good morning. it won multiple prices. the doctor came to the college back in 2011, where she deliveredd a lecture. she is also a noted teacher and lecturer at ucla and w has received numerous awards. when she does a lecture on baseball, at the end of the class, she brings a bag of peanuts, and tosses them out to her students. she has a mean right arm. we have ordered boxes of heart attack -- hard tack. she will be speaking on grant

and the meeting of appomattox. [applause] dr. waugh: thank you, peter for the hilarious introduction. i'm not a right-hander. if i threw hard tack at you, it would be painful. well, good morning. it is delightful to be here. i have not been at the conference for a long time at the civil war institute. i'm happy to be back. i love gettysburg. i have been here many many times . when i say good morning i mean good morning because it is about 5:30 in the morning for me coming from los angeles. i think that will get through this. i do want to say that while i published the book on

grant, i have not finished with him yet. i became fascinated by the surrenders that he conducted during the war and really look at surrenders as a way to understand the nature of this war as i have done in my title, and what it meant for reconstruction and reunion. i only knew what was in my mind -- general ulysses s. grant said the describing his feelings, as he sat down to write down the terms of surrender at appomattox in 1865. somehow that sentence makes it seems so simple. it was not. that early day in april was surely the height of his military career, cementing his representation as a warrior, as well as for shattering -- foreshadowing his postwar role, including b overseeing

policies. i will be accompanying this lecture with some visuals. i don't know how well you can see them in the back. this is one of the many paintings, commemorating the surrender of lead to grant -- of lee to grants. twice before appomattox, grant accepted the surrender of a major confederate force. in 1862 and it 1863. in those two campaigns grant displayed two features of his character and military strategy. he was relentless in pursuing victory. what secured, he also displayed magnanimity, anticipating the

celebrated generosity of the 1865 surrender. that generosity reflected his and abraham lincoln's desire for an easy reunion with the confederacy, while insisting that the people of the rebellious state swear a loyalty to the united states and except a method patient -- except emancipation. i will look at some of the political concerns that were raised regarding a final military surrender. what did that mean as the war came to a close. i want to turn to the story of appomattox courthouse. so that by the end, we can place grant's statement in a more compelling and richer perspective. a word about surrender. surrender, as i found out, has many definitions.

in the context of the civil war we will begin with this one. it is a military or political surrender -- defined as giving up something powerful, if fortress, and army, a terry territory, a set of demands to an enemy. that is simple, and i think we all understand it. at appomattox, grant was already well aware of the complications of surrender, both as a process and a cultural artifact, we might call it as dirty historians. and, as a ceremony, replete with symbolism for the future. as the only civil war general to accept surrender, it is worth revealing the elements of the first two, to see if there is anything to be learned about the third.

as i suggested earlier, i will proceed to give you some background on four dollars and -- for donaldson and vicksburg. in early february 1862, union strategy in the western theater -- maybe while here's a much of the western theater today, but it wasn't tennessee mississippi, georgia, among other states. western strategy was, for the union, targeted a strategically an important ford, for donaldson on the tennessee state side of the cumberland river. sharp fighting gave the rebels expectation of winning the battle, but disagreement between the two senior confederate commanders led them to abandoning the scene in february 1862. they left the lesser ranked

officer in charge. overwhelmed partner sent -- b uckner cents grant a letter asking for an armistice, in other words, stop the fighting. also, hold the conference to discuss the terms of donaldson's surrender. this is an illustration of the fighting at four dollars and with the white fly representing surrender. this request was not unusual. that is what you usually do when you are beaten and want to surrender. you want to hold negotiations to discuss things, and get the best deal for yourself as possible. the result of this request is famous. general grant's swift reply --

i propose to move immediately upon your works. that statement electrified the northern public, but with condemned by a helpless general buckner as ungenerous. grants had no choice but to accept. what made the military surrender at four dollars and -- for dort donaldson? and unconditional surrender is a surrender without conditions. don't you wish everything was so easy? it means that no guarantees are given to the loo losing army. the surrender became unconditional.

writing to buckner's headquarters grant and his staff dismounted at the dover hotel, a two-story wood building situated on the riverfront. this is a picture of the modern hotel at fort donaldson. after some preliminary pleasantries, even jokes shared between grant and buckner, grant got down to business. notably, he decided to dispense with any notion of a formal surrender ceremony of the confederate garrison of approximately 15,000 soldiers, the largest surrender in united states history up to that time. grant believe that this formality, a ceremony that would feature a lowering of the flag, and buckner handing over his

ceremonial sword had no purpose but to humiliate. he explained, why should we go through the vein forms and mortifiy th spirit of brave me who after all, our owny countrymen? grants last words are worth a second look. "i own countrymen," shared a belief that southerners were engaged in a rebellion not a war of nations. was the rebellion ended, the 11 states would return to their proper relationship in the united states. the northern commander promoted an ideal of restraint towards the defeated foe. in february 1862, it was still a limited war that held out the possibility that the two

sections could be reconciled with the union as it was. you all know what that means -- with slavery intact. that would mean a minimum of bitterness and destruction. indeed, some of the scenes unfolding after the surrender at fort donaldson, validated to some extent a hopeful outlook. not only where officers engaging on friendly terms, but many union and confederate soldiers could be seen milling about exchanging conversation, bargaining food. grant ordered his soldiers not to act this effectively towards the confederate captain to wear on their way to northern prison camps. the meeting at the dover hotel

hammered out the conditions of these surrender, including the transport of men to be taken to northern prison camps especially the bigger ones in illinois and massachusetts. buckner prepared himself and some of his troops to leave on a special steamer. just before they parted, general buckner asked grant to witness something. grant stood by quietly, praising the kindness and respect show to them by the union commander. the consequences of the for donaldson -- fort donaldson surrender were monumental.

again, the number of troops was about 16,000. it made him the first great military history of the union. it also raised northern hopes for a fast end to the conflict. it was the first big good news to come from the federal side on the early part of the war. why didn't raise hopes? because of the consequences, what happened after the surrender. in the western theater, the rebel line of defense had been demolished. kentucky and middle tennessee secured for the union leading to the fall of memphis tennessee, and shortly after the capture of new orleans in louisiana. as union forces moved into the this theater, they disrupted railroad

lines, destroyed property, and liberated slaves. we can see the first big preview of reconstruction, in which occupation would take hold. a hostile population would have to be dealt with. policies and issues related to contraband would arrive. the overall picture of the war did not lend itself to cheery predictions of the end. at least in the eyes of most people living at that time, it was ensure that this would be a long war, much longer than i thought it would be. naturally, after antietam the

introduction of emancipation to the union cause changed the political-military strategy, the administration emanating from president lincoln. the national strategy was not the union as it was anymore. that was a conditional surrender that was not acceptable. it was now and unconditional surrender. in late december 1862, and 1863, brought confederate victory. in other words, i will take you to vicksburg now. there was no thought of a quick and easy victory by the day that grant's second agreement was signed in fix for, mississippi on july 4, 1863. the federal goal of securing the length of the mississippi river was accomplished by the

1862-1863 campaign to capture vicksburg, mississippi. the heavily fortified city contained a sizable confederate army about 30,000, commanded by john c pemberton, who grant had known during the mexican war. in the late spring and early summer of 1863 grant combined both naval and infantry forces to encircle and capture e's expert. after a series of victories grant's forces the siege vicksburg. by july 1, general tem pemberton relates he must capitulate. he sent a letter to grant reaching the federal commander

on the morning of july 3. we know what july 3 means. like oxnard, general pemberton requested a meeting to discuss terms. feeling myself able to maintain a position for an indefinite period. pemberton's bluff was swatted away by grant who said that this can be ended anytime, you may choose by an unconditional surrender of the city and garrison. it worked before. softening his harsh tone, he added that men who have shown such courage will always challenge the respect of an adversary, and i can assure you

will be treated with all due respect to prisoners of war. despite his use of "unconditional surrender" grant agreed to meet pemberton at 3:00. you see this "harpers weekly" image on the screen, showing that meeting. he agreed to meet at 3:00 in the afternoon, and pemberton arrived, dressed in full uniform, meeting grant in casual dress. i have read many letters of soldiers who were there and relating this to their family -- they were all silent watching, hoping. the short exchange failed with grant repeating his terms of unconditional surrender, leading pemberton to say angrily, i can

assure you, you will bury many more of your men, before you enter vicksburg. the conversation was a failure yet it established grants willingness to retreat from unconditional surrender. the relative ease at which donaldson was dispatched must have seemed very distant to grant. here sitting in the mississippi heat, the stakes of surrender were even higher as both men knew, the loss of vicksburg would be a catastrophe for the south. no agreement was reached by the afternoons aend, but grant promise that he would send a response soon. consulting with his commanders grant decided to refrainne his surrender from unconditional to

conditional. his letter offered parole to the rebel soldiers instead of incarceration. a few hours later, pemberton accepted. the official surrender would take place on the morning of july 4, 1863. why did grant changes mind? reluctant to launch a wasteful assault on the city, grant also did not want to send thousands of rebel prisoners to prison camps in the north, already overfull. this way, he could instead send valuable union units to help armies, instead of guarding armies. had i settled on a unconditional surrender, there would be 300,000 men to transfer. instead, the whole confederate

garrison was paroled. this meant that prisoners could go free is a promise to not reenter the war. this is a photograph of the united states flag flying over the vicksburg courthouse on the morning of the surrender, july 4, 1863. it came to be that the general whose initials were "unconditional surrender," did not persist. beginning at 8:00, a victorious army marched into vicksburg, and within minutes, planted a fight. the union celebration was even greater, given it was independence day. a little later, the defeated army marched out of vicksburg, officially prisoners of war.

rations were distributed to the hungry people. grant said that the two members celebrated, as though they were of the same cause. i can hardly believe that, but it is nicer when you remember things, they can be both here -- rosier. grant heard criticism for his decision to promote the soldiers, the double soldiers. some confederates took arms -- return to take up arms against the united states. grant dismissed this saying that

their possible escape was precisely what i expected and hoped they would do. in other words, he hoped that many of them would seize the theater of action and go home or escape to some other place. in fact, we do not have the exact numbers, but that appears to be the case. a sizable number did not return. grant asserted, i knew many of them were tired of the war and would get home as soon as they could. he also had something to say about this policy. he said, the men behaved so well that i did not want to humiliate them. i felt that considerations for their feelings would make them less dangerous foes and better citizens after the war was over. at both for donaldson and vicksburg, grant combined

military victories with both sensible and sensitive policy, working towards union. his actions suggested that winning the peace would be as meaningful as winning the war. vicksburg capture accomplish three important goals. it secured union control of the mississippi river. it split the confederacy in half, and sent a heavy blow to the south. the two great victories of 1863 bolstered northern hopes for he is once again, but still, that peace, increasingly distant. it was getting more complicated by the minute. acting quickly after vicksburg

and another grant victory at chattanooga, tennessee president lincoln brought the western men east. in march 1864, grant accepted command of all union armies, cementing his growing reputation as a symbol of union military victory. grant and lincoln, who had never met until march 9, would come to enjoy an unusually close relationship. while lincoln developed strategy that guided his ultimate national strategy of saving the union, grant developed the political skills that complemented his military goal with the same idea in mind, to save the union. assuming a role as many commanders in the civil war, particularly on the federal side

did, of not only planning and executing campaigns, but also advising and carrying out policies on any range of social and political issues in the occupied territory under the control. grant accepted, without question, the president's power as commander in chief. one author wrote -- grant and lincoln assured one another of good intention while maintaining separate series of authority although those spheres sometimes became tangled. this was painted just after chattanooga. here, i want to show you the council of war. i want to emphasize, as they go into the political part of my talk this on it morning, grant was

in constant contact with president lincoln and edwin stanton as well. it would not always agree. more than a few times in the next year, lincoln expressed frustration with the union army's lack of success. he traveled twice to grant's headquarters in the summer of 1864 to discuss these frustrations. as lincoln reminded the secretary of war, edward stanton, on one such occasion of disappointment, you and i have tried to bust this job, and we have not done so well. we have sat across the melons for mr. grant to succeed us, and it think we ought to leave him alone.

