Content Objectives
The Road to Gettysburg: Building Background
The causes of the Civil War that were set in motion over two centuries ago are still hotly contested today. Modern historians and commentators continue to offer their interpretations in an ever-growing body of literature about the Civil War. Since its conclusion, approximately 65,000 books have been written on the conflict.4 Some authors posit that the war was fought over states’ rights to secede, or not. Others argue that the conflict exploded over irreconcilable ideologies on the moral issue of slavery. Still others claim the war was fought over political and economic control in a rapidly expanding nation.5 What all of these arguments have in common is the conflict over the use of slave labor, an enterprise that had been thriving in America for over two centuries. Therefore, students will first need to understand the political, economic, and social implications of slavery that fueled discord between free states and slave states in the pre-Civil War era.
In the years preceding the Civil War, Northern states were building an increasingly industrialized economy based on free labor. In the Southern slave-holding states, wealth was concentrated on plantations driven by slave labor. As the United States gained territory to the West, interested parties from Northern states argued that new territories should protect the interests of free white labor and prohibit slavery, while the representatives of Southern states argued for the expansion of slavery into new territories. This dispute over the expansion of slavery only grew more intense and sectionalism between the North and South increased. Moreover, slave-holders and abolitionists both invoked Christian ideology in their heated moral arguments that supported or rebuked slavery respectively. When Abraham Lincoln was elected president in 1860 without any electoral votes from Southern states, slave-holding states began to secede to form the Confederacy.6
To begin unpacking the tensions over slavery that ignited and sustained the Civil War, students will complete a station activity in which they will investigate the economic, political, and social consequences of slavery. In this station activity, students will view maps, photographs, government documents and excerpts of narratives, as well as secondary sources that describe the Civil War’s causes. This background information will be crucial in student understanding of the dynamic Northern war aims and the events that culminated in the Battle of Gettysburg, the focal event students will study in the second section of the unit.
Before students engage in the station activities, I will model the primary source protocol that students will employ throughout the rest of the unit. As a class, we will analyze and interpret excerpts from the Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, An American Slave. Through whole-class modeling, students will learn how to engage with a primary source, while also learning about slavery and its brutal implications for enslaved persons.
Additionally, students will learn key vocabulary and language arts content to aid them in comprehending many of the primary and secondary sources they will encounter in the unit. Two of the key English language arts concepts students will need to understand in this unit are author’s purpose and rhetoric. Author’s purpose is an author’s motivation for writing based on an expectation of an audience’s reaction. Author’s select their purposes for writing, and the mode of writing, based on what they want their audience “to believe, know, feel, or do.” Broadly, an author’s purpose can generally be categorized as a desire to inform, persuade, and/or entertain, and authors often have more than one purpose in writing. Rhetoric is the way in which people communicate to achieve an intended purpose; it is a system in which an author combines a “control of language and knowledge of culture” to send a message to an audience. This system combines “author purpose, audience, topic, writer, context, and genre” to produce a text.7
Because most of my students are developing reading and writing proficiency in English, an explicit study of rhetoric and author purpose will strengthen their analytical and interpretive skills, as well as their abilities to construct meaningful texts purposefully. Moreover, the study of rhetoric and author purpose overlap with skills students will use in their investigation of primary sources. For example, students will research background information about each author of the texts they will analyze-- this is not only a skill commonly used to investigate primary sources, but a skill that aids the reader in understanding an author’s rhetoric and purpose.
A Clash of Purposes: A Primary Source Exploration
The Battle of Gettysburg has come to represent one of the most important symbols in Civil War history. The battle is considered by most historians to be the “turning point” in the Civil War that ultimately led to Union victory, and is also renowned for its stunning number of casualties.8 The Gettysburg symbolism was solidified in American memory in November of 1863 when Abraham Lincoln dedicated the battlefield as a cemetery and place of remembrance in his famous Gettysburg Address.
