Conference smurf::civil_war

The documentary you are describing sounds very much like the beautifully
crafted 11-hour TV "movie" produced by Ken Burns for American public
television.  The entire series is available from PBS for about $150 on
nine VHS videocassettes.  No mention has been made here of their being
available in PAL video (the recording scheme used in the UK), though.

It was that series that got me going again - one of the writers they
interviewed was Shelby Foote, whose 2700-page 3-volume marrative I
am reading at present.

There is a compact disc of some of the music from the series, with
prominence given to the song that has become the recognized and huch
overplayed theme, called Ashokan Farewell.  (It was actually written in
1982!)  The letter of Sullivan Ballou to his wife is also on the disc.

-d

The British version is only 7 hours (the BBC claim they edited out "repetitions
and minor battles of little interest to British viewers")

British Channel 4 (independant TV) also transmitted a series entitled "The
Civil War" at the same general time - only difference is that the C4 program
dealt with *the* civil war (only joking folks, but in Britain "the civil war"
means the Second British Civil War between the parliamentary forces and the
royalists...)

/. Ian .\

    The Burns series was beautifully put together, but seriously flawed
    from a historical perspective.  There were many factual errors,
    and the slant of the program made in unpalatable to me.  (I distinguish
    between slant and error, here.  Slant is annoying and can be
    corrupting, but factual error is inexcusable.)
    
    Wess

I really liked the Burns CW series.  What it did best was to make the
Civil War real and approachable for millions of Americans who had always
considered it dusty-dry.  And for myself, who already knew a fair amount,
the use of the photographs and music brought me into the subject better
than any book ever has.

I'd be interested to see an accounting of factual errors, Wess.  The
one that I recall seeing mentioned at the time of the series was the
number of 14-year-old boys who served during the war (it was exaggerated
by two orders of magnitude or so).

Ben

    re: .4
    
    The Burns series has been extremely valuable because it has sparked
    an ENORMOUS interest in the war.  For weeks after it was on, I could
    scarcely walk through the plant without being stopped to answer
    questions.  On a couple of occasions, I ended up speaking to groups
    of 10 or 15 people.  In that respect, it was a wonderful piece of
    work.  His use of photographs and music was very evocative.
    
    Among the factual errors were such things as:  more men died in
    Andersonville than in any other prison (the slant was that Federal
    prisons such as Elmira and Johnson's Island were mentioned but very,
    very little, if at all.)  -  The Ft. Pillow massacre was the direct
    cause  of Grant's halting the exchange of prisoners.  (The two
    incidents were totally unrelated.  This matter was slanted in that
    the theory of any sort of "massacre" at all was taken as an
    unquestioned primary, when in fact men on both sides later denied
    it happened.)  -  The Confederacy refused to exchange black soldiers.
    (Actually, the Confederacy exchanged a huge number of black soldiers.
    The refused to exhange excaped slaves, and I'm sure their methods
    of determining which blacks were escaped slaves were pretty flawed,
    but the fact is that the Confederacy exchanged thousands of blacks.)
    There were a jillion technical nits, such as identifications of
    units, the times and directions of their entry into battles, several
    dates were wrong - stuff like that.
    
    The nits, by themselves, are not that important, but it really makes
    me wonder:  If Burns was so sloppy in easily verifiable details,
    how trustworthy are his pronouncements on the more subtle,
    myth-enshrouded points?  I mean, if you stand there and tell me
    the Springfiled rifle was .30 calibre, everything you say after
    that is pretty suspicious!
    
    Wess

>>Among the factual errors were such things as:  more men died in
>>Andersonville than in any other prison (the slant was that Federal
>>prisons such as Elmira and Johnson's Island were mentioned but very,
>>very little, if at all.)

Wess,

Did more men die in Andersonville than in any other prison? Yes or no? Did Burns
make a factual error? And what is your source for your information. If
you are going to accuse someone of incorrectly stating information I'd like
to see more than your *opinions without sources*.

I don't want to defend Burns, but everyone slants things, every note in this
conference has a slant. I recognize this, you probalby do (and it is
unfortunate that alot of people take whatever they hear as truth). I'm sure
that everything you said to people (the small groups etc) was free from slant
and 100% factual. :-)

Sorry to sound so negative. I really like the info your provide on many
topics. And Burns did screw up in many places (as I understand the events :-) )

dave

Re: .5

But, Wess, the Springfiled rifle *is* .30 caliber.  Now if you want to
be a little more specific and eliminate the M1903, then we can start
talking other calibers.

:-)

Information on units' times and places of engagement is still in some
cases problematical.  My great grandfather Henry Bultman was in the 8th
New York Volunteers, who were at the front of Fremont's army at Cross
Keys.  He was positive, until the day he died, that they had engaged
Jackson's troops when in fact it was Ewell's division.  Things are not
always easy, or even *possible*, to sort out with absolute certainty.

Furthermore, family tradition, as related by his daughter, had it that
he spent time in Andersonville, when in fact he was invalided to a
Washington, D.C., hospital and erved there until his regiment was
mustered out in May of 1863. 

(I have these statements of his from a memoir that he dictated to his
granddaughter, my father's sister.)

