Opposing Image Perspectives on the Emancipation Proclamation

Examining opposing views in history makes studying the subject more exciting and potentially provides one balance. Of course, different perspectives not only come in words, they also come in images. One of the most controversial measures of Abraham Lincoln's presidency was his decision to issue the Emancipation Proclamation. First presented preliminarily in September 1862, it was set to go into effect on January 1, 1863. The measure was to free the slaves in those slave states still in rebellion and not under Federal control, and specifically did not free the slaves in the volatile Border States.

Union soldiers as well as civilians viewed the Emancipation Proclamation in diverse ways. Some were for anything that would end the war sooner, while others swore that they would desert before they would fight for anything other than to preserve the Union. Most Southerners were of the opinion that the document was nothing more than a presidential sanction for slave insurrections and wanton destruction.
The image above was drawn by Confederate sympathizer Adelbert J. Volck. Volck was a Prussian political refugee who came to America during the 1848 European revolutions. He was not only an artist, he practiced dentistry as well. Produced in 1864, this pro-Southern image portrays Lincoln as the demonic author of the despised Emancipation Proclamation. Lincoln rests his left foot on the Constitution, while a demonic icon hold his glass of water. A statue of Lady Liberty has a hood over head in the corner as bats are seen out the window. A picture of John Brown holding a pike and with a sarcastic halo is on the wall and labeled "St. Ossawattomie," for his role in Bleeding Kansas and his Harpers Ferry raid. The picture to the right of Brown's image is a scene of terror from the Haitian revolution, "Saint Domingue," where a slave rebellion started in 1791 and took power from the French colony. Finally, what appears to be a buzzard's skull holds back the curtains, while another skull image is worked into the president's chair back.

A more favorable view of Lincoln's measure is David Gilmore Blythe's lithograph, President Lincoln, Writing the Proclamation of Freedom. Also produced in 1864, Blythe's Lincoln is much different than that portrayed by Volck. Blythe's Lincoln is shown working hard on the document in his bed clothes and slippers with books and papers surrounding him for inspiration. Instead of standing on the Constitution as Volck portrays it at top, Blythe shows Lincoln with the Bible and Constitution on his lap. A bust of Andrew Jackson, who threatened to put down South Carolina's threats during the Nullification Crisis of the early 1830s, sits on the mantle, while a bust of former president James Buchanan (who proved inactive in South Carolina's December 1860 secession) hangs by a rope from the bookcase. An American flag drapes the window to allow enlightenment enter the room, while a scales of justice hangs on the wall and a rail splitter's maul lays on the floor with one of his bedroom slippers.

It has been said many times that "a picture is worth a thousand words." Art, like history, is open to interpretation and is influenced by the artist's sympathies and biases. An artists' perspective often comes out as clearly in images as an historians' does in written text. Part of the fun of studying history is recognizing those sympathies and biases and weighing them against what you have previously learned.

Lincoln and Davis On John Brown's Raid

In my search for Kentuckians' thoughts on John Brown's raid, I somehow almost overlooked two of the state's most important native personalities of the era; Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis. I suppose that my oversight was largely due to the little time that either man actually lived in Kentucky. Lincoln's family moved Indiana when he was seven years old and the Davis family left for Louisiana (and then Mississippi) when Jefferson was only two or three years old.

Both men would eventually return to the Bluegrass State during their lives for brief times. Lincoln would come back in 1841 to visit his Illinois friend Joshua Speed at his Farmington Plantation outside of Louisville. Davis would return for his education. He first studied at St. Thomas, a Catholic school in Washington County, Kentucky, and then returned again for college at Transylvania University in Lexington before going on to West Point.

Since Lincoln and Davis were in opposing parties at the time of John Brown's raid, it is not surprising that their opinions differ somewhat; although only slightly. Lincoln, the Republican, had proclaimed that he was not against slavery where it already existed, but he was against the extension of slavery into the western territories. Davis, the Democrat, slaveholder, and ideal Southerner believed that the territories were open to settlement and that settlers had the right to bring their slave property with them.

Lincoln commented on Brown several times in the fall and winter of 1859-60. In one speech in Kansas, Lincoln stated that Brown has been wrong in his actions for two reasons. One reason was that Brown's method was against the law. The second reason was that the raid was useless as an attempt to get rid of a "great evil." He called Brown a man of "great courage," and "rare unselfishness," but ultimately concluded that Brown was "insane." Later on during the same Kansas trip, Lincoln said that Brown had been "executed for a crime against a state." He continued that if Kansas chose to go with those that would seek to destroy the Union, then "it would be our [I suppose he means federal government's] duty to deal with Kansas as old John Brown has been dealt with." In his famous address at Cooper Union in New York City on February 27, 1860, Lincoln reiterated the thoughts he has shared in Kansas, but went on the offensive. He claimed that there was not any connection between Brown and the Republican party. Lincoln said that Harpers Ferry was not a slave insurrection, but rather "an attempt by white men to get up a revolt among slaves, in which the slaves refused to participate." He explained that Southerners had attempted time and time again since the event to make political capital out of it. Lincoln claimed it was the perfect example of the South's attempt to "rule or ruin."

At the time of Harpers Ferry, Davis was a Mississippi senator in Washington DC. In speeches Davis called Harpers Ferry "a murderous raid," and "a conspiracy against a portion of the United States, a rebellion against the constitutional government of a State." He called for investigations into the affair and was a committee member who took an active role. In a senate speech on December 6, only four days after Brown was hanged, Davis explained the major reason an investigation was necessary. "The great consideration is the invasion of a State to disturb its domestic peace, the preservation of which is a purpose which stands prominent among the great objects for which our Union was formed."

Lincoln and Davis seem to differ little in opinion on Harpers Ferry, but while Lincoln could consider that Brown had courage and was unselfish, Davis would not have consented to such an idea. Both thought Brown wrong in that he violated the constitutional laws of a State. But, Lincoln saw Harpers Ferry as an isolated event. He thought slave insurrections were no more common after the formation of the Republican party than before. Davis, on the other hand, saw Harpers Ferry as what Southerners could expect from an unsympathetic North.

