What Reenacting Has Done for Me

A very young, very smooth-faced, and very farby me.

A very young, very smooth-faced, and very farby me as a private in the 3rd Pennsylvania Heavy Artillery, Battery B

As my final passion post of the year, I felt it would be appropriate to close with a summary of what this wonderful hobby has done for me over the years. Reenacting’s been a pretty long road for me. When I first started off, I was a shy little pre-teen kid who barely had a uniform put together. I joined up with a unit from the nearby town of Boalsburg and manned an artillery piece. I was really quiet at that stage of my life, both outside reenacting and inside. When I went to a reenactment, I generally would keep to myself and not talk much. When I did, I was usually so petrified of social interaction that I would stumble over my words and seem silly. Yeah, I was only a kid then, but still, I was pretty awkward.

 

As the years went on, I met more people within the hobby and actually found myself making friends. I met other reenactors my age and started to make some pretty strong bonds with people. I think it was at this point that I really started to learn the idea of social conversation and finesse. Honestly, I credit my younger years in reenacting with teaching me how to be more socially outgoing. Reenacting can be a pretty social thing to do. You communicate with your friends in your unit, people in other units, and the spectators who come to see you. Around the age of fifteen, I got the (looking back, rather silly) idea into my head to form my own unit and be an officer.

Me on the far right in command of a company. Too much hair, too high of rank, and not enough facial hair...

Me on the far right in command of a company. Too much hair, too high of rank, and not enough facial hair…

For a year or two, I served as a captain in command of a small company. Granted, I was pretty wet behind the ears and had no business being an officer yet, but alas! the foolishness of youth. Yet in this capacity, I found myself attending officers’ meetings, coordinating with other company commanders and battalion commanders. I had to conduct myself, even at that young age, in a fairly professional manner (the officer life is very politicky). I think it was that sort of interaction that I found myself in that really taught me how to obtain a professional attitude when I needed one and how to interact with superiors and peers.

Me and that big chucklehead Chase a few years ago, looking like 19th century badasses.

Me and that big chucklehead Chase a few years ago, looking like 19th century badasses.

After a couple years wearing some gold bars on my shoulders, I figured it would be best to just step back into the ranks and be a regular old private. True, the uniform isn’t as sexy, but things are more fun and there’s nowhere near as much responsibility! Even so, I continued to grow personally and socially. I made so many networking connections through these years in reenacting. By meeting new people at each event, hanging out with them, and marching alongside them, I tied myself to people I never would have known without reenacting. For instance, through reenacting I met a real British person for the first time! A real Brit! (Understand, I come from a very rural place that doesn’t get many outsiders). I met numerous specialists in the field of historical interpretation, where I very well may make my career. I got in touch with so many interesting people. Hell, I met my best friend through reenacting. My boy Chase Hornberger and I go way back. That kid’s like a brother to me. We’ve shot at each other, we’ve had fist-fights together, we carried each other out of battle when one of us was wounded. I must say, reenacting set me up with a pretty cool friendship.

Today, reenacting is still doing me some wonders. The volunteer work I did and leadership skills I developed through the hobby has taken me far. You better believe that on my application to PSU, I mentioned the fact that I’m basically an amateur history teacher and I have commanded a twenty-man company. The strong background into historical research methods that the hobby taught me has given me an edge in the pursuit of my history degree. I think the coolest thing reenacting has done for me, though, has just recently come to fruition. Thanks to the capabilities of historical instruction and education that my dearly beloved hobby has taught me, I received a position as an intern this summer at Gettysburg National Military Park.

When I'm out there educating the public on those hallowed fields this summer, I'll have the wearing of that old blue coat to thank.

When I’m out there educating the public on those hallowed fields this summer, I’ll have the wearing of that old blue coat to thank.

I don’t think I ever could have gotten such an amazing opportunity were it not for the social and interpretive skills that reenacting has taught me. Reenacting has taken me pretty far thus far. Having it in my life in the developmental stages of my teenage years I think really influenced for the better the sort of person I am and what I am capable of society. But just because I’m in college now and my career – whatever it may be – looms over the horizon, that doesn’t mean I intend to lay my rifle down and hang up my hat! As long as I can, I hope to keep getting back out in the field with all my friends for a nice long trip back into history. No matter what sort of attire I end up wearing for my career – be it a black suit and tie of a government man or the forest green trousers and gray shirt of a NPS park ranger – part of my heart will always belong to the wearing of that old blue uniform and the shouldering of that heavy old rifle.

Cheers, friends, and keep your powder dry!

The ‘Acting’ in ‘Reenacting’ – Talking the Talk

So, you’re a spectator visiting a reenactment. Things are looking pretty cool. You’re in a pretty period looking camp, with all the men living in cramped little tents and with their weapons all stacked neatly in a line at the head of the company street. The men of the company you’re walking past are just finishing up their mid-day meal of unpleasant salt pork and unbreakable hardtack. Suddenly, bugles begin blowing across the camps and the company falls into formation. The men take their rifles from the stacks and stand at attention, preparing to head off to combat. In your eyes, things are looking pretty freakin’ cool. “Wow, this must be exactly what it was like!” … And then two privates in the front rank of the company strike up the following banter:

“Dude, you see that staff officer walking over there? So, yeah, he’s got a daughter our age, and I’m friends with her on Facebook. Sooooooooo hawt, man.”

