>> weekends on c-span two are an intellectual feast. every saturday, american history tv tells us an american story. and onsunday, book tv brings you little latest in nonfiction books. funding from c-span two comes from these television companies and more, including charger telecommunications. >> broadband is a force for empowerment. that's why, charger has invested billion, building infrastructure, upgrading technology, empowering opportunity, and communities big and small. charter is connecting us. >> charter communications, along with these television companies, support c-span 2 as a public service. >> welcome to the second part of the big 1862 roundtable. my connecticut, and i wil name is manisha sinha and i'm the [inaudible] chair at in american history at the

university of connecticut, and i will be cheering and moderating this roundtable. i should also inform you of course again that the panel is being televised by c-span, and one of our speakers, mycah conner, will be zooming in for her remarks and, you can see her right here on the screen. unfortunately, another panelist, keri leigh merritt, had a family emergency a while ago, and let us know that you would not be able to participate today. so, just in terms of this panel, i would like to just put forward a few framing remarks on the 1862 moment, and then let the speakers go for ten minutes each, deliver their remarks, maybe talk amongst each other, raise some questions for each other. i'd be happy to facilitate that. and then we will open it up for q&a with the audience. and another reminder, do come up to the mic if you have a question. so in most conventional histories of the civil war, the year 1863 is often taken as the turning point of the war. the

year of significant union military victories at gettysburg and vicksburg, and most importantly, the year president abraham lincoln issued the historic emancipation proclamation. but from the vantage point of indian country in the west, 1862 emerges as a crucial marker during the war. a precursor to the brutal subjugation of planes indians, and the conquest of the west that would follow the civil war. i think this is the reason that the oah this year has convened this two part round table on 1862. as my colleague at uconn, nancy shoemaker, likes to tell you, you cannot do in american history without native american history. now, 1862 is the year of the u.s. dakota war, and over 300

warriors were condemned to death by the military. lincoln took the time to review the sentences carefully, and computed most of them, condemning 39 of the 303 dakota warriors to death. in the end, 38 were hanged, and that still constitutes the largest mass execution in u.s. history, as jimmy sweet just pointed out in the previous round table. 1862 is also the year of the [inaudible] background act, the pacific railway act, the internal revenue act, the homestead act. all these acts were predicated on the dispossession of native american nations, and it heralded the development of the american state. it is also the year that president lincoln issued his preliminary proclamation giving advance notice of his intention to issue the emancipation proclamation in 1863. now of course, the process of indian dispossession can be traced

back to the settlement of the north america by european colonists, accelerated mightily by the indian removals and the mexican war in the 19th century. and while there has been much historical scholarship recently, some done by our panelists, on a viewing of the civil war and reconstruction from the west, we still need to elaborate on how we may develop new historical narratives of the war that would combine both older and relatively new approaches to the war and 1862 in particular. today, our speakers will address these issues from varying perspectives. the histories of black emancipation and freed peoples struggles in the west, the history of the state and political ideologies in western history, and at least lincoln himself places like him himself squarely within that history. now i would also like to point out that there was a typo in the original destruction of the

1862 roundtable because they were initially conceived more broadly to cover the entire civil war, rather than just the year 1862. i ask for your forbearance on behalf of the organizers and the staff that put the program together in the midst of a pandemic. let's rest assured that we all know that the sand creek massacre of the arapaho and cheyenne peoples took place in 1864 and not in 1862. i would also like to thank [inaudible] barnes who conceived of these two round tables and the 1862 idea as was mentioned earlier, she could not be here, but she is the one who commandeered all of us in this panel and the earlier one to address this issue. so without further ado, let me introduce our panelists in the order in which they will speak. each panelist will speak, as i said earlier, for around ten minutes, and then we'll open up the discussion here first

amongst themselves, and then to the audience. and i'll introduce all of them in one goes so that they can continue, we can continue with the order of the program. hilary n. green in associate professor in the department of gender and race studies at the university of alabama. she is the author of educational reconstruction, african american schools in the urban south, 1865 to 1890, which was published by the university press in 2016. she's also the author of articles, but chapters and other scholarly publications. she is currently at work on the second book manuscript, tentatively titled, unforgettable sacrifice. this book examines how every day african americans remembered and commemorated the civil war from 1863 to the president. mycah conner, who is

joining us on the zoom right here, the screen, is a post doctoral scholar at [inaudible] penn state university. she received her ph. d. in history at harvard in 2021, her masters in history at harvard in 2014, and her bachelors in history at columbia university in the city of new york in 2011. the working title of her book manuscript is, quote, on this bare ground, the ordeal of freed peoples camps at the making of emancipation in the civil war west. her work has been supported by the charles warren center for american history at harvard university, and the mellon sawyer seminar on the politics of kinship at tufts university. and as i said earlier, she will be joining us virtually. heather cox richardson is professor of history at boston college and an expert on american political and economic history. she is the author of six books on american politics, including

most recently how the south won the civil war, oligarchy, democracy, and the continuing fight for the soul of america, which i have the pleasure to review in the nation. she is a leading two to historian, explaining the historical background of ma turn his stories through twitter thread, z coordinator of [inaudible] we are history, a web magazine of popular history, and the author of that is from an american, a chronicle of american politics. and she is too modest to add that she is the woman of the year named by u.s. today. michael queen is an associate professor of history in the university of nevada las vegas, department of history. he earned his b. a. and emmy at

unlv and his ph. d. at columbia university. he is the author of several books of the civil war era, most recently, lincoln and native americans, for the southern illinois university press series, the concisely library. he has also written several books on nevada history, most notably in the textbook, nevada, a history of the silver. stage two for roman and a history of the great basin for the university of arizona press. she he served as executive director of the pacific coast branch of the american historical association. the floor is all yours -- hillary? >> i want to thank people for coming out today. also to explore an act that most people talk about land grab universities. the moral act of 1862. thinking about the recent attention brought by land grab universities, digital humanities project, created

through investigative reporting and research is very public and very interactive digital tool which if you haven't looked at it, it's great for not just scholarship and ask questions before teaching and getting students to really think about education and institutions and railways. the moral act of 1862, and its finding of natural land grab institutions and other schools. published in march of 2020 in high country news under its education section, this project has garnered must praise, awards, but also scholarly contemplation. the native american and indigenous studies, a leading journal, devoted its spring 2021 issue to critical reflections on the project, including its methodology, research, and future questions that might be drawn and implications for critical university studies, institutional repair. it is

that we are talking about this at this roundtable. the act itself passed on july 2nd, 1862, that facilitated the creation of the state public colleges and universities through the development of sale of federal lands. this legislation that we talked about for the disposition of indigenous lands, for the benefit of predominately white americans. this dispossession occurred through, treaties agreements, seizure, we notice, we know that the federal government proved to be bad actors. negotiated treaties, are they really treaties? the violence both real and rhetorical was at the core of these federal policies. it is the beauty of the land grab university project that shows the real consequences of land loss and u.s. imperialism when the moral

act of 1862 committed the federal government to act each state 30,000 acres of public land, the issue of land scrip certificates for each of its senators in congress. the what is less understood, though, the morrill act also affected southern black education. here is where scholars, including myself, doing this work to we, talk about the second morrill act of 1890, which requires the creation of significant land institutions for black students, or missions not restricted by race. but the first act actually is used by kentucky state, alcorn, claflin, beginning a state university. alcorn is the first, 1871, it starts receive money. claflin and virginia state, called by other names, receive money in 1872. kentucky state received its first funds in