A Kentucky Free Man of Color That Mentioned John Brown

Every once in a while when researching you stumble across something you didn't intend to find, but makes all the other fruitless searching worth the work. Last evening I intended to do some more searching through nineteenth-century Kentucky newspapers for mentions of John Brown. While looking for the roll I wanted to see I saw the Kentucky governors papers on microfilm. After speaking with the reference librarian who had a broad listing of what those paper contained, I saw one section for Governor Magoffin said "Harper's Ferry Affair." BINGO!

About half way through the roll I found what I had only hoped to find; a Kentucky African American perspective on John Brown.

This letter was was written on January 12, 1860; a time when things in Kentucky were fever-hot over Brown's raid. Brown had been hanged on December 2, 1859, and John Fee and his Berea missionaries had been exiled from the state later in the month. Cassius Clay had addressed a crowd from the Kentucky state capitol steps on January 10, in which he condemned Brown's actions, but supported the right to speak freely in opposition to slavery. The letter was written from Lebanon, Kentucky in Marion County.

The author, Abraham Meaux, was a free man of colour (as he spelled it), and was a barber. He had been given his freedom at the death of his master. Since his emancipation he said that, "I have lived every since from the Sweat of my own brow." He stated that "My forefathers was emegrated from Africa to America against their will," and he obviously thought that he too would be moved against his will, as he explained, "its hard that I will have to be driven from home to some place I know not where." Meaux was referring to the tighter controls that were being put on free blacks in Kentucky in the aftermath of John Brown's raid.

Meaux was not totally correct when he said that, "My unfortunate rase [race] had nothing to do with John Brown And nor Harpers ferry." It was quite well known that four of the five African Americans that participated in the raid were free blacks. Meaux expressed strong feelings against Brown and the trouble that he was currently causing free men of color. "I see the evil that he [Brown] has done us poor coloured people in the state of Kentucky. I wished that they had hung him the first day that they imprisoned him higher than Haman was hung," Meaux wrote. He explained that he well knew that there were some free blacks "that is getting their living out of chicken coops and Smoke houses" [thievery]. "But it will look so hard to drive those who stand up and faces the open day light upon his honesty like a white man."

Meaux said that he had recently heard rumors in his barber shop from legislators heading to Frankfort that the governor intended "to make a law to drive" the "free coloured people out of the State." Throughout the letter Meaux is very deferential as one would expect. To close out the letter he became even more so. "I am in hopes that this letter will not be considered as an insult nor as an offence to you. I am a stranger to you but I presume that you was acquainted with my father Walter Meaux he was a man who lived his days honest." He explained that, "Although I have some reckles relatives I have been accused in one or two instances myself but I can raise my right hand at the hour of death not guilty. Alough [allow] me to say againe as your humble servant do not receive this letter as an insult for it is not intended as such. I know you will not condisend [consider, consent?] to answer this address." He closed, "I remain your Obedient Servant;" a common closing of the era.

A description was written on the outside of the letter in different handwriting that said, "Abraham Meaux-free boy." Meaux had described himself as "Boy" earlier in the letter when he wrote he "was raised in the little county of Boyle can bring a repprobation [approbation] from my county court showing that I have been an obedient Boy and have lived honest. Although it looks like my obedience will do me no good in this case it seems that I will have to suffer with the guilty" [he means Brown].

Meaux's spelling and punctuation left something to be desired, but it was certainly no worse and probably much better than many of the whites whose letters I have read. I am curious to learn more about this "free man of colour." How old was he? Did he, as did many blacks in Kentucky, participate in the Civil War? How did he experience Reconstruction? I will probably never find the answers to those questions, but I now have something I had only hoped to find when I began my research; an African American Kentuckian's perspective on John Brown's raid. I love research!

Kentucky Confederate Provisional Governor Hawes Gives His Take On What the War Was About

Kentucky's role in the Civil War was unique. The state had representatives in the United States congress in Washington, and they had representatives in the Confederate congress in Richmond. They had a star in the United States flag, and they had a star in the Confederate battle flag. And, of course, men from the Bluegrass State fought for both the Union and Confederate armies. Kentucky really did experience a war of brother vs. brother.

Kentucky also had two competing governors. Early in the war Bowling Green was designated as the Confederate capital of Kentucky and George W. Johnson was named governor. Johnson's rule was short lived though as the Confederates were driven out of the state in the spring of 1862. Johnson traveled with the Confederate army on its retreat out of the state and fought as a private in the Battle of Shiloh with fellow Kentuckians where he was killed.

Richard Hawes (pictured above) was selected to replace Johnson, and when Braxton Bragg's Confederate army invaded the commonwealth in the late summer of 1862, the Confederate forces captured the capital at Frankfort and held an inauguration for Hawes. But, Hawes's stay in Frankfort proved very short as the Confederates left the state after the Battle of Perryville.

Recently a colleague at work gave me a copy of Hawes's inauguration speech. I found it extremely interesting. Of particular interest to me was a section of the oration where Hawes described why the war was being fought. He said, "The people were told, the that the Federal Government did not intend to destroy the titles to slave property. It is now a truth and a fact, that the great aims and purposes of this war of subjugation, are the abolition of African slavery."

He continued in this same vein, "Let us then forget if we care, the past minor issues and plant ourselves on the one side or the other of this Abolition war. I have lived in your midst from my boyhood to the age of seventy-five [actually sixty-five] years, and I have utterly misconceived the characters and souls of Kentuckians if they hesitate as to the side they will take in this Abolition war."

Hawes then outlined his feelings on slavery, the destruction that emancipation would bring, and the sacrifices needed to win the war. "You know, fellow citizens, what African slavery is. You know that emancipation would be the most unmitigated curse which could be inflicted upon the slave race. You know that the abolition of slavery would crush and desolate the planting States. You know that a war of subjugation, to be successful, must be ruthlessly borne over the dead bodies of millions of the most chivalrous devotees of liberty, who are the bone of your bone and flesh of your flesh."

The Confederate governor concluded this part of his speech on the subject of slavery by stating, "I assume the duties devolved on me as Provisional Governor, to give you and opportunity to take your stand and make your choice in this Abolition war, and to decide fully and fairly whether you will cast your destiny with the North or the South."

