Thanks to all of you who shared your thoughts in response to yesterday’s open thread. They were incredibly thoughtful and gave me a great deal to consider. Here are two to consider:
There are some important omissions from that chart, namely the 50th and 100th anniversaries of the Civil War, when interest was high and people were looking back at that history. The two largest peaks of monument construction took place in the lead up to and during those anniversary years, particularly the 50th anniversary when many of the veterans were still alive. Those are significant facts that are not noted at all in your list of nothing but race-related events. Are you seriously arguing that race alone was the inspiration for constructing Confederate monuments? And how does that explain Union monuments going up at the same time and in similar numbers?
Hi Shane. Thanks for taking the time to comment, but with all due respect, did you not read the post. The entire point was that we need to acknowledge the complexity of history.
You are absolutely right to point out the omissions on the timeline and the age of Confederate veterans. I did not create it and, yes, the two anniversaries you reference are relevant. That said, you ignore the fact that what shaped a commemorative landscape dominated by Confederate monuments is the fact that African Americans had been almost completely disfranchised. The monuments and their emphasis on the Lost Cause completely ignores the story of slavery, emancipation, and the participation of tens of thousands of Black southerners in the United States army. Many Confederate monuments were dedicated in town and counties where the majority of the population was African American.
White supremacy was absolutely decisive in shaping the commemorative landscape during the Jim Crow era.
I did read the post and I agree with a lot of it, which is why the timeline surprised me and stood out so much so it appears to be a single-cause series of contextual events, the opposite of what you advocated in the post. I wonder if a more comprehensive timeline of events would be helpful here? Thanks for the reply.
Thanks for the follow up. The timeline certainly could use a few more reference points, but that should not in any way detract from the point that I made above, which is that white supremacy and the legal restrictions placed on African Americans at the turn of the twentieth century played a decisive role in whose memory of the war would be enshrined in *public spaces* across the South and whose stories would be ignored and/or mythologized.
A very thought provoking piece. I think there is a different conversation to be had when the memorial relates to a war grave particularly if it’s contemporary of the burial, rather than one that merely commemorates soldiers, their service, or a battle.
The issue of what we owe the dead of our enemy can be a vexed one. With reconciliation former enemies can make the sort of peace that allows for the (misattributed) Ataturk Gallipoli speech. Sadly for the US, reconciliation post the Civil War never happened so it remains vexed.
Hi Michael. Thanks for the thoughtful comment. I agree with you that this is an important distinction. It may not be a distinction that matters for some in terms of whether it should remain in situ, but in term of understanding the relevant history it is essential.
There are some important omissions from that chart, namely the 50th and 100th anniversaries of the Civil War, when interest was high and people were looking back at that history. The two largest peaks of monument construction took place in the lead up to and during those anniversary years, particularly the 50th anniversary when many of the veterans were still alive. Those are significant facts that are not noted at all in your list of nothing but race-related events. Are you seriously arguing that race alone was the inspiration for constructing Confederate monuments? And how does that explain Union monuments going up at the same time and in similar numbers?
Hi Shane. Thanks for taking the time to comment, but with all due respect, did you not read the post. The entire point was that we need to acknowledge the complexity of history.
You are absolutely right to point out the omissions on the timeline and the age of Confederate veterans. I did not create it and, yes, the two anniversaries you reference are relevant. That said, you ignore the fact that what shaped a commemorative landscape dominated by Confederate monuments is the fact that African Americans had been almost completely disfranchised. The monuments and their emphasis on the Lost Cause completely ignores the story of slavery, emancipation, and the participation of tens of thousands of Black southerners in the United States army. Many Confederate monuments were dedicated in town and counties where the majority of the population was African American.
White supremacy was absolutely decisive in shaping the commemorative landscape during the Jim Crow era.
I did read the post and I agree with a lot of it, which is why the timeline surprised me and stood out so much so it appears to be a single-cause series of contextual events, the opposite of what you advocated in the post. I wonder if a more comprehensive timeline of events would be helpful here? Thanks for the reply.
Thanks for the follow up. The timeline certainly could use a few more reference points, but that should not in any way detract from the point that I made above, which is that white supremacy and the legal restrictions placed on African Americans at the turn of the twentieth century played a decisive role in whose memory of the war would be enshrined in *public spaces* across the South and whose stories would be ignored and/or mythologized.
A very thought provoking piece. I think there is a different conversation to be had when the memorial relates to a war grave particularly if it’s contemporary of the burial, rather than one that merely commemorates soldiers, their service, or a battle.
The issue of what we owe the dead of our enemy can be a vexed one. With reconciliation former enemies can make the sort of peace that allows for the (misattributed) Ataturk Gallipoli speech. Sadly for the US, reconciliation post the Civil War never happened so it remains vexed.
Hi Michael. Thanks for the thoughtful comment. I agree with you that this is an important distinction. It may not be a distinction that matters for some in terms of whether it should remain in situ, but in term of understanding the relevant history it is essential.