“I believe it, man.”

“Dude, dude, dude! Look, there she is! In the lilac hoop skirt!”

“Daaaaaaaamn, bro. She looks like Jennifer Lawrence, and I ain’t gonna lie, that corset she’s got on is definitely a plus one. You think she’d stitch up that hole in my shirt sleeve? Honestly, if that chick can do a mean back-stitch, I’m gonna be all over that.”

FARBS: Don't let them ruin the moment...

FARBS: Don’t let them ruin the moment…

Yup, your nice period moment where everything seemed exactly like it must have been back in 1864. Gone. Yeah, you’re suddenly right back in 2014 and strikingly aware that all these guys standing in line with guns are not Federal soldiers, but just a bunch of sweaty, smelly modern guys with a weird hobby who didn’t feel like taking up golfing. If this ever happens to you, I AM SO SORRY, and I sincerely apologize for the dinguses (yes, dingus, it’s a great word) who committed the act. Most of us in the reenacting community try our best to keep things as period accurate as possible, even in our conversations.

When we try to keep our terminology and discussion topics in a period appropriate manner, we call this “doing first-person.” First-person refers to not necessarily being at an event to be a historical interpreter as we may sometimes do, but instead being a walking museum. We do this not only for the benefit of visitors so they can get a better feel for the era, but also for our own sake so we can better immerse ourselves in the setting and get what we term a “period moment.” These moments are something that all reenactors strive for. They’re points at an event where everything is just so realistic to the period that you actually stop for a second and think, “My God… This is what it was like…” And you feel as if you’re really there. These tend to be some pretty powerful moments for us personally because we put so much time, work, research, and passion into the history of this era. Doing first-person is always one of the most effective ways to cause a period moment.

In order for we reenactors to do first-person, we have to do a fair amount of research to find out what people in the 1860s actually talked like and talked about. To be honest, it can be a pretty cool anthropological study to do this. Often times, we read through letters, diaries, or other first-person accounts of the era to get a feel for the dialect of the times. We also do all we can to adapt proper accents to the origin of the particular unit we’re portraying. (For the 20th Maine, we’d adapt a New England accent, but not quite as strong as we know it today. For the 29th New York, a regiment made up largely of German immigrants, we may do what we can to use a German accent or maybe work some German into our discussions. For a Southern regiment, like the 14th South Carolina, you bet we’re going to use quite a sloooooooow drawwwwwwwl.) As far as actual terminology, things can be a little different from how we talk today and a lot of the colloquialisms used can sound pretty quaint – as they should! For instance, some period terms might include swapping “between” for “betwixt,” “guys” for “pards” or “fellas,” “played out” for “tired,” or “skedaddle” for “run away.” A typical conversation in a Civil War camp might sound a little like this:

Being authentic is sexy.

Being authentic is sexy.

“Hey, you boys hear about First Sergeant Jones over in Company E? I hear tell he’s come down with an ugly spell of the Kentucky quicksteps. Hear he’s feelin’ right mean as of late.”

“I confess, I ain’t very much surprised, considerin’ the brass went n’ put camp downstream of the sinks. Jones had it comin’ anyway. Ol’ feller was crazier’n a shithouse rat n’ was always fit to be tied ’bout somethin’.”

“I’m just glad it ain’t me. I got a fair share of troubles as it is. Went n’ picked up the rheumatiz last winter in my knee. Cain’t hardly get it to bend on some cold mornings.”

As you can see, slang was pretty different back then. (I personally love to study profanity of the era. Though I included a little in that example, I won’t go into detail on it here.) Talking like this in period topics can really add to the feel of the event, both for spectators and for reenactors. In the next post, we’ll talk about acting as far as how we reenactors act out on the field of battle!

 

 

Also, as a little bonus for you, I run a Facebook page that’s pretty popular within the hobby called “The Best of Reenactor Memes.” Here’s a couple memes for you just because why not.

My buddy Chase made this one at my expense...

My buddy Chase made this one at my expense…

 

 

But it's ok, because he's my best buddy.

But it’s ok, because he’s my best buddy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And just to let you know what to stay away from should you go to a reenactment. This picture is known in the hobby to pretty be a typical definition of a "farb," or inauthentic reenactor.

And just to let you know what to stay away from should you go to a reenactment. This picture is known in the hobby to pretty be a typical definition of a “farb,” or inauthentic reenactor.

 

 

Feeding a Small Army: The Logistics of Reenacting – Part II

Good day, twenty-first century readers! In my last post, I talked a little bit about some of the logistics for planning and setting up a reenactment. I discussed a lot of the hard work that goes into getting an event site good to go for the big weekend (or week, in some cases), like finding appropriate and interesting land to use, constructing earthworks or other resources for the landscape of the battlefield, and establishing a script or plan of action for the opposing forces. Today, I’ll get into some of the really tough grunt work of getting these time travel trips ready.