Bragg had entered Kentucky with wagon loads of rifles to give to the flocking Kentuckians that he was told would enlist if he would only make a stand for the state. Kentuckians never come to the Confederate standard as expected and Bragg left the state following the terrible Battle of Perryville on October 8, 1862. Hawes would leave the state with Bragg, but his hopes and efforts for another major Kentucky campaign lasted until the end of the war.

Just finished reading - The Kentucky Tragedy: A Story of Conflict and Change in Antebellum America by Dickson D. Bruce, Jr.

I first heard about the "Kentucky Tragedy" story shortly after moving to the state. The museum theater group were I work (The Kentucky Historical Society) presented a theatrical interpretation of the story at the annual Boone Day celebration this past June in Frankfort. Unfortunately I was not able to see the play, but I remember that my curiosity to learn more about this event was stirred from the play's description.

Author Dickson D. Bruce in The Kentucky Tragedy: A Story of Conflict and Change in Antebellum America not only covers the history of the Tragedy, but also explores the plethora of copy-cat works of fiction and theatre that closely followed this intriguing murder. Well known authors such as Edgar Alan Poe, William Gilmore Simms, and Charlotte Barnes, among a host of lesser known writers all used the story as a base for works largely because of the public interest in the story.

The idea of honor was as pervasive as any in antebellum America; and most historians would agree even more so in the Old South than anywhere else. At that time one's reputation and family name was paramount to any other consideration, especially for those of wealth and political renown. Bruce uses the idea of honor throughout his book to explain not only the story of the Kentucky Tragedy, but also as a framework to explain how the related events were received by Americans that read the story and the related fiction works that followed.

OK, OK, maybe I have whetted your appetite for what went down. Here goes: Around 1819, Solomon P. Sharp, one of the Bluegrass state's leading politicians allegedly seduced Ann Cooke, who later delivered a stillborn child she claimed Sharp fathered. A few years later Cooke married Jereboam Beauchamp (17 years her junior). During the summer of 1825, the scandal of Cooke and Sharp's illicit affair reemerged, most likely for political reasons. The resurfacing of the event obviously sent Mr., and now Mrs., Beauchamp into a fury. The couple agreed that the only honorable course left them, since Sharp had ruined Ann (and by marriage, Beauchamp's) good name, was to kill Solomon Sharpe.

On November 7, 1825, the day before the Kentucky legislature was set to meet, at about 2 a.m., Beauchamp went to Sharp's Frankfort home and knocked on the door. After a very brief conversation Beauchamp stabbed Sharp in the chest and then fled the scene. Beauchamp was caught, tried, and sentenced to hang for the murder. Ann received permission to visit often with her husband in jail while he awaited his execution date. After asking to be left alone sometime before the execution, they both drank laudanum that Ann had smuggled in, with a desire to commit a double suicide. The drug did not have the desired effect though, it only made them sick. The morning of the execution Ann somehow smuggled in a dagger, and as they pledged their love for one another, they apparently stabbed each another. The stab wound she received proved fatal but his wasn't. Beauchamp's hanging went on as scheduled. The two had requested to be placed together in a single grave and their wish was granted. Wouldn't this make for an interesting short movie?

In his conclusion, Bruce explains that although much as changed since the time of the Kentucky Tragedy, much has also remained the same. "We remain, in many ways, part of the Tragedy's world. Our admiration for the antisocial, violent hero remains undiminished. And many of the tendencies and tensions of antebellum life - its competitive individualism, its stress on appearances, even its seemingly archaic approaches to gender - remain with us as well. We continue to define courage, loyalty, and duty in essentially violent terms. Placing law on the side of rules and rules in opposition to heart-felt action, we remain wedded to scenarios in which law and justice, law and virtue, stand in tense relationship that only violence can resolve. We retain that fascination with and fear of the physical self that underlay the Tragedy's appeal in its own time."

It appears that the Kentucky Tragedy is still as popular today as it was in the 1820s and 1830s. Yet another recent scholarly work has appeared on the subject. Murder and Madness: The Myth of the Kentucky Tragedy by Matthew G. Schoenbachler just came out last fall from the University Press of Kentucky. Looks like I'll have to check out this one too.

1860 Kentucky Statute Limited Free Blacks

In an earlier post I discussed Governor Beriah Magoffin's call to reorganize the Kentucky state militia in the wake of John Brown's Harpers Ferry raid. In his message to the Kentucky General Assembly in December 1859, the governor also called for tighter restrictions on African Americans, especially the free people of color in the Commonwealth.

With thoughts of a potential John Brown-like insurrection weighing heavily on his mind, Governor Magoffin said, "Self-preservation and the safety of the republic demand renewed vigilance upon our part, whether agents and emissaries of the Republican party, and the enemies of the union come among us as teachers, as peddlers, or as free negroes from the free states." The governor was all too aware that free black men such as Dangerfield Newby, John Copeland, Lewis Leary, and Osbourne Anderson had been among Brown's most trusted men.

Magoffin made several recommendations he hoped the state legislature would take seriously. He said "I would therefore recommend a heavier taxation upon peddlers, a repeal of laws allowing free negroes to come within our borders from other States, and the enactment of a law imposing a heavy penalty upon them for coming to the State, under any pretense whatever." He continued, "It would be well, too, to offer to each free negro, who wished to leave the State, who had not the means, a sufficient sum of money to bear his expenses to this destination; when once out, he could not return." In effect he was saying, we want you gone, and we'll help you leave, and once you're gone, don't come back.

The governor made clear his thoughts about free blacks. "This population is a great nuisance in our State, and while the good and industrious ought to be protected and respected, I am not sure that it would not have been well to have sold into slavery again those who were guilty of crimes of a certain description, and for misdemeanors, instead of punishment now provided by law - for drunkenness, immorality, laziness, and general misconduct, upon proof and conviction before a proper tribunal, it might have been well to have hired them out for a year, or longer, for the first offense, and for the second to have banished them from the State, or sold them into slavery, the money raised this way to be transferred to the school fund. Better far would it have been, both for the black and the white man, than to permit him, an idler, a thief, a drunkard, and a vicious vagabond, to have the name of a freeman, and to be left uninterrupted to associate with and to corrupt our slave population."

The Kentucky state legislature took the legal ball in a hand-off from the governor and ran it for a touchdown when they put into law in that session many of his recommendations. On March 3, 1860 the lawmakers passed 14 laws titled, "An Act concerning free negroes, mulattoes, and emancipation."