Battle came to the small town of Gettysburg in the summer of 1863 after Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1st, 1863. With this new wartime order, Northern society was able to successfully coalesce around the cause of fighting the Civil War to end slavery. It is worth noting however, that the Northern objective at the beginning of the Civil War was not to abolish slavery. As Edward Ayers describes in his book on the Civil War that in 1863, “...a North long complicit in slavery would turn a struggle against disunion into a war against bondage.”9 In the years before the Civil War, many Northerners were indifferent to slavery’s existence in Southern states and were content to keep the institution for the sake of union. Thus, the issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation was a groundbreaking event that successfully pivoted the Northern cause of preserving a union of states to one of abolishing the institution of slavery.
The three day battle between July 1 and July 3, 1863 at Gettysburg was brutal, and Union victory was tenuous. For three days, the Union forces engaged Confederate soldiers in a bloody struggle over the hills, farmland, and orchards of Gettysburg. On the first day of fighting, the Confederate army beat the Union army into a retreat. The second day of fighting yielded an uncertain result, as the Confederacy gained ground, but failed to force the Union to abandon their defensive positions. On the final day of battle, Union forces successfully beat the Confederates into retreat. The Union victory was solidified when General Lee led his army back to Confederate territory on July 4th. For Gettysburg, a day typically filled with the celebration of hard-won independence was spent surveying the carnage of a nation torn in two, an irony that was likely not lost on many of the survivors of battle. Nearly 51,000 men were killed, wounded, captured, or missing at the end of the three days of fighting.10
For the citizens of Gettysburg who were unable or unwilling to leave before fighting broke out, the end of the battle gave little relief. Thousands of bodies of dead soldiers littered the battlefield and even more wounded soldiers crowded makeshift hospitals where many men would continue to die or become permanently physically disabled. The most common treatment for soldiers wounded by bullets in the extremities was amputation; soldiers that received gunshot wounds to the torso were rarely treated by surgeons as they were largely expected to die.11
Months later, in November of 1863, President Abraham Lincoln delivered his Gettysburg Address that would transform the battlefield of Gettysburg into a national symbol of soldier sacrifice, and provide a balm to a small town shell-shocked by the destruction of war. Lincoln sought to explain the sacrifice in terms of “freedom” for all men “created equal” while elevating the “honored dead” to the status of heroes.12 Americans in the crowd at Lincoln’s speech could rally around these sentimental and noble causes of freedom and equality. These ideals elicited a sense of purpose that provided some comfort in the wake of profound loss. And yet, in its effort to recover, the American memory at Gettysburg quickly forgot or simply didn’t envision what a true “rebirth” of America would look like. Ayers succinctly summarizes how the redefined purpose of the North to destroy slavery was not necessarily a fight to destroy the deeply ingrained racism and inequality against African Americans. He writes, “The North turned against slavery as a military object but many whites, including some among the North’s leaders, could not imagine black people as free American citizens.”13 This would ultimately create enormous limitations on access to civil rights for recently emancipated African Americans in the years following the Civil War.
In a sweeping overview of the Civil War, individual sentiments and motivations for fighting in the war may seem insignificant and get lost in the overall narrative. However, it is the very fact that individuals were affected by the war in different ways and fighting for different reasons that sheds light on the outcomes of the Civil War.
Abraham Lincoln’s sentiments have stood the test of time for a number of reasons, including his rhetorical skill, his powerful status, and his leadership that culminated in a victory for the Union cause. Additionally, Lincoln’s words allude to the ideals that sit comfortably in the American memory: freedom, equality, honor. However, it is within these broad generalizations that the American memory is able to forget the many divergent sentiments and motivations for fighting. People fought in the war or on behalf of the war effort for many different reasons. Gettysburg had different meanings for different individuals. Thus, collapsing these reasons into a singular understanding of Gettysburg as represented by Lincoln’s famous and generalized ideals creates an inaccurate narrative of the Civil War as a resolute triumph in the fight for freedom.
To scaffold students to this nuanced understanding of how individual experience, politics, class status, race, and other factors contributed to the range of motivations and reactions of participants in the war, they will conduct a primary source exploration of the Battle of Gettysburg from eye-witness accounts before, during, and after the battle. These accounts are from military leaders and soldiers from both the Union and Confederate sides, as well as Gettysburg women. The lack of primary sources detailing the experiences of African American residents of Gettysburg will be a key Socratic seminar topic that students will discuss in the context of Tillie Pierce’s remarks about the “amusing” scene of African American residents fleeing before the battle. Additionally, students will read Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address and Frederick Douglass Our Work is Not Done speech and compare these texts to the eyewitness accounts of participants who experienced Gettysburg firsthand. Throughout the primary source investigation, students will ponder the question-- what were people fighting for?
