Crossroads offers readers a discussion of various topics, most related to history, historians, and the academic life, although here and there other subjects may be included.
Brooks D. Simpson is a historian and writer who teaches at Arizona State University. He has been known to write about nineteenth century American history, although he’s also written on other topics, from George Washington’s Supreme Court appointments to Derek Jeter. You may contact him at cwcrossroads@yahoo.com.
The opinions expressed herein are those of the author alone and are not those of Arizona State University, for those of you who might be confused. Nor are they endorsed by ASU.
Great stuff. Please write more.
I just discovered this blog today. Looking forward to reading more of your posts in the future.
Professor,
I couldn’t find a way to e-mail this to you, but you might like to view this brief blogginheads.tv discussion between Professors John McWhorter and Glenn Loury. They did a brief segment entitled, “Can Confederate History Be Celebrated” posted yesterday, February 21.
http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/34398?in=10:59&out=16:05
Thanks. I will soon make use of it … and the other sections help place their comments in better context.
Yes, they do.
Brooks, please consider adding my Civil War blog to your roll call, thanks,
http://www.soldierstudies.org/blog/
Dear Dr. Simpson,
Two years ago I helped organize a symposium at the National Museum of Health and Medicine on Mr. Lincoln’s Health. Our keynote speaker was Judge Williams.
I was curious about your thoughts on the recent Nat Geographic Special about Mr. Lincoln’s health.
PS enjoyed your discussion at Springfield on 12 Feb.
Todd J. Janus, Ph.D., M.D., FAAN
I understand the concern, although in most cases the significance is not clear. But when I read the following:
“Another outward sign of MEN 2B — lumps on the lips, were visible not only on Lincoln, but in the photos of three of his sons, all of whom died during childhood.”
… I wonder what we’re talking about. There’s no image of Edward, who died in Springfield, and Robert lived to adulthood. Willie’s death was due to something else. So anyone who looks at Lincoln’s medical history had better be well acquainted with his actual story.
And there’s Tad who lived to age 18.
http://rogerjnorton.com/Lincoln69.html
I was trying to give the guy a break on Tad.
Prof. Simpson–
I’m not a Civil War buff, just a plain old high school history teacher with a wide-ranging interest in historical issues. I stumbled on your sight while pursuing a thread which started with Bob Somerby’s Daily Howler, then to his reference to Paul Krugman’s column with an oblique and unnamed reference to Thomas DiLorenzo, and then eventually to your site. It was an interesting journey.
While reading through several posts on your blog, I was continually drawn back to the image at the top of your page. I knew that I had seen it before, but I couldn’t recall where. Finally, it struck me: it’s the Burnside Bridge at Antietam with the “witness tree” on the eastern approach. (Confession: since I’m not a buff, I had to look it up to confirm it.) I crossed and then recrossed it last summer while biking through the battlefield.
Thanks for the comments on Prof. DiLorenzo, and for the little brainteaser you provided me this evening.
–Dan Reynolds
Dear Dr. Simpson,
I have noticed no comments on the several blogs I read so I thought I would call to your attention the news of a new civil war monument erected this month in Muscatine, Iowa.
http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/2e8d972c564949a8aed5461f98287bd6/IA–Civil-War-Monument/
here is a story in the news
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7626360.html
a bit on Texas’s new licence plate.
Civil Warriors Blog hacked?
I clicked the link and got a virus warning.
6/30/2012.
I got the same warning. I have nothing to do with that blog any more.
I recently finished reading your book “Ulysses S. Grant: Triumph Over Adversity” and I wanted to express how much I enjoyed it and how much it increased my understanding of Grant and the factors that shaped his reputation and legacy. I appreciated your objectivity, frankly discussing his faults and failings, but I especially appreciated your separation of fact from fiction regarding some of the criticisms and controversial claims that have been made about Grant, particularly regarding his drinking. I am surprised that so many stories about Grant have been accepted at face value and that the caricature of Grant as a drunk and a butcher still persists. I’m relatively new to serious Civil War scholarship so please forgive me if I am mistaken, but it seems to me that Grant especially has attracted an unwarranted amount of “negative press” over the years, and that even today some authors approach him from a very subjective direction. I recently stumbled upon a particularly vitriolic (so it seemed to me) article from a Civil War magazine by a contemporary writer supporting the argument that John Rawlins not only kept Grant sober but was also the brains behind his battles. Is this tendency for some to perpetuate stereotypes about Grant an ongoing legacy of the Lost Cause movement or is it simply that the seeming contradictions of his life (his success in the war versus his long list of professional failures) and his own reticence make it easier for people to accept rumors and slander about him as fact?