The law said that no slave could be emancipated in Kentucky without a bond being taken out to remove that slave within 90 days after emancipation; any free black or mulatto that came into the state would be guilty of a felony and subject to a sentence of six years in the state penitentiary; any Kentucky free black that leaves the state and enters a free state will forfeit his residence and not be allowed to return; any free black "who shall keep a disorderly house, or be found loitering about, engaged in no honest calling" could be sold into servitude for no less than two and no more than ten years; any free black or mulatto that shall allow others "to assemble at houses occupied by them, or upon premises under their control, for the purpose of gaming, drinking, or dancing," would be punished as detailed in the previous statute.

Interestingly the lawmakers allowed free blacks (men over 21, and women over 18) that wanted to, to choose a master or mistress, "whom he or she will serve during life." They also made it illegal for anyone, white or black, to purchase a slave in order to make them anything other than a slave.

I am not passing judgement or trying to justify the actions of these law makers from 150 years ago; I'm only trying to show what they did and the motivations behind their actions. These laws vividly demonstrate the race basis of slavery in mid-nineteenth century America. Now, can you imagine any body of legislature anywhere at this time making laws such as these that applied to white men? How many white Kentuckians would have filled the state penitentiary if they had been subject to these statutes? Think about it.

Help Save the Franklin Battlefield

CARTER COTTON GIN HOUSE-FRANKLIN, TENNESSEE

From an email sent by the Civil War Preservation Trust:

"Let's Reclaim a Key Section of the Franklin Breakthrough.

'The most desperate fighting imaginable.'

There were many horrifying scenes of carnage throughout the Civil War, but there are few that can compare tot what was witnessed on November 30, 1864 at the Battle of Franklin.

In what became one of the largest and most precipitous charges of the Civil War, Confederates of Frank Cheatham's corps hurled themselves against strong Union entrenchments. Despite facing enormous odds, these battle hardened Confederate forces did manage to break through the Union line at its center.

Facing the sudden prospect of total defeat, Colonel Emerson Opdyke and his brigade of veteran Midwestern soldiers - Opdyke's Tigers - charged forth into the breach and drove back the Confederate attackers. After five hours of frenzied fighting more than 8,500 soldiers would lay dead on the field and John Bell Hood's Army of Tennessee was left in shambles.

CWPT is partnering with Franklin's Charge to preserve forever a 1.07 acre portion of the Franklin battlefield - ground which witnessed the Confederate breakthrough and Union counterattack. Join us in saving this hallowed ground.

Franklin 2010 Preservation Campaign

Acres: 1.07

Total Cost: $950,000

CWPT Fundraising Goal: $150,000

Match: $6.33 to $1

Match Sources: ABPP, Franklin's Charge

For more information - www.civilwar.org/franklin10

It's not everyday that we get the chance to reclaim a battlefield that has been lost. As we did with the former Pizza Hut location, at the Carter House Garden, and on the Eastern Flank, we are slowly taking back what was lost at Franklin. Join us in adding another crucial part of the puzzle at the Franklin battlefield.

Very sincerely yours,

Jim Lighthizer

President, CWPT"

Origins of Underground Railroad Name

While just about everyone has heard of the Underground Railroad, few realize the origins of the name. One story has it that in 1831 a runaway slave from Kentucky, Tice Davids, reached the Ohio River just across from the town of Ripley, Ohio. The fugitive's master was in close pursuit and as Davids slipped in river to swim across, his owner found a boat on the shore and followed. The owner could see Davids's bobbing up and down in the current and saw him emerge on the Ohio bank. When the master finally made his way across the river, he searched high and low in the town in attempt to reclaim his property. But Davids was no where to be found, which led the frustrated owner to exclaim that Davids must have "gone on an underground road."

Although the practice of aiding fugitive slaves predates the term itself, with the rise of the invention of the train, and the rapid expansion of the railroad system in this era, those terms were added to the "underground road" name. In addition, such railroad terms as stations (safe houses), and conductors (friends of fugitives), as well as phrases such as "catching the next train North," were appropriated by those that supported the practice.

Ripley, Ohio was known throughout Kentucky as "the hell hole of abolitionism," due to the fact that many people in the town provided help to fugitives from the Bluegrass state in their effort to make it to Canada. The Rev. John Rankin was the recognized leader in the community. His house sat high atop the town on a ridge (see picture above) and served as a beacon to Kentucky slaves. Rankin was born and raised in Jefferson County in East Tennessee and had later moved to Northern Kentucky to preach, but he finally moved on to Ohio when his antislavery messages were not well received in the Commonwealth. John Parker, a mixed raced freeman born into slavery in Virginia and then sold in a slave coffle to Alabama tried to escape several times before finally purchasing his freedom. He moved to the town in the mid 1840s after a short stay in New Albany, Indiana. Parker eventually established his own iron business and made numerous exciting trips into Kentucky to pilot slaves across the Ohio River and help send them on their way to Canada. His story is vividly brought to life in The Autobiography of John P. Parker, Former Slave and Conductor on the Underground Railroad.

Both the Rankin and Parker houses survive today in Ripley. I hope to soon make a trip across the Ohio myself to see both of these historically significant sites.

John Brown was Hanged with Kentucky Hemp Rope

One of the most rewarding things about doing research is finding that otherwise obscure nugget of information that helps answer the historical question you are asking and that solidifies your hypothesis. On the other hand, one of the most frustrating things about research is finding those nuggets of information and then having to wait to find time to dig deeper to learn even more about a source. I recently ran across a couple of accounts that credited Kentucky with supplying the hemp rope that was used to hang John Brown. Apparently three states (South Carolina, Missouri, and Kentucky) vied for the honor of providing the cordage, but the Bluegrass hemp won out. One account I found explained that the three ropes were examined in a public forum for several days before the execution. The South Carolina rope that was made of cotton was judged too weak for the job, and the Missouri hemp rope was also judged inferior to the Kentucky rope.

