Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ApiMain::$mCommit is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/api/ApiMain.php on line 195
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::current() should either be compatible with Iterator::current(): mixed, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 571
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::next() should either be compatible with Iterator::next(): void, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 585
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::key() should either be compatible with Iterator::key(): mixed, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 578
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::valid() should either be compatible with Iterator::valid(): bool, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 603
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::rewind() should either be compatible with Iterator::rewind(): void, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 553
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property LoadBalancer::$mWriteIndex is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/LoadBalancer.php on line 59
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::current() should either be compatible with Iterator::current(): mixed, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 186
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::next() should either be compatible with Iterator::next(): void, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 203
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::key() should either be compatible with Iterator::key(): mixed, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 196
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::valid() should either be compatible with Iterator::valid(): bool, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 212
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::rewind() should either be compatible with Iterator::rewind(): void, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 175
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property MessageCache::$mMemc is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/cache/MessageCache.php on line 135
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property LoadBalancer::$mWriteIndex is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/LoadBalancer.php on line 59
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Parser::$mPreprocessorClass is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/parser/Parser.php on line 234
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property RequestContext::$recursion is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/context/RequestContext.php on line 292
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property PPDStack::$accum is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/parser/Preprocessor_DOM.php on line 755
Warning: preg_match(): Compilation failed: subpattern name must start with a non-digit at offset 8 in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/MagicWord.php on line 907
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$contribs is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 627
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$tagFilter is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 629
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$nsInvert is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 630
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$associated is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 631
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$deletedOnly is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 633
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$topOnly is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 634
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContentHandler::$mModelName is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/ContentHandler.php on line 402
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($response_code) of type int is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/WebResponse.php on line 38
Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($response_code) of type int is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/WebResponse.php on line 38
Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($response_code) of type int is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/WebResponse.php on line 38 https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=15thvavolunteersMcClurken Wiki - User contributions [en]2026-09-18T19:16:25ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.22.0https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_2_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 2 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-01-20T07:45:48Z<p>15thvavolunteers: /* Remembering Slavery */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Faust ==<br />
<br />
<br />
As mentioned in class, the people at this time did not have the ability to figure out who was who based on DNA when trying to bury them and report to their families. In Faust's reading, somehow James Moore was able to identify 12,912 of the 13,363 bodies of Union soldiers from Andersonville. This just seems remarkable. How long did it take him to figure the identifications of so many men? And how? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Faust talks about how the national reburial program led to the redefining of the nation. How did the treatment of the dead jeopardize the redefinition of the nation? --MK <br />
<br />
MK, don't you think that by 1865, many of the soldiers just wanted to return home? With so many stories of brother-fighting-brother, I think everyone was eager to return home to some sort of union, however tenuous. --Cash<br />
<br />
Faust discusses the role of blacks in the burials of Union soldiers across the South (192-193) and how impartial blacks were to helping the bury the Union dead. Why do you think this was, and what kind of fears do you think the slaves encountered from whites in the south who were hostile to the burying of Union soldiers in the south? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
The issue of a proper and honorable burial for soldiers, especially Union soldiers in the South was a problem after the war. How much do you think this process of creating a national cemetery system contributed to reconciliation? -Avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Faust’s piece contrasts the reinterment process taken on by the federal government for Union soldiers with that taken on by families and women’s organizations for Confederates. The disparity really demonstrates some of the unique awkwardness of the Civil War and Reconstruction. How does this particular aspect of the aftermath of the war help to explain some of the long-held, sectional bad feelings? -Erin B.<br />
<br />
On page 191, Faust writes that during Whitman’s long task to find and record Union graves throughout the South, he often came upon graves or graveyards that were terribly unkempt. Even worse, it seemed obvious that the Southerners were destroying the graveyards on purpose. On page 191, he writes that the Southerners had built roads and walkways over the graves that had all but destroyed them while nearby there were Confederate graves that were very well kept. Why did Southerners purposefully destroy Union graves when they themselves knew the feeling of not knowing where their deceased loved ones were? - Angie<br />
<br />
On Page 189 Drew Faust's work "Battle over the Bodies" how the position of the South had changed from stunned disbelief to a posture of growing defiance. One of the ways that the South continued to defy the North was to disturb the grave sites of Union soldiers which the Union was surprised that this type of action was taking place. Faust discusses that the reason for the South to desecrate Union graces was that the graves proved to be an irresistible target for southern rage and was an opportunity to express their refusal of defeat. The Confederacy was unable to defeat a live Union army, but they could stay fight against a dead one.- Nick<br />
<br />
I was particularly struck by this article. What are your personal opinions regarding Faust's discussion on violence against protectors of Union corpses. Is confederate desecration of Union tombs and bodies understandable? What are your personal reactions about the violence committed against those trying to protect or bury the bodies? Does this article make you reflect on how body treatment was portrayed in popular Civil War movies? - A. Askins<br />
<br />
Faust mentions how Southerners sometimes refused to give up the location of buried Union soldiers, even after the war. Is this rejection of reconciliation even over the dead a sign of the beginning of Southern resentment towards the North? It's interesting to note that they refused to work together, even over the simplicity of honoring the dead. - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
In what ways did the frustrations of Southern Whites in the late 1860's manifest themselves later on? Initially, they desecrated graves and terrified those protecting them. Later, amidst a culture of reconciliation that Blight discusses, did these outburst disappear or simply manifest themselves in other ways?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
How was it possible after a year of decomposition to identify bodies of Union and Confederate soldiers? The bodies were generally buried no more than a foot deep. A good rain would uncover the bodies and as the reading described hogs would eat the bodies. So how could the indentify them. Was there an attempt to return the bodies home to be buried in local cemeteries? Logan T<br />
<br />
== Blight ==<br />
<br />
A couple times in Blight's book, African Americans' sentiments towards the war and slavery were mentioned. A good amount of the time it seemed like they wanted to look past the fact that they were enslaved and oppressed for hundreds of years. Was forgetting slavery something that most African Americans wanted to do in an attempt for reconciliation? This seems like a reaction that immediately followed the war but did not last long. -Avanness<br />
<br />
Blight briefly talks about how women in the South initially remembered the war after the Confederacy's defeat. A theme of gloom seems overwhelming for many women in the south and how they remembered the war. How often did women in the south feel this "gloomy" emotion after the conclusion of the Civil War and how did it affect their memory of it? Also, what about Northern Women? What were their perceptions on the conclusion of the war and their memories? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
Why do we still embrace Blight's "blood feud"? Why haven't we,after one hundred and fifty years,reconciled the Civil War? -- R.King<br />
<br />
Blight discusses how the ideology of the "Lost Cause" developed after the Civil War had ended. The Richmond dispatch discussed that the South had fought for a "sense of rights under the Constitution," "and a conscientious conviction of the justice of their position." They went on to write how the South how sacrificed itself in order to find answers to unsettled questions left by the founding fathers. Do you agree with this statement?- Nick<br />
<br />
On the same note as Avanness comment, do you think this readiness to move on was fueled by the thought that they would be receiving the long denied civil rights? Did they simply desire to move on? - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
I find it incredibly odd that there were travel books published about the battlefields of the war just one year after the war was finished. Did people really visit the battlefields this soon after the war? With all the talk in the Gaust reading about the trouble of burying bodies it makes me think people might have seen some fallen soldiers not yet buried. –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== Remembering Slavery ==<br />
<br />
<br />
Do you think that the use of songs in the slaves' memory of the Civil War and Emancipation impact or influence the memory for those who were relatively young at the time? --MK<br />
<br />
Why did some slaves "stick to (their)masters"? Was it because they were "too soft" as Felix Haywood stated or was it a relic of the oppression they lived with their entire lives? -- R.King<br />
<br />
<br />
On page 271 of Remembering Slavery, the story of Robert Glenn begins. Glenn’s story is interesting because even after he knew he was free, he decided to stay with his master for a year and even considered staying longer. How many freed slaves continued to stay on and live and work for their ex-masters? Why did they decide to continue to work for the people who had enslaved them even though they were now free? - Angie<br />
<br />
It is interesting to note that these accounts seem to be riddles with feelings of "undeserving" and that emancipation had little to no impact on life for slaves. In some accounts (like Felix Haywood's), emancipation is portrayed as overrated and responsible for making life harder for former slaves. Why would these oral histories have such a common tone? Is it possible these accounts were conditioned by the interviewers and ingrained fear?- A. Askins<br />
<br />
Several of the accounts (although not all) we read regarding slavery discuss how the slaves were "content" with their living situations and that it really wasn't so bad. Full bellies and a roof over their heads made up for the "occasional beating". As we discussed in class, do you think this is a biased option based on who the interviewers chose to speak with? - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
Throughout this reading, I was left thinking of what they say about someone who is deaf or blind. You ask this person, "what is like to be blind?" And they respond, "what is it like to see? It is only a disability to you." While I certainly do not want to justify the experience of slavery, it almost seems as though the speaker of this piece didn't necessarily want to be freed. How prevalent do you think this attitude was? --Cash<br />
