Your choice for a new Gettysburg Monument?

I have been researching Elon Farnsworth and I forgot about the veterans attempts in honoring him by a monument to him. This is another worthy suggestion. More on the Farnsworth monument. I love how they refer to his charge as a romantic incident.

“A monument to Gen. Elon J. Farnsworth, who commanded the brigade and fell leading what at the time was considered a desperate and hopeless charge, is proposed to be erected. It is to be placed on the spur of Round Top, southeast of Slyder’s house where he fell. It is to be composed of a mound of boulders gathered in the neighborhood, upon which is to be placed a pentagonal granite shaft, on each of the faces of which is to be inscribed historical data relating to the regiments of the brigade and battery engaged. The mound and shaft are to be surmounted by a statue of Farnsworth. It is desired that all surviving members of this brigade actively interest themselves in this project, in order that it may be made one of the most striking features of the field, as his (Farnsworth’s) fall is one of the most romantic incidents of the battle of Gettysburg. Having won in the 8th Ill. Cav. His promotion, which occurred four days before he was killed, members of that regiment are deeply interested in these proceedings.”

That's the article from The National Tribune that I found in 1997. Before I found that particular article, I'm not sure anyone knew that this had been proposed. That article played a major role in the debacle with the NPS.
 
The monument to Elon Farnsworth and his brigade that was described in detail in an 1888 article in The National Tribune and for which a site was chosen. For reasons that I have never been able to ascertain, said monument was never erected, which is a shame. The veterans obviously intended for it to be erected since they had a design done and chose a spot for it.

In the late 1990's, we tried to put this monument up, but were rebuffed by the NPS.

This is a long and unhappy story. If anyone really wants to hear it, I will tell it. But it angers me every time I think about it.

I would like to know this story.
 
The monument to Elon Farnsworth and his brigade that was described in detail in an 1888 article in The National Tribune and for which a site was chosen. For reasons that I have never been able to ascertain, said monument was never erected, which is a shame. The veterans obviously intended for it to be erected since they had a design done and chose a spot for it.

Strange that there is a monument to his subordinate, William Wells, with a bas relief showing Farnsworth, but no separate monument for him. There is even a monument to the charging unit nearby, the 1st VT. Cavalry.
 
I would like to know this story.

Since you asked....

I discovered that National Tribune article describing the proposed monument while researching Farnsworth's Charge for what became my first book back in 1996. After pondering it for a while, I reached out to my old friend, the late Blake Magner. From prior conversations, I knew that Blake had been the chairman of the committee that placed the Gibbon monument on Cemetery Ridge and that he had extensive experience with this sort of thing. After reading the copy of the article that I sent to Blake, he got on board with the project. Blake, in turn, introduced me to Terry Jones, who sculpted the Gibbon monument. Terry also got on board with the Farnsworth project.

We then enlisted the support and endorsement of a number of prominent Civil War historians, all of whom signed on to the project. We even had some financial support from Farnsworth's home state, Illinois. With all of that in place, Blake and I put together a formal proposal to present to the NPS. We went back and forth with revisions to it for a couple of months and went through multiple drafts of the proposal until it finally reached the point where we were happy with the draft. Blake then did a cover letter and submitted it to the park.

A couple of months went by, and we figured that that was going to be it--that it would die a bureaucratic death. Frankly, that's what I expected, and I was prepared for it. But then Blake got a phone call telling us that the park superintendent, who was then John Latschar, wanted to meet with us to discuss the placement of the monument. We were shocked, but we readily agreed. Terry even went to the effort to sculpt a clay miniature of the proposed monument (called a maquette) to bring to the meeting, something that he spent quite a bit of time on.

The meeting was set for a Wednesday morning at park's headquarters in the old VC. Please keep in mind that I live 6+ hours from Gettysburg. It takes a big chunk of a day to drive there. I gave up three days of work at a time when I was (a) self-employed (meaning that if I don't work, I don't get paid) and (b) in the end phases of a major deal that was about to close and which was taking a lot of time. In short, I didn't have three days to take off, but there I was, driving to Gettysburg.

Blake, Terry and I had dinner the night before to discuss our meeting strategy. We then got to the meeting with Latschar, which was also attended by then chief historian Kathy George Harrison and supervising historian Scott Hartwig. And we were in for a shock.

There are two unforgivable sins in my world. Nobody ever gets a second chance to commit them. And John Latschar committed both of them that morning: he wasted my time and he lied to me. Those are the two unforgivable sins.

It seems that instead of calling us in to discuss the placement of the monument, he dragged us to Gettysburg to tell us that there was no way that the monument would ever be erected on the battlefield while he was in charge and that we would all be better off trying to raise money to repair and maintain the existing monuments.

