>> it was humanitarian. for example, he paid and he hired his body servants during the war and he was the guy that sort of took care of his equipment and he had paid them a growing wage for that kind of work. >> professor -- >> they were not his slaves. >> professor thomas, i want to jump in momentarily and we understand the votes will be here shortly. let's get one more quick call. we have jennifer waiting on line in san diego. go ahead. >> hi. i'll be very quick and say, you know, i think nominating lee is one of the worst kind of revisionist history and it's one of the more insidious. he might have had a moment, and lee was called traitor by grant

by being such a good general and prolonging the war. i'm a descendant from slaves. so he -- i mean, it really is comparable to nominating mandela in israel. he can't be man of the year because we still have history. we are not at 2011. i think lee's body should be mixed with road tar. >> isn't that a little harsh, jennifer? >> it's a little harsh, i think. the assumption is anybody associated with slavery, anyone remotely associated with that and who favors it in any way should be disinterred and mixed with ashes.

would that apply to people living in the united states at the time of abu ghraib? we were war criminals. all of us. in his time, he transformed the war and even as you describe him as some kind of devilish fiend, he's the most influential person in 1862. >> professor thomas we'll let you go there so we can all watch the results. professor ameritus. the dogs of war 1861. we'll see what the result is in a minute or two. >> i'm excited. thank you so much. >> you bet. we'll remind our viewers, too, that we will continue to make your calls once the announcement is made up to 4:30 eastern or so on american history tv on c-span3.

>> okay. if we could arm the mike up there. got it now. okay. ladies and gentlemen. thank you all for attending and bringing part of the symposium and i hope you learned a lot about 1862 in the course of the day in our enthusiasm learning more about thees is kwisentenial, if you want to see this again c-span is airing this tonight at 6:00 p.m. and again for those of you who are insomniacs at 1:00 a.m. i wouldn't be surprised if they air it at a future date. i hope all of you will come to visit us at the museum of the confederacy and since the beginning, i hope you will all be members of the museum of the confederacy. we are opening our new site at

appomattox and it's looking roll good. >> now for the results. general, i'm afraid that your man little napoleon, george mcclellan came in last. he had only 12 votes. [ inaudible ] jim macpherson. instead of saying damn, the torpedos, he might have said full speed ahead and he came second to last at 13 votes.

>> david blight, your manfred bailey otherwise known as frederick douglas came in right in the middle with 20 votes. bob cribbings, hero, and he had 25 votes and i am here to pronounce that robert e. lee with 71 votes was promoted from the king of spades to the ace of spades. robert e. lee is the man of year for 1862, and i'd like to thank all of you for coming and please get home safely.

>> so the winner at the library in virginia in richmond for person of the year is the selection of robert e. lee as person of the year 1862. aga again, the nominees today were from robert krick, who is the chief historian of fredericksburg for 30 years, david blight of yale nominated frederick douglas who came in third, nominated by james macpherson came in first and he

was dead last in the voting in virginia and we congratulate professor thomas and we'll open up the phone line again for our viewers. professor thomas, you earn a big trophy or a big prize? no, i got a handshake for the director of the museum of the confederacy. you talked a little bit about this in your nomination for robert e. lee. when with general lee was the command of the union army in the spring of 1861, did he have inkling that he would take over command of the southern army? >> i don't think so. i think he turned it down because there was some irony

here because he really just did not like conflict. he doesn't respond well to conflict and he does so because he can't handle conflict, what kind of conflict, you ask. he would have had war on his neighbors and relatives and he's going to do that. he would have spent the rest of his life explaining to the people he cared about and loved why he had turned on them and so i think he really thought he was fighting and offering himself his professional experience and capacity for his friends and neighbors. professor thomas and take calls, archibald is in jackson, mississippi. archibald, go ahead with your

comments or question? >> and southern virginia right where jeff stewart was born. by the grace of god i'm a virginian. he came back and married a southern bell from virginia and it was concerned by this last caller, jennifer to equate, with the example of the education system and i want to see what you think of this to where she either does not understand or does not know that the north and the south made a lot of money off of slavery and the west

