Restricted Jefferson Davis Name Removed From Fort Monroe Arch

WJC

Major General
Judge Adv. Genl.
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
He certainly doesn't need one in the South; perhaps one in Massachusetts would be more appropriate in recognition of all those runaway slaves he took home with him
Thanks for your response.
Again, my point is not to advocate for a monument to Butler: it is to show that there was real, 'game-changing' history at Fort Monroe, an action far more worthy of recognition than Davis' involuntary stay.
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2016
Obviously. My point is that if it was an isolated incident, it wouldn't be all that noteworthy. But it's not isolated. As more and more of our shared American history disappears from the landscape, not just Confederate memorials, I would think all of us would have some concern about why this is happening, whether it's healthy for our society, and if it's going to get better or worse.

"our shared American experience"? Somehow, I don't think a lot of people see, say, Nathan Bedford Forrest as part of "our shared American experience." True, he's part of the American experience, but you can have him.
 

lelliott19

Brigadier General
Moderator
* OFFICIAL *
CWT PRESENTER
Forum Host
Silver Patron
Regtl. Staff Chickamauga 2018
Joined
Mar 15, 2013
recognition than Davis' involuntary stay.
I don't really have an opinion either way about the letters on the arch being removed. I'm glad I was able to see it and snap a picture before it was altered from its original form. I do think that the UDC should have been notified that there was intent to disassemble it. After all, they are the ones who fund-raised for it, paid for it, and had it erected. Also, I think its only fair to point out that Davis did have some positive history at Fort Monroe. He was pretty popular as US Secretary of War. Of course this was prior to his "involuntary stay." :D

"As US Secretary of War, Davis implemented a number of welcome changes in the US Army - he introduced general use of the rifle; increased the size of the Army by four regiments (from 11,000 to 15,000); and raised salaries. Morale was improved and Davis was pretty popular. So when US Secretary of War Davis and US President Franklin Pierce visited Fort Monroe in 1855, they were received with thunderous cannon salutes and a spectacular fireworks display that lit up the sky over Old Point Comfort. Davis was honored with the opportunity to direct the garrison in special review on the parade ground. His skill, bearing, and horsemanship impressed the participants, as well as those who witnessed it - the President, the rest of the cabinet, and the accompanying wives." Read the rest here https://civilwartalk.com/threads/je...mprisoned-at-fort-monroe.158441/#post-2062404
 

DanSBHawk

Captain
Joined
May 8, 2015
Location
Wisconsin
I don't really have an opinion either way about the letters on the arch being removed. I'm glad I was able to see it and snap a picture before it was altered from its original form. I do think that the UDC should have been notified that there was intent to disassemble it. After all, they are the ones who fund-raised for it, paid for it, and had it erected. Also, I think its only fair to point out that Davis did have some positive history at Fort Monroe. He was pretty popular as US Secretary of War. Of course this was prior to his "involuntary stay." :D

"As US Secretary of War, Davis implemented a number of welcome changes in the US Army - he introduced general use of the rifle; increased the size of the Army by four regiments (from 11,000 to 15,000); and raised salaries. Morale was improved and Davis was pretty popular. So when US Secretary of War Davis and US President Franklin Pierce visited Fort Monroe in 1855, they were received with thunderous cannon salutes and a spectacular fireworks display that lit up the sky over Old Point Comfort. Davis was honored with the opportunity to direct the garrison in special review on the parade ground. His skill, bearing, and horsemanship impressed the participants, as well as those who witnessed it - the President, the rest of the cabinet, and the accompanying wives." Read the rest here https://civilwartalk.com/threads/je...mprisoned-at-fort-monroe.158441/#post-2062404
His days as Secretary of War were pretty insignificant compared to his involvement in the Civil War.
 

WJC

Major General
Judge Adv. Genl.
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
I don't really have an opinion either way about the letters on the arch being removed. I'm glad I was able to see it and snap a picture before it was altered from its original form. I do think that the UDC should have been notified that there was intent to disassemble it. After all, they are the ones who fund-raised for it, paid for it, and had it erected. Also, I think its only fair to point out that Davis did have some positive history at Fort Monroe. He was pretty popular as US Secretary of War. Of course this was prior to his "involuntary stay." :D

