enemy,” as it were, and to incur no more losses. The experience of the 22d convinced officers and men tat this was the best, and they went to work on the defenses and approaches with a will. With the navy holding the river, the investment of Vicksburg was complete. As long as we could hold our position the enemy was limited in supplies of food, men and munitions of war to what they had on hand. These could not last always.
[Grant now writes about the specifics of the battles that are fought around the siege city, the casualties each side receives, and his tactics. It’s great reading, modest and honest, with insight into the conditions of the troops and the countryside along with the progress of the war. Among the government and military personnel who came to review progress was General Sherman. Sherman had previously criticized Grant’s plans, even kicking his objections up the chain of command, and that is the part I except and highlight for you readers now.]
There was a little knot around Sherman and another around me, and I heard Sherman repeating, in the most animated manner, what he had said to me when we first looked down from Walnut Hills upon the land below on the 18th of May, adding: “Grant is entitled to every bit of the credit for the campaign; I opposed it. I wrote a letter about it.” But for this speech it is not likely that Sherman’s opposition would have ever been heard of. His untiring energy and great efficiency during the campaign entitle him to a full share of all the credit due for its success. He could not have done more if the plan had been his own.
[Grant then footnotes an explanation of Sherman’s letter as follow.]
Note.-When General Sherman first learned of the move I proposed to make, he called to see me about it. I recollect that I had transferred my headquarters from a boat in the river to a house a short distance back from the levee. I was seated on the piazza engaged in conversation with my staff when Sherman came up. After a few moments’ conversation he said that he would like to see me alone. We passed into the house together and shut the door after us. Sherman then expressed his alarm at the move I had ordered, saying that I was putting myself in a position voluntarily which an enemy would be glad to maneuver a year-or a long time-to get me in. I was going into the enemy’s country, with a large river behind me and the enemy holding points strongly fortified above and below. He said that it was an axiom in war that when any great boy of troops moved against an enemy they should do so from a base of supplies, which they would guard as they would the apple of the eye, etc. He pointed out all the difficulties that might be encountered in the campaign proposed, and stated in turn what would be the true campaign to make. This was, in substance, to go back until high ground could be established on the east bank of the river; fortify there and establish a depot of supplies, and move from there, being always prepared to fall back upon it in case of disaster. I said this would take us back to Memphis. Sherman then said that was the very place he would go to, and would move by railroad from Memphis to Grenada, repairing the road as we advanced. To this I replied, the country is already disheartened over the lack of success on the part of our armies; the last election went against the vigorous prosecution of the war, voluntary enlistments had ceased throughout most of the North and conscription [“the draft”] was already resorted to, and if we went back so far as Memphis it would discourage the people so much that bases of supplies would be of no use: neither men to hold them nor supplies to put in them would be furnished. The problem for us was to move forward to a decisive victory, or our cause would be lost. No progress was being made in any other field, and we had to go on.
Sherman wrote to my adjutant-general, Colonel J. A. Rawlins, embodying his views of the campaign that should be made, and asking him to advise me to at least get the views of my generals upon the subject. Colonel Rawlins showed me the letter, but I did not see any reason for changing my plans. The letter was not answered and the subject was not subsequently mentioned between Sherman and myself to the end of the war, that I remember of. I did not regard the letter as official, and consequently did not preserve it. General Sherman furnished a copy himself to General Badeau, who printed it in his history of my campaigns. I did not regard either the conversation between us or the letter to my adjutant-general as protests, but simply friendly advice which the relations between us fully justified. Sherman gave the same energy to make the campaign a success that he would or could have done if it had been ordered by himself. I make this statement here to correct an impression which was circulated at the close of the war to Sherman’s prejudice [meaning being against Grant’s battle plans], and for which there was no fair foundation.
What is so important to notice is that once Sherman raised his concerns, and Grant goes ahead with his battle plans, Sherman threw his support into Grant’s military actions as vigorously as if he had thought of the plan himself. I think today’s military people and government officials should make note of this. Military folks tend to still be this way, but when I see an exception, particularly when it is acted out in Congress; it is disgraceful and painful to see. Even when legislators and government officials eventually agree on one plan, “one side wins,” I see a deliberate lukewarm support for the other “side,” even though, obviously, they are both serving the country’s business. Sherman worried that this decisive battle would be lost, due to Grant not following the standard axioms of war, yet when Grant went ahead, Sherman threw himself into making it every success as if it was his own plan and, as you see, never a word was spoken in public that there was even a disagreement. How unlike this example is compared to just about everything today.
