Take a teacher’s tour of Gettysburg as Matt guides you through the battle’s turning points, illustrating some of its most significant personalities and acts of heroism while sketching the bigger picture of the Gettysburg Campaign.
http://vimeo.com/48368173
http://vimeo.com/48363076
http://vimeo.com/48326791
http://vimeo.com/48326733
http://vimeo.com/48322824
Every time I listen to a lecture, attend a conference, find new material and new ways of thinking about the Civil War I have to rethink how I teach it. I only have two weeks, maybe three at the most if I stretch it, to teach the Civil War from start to finish including what led up to it. How to choose the most important parts to teach and then how to effectively teach them is a real struggle for me. I find that students tend to remember things much better when emotion is attached to whatever they are learning. I have been moved to tears a few times when reading soldiers’ letters home over the last few days and I think this is a valuable tool.
I decided to do my Wordle experiment with the words of a very sweet love letter from a soldier to his wife. I thought this might be a good introduction to both Wordle and the real experiences of war as seen from the primary sources of letters written by soldiers of both sides of the war.
This is something I intend to use. I think the emotion from the voices of the soldiers tell the story of the war very well. As I have read in more than one place, how great it is that during the Civil War there was no censorship of the soldiers’ letters so we can see the honest feelings of the men. My sudents will connect with this.
This is just pure reflection. Of course having listened to the lectures and read the additional documents, watched the guest speakers, etc. Lincoln is on my mind. I love him. I think I am one of his biggest fans. I think of what it must have been like to be married to such an extraordinary man.
I imagine their dinner conversations or even private conversations when they retire for the evening, and I am envious of such a lucky woman to be able to actually just listen to Abraham. However, like many married women, Mary did a lot of “retail therapy” to try to make herself happy because she was apparently not so. I guess, sadly for my romantic side, the Lincolns did not share a relationship like the Adams. What a missed opportunity. I imagine the President when he finally relaxes at night, if he was able to, sharing his real and private thoughts with his wife. How amazing would that be? I believe and am totally convinced that Lincoln ALWAYS hated slavery. He said so himself. I believe the war was about slavery. He said it in the Second Inaugural Address and I believe it was ALWAYS about slavery. Of course it was also about preserving the Union. Lincoln loved this experiement in government and could not stand the idea that it could fail. But he also hated slavery. Was he racist? Perhaps to some degree – especially by today’s standards, however he evolved like all of us do as we learn more and have more life experiences. I think we often, especially in elementary levels, see students who just think of Lincoln as a good honest president who freed the slaves. But he was SO much more than that. He was shrewd. He was brilliant. He was a great politician and he seemed to know exactly when to say what to achieve the results he really wanted. I am so glad we have awesome historians who dig deep into subjects and then share the knowledge they acquire. It makes me feel like I know Abraham Lincoln just a little bit.
The Faust book is a godsend for my students-they just don’t know it yet.
Every year each students pick a Civil War topic to research and every year several students choose women-related topic. Spies. Nurses. Homefront. It ends up that most all of it is from a Northern perspective. Alot of them get stymied by the lack of Confederate information. There are a few online sources but most are at an academic level that my 13 year olds struggle with. This book is a goldmine. I’ve already sent an email to my librarian asking for two copies.
I started reading it from page one but have found myself going to the index over and over again as I remember topics students wanted to search out but our library on online source didn’t have. Many of them are covered by Dr. Faust.
One area my students wrestle with is the sensibility of the day. Chivalry states that women were too delicate physically and emotionally. Seeing men at their worst would change a women. They would get in the way of the doctor and might even start bossing the doctor around. Nursing is such a female dominated occupation today that concerns over “The Florence Nightingale Business” (p. 92) seem trivial.
One gift in this book is the explanation of how the Confederate nursing corp developed. We have so much information about the Union and Dorthea Dix and The Sanitation Commission that I almost automatically send students that direction. To have an accessible explanation on how nurses came to care for Southern soldiers is exciting.
BTW-the document up top is a Confederate Circular asking women to grow poppies to be ground into morphine (source-National Archives).
In 1859 Abraham Lincoln visited Kansas from November 30th through December 5th . He had been invited by a distant relative Mrs. Mark W.Delahay. Her husband Mark Delahay had a personal friendship with Abraham Lincoln originating with their mutual cause in establishing the Republican Party.In 1859, Delahay sought the Republican nomination for a United States Senate seat for Kansas.This is history that Kansas students seem to really enjoy and it gives them a sense that our state was an important part of US history especially from the 1850’s and throughout the time period of the Civil war. I tell them the towns he visited and what he did and said while he was there.
I have attempted to create a Google Map to show you where Abraham Lincoln traveled while in the state of Kansas.
It is incredibly difficult to think of a moment that made me want to fight and die for my country. As a liberal arts student at a liberal arts college, I had casual conversations with friends, perhaps late at night and fueled by liquid courage, about what might happen if the U.S. was attacked by an outside force. In reality, the idea is, despite the events of recent years, so remote as to be inaccessible to most Americans.
I was a sophomore in college on September 11, 2001. I remember this as perhaps the most confusing day of my life. I didn’t know what to do, or how to feel. We actually attended class that day — I remember my professor in Italian 101 breaking down in the middle of her lecture.
One thing I remember, beyond the sadness, beyond the confusion, was the rage. The willingness of my classmates to sign up for, or at least talk about signing up for, military service was shocking. Of course, few did, but I know the feeling was not unique to Loyola University.
