Can Benjamin Butler be redeemed?

[archieclement]

i am fortunate to have dozens and dozens of letters home...dozens of field orders...many many hand written orders...dozens of newspapers and period magazines (yeck I even have 2 totally in German)
The point being while it is true direct contact is out of the question the l
professional historian can avail themselves of as broad a resource as they may choose and develop a pretty clear (er) picture of the Butler subject.

And the reality is we have less resources then a hundred years ago, not more. As well we are less able to judge the character or reliability of sources, as we can't interview people who actually knew them or served with them, or were actually there.

And modern bias and agendas are no better then period ones in determining events.

 

[Saruman]

This is from the diary of a woman, Julia LeGrand, living in New Orleans during the war:

Butler, after his long, disgusting stay here has been compelled to yield his place, his sword, and much of his stolen property. Banks' arrival and Butler's disgrace has created a vent for a long pent-up disgust. General Banks has, so far, by equitable rule commanded the respect of his enemies. We know him as an enemy, it is true, but an honest and respectable one. Every rich man is not his especial foe, to be robbed for his benefit. Butler left on the steamer Spaulding, was accompanied to the wharf by a large crowd, to which he took off his hat. There was not one hurrah, not one sympathizing cry went up for him from the vast crowd which went to see him off - a silent rebuke. I wonder if he felt it!... General Banks is not like Butler; he will protect us. The generality of the soldiers hate the negroes and subject them to great abuse whenever they can.

 

[Dead Parrott]

And the reality is we have less resources then a hundred years ago, not more. As well we are less able to judge the character or reliability of sources, as we can't interview people who actually knew them or served with them, or were actually there.

And modern bias and agendas are no better then period ones in determining events.

There are both advantages and disadvantages to a modern review of the past. The advantages include distance from the center of the maelstrom (and the perspective which that allows), the accumulation of multiple perspectives that may not have been available to the person at the point/location in time, and the benefit of hindsight.

The disadvantages are those you have laid out above: especially the tendency toward our own modern biases.

I'm certain that somewhere out there is a 1960-70s era historian who was convinced Alexander The Great was the First True Hippie …

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

which of the Generals on either side didnt have a "mixed bag" at the end of the war?

A big factor is how mixed the bag is (50-50 vs 80-20), and how much it's spread through their service as opposed to weighted toward one end. Did they have a rocky start, but were coming on strong at the end? Did they start well but decline as the war passed them by? Was their service a roller coaster of successes and failures, or just a few minor stumbles on the way to greatness?

Nobody has more bias than a participant/eyewitness.

Especially a biographer who is a close relative of the deceased subject. In the case of a spouse, they literally knew the subject intimately, which makes them a great source for information, but supremely unqualified to provide fair analysis.

 

[RobertP]

A rather strange statement to make on a history forum.

Granted it provides historians with a living.

 

[RobertP]

Nobody has more bias than a participant/eyewitness.

Then we shouldn't allow their testimony in court.

 

[RobertP]

We have more information than they did.

For example, let's suppose I have a friend who I think is of great character. However, unbeknownst to me he's cheating on his wife. How valid and relevant is my opinion of his character?

The thread is about Ben Butler. Hundreds of people knew him in the flesh and he earned a certain reputation by what they saw. But 150 years later the pointy heads say oh no, I have new information that will rehabilitate him! C'mon.

 

[General Butler]

The thread is about Ben Butler. Hundreds of people knew him in the flesh and he earned a certain reputation by what they saw. But 150 years later the pointy heads say oh no, I have new information that will rehabilitate him! C'mon.

Ahhh the power of cherry picking. Should a person have access to positive reports and choise to set those aside yet focus the pulp narritive on the negative the only point it makes is for a hollow individual with loose morals

 

[breckod]

The thread is about Ben Butler. Hundreds of people knew him in the flesh and he earned a certain reputation by what they saw. But 150 years later the pointy heads say oh no, I have new information that will rehabilitate him! C'mon.

There were also many people who thought well of him, so to be clear, your entire framing is fundamentally false to start with.

 

[General Butler]

There were also many people who thought well of him, so to be clear, your entire framing is fundamentally false to start with.

