Fact vs Interpretation, What We Have to Unlearn.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain won the Battle of Gettysburg and therefore saved the Union on July 2, 1863, was a myth I was taught. While Chamberlain and the 20th fought well on July 2, its a bit more....complicated then that.

Of course I grew up about 12 miles from his birthplace, which may have had something to do with it.

The review of battles, after the Great Rebellion, nearly always attempted to find that "pivotal point"; for the Battle of Gettysburg is was late on the afternoon of July 2nd when General Hannock ordered the 1st Minnesota, about 300 men, to attack the Alabama Regulars, about 1500 men, and "take those colors"; in order, that relief troops could be brought into position, troops that could be seen some five to ten minutes away on the road. Had this flank fallen the Battle of Gettysburg would have been a Confederate victory but the 1st Minnesota suffered the greatest attrition rate of anyone during the entire Civil War in carrying out this order - 82%. In fact, this has been pointed to as the "pivotal point" of the whole Civil War, yet, now when you see history reviews of Gettysburg they point to Pickett's charge and how it failed badly on the third day. There is no doubt that Joshua Chamberlain's charge is one of the heroic events and I believe we need to focus more on the heroes rather than the failures; the men who gave their all, regardless of the impact on the battle or the war are the one's we need to honor in memory. These men fought for what they believed in and their sacrifice, for their cause, is the heroism we need to honor today, rather than argue over the cause.
 
Being somewhat quick to defend New England (Maine in particular), I'm afraid that I object to your over-simplification and your characterization. Currently engaged in a research project on Maine slave ships, I have found that most slave ships weren't even American--they were Spanish. Those that were American were mostly out of New Orleans and New York. Identifying slave ships isn't a quick thing to do because the practice was illegal after 1807, but I have identified 4 Maine ships involved: 1 was wrecked, 1 was seized, 1 unknown and the 4th was interesting: it was seized and its captain/owner was hanged--by New England authorities.


Tell me, how many Africans did Rhode Island slave-traders kidnap from Africa and sell into slavery? Maybe you're somewhat quick to defend the Rhode Island slavers too, who knows.
 
Last edited:
On the Emerging Civil War forum March 12, 2020, Chris Kolakowski wrote a post titled Fact vs Interpretation at the Bloody Lane. The Maryland Campaign has undergone a significant reinterpretation due to recent scholarship. Newly discovered evidence has revealed facts which have enlightened scholars & resulted in the removal of many old interpretive markers. One of the replacements caught Kolakowski's eye.

View attachment 350725
Brigadier General Edward Porter Alexander


Confederate Brigadier General Edward Porter Alexander's statement that the Bloody Lane/Battle of Antietam was "end of the Confederacy" has been quoted & debated who knows how many times. The new marker at the Bloody Lane no longer contains that quote. The reason being that Alexander did not participate in the battle & was stating his interpretation based on the first person accounts he had heard. His was an informed interpretation, but it had been accepted as a first person judgement by a participant for a long time. It is no longer considered an appropriate quote to be used as if it were a first person statement.

I have no intention of going off into the weeds about Alexander's oft quoted statement. What does interest me is how many times in my long study of the Civil War I have had to unlearn absolute certainties. I grew up with an unadulterated Lost Cause narrative that I believed with a certainty normally reserved for revealed religion. I really believed that slaves were thankful for their bondage & loved their kind masters. The Civil War was all the Yankee's fault because they were jealous of Southerner's superior culture. Slavery had nothing to do with secession, etc, etc, etc, the twaddle I had been taught was endless. It was not until I was well into my adulthood before I finally shed the aftereffects of unlearning all that misinformation & began to fully understand what my family members had gone through during the Civil War. Thirty years has not been long enough to reach a full understanding of those fateful events. Civil War history is like unfolding an onion, there are endless layers & it makes your eyes water.

View attachment 350720
Interpretive marker, Hornet's Nest, Shiloh Battlefield


Over two decades as a living history volunteer at Stones River National Battlefield I have had the privilege of touring Western battlefields with scholars, historians & local experts. Many times the volunteers were given "our side of the rope" tours of areas that visitors never get to see. Perhaps the most astonishing one of these tours involved Shiloh.

