Teaching Civil War History · ECW Bookshelf · 10 Questions with Sean Chick · News & Notes
|
|
If I’ve heard it once, I’ve heard it a million times: Young people today don’t know American history very well. They don’t appreciate why it’s important. They don’t understand it. Historical literacy in America is abysmal.
In July, I had the privilege to spend five days in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, at the American Battlefield Trust’s Teacher Institute. (Here's
a recap of the dispatches I filed at ECW.) At the conference, I heard some things regarding history education in America that absolutely shocked me.
“The good news is that there’s not a single piece of data that shows students knowledge of history is in decline,” said Bruce Lesh, a former social studies teacher who now works in education policy at the state level in Maryland. In 2008, he was recognized as the pre-collegiate Teacher of the Year by the Organization of American Historians and in 2013 was named Maryland Secondary Social Studies Teacher of the Year.
The problem, Bruce said, is that students’ knowledge of history isn’t in decline because
it’s always been consistently low. He cited dispiriting research done as early as 1917 that sounded like it could have been released last year.
“It’s become popular to bash teachers,” Bruce said. “Teachers get the blame.” But in fact, he suggested that students find history enjoyable and they love the historical process. They love to ask questions, interrogate sources, argue—the very things historians do in their professional work.
What they don’t love is rote memorization—they very skill overemphasized by standardized testing. “Memorization doesn’t lead to achievement or student engagement,” Bruce said, citing a century’s worth of research to back him up.
However, when teachers are able to put students “in a situation where they have to take a disciplinary approach to history instruction,” research shows excellent results. “They want to mimic, in the classroom, the things historians do,” Bruce explained. “They understand that history is about information, but they want to be able to explore that information.”
The main problem is that teachers’ hands are tied by an educational system that reinforces a century of poor practice. “That’s the way we’ve always done it” is the rule, even though research clearly shows “the way we’ve always done it” doesn’t work all that well.
Bruce’s talk was titled “It’s not what or how much we teach, but how we teach it that matters: Confronting the Legacy of History Instruction.” If I could, I would bottle him up and send him to every Civil War Roundtable in the country—and every school board and state Department of Education, too, for that matter. His message about history education is
that compelling and vital.
Fortunately, a couple hundred teachers gave up part of their summer vacation to attend the Teacher Institute simply because those teachers love what they do. It offered an encouraging reminder that our kids, by and large, are in very good, very capable hands. Those teachers love what they do and love what they teach. We should support every effort that helps them better pass that love on to their students.
Chris Mackowski, Ph.D.
Editor-in-Chief
|
|
In our masthead photo this month,
Kevin Pawlak
talks with attendees at ECW’s first-ever
Pop-Up Tour
, which followed Hartsuff’s Brigade across the Antietam Battlefield.
Dan Welch
, who co-lead the tour, supplied the photo. Thanks to all who attended!
Our
Fifth Annual Emerging Civil War Symposium at Stevenson Ridge
is sold-out! In fact, we sold out in mid-July (an incentive to get your tickets early for next year’s event). We’ll be announcing next year’s theme at this year’s Symposium, and we’ll share details via our blog and newsletter soon thereafter. We’re looking forward to an exceptional event Aug. 3-5 as we focus on “Turning Points of the Civil War.”
|
|
Emerging Civil War Bookshelf
|
Decisions at Chickamauga: The Twenty-Four Critical Decisions that Defined the Battle
is
David A. Powell
’s most recent book concerning the September 1863 battle. Chickamauga is not a new topic for Dave—he has authored five other books on this, the second-largest engagement of the Civil War, including
The Maps of Chickamauga, Failure in the Saddle: Nathan Bedford Forrest, Joseph Wheeler, and the Confederate Cavalry in the Chickamauga Campaign,
and his narrative trilogy,
The Chickamauga Campaign.
Rather than delivering another narrative of the battle,
Decisions at Chickamauga
examines crucial moments—turning points, as it were—in the course of the action, where leaders faced difficult moments and the outcome hinged on their choices. Each discussion outlines a situation a leader (not always the army commander) faced, his possible choices, and the underlying pros and cons. Rather than pass judgment, readers are asked to consider stepping into an officer’s shoes at a particularly compelling moment to reach their own evaluation of each potential course of action.
Written as a form of military-style staff ride,
Decisions
is the latest release in the new
Command Decisions in the American Civil War
series from the University of Tennessee. Earlier works explore Gettysburg, Stones River, and Second Manassas. A number more are planned. Affordably priced, these paperback guides are meant to take students and aficionados onto the battlefield to consider the difficult nature of command in the Civil War.”