1897. the first act, not the second act. it's going to be reported that way. when we look at black education and the schools will we see biracial reconstructive constitutions, once public schools are created for black children, how states use this federal legislation that still on the books to find black education, to raise other money. that i think is -- more of its implications of land grant university. it shows the limits of reconstructive states ability to fund black education. and how they maximize all federal policies and funding initiatives to do so. at the expense of not providing any more money. it's like the state lottery today for education. and so when we look at these states where the

first morrill applied to the early hbcus we see that correlation between the diversity of those reconstruction act conventions, the creation of black schools, but also the dispossession of native americans that made it possible. and so i think one of the things that we have to not only use, look at that act, but more importantly, white supremacist governments that overthrew those reconstruction constitutions, they still use these acts. so you see the first morrill being used into the 20th century, for these hbcus. so we really see that government governments gave the bare minimum four back black higher education but also to -- and systematically under funded, but what does it mean they're also dispossessing native americans too? so it's black education, education, but also southern colonialism going

hand-in-hand. so this is where i think the grass land grant university project leads to a future of scholarship. and i want to raise additional directions for understanding the scope of the morrill act and the land grab university on its impact on marginalized communities of color writ large in the united states. which communities, indigenous communities specifically funded these initial hbcus? those hbcus acknowledge this funding and the impact on indigenous communities to adopt curriculum or admission policies? whom might their institutional reproductive? the schools were created for emancipated and discriminated individuals of predominantly southern black population, do these schools, like claflin, alcorn and others have responsibility and the same institutional burden as, say, ohio state and other large land grab pwrs? and i would argue they don't. but what is a institutional responsibility at

repair look like then? and if white southern legislatures truth federal money to pay for black education instead of using state appropriations, what are the states responsibilities for both tribal communities who they receive funding from and even the underfunded each piece the use that the use of money for in their own institution and states. and as i think we think about this anniversary i think the field can attend more to the finance of land grab university projects for understated and southern communication, emancipation, expansion of federal power, and the overlapping legacies of american institutions of higher ed for all people of color in the united states to. thank you [applause] >> mycah, could you unmute yourself and go ahead? >> yeah. thank you so much. and i really think the organizers and panelists for the

flexibility and this chance to participate in such an important conversation today. while trying to -- excuse me -- organize my thoughts for today, i read the description of part one and i thought i might begin with a line from it, that i've been thinking about. i wasn't able to see the first panel because i'm here so i don't know if the panelists in part one discussed this already but if so, please take my thoughts as an invitation, perhaps, to carry the subject into our discussion. the description refers to is a significant year of transforming a black life while devastating native america. and this way of putting it kind of reminded me of a line from a recent history of the war that the u.s. waged against the dakota people in 1862. and on lincoln and said,

quote, ironically, he was also working on the emancipation proclamation issue, january 1st 1863, which granted freedom to slaves in areas under confederate control. at the same time that he was forced to deal with those dakota who had lost their own freedom and equality, and quote. but i should say that this gives the proclamation perhaps too much credit when the words themselves free no one, but enslaved people had to go out and fight for their freedom. and that gets lost here. we can maybe talk about, you know, congress responding to their actions before lincoln did with a series of legislation they passed in 1862. but for now, i want to just focus on how we might look at getting freedom versus losing freedom or transformation versus devastation, in a different way. and i wonder if this

framework actually keeps us from understanding both the devastation and the violence of fighting and escaping the confederate project or slaveholding unionists, or at the same time eliding the history and survival work and future 80 of them to court to people during and after the wars. i work on the camps and other assemblies of self-eventuated people are free to people or refugees in the western and trans mississippi theaters of the civil war. and i write about how free people who weren't devastated not by freedom but by the violence of the confederate project, by slaveholders, by con man, by union soldiers and employees, by migrants. i wonder then if we can think of overlapping histories, than, of missionary

surveillance, of forced marches, of family separations, or the killings of children? aspects of the atrocities that were telling had [inaudible] were the union forces surrounded voiced to go to families [inaudible] in to do a camp surrounded by was [inaudible] it reminded me of why a study from the same time, atrocities on other banks of the mississippi river and rivers that connect to the mississippi river. it reminded me of the people escaping bondage on the sand at the steamer [inaudible] and executed by guerrillas on the banks of the missouri river. it reminded me of the success of expulsions of free people from places like camp nelson and and those deaths. i think of the hundreds of people who died building fort mcmurray in nashville, tenessee which

remains i think we're still being found in 2018 if, i'm not mistaken. so i wonder where as we think in terms of devastation for one and transformation for another or loss and gain. i wonder, could the camp or the violent practice of encampment represent the possible intersection of these histories, specifically can review it encampment or camps as sites of violence as battlefields in their own right and sides of the injustice of the u.s. government? good to have help us to see both the intersections and the difference of this history of, these histories, and that they need to be at odds. because if you look through the o. r. army you volumes of the official records of the rebellion. series one volumes or teen, you'll find calculations made against the dakota people on the same pages as calculations against people escaping

slavery. like there will be a tally of union forces following the attacks on the dakota people on the same page as samuel curtis instructing a brigadier general, the negroes of loyal men should be encouraged to stay at home and mind their business. so i think if we can change the framework from of one group receiving freedom and another group leaving it all one for being transformed and another devastated, we could form new questions about the ways for me and fine [inaudible] we could see perhaps removals as aspects of [inaudible] management of the free people in the midwest and the mississippi valley. others that would be the effort to clear southern illinois of escaping freed people left the republicans be accused of african icing illinois. whether that's the series of