for the most part, they did. union tribes make possible lincoln's reelection in 1864. as they went into winter, union victory seemed more and more likely. while grant was working for total victory, he was alert to the possibility of ending the war during the negotiated peace bringing him into an even closer relationship with the president. that relationship, it must be said, was of some concern to link. there was a fine line between politics, diplomacy, and the military, and had to do with who would implement that policy. through it all, lincoln and staton made it clear to grant that their job was not to negotiate the conditions of peace in a military surrender. it was to be purely the

surrender of one army to another. both were worried that a military surrender, handled wrongly, may take away the presence goals of reconstruction and reunion. lincoln decided a heart of war and soft tpeace. as late 1864 passed on to 1865, union victory seemed imminent despite the confederate leadership's refusal to give up. undergrad's -- under grant's direction, the country's ability to sustain itself and to defeat armies was bringing the rebellion to its knees.

in late february 1865, grant remarked on the dissolution that was appearing in the confederate army, remarked upon yesterday. this included desertions. doubtless, he was thinking relentlessly about the impending surrender, and the terms that it would dictate. there came a letter from general lee asking if grant would consider meeting to discuss what he called a satisfactory adjustment, a means of a military convention. what lee was proposing to grant in early march 1865 was exactly what lincoln feared. it went beyond a military surrender. grant immediately sent the message to edward stanton, who

replied, the president directs me to say to you that he wishes you to have no conference with general lee, lest it be for the capitulation of lee's army. just in case granted not understand the first part of the letter which lincoln was evidently dictating to stanton his letter ended with this. he instructs me to say that you are not to discuss our confirm upon any political questions. such questions, the president holds in his hand, and will not submit to any military conferences. grant's replies a leak fulfilled his presence and instructions.

such authority is vested in the president of the united states. on march 20, 1865, general grant invited abraham lincoln to meet him at city point in a few days. in this meeting with grant, general sherman, and david quarter of board the river queen, lincoln discussed at length in debt what the military surrender should entail, as well as articulating his own ideas. while the details of this meeting remain close, later accounts stress that lincoln asked for general terms so that

they will not take up arms again. it also insisted that the mancini -- it is hard today to realize how anxiety ridden the federal officials were at this time. they did not believe -- they believe that the war could go on for some time in a variety of ways. it was very important to get these details right. it was incredibly important to give and write. the bottom line was this. momentous decisions have to be made now and soon. lincoln would claim his

reconstruction cards close because he did not want to be pinned down by taking a position that would alienate many of the members of his own party. lincoln and staton make it clear that his job is not to negotiate conditions of peace but conditions of surrender of the army. lincoln really said to grant, i will deal with the conditions and negotiate for peace. your job is to fight. the appomattox campaign beginning on march 25 marked the end of the road. the confederate subscription of

the last line, resulted in the fall of gas in richmond. on april 6, a further disaster was inflicted at say there's great great on april 7 grant spoke with his commanders on what was it is that -- what was a desperate situation. he remarked to his staff, i have a great mind to summon lee to surrender. he said this letter to him. the result of the last three must convince you of the hopelessness of the further resistance in northern virginia. i feel it is so and my duty to shift for myself the responsibility of any further

loss of blood, by asking of you the surrender of the army of northern virginia. lee replied, asking grant to outline the surrender, and receive this note on april 8. there is but one condition that i surrender on and that is that the men be disqualified from taking up arms again against the united states. we responded to grants note that he was not ready to surrender but suggested a meeting to possibly discuss key signature -- peace negotiations. grant's response to lee suggested that sorry, i thought i made myself clear.

i cannot discuss keypeace. lee, after meeting his commanders, turned away and said, there's nothing left to me but to go see general grant, and i would rather die 1000 deaths. making a dramatic moment more so, in the end the hours of the conflict grant's physical condition was precarious. a great anxiety combined with malnourishment chronic sleeplessness, and pure exhaustion brought up one of his debilitating headaches. despite his condition, on the morning of april 9, staff germs down data and alex -- drove

down to appomattox. grant's headache was still raging. in his hand was a sealed envelope, containing lee's replied to grant's most recent communique. the general read the message without commenting. he handed it to his aid, asking him to read it aloud. rollinsgrant's headache disappeared. don't take excedrin migraine when you take a migraine headache. you will think of the surrender. a little after 1:30 p.m., grant

and his staff wrote into the village of appomattox courthouse, where they were directed to the two-story brick farmhouse, along will remit clean -- along wilmer. grant dismounted his beautiful horse and climbed the steps to the house. in the parlor to the left side robert e lee. grant and lee shook hands. this is the depiction of the surrender that you see on the screen. lee returned to his sharchair. grant drew up a seat and sat down, placing his gloves and hat on a nearby table. outside, thousands of weary soldiers waited and watched. all in the room they were aware

of the extraordinary contrast between the two commanders. general lee, i'm tired his best uniform, with a sword on his side. he had dressed carefully for the occasion. the commanding general of the northern armies had not. equipment had disappeared. instead, he wore a casual uniform with shoulder stopsraps pinned on. far from insulting lee or diminishing the importance of the occasion grant's manner revealed much about the man. as a sign of respect, he explained his experience later. he said, i had not expected so

soon the result that was then taking place. the two commanders engaged in some awkward conversation about their service in the mexican war, with lee asking, what are the terms of surrender. grant responded that the terms were exactly the same as indicated by his letter on april 8. many officers who surrendered would be paroled, and could not take up arms again until exchange properly. the arms and supplies were to be captured properly. this was a military surrender the surrender of one army to another. we know that there are several other armies in the field that were yet to be surrendered, even after appomattox. grant remember that what general lee's feelings were that i did

not know. it was impossible to say whether he fell inwardly glad that the and had finally come. for his part lee remain satisfied. perhaps, he felt afraid that the word "unconditional" was not muttered. lee waited while eli parker brought over a small table and a tablet prepared with carbon paper for three copies. grant prepared to write. when i put my pen to the paper, i did not know the first word that i should make use of. allie what was -- i only knew what was in my mind, and wished to express it clearly so there was no mistaking it.

there was no mistaking it. grant rejected any fancy words for a straightforward explanation of the process by which the officers and men of northern for junior would record their paroled. he explained, the thought occurred to me that the officers had their own private horses and effects, important to them, but of no value to us. also, it would be an unnecessary humiliation to call upon them to deliver their arms. these items were to be excluded from weapons and property about to be turned over. also excluded would be a request for lee's ceremonial sword as a trophy for war.

then, there was the final part of the letter to lee. the famous last sentence which has been described as one of the greatest sentences in the history of the united states. no one has described one of my sentences like that. [laughter] it is as follows. each officer and men will be allowed to return to their homes, not to be disturbed by united states authorities, so long as they observe their paroled, and the laws and forth where they may be preside. it was a vital importance and and ending the war and start the progress that followed. when lee came to the end, he looked up and remarked, this

will have a very happy affect upon my army. we had one more request -- lee had one more request. grant agreed, saying it would be very gratifying, much towards conciliating our people. lee returned a book to grants, and ordered a copy. as the documents were prepared grant introduced lee to the staff officers and generals who crowded into the small room, including lincoln's son captain robert lincoln. the two discussed prisoners, and grant agreed to provide rations. around 3:00 p.m., lee and grant hearted ways. they shouook hands.

when lee mounted, he lifted his hat in sloot. granted the same. later, colonel marshall describes the surrender saying, there was no theatrical display about it. it was the simplest. another testimonial came from x confederate general. he said, grant's manner requires the greatest cr praise. and for all time, it will be a good thing. grant left and wrote to headquarters.

news of the surrender spread quickly to the union can't. soon thousands -- a gun salute but grant stopped it immediately. he also remarked that he felt like anything, rather than to be rejoicing. almost as an afterthought, grant sent a telegram to stanton informing him that lee surrendered, on terms imposed by myself. i can, no sustained celebration. no victory dance was allowed. i will say something i said earlier, winning the peace was just as vital as winning the war , although several more armies

would surrender. the meeting between the and grant on palm sunday was considered the end of the civil war. the deeply christian nation welcome the connection between what they deemed to be too sacred days -- palm sunday commemorates christ's's entry into jerusalem. this is a depiction of palm sunday and the appomattox courthouse, published in may 1865. it invites americans to see the -- witness the end of the civil war and the union's victory. after meeting with lee wrink briefly the next morning grant travel

to washington, d.c., missing the ceremony of laying down the arms . joshua chamberlain conducted the ceremony, which featured a notable effort of demonstrating forgiveness and reconciliation. when grant got to washington, he expressed his unqualified approval with the terms that he had given lee. we think of this being one party in the north after the fall of richmond. there was actually a lot of criticism of grant's document. an editorial of "the new york times" say that it was very evident that a large number of our citizens would not have allowed lee and his men their paroled. another newspaper portray's the terms as unqualified

indignation. these feelings were checked by lincoln steadfast determination to stand behind his agreement. indeed, despite some misgivings, the overwhelming evidence suggests that the majority of loyal citizens conflated, combined, and treated the appomattox terms with the union victory. my conclusion is this. the last part of the simple document was something that he gave a lot of thought to expressed in a concentrated form. each man and officer will be allowed to return to their homes, not to be disturbed by

united states authority, so long as they respect their paroled. this sentence reveals his view that when the war was over there should be no predictive -- vindictive policy to the enemy. it revealed his belief that reconstruction would not, and should not, be simply an indulgence and revenge. grant surrender document was not a product of a fleeting moment suggested by the statement that i only knew what was in my mind, but reflected policies and actions. grant's sentiment and judgment form to him firmly with the reconstruction policy, conducted with as little rancor as

possible. here, the final sentence actually made the military surrender into a pieace agreement. they offered peace and reconciliation to those who would embrace it. many commentators have made that observation. they are right. grant exceeded his instruction and made a promise that rightfully belong to another but one that was rendered so perfectly that no complaint was lodged by his president. this talk has been about grants, but it has equally been about the nature of surrender during the american civil war. surrender has multiple levels of meeting. in the context of the civil war surrender is advised as giving up something valuable.