The Federal camp at the 150th anniversary commemoration of the Battle of Shiloh in Tennessee was noted to be basically a swamp and infested with ticks. Yummy, just yummy. Photo courtesy of Simon Taylor.

The Federal camp at the 150th anniversary commemoration of the Battle of Shiloh in Tennessee was noted to be basically a swamp and infested with ticks. Yummy, just yummy. Photo courtesy of Simon Taylor.

As time draws closer to the event weekend, organizers should already have a good site picked out for the event with much of the aesthetic work already in progress. Any removable modern items should be moved away from the event site, a decent battlefield should be picked out, and a general plan of what will happen where should be established. The next big step is selecting campsites for each side. This can be a little tough, because as reenactors, we can be a little picky about where we set up camp. Sure, if it’s a pretty crappy campsite, we deal with it, but we of course want to be comfy if we can. Generally when selecting areas for camps, organizers should try to avoid really marshy ground (sure, it’s easy to hammer in your tent stakes, but trust me, it sucks to sleep on…). Such areas can of course cause you to wake up in a muddy pile of muck and can be host to mosquitoes and all sorts of other nasty wee beasties. Camps should also be situated under some decent tree cover to offer some protection in case of inclement weather. Also, camps set up in valleys or low points in the local topography generally turn out REALLY bad if it rains. Where does rain go if the ground is already saturated? Why, downhill of course. Keep your campgrounds high!

I swear, I’ve never done this… But I know someone who did. What happens in the Army of the Potomac stays in the Army of the Potomac.

In the case of events that are more oriented for less “hardcore” reenactors, event organizers should also make arrangements for proper “latrines.” By this, I basically mean they have to haul in porta-johns. If it’s a really big reenactment, like the annual (and infamously historically inaccurate…) Gettysburg reenactment, they also make sure that if the – ahem – latrines get too full and yucky, the – ahem – “honey dippers” get called in to clean things up. Yeah. If it were my choice, I wouldn’t put up with that. Everybody would do it like they original fellas did: once the regiment made camp, a latrine ditch was establish some distance away, and was covered over when they left. Easy! But, I’ll concede, some of the old fogies aren’t that sprightly anymore, so they do what they gotta do.

This… This just depresses me…

If you’re putting on a legit, decent-quality reenactment, this one can be pretty challenging: providing food for the troops!  This can be done a number of ways. Some less involved organizers might decide to not even offer anything, which we don’t really mind all that much, and we just bring our own food. Some smaller local-based events often times will offer reenactors a nice dinner on Saturday evening, usually something like barbecue or roast chicken. However, this is generally not very authentic and isn’t done at some of the more immersive events. The absolute best and most impressive method of feeding the boys in the field is giving them rations exactly like what the original soldiers had. This can often be a COLOSSAL undertaking, so sometimes event organizers and coordinators will leave food provisions up to the general staffs of each army or to lower level staff officers. Regardless of how it’s done, we reenactors usually pay into it all beforehand so we can all

My boys of the 151st Pennsylvania cooking their rations in winter camp.

My boys of the 151st Pennsylvania cooking their rations in winter camp.

get grub. Depending on how much food needs to be provided, we may have to each contribute $10-$25  so the food coordinators can purchase provisions. Provisions that are often issued at events are hardtack (a very hard cracker), salt pork or beef (a very heavily salted piece of meat that is meant to stay preserved, not to be tasty), fresh beef (PLEASE give me fresh, not salted…), coffee beans, or other fresh produce. As an example, at 150th Antietam, each man in my regiment, the 4th Texas, was issued rations of green corn, unripe apples, a slab of fresh beef, and a cup of flour. At 150th Gettysburg, we in the Iron Brigade were issued a few pieces of hardtack, some salt pork, and whatever else we could scrounge up from trades. As you can see, food can of course be covered in a period accurate manner, but there’s one thing that sadly can’t… Water! Today, our bodies aren’t used to the microbes and whatnot in creeks and rivers that the boys of blue and gray were able to stomach. What’s more, many potential water sources today are a little more polluted than they were in the 1860s. Trust me, you don’t want to fill your canteen in the Potomac. To supply us water, event organizers have to have water brought to the site, often in big tanks called water buffalos or even in huge tanker trucks. Sometimes, we try to camouflage these water sources so they aren’t so glaringly modern-looking, but there’s only so much we can do.

So, that’s what goes into making a reenactment happen! And that’s just for making it possible for us reenactors to do it! You’ve got to do publicity on top of that to ensure people come out to see it, that way all this hard work won’t go unnoticed!

4th

The Birth of Our Oldest Party – The Second Party System

In our prior article in this series, we had discussed the origins of the political divide within the United States. Beginning with divergent opinions over how to interpret and implement the Constitution and the way our nation should be constructed, our first set of political parties – called by political historians the “First Party System” – consisted of the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans. The Federalists favored a strong central federal government that wielded a fair amount of power over the states and believed that the future of the nation rested in commerce, industry, and trade with foreign nations. The Democratic-Republicans believed in a very limited government, preferring the states to possess greater power, and felt that the yeoman middle-class farmer was symbolic of the direction the nation should follow. Despite making important changes in our government that influences us even today, the Federalists were repeatedly swept in elections following the presidency of John Adams. The party soon disbanded in 1828, ushering in the end of the First Party System and bringing on the Second.