relocations of freed people on two islands into the mississippi, like island number 10, or precedent island, which i'm trying to understand in my work. even looking east, you know, perhaps, bernard cox's exploitation of lincoln's early approach to the freed people, the mccall island disaster, where you know, cox took people from fort monroe to an island, where they were robbed. maybe, there is a repertoire of removal-ism, that can cut through these histories. and lincoln and another thing that it is 62 brings to me, you know, if i could say the union without bringing. , freeing any slaves and i would, save the union by freeing all the slaves i would do it, and i could save it by freeing some, living others alone. i would be that. these remarks, really, in

august 1862, are commonplace in history of the civil war and biographies and the precedent. they are direct in varying repercussions for people in bondage, perhaps, it's more commonplace. in order to do analysis of these repercussions, automatically, it accompanies another problem for mark from lincoln about slavery, his prediction in july 1862, that slavery and the border states wouldn't be ending by the mere friction of war. we know, lincoln is urging the patriots in a statement of the border states that would be in their interest to lose their grip on slavery by accepting a plan for gradual incompetence, to emancipate him, but when lincoln pop out this, and when he responded to greely and later, he outlined the tremendous life-threatening political compromise, you know, from the perspective of the people trying to escape bondage. it was a quite acceptance that the digitization of enslaved

people in states like kentucky, the largest and last stronghold of slavery in the union, and the state of the union. but his terms, friction, immigration, in-flight violence, pain, injury, he did not say exactly who will be rubbed raw, ground down, and for how long. who would be sacrificed. and i think of friction and abrasion as happening at places like kentucky in 1864. isabella mueller and joseph mueller, losing their children in their own live, after what -- must be driven out into the cold. but for some among us, there cannot be war lincoln told a delegation of black man trying to convince him to -- do not care for you one way or the other. rather than thinking of lincoln, i guess, as a grant or freedom anti take or freedom,

we could think of lincoln, the reasonable and diplomatic compared to his successor, as engaging in a politics of sacrifice, especially even, especially if he even for a moment thought that the members of the black delegation, for instance, had an obligation to sacrifice themselves to give up their homes and lives because their presence was the cause of the war. that for me is one of the darker meanings of lincoln's friction and operation idea, and of 1862. so i'll end my comments there. >> [applause] i too want to thank the organizers for inviting me to do this and to say it's a real pretty true to be here with these funds colors

that i [inaudible] from social media, and it's especially nice to be here with manisha because she's last person i saw from the profession when the pandemic hit she. was literally the last person i remember looking at her and saying, do we [inaudible] do we wait? here we are, it's my first time, really, back since then. so it's a real pleasure to be here. >> i want to start today by saying that i wrote in my last book about how the humanization of the native americans during the war provided a new model for racial discrimination during the war, to counter veil the changes in the way that the united states government looked at black americans. they had now a new way to look at racial hierarchy to the west. and well that's very important, it's intuitively left now, because i did a lot of work about it. i want to know to a new direction today. and to talk a little bit about the in 1862, with the counter

to the fact that while the congress is doing something that i'm gonna talk about, it's worth remembering that going into the year of 1862, the american public lands, as they were called, although they were of course indian lands, where thought of as a vast biggie bank that could be used to fund the u.s. government. that was the way to keep the government going because that was something that the large people in the american south really liked. the fact that they would not do very much. so, with the idea that the public lands as they were known, incorrectly, at the time, had been used for about 8% of the income of the u.s. government. i want to lay out what does happened during 1862. and it's a story that i think is really important for the k-12 teachers that i hope will be watching this at home, because this is being broadcast for k-12 teachers. so, i want to point out, first of all, that the last section of the 36 congress preassembled

on december 2nd in 1861. it was in the midst of a many questions that was about to get really, really bad. the democrats who had been in charge of the government, as i said, they had not wanted to use it for anything. they insisted it had to be kept small. that it could not fear in any way in the economy. and the way to make the american economy really boom was to turn over control of it to the very wealthy. well, what happens is that the money crisis means that the republican party, which organized with the idea that the government should work for ordinary americans, had to figure out in harry what exactly that meant. so, it happens, on december 30th, the banks in new york city suspend city payments. that is, they're not gonna hold gold any longer, and the country falls into just a spiral of financial crisis. so the new congress, which is going to come into the 37

congress, which is gonna swear in on march 4th, 1862, as itself, it inherited a very large problem. now, it wanted banks to suspend pc payments. congress started to panic, and thought, what on earth can we possibly do? and what they start to do, they start to talk about the idea of creating a new kind of money, a new kind of money that doesn't depend on the money from capitalists, but instead, is based on the american people. now, for a lot of people, you are thinking, who cares? like, she is talking about financial laws, and i'm gonna stereo samuel hooper from massachusetts, but it's gonna be really important, it matters. for the next several months, congress is gonna decide what the government is, who should pay for it, and how you were going to enable people to pay for it? so, between december 30th, the suspension of pc payments, and july into august of 1862, we are going to have a profound transformation of the american

government, who it answers to? who pays for it? what it does? let me just go through what they do. all of these things are being discussed at the same time. so, what i did, i put them in the order in which they were signed into law. all of these, first of all, they're talking about the money. and they are very concerned about the money. they are concerned about how we're gonna move crops, i'm gonna get exceptions. you can imagine, look at rationale. that money can get yourself a big problem. one of the first things that actually gets signed into law is on december 16th, congress -- i'm sorry, lincoln signed, the emancipation act of 1862, which ends human enslavement in washington, d.c., and freed about 3000 individuals. it reimbursed people who had illegally enslaved them, and it offered those people money to emigrate. then, on march -- i am sorry. then, on the beginning of march, they are, they start to talk

about new kinds of ways to raise money for the government. and they introduced incredibly important bill called hr312. and hr312 it's our first major tax bill in u.s. history. it's gonna put taxes on manufacturers. it's going to create an internal revenue system to collect that tax, not through the states, but through federal governments. and it's gonna give us a graduated income tax, not just an income tax, which was invented in 1961, but a graduated income tax, so the people would pay taxes, according to their abilities. as the senators who came up with that said. the income tax is gonna be 3% on income between $610, 000, and 5% on incomes over $10,000. lincoln's gonna file back on july 1st. the same time they're talking about that, they begin to talk about paris, to protect manufacturing in order to get them to prove to pay those 3%