coast of africa. >> we'll let professor thomas respond. >> i think lee was as racist as most people were. they thought there were different races and white folks like himself, and he measured race in terms of white folks like himself who was an important factor. he was -- in terms of individuals, thoughtful and kind to everyone and that included african-americans. he thought slavery was upon it, but always in the abstract. he really thought that god and

god's wisdom would resolve the issue, and it was enough to he -- robert e. lee to do that much about it for which we could fault him, i think. i think the assumption that anybody who enlists something from a moment ago. anybody who says anybody associated with slavery is by nature, evil and beneath contempt must realize that a parallel circumstance is somebody living in the united states during the war crimes of abu ghraib. we were complicit in that. you know, we have to get used to it. come to terms with it. >> professor thomas, that caller jennifer in san diego pointed out the animus in which robert e. lee, did other union generals have the same sort of view of

lee after the war? there was hatred there of lee for having served in the south? >> not really, and i don't think grant despised lee. as a matter of fact, lee met with grant briefly, and the problem -- i don't know how amicably for about 15 minutes when grant was in the white house. it was grant's invitation that lee showed up and they spent about 15 minutes together. they were by themselves so nobody knows what happened, but they did meet and it was at least on the surface, cordial. i think lee was convinced that grant had more of a sources in numbers and that was the source of his victory. my guess is that grant thought his capacity to maneuver those resources had something to do with his victories. in any event, when it was all

over grant made lee and his army presidents of war which gave him the status of prisoners of war and not criminals. they couldn't be tried for treason. they were prisoners of war and that is crucial. what grant did at appomattox is often overlooked, but very important because it's crucial in the piece. you're not going have mass hangings which usually accompany the end of civil wars. one might suggest, as i sometimes have done in classes that the reconstruction, the piece was entirely too easy on upper class white folks in the american south because after most civil wars, the losers are lined up and shot if they're

lucky. >> in this one, jefferson davis got his plantation back, after all, and most southerners, white southerners got pardons for any treason they commended -- either by ignoring it. >> we have just a few minutes left with emory thomas and we'll go to richmond. on the phone is shannon. hi there, what's your comment or question? >> i have several comment, well, just a brief comment. i think that today considering i'm a person of color from virginia, and i think that frederick douglas being nominated number three is actually pretty good enrichment even after 150 years. i just have a question. i know that jennifer was concerned as a person of color,

as well, but i'm from virginia, and i do understand the culture. it doesn't mean you can completely accept it, but in regards to general lee being the great emancipator. i understand he was the emancipator from what he inherited from custard. wasn't that done, and he was just following it through, would you consider that as the emancipator who freed all of the slaves that were held by the rebels. some of that, and lee was compelled to e man si pate, but i will point out that he in so doing freed some slaves that she owned that weren't part of that

estate and basically had no control over these slave, but he was very, very careful to get the names right and to make sure that we were forever free and he wished them well. to some extent i think that is consequential, and it's a way out to slavery which perceived slavery in somewhat the way thomas jefferson did. it was a great burden, but he didn't know what to do about it. at the end of 1862 and with onboard with his father in law's will that he can't control anyway and they were behind enemy lines and he doesn't have to worry about being a slave holder anymore. >> let's get one more quick. >> going to get one more quick

call. >> he's overdoing it. >> here is robert and gaffney, south carolina. you get the last word. go ahead and answer the question. >> home of the big peach. >> i live within five of that peach. i love your comments and history, and i had four grandfathers that served and one of them was killed in that war. i'm glad lee won, and i'm very glad, but i read a book 30 years ago by a school teacher from north carolina that had pictures up and said that abraham lincoln was a son of john abrahams and cherokee, north carolina, after he got his mother pregnant because he objected and sent him away in a wagon with another man. is there any truth to that? >> i don't think so.

there are all kind of stories and questions about abraham lincoln's birthright. the biggest stretch i've ever heard has him the son of calhoun because nancy once worked in a tavern where calhoun may have gone during the time he was riding the legal circuit, but that's a real stretch. i think lincoln was the son of thomas and nancy. >> emory thomas, congratulations again on winning this year's person of the year. >> thank you so much. >> for lee winsthe audience at the library of virginia. we thank you for joining us. >> thank you.