it can also mean something else. it can mean something beautiful tender, or forgiving. it can mean surrender to a lover, or surrender a soul to god. it can mean surrender of selfishness to a greater good. all three places were once a site of brutal warfare and conflict. sites of reunions, reconciliation, and almost immediately, sites of memory. the scars of this awful war, as we know in this room, were too deep to heal quickly or easily. magnanimity proved easier than true union. the challenge of building a new society in the south, that included black and white, proved nearly impossible. there would be accommodations, but precious little

reconciliation. what came out of the appomattox agreement was an act of mercy that secure the united states for all time, and maybe just enough reconciliation reconciliation that kept the spirit of unity alive. the co complex nature of the civil war can somehow be summed up in one deceptively simple sentence -- i only knew what was in my mind. thank you. [applause] we have time for just one

question. don't stand in line, but i would be happy to answer. >> good morning. i will break the one question. how well did the soldiers stick to parole when they went back on? did they enter battle with no permission again? second li does lee's aid have an irc? and, there was a portrait of george washington in the white house in a depiction. i was wondering if the artist put that there. i thought i read once that lee's wife was a descendent of washington. dr. waugh: you have gone way

beyond three questions. -- one question. how about i answer, yes, no, yes. the picture of george washington -- i don't remember. it was commonly placed in civil war images, both in the confederate and union side. both sides look to him for inspiration in their cause. the fact is that we do not really know the exact number of paroled soldiers at the experiment went back into the fighting forces. we know there were a number of them that did go back. there were a lot of them that were permanently removed from the fighting. we do not have the numbers. thank you. [applause]

>> we have about a 10 minute break. you can stretch a little bit, go to the bathroom, get a drink. steve kushman is up next.

in fookt, there was life for joshua chamberlin after getiesburg and we will be talking about him. please welcome steve cushman. [applause]

>> good morning, everyone. very pleased to be here and just want to say again thanks to everybody the staff alison, diana, everybody who makes this possible. a lot of you go to many conferences. some of us also help run them and you really find out from the inside how much work this is. you would think somebody planneded this conference carefully because my talk follow's her very easily. you heard joan say in the last couple minutes of her wonderful talks that after grant finished the surrender, terms with lee, he left went back to washington, and then three days later on april 12, 1865 there was the surrender ceremony which was, which involved somehow joshua lawrence chamber lin. i want to just begin by asking the students here -- and i

realize very early on a saturday morning. thank you so much for being here. the students here, show of hands how many students have been to apmat yosm. just the students. adults can play in a moment. all right. so students. keep them up. all right. look around, everybody. that's not that many. grown ups. there you go. so students you see what you can aspire to. when you go, if you take a tour led by a park ranger, he or she will say something like, and on the 12th of april, 1865 there was the formal surrender ceremony and joshua lawrence chamer lynn formerly of the

20th maine middle honor here at round top, he was in charge. he was in charge. well, what i want to do today is talk about that. i want to talk about what he was in charge of, what he thought he was in charge of. how he talked about it over the 50 years from the surrender itself to the publicication of his book the passing of the armies in 1915. and then after we talk about that, what i want to do at the end is talk about how whatever he did is wermed today in popular culture. ok. one more thing and then we're off and running. hand out was at the back. if you don't have one, can you become friendly with someone who does? i will also be reading some of this stuff. remember you are on television. if you don't want to look dumb

have a handout and look at it once in a while. here we go. picking up where joan left off with grant. in his personal memwours. commenting on what he describes as the story of the famous apple tree. supposedly the surrender took place under an apple tree. offers by way of introduction this typically lean efficient sentence. this is zpwrant. wars produce many stories of fiction. some of which are told until they are believed to be true. among the many stories of fiction produced by the civil war and by the events of weand at the courthouse in particular are those connected with brigadier general joshua

lawrence chamberlin, major general, and his involvement in the surrender ceremony. in goifing us his formulation of how fiction are told until they are believed to be true grant fro vides us with a really useful starting place to begin thinking about his role, his subsequent representations of that role and the stories that he told throughout his life. and here's the last part. the willingness of many people to believe his representations even as late as the second decade of the 21st century. what was chameler lin's role in the surrender ceremony on that damp, chilly, april wednesday morning?

most of what we know comes from himself. even the most skeptical among them would be unlikely to quibble with a few basics. at 5 a.m. almost four years to the minute after the first signal shot was fired at fort u.s.er, the officer from maine having requested a transfer from the first brigade back to his old command for the ceremony began assembling the third brigade. there's going to be a lot of this brigade stuff. so if there's a surgeon general's warning if you're not used to this kind of thing just look at your handout. third brigade. along the southern side of the richmond lynchburg stage road also known as the main street. this location put his left somewhere just east of the

courthouse building with him positioned at the other end of the line toward the river on the extreme right of the fifth corps. the only army at this point. the second and sixth corps having been sent toward berkville. wanting to start his own 24th corps on the road to lynchberg john gibance had ordered him to relieve turner's corps with one of his own and bartlett sent to the village. i don't have to tell this audience that he was no stranger to extreme positions on a federal flank. as we know from wherever it is we are, where he earned the only congressional medal of honor awarded to a soldier of the fifth corps. and this particular position put him closest -- this is the

important part. it put him closest to the surrendering southerners led by confederate second corps under general john b. gordon who would be marching into the village from the north andest or from chamber lin's right. i get to be him. my right. the next day april 13, chamber lin wrote a letter to his sister sara who was nick named sae and this letter now in possession of boden college we know the disposition of the troops under his command. and here's where you just need to take a deep breath. on the extreme right he claims he placed the remnants of the massachusetts ninth, 18, 22 and 32. then came the maine first second and 20th. his own original command. then the michigan first fourth and 16th. and finally the pennsylvania 82, 83 91, 118 and 155.

over the years of his subsequent retelling this basic configuration of massachusetts maine, michigan, pennsylvania, remained consistent. although in 1903 in an address he gave that year, a maryland unit slipped into the picture. all right. so far so good. but as per subsequent events, when gordon's confederate corps came abreast of these federal soldiers, the simple truth is we just don't know what happened. we can be reasonably sure that some command was given. and you notice here that the passive voice reflects the uncertainty. some command was given. the federal soldiers made some

change in how they were standing. and whatever change they made, that change in turn changed the tone of the surrender ceremony in some way the meaningings, the meaningful significance of which many people are still willing and eager to believe. as chamber lin came to represent the moment he ordered his soldiers to shoulder arms. and this order constituted a salute to the surrendering confederates. but even this simple claim has stired controversy and disagreement. some of which his biographer has sum rised helpfully and now i'm quoting. there is some question as to whether or not this was really a salute. in sholdrd arms as described in the infantry tactics it was held in the right hand and resting in the hollow of the right soldier.

a salute would have required that a piece be held by both hands vertically opposite to center of the body. here versus here. in other words, a skeptic could argue his famous salute to gordon's troops may have consisted of nothing more than him calling his own soldiers for attention for the sake of imposing stillness and silence on them. thrsh assuring that there would be no exalting or taunting of the kinds that grant himself expressly wanted to avoid. and joan wall was so good about setting us up for understanding that. among his skeptics, the lead one is william marvel who criticizes the man for maine in not one but two books.

in the first, he describes him this way. general chamber lin proved as magnificent a soldier as he was a lit rarey stylist. but while he was courageous and cool headed he also tended to wrap life's little dramas in ribbons of romantic imagery in which he himself was somehow entwind. in the second book he has this to say. a college professor -- oh, no. a college fro fessor from maine just three years from this day he saw the world as one grand romantic cavelcade in which he participated prominently. and if he did anything common, he seemed unable to remember it that way. the important point to make here is that for marvel and for people who think skeptically this way the fact that he revised and improved his

subsequent representations of the salute is the end of the story. that's it. whereas, what i want to say, those later revisions and improvements are also the beginning of another story. one that has considerable historiccal, not just lit rarey, importance. in fairness to skeptics, claims and counter claims have dogged his accounts all along both during his lifetime and since his death. another biographer, edward g. long acre sum rises some of these criticisms this way. i'm paraphrasing now. he made it appear that his command alone took part in the ceremony ignoring other elements of the fifth corps. he implied that his command receive confederate arms and flags all morning and afternoon instead of during only a portion of the day. he maintain that he was designated by either grant or

griffin to receive the confederate surrender when in fact his division commander and superior officer bart let was really in charge but may have been summoned elsewhere. and here we go. most important for this discussion, he insisted that he and john b. gordon exchange salutes of some kind although they may not actually have done so at all. having sum rised these criticisms and counter claims, he then zraws what i think is an admirably judicious and level headed conclusion. he says these criticisms not withstanding, it seems clear that some gesture on chamber lin's part that day made the ceremony something other than the degrading humiliating experience lee's army might otherwise have found it. since we can't know since we

cannot determine the exact nature of his gesture what i want to focus is us is how his representations have evolved over 50 years and how subsequent students of history have interpreted that gesture. and here comes your chance for your handout. shuffle it, we'll hear the audio on c-span. that's good. six documents. we can refer to each by its number. number one. his let tore his sister written the day after the surrender ceremony. number two, the surrender of general lee published almost three years later in january 1846. number three the third brigade. published in 1894. number four the last salute of the army of northern virginia first published in 1901. number five.

appom at&t ox. and finally, chamber lin's book the passing of the armies which came out in 1915. he had died in 1914. with these six chronological points at hand, we can trace quickly the progress of, for example, chamberlin's represent combration of his own thoughts about offering a salute to gordon's troops. in the first version, which is the one to his sister, that of april 13 1865, h gives his sister say only this bare reportage. if it got in front of you, page 5, first page under version one. in the second chunk of print there about halfway through. we received them with the honors due to troops at a shoulder in silence. they came to a shoulder on passing my flag and preserved perfect order. in his version he makes no

mention of deciding to offer the salute or issuing orders for that salute. his only depiction of his own thoughts takes this shape. poor fellows. i pitied them from the bottom of my heart. in version two new details emerged. page 5. i'm in the bottom paragraph there about halfway through. soon, the rebels were seen slowly forming for the last time. on they came with careless step their ranks thick with banners. the bugle sounds shoulders arms not present as some of the histories have it that would have been too much honor. on our side there is not a sound. the silence is if the dead passed. it is a funeral salute we pay them. they move along our front face inward towards our lines. dress lines. stacked arms. take off their cart ridge boxes

and place them on the pile and then reluctantly painfully furled their flags and lay them down some kneeling and kissing them with tears in their eyes. here he show it is surrendering confederates behaving in ways that could arouse the pity to which he confesses in version one and here he adds the epic image of saluting a procession of the dead. sounds something out of homer employing one of he is his favorite techniques which is the shift into the present tense. but even with all these, he still does not take credit for issuing an order for the salute. the prompting bugle sounds on its own. nobody seems to push any buttons. and he already shows an awareness of potential confusion about or misunderstanding of the historical record of this moment as we see in the careful distinction he draws between shoulder arms and present arms, which he said would have been

too much honor. this last qualification suggests that he knew very well what he was about. it implies a shrewd canny recognition of limits not at all characteristic of some misty eyed romantic sentimently sloshing his way into unqualified reconciliation with a defeated enemy. with version three delivered in 1893 around published in 1894 things get more compli skated. on page 6. and you pick it up with that about halfway through on that big paragraph. we could not content ourselves with simply standing in line and witnessing this crowning scene. so instructions were sent to the several commanders that at the given signal as the head of each division of the surrendering column approached their right they should in succession bring their men to attention and arms to the carry. then resuming the ordered arms and the parade rest as they came opposite our right our

bugle sounds the signal and repeated along the line. each organization comes to attention and there upon takes up successfully the carry. the narrative now includes a representation of the thought process. combee hind the order to salute. and a first person pronoun has emerged to authorize that process. it's a we. it's a plural. but the pronoun is a plural one so it remains unclear who is thinking this way. chamberlin only, with his fellow officers, which he mentions in this version across or as bart let says something to chamberlin. the use of the passive voice again so instructions were sent. further obsecures the top link in the chain of command. finally, a new detail emerges from the manual of arms.