Anyway, thank you for your wonderful book and scholarship. I look forward to reading the second volume!
I’m aware of the article you mention and I found it puzzling and incomplete. However, the people who originally advanced that argument were friends of Rawlins who grew disgruntled with Grant, some of them believing that he had not given Rawlins enough credit.
A new article referencing “Grant the Drunk” in the Sept 5 New York Times (Christopher Phillips “Grant Goes to War.” I get the feeling the article is mostly based on McFeely’s biography (although the author does also cite your “Let Us Have Peace: Ulysses S. Grant and the Politics of War “).
Is it too harsh to believe that McFeely was under the sway of the Dunning School when he wrote this biography?
Sometimes I feel like the “Grant the Drunk” articles are in a similar category as the “Black Confederate Soldiers.” I feel like asking the writers: Just give me the names of a hundred black confederate soldiers, according to pay records. Just give me 4 verifiable dates out of 4 years that Grant was drunk. Just 4 days.
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/05/grant-goes-to-war/?ref=opinion
I always ask, “do you think Lincoln would have placed the fate of the nation in the hands of a drunk?”
Brooks,
Would you please post a review of Phillips’ article?
No. I simply have more important things to do. If the NYT thinks Phillips is their expert on Grant, then we know something about the NYT.
Really kinda stupid to reference LUHP when the first half of the biography would be far more on point.
I wouldn’t associate McFeely with Dunning at all.
Brooks, I don’t have an email for you so I am posting this hear hope that’s ok. I was wondering if you would be able/interested in contributing to this series of articles on Civil War Soldiers:
http://www.soldierstudies.org/index.php?action=lifeofasoldier
No need to reply if you are not able. If you wish to contact me my email is on my website.
Thanks
Chris
Noma –
You ask for four verifiable dates when Grant was drunk during the war.
(1) Here’s a little-known drinking episode that I believe has considerable credibility: Late in May 1862, Grant was in his unhappy role of second-in-command to Halleck during the slow-motion Corinth campaign. A relative of his wife was visiting Grant for a week beginning May 24 (this can be confirmed) and later told Hamlin Garland that Grant took some medicinal brandy during his visit and then, under the influence, went on a lengthy ride along the lines. See Longacre, “Grant : The Soldier and the Man,” 140 and my article “Ulysses in His Tent: Halleck, Grant, Sherman, and ‘The Turning Point of the War,’” Civil War History 56:2, p. 212. (Admittedly, I cannot pinpoint an exact date.)
(2) Sherman once wrote something to the effect that “We all knew Grant drank, but whenever anything important was afoot he was always bright and sober.”
Carl Schenker
P.S. I admire Grant, but I believe Brooks’s “Triumph” book has 30 index entries for drinking. I would think (but do not purport to know) that you could total up four wartime incidents from Brooks’s accounts even if you don’t want to count the Corinth campaign incident I mention above.
Hmm… My question is not what dates did he drink, but on which dates from 1861-1865 is there enough documentation that it can be concluded he was drunk.
Think of it this way. Your boss wants to fire you, saying that you were drunk on the job. About the first thing your lawyer would ask is specifically which dates does he claim you were drunk, and what evidence can he show to back up those claims.
If your boss can’t even reliably document at least several dates, it seems like he has no claim.
Noma –
(1) I have given you one instance (week of May 24, 1862), reported by a relative of Mrs. Grant, when USG supposedly behaved erratically (in a public fashion) after taking brandy. Longacre, p. 140: “He claimed that soon after imbibbing, Grant seemed to lose all reason. Calling for a horse, he was soon off on a cross-country jaunt, ‘over fallen logs and ditches,’ risking life and limb.” I call attn to this incident just because it is not well known, and can be added to the other instances mentioned in Brooks’s book (30 index entries).
(2) Plus, it seems to me, it isn’t just a question of how much Grant drank, but what public perceptions were. To the extent he did drink and behaved as above, he risked undermining his effectiveness as a leader. What mother wants to read reports about her son killed under a drunken commander?
(3) BTW, thank you for calling attn to Chris Phillips’s article in the NYT. So far as I can see, he only mentions drinking during USG’s first stint in the army. There was nothing about drinking as in issue during the Civil War. I am under the impression that Grant did manifest drinking issues during his first stint it the army, leading to his resignation.