manufacturing caps they said they put on a lot of products. the bill is gonna cut it in half, and it's gonna set the rates at about 37%. that signed on july 14th. now, while these things are being discussed, there's the problem of the fact that if you are going to raise that kind of money, you are gonna get that kind of money out of the american people, in order to back this newfangled currency there talking about, in order to do that, you are also gonna have to enable people to make enough money to pay those income taxes, and to pay that manufacturing taxes. so what they do, first of all, on may 15th, they signed into law the department of agriculture, which sounds like who cares, right? the department of agriculture provides seeds to regular guys whose dads and hand them seeds. what they're saying is that you don't have to be the son of somebody important to be able to plant things. so, we get the department of agriculture, which also gives people information about how to farm. a newspaper at the time said,

this is the first important movement by congress, looking directly to the interests of the man who cultivates and the soil. the balance of the government shifts then on may 15th of 1862. five days later, we get the homestead act. hr 1:25, as i said before, so the public land made up 8% of the government income at that point. and there were a lot of people in the north who did not want to give that land away, including some really crucial figures in the republican party. and that's another longer story. but horse grew really insists, from the new york tribune, insists that this will be a good move. he said, every smoke rising from a new opening in the wilderness marks the foundation of a new feeder to commerce and the revenue. lincoln finally signed that into law and may 20th, and

greely says, young men, four men, widows, resolve to have a home of your own. and a senator from maine, who was famous for being the title of the book on the tree who said, i cannot say that the wiser course was not to make the most of our time, for no one knows how some this country may, again, fall into a democratic sulu. recognizing the democrats would never let him do something like this. july 1st, 1862, we get the land grab college act, again funded, as dr. greene said, by 3000 acres of land, according to the number of senators and representatives. she had 30,000 acres for each representatives, which were then sold, put into a fund to fund the college as. that, again, was an attempt to get education into the hands of people who otherwise would not have the ability to get it, because their fathers did not have the kind of money that the large enslavers did. july 16th, we get the second

confiscation act. and the second confiscation act explicitly says that all of the enslaved people covered by the second we confiscation act will be permanently freed, and it was for bait for military returning, escaped slave people, even if they came from states this still had legal slavery. that, of course, set the stage for the emancipation proclamation, which lincoln is going to issue. the preliminary emancipation proclamation on september 22nd of 1862. that is the groundwork for that is laid on july 16th, and when the democrats and the north go bonkers over the idea of freedom for enslaved people, the cincinnati daily gazette, which is from a state that is at that point or running democratic, says, every labor in the community adds to the aggregate 12th. this state needs every labor that has come into it, or is

likely to come, because as it set, every laboring man is worth more and then his weight in gold to the country. so, the 37 congress is going to be done with most of its business by july, and of course, we're gonna get the preliminary emancipation proclamation in september. and then, in december, in the first annual message, lincoln is going to push further on the legal tender act, which set this whole thing up, when he asked for national back notes. so what i'm gonna argue here is that 1862 is crucially important, because it sets up the on the grounds pressure between the old idea of an oligarchy in charge of the country that does not have an active government, and it works only for itself. and on the other hand, then you, fledgling republican party, which has set of all kinds of things about how the government should work for the people. but now, because of the financial crisis and the war, it's got to do it.

and in the space of about seven months, it creates our first active government that is designed to work for the american people. in 1862, owen lovejoy, a republican representative at the time, said that he had lived through a revolution government. and what he said is that they had decided that what is beneficial to people cannot be detrimental to the government. for this country, the interests of both are identical. with us, the government is simply an agency through which the people act for their own benefit. so, i want to take that given, and do a little slighted at hand here, and suggests that perhaps, what's buried within the republican project of equality is not only the problem of the racial inequality that we have been talking about, it was baked into it. but rather, within that very economic expansion, expansionist program, that looked so good on paper, that

within it itself, it's varied in a dependent on both racial and economic hierarchies. thank you. [applause] >> i'd like to thank those who organized the panel, the organization of american historians, especially my fellow panelists. and i'm reminded at this moment of an old country entertain who used to say, lord, i feel so unnecessary. [laughter] but i'll try to say something useful. we have heard today, and we know that 1862 marked a turning point on a number of issues. it was also a turning point in that it became clearer than ever before that the north and the south had gone to war over who would win the west, particularly the far west. it also became clear that abraham lincoln and his party intended to transform that area and that historians who love to make comparisons or synthesize

deceptively different stories or study contradictions have a lot to work with. we have heard about the dakota uprising in minnesota, which then was the west, a reminder that regional spaces move through time. multiple treaties had reduced the dakotas land as part of a decades-long policy of the indian removal and mistreatment. the bureau of endive for indian affairs officials had failed in their treaty obligation to provide food to the dakota, partly because of the civil war diverting resources, mainly because of these officials corruption. essentially, the dakota took matters into their own hands and fought battles against the union army there. when the army triumphed, you tell brief crimes, which despite the brevity, where an improvement of the usual approach of having no trials at all. and sentenced 303 dakota suit to die. lincoln ordered the commander, general john called, a radical republican

favorite, who was eager to get executions going, to wait and to send the case files to washington, where he assigned to interior department attorneys to examine them. he said to limit the executions to those who committed rape or killed women and children. the army ended up hanging 37 tickets to the day after christmas, 1862, thus, as mentioned, the largest mass executions in american history. but lincoln also ordered the largest mass commutation of death sentences in american history in the same action. as for the public reaction, lincoln later mentioned to a congressman from minnesota that his 1864 majority in the state was smaller than it had been in 1860. imagine that, they're counting votes. the congressman replied and that if he had executed all of them, he would have gotten more votes. lincoln responded, i could not afford to hang men for votes. this is not the happiest part of the lincoln story by any means.

it's a reminder of how unhappy the entire story was. the situation in minnesota exemplified much that was wrong with federal relations with native americans, but so did other events. lincoln's administration largely abandon indian territory, modern-day oklahoma, in 1861, leaving cherokee leader, john ross, no choice but to cast his lot with the confederacy. he met with lincoln in an effort to gain support in 1862, but lincoln and his advisers proved largely unsympathetic. in the same year, lincoln agreed to enroll native american troops in the area, well before the historically more famous debate about african american troops. he also had to resolve disputes there between military commanders a, problem with which lincoln was intimately familiar in the morning eastern and western theaters and with which most scholars of the war, intimately familiar as well, but perhaps not so much with farther west. indeed farther west in 1862, the battle of

gloria pass settled whether the confederacy would be able to keep moving west. the army of the pacific and other things to do too including stopping the native american rights on travelers, which resulted many from the lack of food provided by the iaea. to help the [inaudible] the army gave them food on the orders of james cawthorn, who also responded to complaints from where residents of western new mexico territory, president arizona, that the apache indicted the mining industry. he told his lieutenant, kit carson, all indian men have that trouble to be called whenever and wherever you can find them. constitute them. and from there it was george scab for kaufman to concentrate the dine eyeballs but don't or shortly thereafter. that became the known as the long walk of that navajo, again moving to human beings to where the government thought they could be best controlled, like the trail of

