views and predicted that “as soon as [Northern blacks] come within reach of the Southern army they will be captured and restored to the condition for which Providence designed them.”
On May 11, 1864, the Spirit printed a report of an unprovoked assault on a group of workers in Quincy, Ill., “by a whole company of negro soldiers, with brickbats and other missiles….” There were no deaths, went the report, but “some of the party [were] considerably bruised and injured.”
In addition to reporting allegations of riotous misbehavior, the Spirit expressed incredulity about accounts in other papers of black troops who fought bravely and effectively in battle. “It is scarcely possible to take up a newspaper in the interest of Lincoln and Johnson which does not contain grandiloquent spread eagle
GEORGIA’S CONFEDERATE MONUMENTS In Honor of a Fallen Nation Gould B. Hagler, Jr.
This unique work contains a complete photographic record of Georgia’s memorials to the Confederacy, a full transcription of the words engraved upon them, and carefully-researched information about the monuments and the organizations which built them. These works of art and their eloquent nation’s profound grief, praise the soldiers’ bravery and patriotism, and pay homage to the cause for which they fought.
flourishes about the black troops, and comparisons disparaging to our white veterans,” said an article in a July issue.
It is interesting to note that most newspaper commentary on the enlistment of blacks is found in papers opposing the policy. As we have seen, the opposition is expressed in incendiary terms and the language is no less incendiary in Pennsylvania than it is Virginia.
On the other hand, the Franklin Repository, the Republican paper, had little to say on this subject. However, in December 1863, the paper ran a long article entitled “Rebel Atrocities.” Chief among the atrocities was “the treatment of our negro troops,” compared to which “all the other atrocities of the war will pale….” Another issue of the Repository included a quote from the Richmond Enquirer: “Should [black troops]
be sent into the field…none will be taken prisoner – our troops will know what to do.” This, the Pennsylvania editors said, was “frankly admitting that they have been murdered.”
Did the Republican editors calculate that their readers had doubts about the enlistment of blacks? Did they figure that the less said the better, and choose to limit their commentary to what almost any reader would find proper, i.e., that soldiers of the United States, regardless of their race, should not be murdered? In contrast, the Democratic editors pulled no punches in their frequent attacks on Lincoln’s policies and in stark terms laid out the racial issues as they saw them.
The opinions expressed in the Valley Spirit, and the language in which these opinions are articulated, are telling of 19th century racial attitudes. That which would be beyond the pale today was mainstream 150 years ago. It is clear that a great number of citizens saw the issues as the editors of the Spirit saw them, as evidenced by the resolutions adopted at the Pennsylvania Democratic state convention on July 4, 1862.
One resolution is especially noteworthy: “That this is a government of white men, and was established exclusively for the white race; that the negro race are not entitled to and ought not to be admitted to political or social equality with the white race, but that it is our duty to treat them with kindness and consideration, as an inferior and dependent race; that the right of the several States to determine the position and duties of the race is a sovereign right….”
Another resolution stated “That the party fanaticism…that seeks to turn the slaves of the Southern States loose to overrun the North…is insulting to our race, and merits our most emphatic and unqualified condemnation.”
These resolutions were adopted when the war was in its 15th month. Those who favored restoration of “the Union as it was” continued their advocacy. As late as September 1864, the Spirit wrote that the “only true road to peace and Union” lay in the revival of the Crittenden Compromise, in other words, the return of the seceded states with the institution of slavery left intact. The Republican party, however, “has diverted the war to other purposes, and now declares that the unconditional submission of the rebels can alone end it.” The Spirit argued that if the people of the Confederate states “were assured that the government of the country would be administered in accordance with the Constitution as our fathers made it, so that it were rendered impossible to interfere with the reserved rights of the States…they would…soon throw their leaders overboard, and gladly to return to the shelter of the Union.”
How realistic was this hope, when the war was in its 29th month, and had become revolution?
As I sat down to write this month’s column, my daughter called me. She’d just finished up with a doctor’s appointment, and she wanted to give me an update. She’s in the home stretch of pregnancy, and the doctor decided to induce her a couple days early. The COVID-19 pandemic has been putting pressure on hospitals, so the doctor wanted to get the baby delivered and safely home before the pressure on medical services gets any heavier, which is expected.
By the time you read this, Sophie Marie Brand—my first grandchild—will be safely with us. But from where I’m sitting at the moment on a Friday afternoon, Monday’s scheduled induction seems like forever away. Of course, we’ve all waited for nearly nine full months, and we thought we’d have to wait at least another week and a half—her expected due date was March 30, Steph’s one-year anniversary— so the baby is coming sooner than expected. But now that there’s a fixed date, a set deadline, the ticking of the countdown clock has become exponentially louder.
I am beside myself with excitement about being a grandfather. Because of COVID-related concerns, I’m not going to be allowed to be at the hospital when Sophie is born, as I had planned to be. I probably won’t even get to see her for a few weeks because the doctor wants Steph to limit visitors during the current health crisis. Even if that’s disappointing, I understand. Thank heaven for Skype, I guess!
In last March’s newsletter (https://conta.cc/2FDJvWB), I reflected on Steph’s then-upcoming nuptials in the context of Women’s History Month. “In just a few short days, Steph embarks on a new chapter of her own personal history,” I wrote. Now, a year later, she’s about to embark on the next new chapter. Sophie will be a bit of history all to herself, and I hope she grows up to be a strong woman just like her mother has. (In fact, I joke with Steph that all my plans for revenge are about to come to fruition: she’s about to have a daughter and I hope Sophie’s just like Steph!)