-d

>Did more men die in Andersonville than in any other prison? Yes or no? Did Burns
>make a factual error? 

I'll try to dig out the source, but I remember reading recently that more men
died at Elmira than Andersonville.  However the Northern justification was that
the southtern soldiers were in such poor condition & the winters made their
survival difficult.  However in the South weather was not as much a problem, 
the soldiers were in better condition.  They felt that deaths at Andersonville 
were high by design, not due to circumstance.

The other item that I did not like about Burns presentation was the focus on 
slavery as THE cause, not a cause of the Civil War.  On the whole it's
positives far out wiegh the negatives.

Larry

>Did more men die in Andersonville than in any other prison? Yes or no? Did Burns
>make a factual error? 

I found the reference I was looking for & it makes a telling point.  However it 
doesn't shed light on the Adersonville v. Elmira counts.  From "I rode with 
Stonewall" by Henry Kyd Douglas.

"At any rate, when it is known that out of 270,000 prisoner in the South 22,576 
died, and out of 220,000 Souther prisoners in the North 26,246 died it ought to 
stop a great deal of the wild talk about Libby Prison and Andersonville."

If his figures are correct that's about an 8% death rate in the South, and 11% 
in the North with more resources!  I found that chilling since I have not 
learned much about the prison situation in the North, but had heard about 
Andersonville.  I guess one of the benefits of winning is you get to write the
history!  (Don't get me wrong I'm not saying that Andersonville was not horrid, 
I just finished reading the "diary" of a Northern prisoner who was sent 
there...I was sobering...It was also sobering to see how human nature and how 
some Northern prisoners "took advantage" (that's putting it mildly) of each 
other.)

Larry

    re: .9	I think Douglas' figures are in the ballpark, at least.
    I will bring in some other numbers tomorrow.
    
    Another item that Burns - and almost every other writer who has
    "done" Andersonville - left out is that the greatest terror in that
    wretched place did not come from the Southern guards, but from gangs
    of street thugs that arose in the Federal population.  (I've read
    they were mostly New Yorkers, but that seems just a little too easy
    a job of steriotyping!)  
    
    You are so very right about being on the winning side and writing
    the history books.  Lest this be taken totally negatively, I'd like
    to go on record as saying how proud I am of the fact that the original
    records *DO* exist, and are kept intact by the Federal government.
    I tend to get angry with some of the stuff that has been put in
    school books, but there is that other matter; I don't know of another
    instance where the records of the losing side have been kept so
    meticulously by the victor.  Had the North been TOTALLY corrupt,
    those records would not exist and we would not have ANY access to
    the truth.  
    
    (This may be one for the rathole, but out of criosity, Ian, what 
    about records and accounts from the loser's side in your civil war?)
    
    Wess

    When one considers the state of Confederate resources by the time 1864
    rolled around, it is amazing that the CSA was able to provide food to
    prisoners at all. The huge hospital in Richmond, Chimborazo, had to
    close down it's bakery in 1864 and was reusing dressings on a regular
    basis. (Patient dies, remove dressings, boil if time permits, reuse
    them). 7 blocks away at Libbie Prison Northern prisoners were
    receiving, in many cases, better rations than the wounded up the hill.
    
    Also, when considering the deaths at Andersonville, think about the
    climate in Georgia in the summer. Stifling heat, tornados, high
    humidity, etc. Also consider the lack of antiseptic knowledge at that
    time coupled with the overcrowding and death is imminent.
    
    There is no doubt in my mind that deaths occured in both Federal and
    Confederate prisons due to cruelty. However, the picture must be
    enlarged to appreciate the full scope of the conditions of the time to
    truly understand what happened.
    
    Rich
    

Rich, Larry, Wess,

Thanks for the information and some of the source info. Actually, I've
paid more attention to the prison camp issues since last year when Wess brought
the issue up. And I can't think of the book (I'm not so meticulous that I
write down books I read, although I wish I was, it would help right now)
I read in the last year that had some POW information.

Sorry for the rathole. We can now return to "Burns Bashing" (almost as popular
as "McClellan Bashing")

dave

To insure that my intent is clear, from my last note:

Sorry for the rathole. We can now return to "Burns Bashing" (almost as popular
as "McClellan Bashing")  :-)

Get ready, his next documentary is about baseball.

:-)

-d

    
    
       Well I stayed in this week-end becouse of the blizzard & I
    was super surprized to see Ken Burns' Civil War on channel 2..
    It was on from 12 noon till 5:00.... I wonder if they'll show
    the rest of it this week-end???? I hope so.... I really liked
    it.... I had a few people in sooooooo, I couldn't watch it as
    close as I wanted to but, I did see a lot of it......
    
      Is it out on video at the video store so it can be rented?????
    I didn't get to see it the first time cause I work 3rd shift &
    sleep in the evenings..... I tried to stay awake for it but it
    was not in the cards for me I guess......
    
      I've been reading John Jakes North & South trilogy this winter
    & I'm now on the 3rd one, Heaven & Hell..... I really love the
    characters in this series & it is fast reading ferrrrr shurrrrrre....
    It has me awake at all hours of the day reading when I should be
    snoozing.... I just can't put it down....
    
    
    
                     ***** Deadhead Lefty *****