Oh, yes, Old Hickory would get his revenge…

In 1824, before the Federalist Party met its death, the seeds of the Second Party System were already planted. That year, only one party was in the presidential election. The Democratic-Republicans were running four men for the presidency: John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, William Crawford, and Andrew Jackson. Jackson won the popular vote of the election, however there was no electoral majority. The election was then thrown into the House, which, with the behind-the-scenes help of Henry Clay, chose well-connected John Quincy Adams. Jackson, claiming a “corrupt bargain,” left the Democratic-Republicans to form his own faction of reformers. This faction would become known as the Democratic Party. Meanwhile, Adams’ Democratic-Republicans came to be known as National Republicans. Jackson’s party became known for its outspoken disapproval of the Second Bank of the United States, a large federally operated bank based on Alexander Hamilton’s Federalist beliefs. Jacksonian Democrats felt the bank, issuing its paper money, was perpetuating economic instability and that the credit of the United States should be based on specie (gold, silver, etc.) rather than paper notes. Furthermore, the Democrats ran in support of the working class, farmers, immigrants, and the westward expansion of the nation.

Ok, tell me that isn’t awesome.

The election of 1828 brought about an entirely new era of American politics, truly bringing a marked change from the First Party System. Jackson’s Democrats and Adams’ National Republicans unleashed into the country a level of mudslinging and negative campaigning previously unseen in the young nation. Jackson’s supporters referred to Adams as a pimp, spreading a rumor that while Adams was serving as ambassador to Russia, he had given an American girl to the czar for sexual favors. Adams’ supporters countered by calling Jackson a murderer for engaging in numerous duels and executing six militiamen during his military service. The National Republicans went so far as to question the legitimacy of Jackson’s marriage, claiming that Rachel Jackson was an adulteress because she had allegedly married Jackson while married to another man. Despite these less than sparkling aspects of this period in American politics, the election of 1828 sparked a huge overdrive in the levels of voter turnout. The heavy and highly involved campaigning during this election resulted in four times as many voters participating than in 1824.

An 1837 lithograph with the first usage of the Democratic “jackass,” a symbol of the Democrats that still exists today.

Jackson roundly defeated Adams and went on to a two-term presidency marked with what some would term as heavy-handed policy. Crushing the Second Bank of the United States, smashing political opponents like his rival Henry Clay, and presiding over the dangerous Nullification Crisis in which South Carolina threatened to secede over tariffs, Andrew Jackson gathered quite an opposition to his name. His opponents, rallying from the ashes of the old National Republicans, founded the Whig Party in 1833. The term “Whig” is derived from a term patriots and opponents of King George III in the American Revolution referred to themselves as. Wishing to announce their opposition to the oppression of “King Andrew,” the name stuck. Making their first major appearance on the national political stage in the election of 1836, the Whigs ran three candidates: William Henry Harrison, Daniel Webster, Hugh Lawson White, and Willie Person Mangum (what a name…). However, they were unable to muster up enough votes against the genius political maneuvering of “The Little Wizard,” Martin Van Buren. However, war hero Harrison managed to rally significant support and knock Van Buren down four years later.

In the next post, we’ll chart the second half of this rather large and influential segment of American political periodization, following the battle of the Democrats and Whigs, the rise and fall of smaller third parties, the divide over the question of slavery, and the eventual rise of the Republican Party. Thanks for reading, tune in next week!

jqadams

Feeding a Small Army: The Logistics of Reenacting – Part I

I was recently having a chat over the phone with my long-time reenacting friend, Chase. We were both geeking out over the prospect of a sweet new event being held down in Arkansas next June called the Red River Campaign. A full week-long event, about a thousand of us would spend the week on the prowl through 60 miles of southern back country, a regiment of Federals and a regiment of Confederates hunting each other in the hazy forests of the Deep South. As awesome as all this sounds, I had to stop and think, “Holy crap, this is going to be sheer hell for the event organizers. Having to feed a thousand men for seven days?”  I’m not gonna lie, I’m pretty glad I’m not organizing the Red River Campaign. But it got me to thinking, there’s A LOT that goes into organizing a reenactment, even just a weekend event, and it’s often more than spectators – or even we reenactors – expect.

The first thing you’ve got to get down for organizing an event is finding a place to do it. This is easier said than done. I mean, sure, if you really want to, you can organize a reenactment on a local soccer field or fairground, but the thing is that most reenactors won’t show up and it simply won’t be a good experience for anybody. We reenactors want to do our thing on unique and interesting ground with few modern intrusions where we can have a pretty impressive fight. If we get some land like that to play around with, nine times out of ten we will put on an awesome show for the spectators if it is a public event.

This 150th anniversary reenactment of the Battle of Antietam was held on a farm four miles from Antietam National Battlefield in nearby Boonsboro, Maryland. Photo courtesy of Oak Hill Studio.