CRS
Was Sherman crazy? Was Grant a drunk? There is a fine line between genius and crazy/inebriation. Bottom line, Sherman did what was necessary in the west, as did Grant in the east. The majority of citizens appreciated their accomplishments, victories and methods. Both leaders continued in public service after the Civil War and both men have been acclaimed great generals in spite of their detractors.
Bummer
www,civilwarbummer.com
“Grant stood by me when I was crazy, and I stood by him when he was drunk, and now we stand by each other.”
“War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over.”
“War is the remedy that our enemies have chosen, and I say let us give them all they want.”
“My aim, then, was to whip the rebels, to humble their pride, to follow them to their inmost recesses, and make them fear and dread us. Fear is the beginning of wisdom.”
“I am tired and sick of war. Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, for vengeance, for desolation. War is hell.”
William Tecumseh Sherman
Pingback: Christopher Phillips Strikes Again – and this time it’s not Lyon | Yesterday…and Today
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/recounting-the-dead/
FYI,
I really enjoy your blog.
M. Morden
you being a hockey you’ll get a laugh from this
http://www.csnne.com/09/27/11/Marchands-tattoo-Starley-Cup-Champians/landing_bruins.html?blockID=568088&feedID=3944&utm_source=bleacherreport.com&utm_medium=referral
An incident of defacing a monument to CSA soldiers in Cape Girardeau, MO, around October 12, 2011; the responses as portrayed in this newspaper account nicely brings out race and reunion and also battleflag issues:
http://www.semissourian.com/story/1772540.html?response=no
Here is more:
http://www.semissourian.com/story/1773568.html?response=no
Nice new format! Any chance of getting a “Search” button?
We are still in the construction stage.
I have to admit, I do miss the trees – but I I’m guessing they might be considered old fashioned. Anyway, good luck. Re-designing websites is generally time consuming and challenging!
Mr. Simpson: When will your volume 2 of US Grant be published? Its sorely needed. Also found out and wanted to pass along that SIU press is offering single volumes of the Grant Papers for sale at 75% off i.e. 25.00 per volume until Dec. 31st this year. Can you recommend which volumes would be most informative. I thought the Civil War period might be the most rewarding in terms of seeing the war from Grants eyes and how he administered the eventual victory. Thanks, James McCorry
Brooks –
On the not-so-occasional topics of black Confederates and Southern diversity, today I happened upon the linked passage (pages 241-42) about steps Andrew Jackson took to raise black troops in Louisiana during the War of 1812. Plus, I guess the overall diversity of Jackson’s New Orleans forces is by now rather a cliche — it seems to me I learned of it in a Disney movie in me youth.
http://books.google.com/books?id=I4a7hMqBKFMC&pg=PA242&lpg=PA242&dq=h+w+brands+jackson+black+troops&source=bl&ots=PBpB5OqWTD&sig=IV1AUOdgKGrhUJVqXpbL4RZ28t0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=dWz_TpmsAsnz0gHem8GIAg&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
Carl Schenker
The brand new issue of North & South has an article very relevant to recent discussions here of Southern heritage, cause of the war, etc.
It is by Gordon Rhea, descendant of Confederates, who discusses slavery as the cause of the war and says his ancestor nobly served a bad cause. I think the title is “Fellow Southerners!” as he calls for new candor about the causes of the war during the Sesquicentennial. I thought this was very well done.
Carl Schenker
Here is a link to a talk Gordon Rhea gave which, on quick review, appears to be on the same themes as the “Fellow Souhterners!” article mentioned above. The article may be a condensation of this talk. (I apologize if this item is already familiar to everyone except me.) CRS
http://www.civilwar.org/education/history/civil-war-overview/why-non-slaveholding.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/13/chuck-grassley-history-channel_n_1342254.html
I think Grassley has a point about the history channel– seems ratings are more important than history…. Just wondering if you had any thoughts on this Professor
It would have been a better thing in the beginning of the united states if the founding fathers would have put a clause in the constitution stating that secession is illegal. That way there would have been no ifs, ands or buts about it.
Dear sir,
I have only just discovered your blog while searching for evidence to help refute the ridiculous myth of the “black Confederates.” Ultimately, I gave up in frustration trying to convince them to see reason, yet I continued to search and fortunately found your wonderful blog. I am a history teacher and history buff deeply disturned by the neo-Confederate, unrecontructed, Southern apologists who seem to be dominating the front page today. Your site is a breath of fresh air, and I thank you deeply.