[Vicksburg, as history records, was one of Grant’s greatest victories and was a turning point in the war. Vicksburg surrendered to Grant in July. Here is a great snapshot of what it was like during the siege, when there was not battle or skirmishing taking place.]
During the siege there had been a good deal of friendly sparring between the soldiers of the two armies, on picket and where the lines were close together. All rebels were known as “Johnnies,” all Union troops as “Yanks.” Often “Johnny” would call: “Well, Yank, when are you coming into town?” The reply was sometimes: “We propose to celebrate the 4th of July there.” Sometimes it would be: “We always treat our prisoners with kindness and do not want to hurt them;” or, “We are holding you as prisoners of war while you are feeding yourselves.” The garrison, from the commanding general down, undoubtedly expected an assault on the fourth. They knew from the temper of their men it would be successful when made; and that would be a greater humiliation than to surrender. Besides it would be attended to with severe loss to them.
The Vicksburg paper, which we received regularly through the courtesy of the rebel pickets, said prior to the fourth, in speaking of the “Yankee” boast that they would take dinner in Vicksburg that day, that the best receipt for cooking a rabbit was, “First ketch your rabbit.” [For my readers who don’t speak native English, “ketch” is “catch” said with a Southern country accent.] The paper at this time and for some time previous was printed on the plain side of wall paper. The last number was issued on the fourth and announced that we had “caught our rabbit.”
I rode into Vicksburg with the troops, and went to the river to exchange congratulations with the navy upon our joint victory. At that time I found that many of the citizens had been living under ground. The ridges upon which Vicksburg is built, and those back to the Big Black, are composed of a deep yellow clay of great tenacity. .. Many citizens secured places of safety for their families by carving out rooms in these embankments… In these the occupants were fully secure from the shells of the navy, which were dropped into the city night and day without intermission…
This news, with the victory at Gettysburg won the same day, lifted a great load of anxiety from the minds of the President, his Cabinet and the loyal people all over the North. The fate of the Confederacy was sealed when Vicksburg fell. Much hard fighting was to be done afterwards and may precious lives were to be sacrificed; but the morale was with the supporters of the Union ever after.
I at the same time wrote to General Banks informing him of the fall and sending him a copy of the terms; also saying I would send him all the troops he wanted to insure the capture of the only foothold the enemy now had on the Mississippi River…
Steele and Ord were directed to be in readiness to join Sherman in his move against General Johnston, and Sherman was advised of this also. Sherman moved promptly, crossing the Big Black at three different points with as many columns, all concentrating at Bolton, twenty miles west of Jackson. Johnson heard of the surrender of Vicksburg almost as soon as it occurred, and immediately fell back on Jackson…Johnson destroyed the roads as he passed and had so much the start that pursuit was useless; but Sherman sent on division, Steele’s, to Brandon, fourteen miles east of Jackson…Medicines and food were left for the Confederate wounded and sick who had to be left behind…
Medicine and food were also sent to Raymond for the destitute families as well as the sick and wounded, as I thought it only fair that we should return to these people some of the articles we had taken while marching through the country. I wrote to Sherman: “Impress upon the men the importance of going through the State in an orderly manner, abstaining from taking anything not absolutely necessary for their subsistence while travelling. They should try to create as favorable an impression as possible upon the people.” Provisions and forage, when called for by them, were issued to all the people, from Bruinsburg to Jackson and back to Vicksburg, whose resources had been taken for the supply of our army. Very large quantities of groceries and provisions were so issued…
I also detached a brigade under Ransom to Natchez, to garrison that place permanently. This latter move was quite fortunate as to the time when Ransom arrived there. The enemy happened to have a large number, about 5,000 head, of beef cattle there on the way from Texas to feed the Eastern armies, and also a large amount of munitions of war which had probably come through Texas from the Rio Grande, and which were on the way to Lee’s and other armies in the East.
This last attack only served to increase our casualties without giving any benefit whatever. As soon as it was dark our troops that had reached the enemy’s line and been obliged to remain there for security all day, were withdrawn; and thus ended the last assault upon Vicksburg.