So, what happened to this relic after the hanging. It appears there is some disagreement in the historical record. One account said that the wooden gallows was disassembled and mixed with other lumber for use in other construction projects while the rope was burned. Other accounts say that the rope still exists. One possible sample of rope is in the Warren Rifles Confederate Museum in Front Royal, Virginia (pictured above). Apparently this piece of rope was brought back from the hanging by the Warren Rifles militia unit that attended the hanging and later became a company of the 17th Virginia infantry regiment in the Civil War. Another piece is said to be in the West Virginia State Museum. The Massachusetts Historical Society also claims to have some of the rope. A newspaper article from the Charleston (West Virginia) Gazette published in 1929 said that the rope or a piece of it was in the Kentucky archives. I don't think that the Kentucky archives was even existence in its current state in 1929, but possibly they meant the Kentucky Historical Society; anyhow, apparently this piece of the rope no longer exists.

I think that it is a particularly significant gesture for the state of Kentucky to send this token of its hate for abolitionism to Virginia to be used in the execution of Brown. It shows that the state was committed to the institution of slavery and that an attempt such as Brown's to end that practice would not be tolerated. Kentucky was nationally known for its hemp and rope production during the Antebellum years, and by choosing this gifted symbol it solidified its proslavery position in the country's perception.

Which is it, Southern or southern?

Are they any English majors or grammar experts out there that can help me out? I am have been having trouble deciding whether the word Southern or Southerner should be capitalized or not. I was informed by a professor in graduate school that the proper use is, southern, with a small "s". Later, I was corrected by yet another authority that the "s" in Southern or Southerner should be capitalized.

I know that the word South should be capitalized when talking about the region, and should be lower case when speaking about the direction (same goes for North, or course). But when it comes to Southern it seems that anything goes...although there must be a correct and incorrect way to use it. I have often referred to my multitude of books on Southern history for examples, and there too it is used both ways, although, it seems that more recent texts go with lower case "s," while the older books use Southern or Southerner more. It seems that the only rule I can figure is to use one or the other consistently.

If anyone has an opinion or actually knows the rule I would be glad to be properly informed. I have always used Southern, Southerner or Northern and Northerner on the blog here, but I would like to be correct. It will help me sleep better at night.

Southern Distictiveness

I've just finished reading a book of selected essays by noted Southern and Civil War historian Charles P. Roland, titled History Teaches Us to Hope: Reflections on the Civil War and Southern History. I was fortunate enough to meet Dr. Roland a couple of weeks ago at a meeting held to develop interpretive themes for the Kentucky Historical Society's approach to the the Civil War Sesquicentennial commemoration.

Dr. Roland is a native of West Tennessee and received his undergraduate education at Vanderbilt and his graduate degrees from Louisiana State University. At LSU he was a student and research assistant for noted Civil War historian Bell Irvin Wiley (author of the invaluable soldier life studies, The Life of Johnny Reb and The Life of Billy Yank). Dr. Roland served as an officer in World War II and retired from teaching at the University of Kentucky in 1988.

In his essay "The Ever-Vanishing South," published originally in the Journal of Southern History in 1982, Dr. Roland went to Southern author William Faulkner (pictured above) and his recognized work The Hamlet for an illustration on the difference between Southerners and Northerners. It is as follows:
"Another of Faulkner's characters demonstrates humorously the southern sense of concreteness by explaining the difference between how a southerner and a northerner go about establishing a goat ranch. The southerner does it unceremoniously when his herd of goats grows so large it can no longer be accommodated in the barnyard or on the front porch. The northerner begins with no goats at all but with a pencil and piece of paper to reckon how many yards of fence and how many acres of land are needed for a given number of imaginary goats. The southerner never has the problem of making the number of goats match the length of fence or amount of land. They never matched, and he doesn't expect them to. If, on the other hand, after the northerner has set up his business he is unable to make them all match, he resorts to pencil and paper again. Now said Faulkner's speaker, instead of a goat ranch, the northerner has an 'insolvency.'"

While I found all of the essays contained in History Teaches Us to Hope enjoyable, Dr. Roland's essays in "Part Two: Secession and the Civil War," and "Part Four: The South in Fact and in Myth," were especially enlightening. Of particular interest to me was "A Slaveowner's Defense of Slavery." This "faction" (blend of fact and fiction) letter from a Southerner in Louisiana to a Northerner in Illinois in January 1861, who had been classmates at Princeton, is quite impressive. Dr. Roland explains that, "The persons and the letter are imaginary, but the arguments and outlook are not; they have been gleaned by me from thousands of letters and diary entries of the time, supplemented by information from published histories of the South and the nation." As the title indicates, the lengthy illustrative letter contains the viewpoint of a majority of Southerners at the time in defending their economic, social, and political way of life.

I highly recommend History Teaches Us to Hope to anyone interested in array of easy to read essays on Southern and Civil War history.

My Old Kentucky Home and Uncle Tom's Cabin?

OK, back to minstrelsy. Living in Kentucky for the past ten months or so has shown me that no sport takes precedence over Wildcats basketball here in the Commonwealth. I grew up in a Wildcats household (my father was a big fan-he preferred listening on the radio to watching on television) and I was even a fan myself for several years before I found my own team to follow and came to favor football over hoops. A Kentucky tradition that I always found touching is that on Senior Day when the senior members of the Wildcats team and their families get honored and sing My Old Kentucky Home together on the court. It is after all the state song and in my opinion (and many others' too) no state associates with its theme as does Kentucky.

Stephen Collins Foster probably wrote My Old Kentucky Home, Good Night in 1852 as it was published early in 1853. It is significant when he wrote the song because the same year Uncle Tom's Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stow was published in book form and became an immediate transatlantic bestseller. Social events seemingly had an impact on Stephen Foster and the subjects he covered in his songs. Written evidence proves that Uncle Tom's Cabin had an effect on Foster as it did so many other people.

Most people do not realize that the original title to My Old Kentucky Home, Good Night was Poor Uncle Tom, Good Night. Instead of "Then my old Kentucky Home good night," that ends each stanza, Foster's handwritten manuscripts of the lyrics shows he wrote, "Den poor Uncle Tom, good night." In a 1936 article -"The Slavery Background of Foster's My Old Kentucky Home" - printed in the Filson Club Historical Quarterly, Dr. Thomas D. Clark speculates that Foster probably changed the title and lyrics to make the song more marketable to Southern customers, who obviously despised Stowe's book. Minstrelsy was extremely popular thoroughout the United Stated during the 1850s, but especially so in the Southern states. Offending your best fans is not the way to become rich in the music business; then or now.