instead of coming to shoulder arms and standing in that position silently throughout the surrender, his soldiers as he now represents them cycle through the sequence from order arms, which is musket butts resting on the ground as they do in parade rest, to carry and back. so he is doing a sequence. or he has them doing a sequence. with version four, first published in the boston journal in april 1901, and scomb constituently this is very important for civil war memories subsequently picked up and circulated throughout the south by the southern historical society papers in 1904 chamberlin clearly positions himself as the originator of the salute to gordon's troops. i'm now on page of the handout. about three or four inches down the page under chamberlin's thinking. at such a time and under such conditions, i thought it imminently fitting to show some token of our feeling and i

therefore instructed my officers to come to the position of salute in the manual of arms as each body of the confederates passed before us. not hard to see what's happening. in this iteration the first person singular i has relieved the earlier we. and the active voice has displaced the passive. meanwhile, the ambiguous catch-all term salute blur it is earlier specificity of shoulder arms, carry arms, and order arms. most important, about the fourth version is the role it plays in southern imaginations of the surrender. first, in john b. gordon's reminisceances, published in 1903 and subsequently in the lee's lieutenant study of command in 1944 which splices this fourth version with the sixth and final one in his passing of the armies. version 4 also presents one

other striking development in the narrative of the salute. and now i'm back on page 7 down at the bottom last full paragraph. and it can be well imagined too that there was no lack of emotion on our side but the union men were held steady in their lines without the least show of demonstration by word or by motion. there was though a twitching of muscles of their faces and be it said their battle bronzed cheeks were not altogether dry. our men felt the import of the occasion and realized how fully they would have been affected if defeat and surrender had been their lot after such a fearful struggle. what the english romantic poet william wordsworth called the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings tends not to be a favorite topic of conversation among many american males. and especially not among many

military historians. but clearly the surrender was emotionally or psychologically charged for the men gathered there. and clearly his many versions of his salute to gordon wrestle with the problem of how to convey powerful feeling or affect without foundering and sendment tallty. in version one the letter to his sister he mentions his pity and in version two delivered to his audience he represents confederate soldiers as weaping and kissing surrendered flags. here, the emotions of the hour receive their fullest most compelling treatment. his own feelings of pilty for, and identification with, the confederates before him now conbind with their tears and projected on to his own union soldiers. although some might cringe at the i will lit rating hife

nation of battle bronzed cheeks his narrative here achieves something real as it not only anticipates ernest hemming way's strategy for depicting men trying to steady themselves under the influence of violent emotions produced by combat and war. it adds another layer to the salute offered to gordon. instead of an officer's effective method for preserving discipline and preempting the potential taunt of victorious soldiers, his salute now becomes what it no doubt was for more than a few. a manly, even heroic fete of unfaltering self-control under unusual and extraordinary emotional pressure. in version 5 published in 1903 he consolid dates his role as originator of the salute and now i am on the page it is on.

i'm on to page 8. i'm on page 8. and i am picking it up with about halfway through that section version. this was the last scene of such momentous history that i was impelled to render some token of recognition some honor also to manhood so high. instructions had been given and when the head of each division column comes opposite our group the bugle sounds the signal and our w40e8 line in succession gives the soldiers salutation from order arms to the old carry the marching salute. this version adds nothing new to the representation of the salute itself although this is the one where the stray maryland units makes it appearance. but it does show chamberlin straining toward greater

eloquence. with phrases such as last scene of such momentous history and impelled to render some token of recognition now strutting where the perfectly serviceable prose of version four formally did its work. finally, with version six published posthumesly, we get a new wrinkle. page 8 down at the bottom. the momentous meaning of this occasion impressed me deeply. i resolved to market by some token by recognition which could be no other than a salute of arms. well aware of the responsibility assumed and of the criticisms that would follow as the sequel proved, nothing of that kind could move me in the least. here he has scaled back some of the straining eloquence of version five but in its place we now have a feisty

self-righteousness absent from the other versions. coming at the end of his life, this defiant declaration sounds like the proud hindsight of an old warrior who having received his share of wounds from both bullets and words has tenaciously survived both. but in fact this bit of valid dick tri bra vado seems to be little more than the old warrior's shadow boxing since there is no evidence that i've been able to find that there's anybody who criticized his salute. some have questioned his facts. but nobody i've been able to find has condemned whatever gesture he made. in other words, by the time of his death his narrative of the salute showed him spoiling for a fight he never got. although it is pure conjecture

to say so -- and i want to admit that. although it is pure conjecture to say so it may be that his readiness to take on anybody who condemned the salute was a strategy for distracting potential critics from some of the inconsistency among his many narratives. if so, that strategy did not work in the case of many skeptics. many of whom continue to see the inconsistencies as self-evidence that the whole thing is corrupt. the problem with this kind of skepticism in my opinion is that it risks oversimplifying the nature of memory and the nature of truth telling. it is not necessarily true that because one memory of an event comes later than another the later memory is less true than the earlier. if it were true, psycho analysis would be out of

business. the letter chamberlin wrote his sister the day after the ceremony certainly had a raw meadsy that still makes it compelling but its hurried dashed off quality may also reflect its ability to encompass all the details he might have recovered later when the eclipsing urgency of his immediate zuties subsided. nor is it necessarily true that just because he may have embellished his accounts those accounts have no veracity about them. comparing the surrendering confederates to a procession of the dead or describing his own soldiers' cheeks as battle bronzed does not in itself negate the reality of the other claims he made. and finally, and maybe most important, it is not necessarily true that inconsistencies among his accounts negate the reliability

of those claims either. did he place the first brigade with the second brigade on the north side? as claimed in version three. or behind the third brigade on the south side as claimed in version six published 31 years later? this kind of imperfection or flaw in recollection actually may be a sign of authenticity. rather than falsehood. whereas exact undeviated repetition of precisely the same details over 50 years could characaterize the rigidly rehearsed consistency of a liar. and actually i've talked to people who are professional interrogators i'm happy to say on social terms. and they confirm this. that if somebody's story is always always always always the same, watch out. watch out. then there is the whole matter

of john b. gordon's role in the story of the salute. if we say that chamberlin made up the story disregarding to his many claims, might have entitled him to, must we then say the same of gordon subsequently a u.s. senator, and governor of georgia? it is easy to be cynical, especially where politicians are concerned, it would be easy, for example, to claim that he merely brought his men to attention for the sake of imposing silence on them. and gordon, not to be outdone by yankee chivalry, ordered his men to attention also. and then during the post war period the two men consciously or uncloclshsly collaborated to spin out a yarn each for his own political reasons and advantage.

if we take a cynical line we might also be inclined to see art fisses in his own successive representations of gordon during the salute itself. beginning with version three chamberlin began polishing his account of gordon's response to his salute and he polished it through versions four and five where it reached its final form subsequently repeated in the passing of the armies. and now i'm back on page and i'm in version 5. about seven or eight lines from the end. gordon at the head of the column writing with heavy spirit and downcast face catches the sound of shifting arms looks up and takes the meaning wheels superbly making with himself and his horse one uplifted figure with profound salutation as he drops the point of his sword to his boot

toe. then gives word to pass us with the same position of the manual honor answering honor. on our part not a sound of trumpet nor roll of drum not a cheer nor word nor whisper or emogs of man standing again at the order but an odd stillness rather and breath holding as if it were the passing of the dead. a typed script precursor of this passage in the possession of the library shows various interlinear alternatives written in chamberlin's hands. such as sword point to the boot toe for the point of his sword to the boot toe. since the difference between sword point and the point of his sword makes a difference only in prose rhythm not in meaning we could argue that here is an instance of verbal polishing, an instance of what

marvel calls his tendency to wrap little's dramas in the ribbons of romantic imagery. i suspect that not all of us would agree that the surrender was merely one of life's little dramas. but most would accept i suspect the assertion that honor answering honor which in context describes not the salute itself has become the most famous and subsequently quoted phrase to come out of chamberlin's many versions of his role there. and when you do go there send me a post card if somebody says honor answering honor. i bet my mail box ll full. at this point we can return to grant's statement about wars, stories, and belief. remember what he said. wars produce many stories of fiction. some of which are told until they are believed to be true. with this statement in mind,

what i want to do now is move toward conclusion by considering three recent invocations of chamberlin slulet and their very different context. salute and their very different context. so i haven't resolved whether anything really heaped. so when questions come don't ask that one. -- happened. i've tried to show you how complicated it is and all different things. what i'm interested now is in whatever happened how are people writing about it and remembering it now. the first of my three appears in a 1996 book by gordon r. sullivan and michael r. harper entitled "hope is not a method" what business leaders can learn from america's army. and cat logged by the library of congress under the headings industrial management and strategic planning. here is how sullivan and harper

make use of chamberlin's story. and you don't have this in front of you so you just have to listen. when we think of what it means to value and respect people, our thoughts go to one of grant's commanders joshua chamberlin. as a tribute to its heroism grant selected chamberlin's division to formally accept the surrender forming a line in which his second corps surend dangered their arms as they marched off the field. and he quotes some of what you've seen. their conclusion is chamberlin and gordon two of america's citizen soldiers understood the most basic truth. leadership always comes back to people. write that down. the second invocation appears

in to forgive is human. how to put your past in the past. it was published in 1997 by michael e mccullough and others and classified by the library of congress under forgiveness and interpersonal relations. they say the next act of healing in this story was niche yailted by colonel joshua l. chamberlin who had been a professor of theology prior to listen in the union army. nearly 100,000 men passed by the courthouse. chamberlin led his main in a gesture of forgiveness toward those he tried to kill the previous week. war seeks justice but chamberlin understood his enemies were human and deserved more than justice. they deserved respect. he communicated that although

justice would be served, mercy would also be extended. that is forgiveness. in a third and final example robert j. wicks conjures up chamberlin in his handbook of spirituality for ministers. published in 2000 and classified by the library of congress under clergy, religious life, and pastoral theology. here's what he says. at the end of the war, chamberlin is chosen to be the officer in charge of the union troops receiving the surrender. as the confederates dejectedly marched passed the ranks of union soldiers he orders the salute of these men. officers recognized the salute and ordered a similar swlute back. honor answering honor. and then there's some summary of what you've heard. and then he returns. is god in all this? can god be a part from it all?

