Monday, August 3, 2009
Where did July go?
It is hard to believe that July has passed. We are working on finishing our Comprehensive Master Plan -- the broad vision of what we are going to look like and how we are going to function for the next 15 years. Very exciting. We're also working on getting our new home. All I can say is that it is going to be cool. I can't wait to write/talk about/show you all what we have in store. Of course our tours and programs continue -- see the website for the schedule.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Anniversaries
I think it is fair to say that most folks mark their lives in part by marking anniversaries. I think it is also fair to say that anniversaries are important markers of national life -- days that commemorate workers, soldiers, and founders are all important annual events. For whatever reason anniversaries that correspond to some multiple of 5 are given particular importance (5, 10, 25, 50, 75, 100, 150, 200 etc. seem to be especially significant).
Over the next 6 years, we will mark two anniversaries divisible by 5. One will, not surprisingly, get plenty of attention -- in fact there are already plans underway across the nation to mark the 150th anniversary of the Civil War. The other, however, is a bit more obscure -- how many War of 1812 Bicentennial celebrations are you aware of? Maybe New Orleans is planning something big. Maybe the Oliver H. Perry Society is preparing to celebrate. Perhaps. But, to my knowledge, there are no efforts on the scale of the various Civil War Sesquicentennial Commissions being organized to mark the War of 1812.
Now. Before I take too much credit for pointing out the importance of thinking about 1812, I must admit that I hadn't thought too much about it (why I have no idea -- I mean the name of the war should make it easy to remember how long ago it was -- 2012 - 1812 = 200. Even I can do that math in my head). That is until local historian Sam Elliot mentioned it. Wow, I thought. We have to do something. Tennesseans were awfully important in prosecuting the war. The Cherokee were right in the middle of things. The area around Moccasin Bend was the mustering site for a portion of the Tennessee volunteers who invaded the Creek territory.
There have been conversations among a few historians at the state level about the bicentennial. And there is some movement toward creating a traveling exhibit through the Tennessee State Museum that will explain Tennessee's role in the War of 1812. We at the Chattanooga History Center will certainly be planning some tours and lectures that mark the anniversary.
Beyond raising awareness, however, we need to be thinking about what needs to be interpreted. We must be careful to avoid making the commemoration a celebration of Andrew Jackson and the cotton-balers. We must look at the Cherokee and Creek perspectives -- what losses did they suffer as a result of the war in the old southwest? We must think about expansionism and the social and cultural costs of expansion. We must think about the contest of empire that gave form to the war. While the War of 1812 is often called the 2nd American Revolution or the war that confirmed American Independence we must also think of it from the perspective of the African descended slaves who would be rushed into the lands seized from the Creeks. The War of 1812 was catalyst to the expansion of the cotton frontier -- and led to the explosion of slavery in the Alabama and Mississippi Territories. It also led to the continued expansion of white settlement in the Northwest Territory where slavery had long been illegal. So, while the war did help the United States ensure its sovereignty, it also created the political, social, and economic context for national division.
The next six years present an incredible opportunity to think about the actions and decisions that made the United States an independent nation. The next six years also give us the opportunity to think about the costs of that independence.
Over the next 6 years, we will mark two anniversaries divisible by 5. One will, not surprisingly, get plenty of attention -- in fact there are already plans underway across the nation to mark the 150th anniversary of the Civil War. The other, however, is a bit more obscure -- how many War of 1812 Bicentennial celebrations are you aware of? Maybe New Orleans is planning something big. Maybe the Oliver H. Perry Society is preparing to celebrate. Perhaps. But, to my knowledge, there are no efforts on the scale of the various Civil War Sesquicentennial Commissions being organized to mark the War of 1812.
Now. Before I take too much credit for pointing out the importance of thinking about 1812, I must admit that I hadn't thought too much about it (why I have no idea -- I mean the name of the war should make it easy to remember how long ago it was -- 2012 - 1812 = 200. Even I can do that math in my head). That is until local historian Sam Elliot mentioned it. Wow, I thought. We have to do something. Tennesseans were awfully important in prosecuting the war. The Cherokee were right in the middle of things. The area around Moccasin Bend was the mustering site for a portion of the Tennessee volunteers who invaded the Creek territory.
There have been conversations among a few historians at the state level about the bicentennial. And there is some movement toward creating a traveling exhibit through the Tennessee State Museum that will explain Tennessee's role in the War of 1812. We at the Chattanooga History Center will certainly be planning some tours and lectures that mark the anniversary.