tears, elected though cota, like discussions of the colonization of african american. the same kind of response to perceived images of indigenous response threats to prosperity at the desire for settler colonialism would pay our team by a river in colorado, [inaudible] thank creek, and for the most of the rest of the 19th century federal relations with the indigenous population and the west generally. the union party as republicans had reconstitute themselves to attract pro union democrats had a partisans dream come true. many of their opponents had left congress. they had room to maneuver and did they ever maneuver. these acts have been mentioned already. all of these acts, homestead, moral land grant, pacific railroad, creation of the agricultural the later became the department of agriculture, all shaved or east shaped the west. they also fed into a longer pattern to generations ago, david potter put it well in the title of his chapter in the impending crisis on the kansas nebraska act. a railroad promotion and its

sequel. eight years in considerably bloodshed later, construction on that road began. with each of these measures, the union government proposed a change of character resting land and settlement. to import into the west, broadly defined here is the land west of the mississippi river, homesteaders more capable farmers, institutions of higher education, and a railroad. doing so required moving concentrating, and are controlling the native american population. historians see that as an expansion of the federal government scope and power, just at the civil war and reconstruction proved to be a. and also continue those early policies of movement concentration, control. and also reflected lincoln's past, present, and possible future. he was westerner hula -- his entire life until he left springfield for washington d. c.. he was born, raised, and lived in the west he look to

the west. on his last day obviously he didn't know it be hbcus's last day even if stephen spielberg did. he talked of the west with mary lincoln. he talked of the west with skyler cold facts, the speaker of the house who is about to go west. he was indeed thinking of the west not in the way he should have, but perhaps in the only way he could have at the time. we all al-ata elliott west for his article the greater reconstruction, to heather for west from appomattox, there's a growing list of wonderful scholarship on the west that i'll mention here, partly for the benefit of k-12 teachers. kevin waits, west of slavery, ghana matthews the golden state and civil, where meghan kate nelson, the three cornered war, which was a finalist for the pulitzer.

stephen kantrowitz's, pending work on-chunk citizenship. a lot of people are studying the west in the civil war area, a lot can learn from comparison, what happened involving native americans in the west in 1862 takes into account attitudes of race government, western movement and so much more that we see through a different lens when we compare it with the federal response to southern insurrection and enslavement. and with guidance. the civil war and reconstruction reshaped the nation and the west. and the west helped reshape the nation as it helped shape the civil war and reconstruction. thank you. [applause] >> i want to thank all of our panelists remarks today. i wasn't privy to earlier. i'm trying to think of a way in which i could pose the first question, very different

topics. the thing that struck me that is mainly a unifying thread, maybe a similar thread of all the presentations is that we are looking at histories of the civil war and reconstruction that are far more complex and nuance than what we have been made to digest for so long, right? weg o we are going away from a very simple narrative of the war, and reconstruction, just as we have done for american history as a whole. and the danger, i think, is to replace one simple narrative with another counter simple narrative, that might actually alight certain emancipatory possibilities of the war, activism at the grassroots, to

reshape the nation, or even, as heather mentioned, certain ideas about state formation and democracy, that were born in this period. so, we look at something like the legal tender act, it's not just a blunt instrument of financial capitalism, but it's also one that made quite wildly ill available to ordinary people. there is a reason why the labour party was the greenback labour party, right? at this point. so, i think that is something that i would really like participants to talk about. hillary, with her notion of how to think about the moral land grab act, and what it does for hbcus, and also, think about, you know, the ways in which we can -- the ways in which we can think about the enormous land

robbery that devastated native americans. similarly, with michael's comments, i was really struck by how much it reminded me a little bit of amy taylor's embattled freedom, where she really is try to balance emancipatory narratives of these slave refugee camps with the more, you know, the everyday histories of disease, and death, and having to combat all kinds of abuse, including the confederate invasions, that would just destroy and kill people. and then, again, of course, over to michael greene's remarks on lincoln, you know, did lincoln have a plan for the west? what was his view of the so-called indian question? you know, that is something that we need to unpack, as well. even as we understand lincoln's

role animus happy, emancipation, brought profits that included enslaved people, included congress, radicals, abolitionists, and others, and the union army. so, could you just talk about that a little bit? especially, you know, we have the facts before us. but can we think of a way of telling more complex and nuanced histories, without throwing the proverbial baby with the bathwater? anyone? anyone wants to go first? mica, go ahead. >> mica, not michael. >> i am sorry. their two names, michael, michael. >> it's an important question.

i mean, i tend to think of the camps, at least my work, as sort of almost more destructive than generative. and that's i guess why the theme of the problem of trying to control populations of people is something that i think we can use to, if not connect history that are different, maybe even use it as a lens for bring, bringing into relief how history can be, you know, similar or different. and i think that -- i suppose, that will be sort of one way to answer that question. yeah, i tend to find, that

chances are more destructive than character. i think if we can get, not get right off, but a look through the past, beyond the jubilee, i think you can see a lot more echoes between the destructiveness of the war for other groups of people, and the fundamental destructiveness of what slave people were subjected to during this period. i think we may be seeing, and i am not someone who is against the important -- i do think that though maybe there's something kind of about that jubilee nature of the ordeal for free people, that keeps scholars and other

interested people from seeing the really cumulative aspects of the camps. and i don't think of violence happening within them, as something that is sort of accidental or tragic. but as, you know -- in many cases, hurt, and i'm afraid to speak in that language, particular. but you know, their intention. the kind of better go logical violence, you know? the cruelty of the point. getting people to sending messages to people, to get them not to come, by brutalizing them. so i'm kind of getting away from the central question here, but i think that maybe, we shouldn't shy away from those kinds of complexities, you know, you don't want to lose sight of certain triumphs and discontinue, discontinuity's,

but you know, at least in my case, that is something that i try not to lose sight of. >> i will probably follow up on that. one of the things i think about with this, the overlapping mazer of how these policies affected people of color, and it's not always needs are simple. and one of the things i think about, too, these institutions will exist. and we like to talk about the civil war as bracketed, and reconstruction as bracketed, and certain things as, okay, this is here, this is set. but these institutions are still here. so, we are still dealing with a ripple effects of these larger issues, and those questions that are never resolved. and for me, one of the things to think about with lincoln and his movement of the west, and also, the question about the

