PA Confederates in the Gettysburg National Cemetery

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't understand what the OP is supposed to elicit from CWT readers. Is the intent to spark productive debate about if Confederate soldiers should be buried there? Is the intent simply to inform readers that Confederate soldiers are buried there? Or, is the intent to drive home the point that the Confederate soldiers who are buried there are offspring of men who "endorsed" slavery? I don't think it's possible to derive the intent of the researcher because we are only seeing a small piece of his total work. As for the OP, I derived the latter.

Nicely put, @Eleanor Rose.

I too like a few other people was intrigued by the title of the thread, and even the OP info about the specific Confederate soldiers @cash listed--until it came to the end of each about the enslaved humans each man or his father was responsible for. I think it's really interesting to note that there are Confederates buried in the National Cemetery erroneously, and their stories fascinate me, as it seems they do for others who tried to get this thread back on that track.

But the OP feels like bait-and-switch to me. If one of my 8th graders would have done that, especially with the inflammatory topic, they would receive a stern talking to and guidance on how to properly address this sort of thing, because they are 14 and inexperienced writers. I suspect @cash knows this already.

C'mon, what's your real point, Al?
 
Nicely put, @Eleanor Rose.

I too like a few other people was intrigued by the title of the thread, and even the OP info about the specific Confederate soldiers @cash listed--until it came to the end of each about the enslaved humans each man or his father was responsible for. I think it's really interesting to note that there are Confederates buried in the National Cemetery erroneously, and their stories fascinate me, as it seems they do for others who tried to get this thread back on that track.

But the OP feels like bait-and-switch to me. If one of my 8th graders would have done that, especially with the inflammatory topic, they would receive a stern talking to and guidance on how to properly address this sort of thing, because they are 14 and inexperienced writers. I suspect @cash knows this already.

C'mon, what's your real point, Al?

Unfortunately, that seems all too obvious to me. It is as I thought, an "Oh, by the way, they fought for slavery," moment even when there is no evidence submitted to support that, in fact, these men were so motivated. It pushes what I have come to call the "all slavery all the time" agenda. If the Lost Cause denied slavery as a factor in the war, modern activists have adopted its polar opposite that absolutely everything was about slavery. Yes, slavery led to the war. No, not each and every thought and action was motivated by slavery. A truth that some who have an agenda to push do not want to admit.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately, that seems all too obvious to me. It is as I thought, an "Oh, by the way, they fought for slavery," moment even when there is no evidence submitted to support that, in fact, these men were so motivated. It pushes what I have come to call the "all slavery all the time" agenda. If the Lost Cause denied slavery as a factor in the war, modern activists have adopted its polar opposite that absolutely everything was about slavery. Yes, slavery led to the war. No, not each and every thought and action was motivated by slavery. A truth that some who have an agenda to push do not want to admit.
It was obvious to anyone who has been here even for a short time what the intention of the OP was. It should also be well known that there will never be an admission of that intent or the bad judgement it required to post it.
 
Unfortunately, that seems all too obvious to me. It is as I thought, an "Oh, by the way, they fought for slavery," moment even when there is no evidence submitted to support that, in fact, these men were so motivated. It pushes what I have come to call the "all slavery all the time" agenda.....

I've often thought someone should just start a "Slavery was, like, bad and stuff" forum where people with this fixation can go and entertain themselves, leaving the rest of us to occasionally - just, mercifully, once in a while - talk about something else.
 
It pushes what I have come to call the "all slavery all the time" agenda.

Some will even attempt to apply this linkage to soldiers who were drafted, which is beyond absurdity.

When someone wants to make a case for attaching family slavery connections (direct or indirect) to someone's CW military service, I think a stronger case could be made for the importance of taking note of whether an individual was drafted or volunteered. For all we know, some of the individuals listed in the OP may have been drafted. If so, their personal views about slavery were irrelevant.
 
Unfortunately, that seems all too obvious to me. It is as I thought, an "Oh, by the way, they fought for slavery," moment even when there is no evidence submitted to support that, in fact, these men were so motivated. It pushes what I have come to call the "all slavery all the time" agenda. If the Lost Cause denied slavery as a factor in the war, modern activists have adopted its polar opposite that absolutely everything was about slavery. Yes, slavery led to the war. No, not each and every thought and action was motivated by slavery. A truth that some who have an agenda to push do not want to admit.


It was obvious to anyone who has been here even for a short time what the intention of the OP was. It should also be well known that there will never be an admission of that intent or the bad judgement it required to post it.

Um, yup. I'm not that dense, guys. Just trying to make a point.

I really don't like sleight of hand stuff--say what you think, but if you have any doubts about putting it out there and how folks will react, then just don't. The "real" topic here is one everyone knows can be inflammatory really quickly, as evidenced by this thread--the stated topic of which could be really interesting.
 
Somebody a been a very busy beaver this week. The OP mentioning CSA soldiers Sid Carter, John T . Johnson, James Akers and Eli T. Green was posted on 7/4/17. On Find a Grave for each man I found this posted anonymously on 7/5/17.
IMG_2134.jpg
IMG_2135.jpg
IMG_2136.jpg
IMG_2137.PNG


What kind of person would do such a thing?
 
Um, yup. I'm not that dense, guys. Just trying to make a point.