Read more about Dave’s new book
here
.
|
|
10 Questions . . . with ECW’s Sean Michael Chick
A native of New Orleans, Sean Chick leads historic tours of his hometown and has also been involved in historic board game development and design. Sean is the author of The Battle of Petersburg, June 15-18, 1864 (University of Nebraska, 2015). You can read his full bio
here
.
What's your Civil War "origin story"? In other words, how did you get hooked on the war?
In 1990 I saw the movie
Glory
on HBO with my grandfather. Jacob Acker, and brother, Daniel. I was caught up in the whole story, and then I felt a wave of excitement when my grandfather said it was based on real events. I grew up on a steady diet of movies like
Jaws
and
Robocop
. I knew those were fiction, but reality excited me.
I told my father about Glory, and he gave me his take on the war as we skimmed through Robert Paul Jordan’s The Civil War. The pictures were lovely and dramatic. I fell in love with the period. However, my father was really into the Lost Cause. His view of the war was reactionary, racist, and in particular filled with deep and bitter hatred for the North. He still thinks New England is God’s scourge on America. My father, though, taught me that the past hurts, even the distant past of which we have no memory. My father still reminds me of Amory Blaine in This Side of Paradise when he says he was for all the lost causes of history: Bonnie Prince Charlie, Hannibal, the Southern Confederacy. I suffer the same affliction to a degree. I cannot bring myself to play the Roundheads in any wargame nor play against the Jacobites. Like Grant, I still cannot take too much joy at the South losing or that a war was even fought. The idea that a republic, a system of government built to avoid bloodshed, even fought a civil war is a tragedy.
It took me many long years to snap out of that view of the war. One important step was going to Vicksburg and seeing the Union graves. Watching Gettysburg helped, too, because I was really taken with John Buford and Joshua Chamberlain. Then there was reading about William Tecumseh Sherman. Even in my Lost Cause phase I had an odd fascination with Sherman. His grisly visage frightened me as a child (and I loved horror movies). Reading Bruce Catton and David Blight in particular completed my rejection of the Lost Cause. Yet, I cannot bring myself into the current Just Cause interpretation, which often treads into a good vs. evil narrative. Robert Penn Warren called it the “Treasury of Virtue,” and I think it limits our understanding of why the North fought and what the war meant to the North. Nearly every phase or school of Civil War interpretation seems to narrow the war to just one maybe two important implications, and apply that to every aspect of the war. It seems that we are reductionists, and love casting aside older interpretations as wrong. Yet, reading older books has brought up questions and ideas that no longer are addressed. I highly recommend it to anyone. For instance, I think the blundering generation thesis is a very good one and pertinent to today.
New Orleans, of course, has a great Civil War story. What do you like about it so much?
The New Orleans story is complicated and more about memory than great battles. After the war, the citizens played up their Confederate sympathies with not just statues, but a lavish funeral for Jefferson Davis. Confederate women were featured in some of the first truly grand Mardi Gras balls. Our current city hall’s ribbon was cut by the sword of Beauregard. This view, though, ignored the war’s verdict on racial justice, while also forgetting that the city surrendered and provided troops to the Union. On the subject of surrender, there was no sustained guerilla battle in the streets. Union troops were not getting their throats cut, which is amazing considered the city’s high crime rates in the 1850s. Worst of all, the racial violence of Reconstruction was portrayed as a heroic battle over voter rights. While I think the purely political dimensions of Reconstruction do not get enough attention, my forefathers failed to recognize the humanity of others, and we are still dealing with that, here and all over America.
On the other side, currently it is en vogue to downplay the city’s Confederate past. I have heard people say we were never that loyal to the Confederacy. Yet, if you stroll our cemeteries, there are plenty of Confederate graves. We have a museum that is one of the largest collections of Confederate artifacts. Many of the Confederacy’s best units, such as the Washington Artillery and 6th Louisiana, were New Orleans outfits. Many Northern transplants to New Orleans proclaim that we are not a “Southern city.” As to the idea that we are “not Southern,” one has only to stroll around the Garden District to see otherwise. New Orleans is a blend of cultures and memories, yet whoever is dominant seems to enjoy disregarding the parts of the past that are unpleasant to their concept of the “real and authentic” New Orleans.
What do you like about the modern city of New Orleans?
