Letters To The Editor

Originally published September 2017 · pp. 5–16

Letters To The Editor TO THE EDITOR: As I read Frank Williams’ predictably critical review of Elizabeth Brown Pryor’s Six Encounters with Lincoln: A President Confronts Democracy and Its Demons (July CWN), I recalled Elizabeth quipping that she might have to go into exile when this book was published. Her similarly “hard-hitting” evaluation of Robert E. Lee in Reading the Man (which Judge Williams neglected to mention) brought death threats from zealous Lee admirers—and earned her the Lincoln Prize. Elizabeth knowingly strode into the lion’s den of Lincoln biography because she had continually stumbled across contemporary sources that revealed a very different picture of Lincoln than what she read in the familiar hagiographies. She determined to present the sixteenth president as his contemporaries saw and judged him. For her analytical framework, she chose seemingly trivial vignettes that she found —“encounters”—which provide insightful microcosms into larger, significant themes. Judging whether or not those insights are valid and significant is, of course, the reviewer’s responsibility, and I respect Judge Williams’ evaluation. However, in the course of dismissing Six Encounters as “unfair,” Williams cites presidential polls that consistently rate Lincoln number 1 or 2 and observes that “[f]or most readers, Lincoln is a hero and America’s ‘captain.’” Inadvertently, Williams makes a strong case why students of history need and should welcome Six Encounters and other scholarly works that don’t fall into lockstep with polls and hero worship. Elizabeth Pryor’s death in an automobile accident was a personal tragedy for her family and friends. Judge Williams’ review reminds us that her death was also a tragedy for the historical profession. If she were alive, she would be able to engage her critics using her own exhaustive research, her formidable and penetrating intellect, and her firm confidence in her own conclusions—and we would all be richer for the resulting spirited discussions. John M. Coski Richmond, Va.

TO THE EDITOR: In the July issue of CWN, subscriber’s comments were requested about the controversy concerning removal of Confederate statues and monuments. I do not think these statues and monuments should be removed. The campaign to do so is aligned with a movement to revise and sanitize history. This is what happens in totalitarian nations. Hitler and Stalin were experts in rewriting history to further their own nefarious ends. Good history tells all, the good and the bad, warts and all. If these statues and monuments are removed, where will all this end? Next we will have to take down statues of George Washington because he owned slaves and made war on Indian people, didn’t he? Andrew Jackson forcibly removed native tribes from the southeastern states so the land would be open to white settlement. Those tribes were at peace with the U.S. government. This resulted in the “Trail of Tears.” Hundreds lost their lives in that forced move to Oklahoma. Robert E. Lee was a gentleman and a good man. What does that matter, drag him through the dirt too. President Polk engineered the war with Mexico. Was this not a blatant land grab? Get rid of him, adios. Look what Sherman did in Georgia. Why don’t the people in Georgia raise enough hell and get him out? The point I am trying to make is we could wind up removing just about all American historical figures for one reason or another. I am originally from Indiana and have ancestors who fought for the Union so I cannot be called a Confederate apologist. We are embarking onto a dangerous slippery slope just to appease the politically correct. If this comes to pass, one day we will wake up in a nation we do not know. Blair Clifford Yuma, Az.

TO THE EDITOR: The future of interest and caring for our American Civil War rests on connections to communities as a whole . We, elders who have collected, studied and written of the war, should accept that the lives of younger men and women are focused on health, employment, climate and a way of life working with all races and lifestyles. Battle flags and monuments should be looked at in ways that are about the “other” person. Consider what is needed to preserve individual beliefs and service—then make it work for us all. Henry Deeks Ashburnham, Mass.

TO THE EDITOR: “If I had my druthers,” I would let all Confederate statues remain, because I am strongly interested in Civil War history, and, perhaps, also because I am a collateral descendant of a Confederate soldier. With that said, statues on public property may be legally removed, as was the case in New Orleans. Disappointments, protests, and letters may not prevent the removals. Whether the reason for removal of a statue is claimed to be for diversity, or due to changing demographics in large cities, the statues might be removed. It will be more difficult to remove any statues or monuments on State property, and particularly on Federal property, such as on NPS battlefields, but at some point in the future it could happen. In the meantime, people can study Confederate history and biographies and put up portraits of Davis, Lee, or other favorite Generals in their homes. Hopefully, this will never be forbidden, and the books and prints seized and burned. Leon Basile Woburn, Mass.

TO THE EDITOR: Removing Confederate monuments under the gun of political correctness is a bad idea for two reasons. First, the history of the South’s evolving society becomes more apparent by adding new shrines to honor more recent heroes than by destroying old ones. Both will remain as tangible evidence to future generations of how our history evolved. Moreover, the South has been doing this for decades, but getting no credit for it. Despite anger among the politically correct over their state flag, for example, Mississippi towns have seventeen streets named in honor of Martin Luther King Jr. Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island have none. Minnesota and Iowa have one each, while Massachusetts and Connecticut have two each. Pennsylvania has three. The second reason to retain Confederate monuments is that almost nobody today realizes the magnitude of the losses endured by Southern families and their descendants. About six percent of the region’s white population died as soldiers. If America went to war today with comparable losses, the number of people in uniform killed would be over eighteen million, or three times the number of Jewish Holocaust victims. Given such losses, nobody should wonder why Confederate families wanted to honor the loved and lost. To the contrary, I’d wager $100 against a good Cuban cigar that today’s average American would think something would have been wrong with them if they didn’t. Philip Leigh Tampa, Fla.

TO THE EDITOR: I have been a reader for 10 years and thought the Civil War News could not get any better, but thankfully I was wrong. It is now my favorite Civil War “magazine”. Thank you for soliciting opinions on the removal of Civil War monuments. Unfortunately, in the last eight years our country has slipped further to the Left. Our society has become so polarized that everything is Black or White and there is no area for discussion. In Mayor Landrieu”s press release he says “ I am not judging people”. Really? Does he really believe that the rewriting of Civil War history is better for the people and really what we want? Recently the NAACP has demanded that the State of Arizona remove all 10 of it’s memorials to the Civil War. Without taking sides in the issue I have advised all of my 418 members to write and call the Governor’s office and voice their opinion. I wondered if the Civil War Trust had advised their 58,000 members to write the socialist mayor of New Orleans it would have made a difference. I doubt it. The Mayor seems to know what is best for the country. Since George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were slave owners, do you believe the people will stand by while Mount Vernon and Monticello are burned to be politically correct? I think it is time that we all take a proactive part and let the politicians know where we stand on this issue. John Bamberl Scottsdale Az.