I mentioned in my column today about visiting Gettysburg. That was a week ago today, and of course, today is the 142nd anniversary of the last day of the battle. After the news of his death came between that day and this, a friend mentioned that Shelby Foote had maintained that one should always visit Civil War battlefields at the same time of year of the battle — partly so you’ll have similar weather, but also so that the foliage will be the same, so you can see things as the participants saw them.
Well, I did that, unintentionally. And I sincerely hope that it wasn’t as hot this day 142 years ago in that spot as it was last week. (One night last weekend, well after dark, my rental car informed me it was still over 90 outside — in Pennsylvania.) The men who were there suffered enough as it was. It was pretty rough strolling around there in a T-shirt; I can’t imagine fighting even in tattered butternut homespun, much less in a heavy wool dark blue military blouse.
As uncomfortable as it was for me, I have to praise the selflessness of my wife and youngest daughter for accompanying me. Touring battlefields is obviously not everyone’s cup of tea, and they really wanted to get over to Amish country the other side of Lancaster (given Amish pacifism, about as sharp a contrast with battles as one can find).
Being semi-sensitive to their wishes (we DID get to see some beautiful Amish farms before dark, just as the folks who own them were riding home in their buggies or taking their Sunday rest clad in plain finery, in perfect gardens and alongside covered bridges), I decided to take a hit-and-run approach to the site.
I determined that I would find the spot on Little Round Top where, on the second day, a professor of theology named Joshua Chamberlain and his understrength Maine regiment acted with unparalleled courage in one desperate moment and saved the United States of America. (Yes, I realized that’s debatable, but if he had not stopped the Alabama troops who were trying desperately to outflank the Union line, this pivotal battle could have pivoted the other way.) I just wanted to stand in the place where history had stood on a cusp and was decided by sheer, suicidal determination. I expected to feel the power of the place. I didn’t realize that I would be even more awed by another spot altogether.
The ranger in the main building could hardly believe that was the only place I wanted to go. Still, she patiently showed me on the map the best way to get there, bypassing most of the carefully laid-out tour. When she asked if I was sure that’s the only place I wanted to go, I felt bad enough (her manner seemed to imply that my hurried approach showed insufficient respect to the dead whose final resting place Abraham Lincoln had dedicated only about 100 yards from where we stood.
So I added, "Where’s Cemetery Ridge?" "We’re standing on it," she said. "So where’s the stone wall?" "Right over there, the other side of that building." OK, then. I’ll check that out, too.
That was the thing, as it happened, that blew me away. I knew that the Federals had taken the high ground before the battle even started, and that Pickett’s Charge (as well as the advance of other elements of Longstreet’s corps) had been doomed from the start as a result. But to stand on that high ground, and look out at the perfectly clear fields of fire that looked down on the completely open plain upon which the Virginians advanced — not a scrap of cover to speak of; the trees they emerged from looking to be close to two miles away — I could feel what it must have been like to keep marching into certain death. The men who landed on Omaha Beach had a better tactical advantage than those Rebels did. And still they marched on. Could there have been one of them who expected to live through the next hour, much less prevail? And yet still they advanced.
No movie, no book — no matter how it tried to dramatize what happened — could capture the sheer futility of that situation the way I perceived it standing there and looking down upon the place where it happened. This photograph doesn’t do it. You have to stand there and let your eyes wander from the stone wall to those trees so far away, to the flatness below, to the markers behind and around you telling how many batteries of Union artillery poured lead and fire down upon the Southerners.
Little Round Top, when I went there later and saw where Col. Strong Vincent told Col. Chamberlain to "hold this ground at all costs" was every bit as inspiring as I expected it to be. But it didn’t have the emotional kick of standing at the High-Water Mark of the Confederacy and seeing where it left its stain on the magnificent countryside of Pennsylvania.
What was Lee really thinking, attacking the Union center so pointlessly after two days of other, wiser tactics failing? Was it a sort of ennui? A gesture of fatalism? Was he just fed up after three years of mostly successful campaigning? Did he just want an end to it either way — either break the Union Army completely right there in that moment, or suffer a defeat so crippling that it would hasten the inevitable end? (I’m sure there are many reading this who are far better-read than I about Lee’s motives, but who can really know?)
As glad that I am that the Confederate cause failed, I mourn those Southerners who gave their lives so uselessly. If I watch the movie version of this battle, I want to shout at the screen, "Listen to Gen. Longstreet, Marse Robert! Sometimes we South Carolinians know best!" I want his men to live.
