Andersonville to Elmira

The image of Andersonville is that of the skeletal portrait, the walking dead, starvation, mankind at its near worst, in gruesome contrasting black and white, the grey fading somewhere in-between.

Andersonville Survivor

Given as example of the depletion of the Southern cause, a mere lost ignoble fight for an already antiquated institution, the dangers of simplifying the standard is tremendous. To forget that the Federal blockades and relentless actions along multiple fronts not only impacted society women from Virginia, Georgia and the Carolinas, but Northern boys in blue no longer offered for parole, a sentence of starvation and madness, is unjust human nature. More-so, to neglect that the counterparts – those being of the imprisoned southerner in New York – fared as atrocious of conditions is an error beyond reconcile.
While Andersonville is a staple of Civil War critique, infamous for the conditions, the commandant and trials (Wirz as well as the “Raiders”), Elmira if mentioned at all in the traditional government education system is glossed over in passing. The Union, being more capable of supplies, indicates greater culpability for the percentage of deaths at Elmira (an estimated 25% mortality).

Elmira Prison - Surviving Winter in "A" Tents

If the Confederate States had succeeded in secession, Elmira would retain in their national history a place on terms with Andersonville – if not Auschwitz. As it stands, with a Federal victory came dominated perceptions of Federalist ideology. How could preserving the Union be seen in any other light?

The Heroes of Today Are Just the Ghosts of Tomorrow

Much of what we ingest regarding history as a whole is made up of portraits of characters to illustrate the thematic nature of the human saga. The chronicling of these events, there antecedents and repercussions, hinge emotion on the element of humanity allowing us to engage on a more ubiquitous sense of the species - often this is presented with the “Hero Story” and gives admiration for the protagonist while condemnation prevails toward antagonist foils. There occurs, however, throughout history moments that these lines are blurred or that they may waiver with interpretation. How our history is conveyed, how it is transformed from generation to generation is directly affected by the morality, and ethos of the era from which they are cast.
Several such examples spring forth from the relatively short history of the United States. While there are several precursors to the conflict oft called the American Revolution, its characters are formulated to be icons and represent aspects of the ideology of the country at the time of their portrayal more so than of the era in which they lived. However stoic these figures are shown, their humanity is stripped and replaced with idealism or political theory; they are rarely displayed as people. This immortalizing of our for-bearers may serve doctrine, but says little for the appreciation of actual character that lead to creation and progression of the American philosophy.
In today’s American society the aspects of this character are glossed over, most children never learning personal traits of their heritage, as mixed as it may be. Sure, there may be mentions of George Washington’s slaves or Woodrow Wilson’s antisemitism, of Washington Carver’s peanuts, and even passing mention of Mary Todd Lincoln playing the supporting role. In an effort to regain human qualities in history, the approach must be made to understand the times in which the people lived, not just the impact they may or may not have made during that time. A real sense of their character should be explored in contrast to the events surrounding them, how they responded and how we as a population now respond to that.
These portraits fade with the ages, and we should all do well to restore them no matter the color or cost – so that they may be given to our posterity.
__________________________________________________________________________________

One such portrait worth exploring is that of Benedict Arnold. Any citizen of the United States, particularly those who attend or have attended a government (public) school system, would have learned of Arnold. When his name is presented, automatic to an indoctrinated nature, the response is inevitably TRAITOR! - As though our collective pain resonates still from that of Washington himself as he learned of the conspiracy. Little mention is made of where the revolutionary cause would be if not for Arnold in those years prior. Sure, if one is inclined to take moderate steps to explore the history of the American Revolution outside the outline of Lexington/Concord – Valley Forge – Yorktown, you will see evidence of Arnolds firm, if be it conceited, grasp on the patriotic cause. Often this interest is not fostered, even if there is desire to deeper an understanding; the clear water of American History is not to be muddled when ideology and tradition is on the line. The hook for citizens today is taut with easy explanations.

Arnold was a traitor, simple. If we focus on the fact he traded his blue coat for red, sure, call that turncoat. Payout, indeed, Judas money was delivered – albeit less than Arnold bargained for, and at much greater a cost to his reputation. Credit due to Benedict Arnold is collecting interest to this day. There would be no West Point to offer British forces if not for his heroic actions at Quebec or Saratoga, even if you disregard Ticonderoga and give – as at the time – credit to Ethan Allen*, or Horatio Gates. The determinant factors are never as simple as they may appear.
This is not justification of Arnold’s actions, but to understand the portrait as painted - at times the frame must be dismantled.

*Interested in questioning loyalties and self-interests, explore Ethan Allen in Vermont 1777.