>> and we want to remind you in case you missed any of the program today, the interviews, the nominations by the historians. we'll show it all to you again this evening at 6:00 p.m. ea

candidates with the audience making the final decision. a similar event chose abraham

lincoln as person of the year for 1861. we're live from the richmond virginia library. if "time" magazine had been around in 1862, who would time select as person of the year? the library of virginia and museum of confederacy co-hosting an event that the invited five historians. and by the end of the day, the audience here in richmond will vote on person of the year 1862. lots ahead, all day coverage here on c-span3 on american history tv. and during breaks in the event the in richmond we'll take your phone calls, talk to the historians about their selections, and give you a chance to weigh-in with your vote as well. you can do that on the phone, and do that online. if you're on twitter, you can

follow us at american history tv -- specifically today, if you want to tweet, use th the #poty1862. also on facebook, we've already posted the question, who do you think was the most influential person of 1862? facebook.com/cspan. coming up next, they'll get under way shortly at the library of virginia in richmond to get the program under way. live coverage on american history tv on c-span3.

good morning. hello, everybody.

why don't we get started. good morning. my name is matt thompson, chairman of the board of the museum of the confederacy. and on behalf of the museum and the library of virginia, i welcome you to our 2012 symposium. this is the 15th year of our partnership with the library and we are truly grateful to it for hosting this event and for being a center of education in scholarship in downtown richmond. based on the feedback we received from last year's person of the year 1861 symposium, i think it's safe to say that this person of the year series is becoming a signature event of the continuing commemoration of the sesquicentennial of the civil war. as chairman of the museum, i'm obligated to remind everybody we are a member-supported institution. to learn more about the museum and our activities please go to

www.moc.org to become a member, renew your membership, make a donation, and also to learn more about our grand opening on march 31st of our $10 million new exhibit -- new museum, excuse me, to open. it's a great building. it's going to be a great museum experience. and it's really going to allow us to expand our mission and our reach to people from across the country and the world. let me introduce to you waite rawls, the president of the museum. i hope you have a great day and thanks for coming. [ applause ] >> good morning, everybody. and welcome to 1862. today we're going to immerse you in 1862. the people in the events of 150 years ago. by the end of the day, we hope you'll have enough of a

perspective about 1862 to be a perceptive judge of what and who was important in that crucial year. many of you were with us last year and are familiar with the concept and formula of this symposium. but before i go on and explain a little bit about it for those of you who were not here last year, i want to pay tribute to someone who was with us here last year, and is tragically not with us today. many of you know the name of sarah bars, through her father ed barres. if you studied virginia history you know sarah in her own right. for more than 10 years she worked here at the library of virginia as the editor of the dictionary of virginia biography. for 16 years before that, she was the managing editor of the publications of the virginia historical society. sarah died cancer a few weeks ago, a week short of her 52nd birthday. i know all of us, and anyone who

appreciates good writing will miss her greatly. sarah's father kicked off last year's symposium with a typically vigorous speech by pierre gustave toutant beauregard as the person of the year in 1861. he did not do a great job and he did not finish high in the vote. that is the basic concept for this symposium. the talks you will hear today are speeches nominating candidates for the person of the year of 1862. the person who most influenced events, or who exemplified important developments of that year. at the end of the day we will pass out ballots and you will get to vote. as i was last year, i am very pleased that so many of you came to an all day symposium without even knowing who the lecture topics were going to be. and that c-span is interested in not only recording the symposium but broadcasting it live. yes, we are live, without knowing the subjects of the lectures.

we thought that not divulging the nominees in advance would enhance the suspense. and you've confirmed this with your attendance today. we thank you for trusting us to arrange an interesting and worthwhile program and are confident that you won't be disappointed. the person who won last year's vote was abraham lincoln, which surprised a lot of people. abraham lincoln won an election in richmond, virginia? this tells us that perhaps richmond isn't what some people think it is. and it reminds us that the person of the year for 1861 or 1862 is not a popularity contest any more than "time" magazine's person of the year is a measure of popularity. it is a measure of importance and a means of learning about the year. our panelists will try to convince you, the audience and the voters, that their nominees deserve to be recognized for