I now determined upon a regular siege-to “out-camp the enemy,” as it were, and to incur no more losses. The experience of the 22d convinced officers and men tat this was the best, and they went to work on the defenses and approaches with a will. With the navy holding the river, the investment of Vicksburg was complete. As long as we could hold our position the enemy was limited in supplies of food, men and munitions of war to what they had on hand. These could not last always.
[Grant now writes about the specifics of the battles that are fought around the siege city, the casualties each side receives, and his tactics. It’s great reading, modest and honest, with insight into the conditions of the troops and the countryside along with the progress of the war. Among the government and military personnel who came to review progress was General Sherman. Sherman had previously criticized Grant’s plans, even kicking his objections up the chain of command, and that is the part I except and highlight for you readers now.]
There was a little knot around Sherman and another around me, and I heard Sherman repeating, in the most animated manner, what he had said to me when we first looked down from Walnut Hills upon the land below on the 18th of May, adding: “Grant is entitled to every bit of the credit for the campaign; I opposed it. I wrote a letter about it.” But for this speech it is not likely that Sherman’s opposition would have ever been heard of. His untiring energy and great efficiency during the campaign entitle him to a full share of all the credit due for its success. He could not have done more if the plan had been his own.
[Grant then footnotes an explanation of Sherman’s letter as follow.]
Note.-When General Sherman first learned of the move I proposed to make, he called to see me about it. I recollect that I had transferred my headquarters from a boat in the river to a house a short distance back from the levee. I was seated on the piazza engaged in conversation with my staff when Sherman came up. After a few moments’ conversation he said that he would like to see me alone. We passed into the house together and shut the door after us. Sherman then expressed his alarm at the move I had ordered, saying that I was putting myself in a position voluntarily which an enemy would be glad to maneuver a year-or a long time-to get me in. I was going into the enemy’s country, with a large river behind me and the enemy holding points strongly fortified above and below. He said that it was an axiom in war that when any great boy of troops moved against an enemy they should do so from a base of supplies, which they would guard as they would the apple of the eye, etc. He pointed out all the difficulties that might be encountered in the campaign proposed, and stated in turn what would be the true campaign to make. This was, in substance, to go back until high ground could be established on the east bank of the river; fortify there and establish a depot of supplies, and move from there, being always prepared to fall back upon it in case of disaster. I said this would take us back to Memphis. Sherman then said that was the very place he would go to, and would move by railroad from Memphis to Grenada, repairing the road as we advanced. To this I replied, the country is already disheartened over the lack of success on the part of our armies; the last election went against the vigorous prosecution of the war, voluntary enlistments had ceased throughout most of the North and conscription [“the draft”] was already resorted to, and if we went back so far as Memphis it would discourage the people so much that bases of supplies would be of no use: neither men to hold them nor supplies to put in them would be furnished. The problem for us was to move forward to a decisive victory, or our cause would be lost. No progress was being made in any other field, and we had to go on.
Sherman wrote to my adjutant-general, Colonel J. A. Rawlins, embodying his views of the campaign that should be made, and asking him to advise me to at least get the views of my generals upon the subject. Colonel Rawlins showed me the letter, but I did not see any reason for changing my plans. The letter was not answered and the subject was not subsequently mentioned between Sherman and myself to the end of the war, that I remember of. I did not regard the letter as official, and consequently did not preserve it. General Sherman furnished a copy himself to General Badeau, who printed it in his history of my campaigns. I did not regard either the conversation between us or the letter to my adjutant-general as protests, but simply friendly advice which the relations between us fully justified. Sherman gave the same energy to make the campaign a success that he would or could have done if it had been ordered by himself. I make this statement here to correct an impression which was circulated at the close of the war to Sherman’s prejudice [meaning being against Grant’s battle plans], and for which there was no fair foundation.
What is so important to notice is that once Sherman raised his concerns, and Grant goes ahead with his battle plans, Sherman threw his support into Grant’s military actions as vigorously as if he had thought of the plan himself. I think today’s military people and government officials should make note of this. Military folks tend to still be this way, but when I see an exception, particularly when it is acted out in Congress; it is disgraceful and painful to see. Even when legislators and government officials eventually agree on one plan, “one side wins,” I see a deliberate lukewarm support for the other “side,” even though, obviously, they are both serving the country’s business. Sherman worried that this decisive battle would be lost, due to Grant not following the standard axioms of war, yet when Grant went ahead, Sherman threw himself into making it every success as if it was his own plan and, as you see, never a word was spoken in public that there was even a disagreement. How unlike this example is compared to just about everything today.
[Vicksburg, as history records, was one of Grant’s greatest victories and was a turning point in the war. Vicksburg surrendered to Grant in July. Here is a great snapshot of what it was like during the siege, when there was not battle or skirmishing taking place.]
During the siege there had been a good deal of friendly sparring between the soldiers of the two armies, on picket and where the lines were close together. All rebels were known as “Johnnies,” all Union troops as “Yanks.” Often “Johnny” would call: “Well, Yank, when are you coming into town?” The reply was sometimes: “We propose to celebrate the 4th of July there.” Sometimes it would be: “We always treat our prisoners with kindness and do not want to hurt them;” or, “We are holding you as prisoners of war while you are feeding yourselves.” The garrison, from the commanding general down, undoubtedly expected an assault on the fourth. They knew from the temper of their men it would be successful when made; and that would be a greater humiliation than to surrender. Besides it would be attended to with severe loss to them.
The Vicksburg paper, which we received regularly through the courtesy of the rebel pickets, said prior to the fourth, in speaking of the “Yankee” boast that they would take dinner in Vicksburg that day, that the best receipt for cooking a rabbit was, “First ketch your rabbit.” [For my readers who don’t speak native English, “ketch” is “catch” said with a Southern country accent.] The paper at this time and for some time previous was printed on the plain side of wall paper. The last number was issued on the fourth and announced that we had “caught our rabbit.”
I rode into Vicksburg with the troops, and went to the river to exchange congratulations with the navy upon our joint victory. At that time I found that many of the citizens had been living under ground. The ridges upon which Vicksburg is built, and those back to the Big Black, are composed of a deep yellow clay of great tenacity. .. Many citizens secured places of safety for their families by carving out rooms in these embankments… In these the occupants were fully secure from the shells of the navy, which were dropped into the city night and day without intermission…
This news, with the victory at Gettysburg won the same day, lifted a great load of anxiety from the minds of the President, his Cabinet and the loyal people all over the North. The fate of the Confederacy was sealed when Vicksburg fell. Much hard fighting was to be done afterwards and may precious lives were to be sacrificed; but the morale was with the supporters of the Union ever after.
I at the same time wrote to General Banks informing him of the fall and sending him a copy of the terms; also saying I would send him all the troops he wanted to insure the capture of the only foothold the enemy now had on the Mississippi River…
Steele and Ord were directed to be in readiness to join Sherman in his move against General Johnston, and Sherman was advised of this also. Sherman moved promptly, crossing the Big Black at three different points with as many columns, all concentrating at Bolton, twenty miles west of Jackson. Johnson heard of the surrender of Vicksburg almost as soon as it occurred, and immediately fell back on Jackson…Johnson destroyed the roads as he passed and had so much the start that pursuit was useless; but Sherman sent on division, Steele’s, to Brandon, fourteen miles east of Jackson…Medicines and food were left for the Confederate wounded and sick who had to be left behind…
Medicine and food were also sent to Raymond for the destitute families as well as the sick and wounded, as I thought it only fair that we should return to these people some of the articles we had taken while marching through the country. I wrote to Sherman: “Impress upon the men the importance of going through the State in an orderly manner, abstaining from taking anything not absolutely necessary for their subsistence while travelling. They should try to create as favorable an impression as possible upon the people.” Provisions and forage, when called for by them, were issued to all the people, from Bruinsburg to Jackson and back to Vicksburg, whose resources had been taken for the supply of our army. Very large quantities of groceries and provisions were so issued…
I also detached a brigade under Ransom to Natchez, to garrison that place permanently. This latter move was quite fortunate as to the time when Ransom arrived there. The enemy happened to have a large number, about 5,000 head, of beef cattle there on the way from Texas to feed the Eastern armies, and also a large amount of munitions of war which had probably come through Texas from the Rio Grande, and which were on the way to Lee’s and other armies in the East.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Lessons from history (2 of a series)
Here is another great excerpt from the Memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant. I’m piecing together several sections from the same event.