Now, the repair and maintain thing is a legitimate point, and I don't dispute it. But why did he have to waste time and money to drag Blake, Terry, and me to Gettysburg when a letter or a phone call would have accomplished the same thing?

And why not tell us the truth about the purpose of the meeting instead of lying to us to get us to drop everything to be at His Royal Majesty's beck and call?

I was a good bit younger then--not yet 40--and a bit less wise than I am now. It literally took all of my willpower not to go over the table--and Blake holding me back--and rearrange that smarmy festering pile of bovine excrement's face for him. Only the realization that while I would have enjoyed doing so immensely, it was not worth going to prison or losing my license to practice law over it truly stopped me.

To her credit, Kathy Harrison was absolutely appalled by what transpired, and she apologized about five times. But the damage was done. As long as His Majesty remained the superintendent, I refused to acknowledge his existence. He came to one of my talks, came up to me afterward and extended his hand. I looked him straight in the eye, said, "I don't shake the hands of liars," and walked away. Boy, did that feel good.

Nearly twenty years later, I remain livid about it. And the monument--which should be there, since the veterans clearly wanted and intended for it to be there--is no closer to happening. I gave up on this idea a very long time ago, although I still have the brochure that Terry, Blake and I put together for it buried in my files at home.

In the end, karma got its revenge on His Imperial Highness. It couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.

http://www.nationalparkstraveler.co...ent-finds-cybertracks-****ographic-images4784

I took a great deal of pleasure watching his career dissipation light flash brighter and brighter.
 
I agree with the idea of a monument to the 15th Alabama and also one to the sacrifice of Farnsworth and his men .Come to think of it; they both have ties to the 15th Alabama and Wilcox's Brigade.
 
I will also go with the 15th Alabama. Also I vote for a BIG one for all the "Americans" who died for the causes that both sides believed in, which is what makes this country so GREAT. I hope it never comes to that again.
 
But according to Dirty Dan, the ENTIRE battlefield is his monument! :smile:
Well in all fairness he did prevent Meade from retreating and forced the engagement. His wisdom is to misunderstood. If only we would have had a few more Dan Sickles the war would have ended years sooner. :bounce:
 
I'd seriously like to see a plan that would remove or re-arrange some of the existing monuments. There are too many!

It might be good idea to set up two or three statuary parks at different points around the field. Many of the markers, etc., could be consolidated there, clearing some of the clutter from some of key battle sites.
 
Through 1888, I believe this extract from the second link below sums it up.

Further, a lack of Southern desire to commemorate a stinging defeat was coupled with outright hostility toward the idea from within the GBMA. On the battle’s 25th anniversary, only two markers alluded to the presence of Southern troops: a plaque near the Angle commemorating Brig. Gen. Lewis Armistead’s farthest advance during Pickett’s Charge (1887) and the 2nd Maryland Infantry monument on Culp's Hill (1884).


Good reads here on confederate monuments.
https://npsgnmp.wordpress.com/2013/12/19/the-lee-controversy-of-1903/

http://www.civilwar.org/hallowed-ground-magazine/gettysburg-2013/veterans-monuments-and.html

On your Union Monument question, I have never researched every Union regiment at Gettysburg and if they are memorialized by a Gettysburg Monument. I know many Union monuments memorialize multiple regiments (I.E., The New Jersey monument on Sedgewick Avenue). So I can't say that every Union regiment has a marker.

The explanation is quite simple:

Money.

The Federal government authorized a certain sum - I can't recall how much but someone will I'm sure - to be granted for a monument for each Union regiment engaged at Gettysburg.

As they did with the now shocking decision to spend millions to locate and exhume the remains of Union soldiers wherever they were buried and move them to National Cemeteries, no such money was allocated for Confederate units.

It was a scandalous decision at the time and looks even worse now. I've long held that the only fair thing to do would be to decide how much it would cost to create monuments similar in size and craftsmanship to the existing Union regimental monuments and designate that sum for each Confederate unit engaged in the battle.

This would make Gettysburg a truly National historical site rather than what it is today: a memorial tothe postioning and actions of the Union forces engaged.
 
One old lady's opinion, just from reading and pictures, as I've never been there:

First, get rid of Longstreet's ridiculous carousel horse. Either put Longstreet on something that looks like a real horse or forget the "horse" altogether. Or even get rid of the whole thing. Longstreet deserves better than low comedy, even if he ends up with no statue at all.

I agree with Eric about the Farnsworth monument. I also agree about the 15th Alabama. I approve the moratium on new monuments, but both of these were planned way back when, so would be appropriate.

While this definitely strays into the verboten area of modern politics, there does appear to be a possible new source of funding coming up, assuming the news reports about a donated salary are correct. No further comment!
 
Back
Top