Honestly, not much as of late. The city is becoming too expensive, and nearly half of my friends have moved away in the last few years. Two of my closest friends just announced they are leaving, and it is over money and the change in the culture. Airbnb has turned several old neighborhoods into giant hotels. The more carefree atmosphere has been eroded. When I grew up here, it was mostly locals, and the vibe from those days is being lost, particularly as more franchise businesses replace local ones. Our politics is still as rotten as ever, we are still flood prone, and crime is still pretty bad, but lower than the 1990s peak. The real legacy of Mitch Landrieu for me is not statues, but a city that is losing population, vibrancy, and history. At the same time we were taking down a statue of Beauregard, the Woolworth’s on Canal Street, site of a decisive civil rights protest of the 1960s, was being torn up. It will be replaced with a Hard Rock Café Hotel. That sums up Landrieu’s second administration perfectly. The fawning praise he receives in the national media has convinced me most journalists are not doing their jobs.
Sorry to be a pessimist, but it’s been a hard two years in New Orleans. It’s still my favorite place in America, but the post-Katrina recovery high is long gone and there is a listless and nervous feeling that was not evident in 2012 when I moved back. If anything, back then I was struck by how happy people were as compared to even 2004. Still, my family and friends are here and my people have been here since 1832. I am going to remain.
So how did a guy down in Louisiana get interested in Petersburg, which you’ve written a great book about?
I have always been interested in topics I cannot find a lot of information on. When I was a boy and reading about World War II, I took some interest in the Italian Navy because what books I had were vague on the subject. Petersburg was one of those topics. I was impressed with the Confederacy’s ability to hold the city for months, and was surprised to find out that the Union had nearly captured it on June 15-17.
If Grant and Meade had taken Petersburg in June, Richmond would have fallen and Lincoln’s election would have been assured. It was arguably the Confederacy’s last major strategic victory, and certainly one of the most impressive tactical victories considering the Union’s numerical superiority. I was shocked that there was only one book, Thomas Howe’s
Wasted Valor
. I decided to update Howe and found the reasons the battle gets forgotten were caught up in the Lost and Just Cause interpretations. The Lost Cause did not make Beauregard a major hero and Lee was slow to react, undermining the myth of him being prescient. However, Grant failed to press the attack, undermining the myth of him as a hard-charging commander and untutored military genius. If one subscribes to the Just Cause myth, and the current round of Grant hagiography, Petersburg is best forgotten or simply blamed on William F. Smith or George Meade. Writing about the battle allowed me to tell a good story and discuss things about Civil War generalship and memory that often go unmentioned.
Your next project is an ECWS book about the Bermuda Hundred Campaign. What attracted you to that topic?
Working on Petersburg made me interested, since the Petersburg campaign is a sequel to Bermuda Hundred. I like that it is forgotten, yet crucial to Grant’s strategy in Virginia. Being from New Orleans, Beauregard and Butler are always subjects of great interest. Also, the battle of Ware Bottom Church was crucial but only vaguely sketched out in previous books. I devoted a lot of time to figuring out the flow of the battle. With a lot of help from some Virginia locals, such as Scott Williams and Mark Jacobson, we put together a good battle map. It was also a joy getting friends and respected scholars involved, such as Mark Summers, Thomas Howe, Jordan Grove, and Michael Kraemer.
Lightning-Round (short answers):
Most overrated person of the Civil War?
Edwin Stanton. He was vindictive, petty, a flawed strategist, and an all-around awful person. For the Confederates it is William J. Hardee.
Favorite Trans-Mississippi site?
Wilson’s Creek. It is a beautiful looking site, and the park does a good job interpreting the action.
Favorite Regiment?
Confederate would be the Orleans Guard Battalion, a unit of elite New Orleans Creoles who went into Shiloh wearing blue uniforms. For the Union, I like the 69th New York. You have to love a regiment that charges in shouting “Remember Ireland and Fontenoy!”
What one Civil War book do you consider to be essential?
The Inner Civil War
by George Frederickson (1965) is essential reading today. It is the best book about the war’s intellectual aftermath and discusses aspects of the North’s experience and understanding of the war largely ignored by current scholars. Scholars still think highly of the book, but I feel few have actually engaged with its thesis. Because its arguments have not been dealt with, it is still as fresh as it was in 1965.
What’s one question no one has ever asked you that you wish they would?
Who is your favorite member of Davis’ cabinet and who is your favorite member of Lincoln’s cabinet?
|
|
ECW News & Notes
Doug Crenshaw
went to Croatia, Montenegro, Switzerland, Paris, and Normandy in July. “Omaha Beach and the American cemetery were exceptionally moving,” he says.