But getting the land to put on a reenactment isn’t always easy. If we are putting on an anniversary reenactment of a particular battle, we often cannot do it on the original battlefield as most major Civil War battlefields are owned by the National Park Service, who, understandably, does not permit a couple thousand armed men to rampage over their land and make a mess. Often times, the reenactment must be held at an adjacent property, like a nearby farm or woodland preserve. Some land owners are kind enough to allow us to use their land free of charge so long as we clean up afterwards, but other proprietors request payment for the land usage.

Organizers digging trenches during the planning stage of a reenactment to be held this April. Picture courtesy of John Pagano.

Organizers digging trenches during the planning stage of a reenactment to be held this April. Picture courtesy of John Pagano.

The next big step is planning the event itself. What exactly is the event going to entail? If it’s a recreation of a real battle, how are we going to properly recreate portions of the fighting? If it’s just a hypothetical scenario, what can be done to make the experience of the event as good and historically accurate as possible? In some cases to accomplish this, event organizers have to put together a “script” for the reenactment. If we’re recreating a real battle, this script will detail out to commanding officers, “Ok, at 6:30 AM, 1st Brigade will advance into the clearing and commence firing on the right flank of the Chesapeake Volunteer Guard. At 7:15 AM, the Liberty Rifles will march up the eastern road and support 3rd battalion in their assault on General Anders’ center-front.” Sometimes to prepare the event site for the scenario, work needs to be done on the land. Entrenchments may need to be dug, trees may need to be cut, fences may need to be built, and crops may need to be planted. At 2012’s Maryland, My Maryland event in Boonsboro, MD, an entire acre-wide cornfield was planted specifically for reenactors to fight through (don’t worry, all the corn grown in the field was stripped from the stalks before the event and donated to a local food pantry).

Tune in next week to learn how we deal with actually having to take care of a couple thousand hungry, smelly men for a weekend!

Stories from the Frontlines: Gettysburg, 1863 – Part 2

Just like my last passion blog entry, I am telling the story of my own experiences as if they were through the eyes of a real Civil War soldier. In this entry, I will complete the telling of my experience on Culp’s Hill at the Battle of Gettysburg.

Map of the second day at the Battle of Gettysburg. Culp’s Hill is located just southeast of town.

We rose up from behind the barricade, and 500 rifles leveled down the hill. As the officers screamed the order, the wall exploded in a blaze of fire and we showered the charging rebels with a staggering volley. It was the first shot I’d fired in anger. I didn’t aim for anyone in particular. You scarcely had to, there were so many of them. I don’t know if I hit anyone or if I killed anyone that first shot, but it would scarcely matter later, for there were times I knew I had brought a man down. As we reloaded, the rebs struggled up to a fair distance from our entrenchments and took cover wherever they could – behind trees, under fallen logs, under rock ledges. Digging in their heels in their own positions and laying down amidst the brush, they began to fire up at us, taking careful, calculated shots at us. The officers gave us the order to fire at will and the men began opening up fire and random intervals, making a staccato roar that rarely seemed to cease.

The men of the 150th New York rest in between attacks. Chase and I pictured at the right.

The men of the 150th New York rest in between attacks. Chase and I pictured at the right.

As bullets whizzed over our heads, Chase and I kept our heads low and below the brim of the barricade. We’d rise up in tandem, firing down into the woods, now filling with smoke, as the other reloaded. At times, the rebel line would shudder, and at last they began to fall back down the hill to reform. We were left momentarily in comparative silence. The boys of the 150th New York took out new packages of ammunition from their cartridge boxes and prepared for the next wave that was sure to come. I looked to my right and saw that Chase was shaking. He was horrifically shaken by the firing, and with some effort from other men of the company, we managed to calm him down.

That shrill shriek, the rebel yell, broke the silence again, and up the hill they came screaming again. Again we waited, and again we poured another volley into them. After firing, I lingered too long above the cover of the barricade and took a bullet to my left forearm. Chase, again shaken beyond belief, dragged me a few yards behind the barricade and tried to bind up the wound. Trying to calm him, I told him I’d manage and that he should return to the firing line. Dazed and confused, I lay against a tree watching the carnage unfold around me. A good number of men in the regiment had also been hit. Some were lucky and slightly wounded like me. A good number, however, were dead, head wounds mostly. As I looked down the line, I heard the sickening slap of lead hitting flesh near me, and turned in time to see Chase, my best friend, writhing in agony on the ground, shot in the throat. I scrambled over to him and screamed for help, from anyone at all. He didn’t last much longer after that. He died in my arms, and as the battle died away, night fell, and the rebs retreated down the hill into the darkness, I wept over his body while other men of the company gathered around. After a while, I brought myself to leave him and stand alone by the barricade. Around my feet was the tattered detritus of battle: torn cartridge papers, broken equipment, leaves clipped by bullets from the trees. Down below, in the darkness, the fireflies emerged, alighting the hell-stricken forest. But their beauty was pointless amidst the pitiful cries and moans of dying Confederate soldiers on the slopes below. I watched the little yellow lights hover over some motionless gray masses just down the hill from the barricade and thought what hell war was.