I really don't like sleight of hand stuff--say what you think, but if you have any doubts about putting it out there and how folks will react, then just don't. The "real" topic here is one everyone knows can be inflammatory really quickly, as evidenced by this thread--the stated topic of which could be really interesting.
I know Pam and it gets more curious. The same comments about the 4 soldiers were posted on Find a Grave the following day. See my post above.
 
Unfortunately, that seems all too obvious to me.

It was obvious to anyone who has been here even for a short time what the intention of the OP was. It should also be well known that there will never be an admission of that intent or the bad judgement it required to post it.

Um, yup. I'm not that dense, guys. Just trying to make a point.

What kind of person would do such a thing?

You know, as I said in another thread, I sometimes fear my CWT posts sound biased in favor of the South because I am a born and bred Southerner. I sincerely hope everyone knows that is never my intent. I celebrate America, the land I love, and its people of all races, genders and beliefs. I study and contemplate our history (the good, the bad and the ugly) because there is much to learn from our past.

I wanted to share that thought because I know I have participated in some adversarial posts recently and this has really weighed on my mind. This is not to say I won't continue to express my point of view when someone posts something I believe is untrue or something that is intentionally inflammatory. Everyone needs to be willing to do this even if it may draw the ire of others. At the very least we should offer support to those who do so. I may playfully tease about being a southern belle, but make no mistake. I was raised to be a steel magnolia!

As Joshua Chamberlain said in the movie Gettysburg, "Here, we judge you by what you do, not by who your father was." If he didn't say this in real life, he should have!
 
You know, as I said in another thread, I sometimes fear my CWT posts sound biased in favor of the South because I am a born and bred Southerner. I sincerely hope everyone knows that is never my intent. I celebrate America, the land I love, and its people of all races, genders and beliefs. I study and contemplate our history (the good, the bad and the ugly) because there is much to learn from our past.
Same here. I honor the military service of all CW soldiers who served honorably. Edit to add: I visit our National Cemeteries every time I get a chance. They are quite an experience and sights to behold.
 
It is a fine line that public historians have to walk between their public and private lives - they are far more restricted than academics. One false move on Twitter can bring enough calls to your employer and one may find himself off the counter and in the archive warehouse. If he does his job and complies with rules of conduct, I have no problem with continued employment. I wish John Rudy all the best and a bright future with his further research.

As further information, here's something else John says about the confederates in Gettysburg National Cemetery:

"Moving their bodies? Nope."
 
'Anonymous'? What the heck?

Somebody needs to turn off anonymous posting at that site, before some radical activist group realizes how much trouble they can stir up.

The timing of this incident is highly suspicious.

As Joshua Chamberlain said in the movie Gettysburg, "Here, we judge you by what you do, not by who your father was." If he didn't say this in real life, he should have!

I'm reasonably sure Chamberlain wrote this at some point, but I'd be hard pressed to find it again on short notice. Michael Shaara used a large number of documented quotes in book conversations. When there's no transcript from that moment in time, quoting later writings by the same individual is as close as you can come to an educated guess as to what might have been on their minds in that situation.
 
Nicely put, @Eleanor Rose.

I too like a few other people was intrigued by the title of the thread, and even the OP info about the specific Confederate soldiers @cash listed--until it came to the end of each about the enslaved humans each man or his father was responsible for. I think it's really interesting to note that there are Confederates buried in the National Cemetery erroneously, and their stories fascinate me, as it seems they do for others who tried to get this thread back on that track.

But the OP feels like bait-and-switch to me. If one of my 8th graders would have done that, especially with the inflammatory topic, they would receive a stern talking to and guidance on how to properly address this sort of thing, because they are 14 and inexperienced writers. I suspect @cash knows this already.

C'mon, what's your real point, Al?

For the third time, to provide information about confederate soldiers buried in Gettysburg National Cemetery. I provided everything John wrote--an exact copy and paste. I did not erase any historical information from it, I did not add any historical information to it, I did not change the order of the information. I simply copied it and pasted it. I admired the effort put in to track down who these soldiers were and their backgrounds, and I thought people who claim to be interested in history would also appreciate the information.
 
As further information, here's something else John says about the confederates in Gettysburg National Cemetery:

"Moving their bodies? Nope."

This does not surprise me. Such an agenda would require a different tact - one that I have seen no evidence of thus far, in John's writings or documentation.
 
Unfortunately, that seems all too obvious to me. It is as I thought, an "Oh, by the way, they fought for slavery," moment even when there is no evidence submitted to support that, in fact, these men were so motivated. It pushes what I have come to call the "all slavery all the time" agenda. If the Lost Cause denied slavery as a factor in the war, modern activists have adopted its polar opposite that absolutely everything was about slavery. Yes, slavery led to the war. No, not each and every thought and action was motivated by slavery. A truth that some who have an agenda to push do not want to admit.

Projection.
 
As further information, here's something else John says about the confederates in Gettysburg National Cemetery:

"Moving their bodies? Nope."

It would be helpful if you would share the entire piece (cite the source) John Rudy has written about this. I have looked for it (and am continuing to do so), but I haven't seen anything written about this in his blog or posted on his Facebook page. Is this information something he has said verbally to you or something he has actually written? I can certainly message him about this, but it would save a lot of time if you just shared the complete "story." I don't want him to be judged by your quotes alone. That isn't fair. Is it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top