public lands, and that piggy bank that heather talked about here. it is the piggy bank of public lands, or some federal states, to fund black people education, instead of funding them from social taxes. and they knew where that land came from. so, the question becomes to me that, there's so much work at hbcu, and i know some are trying to grapple with that legacy. there is a lot to grapple with, when you know that, and land grabbed university really pointed that out, and also, impacts on the stereotypes, oh, it's only large white schools. it's only this. it is only that. it was an erasure, in many ways, of native americans, but although, there is no african american involvement here. and i'm like, well we have to make hbcus here. so to remind people not just to go back to the simple tropes of

the simple narrative, i think sometimes, no one's here, we're still dealing with that nastiness. i think we can ask you questions of the pass, pushing the questions that people didn't have access to as materials. i think we can make arguments in more nuanced -- it doesn't mean that completely radically change. now we have more data. we have more tools. we have more visualization. we can then talk about other questions. the other thing ing i think about with this too, especially as institutions are going in and looking at their past with slavery, colonialism, and the like, institutions who are affected by this act they're still trying those conversations. those are real conversations on those campuses. i think it's for us to also provide the framing, also the material to help them work through these issues. as historians and teachers who teach at these places, we have a role to. this is where the no more nuanced, think about the overlapping impressions, overlapping things, getting

away from the simple devastation, advance forgiveness, freedom, things like that. i think the more nuance we can do the better. >> hillary, when i was trying to do is broaden what you are saying and suggests that americans really love a government that worked for them. so long as people as color paid for it. >> yeah, very much. >> i'll echo all of that. i'll also say for teaching purposes, i teach in las vegas if you drive to southern california, there is a spot where they supposedly check for fruit. this goes back to the mediterranean fruit fly. all the things that were worried about. i will ask students, when you cross the border, do you suddenly stop being a nevadan? do you stop being in a fountain, and you check your ideas at the border? and of course we don't. [inaudible] we

can also drill down a little more, i think, into what is going on in individual places. we think of ed ayres's work for, example, which is incredible. and i think of a book by a western is historian who wandered into the civil war and influenced we, dick etulain, who did a book on oregon country politics in the civil war. and it's, knee-jerk was they called it the tribe of abraham. because he said so many patronage appointees out there. and what do they do? but if we look at that state, oregon, as an example, they are in a big fight over land and taking it from native americans, which they do. they also managed to supply by way of south carolina, originally, john breckenridge's running mate in the 1860 election. but what is going on in that place? in my place, nevada, aunt trivia fans, las vegas was never part of nevada territory,

i can win money in a trivia contest on that one, the territorial governor was a william seward operatic who called on the territorial legislature to allow african americans to testify in trials and serve in militias, and when the territorial legislature refused, he attacked them. he was critical of them. this speaks well for him. no question about that. but what is going on? what are the influencers back and forth? so the nuance and the overlap that my fellow green mentioned, is indeed a big part of this story. and i think we can find local ways to tell the story that also will help with the national and even transnational understanding of what's going on. >> that's great. thinking about how this westward track began

which i'm thinking of stacey smith's book on california, which is just amazing, and the more recent book book by benjamin madley on the genocide of california native americans, as you can see, getting into the those local spaces into the west, oregon is a bizarre place, it's so bloody for slavery before the civil war, that is the one who doesn't secede during the confederacy. but on that note, if we could just open up the floor. i think all our our panelists here have given us really excellent answers and a lot to chew on. and it would be wonderful if you would come up to the mic, just to remind you that we are being filmed for a program on c-span, so it would be great if you asked your questions there.

any takers? they've been so brilliant. they're silenced everyone. do you have questions to each other maybe? >> can i be a jerk here? am i allowed to talk about reconstruction? >> yes, you are! [laughs] yeah, you are. >> i mean, i wonder, when we talk about 1862 and the civil war, a lot of the things that we are laying out our wartime issues. and the war ended, and there was a moment, and maybe, a fairly long moment when those issues could have been addressed. and instead, it was the man here to my left, will really hammered home to me the degree to which the people in the west who are saying all sorts of the right things back east were saying for the 14th amendment doesn't apply to mexicans. it doesn't apply to chinese. it doesn't apply to indigenous

americans. so i wonder to what degree the issue that we're identifying here in the war -- on so sorry, are we construction issues? >> as you say, reconstruction begins in 1860. i mean, it is a seed. they're trying to -- >> and i would argue, i traveled to anchorage, alaska for the first time this summer. and one of the thing, things i was reminded about was the first, the first troops out there to settle that land and protect it, it's african american soldiers. they're coming from georgia. they're coming from alabama. they are coming from mississippi, and one of the things in a very clever and grateful museum exhibits there about black lives matter in alaska from 1867 to the president, is that indigenous people preferred black soldiers as they can listen to them, they negotiated with them. and they were open minded.

everything else out there. so if you're going west, you don't have to go that was. but also, too, looking at certain things, and looking at what michael green said about lincoln's vision for the west, how much of these policies of 1862 onwards get inactive until reconstruction. and that vision of the west the t had, get in play. that's another thing. i think it's and there, too, very interesting. i didn't think about looking at the west because i'm more east and more southern. but it's something to think about. and those reconstruction issues in there. >> well, i'm suddenly feeling vindicated because of my oral exams from my doctorate i was asked when reconstruction actually began. and i said, well, really the war is an act of reconstruction. i got a really dirty look. [laughter] but that said, again, we can see the connections of south

and west, we can see these people who are reacting to events. are they proactive or reactive? and i'll be local. one of the great stories about this the, classic example, the 15th amendment, and has it referred to the 14th, and doesn't apply to mexicans, chinese, other people of color in the west? the 15th amendment formula floor manager was a senator from nevada, william morris stewart, who may have been the most corrupt senator in american history and that going away. and when it passed, he wired the nevada legislature and said, we are behind this, we should pass this 15th amendment. and the response he got was, does this this mean the chinese can vote? no, don't worry, we're not going to let them vote. oh, okay, then we'll pass. it will, the next census showed about 2000 chinese people in nevada, and about 125 african

americans. the issues may be similar, but the people involved can be different, according to the area. and just hearing the other day that the hispanic population of boston, where we are, is now about 30%, someone said, and it may be less than that, or a little more. but we are seeing this diversity today, and maybe we can think of the diversity today a little differently if we look at the diversity of yesterday. and the unfortunate responses to some of that diversity. >> you know, i think that's really an important point because there is a reason california refuses to ratify the 14th amendment, right? and if you look at the congressional globe, and if you look at the debates, it's really interesting, these republican senators from the west, how democratic they sound. and i would get confused.

