It does not explain why so little has been planned in states like Mississippi and by Southern Heritage groups like the Sons of Confederate Veterans. One can assume that they are not rushing to acknowledge Lincoln's historical significance. But perhaps last week's reenactment of Davis's inauguration provides a clue. [Davis' great-great-grandson Bertram] Hayes-Davis took part in the reenactment of his ancestor's swearing-in ceremony in Montgomery on February 15; however, rather than repeat the oath he simply kissed the Bible and turned to the crowd and said, "So help me God." One is left wondering exactly what he was reenacting.In the sentence bolded in the original, Kevin makes a very plausible suggestion. But he slips into the bad habit that is standard operation procedure for our national "press corps" of phrasing it as mindreading. Plausible though the suggestion is, I wouldn't say there is "no doubt" about it unless the people involved went on record in some way saying that.
I suspect that Hayes-Davis did not want to be perceived to be engaged in another act of treason, but it is the very oath of office to defend the Confederate Constitution that both reflects Davis's significance to American history and perhaps why he has been so easily dismissed as an object of public commemoration. No doubt the fact that the oath was to defend a constitution that was explicitly written to defend and perpetuate slavery shaped their decision to bypass it altogether. It is much easier to focus on the battlefield heroics of Lee and Jackson, in part, because their actions can be interpreted as apolitical. We can wrap their actions around the Victorian ideals of masculinity and courage without acknowledging that the armies they led were extensions of a political system. Davis on the other hand could never be understood apart from the muck and mire of Confederate politics even though he achieved, according to Donald E. Collins, a certain amount of public acclaim in the South towards the end of his life - and more importantly, even if his policies and decisions in Richmond contributed substantially to the growing popularity and eventual legendary status of Lee and Jackson. (my emphasis underlined)
But apart from that nit, he makes an excellent point. Focusing on the battles of the war itself does not not tell us much about the politics of the war. The Lost Cause advocates use sleight-of-hand arguments starting from that perspective, for instance, saying that because most of the Confederate soldiers didn't personally own slaves the war couldn't have been "about" slavery.
Few American soldiers in Iraq personally own oil wells, either. But that fact doesn't tell us anything about whether or not the Iraq War is "about" oil in some way.
Tags: confederate heritage month 2008, jefferson davis, kevin levin
No comments:
Post a Comment