It is fascinating that after all this time Butler still has the power to ignite passions of history

 

[RobertP]

There were also many people who thought well of him, so to be clear, your entire framing is fundamentally false to start with.

Sure, a lot of people still speak well of O J Simpson. Should others change their opinion of him because a dude discovered that he once donated to their favorite charity?

 

[General Butler]

Sure, a lot of people still speak well of O J Simpson. Should others change their opinion of him because a dude discovered that he once donated to their favorite charity?

Oh dear, you're an apples and oranges guy arent you?

 

[breckod]

Sure, a lot of people still speak well of O J Simpson. Should others change their opinion of him because a dude discovered that he once donated to their favorite charity?

You seem to be making an excellent argument for why some cherrypicked contemporary opinions shouldn't be taken as authoritative!

 

[RobertP]

Oh dear, you're an apples and oranges guy arent you?

Think about it. 150 years from now a historian comes up with a information that says Simpson was a generous man who advocated for minorities and migrant workers, and he was after all acquitted in a court of law. Maybe he should be redeemed.

 

[RobertP]

On the other hand, I always found Butler's post-war claim that he talked Lincoln out of colonizing freed people to the Caribbean to be one of his more dubious, self-aggrandizing claims, though one cannot rule out the possibility that it was at least partially true.

After years on this site I've found that most people who discount Butler on this do so to protect Lincoln's reputation.

 

[breckod]

Think about it. 150 years from now a historian comes up with a information that says Simpson was a generous man who advocated for minorities and migrant workers, and he was after all acquitted in a court of law. Maybe he should be redeemed.

Ah yes, one of my favorite genres of Internet posting, "make up a fictional scenario to get mad at".

 

[Nathan Towne]

There were also many people who thought well of him, so to be clear, your entire framing is fundamentally false to start with.

I find you to be a knowledgeable and thoughtful person. Have you studied Butler's career in great depth?

 

[breckod]

I find you to be a knowledgeable and thoughtful person. Have you studied Butler's career in great depth?

I wouldn't say great depth. Actually until the Leonard bio, which I've read, my interest in him was less directly about his Civil War service and more that in reading about Reconstruction and the 1870s-80s, I bumped into mentions and accounts of his postwar political career relatively often, and there's some fascinating stuff there, such as the short-lived alliance between Boston's working-class white and (a faction of) black voters in supporting his candidacies for governor.

 

[Nathan Towne]

I wouldn't say great depth. Actually until the Leonard bio, which I've read, my interest in him was less directly about his Civil War service and more that in reading about Reconstruction and the 1870s-80s, I bumped into mentions and accounts of his postwar political career relatively often, and there's some fascinating stuff there, such as the short-lived alliance between Boston's working-class white and (a faction of) black voters in supporting his candidacies for governor.

I should get a copy of the new biography.

I have studied his tenure as Commander of the Army of the James most intimately and I think that it is pretty clear that he had no business in a position of that magnitude. I sympathize with Gouvonor Warren's anger following the Morton's Ford debacle and his performance in the Bermuda Hundred Campaign was just not at the level which I think the nation deserved from its Army Commanders.

Again, everything is relative. We judge performance in terms relative to the challenges being confronted. Relative to what was being faced, I am pretty confident in stating that his performance was not where it needed to be.

Again, there are many other people who could have filled that role. Buell, for instance. Or Slocum. E.t.c.

 

[breckod]

I should get a copy of the new biography.

I have studied his tenure as Commander of the Army of the James most intimately and I think that it is pretty clear that he had no business in a position of that magnitude. I sympathize with Gouvonor Warren's anger following the Morton's Ford debacle and his performance in the Bermuda Hundred Campaign was just not at the level which I think the nation deserved from its Army Commanders.

Again, everything is relative. We judge performance in terms relative to the challenges being confronted. Relative to what was being faced, I am pretty confident in stating that his performance was not where it needed to be.

Again, there are many other people who could have filled that role. Buell, for instance. Or Slocum. E.t.c.

I will note that I have rather explicitly not argued Butler was a particularly good field commander. Revisionism does have its limits!