i had to actually look up, sometimes, their party affiliations, because i was like, does this person belong to the republican party? because they are so adamant against certain parts of the republican agenda, precisely for the region's, reasons that you mentioned. but we have a question here. so, go ahead. i think it's on, if you could just -- hi. thank you for >> okay, it looks like it's on. hi. thank you for a wonderful roundtable. this is kind of a follow-up question to what you all are just discussing about the west and the 14th amendment. i want to bring us back, maybe, to the question of frameworks for teaching, not just this moment in the civil war, but teaching u.s. history more broadly, and i've heard some great ones about devastation, encampment, land grab. i think one of the huge challenges in teaching a narrative of u.s. history is this question of frameworks that can bring in settler colonialism with the racism

that african americans experienced. but i find that it's so easy and crucial to use citizenship, as one of the frameworks, but then that is in huge tension with settler colonialism. and so i wondered if maybe you could talk a little bit about that or how you think about that in teaching, because this discussion right here, to me, is like you kind of see that tension at work. >> can i take a shot at that? >> yeah. >> that's exactly how i teach this period of citizenship, who's in and who's out. and it's really important to remember that in the west, what they do is they rely on the old slave coats of the early 1800s to say that unless you are free and white, you can't be a citizenship. so that knocks out,

in their minds, the chinese, of course. and they basically wiggle around indigenous americans and all sorts of people as well so while that issue of who is welcome and who's not, and of course that's going to take you into the 18 70s and [inaudible] decision, question of whether or not women are citizens and and in 1875, the supreme court says that women are of course citizens. but this isn't ship doesn't necessarily mean the right to vote, which means everybody is screwed. i hope i'm allowed to say that. but the reason i grabbed the microphone is because i think one of the things that's important about the 14th between this, the 14th amendment, i feel like i walk up to people in the grocery store and say, let's talk about the 14th amendment. because what it does, the 13th, 14th, 15th amendments, first ones and the constitution, that increased rather than decreased

the power of the government. and the 14th amendment is the one that says the federal government has a responsibility to make sure that everybody has the equal protection-able laws, and the due process of law. which we all kind of throw out like, yeah, i got protection. but what that means, you can't have that kkk. you can't have states deciding how the people within the more than a live, without having basic rules of equality before the law, and equality of access to the judicial system. and in terms of teaching, that becomes the key to everything we do, because of course, if ignored until the 1840s -- sorry, wrong century, 1940s. once the supreme court starts to say, we are going to apply the first ten amendments of the constitution to the states, the bill of right to the state, by using the 14th amendment, that is how we get our entire system of the american, of america, a civil rights protection, the

right to be represented in court. this is a regulation, labor laws, all of that comes from the federal government saying, no, you can't screw around with the citizens in the state. and people don't understand that nowadays. they are like, oh, we will let the states do whatever they want. and no, this is why i stop people in the grocery store to talk about the 14th amendment. >> i will add in that i do a course where the theme is freedom. and the questions our freedom to, freedom from. and that is a framework, i think, for looking at a lot of different things. i think it's also interesting, john marshall try to incorporate the bill of rights as early as 1830s, could not pull it off. so these are debates that have gone on from the beginning, and yeah, we are still having them,

obviously. and that's why people run from me in the grocery store. >> yeah, and i would act. i don't view citizenship -- i don't view citizenship basically like if you look at marginalized communities, i note notions of belonging, because people good belong to an area, but not be citizens of the state. but their notions of belonging and feeling of attachment to a place, it leads to activism to include them. so i usually try to do that by usually citizenship belonging, and always, my students return retain enough constitutional amendments, and also, supreme court decisions. so, i'm glad they are here too because they understand how these debates were never fixed. and that idea, that constant negotiation, that back and forth, that allows for some communities who really are not citizens. by the law and other states to still advocate in the sense because they believe themselves

took the law and to be open nation of the state. in their sense of belonging, affects their attitudes and beliefs and what they do, rather than just the top down, sort of, trying to get that are the sets [inaudible] dispossessed from the state. >> i think that's a great point, hillary. we had a previous discussion here between citizenship and sovereignty for near an americans i think that might be also a dichotomy. native americans negotiating citizenship and belonging since the founding of the nation in various ways, mycah, i wonder, and you want to jump in here? yes? >> yes. sorry -- i'm having some trouble hearing some other points, if i'm repeating anything i apologize. there are a number of ways i think you can shake up this citizenship versus settler colonialiasm binary. i think if he maybe teach with questions of materiality or labor and power

and minds it might take some things up. if you center the, i mean, one thing i found to be ie really successful in teaching, is trying to tell, illustrates, demands, problems, struggles through individual stories. i really rely on the freedom -- there are letters from people who are imprisoned that have been published as well. i think if you are looking for and overarching framework or something, if you might not have one, just the teaching things side by side. encouraging your students to try and forge their own connections between first person accounts. i found that

to be really fruitful in my own experience. i think that would be one tactic ideas, just to try to shake up some of the binary's that we tend to fall in. yeah. >> that's a great point. citizenship can be enacted in so many ways beyond the law and beyond politics, right? yeah. we have two questions. here i think we have enough questions to take. you please, go ahead. >> hi, i'm ray arsenault, university of south florida. this discussion has been fascinating. it reminded me of experience i had over 20 years grab program iran called florida studies. a program on regionalism. we have to figure out what on earth florida studies. where we got a grant to do us. we worked it out over 20 years. i would do the interactive courts on regionalism. initially, i set it up over southern history, i

had limericks, legacy of conquest, initially i thought of it, well, i'm going to show how different the south and the west are. in a sense, it backfired. it became clear early on, the students figured it out maybe before i did, when we are really talking about, the burden of western history. over the years, we explore that notion. of course, florida being a frontier state for much of its history, bridges the two traditions. i just think i learned a lot in trying to apply that notion of the burden. of course, patty limerick had gotten that from woodward. she mentioned it in the introduction briefly. the burden of western history. it is not original by my students,

or by me. it was really informative and enlightening to try to do that. you get the sense that in some ways the burden of western history is almost more fundamental than the burden of southern history. and the sense that they might not have the same historical consciousness in the parts of whites in the west, and whites in the south. a lot of the same things are going on. i just kept thinking that when you are talking. >> i think heather has something to say about the unholy alliance between the south and the west. [laughs] >> i would like to say something different about that. one of the things that impresses me about economic the people are playing around with the they're playing around more with the economic and political importance of it. i cared more about the social when i was starting to look into it both the south and the west are shaped by extractive economies. and so if you look at that, and of course, that's where the studies of capitalism came out of but if you look at that and at the studies right now that