"As US Secretary of War, Davis implemented a number of welcome changes in the US Army - he introduced general use of the rifle; increased the size of the Army by four regiments (from 11,000 to 15,000); and raised salaries. Morale was improved and Davis was pretty popular. So when US Secretary of War Davis and US President Franklin Pierce visited Fort Monroe in 1855, they were received with thunderous cannon salutes and a spectacular fireworks display that lit up the sky over Old Point Comfort. Davis was honored with the opportunity to direct the garrison in special review on the parade ground. His skill, bearing, and horsemanship impressed the participants, as well as those who witnessed it - the President, the rest of the cabinet, and the accompanying wives." Read the rest here https://civilwartalk.com/threads/je...mprisoned-at-fort-monroe.158441/#post-2062404
Thanks for your response.
I don't know what the usual process is at NPS, but I agree that since this was a private donation from an organization still in existance and still interested in its gift UDC should have been notified.
As to Davis' record, no one is disputing that he had a long and exceptional career. And no one is suggesting that his imprisonment should be ignored.
This action by NPS, though insensitive to the UDC, does not in any way damage Davis' legacy.
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Honored Fallen Comrade
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Location
Laurinburg NC
Thanks for your response.
Again, my point is not to advocate for a monument to Butler: it is to show that there was real, 'game-changing' history at Fort Monroe, an action far more worthy of recognition than Davis' involuntary stay.
There is "game-changing history" going on all over the US and you have to wonder if any historical reality will remain once game changers are done.
 

WJC

Major General
Judge Adv. Genl.
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
***Posted as Moderator***
This is a controversial topic that can generate strong emotional responses. Let's keep the discussion on the changes NPS is making at Fort Monroe. Any discussion of the broader 'Confederate monuments controversy' should take place elsewhere. No need to start yet another, 'Yeah, my guys were bad, but your's were worse' match here.
If you are in doubt, start a new thread.
 

byron ed

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Location
Midwest
Does this mean that in order to keep a select group happy (and future generations ignorant of facts and heritage) we should all begin to tear pages from our history books? What is the negativity against? Confederacy? Knights of the Golden Circle? History? Personal vendetta? Group politics? I'm not understanding the thought process behind this entire campaign.

This is not that. If the UDC's intention was to commemorate a CW anniversary date they should have some lettering about the date on the arch, not Jefferson Davis. Good attempt to slip in that explanation but it doesn't wash. Based on his performance as Confederte President, Jefferson Davis was no great leader to begin with.

I do think the UDC should have been given the opportunity to react given it's historical role in the arch. They could have proposed returning the lettering on the arch to reflect their original intent claimed. Now its just an arch, kind of nice looking one I think but there should be a plaque explaining the intent of the arch.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

WJC

Major General
Judge Adv. Genl.
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
future generations ignorant of facts and heritage
In many ways it has been just the opposite: with new and better information readily available, old stereotypes and legend have been either confirmed in greater detail or rejected if found false.
"Heritage" sounds like code for a particular bias. "European heritage", "New England heritage", "Southern heritage": if not based on fact the term is simply an excuse for resisting progress.
Facts, just the facts....
 

Old_Glory

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Location
NC
And the hits keep coming.


The way the United Daughters of the Confederacy have been treated in the last few years is disgraceful. This will have a boomerang effect eventually. Hatred always does. These monuments were not built for hatred, they were placed to honor men who deserved the honor.

Thank you for posting the sad news.
 

8thFlorida

First Sergeant
Joined
Nov 27, 2016
He worked diligently to break up the United States illegally, then tried to run when he failed! Then he tried to excuse his actions by trying to change the history of why he, and others took those actions. He needs to be remembered for that.

Kevin Dally
As you know the United States was formed in Rebellion. This is the nature of our formation so historically it was justified. We are in fact the “United States”. If we choose to be ununited that is each states choice.
 

Jamieva

Captain
Forum Host
Joined
Feb 7, 2006
Location
Midlothian, VA
The way the United Daughters of the Confederacy have been treated in the last few years is disgraceful. This will have a boomerang effect eventually. Hatred always does. These monuments were not built for hatred, they were placed to honor men who deserved the honor.

Thank you for posting the sad news.

How is an arch randonly built in 1956 with lettering on it a monument?
 

WJC

Major General
Judge Adv. Genl.
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
We are in fact the “United States”. If we choose to be ununited that is each states choice.
That is certainly a concise presentation of the view of Davis and the other 1860/61 secessionists. Whether it had validity then was decided by war: it certainly has no validity today. At any rate, it is hardly a view worthy of celebration today, particularly at Fort Monroe.
 
Top