<br />
If slaves knew nothing of emancipation, why the seemingly widespread celebrations upon news of its arrival? Susan Merritt described events "after freedom," as if it was a major turning point in her life. It seems to me that emancipation meant so many different things for different people. Some slaves had difficulties grasping the idea of freedom, while others celebrated the coming of emancipation as one of the most important moments of their lives. Is it possible, then, to determine concretely the overall effect of emancipation?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
In Remembering Slavery, some slaves have good things to say about their masters. Do you think that they were influenced by Reconstruction or did they really mean it? Why is Mexico not discussed more often as a slave haven? Why did it take Kentucky so long to get ride of slavery since it was occupied by the Union for the entire war? Logan T<br />
<br />
== General Questions ==<br />
<br />
<br />
A theme I have noticed throughout our readings, often in Blight, and especially now in Faust, is that of a lost opportunity. There were seemingly small but important mistakes made in message (reconciliation) and administration (the failure to treat Confederate dead the same as Union dead) that were major factors in the formation of Lost Cause ideology. Is this the case? Or were these kinds of ideas inevitable? -GStan.</div>15thvavolunteershttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_2_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 2 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-01-20T07:44:11Z<p>15thvavolunteers: /* Faust */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Faust ==<br />
<br />
<br />
As mentioned in class, the people at this time did not have the ability to figure out who was who based on DNA when trying to bury them and report to their families. In Faust's reading, somehow James Moore was able to identify 12,912 of the 13,363 bodies of Union soldiers from Andersonville. This just seems remarkable. How long did it take him to figure the identifications of so many men? And how? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Faust talks about how the national reburial program led to the redefining of the nation. How did the treatment of the dead jeopardize the redefinition of the nation? --MK <br />
<br />
MK, don't you think that by 1865, many of the soldiers just wanted to return home? With so many stories of brother-fighting-brother, I think everyone was eager to return home to some sort of union, however tenuous. --Cash<br />
<br />
Faust discusses the role of blacks in the burials of Union soldiers across the South (192-193) and how impartial blacks were to helping the bury the Union dead. Why do you think this was, and what kind of fears do you think the slaves encountered from whites in the south who were hostile to the burying of Union soldiers in the south? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
The issue of a proper and honorable burial for soldiers, especially Union soldiers in the South was a problem after the war. How much do you think this process of creating a national cemetery system contributed to reconciliation? -Avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Faust’s piece contrasts the reinterment process taken on by the federal government for Union soldiers with that taken on by families and women’s organizations for Confederates. The disparity really demonstrates some of the unique awkwardness of the Civil War and Reconstruction. How does this particular aspect of the aftermath of the war help to explain some of the long-held, sectional bad feelings? -Erin B.<br />
<br />
On page 191, Faust writes that during Whitman’s long task to find and record Union graves throughout the South, he often came upon graves or graveyards that were terribly unkempt. Even worse, it seemed obvious that the Southerners were destroying the graveyards on purpose. On page 191, he writes that the Southerners had built roads and walkways over the graves that had all but destroyed them while nearby there were Confederate graves that were very well kept. Why did Southerners purposefully destroy Union graves when they themselves knew the feeling of not knowing where their deceased loved ones were? - Angie<br />
<br />
On Page 189 Drew Faust's work "Battle over the Bodies" how the position of the South had changed from stunned disbelief to a posture of growing defiance. One of the ways that the South continued to defy the North was to disturb the grave sites of Union soldiers which the Union was surprised that this type of action was taking place. Faust discusses that the reason for the South to desecrate Union graces was that the graves proved to be an irresistible target for southern rage and was an opportunity to express their refusal of defeat. The Confederacy was unable to defeat a live Union army, but they could stay fight against a dead one.- Nick<br />
<br />
I was particularly struck by this article. What are your personal opinions regarding Faust's discussion on violence against protectors of Union corpses. Is confederate desecration of Union tombs and bodies understandable? What are your personal reactions about the violence committed against those trying to protect or bury the bodies? Does this article make you reflect on how body treatment was portrayed in popular Civil War movies? - A. Askins<br />
<br />
Faust mentions how Southerners sometimes refused to give up the location of buried Union soldiers, even after the war. Is this rejection of reconciliation even over the dead a sign of the beginning of Southern resentment towards the North? It's interesting to note that they refused to work together, even over the simplicity of honoring the dead. - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
In what ways did the frustrations of Southern Whites in the late 1860's manifest themselves later on? Initially, they desecrated graves and terrified those protecting them. Later, amidst a culture of reconciliation that Blight discusses, did these outburst disappear or simply manifest themselves in other ways?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
How was it possible after a year of decomposition to identify bodies of Union and Confederate soldiers? The bodies were generally buried no more than a foot deep. A good rain would uncover the bodies and as the reading described hogs would eat the bodies. So how could the indentify them. Was there an attempt to return the bodies home to be buried in local cemeteries? Logan T<br />
<br />
== Blight ==<br />
<br />
A couple times in Blight's book, African Americans' sentiments towards the war and slavery were mentioned. A good amount of the time it seemed like they wanted to look past the fact that they were enslaved and oppressed for hundreds of years. Was forgetting slavery something that most African Americans wanted to do in an attempt for reconciliation? This seems like a reaction that immediately followed the war but did not last long. -Avanness<br />
<br />
Blight briefly talks about how women in the South initially remembered the war after the Confederacy's defeat. A theme of gloom seems overwhelming for many women in the south and how they remembered the war. How often did women in the south feel this "gloomy" emotion after the conclusion of the Civil War and how did it affect their memory of it? Also, what about Northern Women? What were their perceptions on the conclusion of the war and their memories? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
Why do we still embrace Blight's "blood feud"? Why haven't we,after one hundred and fifty years,reconciled the Civil War? -- R.King<br />
<br />
Blight discusses how the ideology of the "Lost Cause" developed after the Civil War had ended. The Richmond dispatch discussed that the South had fought for a "sense of rights under the Constitution," "and a conscientious conviction of the justice of their position." They went on to write how the South how sacrificed itself in order to find answers to unsettled questions left by the founding fathers. Do you agree with this statement?- Nick<br />
<br />
On the same note as Avanness comment, do you think this readiness to move on was fueled by the thought that they would be receiving the long denied civil rights? Did they simply desire to move on? - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
I find it incredibly odd that there were travel books published about the battlefields of the war just one year after the war was finished. Did people really visit the battlefields this soon after the war? With all the talk in the Gaust reading about the trouble of burying bodies it makes me think people might have seen some fallen soldiers not yet buried. –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== Remembering Slavery ==<br />
<br />
<br />
Do you think that the use of songs in the slaves' memory of the Civil War and Emancipation impact or influence the memory for those who were relatively young at the time? --MK<br />
<br />
Why did some slaves "stick to (their)masters"? Was it because they were "too soft" as Felix Haywood stated or was it a relic of the oppression they lived with their entire lives? -- R.King<br />
<br />
<br />
On page 271 of Remembering Slavery, the story of Robert Glenn begins. Glenn’s story is interesting because even after he knew he was free, he decided to stay with his master for a year and even considered staying longer. How many freed slaves continued to stay on and live and work for their ex-masters? Why did they decide to continue to work for the people who had enslaved them even though they were now free? - Angie<br />
<br />
It is interesting to note that these accounts seem to be riddles with feelings of "undeserving" and that emancipation had little to no impact on life for slaves. In some accounts (like Felix Haywood's), emancipation is portrayed as overrated and responsible for making life harder for former slaves. Why would these oral histories have such a common tone? Is it possible these accounts were conditioned by the interviewers and ingrained fear?- A. Askins<br />
<br />
Several of the accounts (although not all) we read regarding slavery discuss how the slaves were "content" with their living situations and that it really wasn't so bad. Full bellies and a roof over their heads made up for the "occasional beating". As we discussed in class, do you think this is a biased option based on who the interviewers chose to speak with? - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
Throughout this reading, I was left thinking of what they say about someone who is deaf or blind. You ask this person, "what is like to be blind?" And they respond, "what is it like to see? It is only a disability to you." While I certainly do not want to justify the experience of slavery, it almost seems as though the speaker of this piece didn't necessarily want to be freed. How prevalent do you think this attitude was? --Cash<br />
<br />
If slaves knew nothing of emancipation, why the seemingly widespread celebrations upon news of its arrival? Susan Merritt described events "after freedom," as if it was a major turning point in her life. It seems to me that emancipation meant so many different things for different people. Some slaves had difficulties grasping the idea of freedom, while others celebrated the coming of emancipation as one of the most important moments of their lives. Is it possible, then, to determine concretely the overall effect of emancipation?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
In Remembering Slavery, some slaves have good things to say about their masters. Do you think that they were influenced by Reconstruction or did they really mean it? Why is Mexico not discussed more often as a slave haven? Why did it take Kentucky so long to get ride of slavery since it was occupied by the Union for the entire war.<br />
Logan T<br />
<br />
== General Questions ==<br />
<br />
<br />
A theme I have noticed throughout our readings, often in Blight, and especially now in Faust, is that of a lost opportunity. There were seemingly small but important mistakes made in message (reconciliation) and administration (the failure to treat Confederate dead the same as Union dead) that were major factors in the formation of Lost Cause ideology. Is this the case? Or were these kinds of ideas inevitable? -GStan.</div>15thvavolunteershttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_2_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 2 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-01-20T07:43:40Z<p>15thvavolunteers: /* Blight */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Faust ==<br />
<br />
<br />
As mentioned in class, the people at this time did not have the ability to figure out who was who based on DNA when trying to bury them and report to their families. In Faust's reading, somehow James Moore was able to identify 12,912 of the 13,363 bodies of Union soldiers from Andersonville. This just seems remarkable. How long did it take him to figure the identifications of so many men? And how? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Faust talks about how the national reburial program led to the redefining of the nation. How did the treatment of the dead jeopardize the redefinition of the nation? --MK <br />
<br />
MK, don't you think that by 1865, many of the soldiers just wanted to return home? With so many stories of brother-fighting-brother, I think everyone was eager to return home to some sort of union, however tenuous. --Cash<br />
<br />
Faust discusses the role of blacks in the burials of Union soldiers across the South (192-193) and how impartial blacks were to helping the bury the Union dead. Why do you think this was, and what kind of fears do you think the slaves encountered from whites in the south who were hostile to the burying of Union soldiers in the south? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