are coming out of the russian economy and what happens when you start to pull pieces out of it like a jango like a jenga system fiona hills fabulous on this. i think there's a lot of work to be done on figuring out how economic systems create sort of tornadoes around themselves that reproduce historically because of the the social patterns the economic patterns and the political patterns that are laid down by them. so i don't think it's in it's i don't think it's an error that the west and the south looks so much alike in the in the 1890s and that and right through the and perhaps the present. yeah, that was calhoun's dream. right ally the south of the west and then we'll defeat the north. right? go ahead. i'm laura burnett, and i'm an independent scholar and i'm not texting. i was really intrigued by micah's invocation of the idea of camps and something heather said about the 14th amendment

and those things clicked together in my mind through a reminder of the lyrics to the battle hymn of the republic where the second verse i think says i have seen him god in the watch fires of a hundred circling camps talking about, you know, kind of the righteous mission of the incampment of civil war soldiers, but i wondered if maybe micah and heather. could speak to from different sides the encampment as a space of people who are excluded by virtue, you know you either you're either in the camp which we often use as a term a slang term to me and you're one of us, but in this case to be in an encampment as mike was using is to be removed from the larger society and we have this long history of encampments from from if you know forced relocation to reservations to the encampments

of the newly self-emancipated to japanese internment camps. to perhaps you could even think of migrant labor camps. as places where people are physically removed in a way maybe just symbolically from the jurisdiction of the state as citizens because the 14th amendment guarantees, you know citizenship to you know, the the same rights. that you have as a us citizen you have in a state where you reside and the states must protect the rights of anyone under their jurisdiction. how does an encampment? of people outside maybe not the jurisdiction, but the sensit belonging to a state. i wondered if you could address that. no, thanks so much for that question and it reflects so much of what? the challenges i've been sort of facing in writing about this and trying to think about camps more

expansively. even you know, what this history can maybe tell us or about you know, the other examples you mentioned in terms of you know, japanese internment and other things i i still think of it kind of narrowly in terms of own work, but i i think that's that's kind of the you know being removed from this. being removed from i was trying to you said being removed from the state versus. um, it's the person still there. i'm sorry. i wanted to ask. que paso she still you can see no. oh, yeah. okay. so no. i only i only see it, but i guess i can sort of god i'm talking about, you know, but the camps especially in this kind of like, mississippi river world in

this westward region and especially in the sort of islands in the mississippi river case like lately. i've been trying to think about how they served such a tremendous obstacle for free women in particular for instance to in in this period where migrating into memphis for instance and being targeted by yeah figures who are you know, they're to eat them. so to speak like johnny, but who you know our riding about them and sort of this the possibility of their begin this demoralizing force for union soldiers and you know all of the implications about sex work or sexual assault that are sort of couched in that kind of polite. they have putting it.

there were projects in. that have moving and getting i think the words that he's in the letter. i'm thinking never, you know, getting getting all of them out of town and if even though this figure of eaten it is someone who's there to aid them you sort of see how his vision or his expectations of you know converting the freed people into these neatly-dressed self-sacrificing tillers of soil are colliding with freedom women's own goals and objectives of for instance coming into the city's living memphis and working on. and working according to their own terms. and so i see the thing. that's kind of challenging about the camps and you know should return to the question of citizenship is that the camps

have, you know previously kind of been written about as places where free people worked for citizenship and i think that when we think about the camps, especially in the context of the role they played in the lower valley in terms of free people strategies of not being sort of booted from them and tied down to you know, the plantations and the sort of, you know, infamous leasing system. i think that. you know there there's free people strategies of to go back to the who's out who's in question. it we need we mustn't lose sight of the demands and different definitions and articulations of freedom. that people are trying to defend

within these very volatile and violent, especially in the western trans, mississippi theater camp contacts. and i don't know if that you know answers. it's kind of strange because it's both. it's the the camps are both functioning it depending on where you look as ways to. not to move people out of the way so to speak but also as a as a sort of mechanism or technology for gaining information about them trying to you know, understand, you know if they would work or if you look at the american freedom of angry commission papers and the survey questions that we're going out about free people and sort of weird fascination with a lot of people there's a kind of

knowledge production element that some of these places have it's it's a true challenge right amount because of how rapidly they change and the different purposes that and they serve depending on what region you're looking at. so there's both a pulling away and a an attempt to pull in and look at that. i'm still trying to um clarify in my work. i think the question that remains to be answered is really what were if it can even be really understood or articulated, what were the major legacies of? what people endured in these at least crucibles? he's really concentrated sites of? violence and destruction yeah, thanks margaret that you want to

have the last word here. sorry. if anyone at hillary, go ahead. no one of the things i was thinking about when you talk about encampments and exclusion those hpc use are sites are exclusion. they're not being educate within the regular population. they are put out somewhere and when you think about where they're located at the edge of towns at the edge of there, so it's also another policy of exclusion. so, how do you talk about these sites as insights of empowerment and without the surveillance, but at the same time a sense that they don't also belong in terms of education and as you need the second moral act and make sure they're black students are getting included. so i think there's a lot of things in there about who belongs around questions about whiteness. and morris and and who's there but black people and people of color not include in that calculus. so it's still another exclusionary practice. i'll just say it quick. and then defer there were at

least three japanese american relocation centers in world war two located on native american reservations. and you think about exclusion it sort of a double exclusion. right there. go ahead. i was just gonna respond to something that dr. connor said and that is there was a really important word there and was freed women. and i would just like to suggest that since i know you're interested in the intellectual idea behind the camps and what georg howe was doing with you know, i have seen them in the watchfires of a hundred circling camps. they have builded him an altar in the evening do's and damps it's it's a call to mythology and there's a huge difference between those. military encampments of men who are supposed to go out and be heroic and and protect the women folk? and the camps that are made up of communities that include women folk who mythologically should not be in camps. so even though they're both

camps and they're both exclusionary and they're both outside and there's all the things going on in the chaos. i think the gendered component of that actually really matters at least. mythologically. they're supposed to be home not being supervised by the state and instead they are themselves in the camps. so i'm afraid, you know, we could continue this conversation for a very long time, but we have in fact run out of time and i like the fact that we ended on the on this note because if you think of, you know migrant detention centers today refugees and migrant peoples and that that's an ongoing, you know an issue for us to address so and notions of national citizenship and who belongs there does not so i like the fact that at least moved from talking about contraband camps as slave refugee camps, but but maybe you know in the future we are going

to have more work done on this that'll really connect the past to the present. so, thank you so much for for being with us today. and thank you a round of applause to all our wonderful panelists who who really really thoughtful and