our theology today tells us that the world and god are inseparable. god is the depth level of all human experience. industrial management, strategic planning forgiveness, interpersonal relations, clernly, religious life pastoral theology. this list covers the spectrum from on the one hand the commercial and the pragmatic through the social and emotional in the middle and on to the spiritual and religious at the other end. the spectrum is a distinctly american one and chamberlin's relevance to any point on that spectrum or more precisely the widespread belief in his relevance testifies per swacively to the power of the story he developed over 50 years. what i find particularly remarkable if not downright moving about these varied uses

of chamberlin is that they appear in the writing and work of people who do not necessarily know much about the civil war. consider the wildly exaggerated figure of nearly 100,000 men passing by the courthouse. lee wished. people who don't know much about the civil war but who recognize in a story from the civil war a paradigm or a fable or a parable for complicated and difficult moments in which temporary civilian life. to make this claim is not to pretend for a moment that skeptics about to details of chamberlin's salute will or should be persuaded. should be persuaded to accept everything he has written as are credlussly as the nonspecialist writers making use of his story now. but it is to make the claim that the gestures he made toward gordon and the confederate's second corps on

the raw morning of april 12, 1865, whatever that gesture may have been, amounts to only one aspect of his achievement and legacy. a legacy subsequently developed during the late 19th and early 20th centuries against the backdrops of reconstruction and its end, against war with spain, against varying degrees of reconciliation between the white poll lations of the antagonistic sections. as we see now a second aspect of his legacy continues today in widely diverging contexts. each with its own set of attitudes and concerns which show little or no awareness of or need for the uncertainties of that raw april morning. thank you. [applause] .

ok. i'm told we have time for questions. so if you'd like to come up and ask any, i'm happy to try to answer them. or i can sing. yes, sir. >> steve from massachusetts. you mentioned that gordon wrote some memoirs. did he comment at all about what he perceived happened? >> yes indeed. absolutely. he did indeed. and it's even more interesting than that. in his reminisceance comes out in 1903 and he definitely talks about what happened. but the two men appeared in new york in 1894 on the same stage and gordon was giving address

at the -- he says now i want to shake the hand of the man who offered us such a mag nan muss gesture. and he introduces chamberlin. so clearly they had figured that they had something here. and that they -- they did it in a public performance. absolutely. it's in the reminisceances. >> no other accounts? >> this is a good question. what william marvel would argue is that his line is a hard line on chamberlin. his line is that all the accounts we have confirming that chamberlin led the salute came from soldiers in his own units.

>> -- well, if you have amuse -- a muse, it suggests that this stuff is coming from somewhere. are you working with fax? we would like to say yes. when it comes to empirical data, i'm a positivist. i do believe things happen. i don't believe nothing happens until written about it. i am not that far gone. [laughter] but -- but for civil war historians in particular, this is a very important thing because the amount of writing that we have from the war and the degree of literacy of the people who generated this writing is so large and so great

that if we are going to try to recover texture -- the texture of what the war was like for them, we've got to become better readers. because they were so literate. they are steeped in the bible, shakespeare, the classics. they are using all kinds of language that has been transmitted to them culturally for a long, long, long time. so we want to say, did it happen or did it not happen? we want to make it like a courtroom. but even -- even a lawyer -- well, even a lawyer -- especially a lawyer will tell you -- will tell you, eyewitness testimony, what is that? you get one, i get one. they don't agree. already things are shaping going around how you say it. i was once on jury duty and the

judge strictly charged us not to talk to one another because he said as soon as you start to narrate, you start making judgments. as soon as you start to narrate you start making judgments. there you go. as for fiction, that is something i feel very strongly about. all fiction doesn't mean false. all fiction means is manipulated, literally fingered as if you finger clay. all the people whose books you see back there -- some of them are doing better things, but a lot of them are back there. you ask anyone of them who has written a book back there whether or not he or she revised or second draft or third draft -- as soon as you start doing that, language is creeping in. we are born into a language. we don't make the rules of english.

we are born into that language and we have to use it. and it governs us in ways that we cannot always control. so the myths -- you know -- when i hear honor answering honor, or the one that i love that is apparently apocryphal is when they are talking about beating on the river green among the grant chairman porter and lincoln, apparently lincoln is supposed to have said, let him up easy. well, we have no documentation of that. but i want to believe that right? and there is a way in which that shaped things, shaped utterance and large is my sense of what is going on. so, i would say how'd the myths. embrace them. get them. >> to a non-historian, i have a mechanical question. i'm curious to know how you found those quotations of

chamberlain? >> bloodshot eyes. [laughter] yeah, just a lot of feet in a chair with lots of words. i go into the library, i go to the reference desk, i say, help. [laughter] and they do. they live for that. and, so -- so i just started finding where the papers are got in touch with the librarians . the internet is hugely helpful. search engines are going to help you find with these things are. but again, as i think anybody out here who has written a book on those shelves will confirm that is the hard work. there is the answer to the myth thing. i mean, i can't make that up. i've got to read all that stuff. i wish i could say it were

inspired, but it was just bloodshot eyes. yeah. thank you. yes, ma'am? >> i wonder if you would confirm something i think i have read. that chamberlain taught every subject with the exception of math. i would say that the change in the writing style has something to do with the fact that he was such a well-rounded professor. >> i have heard that. i have heard that. the great biography of chamberlin -- and she says that, too. what a loser. he couldn't do math, too? [laughter] he should have done that as well . but i think that -- i think that that is the thing that puts a lot of skeptics on guard is -- is he taught rhetoric. well, for us, rhetoric is a word

that has undergone the technical process of what is called pagination -- pejoration. it's meaning has worsened. apathy is like that, too. rhetoric -- all the rhetoric is is the art of persuasion. it is ancient, it is important it is crucial in every aspect of civil life, but now we mean it to mean i am trying to hoodwink you. don't give me that rhetoric. so, yes, absolutely, he clearly was a man who loved language, reveled in language. lived through language. but he was also, as lots of other accounts confirm, an impressive man of action. he wasn't just in the ivory tower. he was capable of doing all these amazing things that he did. and -- and yet he was going to

write about them. you write something and then you look at it and go, oh, i could do that a little better. so he does that over 50 years. >> deal roberts now -- darrell roberts, now living in gettysburg. i skipped a little bit of skepticism. of some of what chamberlain said as he went on about describing the events that occurred because especially for men who have been in the military and actually have done -- i was supposed to be at the 100 -- 153 enactment at appomattox, there was a certain protocol they would've already been used to doing when they were information. so some of the actions that he described a later, even though he doesn't describe them initially, would have just kind of been the norm to be in position.

if they were originally and parade rest, then as soldiers approach them, it would have not been out of context to then go to order of arms. to present arms, i get that. clearly, the sloot that he does come if he does that, would have been a personal thing, but i got the sense that there was some questioning of whether they would have done that. i think it wouldn't have been a crazy thought, even though chamberlin added it later. just as a hindsight to add being obviously a fan of chamberlin you are, i don't know if you are aware of this, maybe so, but to kind of give an example of his influence even in places you might not have anticipated. in greensboro, north carolina there is a baseball field, a minor-league baseball field, for the greensboro -- i forgot what they are now. that was built in the early 2000's. i was there recently and believe it or not, when you first and to

the field through the main gate, -- enter the field through the gate, up on the wall are the words that chamberlain presented, i believe, at the 50th -- when he says, in great things -- and great moments great things abide. i messed up the quote. sorry about that. i was shocked to see that quote first of all in the context of the war, and second of all in a southern location, especially north carolina. i thought that was an interesting thing. >> thank you very much for that. i do not know that. it confirms the sense that his legacy, his achievements circulate widely. the first part of what you say makes a lot of sense, but i do want to point out, again following something watts said, there is no script for the

surrender ceremony at appomattox. there are manuals of tactics and there are moves that -- that the soldiers would make if you order them to attention, they would do it this way. but nobody -- this had not happened before in the civil war, this kind of massive, as joan said, the other two surrenders the spend it all together. so the ceremony aspect of this thing is being made up on the fly. we don't know -- again -- grant doesn't mention it at all in his memoirs. he wasn't there, but he could have read about it. locke street -- lingstree -- longstreet doesn't mention it at all. so we are not sure what things

are being assumed as normal and what things are basically innovations that are happening at that moment spontaneously. i think -- i think skepticism is probably not a bad position to adopt. that word is just a greek word that means to judge. it is a good thing to judge evidence that is submitted to you, but it is the kind of skepticism that just assumed that nobody could ever do something from a noble motive that i think hits -- his story invites us to protest the game -- against. > in one of the accounts> you read, a more modern account, it said that chamberlin's unit was -- two burst perfectly -- to specifically participate in the ceremony. other accounts have said well, they were just the ones available. >> that is a perfect example.

chamberlin had nothing to do with being a member of the fifth corps. it had nothing to do that the fifth corps was the last unit of the army, so, how lucky for him there he is. the idea that he was selected for his bravery -- grant mentions chamberlain once in his memoirs, and that is the story during the petersburg evacuation. so, there is no -- grant could have said i selected the sky for his bravery to do the ceremony, but he doesn't say it. it may be what william may say is he was the right guy at the right time. he made hay with the fact that he was in the situation and carrying out the orders. ok, that is it. thank you very much. [applause]

>> all right. we have a 15 minute break before held comes to the state -- harol d comes to the stage. >> [indistinct chatter] >> we will come back to gettysburg college for more of their conference in just a few minutes. when we do come back from the break, we will hear from harold holder, the winner of the 2013 lincoln prize. his topic is lincoln and the press. they will have a lunch break from 12:00 to 1:00 where we will

hear about how presidents interpret the constitution. and the program continues until 2:00 where we will hear about the medical crisis of a emancipation. we join our c-span cities tour as they exploit the history of key west, florida. -- explore the history of key west, florida. >> the really sad part though, is that a lot of them were really, really sick from being on board the ships. the slaving crews really -- it was all about making money and wasn't about taking care of people. very sadly, 295 people died during their time here in key west. and they were buried in graves on the south shore of the island. this is the story of three slave

ships that were -- wound up in key west in 1860. the very tail and, the dying days -- end the dying days of the atlantic slave trade. a lot of people started questioning really seriously the morality of it all. and you started seeing the -- the end of the trade itself. 1807, england outlaws betrayed across the ocean. 1808, the united states is saying the same. in 1820, other countries, spain, and so on. that didn't mean the people that were already here could get out of sale every -- get out of slavery. of course, there was a lot of money to be made in this business so after the early 1800s, a clandestine slave trade sprung up and we start seeing

illegal slave ships crossing the ocean and a steady stream from africa to the americas, bringing people -- even though it was wholly illegal and they could be caught and charged as criminals -- people did it anyway. in the 19th century cuba sort of coinciding with the end of the legal transatlantic slave trade, cuba's sugar industry really started to take off. and in the early and mid-1800s, cuba began to become the world's largest producer of sugar. and to keep that industry moving forward and successful require a huge amount of slave labor. they had predicated the hope business on slavery and to keep what was really the -- their key to success moving toward required more and more and more

captive african people to be brought in to cuba to make the plantations thrive. in 1860, at the illegal slave trade -- really in 1859 -- was starting to escalate again. and what we are seeing at this time as a lot of american slave ships from places like new orleans and new york going to africa getting people, and then carrying them to cuba to sell them to the sugar industry there. despite in 1859 really just triggered an outcry and our government decided enough is enough. there are too many americans participating in this. we wanted to and it for decades now. we are really going to put our thumbs down and eradicate this.