The issue of a proper and honorable burial for soldiers, especially Union soldiers in the South was a problem after the war. How much do you think this process of creating a national cemetery system contributed to reconciliation? -Avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Faust’s piece contrasts the reinterment process taken on by the federal government for Union soldiers with that taken on by families and women’s organizations for Confederates. The disparity really demonstrates some of the unique awkwardness of the Civil War and Reconstruction. How does this particular aspect of the aftermath of the war help to explain some of the long-held, sectional bad feelings? -Erin B.<br />
<br />
On page 191, Faust writes that during Whitman’s long task to find and record Union graves throughout the South, he often came upon graves or graveyards that were terribly unkempt. Even worse, it seemed obvious that the Southerners were destroying the graveyards on purpose. On page 191, he writes that the Southerners had built roads and walkways over the graves that had all but destroyed them while nearby there were Confederate graves that were very well kept. Why did Southerners purposefully destroy Union graves when they themselves knew the feeling of not knowing where their deceased loved ones were? - Angie<br />
<br />
On Page 189 Drew Faust's work "Battle over the Bodies" how the position of the South had changed from stunned disbelief to a posture of growing defiance. One of the ways that the South continued to defy the North was to disturb the grave sites of Union soldiers which the Union was surprised that this type of action was taking place. Faust discusses that the reason for the South to desecrate Union graces was that the graves proved to be an irresistible target for southern rage and was an opportunity to express their refusal of defeat. The Confederacy was unable to defeat a live Union army, but they could stay fight against a dead one.- Nick<br />
<br />
I was particularly struck by this article. What are your personal opinions regarding Faust's discussion on violence against protectors of Union corpses. Is confederate desecration of Union tombs and bodies understandable? What are your personal reactions about the violence committed against those trying to protect or bury the bodies? Does this article make you reflect on how body treatment was portrayed in popular Civil War movies? - A. Askins<br />
<br />
Faust mentions how Southerners sometimes refused to give up the location of buried Union soldiers, even after the war. Is this rejection of reconciliation even over the dead a sign of the beginning of Southern resentment towards the North? It's interesting to note that they refused to work together, even over the simplicity of honoring the dead. - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
In what ways did the frustrations of Southern Whites in the late 1860's manifest themselves later on? Initially, they desecrated graves and terrified those protecting them. Later, amidst a culture of reconciliation that Blight discusses, did these outburst disappear or simply manifest themselves in other ways?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
== Blight ==<br />
<br />
A couple times in Blight's book, African Americans' sentiments towards the war and slavery were mentioned. A good amount of the time it seemed like they wanted to look past the fact that they were enslaved and oppressed for hundreds of years. Was forgetting slavery something that most African Americans wanted to do in an attempt for reconciliation? This seems like a reaction that immediately followed the war but did not last long. -Avanness<br />
<br />
Blight briefly talks about how women in the South initially remembered the war after the Confederacy's defeat. A theme of gloom seems overwhelming for many women in the south and how they remembered the war. How often did women in the south feel this "gloomy" emotion after the conclusion of the Civil War and how did it affect their memory of it? Also, what about Northern Women? What were their perceptions on the conclusion of the war and their memories? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
Why do we still embrace Blight's "blood feud"? Why haven't we,after one hundred and fifty years,reconciled the Civil War? -- R.King<br />
<br />
Blight discusses how the ideology of the "Lost Cause" developed after the Civil War had ended. The Richmond dispatch discussed that the South had fought for a "sense of rights under the Constitution," "and a conscientious conviction of the justice of their position." They went on to write how the South how sacrificed itself in order to find answers to unsettled questions left by the founding fathers. Do you agree with this statement?- Nick<br />
<br />
On the same note as Avanness comment, do you think this readiness to move on was fueled by the thought that they would be receiving the long denied civil rights? Did they simply desire to move on? - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
I find it incredibly odd that there were travel books published about the battlefields of the war just one year after the war was finished. Did people really visit the battlefields this soon after the war? With all the talk in the Gaust reading about the trouble of burying bodies it makes me think people might have seen some fallen soldiers not yet buried. –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== Remembering Slavery ==<br />
<br />
<br />
Do you think that the use of songs in the slaves' memory of the Civil War and Emancipation impact or influence the memory for those who were relatively young at the time? --MK<br />
<br />
Why did some slaves "stick to (their)masters"? Was it because they were "too soft" as Felix Haywood stated or was it a relic of the oppression they lived with their entire lives? -- R.King<br />
<br />
<br />
On page 271 of Remembering Slavery, the story of Robert Glenn begins. Glenn’s story is interesting because even after he knew he was free, he decided to stay with his master for a year and even considered staying longer. How many freed slaves continued to stay on and live and work for their ex-masters? Why did they decide to continue to work for the people who had enslaved them even though they were now free? - Angie<br />
<br />
It is interesting to note that these accounts seem to be riddles with feelings of "undeserving" and that emancipation had little to no impact on life for slaves. In some accounts (like Felix Haywood's), emancipation is portrayed as overrated and responsible for making life harder for former slaves. Why would these oral histories have such a common tone? Is it possible these accounts were conditioned by the interviewers and ingrained fear?- A. Askins<br />
<br />
Several of the accounts (although not all) we read regarding slavery discuss how the slaves were "content" with their living situations and that it really wasn't so bad. Full bellies and a roof over their heads made up for the "occasional beating". As we discussed in class, do you think this is a biased option based on who the interviewers chose to speak with? - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
Throughout this reading, I was left thinking of what they say about someone who is deaf or blind. You ask this person, "what is like to be blind?" And they respond, "what is it like to see? It is only a disability to you." While I certainly do not want to justify the experience of slavery, it almost seems as though the speaker of this piece didn't necessarily want to be freed. How prevalent do you think this attitude was? --Cash<br />
<br />
If slaves knew nothing of emancipation, why the seemingly widespread celebrations upon news of its arrival? Susan Merritt described events "after freedom," as if it was a major turning point in her life. It seems to me that emancipation meant so many different things for different people. Some slaves had difficulties grasping the idea of freedom, while others celebrated the coming of emancipation as one of the most important moments of their lives. Is it possible, then, to determine concretely the overall effect of emancipation?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
In Remembering Slavery, some slaves have good things to say about their masters. Do you think that they were influenced by Reconstruction or did they really mean it? Why is Mexico not discussed more often as a slave haven? Why did it take Kentucky so long to get ride of slavery since it was occupied by the Union for the entire war.<br />
Logan T<br />
<br />
== General Questions ==<br />
<br />
<br />
A theme I have noticed throughout our readings, often in Blight, and especially now in Faust, is that of a lost opportunity. There were seemingly small but important mistakes made in message (reconciliation) and administration (the failure to treat Confederate dead the same as Union dead) that were major factors in the formation of Lost Cause ideology. Is this the case? Or were these kinds of ideas inevitable? -GStan.</div>15thvavolunteershttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_2_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 2 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-01-20T07:42:37Z<p>15thvavolunteers: /* Blight */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Faust ==<br />
<br />
<br />
As mentioned in class, the people at this time did not have the ability to figure out who was who based on DNA when trying to bury them and report to their families. In Faust's reading, somehow James Moore was able to identify 12,912 of the 13,363 bodies of Union soldiers from Andersonville. This just seems remarkable. How long did it take him to figure the identifications of so many men? And how? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Faust talks about how the national reburial program led to the redefining of the nation. How did the treatment of the dead jeopardize the redefinition of the nation? --MK <br />
<br />
MK, don't you think that by 1865, many of the soldiers just wanted to return home? With so many stories of brother-fighting-brother, I think everyone was eager to return home to some sort of union, however tenuous. --Cash<br />
<br />
Faust discusses the role of blacks in the burials of Union soldiers across the South (192-193) and how impartial blacks were to helping the bury the Union dead. Why do you think this was, and what kind of fears do you think the slaves encountered from whites in the south who were hostile to the burying of Union soldiers in the south? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
The issue of a proper and honorable burial for soldiers, especially Union soldiers in the South was a problem after the war. How much do you think this process of creating a national cemetery system contributed to reconciliation? -Avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Faust’s piece contrasts the reinterment process taken on by the federal government for Union soldiers with that taken on by families and women’s organizations for Confederates. The disparity really demonstrates some of the unique awkwardness of the Civil War and Reconstruction. How does this particular aspect of the aftermath of the war help to explain some of the long-held, sectional bad feelings? -Erin B.<br />
<br />
On page 191, Faust writes that during Whitman’s long task to find and record Union graves throughout the South, he often came upon graves or graveyards that were terribly unkempt. Even worse, it seemed obvious that the Southerners were destroying the graveyards on purpose. On page 191, he writes that the Southerners had built roads and walkways over the graves that had all but destroyed them while nearby there were Confederate graves that were very well kept. Why did Southerners purposefully destroy Union graves when they themselves knew the feeling of not knowing where their deceased loved ones were? - Angie<br />
<br />
On Page 189 Drew Faust's work "Battle over the Bodies" how the position of the South had changed from stunned disbelief to a posture of growing defiance. One of the ways that the South continued to defy the North was to disturb the grave sites of Union soldiers which the Union was surprised that this type of action was taking place. Faust discusses that the reason for the South to desecrate Union graces was that the graves proved to be an irresistible target for southern rage and was an opportunity to express their refusal of defeat. The Confederacy was unable to defeat a live Union army, but they could stay fight against a dead one.- Nick<br />
<br />
I was particularly struck by this article. What are your personal opinions regarding Faust's discussion on violence against protectors of Union corpses. Is confederate desecration of Union tombs and bodies understandable? What are your personal reactions about the violence committed against those trying to protect or bury the bodies? Does this article make you reflect on how body treatment was portrayed in popular Civil War movies? - A. Askins<br />
<br />
Faust mentions how Southerners sometimes refused to give up the location of buried Union soldiers, even after the war. Is this rejection of reconciliation even over the dead a sign of the beginning of Southern resentment towards the North? It's interesting to note that they refused to work together, even over the simplicity of honoring the dead. - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
In what ways did the frustrations of Southern Whites in the late 1860's manifest themselves later on? Initially, they desecrated graves and terrified those protecting them. Later, amidst a culture of reconciliation that Blight discusses, did these outburst disappear or simply manifest themselves in other ways?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
== Blight ==<br />
<br />
A couple times in Blight's book, African Americans' sentiments towards the war and slavery were mentioned. A good amount of the time it seemed like they wanted to look past the fact that they were enslaved and oppressed for hundreds of years. Was forgetting slavery something that most African Americans wanted to do in an attempt for reconciliation? This seems like a reaction that immediately followed the war but did not last long. -Avanness<br />
<br />
Blight briefly talks about how women in the South initially remembered the war after the Confederacy's defeat. A theme of gloom seems overwhelming for many women in the south and how they remembered the war. How often did women in the south feel this "gloomy" emotion after the conclusion of the Civil War and how did it affect their memory of it? Also, what about Northern Women? What were their perceptions on the conclusion of the war and their memories? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
Why do we still embrace Blight's "blood feud"? Why haven't we,after one hundred and fifty years,reconciled the Civil War? -- R.King<br />
<br />
Blight discusses how the ideology of the "Lost Cause" developed after the Civil War had ended. The Richmond dispatch discussed that the South had fought for a "sense of rights under the Constitution," "and a conscientious conviction of the justice of their position." They went on to write how the South how sacrificed itself in order to find answers to unsettled questions left by the founding fathers. Do you agree with this statement?- Nick<br />
<br />
On the same note as Avanness comment, do you think this readiness to move on was fueled by the thought that they would be receiving the long denied civil rights? Did they simply desire to move on? - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
I find it incredibly odd that there were travel books published about the battlefields of the war just one year after the war was finished. Did people really visit the battlefields this soon after the war? With all the talk in the Gaust reading about the trouble of burying bodies it makes me think people might have seen some fallen soldiers not yet buried. –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
How was it possible after a year of decomposition to identify bodies of Union and Confederate soldiers? The bodies were generally buried no more than a foot deep. A good rain would uncover the bodies and as the reading described hogs would eat the bodies. So how could the indentify them. Was there an attempt to return the bodies home to be buried in local cemeteries? Logan T<br />
<br />
== Remembering Slavery ==<br />
<br />
<br />
Do you think that the use of songs in the slaves' memory of the Civil War and Emancipation impact or influence the memory for those who were relatively young at the time? --MK<br />
<br />
Why did some slaves "stick to (their)masters"? Was it because they were "too soft" as Felix Haywood stated or was it a relic of the oppression they lived with their entire lives? -- R.King<br />
<br />
<br />
On page 271 of Remembering Slavery, the story of Robert Glenn begins. Glenn’s story is interesting because even after he knew he was free, he decided to stay with his master for a year and even considered staying longer. How many freed slaves continued to stay on and live and work for their ex-masters? Why did they decide to continue to work for the people who had enslaved them even though they were now free? - Angie<br />
<br />
It is interesting to note that these accounts seem to be riddles with feelings of "undeserving" and that emancipation had little to no impact on life for slaves. In some accounts (like Felix Haywood's), emancipation is portrayed as overrated and responsible for making life harder for former slaves. Why would these oral histories have such a common tone? Is it possible these accounts were conditioned by the interviewers and ingrained fear?- A. Askins<br />
<br />
Several of the accounts (although not all) we read regarding slavery discuss how the slaves were "content" with their living situations and that it really wasn't so bad. Full bellies and a roof over their heads made up for the "occasional beating". As we discussed in class, do you think this is a biased option based on who the interviewers chose to speak with? - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
Throughout this reading, I was left thinking of what they say about someone who is deaf or blind. You ask this person, "what is like to be blind?" And they respond, "what is it like to see? It is only a disability to you." While I certainly do not want to justify the experience of slavery, it almost seems as though the speaker of this piece didn't necessarily want to be freed. How prevalent do you think this attitude was? --Cash<br />
<br />
If slaves knew nothing of emancipation, why the seemingly widespread celebrations upon news of its arrival? Susan Merritt described events "after freedom," as if it was a major turning point in her life. It seems to me that emancipation meant so many different things for different people. Some slaves had difficulties grasping the idea of freedom, while others celebrated the coming of emancipation as one of the most important moments of their lives. Is it possible, then, to determine concretely the overall effect of emancipation?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
In Remembering Slavery, some slaves have good things to say about their masters. Do you think that they were influenced by Reconstruction or did they really mean it? Why is Mexico not discussed more often as a slave haven? Why did it take Kentucky so long to get ride of slavery since it was occupied by the Union for the entire war.<br />
Logan T<br />
<br />
== General Questions ==<br />
<br />
<br />
A theme I have noticed throughout our readings, often in Blight, and especially now in Faust, is that of a lost opportunity. There were seemingly small but important mistakes made in message (reconciliation) and administration (the failure to treat Confederate dead the same as Union dead) that were major factors in the formation of Lost Cause ideology. Is this the case? Or were these kinds of ideas inevitable? -GStan.</div>15thvavolunteershttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_2_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 2 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-01-20T07:31:11Z<p>15thvavolunteers: /* Remembering Slavery */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Faust ==<br />
<br />
<br />
As mentioned in class, the people at this time did not have the ability to figure out who was who based on DNA when trying to bury them and report to their families. In Faust's reading, somehow James Moore was able to identify 12,912 of the 13,363 bodies of Union soldiers from Andersonville. This just seems remarkable. How long did it take him to figure the identifications of so many men? And how? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Faust talks about how the national reburial program led to the redefining of the nation. How did the treatment of the dead jeopardize the redefinition of the nation? --MK <br />
<br />
MK, don't you think that by 1865, many of the soldiers just wanted to return home? With so many stories of brother-fighting-brother, I think everyone was eager to return home to some sort of union, however tenuous. --Cash<br />
<br />
Faust discusses the role of blacks in the burials of Union soldiers across the South (192-193) and how impartial blacks were to helping the bury the Union dead. Why do you think this was, and what kind of fears do you think the slaves encountered from whites in the south who were hostile to the burying of Union soldiers in the south? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
The issue of a proper and honorable burial for soldiers, especially Union soldiers in the South was a problem after the war. How much do you think this process of creating a national cemetery system contributed to reconciliation? -Avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Faust’s piece contrasts the reinterment process taken on by the federal government for Union soldiers with that taken on by families and women’s organizations for Confederates. The disparity really demonstrates some of the unique awkwardness of the Civil War and Reconstruction. How does this particular aspect of the aftermath of the war help to explain some of the long-held, sectional bad feelings? -Erin B.<br />
<br />
On page 191, Faust writes that during Whitman’s long task to find and record Union graves throughout the South, he often came upon graves or graveyards that were terribly unkempt. Even worse, it seemed obvious that the Southerners were destroying the graveyards on purpose. On page 191, he writes that the Southerners had built roads and walkways over the graves that had all but destroyed them while nearby there were Confederate graves that were very well kept. Why did Southerners purposefully destroy Union graves when they themselves knew the feeling of not knowing where their deceased loved ones were? - Angie<br />
<br />
On Page 189 Drew Faust's work "Battle over the Bodies" how the position of the South had changed from stunned disbelief to a posture of growing defiance. One of the ways that the South continued to defy the North was to disturb the grave sites of Union soldiers which the Union was surprised that this type of action was taking place. Faust discusses that the reason for the South to desecrate Union graces was that the graves proved to be an irresistible target for southern rage and was an opportunity to express their refusal of defeat. The Confederacy was unable to defeat a live Union army, but they could stay fight against a dead one.- Nick<br />
<br />
I was particularly struck by this article. What are your personal opinions regarding Faust's discussion on violence against protectors of Union corpses. Is confederate desecration of Union tombs and bodies understandable? What are your personal reactions about the violence committed against those trying to protect or bury the bodies? Does this article make you reflect on how body treatment was portrayed in popular Civil War movies? - A. Askins<br />
<br />
Faust mentions how Southerners sometimes refused to give up the location of buried Union soldiers, even after the war. Is this rejection of reconciliation even over the dead a sign of the beginning of Southern resentment towards the North? It's interesting to note that they refused to work together, even over the simplicity of honoring the dead. - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
In what ways did the frustrations of Southern Whites in the late 1860's manifest themselves later on? Initially, they desecrated graves and terrified those protecting them. Later, amidst a culture of reconciliation that Blight discusses, did these outburst disappear or simply manifest themselves in other ways?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
== Blight ==<br />
<br />
A couple times in Blight's book, African Americans' sentiments towards the war and slavery were mentioned. A good amount of the time it seemed like they wanted to look past the fact that they were enslaved and oppressed for hundreds of years. Was forgetting slavery something that most African Americans wanted to do in an attempt for reconciliation? This seems like a reaction that immediately followed the war but did not last long. -Avanness<br />
<br />
Blight briefly talks about how women in the South initially remembered the war after the Confederacy's defeat. A theme of gloom seems overwhelming for many women in the south and how they remembered the war. How often did women in the south feel this "gloomy" emotion after the conclusion of the Civil War and how did it affect their memory of it? Also, what about Northern Women? What were their perceptions on the conclusion of the war and their memories? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
Why do we still embrace Blight's "blood feud"? Why haven't we,after one hundred and fifty years,reconciled the Civil War? -- R.King<br />
<br />
Blight discusses how the ideology of the "Lost Cause" developed after the Civil War had ended. The Richmond dispatch discussed that the South had fought for a "sense of rights under the Constitution," "and a conscientious conviction of the justice of their position." They went on to write how the South how sacrificed itself in order to find answers to unsettled questions left by the founding fathers. Do you agree with this statement?- Nick<br />
<br />
On the same note as Avanness comment, do you think this readiness to move on was fueled by the thought that they would be receiving the long denied civil rights? Did they simply desire to move on? - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
I find it incredibly odd that there were travel books published about the battlefields of the war just one year after the war was finished. Did people really visit the battlefields this soon after the war? With all the talk in the Gaust reading about the trouble of burying bodies it makes me think people might have seen some fallen soldiers not yet buried. –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== Remembering Slavery ==<br />
<br />
<br />
Do you think that the use of songs in the slaves' memory of the Civil War and Emancipation impact or influence the memory for those who were relatively young at the time? --MK<br />
<br />
Why did some slaves "stick to (their)masters"? Was it because they were "too soft" as Felix Haywood stated or was it a relic of the oppression they lived with their entire lives? -- R.King<br />
<br />
<br />
On page 271 of Remembering Slavery, the story of Robert Glenn begins. Glenn’s story is interesting because even after he knew he was free, he decided to stay with his master for a year and even considered staying longer. How many freed slaves continued to stay on and live and work for their ex-masters? Why did they decide to continue to work for the people who had enslaved them even though they were now free? - Angie<br />
<br />
It is interesting to note that these accounts seem to be riddles with feelings of "undeserving" and that emancipation had little to no impact on life for slaves. In some accounts (like Felix Haywood's), emancipation is portrayed as overrated and responsible for making life harder for former slaves. Why would these oral histories have such a common tone? Is it possible these accounts were conditioned by the interviewers and ingrained fear?- A. Askins<br />
<br />
Several of the accounts (although not all) we read regarding slavery discuss how the slaves were "content" with their living situations and that it really wasn't so bad. Full bellies and a roof over their heads made up for the "occasional beating". As we discussed in class, do you think this is a biased option based on who the interviewers chose to speak with? - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
Throughout this reading, I was left thinking of what they say about someone who is deaf or blind. You ask this person, "what is like to be blind?" And they respond, "what is it like to see? It is only a disability to you." While I certainly do not want to justify the experience of slavery, it almost seems as though the speaker of this piece didn't necessarily want to be freed. How prevalent do you think this attitude was? --Cash<br />
<br />
If slaves knew nothing of emancipation, why the seemingly widespread celebrations upon news of its arrival? Susan Merritt described events "after freedom," as if it was a major turning point in her life. It seems to me that emancipation meant so many different things for different people. Some slaves had difficulties grasping the idea of freedom, while others celebrated the coming of emancipation as one of the most important moments of their lives. Is it possible, then, to determine concretely the overall effect of emancipation?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
In Remembering Slavery, some slaves have good things to say about their masters. Do you think that they were influenced by Reconstruction or did they really mean it? Why is Mexico not discussed more often as a slave haven? Why did it take Kentucky so long to get ride of slavery since it was occupied by the Union for the entire war.<br />
Logan T<br />
<br />
== General Questions ==<br />
<br />
<br />
A theme I have noticed throughout our readings, often in Blight, and especially now in Faust, is that of a lost opportunity. There were seemingly small but important mistakes made in message (reconciliation) and administration (the failure to treat Confederate dead the same as Union dead) that were major factors in the formation of Lost Cause ideology. Is this the case? Or were these kinds of ideas inevitable? -GStan.</div>15thvavolunteershttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_2_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 2 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-01-18T09:36:55Z<p>15thvavolunteers: /* Blight, ''Race and Reunion'' */</p>
<hr />
<div>== McPherson, What They Fought For, ==<br />
<br />
In McPherson's "What They Fought For," the issue of slavery was left out in the majority of the letters on both the Union and Confederate sides (pg. 49). However, many soldiers understood the War as fundamentally about slavery instead of reunion after the Emancipation Proclamation. Do you think the absence of slavery in the letters affected the soldiers' memories? --MK Napier <br />
<br />
<br />
McPherson discusses the both the North and the South's reasons for fighting and through his sampling of letters, he was able to draw some parallels between the two. Both sides seemed to connect one of their reasons for fighting to the American Revolution and upholding a sense of liberty. Do you think this connection to the American Revolution and the Civil War is important? Did many soldiers experience similar sentiments, not just the ones from McPherson's sampling? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
<br />
McPherson sampling techniques are to say the least "interesting" and at worst suspect. He has taken a very unbalanced approach when it comes to confederate letters and diaries yet takes a more balanced approach with the northern articles. Is he taking Telsen's approach of constructing a history to fit his needs or is it something more benign? -- R.King<br />
<br />
McPherson repeated over and over again about how the Confederate soldiers expected to win, that it would be better to die for the cause, and he even used the term "subjugated" to refer to losing the war to be a fate worse than death. Later on in the reading he also used the term "glorious cause." I wonder how words like this that are written in soldiers' diaries and read throughout primary sources shape the way in which people think of the Confederacy, their passion, and their reasons for their involvement in the war? -Avanness<br />
<br />
McPherson suggests that, based on his sample of journal entries, Confederate soldiers seemed largely oblivious to the irony of their references to slavery and freedom when referring to the "tyranny" of the Yankees, while suggesting that their Revolution-era counterparts were typically appreciative of this “paradox” (50-51). Is this demonstrative of a shift in culture in the South since the American Revolution or is it just an example of how patriotism is written about in war-time journal entries? -Erin B.<br />
<br />
<br />
McPherson throughout the section on "Holy Cause of Liberty and Independence" describes the Confederacy's motivation in fighting and discusses that the defense of their homeland was one of their chief motivations. Defending their homeland from the Union seemed to greatly inspire the Confederacy and in response to their fighting spirit a sergeant from Illinois wrote that the Confederates " fight Devils in Tophet because the were fighting to keep an enemy out of their own neighborhood and their own property" (19). An officer also from Illinois summarized the Confederacy's war motivation fairly well by stating " they are fighting from different motives than us. We are fighting for the Union... a high and noble sentiment but after all only a sentiment. They are fighting for independence and are animated by passion and hatred against invaders ... it makes no reason whether their cause is just or not. Do you agree with this statement that it made no difference if the Confederacy's cause was just or not?- Nick J.<br />
<br />
McPherson's article outlines the various motives for fighting, and the particular confederate and union attitudes regarding each other. One chapter outlined the "confederate bloodlust" at seeing dead yankees, a particularly striking chapter, but there was no parallel description of Yankee point-of-view as particularly morbid. Why would the south be more inclined to emphasize in correspondence home this morbid satisfaction? Or is this a result of historiographical error or bias?- A. Askins<br />
<br />
"What They Fought For" posits that civil war soldiers were far more idealistic than previously assumed. However, a letter does not describe a soldier's thoughts, but what they put down on paper. In any war the two may not be the same thing, though they certainly could be. Is there a difference in the two, or are the views in these letters, as McPherson suggests, largely accurate portraits of soldiers' opinions on the war? Also, it should be noted that the view in general society was that war in general was honorable and glorious, which cannot be said for the first world war or those after it. Could this have affected how a soldier chose to describe the war? -GStan.<br />
<br />
As mentioned before in McPherson’s piece both the Union soldiers and the Confederates compared themselves to the men who fought in the Revolutionary War. In your opinion, did one side have a stronger argument in comparing themselves to their forefathers? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Why, as McPherson states at the end of page 21, did the Texan troops appear to be more candid about the massacring of Yankee soldiers when they were the furthest away from a great deal of the fighting, geographically?-AJ L.<br />
<br />
The McPherson reading discusses how romanticism was a motivator for soldiers to enlist. Is romanticism a forgotten cause for the conflict or is it a reason why so many people are draw to it? Logan T<br />
<br />
== Remembering Slavery ==<br />
<br />
In ''Remembering Slavery'', many of the slaves mention that did not understand the meaning of 'freedom'. For example, on page 215, a salve girl remarks, "I didn't know what 'free' meant, and I askes Mrs. Harris if I was free." I'd imagine that many slaves did not understand this concept as well, but my question is, how many of them asked their slaveholder what the meaning of free was and got a truthful answer? Were the slaveholders able to exploit their slaves further even after the Civil War ended simply because many did not understand what it meant to be free? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
On page 240-241 of the Remembering Slavery article, said that some freed slaves were sad that they were free after the war partially because the Yankee soldiers had destroyed food and livestock in the regions in which they lived. Since earlier accounts had talked about the celebrations of the soldiers coming to town (pg. 234), does this mean that the “collective” memory of freed slaves is actually quite different than individual memories? -Angie<br />
<br />
One of the things that struck me about so many of these narratives was the ways in which the slaves discussed their normal, everyday activities, while simultaneously notions of freedom. Even those for whom the concept of freedom was impossibly foreign quickly came to understand the implications of the arrival of the Union Army. How much did slaves of the Deep South know about the War, both before and during? Did George Kye, a wagon driver serving in the Confederate Army in the place of his master, acknowledge the purpose of the War before being set free?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
== Blight, ''Race and Reunion'' ==<br />
<br />
In ''Race and Reunion'' Blight talks about themes of rebirth, reunion, and reconciliation of the nation at the end of the Civil War. Do you think that the southern memory of the Civil War (in particular the Lost Cause, Jim Crow Laws, etc.) were an attempt to stop the "rebirth" of the nation?--MK Napier<br />
<br />
Why did the promoters of the 1913 Gettysburg reunion discourage discussion of the causes of the war? Was it because it would have shown the war to be a Union failure in light of the countries acceptance of Jim Crow? -- R.King<br />
<br />
<br />
In Blight's reading and throughout "Remembering Slavery," the idea of a Black Civil War memory is mentioned. I wonder how important you think their memories about Civil War are in the way we have shaped the Civil War in our memory today? Do you think they are more important than Union or Confederate soldiers' memories or that many of their memories have been lost over time due to their slave status? -Avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
In Race and Reunion, Blight discusses Walt Whitman’s writing about his experiences in Civil War hospitals and the ways in which witnessing the brutality of war inspired his later writing, especially the themes of death and destruction as a means to national rebirth, and redefinition. But the issues of abolition and race are absent from Whitman’s poetry and prose concerning his experiences with the “Secession War.” How does this reflect the larger, national understanding of the meaning of the end of the war for white Americans? - Erin B.<br />
<br />
On page 19 in Blight’s book, he mentions that in the aftermath of the war, private, or individual, memories collided with the political collective memory that was involving. What would be the difference between individual and collective memories? Would they always oppose each other? -Angie<br />
<br />
In Blight's book, he mentions Whitman's quote about the "real war" getting into the books, how much did the advances in historians and writers methods affect the memory of the civil war both in the face of all the conflicting stories from the war. - AJ L.<br />
<br />
In the Race and Reunion reading the author discusses a meeting between General Sherman, Secretary Stanton, and twenty black ministers. Having read many books about the Civil War this is the first time I can remember reading about this meeting. Does it appear to anyone else that this meeting has escaped the mainstream memory? Why is this meeting not discussed in more books? Blight called it controversial why? Logan T<br />
<br />
== General questions ==<br />
<br />
There war was called by many different names. From our readings we have the 2nd War for Independence, a southerner’s term for the war (in McPherson’s piece) and the Secession War from Whitman, a northerner (in the reading from Blight). How long after the war did it take for ‘The Civil War’ to become the most common term for the war? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
The discussion of what the soldiers were fighting for makes me think of current issues today. I can’t help but see parallels between the causes of the Civil War and the healthcare debate. This question is not meant to start a debate on Healthcare or the causes of the Civil War. Americans during the Civil War disagreed on three issues, the moral question of Slavery, the economic question of agrarian vs. industry based economies, and the political question of states rights vs. federal sovereignty. These disagreements divided the country and started a war. Healthcare has also caused Americans to disagree on three issues; the moral question of the healthcare system, the economic question of who should pay for healthcare, and the political question can a state government “Virginia” over turn a federal law. Has our memory of the Civil War caused the healthcare debate to be non-violent? Has our memory of the Civil War made the Healthcare debate more heated? Does our memory of the Civil War effect political issues that don’t seem to be related to the conflict? Logan T<br />
<br />
== debate topics ==<br />
<br />
McPherson talks about northern women extolling their husbands to return home, that family was more important then fighting for their country. Did southern women fell the same way or did they feel as there husbands did. -- R.King<br />
<br />
In ''Remembering Slavery'': the importance of song and folk lyrics as their own battlefield: how did the southern blacks use song to demonstrate and spread their own current events knowledge, and what examples in this article struck you most?- A. Askins<br />
