Vol. 42, No. 4 Jamestown Settlement “Military Thr By Nancy Jennis Olds JAMESTOWN, Va.—They came with their armor, weapons, tents, and cooking pots. Armies, ranging chronologically from the Roman Legions to today’s Virginia Army National Guard, with several Civil War organizations participating Thirty-five groups came from Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, North Carolina and Pennsylvania setting up their camps at the Jamestown Settlement, renown as the site for the first permanent English colony Virginia in 1607, for the 2016 “Mi itary Through The Ages”. This popular event, which occurs just befo the approach of spring, this year on the weekend of March 19 through March 20, is a family-friendly eve open to the public. Participating groups test their skills in accura ly depicting military life accordi to their chosen time period, such the War of the Roses, the American Revolution, the Napoleonic Wars and more contemporary wars such as the Spanish-American War, WWI, WWII, the War in Vietnam to name a few. Moving from camp to camp is
Pvt. Neil Burke, acting assistant Pvt. David Welker all of the 3rd U
he Ages” Event as simple as stepping back and forward in time, leaping from one century to the next! There was a strong showing of Civil War organizations, among them the Tidewater Maritime Living History-Associates, U.S.S. Aroostook, 1862, the 3rd U.S. Regular In fantry, 1861, and the Norfolk Light
group, the Jetersville Militia, 23r Regiment of Infantry, Virginia-1859 represented an earlier militia arou the time of the capture of abolitio John Brown and his band after their raid on Harper’s Ferry. Several qualified historians serv as judges for this broad spectrum of military reenactors with judging based on three defining periods which used these types of transformative weaponry: cold steel period, black powder period and modern period. The Civil War impressions qualified for the black powder period. All participating reenactors are judged by their unit impression and demonstration. The 2016 Reenactor’s Choice Award and the 2016 Visitor’s Choice Award go
rmaster, Pvt. Tom Weiss and gulars. Article photographs Nancy Jennis Ol
to the most outstanding impression. La Belle Compagnie, 1400, a medieval group, won both of those categories. The 3rd U.S. Regular Infantry, 1861, won third place in t Best Unit Impression-Black Powder Period. The Tidewater Maritime Living-History Associates, U.S.S. Aroostook, 1862 won second place with the Best Unit DemonstrationBlack Powder Period and the 3rd U.S. Regular Infantry, 1861 gained third place in the same category. Visitors to the event were also welcomed to interact with these mili tary units testing their skills at s fighting, marching, or in the case o the 3rd U.S. Regular Infantry, 1861, thrusting a musket with a fixed bayonet into the “enemy”. Members of the Young Marines, a national youth organization headquartered in Quantico, Virginia, dressed in their mil tary khakis, lined up to try their s in dispatching the “enemy”. The Tidewater Maritime Living History Associates, U.S.S. Aroostook, recreated its history. It was Union Navy gunboat that patrolled the James River thwarting Confederate vessels from trading abroad. Members had their own cannon, which they demonstrated. The Norfolk Light Artillery Blues, 1865, brought their own cannon as well. This artillery unit is the Civ
War equivalent of today’s Virginia National Guard, founded in 1828. This medley of military prowess through the ages has continued since its inception in 1984. This year, three Civil War regiments and
one pre-Civil War militia regiment contributed to this truly unique eve encompassing centuries of military history at Jamestown Settlement.
since we acquired the Civil War News piration date is printed on your p this year. Time sure flies by quick- each month on your mailing address
month. We are expecting a very busy count number. In addition to that, summer with lots of travel to cover we send out reminder/renewal lette
Civil War Show the last weekend of due to expire to give you plenty o April, the National Skirmish Shoot- time to act so you don’t miss a si er’s Association (N-SSA) in May issue. and then Gettysburg in June. We are Finally, if you are moving or looking forward to bring you some have a temporary change of address great coverage and photographs of please let us know in advance so t the events. We are getting very ex- we can make the change in our syscited about the upcoming Gettysburg tem to avoid any delays or interru edition in July. Please contact us if tions in service. you have stories or event announce- The Gettysburg Section is comin ments you would like to share. soon. Contact us if you have an su On another note, we are often gestions, articles, events, or adv asked the question “How do I know ing. That deadline is June 3 so pl
6175 Hickory Flat Hwy. • Suite 110-355 • Canton, Georgia 30115
Jack W. Melton Jr. C. Peter & Kathryn Jorgensen Publisher Founding Publishers Advertising Sales: Peggy Melton Columnists: Joseph Bilby, Greg Biggs, Stephen Davis, Stephanie Hagiwara, Michael Kent, James M. Schmidt, John Sexton, Michael K. Shaffer, The Watchdog Staff
Editorial & Photography Staff: Scott C. Boyd, Joe Bordonaro, Sandy Goss,
Gordon L. Jones, Michael Kent, George Lomas, Nancy Jennis Olds, Leon Reed, Helen S. Schwartz, Gregory L. Wade, Joan Wenner Mike Cavanaugh, Founder - Civil War Book Exchange Book Review Editor: Edward H. Bonekemper III
Book Review Staff: Walt Albro David Galli John Michael Priest
J. Lee Bailey Allen Guelzo Patrick Purcell Michael Ballard C. Michael Harrington Michael Russert Greg Biggs Thomas A. Horrocks Thomas J. Ryan
Richard J. Blumberg Jay Jorgensen Sean Scott Charles H. Bogart Clint Johnson David Sesser Mike Cavanaugh John F. Marszalek Paul Taylor Connie Clowers Evan McLaughlin Joseph Truglio Larry Clowers Richard McMurry Jeffry Wert Steven Davis Jonathan A. Noyalas Jonathan W. White
Joseph A. Derie Jeff Patrick Frank J. Williams
Robert L. Durham James Percoco Kenneth D. Williams John Foskett Frank Piatek Wayne F. Wolf
Monthly. Business and Editorial Offices: 6175 Hickory Flat Hwy., Suite 110355, Canton, Georgia 30115, Accounting and Circulation Offices: Historical
postage prices is pending at Canton, Georgia and additional mailing offices
(if applicable). Periodicals postage paid at U.S.P.S. 131 W. High St., Jeff City, MO 65101.