Dr. Brooks – I’ll echo what Mr. McCorry wrote above: When will your volume 2 of US Grant be published? Its sorely needed.
Any information would be appreciated.
Brooks, this looks intriguing, what do you think?
http://www.amazon.com/gp/election-heatmap/ref=tsm_1_fb_s_amzn_m96ri5
I’m not sure, given how Amazon rates a book’s popularity. It seems that many people read that which confirms their own interests and perhaps prejudices.
Indeed, but I hope your use of prejudices is not pejorative. And that is the interesting point, if the book sales are a reflection of their political leanings, could that be indicative on how they will vote? As stated before, it would be interesting to monitor the sales up to and including November.
Thanks for the feedback.
It’s not partisan. And it’s not prejorative. You can be prejudiced for or against.
Brooks, have you seen this?
Yup.
Pingback: First reactions to “The Chattanooga Campaign” — TOCWOC - A Civil War Blog
New Evidence That Racism Isn’t ‘Natural’
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/10/new-evidence-that-racism-isnt-natural/263785/
Civil War on BookTV this weekend!
Sunday, Noon ET
H.W. Brands, The Man Who Saved the Union: Ulysses Grant in War and Peace
William Cooper, We Have the War Upon Us: The Onset of the Civil War, November 1860-April 1861 (Sat. 11 pm; Mon. 7 am ET)
Brooks,
Your site was one of the arenas that inspired me to create Civil War Bummer. I would be honored if your blog could be included in my favorites. If not that’s okay also, Crossroads will still be a daily read.
Thanks Bummer
Map lays out racist election tweets, most originated from southeast
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/map-pinpoints-election-online-hate-tweets-article-1.1199402
Construction Site Offers Fleeting Glimpse of the Civil War Past
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/12/us/construction-site-offers-fleeting-glimpse-of-the-civil-war-past.html
Book Review: Victors in Blue: How Union Generals Fought the Confederates, Battled Each Other, and Won the Civil War.
http://warandgame.com/2012/11/18/book-review-victors-in-blue-how-union-generals-fought-the-confederates-battled-each-other-and-won-the-civil-war/
Shut up and quit whining….
“Apparently, Georges Santayana was correct when he wrote “those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
http://civilwarcavalry.com/?p=3453
The infamous sheriff “gratefully accepted” an award from the Sons of Confederate Veterans last year
http://www.salon.com/2012/12/27/joe_arpaio_accepted_award_from_neo_confederate_group/
A quote from one of their newsletters, “From the Miami Beach Morning Mail of 1939…”Your recent quote by Dr. Paul Dekruff that “he hadn’t gone to see Gone with the Wind because the South lost the War but the film won’t admit it” was interesting, writes Mrs. Gladys Stephens. “But my grandfather, who fought in it, knows better. As a youngster, I asked him just how come the North won. “Why, honey,” he told me, “they never licked us! We wore ourselves out lickin’ them!””
Are you going to see Ed Bearess in a couple of weeks, Professor Simpson?
I don’t believe so.
White Power to the Rescue, Nathan Bedford Forrest and Memphis
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/white_power_to_the_rescue_20130128/
Great blog, more than just a historical blog but a life lesson in critical thinking. Thanks Dr Simpson
Dr. Simpson,
Just wanted to flag you that I’ve listed your blog on my page for a “Liebster Award,” the peer recognition from fellow bloggers. Don’t feel as though you need to follow through with the question-and-answer parameters suggested by the award guidelines (it’s actually a bit labor intensive!). But I just wanted to let you know I admire the work you’re doing here.
Best,
Patrick
Dr. Simpson, Thank you for being there. Keep up the good work! Your reasoning is refreshing on a War that still arouses passions. As an old Southerner, I found your take on Robert E. Lee quite acceptable. Well-balanced and thoughtful in a world that is a bit crude and opinionated in nefarious, self-serving ways. I have been researching and writing historical fiction novel on my great-grandfather’s service under Lee in some of the great battles in Virginia. Title: Pinckney’s General. Ready soon. For my reading pleasure, I roam google, even thought novel is finished and being proofread. Coming across your site is an unexpected pleasure, an island of sanity, both informative and, somehow, amusing! Thanks so much!