For General George Meade, Union leader of the Army of the Potomac, fighting in the Civil War was a “duty” to the Union cause, but possibly an opportunity for glory as well. After Gettysburg, Meade describes to his wife how his duty came with a great deal of flattery after his victory as Gettysburg. Meade’s letter to his wife after the Battle of Gettysburg describes how he “did and will continue to do my duties to the best of my ability.” Meade describes his humble embarrassment at the attention he receives as a result of his victory, but also describes finding himself “a lion” in the days after Gettysburg.14
General Robert E. Lee states clearly his purpose for fighting in a letter to Confederate president Jefferson Davis. Lee. In August 1863, Lee attempted to resign as leader of the Army of Northern Virginia following his embarrassing defeat at Gettysburg; Davis refused his resignation. In response to Davis’ refusal, Lee responds that he will continue to serve and “devote myself to the defense of our violated country’s rights.”15
Some soldiers, like Union soldier Samuel Hodgman, may have been fighting to prove their bravery, a quality central to the concept of ideal masculinity in the 19th century. Hodgman also mentions his ability to send home money to support the family, another potential motivation that some soldiers had to enlist in the war.16 Other soldiers, such as Confederate soldier William W. Edwards, may have fought to protect their way of life from certain “destruction.” In his letter, Edwards also gives a harrowing account of dead and wounded soldiers at Gettysburg, and describes his difficulty in seeking medical treatment after being wounded. Edwards’ letter is candid about his fear of dying far from home, yet states that he will continue fighting with the Confederacy.17
Though women did not participate in the war in direct battle, they were nonetheless participants in the war effort. In addition to raising children and running homesteads, many of the women of Gettysburg took on the additional responsibilities of feeding soldiers, caring for the wounded, and even burying the dead.18 Students will view secondary sources of Elizabeth Thorn’s statue at Gettysburg and a short description of her part in the war effort during Gettysburg. Thorn, the wife of the cemetery caretaker, was responsible for burying close to 100 dead soldiers after the Battle of Gettysburg. Thorn’s husband was away fighting for the Union army and she was six months pregnant at the time. She was also maintaining a home and caring for her children and elderly father.19 I plan to have students consider why we do not have many firsthand accounts of Thorn’s experience; students will consider Thorn’s class status and life circumstances in their Socratic seminar discussion. Students will debate Elizabeth Thorn’s motivation for participating in the war effort-- as a lower-class woman responsible for maintaining the town’s cemetery in her husband’s absence, did she have a choice?
Students will compare their understanding of Thorn’s experience to Tillie Pierce’s account as a 15-year-old girl from a middle-class family who gives an account of the events before, during, and after the battle. In her recollection of events preceding the battle, she recalls the “amusing” scene of African American residents fleeing their homes before Confederate forces arrived. Pierce also describes feelings of elation after the battle to be “free and independent of the tyranny upheld by an enemy”.20
Students will not only draw comparisons between Elizabeth Thorn and Tillie Pierce’s experiences, but will also consider the absence of primary source materials for African American residents of Gettysburg, especially in light of Pierce’s recollection. In Socratic seminar, students will discuss what they believe Tillie Pierce was fighting for as a supporter of the Union. They will also compare how Pierce’s class and race may have contributed to her attitude toward the African American residents of Gettysburg who were fleeing for their lives and to maintain their tenuous freedom in Northern society. Students will grapple with Pierce’s support of the Union cause in abolishing slavery and her indifference toward the wellbeing and safety of her African American neighbors.
At the outset of this section of the unit, students will read or watch a secondary description of the Battle of Gettysburg. Through the primary source exploration, students will reference this secondary account and consider how the account is similar and different from those documented in the primary sources. Additionally, students will compare how the authors of each account are similar and different, and how these differences may have influenced their experiences of the battle as well as their motivations for participation. In essence, students will engage in what Sam Wineburg defines as historical thinking, or “verification”, of different accounts of history, both primary and secondary.21 In addition to guiding students to develop historical thinking, I will spiral mini-lessons of language and grammar points essential to the genre of comparison in speaking and writing. This will scaffold the students’ collaborative, evidence-based responses when comparing documents and prepare students for their essay that compares Lincoln and Douglass’ rhetoric at the end of the unit.