Dr. Clark states that, "Thus it matters little where My Old Kentucky Home, Good Night was written, but it is significant that it mirrors a most interesting background of the nation's history. It is signifcant, also, that the author's use of a title obscured his context sufficiently to cause Kentuckians, to whom Uncle Tom's Cabin was anathema, to take the song to their hearts and claim it as their very own." Interesting huh?

John Brown and Phrenology?

Yesterday I spent much of the day at the University of Kentucky's Young Library looking through microfilm of 1859 newspapers searching for how Kentuckians reacted to John Brown's raid. Actually, I really only got through the second half of October and the first half of November. If you have never viewed period newspapers you don't know what you're missing. They are printed in tiny type and have a gazillion columns; it is enough to make you go cross eyed.

The editor of the Daily Louisville Democrat, as you might imagine, did not hold Brown in high esteem. He also did not hold dear feelings for other abolitionists such as Bostonian Wendell Phillips. On November 3, 1859 the editor wrote, "We see that Wendell Phillips has been making an ass of himself as usual, in pubic and speech. He has been long known as a crazy fool running at large about Boston, where there are a good many of the same sort. Phillips is valiant in words, and generally exhibits his prowess in that way. He is more guilty than Brown, but he knows what Brown doesn't, that discretion is be better part of valor."

Many abolitionist were considered mad or crazy or insane by those that favored slavery - both North and South. I am not aware of Brown or many other abolitionists receiving treatment for insanity (except for Gerrit Smith when he checked himself into an asylum after Brown's raid), but there is documentation that Brown visited a phrenologist in 1847.

Phrenology was a pseudo-science that was extremely popular in the nineteenth century. During that era it was believed that one could find out their natural attributes by having a skilled phrenologist "read" the bumps on their skull. In February, 1847 Brown's head was read by noted phrenologist Orson S. Fowler. To a large degree Fowler was spot on about Brown's personality. After feeling Brown's skull Fowler determined that Brown was "positive in your likes and dislikes, 'go the whole figure or nothing,' and want others to do the same." He also found that Brown's head bumps made him "practical rather than theoretical," and that he "would rather lead than follow." In addition, he saw that Brown possessed a "great sense of honor, and would scorn to do anything mean or disgraceful. You might be persuaded, but to drive you would be impossible. You like to have your own way, and to think and act for yourself - are quite independent and dignified, yet candid, open, and plain; say just what you think, and most heartily despise hypocrisy and artificiality, yet you value the good opinion of others though you would not stoop to gain applause."

Without the aid of hindsight that we have in examining Brown's personality and actions, Fowler made quite the prescient reading; even if his method was nothing but "hogwash," as my father used to say.

The Story of the Yellow Rose of Texas

Lately I have been trying to learn more about the pop culture of the mid-nineteenth century-minstrelsy. Recently reading Sarah Meer's Uncle Tom Mania: Slavery, Minstrelsy and Transatlantic Culture in the 1850s, has touched off a multitude of questions that now plague my thoughts. That's the curse (or blessing-depending on who you look at it) of loving history.

I first became interested in minstrelsy a few years back when I was doing Civil War reenacting. I bought a CD by the 2nd South Carolina String Band that had a number of songs by Stephen Foster, Dan Emmet, and other minstrel writers of the 1840s-1860s on it. Inside the liner notes it had a brief history of each song. Since then I have purchased a few more of their CDs, and I highly recommend their recordings.

One of songs that the 2nd South Carolina covers on their latest CD, Dulcem Melodies, and that has an interesting story is the Yellow Rose of Texas. Although it was published by "J.K" Frith, Pond & Co. in 1858, the true author is unknown and most certainly the song was written earlier than the published date.

The story is based in the era of the Texas Revolution of 1836, in which Texas was attempting to claim its independence from Mexico. According to the legend there was a beautiful young mixed race (thus the "yellow" adjective) woman named Emily West who had migrated to Texas in 1835 and was indentured on the plantation of James Morgan in New Washington, Texas. When Mexican general Santa Anna arrived in New Washington he was so captivated by West that he had her captured and brought along with the army. The legend is not real clear but apparently Santa Anna was so smitten, seduced, or distracted (or all three) by West that he did not prepare his troops properly, and during the day's siesta, on April 21, 1836, the Mexican army was badly defeated at the Battle of San Jacinto. Morgan was reportedly so appreciative of West's help in winning Texas its independence that he released her from her indenture.

Here are the words to the minstrel song:

There's a yellow Rose of Texas that I am going to see

No other darkie knows her, no darkie only me

She cried so when I left her, it nearly broke my heart

And if I ever find her we never more will part.

(Chorus) She's the sweetest Rose of color this darkie ever knew

Her eyes are bright as diamonds, they sparkle like the dew

You may talk about your May most dear and sing of Rosa Lee

but the yellow Rose of Texas beats the belles of Tennessee.

Where the Rio Grand is flowing and the starry skies are bright

She walks along the river in the quiet summer night

She thinks if I remember, when we parted long ago

I promised to come back again and not to leave her so.

(Chorus)

Oh! now I'm going to find her, for my heart is full of woe

And we'll sing the song together, that we sung so long ago

We'll play the banjo gaily and we'll sing the songs of yore

And the yellow Rose of Texas will be mine forever more.

During the Civil War the song became a favorite marching tune for Confederate soldiers. After General John Bell Hood's disastrous Tennessee campaign in November and December 1864 ended with the virtual destruction of the Army of Tennessee at the battles of Franklin and Nashville, those veterans added their own verse:

Oh my feet are torn and bloody and my heart is full of woe

I'm going back to Georgia to find my Uncle Joe [Johnston]

You may talk about your Beauregard and sing of General Lee

But the gallant Hood of Texas, he played hell in Tennessee.

William Apes, The American Indian Frederick Douglass?

While recently reading Facing East from Indian Country: A Native History of Early America I ran across an individual I had never heard of. That was not so surprising to me, considering my lack of Native American history knowledge. But what was surprising to me was learning that there was an Indian voice in the 1830s that evoked much of what Frederick Douglass would later say on behalf of African Americans.