On the last of January, 1865, peace commissioners from the so-called Confederate States presented themselves on our lines around Petersburg, and were immediately conducted to my headquarters at City Point. They proved to be Alexander H. Stephens, Vice-President of the Confederacy, Judge Campbell, Assistant-Secretary of War, and R. M. T. Hunter, formerly United States Senator and then a member of the Confederate Senate….
I was instructed to retain them at City Point, until the President, or some one whom he would designate, should come to meet them. They remained several days as guests on board the boat…
I had never met either of these gentlemen before the war, but knew them well by reputation and through their public services, and I had been a particular admirer of Mr. Stephens. I had always supposed that he was a very small man, but when I saw him in the dusk of the evening I was very much surprised to find so large a man as he seemed to be. When he got down on to the boat I found that he was wearing a coarse gray woolen overcoat, a manufacture that had been introduced into the South during the rebellion. The cloth was thicker than anything of the kind I had ever seen, even in Canada. The overcoat extended nearly to his feet, and was so large that it gave him the appearance of being an average-sized man. He took this off when he reached the cabin of the boat, and I was struck with the apparent change in size, in the coat and out of it…
Right here I might relate an anecdote of Mr. Lincoln. It was on the occasion of his visit to me just after he had talked with the peace commissioners at Hampton Roads. After a little conversation, he asked me if I had seen that overcoat of Stephen’s. I replied that I had.
“Well,” said he, “did you see him take it off?” I said yes.
“Well,” said he, “didn’t you think it was the biggest shuck and the littlest ear that ever you did see?”
Long afterwards I told this story to the Confederate General J. B. Gordon, at the time a member of the Senate. He repeated it to Stephens, and, as I heard afterwards, Stephens laughed immoderately at the simile of Mr. Lincoln.
[Here I will explain the simile, in case some of my readers are unfamiliar with the term. Lincoln was referring to the process of removing the husk from an ear of corn. The process of removing the husk is called shucking. So Lincoln was making a droll agricultural reference by comparing the giant coat that Stephens used, and when he removed it revealing his very small stature, with shucking the husk off from an ear of corn, to find a very small ear inside. It’s a great story, especially when one reads with what good humor Mr. Stephens took hearing about it. Also I am always thrilled to read a historic corn reference!
To keep continuity of that event, I had skipped over what Grant wrote about Lincoln’s reaction to the peace commission. Here it is, and very moving reading it most certainly is.]
After a few days, about the 2d of February, I received a dispatch from Washington, directing me to send the commissioners to Hampton Roads to meet the President and a member of the cabinet. Mr. Lincoln met them there and had an interview of short duration. It was not a great while after they met that the President visited me at City Point. He spoke of his having met the commissioners, and said he had told them that there would be no use in entering into any negotiations unless they would recognize, first: that the Union as a whole must be forever preserved, and second: that slavery must be abolished. If they were willing to concede these two points, then he was ready to enter into negotiations and was almost willing to hand them a blank sheet of paper with his signature attached for them to fill in the terms upon which they were willing to live with us in the Union and be one people. He always showed a generous and kindly spirit toward the Southern people, and I never heard him abuse an enemy. Some of the cruel things said about President Lincoln, particularly in the North, used to pierce him to the heart; but never in my presence did he evince a revengeful disposition-and I saw a great deal of him at City Point, for he seemed glad to get away from the cares and anxieties of the capital.
On the last of January, 1865, peace commissioners from the so-called Confederate States presented themselves on our lines around Petersburg, and were immediately conducted to my headquarters at City Point. They proved to be Alexander H. Stephens, Vice-President of the Confederacy, Judge Campbell, Assistant-Secretary of War, and R. M. T. Hunter, formerly United States Senator and then a member of the Confederate Senate….
I was instructed to retain them at City Point, until the President, or some one whom he would designate, should come to meet them. They remained several days as guests on board the boat…
I had never met either of these gentlemen before the war, but knew them well by reputation and through their public services, and I had been a particular admirer of Mr. Stephens. I had always supposed that he was a very small man, but when I saw him in the dusk of the evening I was very much surprised to find so large a man as he seemed to be. When he got down on to the boat I found that he was wearing a coarse gray woolen overcoat, a manufacture that had been introduced into the South during the rebellion. The cloth was thicker than anything of the kind I had ever seen, even in Canada. The overcoat extended nearly to his feet, and was so large that it gave him the appearance of being an average-sized man. He took this off when he reached the cabin of the boat, and I was struck with the apparent change in size, in the coat and out of it…
Right here I might relate an anecdote of Mr. Lincoln. It was on the occasion of his visit to me just after he had talked with the peace commissioners at Hampton Roads. After a little conversation, he asked me if I had seen that overcoat of Stephen’s. I replied that I had.