so president buchanan ordered a blockade of cuba by the u.s. navy and he stationed for -- four united states steamers around cuba. the purpose of the ships was to intercept american slavers going into the islands. and in the spring of 1860, they saw some tremendous success. first and april, the intercepted -- in april, the intercepted the american wildfire sailing out of new york. a week later they intercepted a slave or william. and a week later another one. these three ships each had roughly 500 people on board. the navy crews to control of the -- the slave ships they toted

them here to key west because -- toew -- towed them here to key west because key west was a naval port. they arrived over that three or four week period 1432 african people from those three ships. the crews were jailed, the ships were seized and auctioned, the people than -- the african people -- were housed here on the island for the summer of 1860 until something could be figured out to do with them. they were taken charge of by the u.s. government. the u.s. marshal, imad named fernando marino -- a man named fernando moreno. the bear cones -- the barricades were enclosed. they had a place to sleep, they had a hospital, they had a

kitchen. and those people lived for those months in that compound until an answer could be figured out for what to do with them. we do know a little bit about the people that were here in key west. we know that two of the ships the wildfire and the william had gone to the congo river and acquired people from their, from that area -- there, from that area. we know the bogota had acquired people from a different area. they were all from different cultures. some of them couldn't even speak to each other because they had different languages and different cultures entirely. we know a little bit about the time here in key west. a mother and her daughter arrived here in key west on the wildfire, the for ship that came here. -- first ship that came here. they were in the compound a --

and a week later, the william arrived. there are accounts written that this woman, as she watched through the fence as the people from the william arrived, she started going crazy. screaming with excitement and joy. two of her other family members -- it was not clear if it was her daughters or nieces -- arrived on the william. so you have this sort of family reunion here in key west of people that didn't know what had happened to each other. but there they are, they are back together again. and they were, you know, so thrilled to be together. they never left the compound. they weren't allowed to. they were considered wild africans and there were not quite sure even if these people were, you know, whole humans sometimes. but they were interesting to the people here in key west. they were interesting to people

that were visiting key west. so they would go down and they would watch through the fence and watch these people. so we know that they spent their days drumming. they took barrels and things that were provided to them and use them as drums. they would spend their days drumming and dancing. so, their time here -- they took as good of care of them as they could. there were three doctors and interfering -- and a nursing staff working 24 hours a day. the really sad part is that a lot of them are really, really sick from being on board the ships. they were not well taken care of. the slaving crews really -- it was all about making money and wasn't about taking care of people. so a lot of them were very ill and really just couldn't recover from their illnesses. very sadly, 295 people died during that time here in key west.

and they were buried in graves on the south shore of the island. we do have records of that. there was great debate amongst our government and the representatives and the president as to what the answer was. some people said, oh, they are here already, just put them into slavery. we could use them in some of the plantations here. others said, no, these are free people. they should be liberated into the united states. the final answer was neither one of those. the final answer was -- let's just send them to liberia. liberia had been established in the 1820's by the united states and a group called the american colonization society as sort of a -- a -- a refuge on the west coast of africa for liberated slaves freedmen, as well as

these people captured from slave ships that they called re-captives. when they cross the ocean again to go to liberia, even more people died because even though they were meant to be taken care of in this re-crossing of the atlantic, again, they were too sick to really do it. the food wasn't adequate. and another couple hundred people died crossing the ocean again. so by the time they all arrived in liberia, there were fewer than half the number that had started out in the original crossing. here at the maritime museum, we have had a strong interest in the slave trade. we studied a shipwreck for quite a while. and that was a london-based slaver that wrecked in the 7000. we have really been able to shed a lot of light on the slave trade from those early days. with that interest, we have

always kept her eyes open for other interesting slave trade related stories. and there was a -- a historian working here in the keys named dale swanson -- gale swanson. and she had uncovered some information from a map from 1861 key west showing a notation called african cemetery on it. and she figured that had to relate to this story, which was already known in key west, about the 1860 event. and so we decided to zero in on where that site might be. and then looked at it and said ok, what is the best way to survey the area? we are not going through with shovels and looking for graves and bones, so we settled on ground penetrating radar survey. in our area of interest. we brought in a specialist to help us with that.

surveyed our area, and low and behold within two hours, we started finding graves. exactly where we thought they would be. and that was in 2002. wonderful discovery to be able to have not only this rich history, but now a physical present here still to remind us of these events. and it has just been wonderful. the community has been very supportive. there is now a memorial built over that site and we have since done other surveys and found even more graves in -- in this area, the thought in -- the southern shore of key west. a really tremendous site and a reminder of, you know, not only the transatlantic slave trade but a reminder of the poor

people that were caught up in this whole mess and really died for nothing. >> johnson was 54 years old and an invalid when she was thrust into the role of first lady. as her husband navigated the turbulent and -- end to the civil war. this sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's original series "first ladies." their influence on the presidency from martha washington to michelle obama. sundays at 8:00 p.m. eastern on "american history tv." >> we are back now to our live coverage at gettysburg college in pennsylvania for a conference on the end of the civil war and its aftermath. we will hear from harold the

winner of the 2015 lincoln prize. he is talking about the lincoln and the press. this is live coverage on "american history tv," on c-span3. >> [indistinct chatter] >> ok, can we get seated, please? all right. we are going to wrap up our morning talks. with harold. harold is a familiar face to the audience this year at cwi. he has been a longtime contributor and he is a leading expert on the presidency of abraham lincoln. he has authored, edited, and

co-authored more than 50 titles related to the civil war. is that correct? 50. i said that. he is right that 50 right now. he is terrific, as you all know. there will be a real spike in his production because in july he is retiring from his daytime job, which is at the metropolitan museum of art. now you have all this free time to be able to devote to scholarly endeavors. as you all know, his books are wildly popular. his most recent book "lincoln and the power of the press," it is the most recent recipient of the lincoln prize. so, i am very pleased to introduce harold. 2[applause] [applause]

>> thank you, peter. wow, what a great view of all of you. it is wonderful to be back at the cwi. peter calls me a regular visitor, so he has to make sure that that is the case. we love coming back to gettysburg and particularly seeing so many i do want to see old friends, but friends who we like to see often. and i am going to speak on -- on the press and lincoln. i entitled the talk, "like an and the press: the last full measure." but a little truth in advertising i am not going to talk only about the end of the press' relation with lincoln's i want to offer some context to get to that point and i cannot resist doing local context when you are actually present in the most inspiring civil war venue

in the united states. bear that in mind as i me and her here. 150 years ago, this month, the last tribute among the first wave of eulogies for lincoln -- and that is praised by the newspapers following his assassination and funeral -- finally begin to yield to the inevitable resumption of business as usual by the press highly partisan responses in this case to the first effort by democratic and republican military and civilian officials to define their visions of reunion and reconstruction. but for the months leading up to say, july 1865, opposition editors who had long describes the late president -- described the late president as a tyrant had been likening him not to a caesar, but to a saint.

it was the last full measure of a once very partisan press response to abraham lincoln. the last full measure and also the first draft of lincoln biography and civil war history. take the "new york daily news," not the same as the current daily news. harassed by the lincoln administration only four years earlier, its editors threatened it had been expressing profound emotions in common with grieved and horror stricken people. the new york world shut down by presidential order in 1864 now gravely reported every heart must suffer the terrible shock and swell with overburdening grief at the calamity which has been permitted to befall us. i always like their language. he speaks so beautifully about the language of civil war

writing. it would be terrible if the world admitted to creating the actions that inspired the assassination. it is a calamity that has been permitted by you know who to be followed. anyway tribute have been even more -- of an even more effusive nature came from the pages of republican papers. and so began what we call the first draft of history. but all press, like all politics, is inevitably local and, as i said, we want to go back to some reputation building moments that have their roots here in gettysburg. newsworthy events to say the least. historic events that occur right here. how the press covered them, or in some cases, did not cover them. and how legends were forged i missed the gloryamidst the glory -- admist the glory earned in

this historic time. keep in mind as i give you these examples that we are talking about a partisan press culture. democratic papers and republican papers who interpret politics and even military actions quite differently. not only that, we have to tensions -- two tensions operating at the same time. one is the overarching fear that the government will crack down as newspaper editors walk the thin line between dissent and what the administration and the military regards as treason. part of that is not just political. there is also a fine line, says the administration, between scoops -- is that still a word in the internet age? yes? a scoop is when a reporter has

the first story, the first report on a story. so what is the difference between a scoop and giving aid and comfort to the enemy with a report that shouldn't be published? that is not a modern expression -- age -- aiden comfort to the enemy. -- aud and -- aid and comfort to the enemy. i want to go back to 1863 to begin not with lincoln and the press, but with joe hooker and to the press. he might have easily been the commander of the army of the potomac at gettysburg. the press liked general hooker. he was charismatic, he was newsworthy, he talked to the press, he drank with the press. it didn't get -- i mean -- things got a little different. except to say he was a terrible commander.

hooker, of course, immediately worried that he had been to chumming with the press -- too chumming with the press. an interesting report i found that hooker went awol after chancellorsville and snuck into washington for one have his infamous evenings of revelry whether the word hooker was actually created after general hooker, no one is sure. but he was in washington reportedly without permission of the war department and he wrote a letter to lincoln saying don't believe what you read in the press about me. he is perfectly happy to have lincoln believe how terrific u.s., but not now. and lincoln wrote back -- i'm sorry, poker rights to lincoln don't believe anymore than what you choose of what is in the associated press dispatches concerning me tomorrow. this is june 26, 1823. think how close it is to what happened here a week later.

lincoln replied the next day, in a wonderful letter, he says, don't think about the negative reports. i heard about you. they did not come from the newspapers in any case. [applause] -- [laughter] i like that. look, of course the president no longer believes in hooker because he replaces him. meanwhile, keep in mind that only -- lee is chiding his course. by reading the guide to troop movements. it is true, the same day as hooker is worrying about lincoln , june 26, the editor of a federal grand jury in washington brought charges against william harding, the editor of the