Beyond raising awareness, however, we need to be thinking about what needs to be interpreted. We must be careful to avoid making the commemoration a celebration of Andrew Jackson and the cotton-balers. We must look at the Cherokee and Creek perspectives -- what losses did they suffer as a result of the war in the old southwest? We must think about expansionism and the social and cultural costs of expansion. We must think about the contest of empire that gave form to the war. While the War of 1812 is often called the 2nd American Revolution or the war that confirmed American Independence we must also think of it from the perspective of the African descended slaves who would be rushed into the lands seized from the Creeks. The War of 1812 was catalyst to the expansion of the cotton frontier -- and led to the explosion of slavery in the Alabama and Mississippi Territories. It also led to the continued expansion of white settlement in the Northwest Territory where slavery had long been illegal. So, while the war did help the United States ensure its sovereignty, it also created the political, social, and economic context for national division.
The next six years present an incredible opportunity to think about the actions and decisions that made the United States an independent nation. The next six years also give us the opportunity to think about the costs of that independence.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Eviction
This week marks the anniversary of the first involuntary departures of Cherokees from Ross's Landing. On June 6, 1838 an estimated 800 people were forced onto 6 flatboats lashed to a steamboat. According to witnesses, the boats creaked and beams cracked under the load. Many feared the make-shift vessel would sink before it cast off. On June 12 or 15th another 876 people were forced onto a cobbled together boat and driven west. Finally on June 17 nearly 1,100 people were forced from their homeland on foot. This last group crossed the river on the ferry at Ross's Landing, camped on the low ground now occupied by Renaissance Park and then were forced to westward.
The events that unfolded here in 1838 are hard to think about. How could a country founded on the idea that all men are created equal so brutally treat others? How could a nation dedicated to the rule of law justly enforced ignore the findings of its own highest court? How could Americans seeking a new home be blind to the fact that their own independence on the land came at such a high cost for others? How could a nation that valorized the home and women act with such arbitrary cruelty to people abiding in their homes and taking on the values of American domestic life?
To ask these questions is not an act of historical revisionism -- it is not asking questions of the past unknown to the past (or as some would put it being "presentist"). Indeed these questions were hotly debated at the time. Among European descended Americans, ministers and humanitarians decried the eviction. Mass meetings denouncing the Indian Removal Act of 1830 (the national legislation that ratified the eviction of the Creek, Choctaw, Chickasaw, Seminole, and Cherokee people from their homeslands) were held in towns across New England and the northeastern states. Essayists attacked the high-handedness of the Jackson administration in the wake of Worcester v. Georgia case. Some Anglo-Americans agonized over the decision to make claims on Cheorkee lands.
The Cherokee people themselves also engaged the constest for their future. They penned petitions and memorials stating their desire to stay on the lands of their ancestors. Representatives of the Cherokee Nation toured the northeast working to gather support to defend their national soverignty (recognized by the U. S. Supreme Court). Groups worked to resist the squatters who flooded into the Cherokee lands after 1830. Children at the Brainerd Mission asked their teachers why the Americans were so insistent on gaining possession of their homeland. Most Cherokee, in fact the vast majority of Cherokee, made it clear they wanted to stay in the mountains and valleys in which they had been born. And they resisted until the United States Army invaded their homes and fields.
We know how the story played out -- how the army drove men, women and children to concentration camps scattered across what is now western North Carolina, north Georgia, southeast Tennessee, and northeast Alabama. How the army camps at Ross's Landing were ill-prepared for the thousands of Cherokee who were driven there in late May and early June 1838. How families worked to re-unite after the disruptions of the initial round-ups. How sickness swept the camps around Ross's Landing and how dozens of Cherokee died before the long-marches began. We also know that scores of Cherokee resisted to the end by stealing away into the woods and mountains. We also know that some of the soldiers and militia-men who enforced the eviction order winced at what they saw -- that they believed what they were doing was wrong. We also know that many of the soldiers and militia-men behaved arrogantly and cruely.
It is easy to assign blame and attach guilt 171 years later. But assigning guilt and identifying the wrong doings of those who occupied the past achieves little of real value. Rather, the value of thinking about the events of June 1838 is that it requires us all to think hard about the meaning of citizenship. How do various interests and desires intersect with those of others? How can we reconcile conflict? How do we define justice and act justly? How do we engage in a civil discourse about what the future should look like? How do institutions continue to fail to provide a structure for achieving the idealistic goals that in many ways define the United States?
It is not enough to say that we should learn from the past so we are not doomed to repeat the past. To me that is far too deterministic view that suggests that the past and future play out in some cyclical and predictable way. I prefer to think about the past's lessons as being lessons in contingency. I want to think about how the structures of living and the decisions made by people living within those structures shaped the experiences of people in time. And from that learn how we can better understand the assumptions that structure our own lives and how we can better negotiate the present to create a more just future.
The events that unfolded here in 1838 are hard to think about. How could a country founded on the idea that all men are created equal so brutally treat others? How could a nation dedicated to the rule of law justly enforced ignore the findings of its own highest court? How could Americans seeking a new home be blind to the fact that their own independence on the land came at such a high cost for others? How could a nation that valorized the home and women act with such arbitrary cruelty to people abiding in their homes and taking on the values of American domestic life?