We buried Chase that night on the hill, his blanket for a burial shroud. I sent his personal effects home to his mother and father.

Video credit – Andrew Prasse/HistoricSandusky – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UD6mbdrpl6w

Where It All Began – The First Parties

In last week’s blog post, we covered the opinions of our nation’s Founding Fathers on the concept of political parties within the United States of America. The three spotlighted Founding Fathers we spotlighted were our first three presidents, George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson. What they had to say about political parties would certainly not flatter the modern Democratic Party or GOP. Washington said, “The alternate domination of one faction over another… is itself a frightful despotism.” Almost having a frightful premonition, Adams put it, “There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties.” Jefferson mused, “Such an addiction [the submission to a political party] is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all.”

Yet, despite these men’s best efforts, political parties began to form early in our nations history. This week, we’ll explore the origins of these parties and what they stood for in the period typically described as America’s First Party System.

The First Party System is typically described by political historians as beginning around 1796 and progressing to 1816. In the first years since the Constitution’s ratification in 1787, George Washington provided something of a stabilizing presence within the nation’s political realm. A dedicated non-partisan, he despised the notion of the country becoming split into factions. However, even under his own administration, he saw the effects of political division beginning to take effect. The first great political break initiated with the construction of the Constitution itself. Federalists (led by James Madison and Alexander Hamilton) were for the establishment of a stronger central government and the eventual passage of the Constitution, while the Anti-Federalists (led by the likes of Patrick Henry) preferred a weaker national government and preferred things as they were under the Articles of Confederation. As we all know, the Constitution passed and the Anti-Federalists were defeated. But still, the question of how strong the national government should be is a question that continued to a be a burr under the saddle for Americans throughout the coming years.

A pretty accurate description of how the First Party System came to be.

This question brought about the rise of personalities as rallying posts for where the country would go in the future. On one hand was Alexander Hamilton, Secretary of the Treasury under Washington, who had visions of a strong federal government based on industry and mercantilism with foreign nations (Great Britain in particular). On the other was Thomas Jefferson, a strong supporter of the the value of “republicanism” (note the small “r”). The classical concept of republicanism in American political history holds a belief in the rights of the states rather than the strength of the Federal government, and that the key to building the nation was through the liberty of the yeomanry (middle-class independent farmers). As Hamilton drew more supporters, his coalition came to be called the “Federalist Party” around 1793. In response, Jefferson’s supporters founded what they termed the “Republican Party,” called the “Democratic-Republican Party” by political scientists today to avoid confusion with later parties.

A black and white cockade, the symbol of the Federalist Party.

Thomas Jefferson himself gave an accurate synopsis of this period in American political history. He wrote in 1798, “Two political Sects have arisen within the U. S. the one believing that the executive is the branch of our government which the most needs support; the other that like the analogous branch in the English Government, it is already too strong for the republican parts of the Constitution; and therefore in equivocal cases they incline to the legislative powers: the former of these are called federalists, sometimes aristocrats or monocrats, and sometimes tories, after the corresponding sect in the English Government of exactly the same definition: the latter are stiled republicans, whigs, jacobins, anarchists, disorganizers, etc. these terms are in familiar use with most persons.”

When George Washington chose to leave office in 1796, the floodgates were opened for political battle between these two now firmly established parties. Jefferson challenged Federalist and former Vice President John Adams for the presidency that year, but found himself defeated by his good friend turned political adversary. However, policies by Adams’ administration, like the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, proved unpopular, and in 1800, Jefferson’s Democratic-Republicans roundly defeated the Federalists in national elections, Jefferson himself taking the Presidency. However, Federalists remained at a considerable strength in the judiciary and legislature, making many advances in strengthening the Federal government. The Federalists would never again take the Presidency, and eventually following the War of 1812 in a period known as the Era of Good Feelings, many of the issues that the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans had fought over became moot. Thus, the Democratic-Republicans remained in power and the Federalist Party fell away into history.

In an illustration from 1800, the late President Washington, pictured in heaven, implores Federalists and Democratic-Republicans not to destroy the pillars of liberty in the midst of their fighting.

The question of the strength of the Federal government remained a provocative issue throughout American political history, and in fact still is today. Today in Congress, we see squabbles over whether or not the government is overreaching its authority on measures like healthcare, Social Security, surveillance, and other issues. In our next post, we’ll explore later periods in American politics and the effects they had on today’s polarized political atmosphere.

Stories from the Frontlines: Gettysburg, 1863

In the process of thinking about what to write for this blog, I’ve decided that I’ll attempt to start a sort of series of stories. These are all stories of my experiences in Civil War reenacting through years, but told from the point of view of a Civil War soldier as if it were all happening for real. For my first post in this series, I’ll give a slightly condensed form of my experience at the Battle of Gettysburg. This reenactment took place at the end of last June. (Note, as reenactors, we are also actors, so we really get into these things.)