"philadelphia inquirer." for treason, for printing information, and i quote concerning the army movement to the aiden comfort of those -- aid and comfort of those engaged in rebellion against the united states. reputation changing reports fear that lee is reading the "philadelphia inquirer," based on where reports of poker is. of course, now, we have general mead on the scene. mead fending off lee here at gettysburg. and mead might have become the great hero of the civil war. indeed even a great hero of the civil war. but to the press, he was a villain. one of those generals who hated journalists, and there were plenty of them and who inspired the same reaction in response. sherman is another story, but

sherman, as i always say, is too big to fail. mead is not too big to fail. mead is angry about press coverage always. he expels a "new york times" reporter because he criticized mead after gettysburg. mead's reaction is based on not to lincoln's famous unsent letter you have prolonged the war, you should have gone after lee. we all know, i think, that lincoln wrote this agonizing letter to mead about what a terrible blunder he had made about not being more aggressive after gettysburg into pursuing lee into virginia. and we know he pocketed it, a great example of his severance and lack of ego and his brilliant management style. get everything off your chest but don't humiliate people. may be all true, but some people have inferred from that that no one criticized mead until later

for not pursuing lee. the press was all over him. lee -- said that lee's escape is the greatest blunder of the war. and that was saying a lot in july 1863 for the union side. mead is unpopular and his unpopularity dates back to when -- when he had written a cold -- ridiculed one correspondent. he can cut it to his wife that you're sure you would not get any credit for any of the battles he was fighting. later, mead not realizing he is cutting off his nose, he orders the arrest of a new york tribune reporter named william kent for filing stories quotes, full of malicious falsehoods. he would have arrested thomas cook of the new york herald are roads that lincoln plan to

relieve mead, but cook left cap just ahead of his paper. there -- all of the papers were prounion papers. pro-administration papers. of course, whatever mead's version to the press and they to him, gettysburg produced a flood of celebratory press coverage in the north. the "new york times" immediately called it the most abundant triumph of the war. it is interesting, southern accounts of what was going on july 1 through fourth 1863 were quite different. one paper as close as richmond reported that the confederate army had routed the union and taking 40,000 union prisoners. branching northern reports of mead's victory a yankee lie. a vicksburg paper printed on wallpaper, no less, published

one day shy of playing time -- town in the wake of the occupation by ulysses s grant erroneously declared, today maryland is ours. tomorrow, pennsylvania will be. and the next day, ohio. but in at least one instance, the battle inspired pure poetry. samuel wilkinson of the "new york times" -- knowing that his own son was serving here, he arrived in gettysburg on the evening of july 1. only to learn that his boy had been struck by an artillery shell and mortars in a field hospital when union forces retreated. young wilkinson died that first night. who can read the history of a battle whose eyes are a movably fastened upon the central figure of transcendentally absorbing

interest, wilkinson wrote in a very brave story published a few days later. stephen talked about rewriting and enriching language. for better or for worse. this is wilkinson's first draft of what had happened. absorbing interest, the dead body of an oldest born crushed by a shell in a position where batteries should never have been sent and abandoned to death at a building where they gain -- there not stray. -- dare not stray. and then elevating journalism almost to scripture, he added my pen is heavy. oh, you dead who at gettysburg have baptized with your blood the second birth of freedom in america. how you are envied. did lincoln himself read those words? no one knows, but they certainly won enough acclaim to compel his

attention even during this time where he sort of ended a lifetime of reading newspapers almost obsessively. he just didn't have the time even to read news summaries. but if you did read the story that one phrase may have inspired him because with his own new birth of freedom declaration, obviously, he would eventually consecrate all of the suffering and all of the casualties here at gettysburg. back to mead for a moment. in the midst of the triumphs that follows life, he learns a little from his experiences with the press here and elsewhere. a full year after gettysburg, he punished a philadelphia journalist named edward cropsey for supposedly libelous statements. in other words, writing something critical about george g mead.

before banishing him from cap which was sort of his right, mead forced him to march their camp, carrying a sign reading liebler of the press. -- libeler of the press. mead boasts in a letter to his wife that the sentence, as he puts it, was carried out to the delight of the or me -- of the whole army. journalists reacted by ignoring mead and their subsequent dispatches, except to report his failures. although he continues technically to command the army of the potomac for the duration journalists began treating him as if you no longer existed. later, the first generation of wartime memoirs, many compiled by former war correspondent, did likewise. unlike sherman again too big

to be ignored, mead's hostility contributed to a future in visibility, at least in the rank he may have thought he deserved and maybe dead. after 1863, the reporters who had been or became his victims wrote him out of the civil war. his troops may have been baptized in blood, their general was buried in ink, or at least the absence of ink. in some ways, however, and i'm going to skip ahead a few months the other union leader who made his mark here at gettysburg was a suspicious -- as suspicious of the press as mead, though nether -- never as clumsy in dealing with them. and i am speaking of abraham lincoln. -- working closely with

republican newspapers, working in their headquarters, using their headquarters as his plotting strategy with newspaper editors, etc. of course, he mastered this not just by befriending reporters and that was a big part of it. he visited reporters everywhere he went. and annoyed at first, they always inevitably were charmed by him and his knowledge of local politics. i saw it again and again in reading the memoirs of the most obscure editors in illinois, for example. but there was something more, which was not just his charm. it was the fact that if you link your star or whatever the expression is to a rising politician, you don't expect just to say after election day i'm so proud that i helped this fellow i will tell my children and grandchildren about my -- my good intentions. you expect reward and newspaper editors got rewards.

they got advertising contracts. they got printing contracts. if the leaders they supported became successful. most of all, they got patronage jobs. and lincoln had lots of reporters and editors on the federal payroll, both civilian and military, during the civil war. there was a joke that was rooted about in the early days that the new york tribune would not be able to publish anymore daily additions because so many editors have been named to diplomatic posts. so there was a lot of patriotism. again, also, suppression. the newspapers who disagreed with lincoln were subject to very close scrutiny once the war started. in one case i always talk about and it starts in the border states, of course, which lincoln cannot afford to have secede and he thinks newspaper editorials

supporting secession are dangerous and are to be suppressed. one of the victims of that policy early in the conflict, even before -- or right after sumter is an editor named francis key howard, editor of a baltimore paper, a democratic paper. he is arrested and sent, ironically enough, to prison in fort mchenry. some of you are laughing because you get it. francis key howard's grandfather had seen the star-spangled banner waving at fort mchenry 50 years earlier. and, of course, written the national anthem. that was not the case in 1861. after the battle of bull run and i think kind of the shame that some of the volunteers felt as they were returning after their first enlistment, there was a huge, dozens more, cases of suppression and censorship

confiscation of printing presses, banning of newspapers the detaining of editors and mob attacks that were tolerated or even participated in by the army. but this vast outbreak was not restricted to the early days of the war. as close to the battle of gettysburg as january 1963, a union general i read it -- arrested the editor of the philadelphia evening journal unleashing an uproar in the pennsylvania legislature about the efficacy -- efficacy of military control where the civil courts were in operation. huge conflicts that lincoln were not very -- was not very happy about. and to keep this. it's -- to keep this period in context, in 1863 following the

arrest, trial, and conviction on former or how democratic congressman -- , union general burnside, who was equally popular with the press, ordered the shutdown of the democratic chicago times for criticizing the arrest and the banishment to the confederacy. that was quite a moment for lincoln because oh, you must have at least take a few moments of pleasure. the chicago times had been criticizing him for almost 10 years. he must have loved the idea of the editor being detained just a little bit. and the newspaper shut down for a few days, but ultimately he reversed the order. he never said it was improper to interfere with the press. he said to the chicago times, i can only say i was embarrassed with the question between what was due to military service on

the one hand and the liberty of the press on the other. sort of a tortured double negative that betrays the delicate balancing act that haunted him. and he admitted, i am far from certain today that the revocation was not right. that is a double negative. far from certain that the revocation, which is a negative, was not right. in other words, maybe he should have let the chicago times stay shut down. lincoln also found a way to deal with the press by bypassing the press, and that is crafting these series of special messages or letters. we call them public letters. that did not require him to give speeches because in this period, presidents did not give public speeches except for their inaugural adjusts. lincoln issues --

publishes letters so that the people can directly read his thoughts. comments to be made by editors later. so this is lincoln's mastery of the press. of course, he had -- though he had used the public letter format to prepare the country for the emancipation proclamation, no public oratory connected directly with that most important act of his administration or, as he put it, the most important act of the 19th century, there is the one invitation he cannot resist, gettysburg. and he thought about his ideas even before he got the invitation. how long ago is it, he said, from the white house after the victory. 80 odd years since on the fourth

of july for the first time in the history of the world, a nation by its representatives assembled and declared as a self-evident truth that all men are created equal. the following morning, those ramblings impromptu words appeared in the press and lincoln may have been embarrassed when he read them. not his finest moment. but the thought behind them seemed perfect. and he will resolved -- he resolved to express it more when he got an opportunity to do so. and that opportunity was here, and of course it came out with a great exordium, four score and seven years ago etc. for his closing, maybe he remembered samuel wilkinson's obituary to his fallen son. the second birth of freedom in america. the nation would now be dedicated to a new birth of freedom.

he has written about this in his book on the gettysburg address. lincoln had not lost at his prodigious memory for press reports nor his abundant gift for rewriting. that is the whole of the story. not only a great writer, but a great rewriter. a few days before his trip, he had soft to the photographer alexander gardner's washington gallery to have some pictures made. more on that later today in this conference but during the session, which is amazing to me because he always seems to have his photograph taken around the time of important moment in his life, oratory moments. cooper union, the first inaugural, gettysburg, the second inaugural. noah brooks, a correspondent, is there at the scene. have you written your remarks yet? yes, but not yet finished. his draft was brief, or as he

expressed it to brooks, short, short, short. for those of you who have heard james mcpherson speak last night about lincoln's advice to law students work, work, work, lincoln liked these triplets. of the people, by the people for the people. so he embarks from gettysburg the day before the ceremony. not alone. among the passengers are his secretary, who double as press secretaries. and the core of supportive reporters prepared to pick up the slack if positive coverage falters. lincoln goes, as we know, to the home of david wells on the town diamond. but his two secretaries did not rest or even work with him. they go over to hang out with a man named john, one of the

favorite characters i wrote about in my book. the editor of two newspapers. the philadelphia press and a pro-lincoln paper into a daily during the war, the washington chronicle. he looked a lot like bill murray. i am almost sorry i didn't have a slide of him. picture bill murray. he was drinking a lot. that evening. and was feeling a little ugly and dangerous, he writes, particularly on the subject -- he wants them out of the cabinet. so they go over and -- and instigate him to get his own gettysburg address. the street. this figure who is not considered a guy of great humor is the one who eggs him on. the prankster of the two is

horrified because they are -- there are journalists all around. if i speak, i was speak my mind, he says. so he actually gets a reporter to take notes and gets a brass band to play in his honor first.

lincoln is now the next morning, at gettysburg, at the cemetery. i do not know if john wayne ever sobered up enough to get to the cemetery. there is no proof that he was on the stage. he might have had the most colossal hangover, and having been a veteran, i know you have to do a lot of jerking to -- lot of drinking to set the record. john russell young, who told

someone to be quiet and told the press to not write about it, turned to lincoln. imagine, the people who stand in back of obama during speeches. lincoln stops the speech, positive, and john russell young said, is that all? lincoln glanced at him, and said yes. meanwhile, his friend is on the stand. the most important person -- a young man named joseph gilbert. young, very young harrisburg-based reporter, hired

by the associated press to cover the gettysburg address he later claims that he has become so fascinated by lincoln's earnestness that he intentionally stopped taking notes. just as lincoln glanced up, he remembered -- he lived almost as long as chamberlain and gave talks well into his 60's and 70's. he glanced up, appealing to the few thousand below him, whose his words were to reach. one of the interesting secrets of the gettysburg transcripts is that gilbert shows is copied to lincoln and lincoln does some work on it -- gilbert constructs the first draft of history, the first nationally released report

of the gettysburg address, complete with mistakes, by the way. but, lincoln approved it. the most remarkable thing -- i will give you an example. "the government by and for the people," came out as "the governments." had it not been for joseph gilbert, the biggest story of lincoln's presidency, as far as oratory might have been missed

entirely. here is the contingency of an ap reporter getting a helping hand from lincoln after a two minute speech. without it, i don't know what would have happened in press coverage. as it was, the media coverage was not strong. everett dominated the press coverage. why? it was not the greatest speech but it is making a comeback. the veteran, well past of time, lincoln joked that he did not know why it was famous. he was sort of just famous for being famous. he was still clever enough to plan things very well. although, he told lincoln later that he wished this he could say what lincoln said in two minutes

