Remembering the Fallen

               Sorry for the time of absence, everyone! I intentionally did two posts before I left for Gettysburg in order to keep my blog count up. Hope you find this week's article interesting!

              I found this article particularly interesting. Apparently, two sailors from the Civil War were buried today at Arlington National Cemetery. The soldiers were from the USS Monitor, which were recently discovered. (If you go through a few of my old posts, I have an earlier discussion on the new developments made with the USS Monitor due to new technology that allowed greater access to the ship.) Unfortunately, the soldiers so far remain unidentified. Yet, a researcher, named Megan Smolenyak, has been working for a period of time now to discover who they are. She has identified that one of the sailors are either Robert Williams or William Bryan. This has been achieved by looking through documents and pictures of the ship, its crew, and other pertinent details in the National Archives. It has been difficult to ascertain much more beyond this finding, however. This research will continue to be an ongoing local project.

                For now, though, the sailors will be in a respected spot in Arlington National Cemetery. Eventually, the Cemetery has officially confirmed, they will implement a monument in dedication to all of the sailors that served on the USS Monitor during the Civil War. I had visited to Arlington prior, so I know the area, but I am not certain exactly where they would place this marker. However, the public anticipates that it will obviously be professional and well-executed.

                After our trip to both the Gettysburg and Antietam cemeteries, I thought that this would be especially pertinent. With such extensive care, use of resources, and effort that people put into cemeteries, they have become symbols that reflect how we revere and view our past. They serve as excellent parallels into our dedication, cultural influences, and existential perspective. That is why I find them and their perpetuation very important.

Link Can Be Found Here: http://commercial-news.com/local/x620882144/Civil-War-sailors-buried-at-Arlington

Student Questions for Desjardin's Book

1. Who is Daniel E. Sickles? How did he shape historic and modern societal perspectives on General Meade?

2. Who is John Badger Bachelder? Why do you believe that he spent so much effort to collect information on the battle of Gettysburg only to use a small amount of “official reports” for his project?

3. What is the Lost Cause Ideology? When did it start to emerge? Which major organizations were behind the perpetuation of the myth?

4. What is monumentation, and who governed the process at Gettysburg? What are a few examples of inconsistent beliefs on it that are illustrated in Desjardin’s book?

5. If historians cannot ever accurately prove the “facts” about many historical events, does Desjardin suggest that studying history is a fruitless pursuit? 

A Lincoln Lecturer

            If there is one aspect of college that I have enjoyed, it is the fact that Barrett and ASU host many informative lectures on campus. If I do not have class, I am nearly guaranteed to go to one of the evening lecture/events – especially if the topic revolves around history. Unlike many of the math or science ones I have been to, the history lectures often involve a lot more individual interpretation and analysis from the guest speaker.

 It is my interest in guest speakers that actually drew me to read a recent article on a Lincoln lecture. In Bloomington Illinois, the “nationally recognized” Civil War scholar Allen C. Guelzo gave a speech on the motivations that influenced Abraham Lincoln to abolish slavery. Other historians have attributed his actions to his feelings against racial injustice, or to want to weaken the Southern states’ workforce, but Guelzo does not think either of these perspectives are accurate. Rather, he finds that: “What Lincoln hated in slavery was not just its racial injustice, but the re-emergence in America of the old demon of monarchy, where some people were born with uncalloused hands, booted and spurred and ready to ride on the backs of everyone else who had to work…” (IWU, 2013, Paragraph 3). Apparently, he saw slavery as an institution that promoted aristocratic habits and violated the democratic political system.

Now, I have not heard this theory before, and I am not certain what others’ opinions of it might be. However, I find the lecture interesting and want to bring it up in our discussion of historical interpretation. Dr. Simpson had mentioned in class prior that the “President Lincoln of the early twentieth century” was a moderate racist, fully accepted as so, and was focused on reunion and preservation. It makes sense that this interpretation would be prevalent, because the reconciliationist vision was very strong at this point in time. How Lincoln was viewed then was definitely a reflection of the beliefs of society at that time. Each generation, it appears, tries to implement Lincoln in some way into their societal beliefs of the moment. Our nation is currently fraught with economic woes and threats of sequestration, and I have seen many people disillusioned with entrepreneurs at the top and those that make a significantly more amount of money than the rest of the population. Turning Lincoln into a man that could not stand the aristocratic system simultaneously validates citizens’ disapproval of the economic system today. Once again, implementing Lincoln into the current societal beliefs shows an ongoing respect and need for the man, his views, and intellect.  

No matter your opinion on Guelzo’s theory or my ideas on his interpretation, the article is still nonetheless interesting. You can check it out at the link below.

http://www.iwu.edu/news/2013/02-guelzo-on-civil-war.html