William Apes (also spelled Apess) was born in 1798. His father was a mixed race Euro-Indian and his mother was, he said, a Pequot Indian, but may have been of mixed race Indian-African ancestry. He was left to his abusive grandparents when he was a child and then when he was five he was apprenticed to a white family, through which he received a partial education.

He enlisted in a New York regiment as a drummer and fought in the War of 1812 in Canadian actions. After the war he wandered the New York-Canadian border and developed an addiction to alcohol that would plague him the rest of his life. In 1818, he "found religion" and became a licensed Methodist exhorter. I suppose that was just a step down from a preacher in those days.

In 1829 he wrote his autobiography, A Son of the Forest. He put out two more books in 1831, The Increase of the Kingdom of Christ: A Sermon, and The Indians: The Ten Lost Tribes. In 1833 he wrote, The Experiences of Five Christian Indians of the Pequot Tribe; or An Indian's Looking-Glass for the White Man.

Apes seemingly kept an eye on national politics, and particularly President Andrew Jackson's evolving plan of Indian removal. In 1836 he delivered a speech titled "Eulogy on King Philip." In this lecture he explained his perspective on how Indians had been treated over the years. King Philip, or Metacom (his Indian name), you might recall was a Wampanoag leader who lead a revolt against the English in Massachusetts in 1675 when diplomatic efforts broke down between the two belligerents. King Philip was killed in 1676 by an Indian that was a soldier for the English forces and that basically ended the fighting but not the ill will between the colonists and the indigenous population.

As I read through Apes' "Eulogy on King Philip" it struck me as sounding very familiar. It finally dawned on me that it reminded me a lot of Frederick Douglass' "What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?," which was given on July 5, 1852 (see my July 2, 2009 post). Instead of emphasizing the irony of the Fourth of July to enslaved African Americans as Douglass did, Apes highlighted the incongruity of celebrating the Mayflower landing (and Fourth of July) to the Indians. The following is that quote:

"Let the children of the pilgrims blush, while the son of the forest drops a tear, and groans over the fate of his murdered and departed fathers. He would say to the sons of the pilgrims, (as Job said about his birthday), let the day be dark, the 22d day of December, 1620; let it be forgotten in your celebration, in your speeches, and by the burying of the Rock that your fathers first put their foot upon. For be it remembered, although the gospel is said to be glad tidings to all people, yet we poor Indians never have found those who brought it as messengers of mercy, but contrawise. We say, therefore, let every man of color wrap himself in mourning, for the 22nd of December and the 4th of July are days of mourning and not of joy."

I don't know if Douglass had read Apes' "Eulogy on King Philip" and drew inspiration for his speech in 1852, but I would not be surprised to find that he did.

Edmond Kelley to Abraham Lincoln

It is unfathomable how many people probably wrote to Abraham Lincoln during his presidency. I seriously doubt that he had the time to read every letter that came his way, but I wouldn't be surprised if he tried. That just seems to be the type of person he was.

One of the multitudes of letters that has survived was written by an African American preacher named Edmond Kelley. Kelley was born a slave in 1817 in Columbia, Tennessee. He was baptized after he "got religion" in 1838. He was licensed to preach by his local church in 1842, and was formally ordained as a Baptist minister in 1843. In 1846 his owner, Ann White, went into debt and encouraged Kelley to escape before he would have to be sold. Instead of fleeing Kelley was provided by White with a pass to travel anywhere he wished in order to preach. In 1847 he became the minister of the Second Baptist Church in New Bedford, Massachusetts. Over the next several years he worked with antislavery advocates to raise money to purchase the freedom of his wife and family, still enslaved in Tennessee. In 1851 the family was finally reunited.

The letter Kelley wrote to Lincoln was penned on August 21, 1863, a full eight months after the Emancipation Proclamation went into effect. And, while Kelley's letter to Lincoln covers a number of interesting points, I found the following paragraph especially telling:

"For one, I sincerely trust the colored people will never wait to be drafted, but volunteer to a man. First, because slaveholders and the proslavery party have long since argued, and still argue, that the colored people are an inferior, cowardly, docile race, only fit to be slaves. Second, because the colored people have more at stake than the white people; for while the whites hazard their civil and political rights, the colored people lose both, and their freedom besides. Third, because the colored people generally proffered their services to the government, to aid in putting down the rebellion, shortly after the war broke out in 1861, when the indications were much less favorable for us than they are now. But this was specifically true of the colored people of this State [Massachusetts], and more especially for this city [New Bedford]; for it will be remembered by all that several large meetings were called, at which meetings resolutions were presented and passed by the colored people of this city, expressive of their willingness to enlist in the Government or State service. These resolutions were transmitted to the Governor and Council of this State, who without hesitancy expressed a willingness to have the colored people bear their part, but informed our friends of some of the legal difficulties in the way then, but encouraged the colored people to organize themselves into companies, and hold themselves in readiness. Let it be borne in mind that when the Governor's reply was received, another large meeting was called, and the recommendations of the governor were overwhelmingly adopted by our colored citizens. And since their prayer is answered, and the requisition has come, let none hold back, or wait to be drafted."

By the time this letter was written African Americans had already rushed to Union service. Massachusetts produced the 54th and 55th infantry regiments, as well as the 5th cavalry regiment; although these units were recruited free blacks from across the northern states, not just the Bay State. Slaves came too. Louisiana produced the most African American soldiers and Kentucky was second.

Especially during black history month, let's not forget the service of these African American soldiers and their efforts to keep our country united. Their service helped offer freedom to those who had never known it.

More Manifest Destiny Art

The Promised Land-The Grayson Family by William S. Jewett, 1850

Emigrants Crossing the Plains by Albert Bierstadt, 1867


Westward the Course of Empire Takes its Way by Emanuel Leutze, 1861

Daniel Boone's First View of Kentucky by William Ranney, 1849

Daniel Boone Escorting Settlers through the Cumberland Gap
by George Caleb Bingham, 1851

Manifest Destiny in Art

The current generation of students seem to be lacking many basic visual literacy skills. Due largely to the rapid nature of communication and technology today, young learners don't seem to focus on any one thing long enough to consider the all of the potential learning opportunities that are available. Instead, it is more like, "OK I've seen that, what's the next thing?"

