Thank you, Kevin, for exploring this further and laying out some of the evidence. Before I get into that in a little more detail, I noticed in one of your comments to another response that you mention the fact that Tubman was never officially inducted/recruited into the Army - and of course, she could not have been because she was a woman. You and your followers might be very interested to know that the United States Army and the Pentagon are currently working on the reams of paperwork to sponsor legislation that would officially induct Tubman into the Army posthumously (it actually takes an Act of Congress). They are eager to award her a Medal of Honor. This came from inside the military, not via an outside campaign. Tubman may be getting what she has been due all this time!
On another point, I think that as historians we need to be mindful of class and race-based assumptions, then and now, when considering historical records and writing about them. I agree that Shaw likely did not give Tubman much thought, and given the battles ahead of him would not have mentioned her in his writings. It took men like the numerous and powerful abolitionists in New England, New York, Pennsylvania, and Delaware, and military men like Montgomery, Hunter, Gillmore, Higginson, among others, to acknowledge and recognize Tubman and her incredible skills and brilliance and write about her. By drawing attention to the fact that Tubman served Shaw his last meal - a witness to his last hours - does not diminish in any way her incredible work with Montgomery. It is just another aspect of the many, many relationships and endeavors she engaged in during the war.
There is one thing that you wrote that I would like to call out. You write, in reference to Philadelphian Charlotte Forten : "Shaw was clearly attracted to the young educator, but I think what stood out to him most was that she was intelligent and cultured. Despite their racial differences, Forten was the first woman that he had come across during his time in South Carolina that he could hold a conversation with." Ouch. Harriet Tubman was not only intelligent, she was a genius. She did not have formal schooling in that she could not read or write text. What she did have was incredible *literacies*. She could "read" the night sky as well as any mariner. She could "read" the landscape - the forest, the fields, the marshes, streams, rivers, bays, ,and more, so well that she successfully navigated not only hostile and dangerous slave territory in Maryland, but also in South Carolina and Georgia during deadly wartime. She could "read" people, too. As for culture, what you really mean is that Forten was upper-class, and elite, like Shaw. Tubman exuded culture - a culture of extremely confident Black womanhood that drew admirers all races and sex. You were correct, however, when you identify Shaw as a racist. That says it all.
Thanks for taking the time to write such a lengthy and helpful comment. Great to hear that the Army is working on formally recognizing Tubman. Well deserved.
I agree with you that recognizing the story of Tubman serving Shaw his last meal doesn't diminish her importance. How could it. Let me be clear that I am not suggesting that Shaw may not have given Tubman "much thought," but that he may not have given her any thought. This is an observation based on having spent time with his correspondence, specifically in connection to his interactions with African Americans.
Finally, I certainly didn't intend to suggest that Tubman was not intelligent by pointing out how Shaw likely viewed Forten. My comment was intended entirely to represent his perspective.
Thank you, Kevin. My point is that the words we choose as historians and educators matter. I learned an important lesson years ago when I was invited to speak about Tubman with a group of elementary and junior high students who struggled with a variety of learning disabilities. A young girl, a 6th grader, approached me and told me that she had dyslexia and had an extremely difficult time reading. But after learning about Tubman's inability to read and write text, the young girl realized that she, too, was smart and could do amazing things, too. I will never forget her face, and how her whole being exuded joy with her new knowledge.
I appreciate this nuanced analysis of the incident remembered by Tubman and not mentioned by Shaw. The context of their respective lives and of others, like Montgomery, illustrate the era's class-centric mores. If what comes to us now can't be conclusive I am happy to be content with KML's scholarship.
What stand out to me, so far: Tubman just six weeks earlier was a de facto federal army officer. (Was she actually under the command of the same Col Montgomery? Had to be.) She was fully able to lead a raid into deep enemy countryside, albeit, that she had numerous local compatriots able to point out where 'torpedoes' (river mines) were planted, and tell dispositions of any White/Rebel forces.
The biographies I have read point underscore Tubman's nerves of steel that enabled her to perform these feats and similar ones on the Underground RR (and boast she'd never lost a passenger), yet with a Magdelene-like willingness to work as a camp servant if it helped the cause. A person showing this fortitude did not need to embroider on the truth. I might imagine she could lie, but only in the context of an enslaved woman speaking to an enslaver, or, as an operative, in an espionage situation (which may have been often). So if she remembered serving a meal to the 54th's colonel, his last one, just how can this be gainsaid?
Shaw was to lead a desperate attack starting at sunset. At dinner, he likely had focused his mind on imminent tasks facing the 54th. And few minutes to record whom he'd seen at his table.
I know basically nothing about the 54th's officers and look forward to KML's biography of Shaw. Certainly the character descriptions of him and Montgomery are worth anticipating the read.
Hi Norm. Thanks for the comment. I don't believe Tubman was formally under the command of Montgomery. She was sent by Gov. John Andrew to South Carolina in early 1863 to help with scouting and intelligence, but she was not formally enlisted in the army. I agree with you that Tubman did not need to lie about the meal and I entirely agree with your characterization of her. She was a remarkable woman.
I appreciate knowing the circumstances sending her to SC. Had there been an award for Volunteer of the __ (Year, War, Decade...Century? It wasn't until 1899 that her pension started) Harriet Tubman would have walked away with the plaque.
Thank you, Kevin, for exploring this further and laying out some of the evidence. Before I get into that in a little more detail, I noticed in one of your comments to another response that you mention the fact that Tubman was never officially inducted/recruited into the Army - and of course, she could not have been because she was a woman. You and your followers might be very interested to know that the United States Army and the Pentagon are currently working on the reams of paperwork to sponsor legislation that would officially induct Tubman into the Army posthumously (it actually takes an Act of Congress). They are eager to award her a Medal of Honor. This came from inside the military, not via an outside campaign. Tubman may be getting what she has been due all this time!
On another point, I think that as historians we need to be mindful of class and race-based assumptions, then and now, when considering historical records and writing about them. I agree that Shaw likely did not give Tubman much thought, and given the battles ahead of him would not have mentioned her in his writings. It took men like the numerous and powerful abolitionists in New England, New York, Pennsylvania, and Delaware, and military men like Montgomery, Hunter, Gillmore, Higginson, among others, to acknowledge and recognize Tubman and her incredible skills and brilliance and write about her. By drawing attention to the fact that Tubman served Shaw his last meal - a witness to his last hours - does not diminish in any way her incredible work with Montgomery. It is just another aspect of the many, many relationships and endeavors she engaged in during the war.
There is one thing that you wrote that I would like to call out. You write, in reference to Philadelphian Charlotte Forten : "Shaw was clearly attracted to the young educator, but I think what stood out to him most was that she was intelligent and cultured. Despite their racial differences, Forten was the first woman that he had come across during his time in South Carolina that he could hold a conversation with." Ouch. Harriet Tubman was not only intelligent, she was a genius. She did not have formal schooling in that she could not read or write text. What she did have was incredible *literacies*. She could "read" the night sky as well as any mariner. She could "read" the landscape - the forest, the fields, the marshes, streams, rivers, bays, ,and more, so well that she successfully navigated not only hostile and dangerous slave territory in Maryland, but also in South Carolina and Georgia during deadly wartime. She could "read" people, too. As for culture, what you really mean is that Forten was upper-class, and elite, like Shaw. Tubman exuded culture - a culture of extremely confident Black womanhood that drew admirers all races and sex. You were correct, however, when you identify Shaw as a racist. That says it all.
Hi Kate,
Thanks for taking the time to write such a lengthy and helpful comment. Great to hear that the Army is working on formally recognizing Tubman. Well deserved.
I agree with you that recognizing the story of Tubman serving Shaw his last meal doesn't diminish her importance. How could it. Let me be clear that I am not suggesting that Shaw may not have given Tubman "much thought," but that he may not have given her any thought. This is an observation based on having spent time with his correspondence, specifically in connection to his interactions with African Americans.
Finally, I certainly didn't intend to suggest that Tubman was not intelligent by pointing out how Shaw likely viewed Forten. My comment was intended entirely to represent his perspective.
Thanks again.
Thank you, Kevin. My point is that the words we choose as historians and educators matter. I learned an important lesson years ago when I was invited to speak about Tubman with a group of elementary and junior high students who struggled with a variety of learning disabilities. A young girl, a 6th grader, approached me and told me that she had dyslexia and had an extremely difficult time reading. But after learning about Tubman's inability to read and write text, the young girl realized that she, too, was smart and could do amazing things, too. I will never forget her face, and how her whole being exuded joy with her new knowledge.
Such an important point. Thanks, Kate.
This was simply an excellent exposition of how sources can and should be assessed. Well played, Kevin, very well played!
Thanks, Jim.
I appreciate this nuanced analysis of the incident remembered by Tubman and not mentioned by Shaw. The context of their respective lives and of others, like Montgomery, illustrate the era's class-centric mores. If what comes to us now can't be conclusive I am happy to be content with KML's scholarship.
What stand out to me, so far: Tubman just six weeks earlier was a de facto federal army officer. (Was she actually under the command of the same Col Montgomery? Had to be.) She was fully able to lead a raid into deep enemy countryside, albeit, that she had numerous local compatriots able to point out where 'torpedoes' (river mines) were planted, and tell dispositions of any White/Rebel forces.
The biographies I have read point underscore Tubman's nerves of steel that enabled her to perform these feats and similar ones on the Underground RR (and boast she'd never lost a passenger), yet with a Magdelene-like willingness to work as a camp servant if it helped the cause. A person showing this fortitude did not need to embroider on the truth. I might imagine she could lie, but only in the context of an enslaved woman speaking to an enslaver, or, as an operative, in an espionage situation (which may have been often). So if she remembered serving a meal to the 54th's colonel, his last one, just how can this be gainsaid?
Shaw was to lead a desperate attack starting at sunset. At dinner, he likely had focused his mind on imminent tasks facing the 54th. And few minutes to record whom he'd seen at his table.
I know basically nothing about the 54th's officers and look forward to KML's biography of Shaw. Certainly the character descriptions of him and Montgomery are worth anticipating the read.
Hi Norm. Thanks for the comment. I don't believe Tubman was formally under the command of Montgomery. She was sent by Gov. John Andrew to South Carolina in early 1863 to help with scouting and intelligence, but she was not formally enlisted in the army. I agree with you that Tubman did not need to lie about the meal and I entirely agree with your characterization of her. She was a remarkable woman.
I appreciate knowing the circumstances sending her to SC. Had there been an award for Volunteer of the __ (Year, War, Decade...Century? It wasn't until 1899 that her pension started) Harriet Tubman would have walked away with the plaque.