This is the closest I can get to the mindset of the Oberlin College student cited by McPherson on p. 16 of his book. “WAR! and volunteers are only topics of conversation or thought. The lessons today have been a mere form. I cannot study. I cannot sleep. I cannot work.”
How do we move our students to understand this mindset? The September 11 attacks themselves are difficult to teach — most high school students are too young to remember them. How can we give life to the words long dead soldiers in our nation’s deadliest conflict?
Alexander Stephens’ “Cornerstone” speech
I was mucking about with Tagxedo…
I am fascinated with pro-slavery thought. My younger self believed the planter class lived in a sad state of denial, not knowing the wrongs they committed. A bit later, I wondered at the stress that must have consumed those whose hands held the wolf’s ears. It’s not that I never felt deeply for the slaves, or at all blamed enslaved people for their condition and treatment. I don’t blame victims.
But I am curious about the mindset of victimizers; perhaps there may be some future value in that understanding. Among the most interesting elements of the buildup to the Civil War was the reaction of Southern political leaders to the pending ascendancy of the Republican party, especially among the most eloquent pro-slavery speakers.
Alexander Stephens is represented above, in his Cornerstone speech of March 21, 1861. “Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition.”
Fascinating.
I spent some time exploring and becoming familiar with the House Divided research engine this afternoon. There seem to be a lot of very interesting facets to this project which could be utilized in the classroom. While exploring I spent some time with the House Divided Video Channel and viewed the interview with Fergus Bordewich about the Underground Railroad.
I found Bordewich’s discussion about the religious motivation behind the Underground Railroad particularly interesting. He commented that he was surprised by the significance that the religious revivalism of the time played in the establishment of the Underground Railroad. Because I am interested in the religious aspects of the abolitionist and anti-slavery movements this caught my attention. I am intrigued by and would like to know more about this aspect of the coming of the war, the war itself and Reconstruction. Any suggestions as to books, websites or other materials on this would be appreciated
His telling of the story of Jermain Loguen was also notable. This portion of the clip would be a great attention getter to show at the beginning of a lesson on the Underground Railroad. It could also serve as a springboard into some form of discussion activity which could lead into a brief writing assignment or blogging activity. Good stuff.
I will admit to tunnel vision with much of my teaching over the last eight years. I believe that I am in such a hurry to make up for the lack of information that I was given on Black Studies in high school and with my undergraduate degree and, I am trying to ensure that my students do not share the same fate. So I am definitely a bottom up interpreter of history teacher for my students.
So, I am intrigued that I am so drawn to the book by Faust and she hooked me with the introduction. As she explain that the “history of elites has not been a particularly fashionable topic in recent years,” and why she chose to still pursue the research. What captured me was that through this work, I was also able to learn nuances of the enslaved people as well.
I use the book NightJohn by Gary Pulsen to teach the Antebellum Period and we watch the movie in its entirety. Last year I added the narratives of Thomas Day and Dave the Potter to give students a wider perspective of people of color during this period. On page 161 of Faust book, where she discusses reading and writing, and how the Civil War and literacy changed the course for many women, I thought that I could add this in another layer to my NightJohn lesson, particularly comparing and contrasting the meaning of reading from an enslaved perspective and that of the elite class. So excited to see where this will lead.
Constitutional Firewall. What an interesting phrase. I rolled it around on my tongue a few times and I liked it. Wish I’d coined it, but that credit goes to Allen Guetzo.
Did not know about Guetzo except he delivers internet lectures in an arresting fashion. Searched for more about him and found a few tidbits and a presidential appointment. Which is excellent, because I took what he said as solid historical documentation. His GL lecture explained a good deal of the political intrigue behind Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation.
Washington, D.C. was a tough town for Lincoln. He did not have as much support from his fellow republicans as I presumed and surprisingly, one of his military generals, was bent on telling him how to run the country. On top of two prominant snakes waiting in White House front lawn grass, Lincoln’s hands were bound by the constraints of the U.S. Constitution. Firewall indeed. Lincoln had to color within the lines while maintaining the founding fathers’ war powers. But, he did not necessarily have to live by them.
According to Guetzo, Lincoln devised a modern day “buyout” plan. A golden parachute he wanted to offer to border states willing to accept $700 thousands dollars. It was insurance money for Delware, Kentucky, Maryland and Missouri to stay on the side of Union and even better, entice the rebel states back home. It was not a cheap plan. Lincoln needed something though to outmaneuver Roger B. Taney. The US Chief Justice and brother-in-law of Francis Scott Key, was determined to stop Lincoln from declaring maritial law, civil war, his love for his country, heck, he did not want Lincoln doing anything that helped the cause against the South. Taney was not Lincoln’s biggest problem child at the beginning of the war. That honor went to Major General George Brinton (love the middle name) McClellan.
It seems “Little Mac” or “Young Napoleon” was pretty sure of himself during his tenure as Lincoln’s General-in-Chief of the Union Army. At this point in his lecture, Guetzo reminded his audience of a fact I did not know existed. McClellan wrote a missive to Lincoln. Told the chief executive Washington, D.C. would be best run by a military man, a dictator rather than the president! I can see why Lincoln dismissed McClellan’s fanciful notion and then dismissed (now lower case) major general as well. Although, presidents could not afford to fire military leaders, they just reassigned them elsewhere, way elsewhere, so they were no longer important. As Douglas MacArthur, in his famous bitter last words, stated these type of “old soldiers never die, they just fade away.” These “mac” militaries had more in common than I thought!
Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén