The Southern Poverty Law Center has released Whose Heritage? Public Symbols of the Confederacy that “catalogs 1,503 examples of monuments and statues; flags; city, county and school names; lakes, dams and other public works; state holidays; and other symbols that honor the Confederacy.” Here is their press release.
Amazingly, one is in Boston. The Center’s report links to this 2013 photograph and accompanying article on Civil War Memory, a website by local historian Kevin M. Levin:
Today my wife and I spent the day on Georges Island in Boston harbor. I gave a brief presentation for the National Park Service on Boston’s Civil War memory, which went really well. Afterwards, we spent some time walking through Fort Warren.
A number of prominent Confederate officials, including James Mason, John Slidell and Alexander Stephens were held as prisoners for various periods of time. In addition, Richard Ewell, Isaac Trimble, Simon Bolivar Buckner and a small number of Confederate soldiers were also held as prisoners during the war.
I knew all of this, but what truly surprised was this monument to those Confederates who died as prisoners, which was dedicated by the Boston chapter of the United Daughters of the Confederacy in 1963. Yeah, that’s right, there was a UDC chapter in Boston.
Kudos to Levin for breaking the story, in a sense.
The Law Center urges community members to “organize campaigns to remove these symbols from public spaces and place them in museums or similar venues where a full account of the history can be provided.” Noted Civil War historian Eric Foner has argued it is more effective to leave such memorials in place, but add additional material that puts them in historical context. WaPo:
“In the south, I don’t think they should take down statues of Confederate leaders,” Foner continued. “They should put up statues of black congressmen and senators. It makes the public history more accurately reflect our entire history.”
At a minimum, such additional material should be added to this memorial. For a start, it might mention the 13,942 Massachusetts residents who died in that awful conflict, and the millions of people enslaved by the brutal government whose seal is featured on the memorial.
Then again, Foner did preface that comment with “In the south.” Maybe here in the North, we don’t need a relatively recent confederate memorial complete with the seal of the CSA and its motto “Under God, Our Vindicator” on George’s Island, and it would be better off in a museum as the Center recommends — complete with additional contextualizing material. The Robert Gould Shaw Memorial on Boston Common says more, better.
Thoughts?
SomervilleTom says
I’m familiar with the marker, George’s Island has been a favorite summertime destination for my family and I since my five children were babies (my youngest is now 20). I see nothing offensive in this marker. There is no stars-and-bars, nothing beyond a relatively sedate seal and somber list of names.
We in Massachusetts strike me as reasonably able to acknowledge the sacrifice made by our British enemies during the revolution. I see no reason why we should not do the same for these Confederate casualties.
jconway says
I much prefer the phrase on the Mt Auburn Civil War Memorial that my grandparents are buried next to “Dedicated to those Brave Men who Fought the Insurrection”. Otherwise those men did did here and it makes sense to mark that and their cause.
There is a more problematic Confederate grave in the middle of the black Woodlawn neighborhood on the South Side of Chicago. The CSA flag was taken down from there by a protestor and hasn’t been replaced. It’s still shameful such a flag flew in a cemetary in the same neighborhood the first black President first represented in the State Senate and that it sits next to the graves of many prominent civil rights activists. Like Georges Island, the area once housed many CSA POWs.
Christopher says
…since I’ve heard War Between The States. Of course that’s too neutral for some too. “Real Southerners” call it the “War of Northern Aggression”:) (never mind they fired first on Ft. Sumter, but I digress)
stomv says
I agree with s’tom that there doesn’t appear to be anything offensive about the marker per se. It doesn’t glorify, doesn’t lay claim to something it doesn’t deserve, etc.
However, I am automatically suspicious of any CSA-related marker placed in the 1954-1968 time frame. The boomlet of CSA-related monuments, school-namings, etc. do coincide with the Civil War centennial, but they also coincide with the Civil Rights Movement. Methinks the latter of the two motivated, at least in part, a great many of those monuments and namings, and it just disgusts me.
Christopher says
…that there was a UDC chapter in Boston. People do move around after all. It’s in a very appropriate spot given the history. There are plenty of other references and memorials to Union dead.
Christopher says
…that any reference to the Confederacy is motivated by hate or bigotry. At least, my understanding is that they bill themselves as a watchdog of hate groups. BOTH sides of that conflict are, after all, part of our collective history.
stomv says
Nathan Bedford Forrest is unquestionably part of our history. But christopher, I ask you, how many schools, buildings, or state parks should be named after a Civil War general who was the first Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan?
Christopher says
I could understand in his hometown, maybe, or near a particular battle site where he played a prominent role. I can also see how it would make people cringe.