“Well,” said he, “did you see him take it off?” I said yes.
“Well,” said he, “didn’t you think it was the biggest shuck and the littlest ear that ever you did see?”
Long afterwards I told this story to the Confederate General J. B. Gordon, at the time a member of the Senate. He repeated it to Stephens, and, as I heard afterwards, Stephens laughed immoderately at the simile of Mr. Lincoln.
[Here I will explain the simile, in case some of my readers are unfamiliar with the term. Lincoln was referring to the process of removing the husk from an ear of corn. The process of removing the husk is called shucking. So Lincoln was making a droll agricultural reference by comparing the giant coat that Stephens used, and when he removed it revealing his very small stature, with shucking the husk off from an ear of corn, to find a very small ear inside. It’s a great story, especially when one reads with what good humor Mr. Stephens took hearing about it. Also I am always thrilled to read a historic corn reference!
To keep continuity of that event, I had skipped over what Grant wrote about Lincoln’s reaction to the peace commission. Here it is, and very moving reading it most certainly is.]
After a few days, about the 2d of February, I received a dispatch from Washington, directing me to send the commissioners to Hampton Roads to meet the President and a member of the cabinet. Mr. Lincoln met them there and had an interview of short duration. It was not a great while after they met that the President visited me at City Point. He spoke of his having met the commissioners, and said he had told them that there would be no use in entering into any negotiations unless they would recognize, first: that the Union as a whole must be forever preserved, and second: that slavery must be abolished. If they were willing to concede these two points, then he was ready to enter into negotiations and was almost willing to hand them a blank sheet of paper with his signature attached for them to fill in the terms upon which they were willing to live with us in the Union and be one people. He always showed a generous and kindly spirit toward the Southern people, and I never heard him abuse an enemy. Some of the cruel things said about President Lincoln, particularly in the North, used to pierce him to the heart; but never in my presence did he evince a revengeful disposition-and I saw a great deal of him at City Point, for he seemed glad to get away from the cares and anxieties of the capital.
Sunday, June 8, 2008
Thoughts re American Civil War & my fav Grant
Like any normal human I find myself interested in certain chapters of American and world history, and not so interested in other topics. That's how sane people are; they have interests, hobbies and curiosity about some things and not so much about others.
The American Civil War was not an area that I tended to do much reading about or tourism of important scenes from the war. That's not because I was not a supporter of the war; to the contrary, I have always been an ardent supporter of the Union's cause, both to keep the union of the USA together and to defeat slavery. But to me this was familiar territory, and not because "I'm a reincarnated bozo from the Civil War era." It was familiar to me because in the 1950's and 1960's it was still taught in the schools with great scholarly detail in both history classes and in English (the literature part) classes. Kids of my era were pretty educated in the Civil War, so it did not have a mystique that would pique a collecting, traveling or lore interest. Further, a Civil War vet actually lived in my grandparents' hotel. While that was before my time by a few years, it shows that when I was growing up there was actually only one generation removed from people who remembered the Civil War first hand. It was the same for many Afro-Americans in those days whose parents would know family members who remembered slavery and the War to end it first hand.
But like most well educated Americans at that time I did have a "hero" from that time, being Ulysses Grant, commander of the Union army and later two term President. I admired Grant and was interested in him the same way one of my favorite historical figures is George Washington. I admire people who have incredible greatness of calling thrust upon them and who respond in an admirable way. These are not people who are "entitled" to "glory" or "responsibility." They are people who through patriotism, fortitude, faith and a particular set of skills find themselves with the huge responsibility of the country's very well being and existence placed upon their shoulders. It is for that reason that I've always admired General Grant. Further, he made very forceful actions to protect the rights and lives of the freed slaves; he did not drop his interest in their well being after achieving the necessary military victories. He was ahead of his time (and under appreciated).
