It’s always a pleasure talking with my friend and fellow historian Barbara Gannon. Barbara teaches history at the University of Central Florida and specializes in the Civil War era and military history. She is the author of two books, including Americans Remember Their Civil War
I find Gannon's interview interesting (I suppose I say that about virtually everything you post). My archaeology colleagues, at least some, would argue that you can't get inside a dead persons head-thus their reliance on physical evidence to interpret the past. The point being that you can't really know what the GAR men would have thought of the Beavers or the Confederate memorials. On the other hand, as Gannon suggests, the GAR men left a pretty clear record, at least on the Confederate memorials. I agree with her I don't think they approved at all. I also think she is right that they would have said leave the Beavers alone.
No matter what arguments we want to make with ourselves I also think Gannon is right, we can't preserve these battlefields, or any other battlefield, exactly as they were at the time of the battle. The act of preserving them changes them and I am not referring just to the addition of signage and walking paths. I think the question is why are we preserving these places? And, though some in our culture may not like it our reason for preserving the Civil War battlefields is changing. It is moving away from a theme of reunification, not reconciliation but reunification to some place we have not fully landed yet. And, by the way my view on the Beavers has changed as I have read and listened to the material you have posted-I agree with the GAR men, leave them alone.
I find Gannon's interview interesting (I suppose I say that about virtually everything you post). My archaeology colleagues, at least some, would argue that you can't get inside a dead persons head-thus their reliance on physical evidence to interpret the past. The point being that you can't really know what the GAR men would have thought of the Beavers or the Confederate memorials. On the other hand, as Gannon suggests, the GAR men left a pretty clear record, at least on the Confederate memorials. I agree with her I don't think they approved at all. I also think she is right that they would have said leave the Beavers alone.
No matter what arguments we want to make with ourselves I also think Gannon is right, we can't preserve these battlefields, or any other battlefield, exactly as they were at the time of the battle. The act of preserving them changes them and I am not referring just to the addition of signage and walking paths. I think the question is why are we preserving these places? And, though some in our culture may not like it our reason for preserving the Civil War battlefields is changing. It is moving away from a theme of reunification, not reconciliation but reunification to some place we have not fully landed yet. And, by the way my view on the Beavers has changed as I have read and listened to the material you have posted-I agree with the GAR men, leave them alone.