<br />
McPherson in "Remembering Slavery discusses the recruitment of African Americans in the Union Army and how the inclusion of African Americans soldiers impacted the war. In your opinion, how instrumental was African Americans joining the Union Army in contributing to the Union's victory?-Nick. J<br />
<br />
The role of Lincoln in the creation of a Civil War memory. Blight touches on the weary president attempting to come to term with the death toll of a war no longer under his control. We talk quite a bit about the roles of Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee after the War. Can it be argued that, despite his life being cut short, Lincoln shaped the public memory of the Civil War as much or more than Lee and Davis with the Gettysburg Address? -D. Radtke</div>15thvavolunteershttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_2_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 2 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-01-18T09:35:24Z<p>15thvavolunteers: /* General questions */</p>
<hr />
<div>== McPherson, What They Fought For, ==<br />
<br />
In McPherson's "What They Fought For," the issue of slavery was left out in the majority of the letters on both the Union and Confederate sides (pg. 49). However, many soldiers understood the War as fundamentally about slavery instead of reunion after the Emancipation Proclamation. Do you think the absence of slavery in the letters affected the soldiers' memories? --MK Napier <br />
<br />
<br />
McPherson discusses the both the North and the South's reasons for fighting and through his sampling of letters, he was able to draw some parallels between the two. Both sides seemed to connect one of their reasons for fighting to the American Revolution and upholding a sense of liberty. Do you think this connection to the American Revolution and the Civil War is important? Did many soldiers experience similar sentiments, not just the ones from McPherson's sampling? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
<br />
McPherson sampling techniques are to say the least "interesting" and at worst suspect. He has taken a very unbalanced approach when it comes to confederate letters and diaries yet takes a more balanced approach with the northern articles. Is he taking Telsen's approach of constructing a history to fit his needs or is it something more benign? -- R.King<br />
<br />
McPherson repeated over and over again about how the Confederate soldiers expected to win, that it would be better to die for the cause, and he even used the term "subjugated" to refer to losing the war to be a fate worse than death. Later on in the reading he also used the term "glorious cause." I wonder how words like this that are written in soldiers' diaries and read throughout primary sources shape the way in which people think of the Confederacy, their passion, and their reasons for their involvement in the war? -Avanness<br />
<br />
McPherson suggests that, based on his sample of journal entries, Confederate soldiers seemed largely oblivious to the irony of their references to slavery and freedom when referring to the "tyranny" of the Yankees, while suggesting that their Revolution-era counterparts were typically appreciative of this “paradox” (50-51). Is this demonstrative of a shift in culture in the South since the American Revolution or is it just an example of how patriotism is written about in war-time journal entries? -Erin B.<br />
<br />
<br />
McPherson throughout the section on "Holy Cause of Liberty and Independence" describes the Confederacy's motivation in fighting and discusses that the defense of their homeland was one of their chief motivations. Defending their homeland from the Union seemed to greatly inspire the Confederacy and in response to their fighting spirit a sergeant from Illinois wrote that the Confederates " fight Devils in Tophet because the were fighting to keep an enemy out of their own neighborhood and their own property" (19). An officer also from Illinois summarized the Confederacy's war motivation fairly well by stating " they are fighting from different motives than us. We are fighting for the Union... a high and noble sentiment but after all only a sentiment. They are fighting for independence and are animated by passion and hatred against invaders ... it makes no reason whether their cause is just or not. Do you agree with this statement that it made no difference if the Confederacy's cause was just or not?- Nick J.<br />
<br />
McPherson's article outlines the various motives for fighting, and the particular confederate and union attitudes regarding each other. One chapter outlined the "confederate bloodlust" at seeing dead yankees, a particularly striking chapter, but there was no parallel description of Yankee point-of-view as particularly morbid. Why would the south be more inclined to emphasize in correspondence home this morbid satisfaction? Or is this a result of historiographical error or bias?- A. Askins<br />
<br />
"What They Fought For" posits that civil war soldiers were far more idealistic than previously assumed. However, a letter does not describe a soldier's thoughts, but what they put down on paper. In any war the two may not be the same thing, though they certainly could be. Is there a difference in the two, or are the views in these letters, as McPherson suggests, largely accurate portraits of soldiers' opinions on the war? Also, it should be noted that the view in general society was that war in general was honorable and glorious, which cannot be said for the first world war or those after it. Could this have affected how a soldier chose to describe the war? -GStan.<br />
<br />
As mentioned before in McPherson’s piece both the Union soldiers and the Confederates compared themselves to the men who fought in the Revolutionary War. In your opinion, did one side have a stronger argument in comparing themselves to their forefathers? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Why, as McPherson states at the end of page 21, did the Texan troops appear to be more candid about the massacring of Yankee soldiers when they were the furthest away from a great deal of the fighting, geographically?-AJ L.<br />
<br />
The McPherson reading discusses how romanticism was a motivator for soldiers to enlist. Is romanticism a forgotten cause for the conflict or is it a reason why so many people are draw to it? Logan T<br />
<br />
== Remembering Slavery ==<br />
<br />
In ''Remembering Slavery'', many of the slaves mention that did not understand the meaning of 'freedom'. For example, on page 215, a salve girl remarks, "I didn't know what 'free' meant, and I askes Mrs. Harris if I was free." I'd imagine that many slaves did not understand this concept as well, but my question is, how many of them asked their slaveholder what the meaning of free was and got a truthful answer? Were the slaveholders able to exploit their slaves further even after the Civil War ended simply because many did not understand what it meant to be free? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
On page 240-241 of the Remembering Slavery article, said that some freed slaves were sad that they were free after the war partially because the Yankee soldiers had destroyed food and livestock in the regions in which they lived. Since earlier accounts had talked about the celebrations of the soldiers coming to town (pg. 234), does this mean that the “collective” memory of freed slaves is actually quite different than individual memories? -Angie<br />
<br />
One of the things that struck me about so many of these narratives was the ways in which the slaves discussed their normal, everyday activities, while simultaneously notions of freedom. Even those for whom the concept of freedom was impossibly foreign quickly came to understand the implications of the arrival of the Union Army. How much did slaves of the Deep South know about the War, both before and during? Did George Kye, a wagon driver serving in the Confederate Army in the place of his master, acknowledge the purpose of the War before being set free?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
== Blight, ''Race and Reunion'' ==<br />
<br />
In ''Race and Reunion'' Blight talks about themes of rebirth, reunion, and reconciliation of the nation at the end of the Civil War. Do you think that the southern memory of the Civil War (in particular the Lost Cause, Jim Crow Laws, etc.) were an attempt to stop the "rebirth" of the nation?--MK Napier<br />
<br />
Why did the promoters of the 1913 Gettysburg reunion discourage discussion of the causes of the war? Was it because it would have shown the war to be a Union failure in light of the countries acceptance of Jim Crow? -- R.King<br />
<br />
<br />
In Blight's reading and throughout "Remembering Slavery," the idea of a Black Civil War memory is mentioned. I wonder how important you think their memories about Civil War are in the way we have shaped the Civil War in our memory today? Do you think they are more important than Union or Confederate soldiers' memories or that many of their memories have been lost over time due to their slave status? -Avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
In Race and Reunion, Blight discusses Walt Whitman’s writing about his experiences in Civil War hospitals and the ways in which witnessing the brutality of war inspired his later writing, especially the themes of death and destruction as a means to national rebirth, and redefinition. But the issues of abolition and race are absent from Whitman’s poetry and prose concerning his experiences with the “Secession War.” How does this reflect the larger, national understanding of the meaning of the end of the war for white Americans? - Erin B.<br />
<br />
On page 19 in Blight’s book, he mentions that in the aftermath of the war, private, or individual, memories collided with the political collective memory that was involving. What would be the difference between individual and collective memories? Would they always oppose each other? -Angie<br />
<br />
In Blight's book, he mentions Whitman's quote about the "real war" getting into the books, how much did the advances in historians and writers methods affect the memory of the civil war both in the face of all the conflicting stories from the war. - AJ L. <br />
<br />
== General questions ==<br />
<br />
There war was called by many different names. From our readings we have the 2nd War for Independence, a southerner’s term for the war (in McPherson’s piece) and the Secession War from Whitman, a northerner (in the reading from Blight). How long after the war did it take for ‘The Civil War’ to become the most common term for the war? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
The discussion of what the soldiers were fighting for makes me think of current issues today. I can’t help but see parallels between the causes of the Civil War and the healthcare debate. This question is not meant to start a debate on Healthcare or the causes of the Civil War. Americans during the Civil War disagreed on three issues, the moral question of Slavery, the economic question of agrarian vs. industry based economies, and the political question of states rights vs. federal sovereignty. These disagreements divided the country and started a war. Healthcare has also caused Americans to disagree on three issues; the moral question of the healthcare system, the economic question of who should pay for healthcare, and the political question can a state government “Virginia” over turn a federal law. Has our memory of the Civil War caused the healthcare debate to be non-violent? Has our memory of the Civil War made the Healthcare debate more heated? Does our memory of the Civil War effect political issues that don’t seem to be related to the conflict? Logan T<br />
<br />
== debate topics ==<br />
<br />
McPherson talks about northern women extolling their husbands to return home, that family was more important then fighting for their country. Did southern women fell the same way or did they feel as there husbands did. -- R.King<br />
<br />
In ''Remembering Slavery'': the importance of song and folk lyrics as their own battlefield: how did the southern blacks use song to demonstrate and spread their own current events knowledge, and what examples in this article struck you most?- A. Askins<br />
<br />
McPherson in "Remembering Slavery discusses the recruitment of African Americans in the Union Army and how the inclusion of African Americans soldiers impacted the war. In your opinion, how instrumental was African Americans joining the Union Army in contributing to the Union's victory?-Nick. J<br />
<br />
The role of Lincoln in the creation of a Civil War memory. Blight touches on the weary president attempting to come to term with the death toll of a war no longer under his control. We talk quite a bit about the roles of Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee after the War. Can it be argued that, despite his life being cut short, Lincoln shaped the public memory of the Civil War as much or more than Lee and Davis with the Gettysburg Address? -D. Radtke</div>15thvavolunteershttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_2_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 2 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-01-18T09:27:57Z<p>15thvavolunteers: /* McPherson, What They Fought For, */</p>
<hr />
<div>== McPherson, What They Fought For, ==<br />
<br />
In McPherson's "What They Fought For," the issue of slavery was left out in the majority of the letters on both the Union and Confederate sides (pg. 49). However, many soldiers understood the War as fundamentally about slavery instead of reunion after the Emancipation Proclamation. Do you think the absence of slavery in the letters affected the soldiers' memories? --MK Napier <br />
<br />
<br />
McPherson discusses the both the North and the South's reasons for fighting and through his sampling of letters, he was able to draw some parallels between the two. Both sides seemed to connect one of their reasons for fighting to the American Revolution and upholding a sense of liberty. Do you think this connection to the American Revolution and the Civil War is important? Did many soldiers experience similar sentiments, not just the ones from McPherson's sampling? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
<br />
McPherson sampling techniques are to say the least "interesting" and at worst suspect. He has taken a very unbalanced approach when it comes to confederate letters and diaries yet takes a more balanced approach with the northern articles. Is he taking Telsen's approach of constructing a history to fit his needs or is it something more benign? -- R.King<br />
<br />
McPherson repeated over and over again about how the Confederate soldiers expected to win, that it would be better to die for the cause, and he even used the term "subjugated" to refer to losing the war to be a fate worse than death. Later on in the reading he also used the term "glorious cause." I wonder how words like this that are written in soldiers' diaries and read throughout primary sources shape the way in which people think of the Confederacy, their passion, and their reasons for their involvement in the war? -Avanness<br />
<br />
McPherson suggests that, based on his sample of journal entries, Confederate soldiers seemed largely oblivious to the irony of their references to slavery and freedom when referring to the "tyranny" of the Yankees, while suggesting that their Revolution-era counterparts were typically appreciative of this “paradox” (50-51). Is this demonstrative of a shift in culture in the South since the American Revolution or is it just an example of how patriotism is written about in war-time journal entries? -Erin B.<br />
<br />
<br />
McPherson throughout the section on "Holy Cause of Liberty and Independence" describes the Confederacy's motivation in fighting and discusses that the defense of their homeland was one of their chief motivations. Defending their homeland from the Union seemed to greatly inspire the Confederacy and in response to their fighting spirit a sergeant from Illinois wrote that the Confederates " fight Devils in Tophet because the were fighting to keep an enemy out of their own neighborhood and their own property" (19). An officer also from Illinois summarized the Confederacy's war motivation fairly well by stating " they are fighting from different motives than us. We are fighting for the Union... a high and noble sentiment but after all only a sentiment. They are fighting for independence and are animated by passion and hatred against invaders ... it makes no reason whether their cause is just or not. Do you agree with this statement that it made no difference if the Confederacy's cause was just or not?- Nick J.<br />
<br />
McPherson's article outlines the various motives for fighting, and the particular confederate and union attitudes regarding each other. One chapter outlined the "confederate bloodlust" at seeing dead yankees, a particularly striking chapter, but there was no parallel description of Yankee point-of-view as particularly morbid. Why would the south be more inclined to emphasize in correspondence home this morbid satisfaction? Or is this a result of historiographical error or bias?- A. Askins<br />
<br />
"What They Fought For" posits that civil war soldiers were far more idealistic than previously assumed. However, a letter does not describe a soldier's thoughts, but what they put down on paper. In any war the two may not be the same thing, though they certainly could be. Is there a difference in the two, or are the views in these letters, as McPherson suggests, largely accurate portraits of soldiers' opinions on the war? Also, it should be noted that the view in general society was that war in general was honorable and glorious, which cannot be said for the first world war or those after it. Could this have affected how a soldier chose to describe the war? -GStan.<br />
<br />
As mentioned before in McPherson’s piece both the Union soldiers and the Confederates compared themselves to the men who fought in the Revolutionary War. In your opinion, did one side have a stronger argument in comparing themselves to their forefathers? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Why, as McPherson states at the end of page 21, did the Texan troops appear to be more candid about the massacring of Yankee soldiers when they were the furthest away from a great deal of the fighting, geographically?-AJ L.<br />
<br />
The McPherson reading discusses how romanticism was a motivator for soldiers to enlist. Is romanticism a forgotten cause for the conflict or is it a reason why so many people are draw to it? Logan T<br />
<br />
== Remembering Slavery ==<br />
<br />
In ''Remembering Slavery'', many of the slaves mention that did not understand the meaning of 'freedom'. For example, on page 215, a salve girl remarks, "I didn't know what 'free' meant, and I askes Mrs. Harris if I was free." I'd imagine that many slaves did not understand this concept as well, but my question is, how many of them asked their slaveholder what the meaning of free was and got a truthful answer? Were the slaveholders able to exploit their slaves further even after the Civil War ended simply because many did not understand what it meant to be free? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
On page 240-241 of the Remembering Slavery article, said that some freed slaves were sad that they were free after the war partially because the Yankee soldiers had destroyed food and livestock in the regions in which they lived. Since earlier accounts had talked about the celebrations of the soldiers coming to town (pg. 234), does this mean that the “collective” memory of freed slaves is actually quite different than individual memories? -Angie<br />
<br />
One of the things that struck me about so many of these narratives was the ways in which the slaves discussed their normal, everyday activities, while simultaneously notions of freedom. Even those for whom the concept of freedom was impossibly foreign quickly came to understand the implications of the arrival of the Union Army. How much did slaves of the Deep South know about the War, both before and during? Did George Kye, a wagon driver serving in the Confederate Army in the place of his master, acknowledge the purpose of the War before being set free?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
== Blight, ''Race and Reunion'' ==<br />
<br />
In ''Race and Reunion'' Blight talks about themes of rebirth, reunion, and reconciliation of the nation at the end of the Civil War. Do you think that the southern memory of the Civil War (in particular the Lost Cause, Jim Crow Laws, etc.) were an attempt to stop the "rebirth" of the nation?--MK Napier<br />
<br />
Why did the promoters of the 1913 Gettysburg reunion discourage discussion of the causes of the war? Was it because it would have shown the war to be a Union failure in light of the countries acceptance of Jim Crow? -- R.King<br />
<br />
<br />
In Blight's reading and throughout "Remembering Slavery," the idea of a Black Civil War memory is mentioned. I wonder how important you think their memories about Civil War are in the way we have shaped the Civil War in our memory today? Do you think they are more important than Union or Confederate soldiers' memories or that many of their memories have been lost over time due to their slave status? -Avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
In Race and Reunion, Blight discusses Walt Whitman’s writing about his experiences in Civil War hospitals and the ways in which witnessing the brutality of war inspired his later writing, especially the themes of death and destruction as a means to national rebirth, and redefinition. But the issues of abolition and race are absent from Whitman’s poetry and prose concerning his experiences with the “Secession War.” How does this reflect the larger, national understanding of the meaning of the end of the war for white Americans? - Erin B.<br />
<br />
On page 19 in Blight’s book, he mentions that in the aftermath of the war, private, or individual, memories collided with the political collective memory that was involving. What would be the difference between individual and collective memories? Would they always oppose each other? -Angie<br />
<br />
In Blight's book, he mentions Whitman's quote about the "real war" getting into the books, how much did the advances in historians and writers methods affect the memory of the civil war both in the face of all the conflicting stories from the war. - AJ L. <br />
<br />
== General questions ==<br />
<br />
There war was called by many different names. From our readings we have the 2nd War for Independence, a southerner’s term for the war (in McPherson’s piece) and the Secession War from Whitman, a northerner (in the reading from Blight). How long after the war did it take for ‘The Civil War’ to become the most common term for the war? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
== debate topics ==<br />
<br />
McPherson talks about northern women extolling their husbands to return home, that family was more important then fighting for their country. Did southern women fell the same way or did they feel as there husbands did. -- R.King<br />
<br />
In ''Remembering Slavery'': the importance of song and folk lyrics as their own battlefield: how did the southern blacks use song to demonstrate and spread their own current events knowledge, and what examples in this article struck you most?- A. Askins<br />
<br />
McPherson in "Remembering Slavery discusses the recruitment of African Americans in the Union Army and how the inclusion of African Americans soldiers impacted the war. In your opinion, how instrumental was African Americans joining the Union Army in contributing to the Union's victory?-Nick. J<br />
<br />
The role of Lincoln in the creation of a Civil War memory. Blight touches on the weary president attempting to come to term with the death toll of a war no longer under his control. We talk quite a bit about the roles of Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee after the War. Can it be argued that, despite his life being cut short, Lincoln shaped the public memory of the Civil War as much or more than Lee and Davis with the Gettysburg Address? -D. Radtke</div>15thvavolunteershttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_1_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 1 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-01-13T07:28:10Z<p>15thvavolunteers: /* General questions */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Blight, ''Race and Reunion'', Title page through 5; ==<br />
<br />
<br />
In Blight’s prologue, specifically on page 4, he writes that American’s chose romance over reality in their remembrance of the Civil War. It is easy to understand that the South might not have wanted to face the hard reality of their loss, but why did the North choose romance as well? Was it just as hard for the North to deal with the realities of the end of the War as it was for the South? – Angie<br />
<br />
How have race relations been affected by the reconciliationist ideals of the late nineteenth and much of the twentieth centuries? Were relations affected so much that these consequences reach into the modern era?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
Are sentimental remembrances winning over reality? -- Bob King<br />
<br />
== Fahs and Waugh, ''The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture'', 1-4 ==<br />
<br />
How does Civil War memory allow for the denial of national membership to "others" (as claimed in the introduction to ''The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture'')? - Askins<br />
<br />
<br />
The introduction to ''The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture'' describes how the memory of the Civil War was often invoked for political purposes. To what extent is remembrance of the war actual cultural nostalgia, as opposed to a political tool? -GStan.<br />
<br />
Something that was interesting to me while reading the introduction to ''The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture'' was how one of the articles discusses school textbooks in the North and the South. How common was the Civil War disputed in school textbooks and also, why did the North offer so little opposition to the southern textbooks? Was it political reasons or something else? - A. Bratchie<br />
<br />
Upon reading the introduction of the memory in the Civil War I was puzzled by the statue of Lincoln that was unveiled in Richmond in 2003 brought forth protesters. After reading the sources for this week I have a better understanding for why there would be protesters because the Civil War still plays an important part in people's life's.--Nick J<br />
<br />
== David Thelen, “Memory and American History,” ''Journal of American History'', 75 (March 1989): 1117-29 ==<br />
<br />
Do you agree that it is more important the way a memory is constructed (what influences the narrator, how a person utilizes others' memories/ideas to explain about an event or detail, his or her mood/biases etc.) rather than the accuracy of the memory itself? -avanness<br />
<br />
On page 1123 of David Thelen’s article, he writes that “people together searched for common memories to meet present needs.” Later, on page 1126, he asks the question, “Why did some southern whites energize their resistance to Reconstruction with memories of a Lost Cause?” Did the need for southern whites to stand apart from Reconstruction initiate a common memory of some sort of “Lost Cause” even though perhaps the “cause” was a little bit different for each of them as individuals? If southern whites did not feel so strongly against the emancipation and equality of African Americans would they have all still united under such a memory as the “Lost Cause”? – Angie<br />
<br />
In David Thelen's piece, he discusses this idea between reconstruction vs. reproduction in terms of memories. How valid are the claims made that memory is in fact a reconstruction rather than a reproduction of past events? Also, how does this play into the validity of a person's memory of an event in history? Should it be trusted, and if so, to what extent? - A. Bratchie<br />
<br />
Do you agree with the statement in the Thelen article on page 1120 that “remembering appears to be far more decisively an affair of construction rather than one of mere reproduction”? Could it be possible to ever have a truly objective view on something such as the American Civil War? Also, did anyone expect the Thelen article to lapse into biology there in the middle? --Cash Nelson<br />
<br />
Is David Thelen saying that a historian should write several versions of his history, one for each audience he hopes to reach? --Bob King<br />
<br />
== Thomas Brown, ''The Public Art of Civil War Commemoration'', 1-14 ==<br />
<br />
Why do you think women had such a desire to create commemorative groups, especially in the south, after the Civil War? The reading by Thomas Brown said that these groups had wanted to honor those who had died, sponsor mourning ceremonies, and engage in everyday social activities. What would they have inevitably gotten out of engaging in these types of activities? -avanness<br />
<br />
What are the driving forces behind the creation of the Lost Cause- or, more broadly, the creation of a uniquely Southern memory of the Civil War? Thomas Brown argues that the aforementioned mode of memory evolved from more than a hope for vindication of the Confederacy. The north, he says, came to admire the South as a "place of respite from the economic and social pressures of life in the north" (page 8). In other words, old enemies were able to reconcile, not over issues of race, but over differences in economy and everyday life. Do you agree with this assertion? -D. Radtke<br />
<br />
What do you think can be attributed to the nation's increasingly positive view towards the history and memorializing of the Civil War? What leads us as a nation to view something so costly and divisive as necessary for commemoration and reverence? --Cash Nelson<br />
<br />
== '''Debate topics:''' ==<br />
<br />
Reconciliation undermining racial equality- Askins<br />
<br />
Northern and Southern views on the history. --Cash<br />
<br />
Is the "lost cause" a lost cause? -- B.King<br />
<br />
The three overall visions of Civil War memory that have developed: the reconciliationist vision, the white supremacist vision, and the emancipationist vision. We should discuss in detail the nature of these views and how they have developed over time.--Nick. J<br />
<br />
== General questions ==<br />
<br />
<br />
If the Race problem was so deeply ingrained in the reasoning behind the civil war, and both sides believed they were fighting for the right causes, how did the Yankee and Confederate soldiers reconcile their differences while the race problem itself continued to grow bigger and bigger?- AJ L.<br />
<br />
What methods of shaping people's memory of the civil war seemed to be most effective? The monuments that were erected, the books that told the varying history of the war (printed by both north and south), the politics of the time etc... AJ L.<br />
<br />
How does the collective memory of the Civil War from both the northern and southern perspectives influence the "American Memory" and history of the Civil War? --MK Napier <br />
<br />
Other than the Lost Cause, what might be some reasons for why the South seems to have heavily dominated the memorializing through monuments, books, movies, etc., the Civil War? --MK Napier<br />
<br />
Can someone explain the Lost Cause to me? It's exactly how I'm describing myself in trying to understand what it is... --Cash Ibid --B. King<br />
<br />
----The "Lost Cause" as an intellectual movement holds that the institution of slavery was largely a benevolent one and would have eventually died out on its own. Slaves were faithful to their owners. The South did not so much "lose" the War as they were forced to yield to a materially and economically superior foe. I think Blight talks more about it in later chapters. In a sense, the "Lost Cause" is a means of seeking some sort of justification or vindication for their ancestors. If you want to see classic Lost Causers, check out the Sons of Confederate Veterans website.... -D.R.<br />
<br />
How did Americans remember the Civil war in the period immediately following the conflict? --B. King<br />
<br />
Thelen mentions that "The challenge of history is to recover the past and introduce it to the present." However, Fahs and Waugh say that the "Civil War has never receded into the remote past." Does this make it easier or more difficult to study/research how the Civil War was seen in the past versus how we’re remembering it at 150 years later? And (how) does it differ from the researching of events that have been mostly ignored for years? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Are the future commemoration ceremonies of the Civil War’s 150th anniversary going to change our memory of the war by opening up new debates about how the war should be remembered? Logan T<br />
<br />
How different are Western American views of the war compared to states that participated in the conflict? Is the Western view the truly neutral view? Logan T</div>15thvavolunteershttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_1_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 1 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-01-13T07:18:24Z<p>15thvavolunteers: /* General questions */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Blight, ''Race and Reunion'', Title page through 5; ==<br />
<br />
<br />
In Blight’s prologue, specifically on page 4, he writes that American’s chose romance over reality in their remembrance of the Civil War. It is easy to understand that the South might not have wanted to face the hard reality of their loss, but why did the North choose romance as well? Was it just as hard for the North to deal with the realities of the end of the War as it was for the South? – Angie<br />
<br />
How have race relations been affected by the reconciliationist ideals of the late nineteenth and much of the twentieth centuries? Were relations affected so much that these consequences reach into the modern era?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
Are sentimental remembrances winning over reality? -- Bob King<br />
<br />
== Fahs and Waugh, ''The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture'', 1-4 ==<br />
<br />
How does Civil War memory allow for the denial of national membership to "others" (as claimed in the introduction to ''The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture'')? - Askins<br />
<br />
<br />
The introduction to ''The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture'' describes how the memory of the Civil War was often invoked for political purposes. To what extent is remembrance of the war actual cultural nostalgia, as opposed to a political tool? -GStan.<br />
<br />
Something that was interesting to me while reading the introduction to ''The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture'' was how one of the articles discusses school textbooks in the North and the South. How common was the Civil War disputed in school textbooks and also, why did the North offer so little opposition to the southern textbooks? Was it political reasons or something else? - A. Bratchie<br />
<br />
Upon reading the introduction of the memory in the Civil War I was puzzled by the statue of Lincoln that was unveiled in Richmond in 2003 brought forth protesters. After reading the sources for this week I have a better understanding for why there would be protesters because the Civil War still plays an important part in people's life's.--Nick J<br />
<br />
== David Thelen, “Memory and American History,” ''Journal of American History'', 75 (March 1989): 1117-29 ==<br />
<br />
Do you agree that it is more important the way a memory is constructed (what influences the narrator, how a person utilizes others' memories/ideas to explain about an event or detail, his or her mood/biases etc.) rather than the accuracy of the memory itself? -avanness<br />
<br />
On page 1123 of David Thelen’s article, he writes that “people together searched for common memories to meet present needs.” Later, on page 1126, he asks the question, “Why did some southern whites energize their resistance to Reconstruction with memories of a Lost Cause?” Did the need for southern whites to stand apart from Reconstruction initiate a common memory of some sort of “Lost Cause” even though perhaps the “cause” was a little bit different for each of them as individuals? If southern whites did not feel so strongly against the emancipation and equality of African Americans would they have all still united under such a memory as the “Lost Cause”? – Angie<br />
<br />
In David Thelen's piece, he discusses this idea between reconstruction vs. reproduction in terms of memories. How valid are the claims made that memory is in fact a reconstruction rather than a reproduction of past events? Also, how does this play into the validity of a person's memory of an event in history? Should it be trusted, and if so, to what extent? - A. Bratchie<br />
<br />
Do you agree with the statement in the Thelen article on page 1120 that “remembering appears to be far more decisively an affair of construction rather than one of mere reproduction”? Could it be possible to ever have a truly objective view on something such as the American Civil War? Also, did anyone expect the Thelen article to lapse into biology there in the middle? --Cash Nelson<br />
<br />
Is David Thelen saying that a historian should write several versions of his history, one for each audience he hopes to reach? --Bob King<br />
<br />
== Thomas Brown, ''The Public Art of Civil War Commemoration'', 1-14 ==<br />
<br />
Why do you think women had such a desire to create commemorative groups, especially in the south, after the Civil War? The reading by Thomas Brown said that these groups had wanted to honor those who had died, sponsor mourning ceremonies, and engage in everyday social activities. What would they have inevitably gotten out of engaging in these types of activities? -avanness<br />
<br />
What are the driving forces behind the creation of the Lost Cause- or, more broadly, the creation of a uniquely Southern memory of the Civil War? Thomas Brown argues that the aforementioned mode of memory evolved from more than a hope for vindication of the Confederacy. The north, he says, came to admire the South as a "place of respite from the economic and social pressures of life in the north" (page 8). In other words, old enemies were able to reconcile, not over issues of race, but over differences in economy and everyday life. Do you agree with this assertion? -D. Radtke<br />
<br />
What do you think can be attributed to the nation's increasingly positive view towards the history and memorializing of the Civil War? What leads us as a nation to view something so costly and divisive as necessary for commemoration and reverence? --Cash Nelson<br />
<br />
== '''Debate topics:''' ==<br />
<br />
Reconciliation undermining racial equality- Askins<br />
<br />
Northern and Southern views on the history. --Cash<br />
<br />
Is the "lost cause" a lost cause? -- B.King<br />
<br />
The three overall visions of Civil War memory that have developed: the reconciliationist vision, the white supremacist vision, and the emancipationist vision. We should discuss in detail the nature of these views and how they have developed over time.--Nick. J<br />
<br />
== General questions ==<br />
<br />
<br />
If the Race problem was so deeply ingrained in the reasoning behind the civil war, and both sides believed they were fighting for the right causes, how did the Yankee and Confederate soldiers reconcile their differences while the race problem itself continued to grow bigger and bigger?- AJ L.<br />
<br />
What methods of shaping people's memory of the civil war seemed to be most effective? The monuments that were erected, the books that told the varying history of the war (printed by both north and south), the politics of the time etc... AJ L.<br />
<br />
How does the collective memory of the Civil War from both the northern and southern perspectives influence the "American Memory" and history of the Civil War? --MK Napier <br />
<br />
Other than the Lost Cause, what might be some reasons for why the South seems to have heavily dominated the memorializing through monuments, books, movies, etc., the Civil War? --MK Napier<br />
<br />
Can someone explain the Lost Cause to me? It's exactly how I'm describing myself in trying to understand what it is... --Cash Ibid --B. King<br />
<br />
----The "Lost Cause" as an intellectual movement holds that the institution of slavery was largely a benevolent one and would have eventually died out on its own. Slaves were faithful to their owners. The South did not so much "lose" the War as they were forced to yield to a materially and economically superior foe. I think Blight talks more about it in later chapters. In a sense, the "Lost Cause" is a means of seeking some sort of justification or vindication for their ancestors. If you want to see classic Lost Causers, check out the Sons of Confederate Veterans website.... -D.R.<br />
<br />
How did Americans remember the Civil war in the period immediately following the conflict? --B. King<br />
<br />
Thelen mentions that "The challenge of history is to recover the past and introduce it to the present." However, Fahs and Waugh say that the "Civil War has never receded into the remote past." Does this make it easier or more difficult to study/research how the Civil War was seen in the past versus how we’re remembering it at 150 years later? And (how) does it differ from the researching of events that have been mostly ignored for years? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Are the future commemoration ceremonies of the Civil War’s 150th anniversary going to change our memory of the war by opening up new debates about how the war should be remembered? Logan T</div>15thvavolunteers Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($response_code) of type int is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/WebResponse.php on line 38