Our tour of the battlefield coincided with the publication of the complete reinterpretation of the Battle of Shiloh. The major fighting occurred on the Confederate left flank against Sherman. The Hornet's Nest, while intense, was not the pivotal focus of the battle. Beauregard's announced plan was to break Grant's connection with the river & drive him into the interior. For reasons that are still obscure to me, N.B. Forrest & his fellow commanders on the Confederate right, which were supposed to turn Grant's left did not receive any orders to attack. By the time they acted on their own initiative, it was too little, too late. It was not the death of Albert Sidney Johnston that prevented the Confederate victory, it was rank incompetence, pure & simple. As executed, the Confederate assault was foredoomed to failure. By the end of our tour, a list of my dearly held beliefs as long as my arm had to be wadded up & tossed into the trash. I must say, what replaced it was ever so much more nuanced & fascinating.

View attachment 350726
Living history volunteers from Stones River N.B. serve their section of 1841 Model 6 pdrs, at Chickamauga N.M.P.
Battery has fired by piece from the right. Author is #1 on left gun of the right section.

Since then, any number of certainties have been added to my Civil War feet of clay collection. For example, for the better part of 20 years I had told visitors that six pound field cannon didn't actually fire grape shot, it was merely a literary convention. Imagine my chagrin when I saw a stand of grape for a 6 pdr at the Fort Defiance Museum in Clarksville TN! It must have been a naval round, but nevertheless less, there it was. If you Google six pounder gape shot, you will find me as a reference on several sites. I wasn't the only one surprised by that miniature stand of grape.

What dearly held Civil War certainty of yours has been shown to be untrue & how did learning the truth affect your understanding of what caused the war & how it was fought?
As living historian, I often listened to the Lost Cause banter that the South was fighting for States Rights. Nothing regarding slavery. It wasn’t until I read the book “
On the Emerging Civil War forum March 12, 2020, Chris Kolakowski wrote a post titled Fact vs Interpretation at the Bloody Lane. The Maryland Campaign has undergone a significant reinterpretation due to recent scholarship. Newly discovered evidence has revealed facts which have enlightened scholars & resulted in the removal of many old interpretive markers. One of the replacements caught Kolakowski's eye.

View attachment 350725
Brigadier General Edward Porter Alexander


Confederate Brigadier General Edward Porter Alexander's statement that the Bloody Lane/Battle of Antietam was "end of the Confederacy" has been quoted & debated who knows how many times. The new marker at the Bloody Lane no longer contains that quote. The reason being that Alexander did not participate in the battle & was stating his interpretation based on the first person accounts he had heard. His was an informed interpretation, but it had been accepted as a first person judgement by a participant for a long time. It is no longer considered an appropriate quote to be used as if it were a first person statement.

I have no intention of going off into the weeds about Alexander's oft quoted statement. What does interest me is how many times in my long study of the Civil War I have had to unlearn absolute certainties. I grew up with an unadulterated Lost Cause narrative that I believed with a certainty normally reserved for revealed religion. I really believed that slaves were thankful for their bondage & loved their kind masters. The Civil War was all the Yankee's fault because they were jealous of Southerner's superior culture. Slavery had nothing to do with secession, etc, etc, etc, the twaddle I had been taught was endless. It was not until I was well into my adulthood before I finally shed the aftereffects of unlearning all that misinformation & began to fully understand what my family members had gone through during the Civil War. Thirty years has not been long enough to reach a full understanding of those fateful events. Civil War history is like unfolding an onion, there are endless layers & it makes your eyes water.

View attachment 350720
Interpretive marker, Hornet's Nest, Shiloh Battlefield


Over two decades as a living history volunteer at Stones River National Battlefield I have had the privilege of touring Western battlefields with scholars, historians & local experts. Many times the volunteers were given "our side of the rope" tours of areas that visitors never get to see. Perhaps the most astonishing one of these tours involved Shiloh.