Grant wrote a tour de force book, his "Memoirs," which I highly recommend. I have a copy in storage and picked it up several times to finally read, but didn't get the chance as yet. You can read a very excellent and balanced summary of Grant on Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulysses_Grant
When I got my first car in college and did some bird watching and camping, there was exactly one place that I wanted to visit regarding the Civil War, however, and so I followed the map and found it. It is the courthouse at Appomattox where General Lee surrendered to General Grant. That I just wanted to see. On the way there I was touched by the small signs along roadsides marking where a certain number of Confederate or Union soldiers were buried.
The American Civil War was not an area that I tended to do much reading about or tourism of important scenes from the war. That's not because I was not a supporter of the war; to the contrary, I have always been an ardent supporter of the Union's cause, both to keep the union of the USA together and to defeat slavery. But to me this was familiar territory, and not because "I'm a reincarnated bozo from the Civil War era." It was familiar to me because in the 1950's and 1960's it was still taught in the schools with great scholarly detail in both history classes and in English (the literature part) classes. Kids of my era were pretty educated in the Civil War, so it did not have a mystique that would pique a collecting, traveling or lore interest. Further, a Civil War vet actually lived in my grandparents' hotel. While that was before my time by a few years, it shows that when I was growing up there was actually only one generation removed from people who remembered the Civil War first hand. It was the same for many Afro-Americans in those days whose parents would know family members who remembered slavery and the War to end it first hand.
But like most well educated Americans at that time I did have a "hero" from that time, being Ulysses Grant, commander of the Union army and later two term President. I admired Grant and was interested in him the same way one of my favorite historical figures is George Washington. I admire people who have incredible greatness of calling thrust upon them and who respond in an admirable way. These are not people who are "entitled" to "glory" or "responsibility." They are people who through patriotism, fortitude, faith and a particular set of skills find themselves with the huge responsibility of the country's very well being and existence placed upon their shoulders. It is for that reason that I've always admired General Grant. Further, he made very forceful actions to protect the rights and lives of the freed slaves; he did not drop his interest in their well being after achieving the necessary military victories. He was ahead of his time (and under appreciated).
Grant wrote a tour de force book, his "Memoirs," which I highly recommend. I have a copy in storage and picked it up several times to finally read, but didn't get the chance as yet. You can read a very excellent and balanced summary of Grant on Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulysses_Grant
When I got my first car in college and did some bird watching and camping, there was exactly one place that I wanted to visit regarding the Civil War, however, and so I followed the map and found it. It is the courthouse at Appomattox where General Lee surrendered to General Grant. That I just wanted to see. On the way there I was touched by the small signs along roadsides marking where a certain number of Confederate or Union soldiers were buried.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appomattox_Court_House
I knew several Civil War enthusiasts. That's cool. Like I said, to each his own about what chapters of history they are interested in. But what really turns me off are the many freaks who are interested because they believe in reincarnation, and not only claim those roles for themselves but assign them to others. As regular readers know, New Age reincarnation believers disgust me and make me puke. I can't wait until it is my time in heaven and there are none of them in sight or smell, since belief in reincarnation is refuted and forbidden by God. (Again, I have no quarrel with those of legitimate traditional faiths whose belief includes reincarnation. But they are not to live as if they "know" who "they really are" and who "you really are." That is abomination under any faith).For years I have seen a moron who likes to walk or drive past me acting out his belief that he is reincarnated Grant. Nothing puts a sane, clean and sober person more off another person than a malicious retard who defies God and assigns recycled sausage souls to his or her self and to others. That has done a huge part in eliminating my interest in any historical era or figure. These scum buckets drool over every book I buy or historic site I visit thinking "Oooh, maybe she's 'remembering' who we 'really are.'" It makes me sick how they probably cackled with glee when I bought a garnet cross shaped pin that was owned by a relative of Lincoln's. No, but God's going to remind YOU who you really are when you die and are judged unworthy for claiming souls of people while not even tending to the authentic one that you have been given.
Anyway, I hope you young readers of my blog will give American history another chance and do some reading on figures like General Grant. You'll really enjoy it if you think in terms of the enormous challenges that these people met with honor, especially in the context of the times. Ken Burns did a marvelous job with his "Civil War" series on PBS. You'll also enjoy it if you have not been contaminated by your sick parents or their friends into thinking that you need to study the historic figures to know 'who you really are.' You really are yourself, asshats: one soul, one life, one God you are responsible to, that's it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