In the latter section of the primary source exploration, students will read Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address and Frederick Douglass’ Our Work is Not Done. Students will discuss in Socratic seminar how these accounts of Gettysburg are similar and different to those of the people who experienced Gettysburg firsthand. Similarly, students will begin to draw comparisons between these texts in preparation for the unit’s culminating task.
Determining Meaning in the Aftermath: Comparing Rhetoric
For Frederick Douglass, a formerly enslaved African American abolitionist, Gettysburg had an entirely different meaning than the symbolic heroism and bodily sacrifice that many have come to associate with Gettysburg. In his speech to the Anti-Slavery Society in December 1863, Douglass recalled a past trip to Gettysburg in which friends warned him to “remain in the house during the day-time, and travel in the night, lest I should be kidnapped and carried over into Maryland” to be re-sold into slavery.22 Douglass’ words not only indicate what was at stake for African Americans before and during the Civil War, but his specific reference to Gettysburg assigns an entirely different meaning to the place symbolized in the traditional American memory by an infamous battle.
The idea of freedom that Douglass derived from Gettysburg is not a vague ideal, but a fragile reality that faced constant threat. Moreover, in this speech entitled Our Work is Not Done, Douglass specified the “unfinished work” that Lincoln briefly referenced in his Gettysburg Address. In addition to calling out the “prejudice against color” that African Americans faced in Northern society and demanding equal pay for African American troops enlisted in the Northern army, Douglass argued that the purpose of the Civil War would only be achieved when “the colored man is admitted a full member in good and regular standing in the American body politic.”23 Thus, in his speech, Douglass made clear the meaning he assigned to the Battle of Gettysburg and what he was fighting for in the war effort-- truly realized equality for newly emancipated African Americans.
While Douglass’ rhetoric aligns in some ways with Lincoln’s, it diverges in its specificity calling for economic and political equality for the emancipated population. Furthermore, Douglass’ author’s purpose is similar in convincing an audience of the true meaning of the Civil War, a fight for freedom. However, Douglass is not vague in specifying who that freedom is for (African Americans) and how that freedom should be realized (in all aspects of citizenship). Because Douglass is direct and specific about the freedoms required to achieve equality, his speech cannot be reinterpreted in the American memory as a general call to fight for freedom, which was a claim made by both the Union and Confederate sides. The fight for freedom that the Confederate side claimed was reserved for white Southerners who felt oppressed by the federal government; ironically, this fight for freedom simultaneously defended the right to prevent enslaved persons from living freely. The undefined term “freedom” in Lincoln’s speech left just enough space for North and South to reconcile over their mutual valiant sacrifices in the years after the Battle of Gettysburg. As a result, Emancipation was pushed aside and the Confederate effort to preserve slavery was minimized in the American memory. As students work through their analysis and interpretation of the rhetoric and purpose of both speeches, students will consider how their understanding of Gettysburg changes when they read both Lincoln and Douglass’ speeches, rather than just Lincoln’s speech. Students will make conclusions as to why Lincoln’s speech has been canonized in literature textbooks and the American memory, while the Douglass’ speech has not.
In this final section of the unit, students will be experienced in analyzing and interpreting primary sources, and in employing the language of comparison in speaking and writing. Students will interact with Douglass and Lincoln’s speeches in the second part of the unit in order to determine what each man is fighting for in relation to the Battle of Gettysburg, and in the larger context of the Civil War. Students will prepare for a final Socratic seminar by identifying each author’s purpose and specific rhetoric that reveals the central message of each speech. In a final Socratic seminar, students will discuss and debate what these men were fighting for, and how their causes were similar and different, and how their backgrounds contributed to their author’s purposes and central messages. Students will then apply key ideas from the academic discussion and their own interpretation of these speeches to write a comparison essay that explores the alignment and divergence between Lincoln and Douglass’ speeches.
Comments: