The only comfort I can take from this week's election outcomes — both in Wisconsin and nationally — is that we're not going to war over the results. We may be polarized, angry and uncivil, but so far no weapons or threats by state legislators to secede have been seriously bandied about. That was not the case in the national elections that took place one hundred and fifty years ago. Tomorrow marks the Sesquicentennial of Lincoln's election as President: November 6, 1860. President Obama faces a situation today that is reminiscent of what Lincoln's friend, Joshua Speed, wrote to him at the time, "The eyes of the whole nation will be upon you, while unfortunately the ears of one half of it will be closed to any thing you might say."
For all intents and purposes Lincoln's election also marks the beginning of the American Civil War; though that conflict is not considered to have officially started until the following spring when Confederate soldiers fired on Fort Sumter, a federal military installation. For history buffs, the next four years will offer a feast of lectures, books, reflecting, rehashing and re-enacting the war.
The most tangible reminders of the war are its battlefields, many of which are now national parks under the care of The National Park Service which has a web site devoted to Sesquicentennial events here.The Civil War Preservation Trust works to preserve those sites and has a beautiful web site with historic and contemporary images and information on the status of endangered sites and a wealth of links to current articles about the war and the Sesquicentennial. Find it all here.
I am using the occasion of the Sesquicentennial to conduct my own personal Civil War Sesquicentennial Reading Project. The idea was sparked by my re-reading Gene Smith's "Lee and Grant: A Dual Biography;" at least the third time I've read this bio of the two men who defined the American Civil War. Smith looks at the youth of the two men, as well as their roles as adversaries in the war and their post-war years, and the similarities and disparities that tie them together. It's a short book, as histories usually go, and very accessible.
Now my plan is to read the Civil War books that have been on my life list (and my bookshelf) for years: Mary Chesnut's diaries and Grant's memoirs. I've started Chesnut's diaries with its long (but excellent) introduction by historian C. Vann Woodward. I have to admit it's slow going so far; partly because Chesnut knew and was related to so many people that every entry is littered with names. It's hard to know if they will appear again and thus are worth remembering — something that feels like an impossible task at the moment.
If you prefer novels to non-fiction, there is a whole site devoted to Civil War novels. My personal favorites are Howard Bahr's loosely linked trilogy: "The Black Flower," "The Year of Jubilo" and "The Judas Field," and Paulette Jiles' "Enemy Women."
When I reviewed Jiles' book at its release in 2002 I noted that she was "a stickler for detail, having learned how to ride a horse sidesaddle for 'Enemy Women.' It's that intimate knowledge of how things worked, smelled and tasted more than a hundred years ago that lends her tale its strength and immediacy." Jiles makes the Civil War not only seem like a new story, but she makes it one that is more related to contemporary history and politics than I would have imagined possible. One reason is that Jiles changes the focus from men to women, from soldiers on the field to inmates in the wartime federal women's prison in St. Louis. Because Jiles story is also set in the border states, much of it deals with guerilla warfare and the tribulations of war time refugees on the road; again adding to the newness of the story for me.
General Grant (above) and Mary Chesnut (above center).