To ask these questions is not an act of historical revisionism -- it is not asking questions of the past unknown to the past (or as some would put it being "presentist"). Indeed these questions were hotly debated at the time. Among European descended Americans, ministers and humanitarians decried the eviction. Mass meetings denouncing the Indian Removal Act of 1830 (the national legislation that ratified the eviction of the Creek, Choctaw, Chickasaw, Seminole, and Cherokee people from their homeslands) were held in towns across New England and the northeastern states. Essayists attacked the high-handedness of the Jackson administration in the wake of Worcester v. Georgia case. Some Anglo-Americans agonized over the decision to make claims on Cheorkee lands.
The Cherokee people themselves also engaged the constest for their future. They penned petitions and memorials stating their desire to stay on the lands of their ancestors. Representatives of the Cherokee Nation toured the northeast working to gather support to defend their national soverignty (recognized by the U. S. Supreme Court). Groups worked to resist the squatters who flooded into the Cherokee lands after 1830. Children at the Brainerd Mission asked their teachers why the Americans were so insistent on gaining possession of their homeland. Most Cherokee, in fact the vast majority of Cherokee, made it clear they wanted to stay in the mountains and valleys in which they had been born. And they resisted until the United States Army invaded their homes and fields.
We know how the story played out -- how the army drove men, women and children to concentration camps scattered across what is now western North Carolina, north Georgia, southeast Tennessee, and northeast Alabama. How the army camps at Ross's Landing were ill-prepared for the thousands of Cherokee who were driven there in late May and early June 1838. How families worked to re-unite after the disruptions of the initial round-ups. How sickness swept the camps around Ross's Landing and how dozens of Cherokee died before the long-marches began. We also know that scores of Cherokee resisted to the end by stealing away into the woods and mountains. We also know that some of the soldiers and militia-men who enforced the eviction order winced at what they saw -- that they believed what they were doing was wrong. We also know that many of the soldiers and militia-men behaved arrogantly and cruely.
It is easy to assign blame and attach guilt 171 years later. But assigning guilt and identifying the wrong doings of those who occupied the past achieves little of real value. Rather, the value of thinking about the events of June 1838 is that it requires us all to think hard about the meaning of citizenship. How do various interests and desires intersect with those of others? How can we reconcile conflict? How do we define justice and act justly? How do we engage in a civil discourse about what the future should look like? How do institutions continue to fail to provide a structure for achieving the idealistic goals that in many ways define the United States?
It is not enough to say that we should learn from the past so we are not doomed to repeat the past. To me that is far too deterministic view that suggests that the past and future play out in some cyclical and predictable way. I prefer to think about the past's lessons as being lessons in contingency. I want to think about how the structures of living and the decisions made by people living within those structures shaped the experiences of people in time. And from that learn how we can better understand the assumptions that structure our own lives and how we can better negotiate the present to create a more just future.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Remembering the Civil War
I've just read David Blight's thoughts on the Civil War Sesquicentennial published in The Chronicle of Higher Education http://chronicle.com/free/v55/i38/38blight.htm and it has gotten me thinking about how the 150th anniversary will be marked here in Chattanooga. As Dr. Blight points out "the centennial commemoration of the Civil War was a political and historical debacle." Racism, anti-communism, and Lost Causism all worked to obscure the causes and consequences of the conflict. Most of the centennial celebrated "a master narrative of mutual heroism in a war in which everyone had fought for their sense of the 'right'."
As Blight points out the 150th anniversary allows us the opportunity to stare the past directly in the face and to struggle with the complex and troubling history of the war and its aftermath (especially the issue of emancipation and the many responses to the end of slavery that impact American social and cultural life today). But how willing will our audiences in Chattanooga be to confronting these issues? Dr. Blight paints a hopeful picture based on his experience at the University of Richmond symposium "America on the Eve of the Civil War". In it scholars investigated the rising tensions surrounding John Brown's Harper's Ferry raid and the increasing anxiety over the election of 1860. Politicians and the public alike responded enthusiastically and Blight concludes "If the self-selected audience can be any kind of model, and if the Richmond event can be evenly modestly duplicated elsewhere, the sesquicentennial will be very different from the fiasco of the centennial of the Civil War in 1961-1965."
My recent experience suggests that to modestly duplicate the success of the Richmond symposium (or at least to engage in the kind of analysis and examination the panelists prompted) in our region will take much work. I have been struck by the continuing hold of the Lost Cause interpretation in our region (a version of the Civil War that minimizes to the point of invisibility the central role of slavery in the conflict). It also seems true that a decided majority of those interested in the Civil War in our neighborhood prefer to emphasize the glory of military history over the social, cultural, and political issues that created the context for secession and war. This point became particularly clear during the recent 145th commemorations of the battle of Chickamauga. Two commemorative events were held to mark the event -- one a large scale reenactment of the battle held on private land in McLemore's Cove the other a small living history event at the Chickamauga National Military Park.