Hickory Flat Hwy., Suite 110-355, Canton, Georgia 30115. Display advertising rates and media kit on request.
– Letters To The Editor – Distortions Of History Or Erroneous P TO THE EDITOR: H.V. Traywick’s once again engages in distortions of history, this time in response to my critical lette of his neo-Confederate views in a prior issue. I would like to respond to some of the so-called “erroneous points” of mine that Traywick cites in his letter. Sorry, Mr. Traywick, the South’s response to Lincoln’s legal election as president, after it dominated the federal government since its inception, was indeed armed insurrection. The seceded states renounced their allegiance to the federal government, placed tens of thousands of men under arms, seized federal forts and arrested hundreds of U.S. army personnel, and fired on a U.S. vessel all before Lincoln was sworn in as president. Shortly after Lincoln was in offic the South opened fire on federal Fort Sumter, which was obliged to surrender If these acts do not constitut armed insurrection, what would? As for Traywick’s bizarre claim that the first “act of war” was Major Ander-
son’s burning of the gun carriages at Fort Moultrie in Charleston, appar-
ently he forgets that these carriages were the property of the United States government, as were both Forts Moultrie and Sumter. The South wanted those gun carriages to use in its rebellion agains the United States! Traywick feels that Lincoln’s only recourse to these violent actions was to acquiesce in the South’s unconstitutional rejection of his election. This is analogous to saying that FDR’s only valid response to the
To Expand Slavery Claims TO THE EDITOR: In the April issue, H.V. Traywick, Jr. writes that secession was not intended to expand slavery because the
seceding states “gave up any claims to the common U.S. Territories and thereby willfully gave up any claims to their rights to carry slavery into them!” He fails to acknowledge that many Confederates desired to annex and bring slavery to Cuba and parts of Mexico, Central America and the
In fact, the Confederate Constitution reflects their expansionist de-
sires. Article IV, Section 3(3) state “The Confederate States may ac-
quire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhab-
itants of all territory belonging to Confederate States, lying without
[emphasis added] the limits of the several States, and may permit them, at such times and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form States to be admitted into the Confederacy.
In all such territory, the institutio negro slavery, as it now exists in th
attack on Pearl Harbor would have been to capitulate to Japan’s quest hegemony in order to avoid a bloody war. Lincoln chose to preserve the nation rather than see it torn asund and the South bears responsibility for the carnage that followed. As for Lincoln’s “war of invasion,” how can a country invade itself? Treason has its consequences, Mr. Traywick. The armed insurrection preceded the war. And yes, Mr. Traywick, the seceded states did indeed intend to expan slavery. The Confederate Constitution required that all territories admitted to the CSA would have to be slave states. As various reputabl historians have noted, the Confederacy planned to annex Cuba and parts of northern Mexico as well as to invade Haiti and enslave its free black population, whom the South had long regarded as a threat. And Traywick’s assertion that by seceding the Confederacy “gave up any claims to the common U.S. territories” is patently absurd. The Confederates claimed, and invaded,
the New Mexico Territory (the present day states of Arizona and New
Mexico) and had designs on Colorado Territory as well. And, yes, th various Secession Ordinances did indeed make clear that slavery was by far the primary reason for the Cotton States illicit withdrawal fro the Union, with their rants against “Black Republicanism,” “Abolitionism,” and “miscegenation.” Finally, Traywick regurgitates th revisionist claim that Lincoln waged war solely for economic reasons under pressure from “the industrialist
Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress and the territorial government; and the
inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall hav the right to take to such territory slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States.” Mr. Traywick also says that “any reading of these Ordinances of Se-
ervation of slavery was only one, bu not the only, reason for secession.
To the contrary, the reasons for secession set forth in those documents
relate exclusively to preservation o slavery and white supremacy, the right to extend slavery into territo
ries, and the right to secede if the pro-slavery and white supremacy ar-
guments were not accepted. For details on the exclusive slavery/white supremacy basis for secession and the Confederacy, see my book on The Myth of the Lost Cause.
the financiers, the railroad magnate and the crony capitalists who had gotten him elected” (I guess the mil lions of people that voted for him d not count), implying that Lincoln and the Northern people had no other considerations in making vast sacrifices in order to preserve the Union other than greed. The fact is that if Lincoln had simply recognized the Confederacy, southern cotton would still have bee sold to northern mills, the South st would have been a market for northern manufactured goods, and USA ships would still have had access to the mouth of the Mississippi, since blocking access would have been an act of war, which the South would certainly have wanted to avoid. An independent South would have been no more free of Northern economic power than an independent Canada is free of United States economic might today. As for the loss o tariff income from the South, Traywick conveniently neglects to note that a disproportionate amount of th federal budget was devoted to the
numerous forts and military installations defending the South’s enormously long coastline as well as the Mexican border with Texas, a state that also needed federal protection from hostile Native Americans. Recognizing secession would have freed the federal government from all of these monetary obligations. No, it was not greed that motivated the Union to suppress the rebellion, but higher principles than Mr. Traywick is willing to acknowledge. I know, facts can be so very annoying at times.
TO THE EDITOR: best ever! I have always enjoyed Joe Bilby’s column and his great perspective. I
wish we had a black powder/modern cannoneer historian to run a column like Bilby. Rob Zaworski Atlanta, Ga