. he arranged for the printing of his two-hour oration, and distribute to editors around the country. theiry preset in type. everett speech in a really covered nearly the entire front page with abraham lincoln's brief address, if appearing at all on page one, relegated to the right-hand corner. there were a lot of difficulties -- i'm trying to say -- for reporters and covering the war. circumstances made it difficult, contingencies, censorship, administrative censorship made it difficult. contingency did not work on april 4, 1865, when lincoln entered richmond. imagine the present of the

united states making a trip to a war zone, which both president obama and president bush did to the middle east, without press to broadcast it or report on it. lincoln's visit to richmond was ventured only with his son at his side, and a few guards that were with him. there was a small knot of journalists in richmond, but they were not expecting lincoln anymore than the african-americans that gather joyfully to greet him. i always thought that the journalists who heard about lincoln's arrival, has something to do with that perception. i am wondering, or i have always wondered, how did african-americans know -- enslaved people know -- what

abraham lincoln looks like. if the president united states arrives with no fanfare, how do they know? well, admiral porter and perhaps the journal said, that is father abraham. whatever the reason, dozens, hundreds of african-americans bitterly freed by his arrival in some sense swarm around him joyfully. one elderly man fell upon his knees before the president and kissed his feet, prompting lincoln to please, do not kneel to me, that is not right. you must kneel only to god, and thank him for the liberty you will enjoy. a scene" not -- a scene and a

quote not recorded by the press but by a navy man. they did not write about the african-americans who welcome lincoln. they wrote about how abraham lincoln cap swiveling in different -- jefferson davis's chair, and running his fingers through his hair. the tribune could not talk about the reception by african-americans, but the following -- it is not known if the occasion reminded president lincoln of a funny story, but it is to be presumed that it did. once again, then your journalist, i believe they

missed the gettysburg address and a certain sense, they missed lincoln's arrival in richmond. fortunately, thomas mars chester, and african-american correspondent, working for the philadelphia press reported that one enthusiastic negro woman greeted the president by saying, i know that i am free for i have seen father abraham and felt them. the boston journal's correspondent caught up just in time to write. this is a report that i would like to believe. this is a beautiful one. an old negro removing his hat to him with tears of joy rolling down his cheeks. in response, the president removed his hat, and bowed in

silence. a very quiet moment of mutual respect. that small, but momentous, gesture upset the forms laws, customs, and ceremonies of centuries. it may be as important, even if temporary, in the story of reconciliation of the story of chamberlain and gordon. back in washington, the ap's bureau chief who had tonsils with lincoln over access to o early stories, watch lincoln gave his reconstruction address on april 11. reports on lincoln are beginning to change. i had never seen him so quietly happy. it seemed that his tall form had

received an additional foot of stature. three nights later, goldberg was sitting alone in his office, as he reported having filed his last dispatch. shortly after 10:00 he put it, maybe a little early in his recollection, he found the -- he heard the sound of boots steps and then a loud pounding on his door. a breathless person throws the door open. it is a friend of his. he said, i was just sitting in ford's theater, watching a play, and the actor wilkes booth shot at the present. the doctors are attending to him. gold bright says, this better be right because i going to file a dispatch. the man is clearly telling the truth, goldberg knows him. he then sends out what is

probably the most famous dispatch of the entire civil war. and, utterly harrowing in its simplicity. the president was shot in the theater tonight, and is perhaps mortally wounded. gold bright than races to the scene with his friend. ford's theater is abandoned. he goes in. he actually gets to the presidential box. as he puts it, we saw the chair where the president sat during the presentation. we could see. as it turns out it probably was not lincoln's blood, but they saw blood. then, he gets down on his hands and knees to feel what is there.

he feels a handle, and list up -- lifts up the dagger that only hours before john wilkes booth had plunged into the major. it is then taken from him for evidence. he tries to get into the peterson house, but is told that he cannot come in. then, he goes back to his office on 14th street and rights of full account, as he puts it, of that night's occurrences. though my fingers were nervous and troubling, he said, he had a job to do. he did it. as lincoln's body was carried back to the white house the three newspapers, the major newspapers of new york that had covered him over the four years and distinctively -- in

distinctly different ways, not always distinguished or distinctive. the herald, the tribune and "the new york times" had disagreed on just about everything. now, they produced thick black headlines that remarkably echoed not only the nation's grief, but each other. "our loss, the great national calamity." "our great loss, the national calamity." lincoln had died, by the way with a wallet full of interesting objects including a

bunch of carefully clipped newspaper cuttings. i have seen a lot of articles that lincoln clipped over the years. i think he did them, because sometimes he would just write descriptions. he was very careful about it. guess what, they were all praiseworthy editorials about him. he liked to keep his good press on hand so that if anyone asked what is new in the press -- he could say, look at this. beecher had helped introduce him to cooper union five years earlier and had been sometimes a supporter or sometimes a critic. now, he writes, lincoln may well be another jackson.

having suffered for four years, he is now entitled to four years of teeth. how do we take the last full measure of the press reports on abraham lincoln and the civil war? we take it with the proverbial historical grain of salt. a lot of the reports are written through the filter of partisan politics. a lot of it is constrained by censorship and prohibited by the fear that is it may be interpreted by eight and comfort to the enemy. i love the fact that after the assassination, the three rival new york dailies spoke with one voice. they finally found something that they could agree about, and it was the assassination. you can be absolutely sure, i

miss the rivalries that had existed for so long, within one week of the funeral, they return to the practice of assassinating one another. that is one of the great lessons of civil war journalism that i have enjoyed sharing with you this morning. thank you. [applause] we have time for a few questions. hi. wait until the mic is on, right? here comes someone to help. >> yeah. hi. sherman was famous with his

hatred for the press. where there any examples of certain papers are certain reporters that sherman allowed? >> i was hoping you would ask for a great anecdote about his heart hand against journalists. you know, he had this wonderful quote after he was prevented by lincoln, who conveyed his orders through general grant, because he didn't want to adjust sherman directly. he was going to have a court-martial hopefully executed for traveling with his army. sherman was infuriated that the court-martial proceedings ended. he testified in the case twice before was ended, was suspended. he wrote, i'm paraphrasing, to

our army bearing a musket, and you will be accepted. come with just a pen, and you will be treated as the coward that you are. what my friend john said, he never met a journalist that he did not hate. the remarkable thing is that he emerges from the civil war certainly unpopular in the south, but revered in the north, leaving out greensboro. even the press could not write him down. remember in 1861, some journalists had declared that he had gone temporarily insane. that was a story that heard him deeply. it may have been true, but he believed it would cripple him professionally. he never forgive the press after that.

my favorite sherman press story is that sherman happens to be at a railroad station, and t a train pulls and -- i think in ohio -- and a person gets up to say, i'm here to cover the war i hope to speak to you. sherman takes out his pocket watch and says, it is now 2:50 there is a train out at 3:10, be on it. >> recently in hanover, i uncovered a story of the apparent only female journalist to cover the gettysburg address. allegedly, she was one of the few praising the address. can you confirm that there were

really not many pro-lincoln journalists present at the gettysburg address. the republican papers praised it, but apparently a lot of these people were not there. >> good question. forney was here. john russell is here. the ap was here. the ap is reasonably loyal, or else they can get to the wire. in a sense, it almost doesn't matter. the reputation of the speech is built not on the crowd reaction, which is of course disputed, and still disputed -- do they like it, did they not? lincoln knows it is about the reprints and the editorial.

that is why he works with gilbert to make sure the text is accurate enough to be representative of what he said like "under god," which he adds as he speaks. the press is partisan in nature. it has to be for -- "the chicago tribune" says that his speech will live in the annals of the war. it all depends on which position party you are writing from. the shorthand answer is lincoln brings some journalist here, but it all depends on the reprints. >> mike, smithtown, new york.

i was wondering if you found in your research anyway that lincoln altered the champions of the press during the election. >> how did lincoln alter his treatment. press crackdown happen throughout the war. in fact, i found evidence of one that to laze in january 1865, when you think he would have just cold ooled it already. kentucky missouri -- one of the western boarder states. a guy wrote a passionate letter to lincoln to say, please reopen. one religious paper was shut down in maryland in 1861. then, the guide announces him -- denounces him as a tyrant. i found press suppression, which

was a continuing thing, stopped during to key periods throughout the war though elections are a continuous thing. in the 1862 congressional campaign, and again during the other camping, lincoln and others do not enforce the same sort of censorship that they did before. it is almost that lincoln believes that the political process is so sacred. he shuts down the "new york world" on june 8. after he gets the nomination, the paper goes after him with a vengeance, issuing political cartoons saying that he is

creating a biracial society heaven for bid that africans and whites will co-mingle. they write that he came to antietam and requested a song. lincoln got so angry that he drafted a letter to the editor, one of the famous letters that he does not send, but he does not shut them down. he even allows the editor of the tribute to become a self appointed ambassador to conduct peace negotiations and could -- in canada. good question. >> i am mark, i work at the frederick douglass house and washington, d.c.. my question is if we know if lincoln followed the abolitionist press and was

there any sort of fear of their criticisms of him early on that he was not acting fast enough? >> i think he did follow the abolitionist press to some degree. no one knows whether he read frederick douglas's paper. to some degree, it is a little glib i said in my book, but had abraham lincoln been caught reading and african-american newspaper, it is equivalent to a modern-day politician looking up or not murphy. i'm not sure that he read frederick douglas's d papers, but he talks about in 1859, "right makes might your code and in 1860, at his speech and

cooper union, lincoln says the same. i know that he read pearson. we know he read the "new york independent." again, you don't talk about the extremist press because to talk about in the main street wil world it was not acceptable. it collocated issue. one more. really quick question. i did not see you. sorry. maybe i will be so quick that i can do you. >> can you, as to meet and

singles after sickle said he would vindicate the battle and say who the real hero was and who wasn't. >> no. it is a good story. i do not mean to be dismissive. >> i was just curious as to what forces may have been play why there are critics -- why the critics had such a quick turnaround, and if that was common in other presidential assassinations? >> his was the first. there was the fear that you have to be on the page when such an occurrence takes place. it is unprecedented. the readers are grieving. as martha and others have pointed out, and i did in a new book that i did called "president lincoln

assassinated," there are plenty of southern newspapers there are not quite as friendly about the passing of lincoln. there are some liberal republican papers that editorialize, a few days after maybe he was too forgiving and god has interfered, and gotten a more sophisticated and deft politician to manage reconstruction. thank you. [applause] >> thank you so much, harold. if you can sit tight for just a moment, we have a few instructions before we head off to lunch. >> i will be very quick, i promise. three quick things. for anyone interested in the