Our tour of the battlefield coincided with the publication of the complete reinterpretation of the Battle of Shiloh. The major fighting occurred on the Confederate left flank against Sherman. The Hornet's Nest, while intense, was not the pivotal focus of the battle. Beauregard's announced plan was to break Grant's connection with the river & drive him into the interior. For reasons that are still obscure to me, N.B. Forrest & his fellow commanders on the Confederate right, which were supposed to turn Grant's left did not receive any orders to attack. By the time they acted on their own initiative, it was too little, too late. It was not the death of Albert Sidney Johnston that prevented the Confederate victory, it was rank incompetence, pure & simple. As executed, the Confederate assault was foredoomed to failure. By the end of our tour, a list of my dearly held beliefs as long as my arm had to be wadded up & tossed into the trash. I must say, what replaced it was ever so much more nuanced & fascinating.

View attachment 350726
Living history volunteers from Stones River N.B. serve their section of 1841 Model 6 pdrs, at Chickamauga N.M.P.
Battery has fired by piece from the right. Author is #1 on left gun of the right section.

Since then, any number of certainties have been added to my Civil War feet of clay collection. For example, for the better part of 20 years I had told visitors that six pound field cannon didn't actually fire grape shot, it was merely a literary convention. Imagine my chagrin when I saw a stand of grape for a 6 pdr at the Fort Defiance Museum in Clarksville TN! It must have been a naval round, but nevertheless less, there it was. If you Google six pounder gape shot, you will find me as a reference on several sites. I wasn't the only one surprised by that miniature stand of grape.

What dearly held Civil War certainty of yours has been shown to be untrue & how did learning the truth affect your understanding of what caused the war & how it was fought?
As a living historian, I often heard about the South fighting for States Rights, nothing about slavery. It wasn’t until I read the book “Apostles of Disunion” that the truth unveiled itself. The book gave accounts of the Southern Commissioners presenting their case for secession. The dialogue was all about retaining slavery.
 
Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain won the Battle of Gettysburg and therefore saved the Union on July 2, 1863, was a myth I was taught. While Chamberlain and the 20th fought well on July 2, its a bit more....complicated then that.

Of course I grew up about 12 miles from his birthplace, which may have had something to do with it.
True, the 20th Maine held their position. What I often heard is that they were the only troops there. The truth is the southern end of Little Round Top had the 83 PA, 16 Michigan and the 44 NY defending that position with the 20th Maine.
 
Tell me, how many Africans did Rhode Islanders slave-traders kidnap from Africa and sell into slavery? Maybe you're somewhat quick to defend the Rhode Island slavers too, who knows.
Because I've been concentrating on ships and trade, that hasn't been something I would know. However, I do know that RI passed some of the earliest anti-slave trading laws in the country.
 
Yep.

That was exactly how and why he did it.

What many don't know, is that some of the enslaved (even in Louisiana) were exempt from this 'Emancipation Proclamation'.

As I originally said . . . it all boils down to economic profit.
And the Yanks were making a large amount of money in some Southern States during the duration of the War.

If we're going to use this forum to study the ACW, let's review everything.
It is my understanding that Lincoln issued the EP not as President but as Commander in Chief, therefore, it only had effect in areas that came under military jurisdiction after its effective date. In other words it was only effective in territories conquered and held by US military forces.
 
Last edited:
Because I've been concentrating on ships and trade, that hasn't been something I would know. However, I do know that RI passed some of the earliest anti-slave trading laws in the country.


The answer is 100,000. Rhode Island slave-traders brutally and sadistically tortured over 100,000 Africans with their participation in the Trans-Atlantic slave-trade.

PS- You might want to do some research on The Slave Ship Nightingale. It was built in Maine, and in 1860 was still operating out of Boston as a slave ship.
 
Ye
Lefty, the USA was based on the premise of **** so no attitudes were changed for the better or worse by secession from that country.
Yes but ending slavery and allowing African Americans to vote was a big step forward. No civil rights advancements were ever made by a Southern state with out federal intervention so yes defeating the Confederacy was a huge civil rights gain in the long term.
Leftyhunter
 
"I had said this, he goes on and eliminates, or draws out, from my speech this tendency of mine to set the States at war with one another, to make all the institutions uniform, and set the ni**ers and white people to marrying together. [Laughter.]

- Abraham Lincoln

Yup, those are Lincoln's idea of civil rights gains. Yes sireee....
 