SomervilleTom says
I don’t want to provoke Godwin’s law, but seriously — isn’t this like arguing that some of the things Hitler did were good?
Christopher says
Hitler was in a league all his own; nothing redeemable about him. There have been plenty of genocides in history, including black slavery in the US, but there has only been one Holocaust. I wouldn’t want anything for Hitler other than maybe a matter-of-fact Hitler was born here plaque on the appropriate spot. It wouldn’t need context; everyone already knows exactly what he was.
centralmassdad says
If you ever spend any time at all around Nashville or Memphis, you find the word “Forest” misspelled everywhere. Schools, parks, streets. Mississippi kicked around adding him to the license plate just five years ago. They put up a huge statue of him ion Selma in 2001. Etc.
Maybe they should name things after him around Fort Pillow. He certainly played a prominent role there.
jconway says
It’s a denial that their side was in the wrong, that it lost, and a rejection of Reconstruction. It’s no accident that many of these memorials propped up during the period after Plessy when black voting rights were quashed with violence and the Klan was revived.
The Lost Cause narrative was still the official history when my parents went to school and movies like Birth of a Nation and Gone with the Wind were still in the conscience of many Americans. The carousel at the Willows when my dad was a kid had a bunch of scenes of sambos picking cotton and grinning while doing it. We threw out all of my grandparents black faced knick knacks and lawn jockeys after she passed, those things were a recent part of our history.
Christopher says
…but they were ultimately Americans too – the North made sure of that, after all. I don’t think we should pretend the other side didn’t exist. We can remember them without justifying their cause, which I hate doing too. Neither side should refight the Civil War.
jeremy says
Even though it’s from the 60s, it’s understated, and is a reasonable memorial to those who died. Now if there was a large confederate flag there, I’d be happy to consider removing it, but I’m not sure we should be so eager to whitewash history.
sabutai says
I’m not a fan of the loaded term “war between the states”. I suspect there aren’t a whole lot of monuments in Cuba or Grenada to “American liberators,” so I don’t know why we’d honor an enemy in their terms. I wouldn’t mind an historical marker of an interesting thing that happened in Massachusetts, but this attempt to honor them is analogous to “teaching the controversy” in evolution — it’s sneaky propaganda.
Christopher says
For that matter, it is also a fact that these people died on Georges Island. War Between The States is relatively tame and I think we should respect the UDC’s wishes.
jconway says
I prefer the Mt. Auburn designation of the “Insurrection”. In really looking forward to the new “Birth of a Nation” that tells the Nat Turner story from a positive stance. He and John Brown were American heroes, Jackson, Forrest, and even a more respectable fellow like Lee engaged in acts of profound treason. Most anti-American force we ever fought and we shouldn’t hide or sugarcoat that.
marcus-graly says
I mean, it is very much in its context, being on George’s Island, which is a civil war era fort and already has a substantial visitors center, guided tours, etc. If anything, the memorial would be more prominent being inside the visitors center, rather than where it is now.
We have much larger, more visible monuments to the Union dead. Boston Common, for instance, has the Shaw Memorial and the Soldiers and Sailors Monument. Adding another monument adjacent to this one, or adding more text, would only serve to give more prominence to what is rather obscure marker. I’ve been to George’s several times and never noticed it.
hesterprynne says
I went to the website that Bob linked to. One other item on the agenda of the Massachusetts chapter of the United Daughters of the Confederacy was to get military bands in Massachusetts to stop playing “Marching Through Georgia.”
If it’s true that our military bands were playing “Marching Through Georgia,” it doesn’t seem like a huge ask to request they stop. But I’m still not sure what I think of the George’s Island monument.
jconway says
I’ll have to confirm with my roommate that the MA National Guard still plays that. I hope they still do! Cump Sherman is an American hero and the traitors deserved to have their plantations burned. The North doesn’t celebrate its victory enough, we were the righteous army!
Christopher says
A friend of mine once told me the following about a friend of his:
This guy (college age) was driving on a very straight rural Georgia interstate at ungodly speeds. Seems he saw the signs saying 95 and thought they were the speed limit rather than the highway designation. It was the wee hours of the morning and as far as he could tell he had the highway to himself.
Turns out he wasn’t quite alone. In time he noticed blue lights flashing behind him. The Sheriff’s Deputy had noticed how fast he was going. The Deputy says to this driver (probably best to imagine the deepest possible southern drawl in his voice), “Son, you were going awfully fast back there. In all my years as Sheriff’s Deputy I’ve never seen anyone drive so fast. In fact, I’d be willing to wager that nobody in history has burned through this part of Georgia as fast as you were just now.”