The Chattanooga Times estimated nearly 40,000 people attended the 3 day festival at McLemore's Cove. There they were treated to period sutlers, food vendors, and large scale re-creations of the battle. The Times ran daily articles about the festival including streaming video on their website. Interpretation included the dubious (presentations that made claims that African American slaves supported the Confederacy) to the mundane (one streaming video on the Times site showed a group of school students listening to a recital of facts about the commanders of the Union army). At the same time, at the Chickamuaga National Military Park about 3,500 people gathered over the weekend to take tours, watch tactical demonstrations, and engage with the question of slavery and the Confederacy in an innovative living history demonstration. Little attention was paid by the local press.
The two events were dramatically different -- one was largely empty of the kind of content Dr. Blight (and many others) hope will be at the forefront of the150th commemorations. The other contained elements of both military history and social and cultural history that engaged multiple approaches to undertanding the war. The former approach gained the lion's share of publicity and attention. The latter gained an appreciative yet small audience and paltry media attention. To me the events and response to them suggest that much serious work needs to be done in our community before the kind of engagement so many hope for can be achieved.
As Blight points out the 150th anniversary allows us the opportunity to stare the past directly in the face and to struggle with the complex and troubling history of the war and its aftermath (especially the issue of emancipation and the many responses to the end of slavery that impact American social and cultural life today). But how willing will our audiences in Chattanooga be to confronting these issues? Dr. Blight paints a hopeful picture based on his experience at the University of Richmond symposium "America on the Eve of the Civil War". In it scholars investigated the rising tensions surrounding John Brown's Harper's Ferry raid and the increasing anxiety over the election of 1860. Politicians and the public alike responded enthusiastically and Blight concludes "If the self-selected audience can be any kind of model, and if the Richmond event can be evenly modestly duplicated elsewhere, the sesquicentennial will be very different from the fiasco of the centennial of the Civil War in 1961-1965."
My recent experience suggests that to modestly duplicate the success of the Richmond symposium (or at least to engage in the kind of analysis and examination the panelists prompted) in our region will take much work. I have been struck by the continuing hold of the Lost Cause interpretation in our region (a version of the Civil War that minimizes to the point of invisibility the central role of slavery in the conflict). It also seems true that a decided majority of those interested in the Civil War in our neighborhood prefer to emphasize the glory of military history over the social, cultural, and political issues that created the context for secession and war. This point became particularly clear during the recent 145th commemorations of the battle of Chickamauga. Two commemorative events were held to mark the event -- one a large scale reenactment of the battle held on private land in McLemore's Cove the other a small living history event at the Chickamauga National Military Park.
The Chattanooga Times estimated nearly 40,000 people attended the 3 day festival at McLemore's Cove. There they were treated to period sutlers, food vendors, and large scale re-creations of the battle. The Times ran daily articles about the festival including streaming video on their website. Interpretation included the dubious (presentations that made claims that African American slaves supported the Confederacy) to the mundane (one streaming video on the Times site showed a group of school students listening to a recital of facts about the commanders of the Union army). At the same time, at the Chickamuaga National Military Park about 3,500 people gathered over the weekend to take tours, watch tactical demonstrations, and engage with the question of slavery and the Confederacy in an innovative living history demonstration. Little attention was paid by the local press.
The two events were dramatically different -- one was largely empty of the kind of content Dr. Blight (and many others) hope will be at the forefront of the150th commemorations. The other contained elements of both military history and social and cultural history that engaged multiple approaches to undertanding the war. The former approach gained the lion's share of publicity and attention. The latter gained an appreciative yet small audience and paltry media attention. To me the events and response to them suggest that much serious work needs to be done in our community before the kind of engagement so many hope for can be achieved.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Chattanooga Pictures
I love the CHC's photographic collection. We are fortunate to have a tremendous variety of images that provide insight into the city's past. I thought it might be fun to post images on a rotating basis to both share parts of the collection and to prompt conversations. The first three are: a 1947 image of downtown -- note the plumes of smoke rising from the river side factory; Orchard Knob -- scene of fierce fighting during the Battle of Chattanooga and U. S. Grant's advanced HQ during the assault on Missionary Ridge. The image was taken just after the Chickamauaga and Chattanooga National Military Park was dedicated in 1895; Rock City barn -- this icon of early auto-tourism needs little comment. Check back for more later.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Welcome
I've finally jumped into the blogosphere (sp?). The reason is pretty simple -- I want to provide a means to communicate the goings on at the Chattanooga History Center as we plan and create a new institution that will help connect us to the complex and fascinating story of Chattanooga's past, present, and future. So look for an update every other day or so. Thanks for logging in and check back often.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