So, here’s to the great women in our lives, young and old. May they continue to make history of their own.
Editor-in-Chief, Emerging Civil War. Grandfather, Sophie Marie Brand.
With the spread of coronavirus and the declaration of a pandemic, Emerging Civil War wants to updates its readers about the status of the 2020 Symposium. The event is nearly five months away, so we are still all systems go for August 7-9, 2020. Emerging Civil War will continue to monitor and assess the situation and update its readers accordingly. As of right now, though, we are current on schedule for a great event.
Sarah Kay Bierle has been putting in some time and miles for her artillery research. At the beginning of March, she headed for Antietam National Battlefield to take a look at some artillery positions before the trees leaf out.
Speaking of Antietam, Kevin Pawlak has been spending time at the Antietam National Battlefield library and archives doing research on his and Dan Welch’s forthcoming work on Ohioans at the battle. He says he found some neat things, including requisition forms for more ammunition on September 18, 1862!
Meg Groeling is joining the hoarders in rushing to amazonsmile to purchase small bags of Cracker Jacks in bulk. No, she is not afraid of Covid-19 but she is planning for planned presentations on one of her favorite topics--Civil War Base Ball and John Wildey, Colonel Elmer Ellsworth’s aide-de-camp and later the first in a long line of baseball commissioners. Ragin’Jack was a character to be remembered.
Meg also continues to wrestle with the complex and challenging job of sourcing images for First Fallen: The Life of Colonel Elmer Ellsworth, the North’s First Civil War Hero. Meg hates to think about indexing--the horror, the horror!
Dwight Hughes says: “Spring is springing! It’s warming up. Daffodils appear. Flower beds need cleaning up, shrubs trimmed, new plants planted, and grass tended, and our editor is bugging me about deadlines. Uh-oh. What’s a writer/gardener to do?”
The Spirits of Bad Men Made Perfect: The Life and Diary of Confederate Artillerist William Ellis Jones by Constance Hall Jones, part of ECW’s Engaging the Civil War Series, received a nice review in the Midwest Book Review: http://www.midwestbookreview.com/lbw/mar_20.htm#CivilWar. The reviewer called it “An inherently fascinating and impressively informative Civil War biography.”
Chris Mackowski was interviewed for the War Scholar Entertaining podcast about History: The Civil War in Literature, Film, and Song, which is part of ECW’s Engaging the Civil War Series. You can listen to the podcast here: http://warscholar.org/?p=1191.
Your work for ECW thus far has focused on some of the challenges and unique aspects of leadership. What got you interested in that area?
Leadership has always been one of my interests. When I was a young lass, I read I Rode With Stonewall, Lee’s Lieutenants, Grant’s and Sherman’s Memoirs, and many more books in the same genre.
In the last fifteen years, there were two events that specifically triggered my interest in leadership. I had a supervisor who was a toxic leader—think Captain Bligh. Up until then, I did not understand how significant a leader was to an organization. How the leader’s mood influenced the team. Yes, it stank to be on the receiving end of this individual, but after many years of discussing the situation, I understand her lack of leadership had nothing to do with her being a woman. It had to do with her not being trained, probably having one or more not so nice mentors, and then her being a miserable persona. The second incident that influenced my interest in leadership occurred when I was deciding the subject for my Ph.D. dissertation. I thought I would research Human Intelligence and Technology, but I had no contacts with the U.S. Army’s intelligence community. I had already been researching Lee, so I went to Dr. Richard Sommers to discuss my idea of writing a dissertation on his grand strategy and strategic leadership. The rest is history (pun intended).
My blogs are written using a pedagogical (analytical) voice
Digital Issues of CWN are available by subscription alone or with print plus CWN archives at
and a narrative voice. Usually, historians write either/or. I also combine history with the study of military theory and leadership. This allows me to place military theory concepts and leadership mechanics into historical context. It’s a unique approach, and some academics out there downright wouldn’t like it. In fact, I read a book on the Iraq War by a military theorist/strategist and he said in his introduction “I am not a historian.” I laughed. I wanted to ask this author: how do you know your theories work without historical context. I didn’t do it. Unlike this author, I’m not writing for the academics. My audience is the general public. When you see specific military theory or leadership concepts in a historical arena, you get a better sense at how winning a war or leadership works or doesn’t work.
So, analytical historian is the canary in a coal mine in me; explaining military theorist/leadership principles for the general public is the instructor in me, and a narrative historian is the bard in me: Hybrid Historian
Two of your mentors were Jay Luvaas and Richard Sommers—two great military historians. What’s one lesson each of them passed on to you?
Foremost, Luvaas taught me humility. He taught me that this (the writing, instructing, and speaking) is not about the individual historian; it is about helping to light the path ahead for the present and future generations. I also learned the importance of mentoring the younger generations.
Sommers taught me the importance of work ethic, although I don’t try to compete with his at all. I think the only one who would come close to having the same work ethic as him is Robert E. Lee.
Sommers also taught me patience, understanding, and forgiveness. My 130-pound German Shepherd, “Sherman”—named for the major general—almost attacked one of Dick’s little Boston Terriers. It was horrifying. I love animals. Fortunately, I had learned to do rodeo tackles with my Sherman and got him under control. Phew!
Military history tends to be a male-dominated field. Is there anything particularly challenging about being a woman in that field?