A Private of the 150th New York Infantry, July 2nd, 1863

Culp’s Hill, southwest of the town of Gettysburg

We had been put in place up on this wooded hill beyond the town. I must confess, it was an ugly place. The woods were pretty well overgrown and great massive boulders were strewn across the hill. Ugly as it was, it was a hell of a place for defense, so I could scarcely complain. There were about 500 of us in the 150th New York that evening. I won’t lie, we were completely green. We’d never so much as fired a shot in the direction of the enemy. Regardless of our inexperience, they put us up on the line. We’d built a good solid barricade up on the hill, made of good stout tree trunks, limbs, rocks, and earth. As the sun began its descent to the horizon, we huddled close to the barricade, most of us sitting up against it and smoking our pipes and cigars as our officers looked on. I sat next to my best friend Chase, smoking away at some cherry tobacco in our pipes and reading through a week-old newspaper from Washington. Aside from the muttering of the men around us, the hill was quiet.

A picket came running in from down the hill, stating he’d seen movement of a body of rebs down the hill. Officers began to congregate behind us with some apprehension on their faces, but we kept to ourselves. Soon, bugles were blown and company officers rushed to their men. Lieutenant Bowser, a favorite of our company, came briskly to us and ordered us to load. I admit, fear struck into me at this point. Something was clearly coming, there was no doubt of that. Emptying our pipes and opening our cartridge boxes, we loaded our rifles as we gazed out over the barricade into the darkening forest below. To the left and right of me, hundreds of men extended along the barricade, but we all went silent, all waiting, all watching, preparing for something to happen. You could have heard a pin drop on that line.

Almost like the slow beginnings of rain, we heard a soft crackling from below, the snapping of twigs and the crunching of leaves – the sounds of men in motion. They were climbing. How many of the enemy were on their way, we couldn’t say. We couldn’t even explain what the enemy looked like, we’d never even seen them in person, yet now we knelt behind the barricade, waiting for them to come. If you trained your eye through the trees below, you could see them: men in gray and tan, with loaded rifles and shining bayonets pointed toward us. Onward they came. It was they who broke the silence first, emitting a sound I’d never heard in my life and never care to hear again. Like the whoop of an Indian or the scream of a fox, they all let loose this horrific scream, the infamous rebel yell. It swept up through the trees and the rocks, over the barricade, and pierced our hearts with a shrill and ringing fear. It was then that they ran. Screaming. Shouting. Running right toward us with a sole purpose: kill or be killed. And we rose from behind the barricade to meet them…

To be continued next week.

From the Beginning – What Our Founding Fathers Can Tell Us Regarding Parties

These days, politicians positively love to raise up the ghosts of the Founding Fathers.

“Thomas Jefferson would roll over in his grave if he would see that this administration has done x.” 

“Our nation’s father, George Washington, would hang his head in shame to see the state of this country after y.”

“Benjamin Franklin would certainly have preferred z over what this Congress is proposing.”

Senator Paul of Kentucky, avid utterer of Founding Fathers’ quotes

The Founding Fathers are quite frequently included in the rhetoric of today’s political orators. After all, what red-blooded American could revile the holiest of all American holies, the men that created this Union? It’s a fair enough rhetorical device, and it often enough actually works. We can see from a decent glance through a history book how Jefferson felt about the size of the role of government in American society, the vision Washington held for the future of the nation, or the methodology Franklin may have used in foreign diplomacy. Why not call these facts up a bit to help bolster our argument against our political opponents, those miscreants across the aisle? Strong libertarian and opponent of large government Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky certainly loves to throw Jefferson at his adversaries. In his victory speech after winning his senatorial seat in 2010, Paul proclaimed, “Thomas Jefferson wrote, ‘That government is best that governs least.'” (Rather unfortunately for Sen. Paul, though that quote is often attributed to the third President of the United States, it was actually authored by literary figure Henry David Thoreau.)

But there are some opinions and philosophies of the Founding Fathers that esteemed congressmen of either side will not generally air, mainly due to concern for their political survival. It may come as a shock to the leading members of the Democratic Party and the GOP to suddenly be reminded that those men they so revere, the ones they studied all through their academic careers, absolutely reviled the concept of political division and partisan rule in the United States of America. It’s quite true.

The founders of our nation were of course prepared to expect that not everyone would get along in American politics. Not everyone will be of one accord, and naturally people will be split on issues. That, of course, is how democracy works – through deliberation of issues by differing mindsets and searching for an outcome that is best somewhere in the middle. But never did these men hope to see this nation descend into the bitter partisan polarization that we now see today. Rhetorically speaking, if we look at a lot of our legislators and political figures in our nation today, we almost see a stronger devotion to the concept of party than to the duty of the job they had been elected to do. Rather than cooperate to produce a final product beneficial to the American people, it almost appears that the main goal of politics today is to retain and defend the integrity of one’s own party while, if one can, demeaning the opposition.

