tv The Civil War CSPAN March 31, 2016 11:45pm-12:40am EDT
puerto rico and the philippines. so they use reconstruction and the memory of that in two opposing ways, but it's very formative in their minds of how they think about the role of the united states in these colonies. thank you all. [ applause ] american history tv on c-span 3. this weekend saturday night at 10:00 eastern on real america. >> all such farm jobs which are tough dirty or unpleasant, are generally referred to as stoop labor. understandably this is the only area in which the american farm labor supply falls short and is supplemented by mexican citizens called nationals or mexican nationals, but the term most commonly used is brazaros.
in spanish, this means a man who works with his arms and his hands. the big question is why braceros? >> this video promoted the program, a guest worker agreement between the u.s. and mexico between 1942 to 1964. sunday morning at 10:00 eastern on road to the white house rewind. >> my view is that the soviets are aggressive, they have overstayed in afghanistan, they have bitten off more in my judgment than they should be allowed to digest. i think the best answer to it is for them to know that the united states is going to keep its commitments. >> i agree completely. where people want to be free on soviet or cuban domination where the proxy troops are used are the cubans. the united states should be
willing to provide weapons to any men who want to fight for freedom against those hostile forces. >> the republican primary debate between ronald reagan and george h.w. bush. at 6:00 on american artifacts. >> the russell building is very neoclassical. the hart building is very modern. some people have compared it to a large ice cube tray. >> senate historian don richie takes us inside the newest of the three senate office building. the 1983 senate hart building to learn about its construction and place in congressional history. on the presidency at 8:00,
senior historian david ward chronicles abraham lincoln's life through photographs and portraits. >> abraham lincoln takes time out to sit for that last photograph in which he does look kind of peevish. the eyes disappear. >> for the complete american history tv weekend schedule, go to c-span.org. next, author and professor gary gallagher discusses two questions stemming from confederate general robert e. lee's surrender to union general ulysses s. grant at appomattox in 1865. he analyzed whether appomattox was the end of the civil war. second, mr. gallagher looks at the wartime goals of the union
and if these were in fact achieved. >> dr. gary w. gallagher is the john l. now the third professor in the american civil war at the history of virginia. now that means in o.w. now is the director of the john now that's in au now center for civil war studies at uva. gary is such a popular speaker that he allows organizations like ours to work him way too hard, but we do it anyway. he flew in a few hours ago. he wasn't here right when we started this morning because he was jetting up here from florida where he was speaking at another conference. we're very grateful to gary that we do feel a little guilty for asking him back so soon. gary's not only a prolific speaker and author, but a
popular battlefield guide, one of the leaders in the battlefield preservation movement, and award-winning teacher, and one of the most important mentors of graduate students in civil war history. as i noted when i introduced gary at the 2014 symposium, he dedicated his prize-winning book "the union war" to his graduate students at penn state and the university of virginia with admiration for their contributions to the field. i know that his students resipry kate that admiration as do all of us who enjoy and benefit from their work and his work. it is just an example of what gary and ed airs have done for the next generation of historians. our previous speaker carrie janney is just one example. we owe it to gary to put in a plug for his late egs work, the recently released, "the american
civil war, a history of the civil war era" that he co-authored with dr. joan wall. today, we have asked gary to offer evaluation of trends in the civil war which he agreed to do in a talk entitled "from war to reconstruction, peace, continuity, conflict, in post-appomattox america." ladies and gentlemen, gary gallagher. >> i don't think waite really feels guilty about anything, but he pretends well sometimes. i'm very sorry that i missed the first two talks this morning. i did start my day in gainesville, as waite remarked, and i want to begin with my hat as director of the new now civil war, the john l. now iii civil
war university at virginia. i want to extend my welcome to all of you for this symposium that goes along with what i'm sure waite did earlier today. we a co-sponsor for this symposium. as the months roll ahead in the future, i hope we work with the folks here again multiple times and i suspect that we will be. there should be a lot of giving and taking between these two organizations going forward. john kosky and i discussed my role in this program, and we decided i would focus on two questions that are very important to anyone who is trying to understand the end of the civil war and the very turbulent period that followed. we actually -- john asked what i wanted to do and i said that's what i wanted to do and he said okay. but we did exchange a lot of e-mails, didn't we, john? here are my two questions. first, should we consider
grant's acceptance of robert e. lee's surrender that signaled the effective end of the conflict? i raise this in light of scholarship that positis a continuing war. my second question is there is a lost moment of possible revolutionary change regarding race and black rights in the wake of the conflict. the key to understanding this, i believe, lies in assessing whether most of the white north believed that the war had settled two momentous issues, saving the union, killing the institution of slavery, and that same white northern population really didn't care very much about extending anything that we would call equal rights to the freed people. those are my two questions, and i'll take them up in that order. it's very hard for me to just stand behind a podium.
you have to understand i'm not comfortab comfortable. i'd like to be walking around. here i am. if i seem a little out of sorts, that's why. i may need help. i'm not going to get it today. i'm going the start with secretary of the navy, gideon wells. he is always a good place to start. had one of the best full head wigs of anybody in the civil war and kept a really fine diary. he wrote in that diary on april 10th, 1865, about news regarding u.s. grant's, quote, capture of lee and his army. that is well's language, the previous day. the tidings were spread all over the country during the night, noted wells, and the nation seems delirious with joy. this surrouender of the great rebel captain virtually terminates the rebellion. there would be some continued,
quote, marauding and murder. one day later, george templeton strong, the observant new yorker, whose diary ranks among the best that we have, suggested in clipped sentences that the demise of lee's army carried decisive weight. people hold the war virtually ended, period. it looks so, period. lee is out of the game, period. he is sort of channelling ernest hemingway, except hemingway hasn't been born yet. edward a. pollard whose southern history of the war chronicled the life of the confederacy as it unfolded echoed wells and strong. in the final volume of southern history, which was completed and
published in 1865, pollard ra d remarked, the surrender of lee in effect terminated the war. i'll put it in a little bit of a brief plug for pollard. pollard's four thick volumes are a vastly underused source. it's not quite a primary source, but it's almost a primary source in different ways. it's full of his kind of nutty ideas about a lot of things, but it is also wonderfully instructive about innumerable suggestions about the civil war. he is worth it. that's the end of my little commercial for pollard.
i have no financial connection with that. wells and strong and pollard, i think, anticipated how most americans would understand the end of the civil war. in other words, they would put appomattox in a very prominent position in their understanding of the end of the war. an increasing number of scholars, however, have questioned whether lee's surrender should be reckoned a decisive indicator of the practical end of the conflict. t this builds on a phenomenon that has been present for a number of years and seeks to emphasize post-war violence in the former confederacy and the other conflicts enduring conflicts which are many and profound. within this chronological reframing the war did not end at
appomatt appomattox, it did not end with those iconic military surrenders that came in a group. it continued. it continued through reconstruction or through the jim crow era or down to the present. the war that never ended syndrome. there's an example of that. "time" magazine's cover a very unfortunate choice that had lincoln on the front with a tear rolling down his cheek. if you go back and read that article, you'll get a very nice sense of, no, the war didn't end then. it's still going on. these are the ways that that is happening. for far too long, argue those who embrace the analytic lens of a long civil war, a disproportionate number of authors and readers have burroed every more deeply in the era between sumter and appomattox
treating those bloody years largely in isolation and thereby robbing the conflict of needed context. a longer perspective works against a focus on appomattox, of course. it was appomattox alongside gettysburg that was one of the two events that received by far the most attention during the centennial. those were the two events that are the highlights. too many attention to appomattox in this view creates a misleading impression that grant and lee fashioned an agreement in mclain's parlor that just opened the door to reconciliation. it's too neat. it's too satisfying, too simple. could not have been like this. i will say and say very strongly that no serious person can dispute the necessity of placing