Doing some research for an activity on manifest destiny and westward expansion the past week or so I ran into this piece of art titled American Progress, painted by John Gast in 1872.

Without taking a few minutes to look at it closely it doesn't look like much more than an angel floating over an Old West landscape. But, upon further review there is much to be learned in this particular piece of artwork.

The figure floating above the scene is not an angel, but rather Lady Columbia, a symbol for The United States. She is moving over an allegorical map of America, from east to west. On her forehead she wears the star of empire. In her right arm she carries not the Bible, but a school book, bringing education to the uncivilized West. In her left hand she strings telegraph wire, connecting the reunited United States. Railroads run behind her as well as stagecoaches and westward pioneers.

Uncivilized Indians and wild animals such as bears, wolves, and buffalo flee before her enlightening atmosphere. The Indians have left their teepees and the bones of the buffalo behind. To the East the skies are clear, representing the influence of civilization and technology, but to the west, over the Rocky Mountains, where the white man has barely reached, it is dark and unsettled.

Just behind Lady Columbia settlers have built a cabin and are plowing the ground to raise crops. Just under her are frontiersmen, miners, and hunters, on foot and on horseback reaching the border between civilization and wilderness.

From the late 1840s, just after the Mexican-American War, to the the 1880s, when the Wild West was finally being tamed, this idea of Manifest Destiny was portrayed in numerous pieces of artwork. Most take on a theme of progress and are heavily influenced by romanticism. Much can be learned by viewing these unique primary sources, and when you stop and take the time to look closely, they can speak to you as well as any written document.

Garrison Comments on Nat Turner's Rebellion

Many historians of the nineteenth century consider 1831 a watershed year. In fact, this year is of such significance that a book has even been written covering its momentous events (1831: Year of Eclipse by Louis P. Masuer).

Two of the those important events in 1831 had much in common. On January 1, 1831 William Lloyd Garrison (pictured here) started publishing his antislavery newspaper The Liberator in Boston. Garrison's clear and unabashed abolitionist views expressed in his press were not well received, even in the North. Eight months later, on August 21, Nat Turner led a group of slaves on a bloody rampage through Southampton County, Virginia. Turner and his band eventually killed at least 55 white men, women, and children before they were stopped by the Virginia militia. Turner initially escaped capture by hiding out, but he was caught on October 30, tired and then hanged on November 11. Many Southerners blamed Garrison and his newspaper for bringing abolitionist views to their slaves' knowledge and thus fomenting insurrection. Of course most slaves couldn't read and the circulation of The Liberator was not of much significance this early in its career, but nonetheless, such views were not to be tolerated in the slave states.

I was curious about what Garrison wrote in his paper concerning Nat Turner's rebellion. After doing a little searching I found an interesting passage from the September 3, 1831 issue of The Liberator that I thought I'd share.

"What we have long predicted,-at the peril of being stigmatized as an alarmist and declaimer,-has commenced its fulfilment. The first step of the earthquake, which is ultimately to shake down the fabric of oppression, leaving not one stone upon the other, has been made. The first drops of blood, which are but the prelude to a deluge from the gathering clouds, have fallen. The first flash of lightening, which is to ignite and consume, has been felt. The first wailings of bereavement, which is to clothe the earth in sackcloth, have broken upon our ears.

In the first number of the Liberator, we alluded to the hour of vengeance in the following lines:

Wo if it come with storm, and blood, and fire,

When midnight darkness veils the earth and sky!

Wo to the innocent babe-the guilty sire-

Mother and daughter-friends of kindred tie!

Stranger and citizen alike shall die!

Red-handed Slaughter his revenge shall feed,

And havoc yell his ominous death-cry,

And wild Despair in vain for mercy plead-

While hell itself shall shrink and sicken at the deed!

Read the account of the insurrection in Virginia, and say whether our prophecy be not fulfilled. What was poetry-imagination-in January, is now bloody reality. 'Wo to the innocent babe-to mother and daughter!' Is it not true? Turn again to the record of the slaughter! Whole families have been cut off-not a mother, not a daughter, not a babe left. Dreadful retaliation! 'The dead bodies of white and black lying just as they were slain, unburied'-the oppressor and the oppressed equal at last in death-what a spectacle!"

Garrison ends his column with this sentence: "IMMEDIATE EMANCIPATION can alone save her from the vengeance of Heaven, and cancel the debt of ages."

Garrison and other abolitionists clearly saw that the only way to prevent further outrages such as Turner's rebellion was to immediately free the slaves. He believed that only more bloodshed could come from their continued enslavement. Garrison would again appear to be somewhat prophetic when one considers the loss of life that the Civil War would cost only 30 short years later.

CWPT Has Great Maps at a Click

Maps are essential for most historians, especially military historians. Without maps reference points can get confusing and events that are described are not nearly as understandable. Military maps quickly show distance, geographical features of battlefields, and troop location. Without maps battlefield students are literally lost.

Fortunately, the Civil War Preservation Trust knows the importance of maps to those of us who enjoy touring Civil War battlefields, or even just reading about battles. The CWPT has gone to great lengths to provide a database of high-quality maps that are accessible at any time with a point and click.

The CWPT has divided their maps into basically three categories. Each of these categories show different but important aspects of maps and mapping. One category is "historical maps." These are largely period-produced maps drawn by engineers and cartographers during the war. The historical maps are important for many reasons, but mostly because they do not show the many modern changes that have appeared on so many battlefield landscapes.

Another category of maps are the "CWPT battle maps." These stunning maps show troop locations and movements, topography, direction, and even modern roads. The map legends are easy to understand and provide excellent reference. CWPT battle maps are a must have for modern battlefield explorers.

The most impressive CWPT maps though are the "animated maps." These amazing digital works of art vividly show troop movements without the distracting arrows, rather the skirmishers, regiments, brigades, and divisions actually move on the map as the narrative of the battle is displayed. In addition, a running timeline is also provided to give the viewer a better chronological understanding of what time actions occurred during the battle. BEWARE though, these animated maps are highly addictive and hours can slip by while viewing them without even realizing it.

To see CWPT's offering of maps click on the following link: www.civilwar.org/maps/