But from the very beginning, it was this sort of political behavior that our first leaders warned us about. Let us observe George Washington’s farewell address, delivered in a letter “to the People of the United States” at the close of his second term in 1796. This letter was originally to be delivered in 1792, when Washington originally planned to step down. However, in order to prevent the rising tension between the new Federalist Party and Democratic-Republican Party, he stayed on a second term, thus saving this letter for later. Washington knew in 1796 that the nation’s strength was threatened by political divisiveness, and thus made it one of the key topics of his address. He writes:

President Washington, 1789-1797

“The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension … is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.”

 

 

Furthermore down the line of presidential stock, we find the beliefs of John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, both some of the most lauded of our Founding Fathers. Adams and Jefferson lived in the first truly charged partisan atmosphere of American history, in the midst of the conflict and bitter rivalry between the Federalists and Democratic-Republicans. Perhaps none at the time were more aware of the vitriolic poison of such an atmosphere than these two. Dear friends and political partners during the time of the Revolution, Adams and Jefferson, a Federalist and Democratic-Republican respectively, were drawn apart by the political tension of the era. Sucked into the political division as they were by the events of the time, there was little they could do about it. Nonetheless, we do find in each of their pasts a hatred for the bitterness that partisan division brings.

President Adams, 1797 – 1801

Adams writes in 1780:
“There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other.”

Jefferson writes in 1789:

“I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all.”

President Jefferson, 1801-1809

The Founding Fathers themselves have presented us with the dangers of partisan division, and Adams and Jefferson found themselves lost in it. In the next blog post, we will explore the origins of American parties, starting with Adams and Jefferson’s own Federalists and Democratic-Republicans.

The State of the Union – A Look Back at Partisan Divisions

Mr. Obama flanked by the Vice President, Joe Biden (left) and the Speaker of the House, John Boehner (right)

On Tuesday night, January 28, 2014, the President of the United States, Barack Obama, stepped into the House Chamber before a thronging audience of senators and representatives, generals and officers, justices, esteemed guests, and the almighty television camera to perform his perennial duty as mandated by our Constitution: to “give to Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.” After a year consisting of debacles like the government shutdown crisis, a rocky roll-out of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the leaking of crucial government information by Edward Snowden, the international bur-under-the-saddle of Syria, and the lack of meaningful legislation on firearms and immigration policies, Mr. Obama had much to say.

After a brief run-down of advances and improvements made by the administration over the past year (a slightly inflated view of things, according to fact-checking by political news clearinghouse Politico), Mr. Obama launched directly into an acknowledgement of the deep partisan divides that have halted progress on nearly all fronts of our national legislature. “For several years now, this town has been consumed by a rancorous argument over the proper size of the federal government… But when that debate prevents us from carrying out even the most basic functions of our democracy – when our differences shut down government or threaten the full faith and credit of the United States – then we are not doing right by the American people.” The President clearly referred to the sharp political battle that boiled in October of last year when Congressional Republicans, coaxed along by ringleader Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, blocked the passage of the federal budget due to the inclusion of the Affordable Care Act, resulting in a government shutdown and the threatening of the United States’ AAA credit rating.

The political deadlock in Congress caused by the polarized political attitudes now prevalent amidst the nation’s legislators is a major problem, and no one knows it better perhaps than Mr. Obama. The amount of pushback this president has received from Congress is almost unprecedented, the greater portion of it regarding the president’s healthcare reform. House Republicans voted, as of November of 2013, 47 times to repeal the Affordable Care Act, a statistic Obama almost blithely included Tuesday night, saying, “But let’s not have another forty-something votes to repeal a law… The first forty were plenty.” But of course the most significant jams in the process of legislative progress are not between the President and Congressional Republicans, but between Congressional Democrats and Congressional Republicans. Though the Democratic Party presently holds a majority in the Senate with 53 Democrats and two Democratically-caucusing independents, the GOP holds a strong majority of 233 to 200.

Courtesy, Gallup Politics

Courtesy, Gallup Politics

The partisan deadlock has manifested itself in a noted lack of productivity in this 113th Congress, a sharp decline from 2009-2010’s 111th Congress – noted as one of the most productive since the 1960s. Approval ratings of this current Congress certainly point to the general public’s opinions on the present lack of activity. In November, 2013, in the wake of the hindrous and disgraceful government shutdown and debt ceiling crisis, Gallup polling registered a Congressional approval rating of a paltry 9%. This ranks the current Congress as the least-respected since Gallup began measuring the nation’s feelings regarding it.

Feeling the clearly evident pulse of the nation regarding our law-making bodies, Obama called for an end to the partisan detritus that so hindered legislative efforts over the past year and a refocusing by Congress back onto what truly matters, requesting, “In the coming months, let’s see where else we can make progress together.  Let’s make this a year of action.  That’s what most Americans want – for all of us in this chamber to focus on their lives, their hopes, their aspirations.”

Moving through his address, Mr. Obama touched upon several issues, from education, to foreign policy, to alternative energy, to climate change, to healthcare reform (Ted Cruz at this point clenched his fists in silent frustration), to jobless benefits. His message to the nation was clear: on these topics, he intended to see meaningful legislation passed and useful action taken. However, the nation will silently (or perhaps not so silently) wait and see what the ever-deadlocked 113th Congress will do with respect to Mr. Obama’s wishes.