The driver thinks for a moment, looks up at the Sheriff’s Deputy, smiles ever so sweetly and innocently and says, “Sherman did!”
jconway says
I guess these marches were to keep tempo for the troop movements up to WWI. No longer necessary, so they’ve since fallen out of favor and it’s just the Anthem and Stars and Stripes Forever for ceremonial musters which are the only time the full band with fife and drum come kid.
Too bad, Johnny Reb should be reminded how badly he got licked by the Union! Especially these days.
hesterprynne says
That sounds a little Trumpian, which doesn’t seem characteristic of you.
Christopher says
President Lincoln asked to hear “Dixie”; it was one of his favorites. Too bad he hadn’t lived. I wish we could have somehow had Radical Reconstruction policies in the sense of making darn sure former slaves could vote combined with the magnanimous spirit of Lincoln.
jconway says
Racist slaveholders deserved to have their “property” liberated, confiscated and destroyed. The North was too deferential to the South before and after the war. Nat Turner and John Brown are heroes of mine. Slavery is America’s original sin and I will refuse to apologize that brave men like Lincoln, Grant and Sherman took up arms to save this country from sin and secession!
hesterprynne says
to Trumanesque, for Hiroshima and the idea of shortening conflict. But I’m still glad the military bands have stopped trumpeting, so to speak, scorched earth as an ideal.
jconway says
I don’t see how we would’ve ended slavery without the war or these tactics, barring an alternative history where the founders have the full courage of their stated convictions and ban it at the convention. Sherman was portrayed as a butcher by historians on both sides of the war for a long time, as part of the Lost Cause narrative.
If only he had fought honorably like a true gentleman like Lee (who brutalized the people he unjustly owned), the South may have bartered for terms. Right up to Hampden Roads conference the South insisted on returning to the union only if the antebellum status quo on slavery was restored. Having their crops, barns, railroads, factories, and plantations burned was the only way they would realize the war was their fault and they had to surrender. If only we had men of such courage leading the country after the war, we might be avoided repeating history with Jim Crow and it’s 70 year rein of terror on black lives.
Christopher says
For the record, only a handful of Founders were as committed to ending slavery as we would probably like. Plenty of them of course were ardent defenders to the point of threatening to walk out of the Federal Convention. We would not have had a united country without acquiescing and we would not have survived divided, so in the first things first department the historian in me grudgingly accepts what happened in 1787. Of course, there was widespread thought that slavery was on its way out. (Darn you, Eli Whitney!) I do wish the north could have said none of this 3/5 nonsense; if you won’t let them vote we don’t want to count them either. I’m in full agreement with your last sentence.
jconway says
But in either scenario I don’t see how the South or Japan capitulates without the march to Georgia or the atomic bombing. In the case of the Japanese people I have a tremendous well of sympathy, particularly after reading Hershey’s Hiroshima, of the uniquely horrible after effects of the bomb and I hope that testimony encourages everyone on the planet never to use those weapons again. As for the March to Georgia I have far less sympathy because their cause was so heinous.
Agree on the Founders to a degree, though as you said some compromises that exacerbated the problem might’ve been avoided. And it’s doubtful it would’ve survived has the cotton gin not made it suddenly profitable and lucrative.
scott12mass says
It was unfortunately necessary to convince them twice.
SomervilleTom says
The Japanese were not the only audience.
Rightly or wrongly, the US chose to detonate more than one device in order to demonstrate to both the Japanese and the Soviets that this was a technology (and not a special case) and that we could produce and deliver as many as we chose.
centralmassdad says
I would say uncomfortably triumphalist.
Playing that particular tune in the particular context described above is not unlike the Orange Order’s parades through Catholic neighborhoods of Belfast every July 12, in that both are designed specifically to rub the other’s nose in something, in order to inflame and perpetuate divisiveness.
billg says
While I agree with Eric Foner’s idea that more context would be preferable, stumbling across a reminder of how close to home the Civil War actually was seems important to me. Like seeing the slave quarters in Medford — it is stark reminder of how pervasive slavery was. Slavery and the Civil War shaped our nation in a way that we continue to struggle with. I do not think that everything should be moved to a museum — people should know when they are walking the same ground where people may have been enslaved, fought and died, or been imprisoned. As others have noted, the dead prisoners are not glorified by the monument on Georges Island, only remembered.
Christopher says
I lived in Alexandria, VA for a while and one time when I was in its public library I noticed a photograph depicting a sign that hung there back in the day noting that no “colored people” were welcome in the building. I’ve of course known “forever” that many public accommodations in the South were once racially segregated, but as a northerner the reality of Jim Crow hit me harder in that moment than it ever had that I was right then standing in a building to which such rules once applied.
Christopher says
The bad news – we were the first to have it.
The good news – we were the first to abolish it.