But maybe that couldn’t be. Maybe the cliche that the sin of slavery could only be washed away with oceans of blood, both Northern and Southern, is the pure and simple truth. (And please, neo-Confederates, don’t start on the "it wasn’t about slavery" kick. Almost every political interaction between North and South since the beginning of the nation, from the Constitutional Convention through Bleeding Kansas, had in one way or another been about that one issue. Talk about tariffs and such all day, and you can’t get around the fact that one of the two economic systems involved in the debates was founded on slavery, which gave the land its economic value. Talk, as George Bush’s critics do today, about how the Republican president kept changing his stated rationale for the war as it wore on. None of that changes what is obvious to anyone who is not just bound and determined to rationalize that which cannot be justified. Read what the South Carolinians who made the decision to secede said to explain themselves — and don’t forget to do a search to see how many times "slave" occurs in the document. It just doesn’t matter that most Southern soldiers didn’t own slaves; that fact just makes them the victims of those who did.)
Maybe the fact that both North and South had winked at the problem for four score and seven years, tiptoeing around the issue in flawed compromise after compromise in an effort to keep the young nation together, meant there had to be such a titanic holocaust offered on the altar of fratricidal war. You can read that thought in books, but it just doesn’t have the same force as standing there, sweating and weary and ready to go home, upon the altar itself.
Dear Brad,
I am constantly amazed at how amazed southerners are when traveling or moving outside of their narrow set of circumstances. After all, being a world traveler should not limit oneself to going to the annual Myrtle Beach summer vacation. We are finishing our 30th year in Columbia after being raised in Vermont, trained in New York and being stationed in Florida. Two examples of why we feel that Northerners are just as nice as Southerners.
(1.) A friend of mine and a true southern chauvenist brought his son to my alma mater the University of Vermont for his freshman year. He came back and exclaimed to me “I couldn’t believe how NICE the people up there were!” WHen I asked him how many Vermonters other than me had he known, he said no others. I replied ” Well, what does that say about how nice you think I am, if nice Vermonters are such a surprise.”
(2.) In Christopher Wren’s book, “Walking to Vermont” the retired foreign correspondant to the New York Times said that he had to walk for three days before the people he encountered were nice to him. his point was that city people tend to be in a hurry and don’t have time to spend with strangers. People in the smaller towns were nice to him. I would submit to you that the same would happen if he walked for three days outside of Atlanta or any other big city. Big city folks are commuting to work, are rushed and don’t have time for strangers. You have to get to the smaller and more rural areas to get back to having the time for pleasantries.
Additonally, the rate of domestic violence, murder, rape etc. are all higher in the South. If people were all that nice, that would not be the case. Southerners are superficially more pleasant (perhaps) but working with people with all sorts of problems in my job, I have found them to be no better, and in some ways worse, than folks from other places.
Brad,
I was at Gettysburg last week as well, Wednesday and Thursday as part of a study tour on leadership organized by a theological seminary. The battlefield, littered with monuments, is indeed a sacred place.
We did discuss how slavery was the flashpoint, the tipping issue of the war and how those in moral authority, ministers especially, failed to convict the South of much of her blindspots.
As far as why Lee attacked the center, check out a recent book by the Gettysburg Park Superintendent called Lee’s Real Plan, which argues that Lee’s plan was not the bloody angle and the copse of trees as proposed by the sulking Longstreet; but instead his objective was Cemetary Ridge. His failure to communicate and his subordinates failure to listen compounded problems and ended up in the failure of “Picket’s” charge on July 3.
Thanks!
I went to Cemetary Ridge years ago (45 at least) and had the same reaction. Was this a mentality similar to those of the Suicide Bombers today? Or were these soldiers mislead by their commanders and simply following orders?
Perplexing!
Dear Brad,
I am constantly amazed at how amazed southerners are when traveling or moving outside of their narrow set of circumstances. After all, being a world traveler should not limit oneself to going to the annual Myrtle Beach summer vacation. We are finishing our 30th year in Columbia after being raised in Vermont, trained in New York and being stationed in Florida. Two examples of why we feel that Northerners are just as nice as Southerners.
(1.) A friend of mine and a true southern chauvenist brought his son to my alma mater the University of Vermont for his freshman year. He came back and exclaimed to me “I couldn’t believe how NICE the people up there were!” WHen I asked him how many Vermonters other than me had he known, he said no others. I replied ” Well, what does that say about how nice you think I am, if nice Vermonters are such a surprise.”
(2.) In Christopher Wren’s book, “Walking to Vermont” the retired foreign correspondant to the New York Times said that he had to walk for three days before the people he encountered were nice to him. his point was that city people tend to be in a hurry and don’t have time to spend with strangers. People in the smaller towns were nice to him. I would submit to you that the same would happen if he walked for three days outside of Atlanta or any other big city. Big city folks are commuting to work, are rushed and don’t have time for strangers. You have to get to the smaller and more rural areas to get back to having the time for pleasantries.
Additonally, the rate of domestic violence, murder, rape etc. are all higher in the South. If people were all that nice, that would not be the case. Southerners are superficially more pleasant (perhaps) but working with people with all sorts of problems in my job, I have found them to be no better, and in some ways worse, than folks from other places.
I agree with you friend