It is my understanding that Lincoln issued the EP not as President but as Commander in Chief, therefore, it only had effect in areas that came under military jurisdiction after its effective date. In other words it was only effective in territories conquered and held by US military forces.
That’s called a distinction without a difference.
 
Delaware borders Maryland, a border state. Border states supplied units to both sides:
1st Maryland Inf U.S.
1st Maryland Inf C.S.
No C.S. units from Delaware
You can change the name
But the facts remain the same
It was very common for men from one state to join an out of state regiment.
No doubt some men from Delaware joined the Confederate Army.
Leftyhunter
 
I see. New England slave-traders were perfectly decent human beings, not greedy, white-supremacist, profiteers who inflicted unimaginable suffering on innocent Africans. And they are indicative of the social equality and racial harmony that existed in the North throughout the entire history of the country.
And said New England traders forced Southeners to keep their slaves, rape their slaves and suppress their Civil Rights well into the modern era plays fight a loosing war to preserve and expand slavery.
That's an interesting take on history to put it politely.
Leftyhunter
 
As living historian, I often listened to the Lost Cause banter that the South was fighting for States Rights. Nothing regarding slavery. It wasn’t until I read the book “

As a living historian, I often heard about the South fighting for States Rights, nothing about slavery. It wasn’t until I read the book “Apostles of Disunion” that the truth unveiled itself. The book gave accounts of the Southern Commissioners presenting their case for secession. The dialogue was all about retaining slavery.
As a living historian, I can't agree more. My copy of Dr. Dew's book is festooned with so many different colored posit notes that they look like Tibetan Prayer flags. I had the privilege of meeting Dr. Dew at a seminar & having conversations with him over three days. Besides being an excellent historian, he is an equally entertaining raconteur.
 
And said New England traders forced Southeners to keep their slaves, rape their slaves and suppress their Civil Rights well into the modern era plays fight a loosing war to preserve and expand slavery.
That's an interesting take on history to put it politely.
Leftyhunter


Well, we know New England slave-traders didn't force United States slave-owners to rape their slaves and suppress their Civil Rights well into the modern era and plays fight a loosing war to preserve and expand slavery. A very polite interpretation on the history of United States slavery, to put it lightly.
 
And said New England traders forced Southeners to keep their slaves, rape their slaves and suppress their Civil Rights well into the modern era plays fight a loosing war to preserve and expand slavery.
That's an interesting take on history to put it politely.
Leftyhunter
Like you, Leftyhunter, I can't believe that anybody would post such a thing without their faces going red with shame. Personally, I find such assertions an outright insult to the memory of my slave-holding relations.
 
Well it wasn’t just a premise, it was the law. In 1857 the USSC ruled via the Dred Scott case that black people were not and could not be US citizens.
True but Lincoln changed that. Without defeating the Confederacy there would of been no advancements towards Civil Rights.
Leftyhunter
 
I can't believe anybody would defend New England slave-trading without their face going bright cherry-red with shame and disgrace. Personally, I find such taking such a position a foul insult to those who suffered shackled in the holds of the filthy New England slave-ships.
 
Well, we know New England slave-traders didn't force United States slave-owners to rape their slaves and suppress their Civil Rights well into the modern era and plays fight a loosing war to preserve and expand slavery. A very polite interpretation on the history of United States slavery, to put it lightly.
Your forgetting that New England freed its slaves and ended racial discrimination laws such has miscegenation laws well before any Southern state. Your also forgetting that troops from New England fought and sacraficed to free Southern blacks from slavery.
Your also forgetting that New England states had African American elected politicians post Reconstruction well before any Southern state.
Leftyhunter
 
Your forgetting that New England freed its slaves and ended racial discrimination laws such has miscegenation laws well before any Southern state. Your also forgetting that troops from New England fought and sacraficed to free Southern blacks from slavery.
Your also forgetting that New England states had African American elected politicians post Reconstruction well before any Southern state.
Leftyhunter


You're forgetting that New England was a major supporter of slavery through its continued purchasing of cotton for its textile mills. You're also forgetting that citizens from New England prospered greatly from the products of slavery and didn't hesitate to consume them for their enrichment. You're also forgetting that their was an enormous New England economic corollary, with insurers, bankers and merchants all profiting from slavery.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top