Daniel T. Davis
,
Phill Greenwalt
,
Chris Mackowski
,
Dan Welch
, and
Kris White
all assisted with the American Battlefield Trust’s 2018 Teacher Institute in Valley Forge, PA. (well, Kris didn’t just “assist”—as the Trust’s education manager, he ran the event!). Phill invited attendees to rethink George Washington as a teaching tool, Chris offered ways to bring controversies such as Confederate monuments into classrooms as teaching tools, and Dan W. explored “the Philadelphia Sound and Philly Soul.” Dan D., Phill, and Chris led tours to Independence National Historic Site in downtown Philly, and Dan D. led a tour of Valley Forge National Historic Site.
In addition to writing about the Civil War,
Meg Groeling
writes for the quarterly magazine
American Bungalow
, which is dedicated to exploring the history, ownership, and love of, well, American bungalows. Her article in the Summer 2018 edition concerns the remodel of her appropriately titled "whimsical" kitchen, hex-tile daisies and all.
Dwight Hughes
recently presented a paper at the North American Society for Oceanic History (NASOH) Annual Conference in St. Charles, Missouri, titled “Unvexed Waters: The Mississippi River Squadron” discussing unprecedented technical, tactical, and command challenges in naval and joint shallow-water warfare along the spine of America, from Forts Henry and Donelson through Memphis and Vicksburg. This and other Civil War naval history presentations are available for interested audiences
here.
Dwight
also reports: “Had a bear in our backyard. He destroyed our bird feeders. Unusual for the suburbs of Manassas.” (see photo, above!)
Frank Jastrzembski
had an article on Gen. John C. Robinson published in the July edition (issue 57) of the British magazine
History of War
.
Chris Kolakowski
has been invited to speak at the George C. Marshall Museum at the Virginia Military Institute on October 11. Chris’s talk, “The Two Georges: Marshall and Patton,” will be part of the George C. Marshall Legacy Series sponsored by Carnegie Corporation of New York. You can find more information
here
.
Rob Orrison
and
Paige Gibbons-Backus
presented a series of Facebook LIVE broadcasts on Saturday, July 21, to commemorate the battle of First Manassas. A number of guests joined them throughout the day for their real-time programs, which spanned locations such as the Stone Bridge, Henry House Hill, and Ben Lomond hospital. You can watch the video archive on Facebook
here
.
Look for
Kevin Pawlak
and
Rob Orrison
speaking about their newest release on the Antietam Campaign,
To Hazard All
, in Leesburg, VA on September 9.
Kevin
will also be speaking on Wednesday night, August 15, at the Jacob Rohrbach Inn in Sharpsburg, MD about the Emancipation Proclamation as a turning point in the Civil War.
In the August 2018 issue of Civil War News,
Meg Groeling
reviewed Richard Hurley’s
California and the Civil War
.
Steve Davis
’s “Critics Corner” column featured a look at Richard Barksdale Harwell’s
The Union Reader
.
|
|
News from Emerging Revolutionary War
|
On July 15th, ERW Historian
Mark Maloy
spoke at Morristown National Historical Park on his book
Victory or Death: The Battles of Trenton and Princeton, December 25, 1776 – January 3, 1777.
For more information:
www.nps.gov/morr
.
On July 18, ERW Historian
Phillip S. Greenwalt
spoke at the Lehigh Valley American Revolution Round Table about the book he co-authored with ERW Historian
Rob Orrison
,
A Single Blow: The Battles of Lexington and Concord and the Beginning of the American Revolution, April 19, 1775.
For more information:
www.lvarrt.org
|
|
August
3-5th: The Fifth Annual Emerging Civil War Symposium at Stevenson Ridge: “Turning Points of the American Civil War.”
9th: Chris Kolakowski, “The Kentucky Campaign,” Bull Run CWRT, Manassas, VA
13th: Chris Mackowski, “A Season of Slaughter: Spotsylvania Court House,” Western NC Civil War Round Table, special meeting in Franklin, NC
17th & 18th: Chris Mackowski, keynote, Civil War Roundtable Congress, National Civil War Museum, Harrisburg, PA
26th: Chris Mackowski, “Grant’s Next Chapter,” Grant Cottage State Historic Site, Mt. McGregor, Wilton, NY
September
27th: Chris Mackowski, “Grant’s Next Chapter,” Buffalo Civil War Roundtable, Buffalo, NY
28th: Eric Wittenberg, Bus Tour of Monroe’s Crossroads Battlefield, Friends of Bentonville Battlefield 2018 Symposium,
www.fobb.net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
