VA-HIST Archives

Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history

VA-HIST@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Gregg Kimball <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 30 Aug 2001 15:46:49 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (82 lines)
I would agree with David Kiracofe and Harold Forsythe that this was a very
complex issue.  I certainly believe that the growing memorialization of the
American Revolution and its heroes in the late antebellum period provided a
vehicle for a more unified vision of state and country, at least among
whites.  This was especially true in Virginia because so many of the major
Revolutionary icons could stand for both state and country.  Take a look at
the Mount Vernon Ladies Association as described by Elizabeth Varon and
others.  It included women from the North and South as one might expect of
an organization honoring a national figure.

Yet we know that political rancor along sectional lines was growing in the
very same period.  Indeed, there were momentary outbreaks of sectional
tension among the early Mount Vernon organizers.  How to explain this?
Well, I would say that identity is somewhat "situational."  Certainly we
understand from our own society that people can have multiple levels
(layers?) of identity and allegiances.  I'm sure that many people on this
list could find and quote contrary statements from any number of historical
actors regarding state and national allegiances.  It seems to me that the
key to such a complex question might be how, where, when, and why such
identities were expressed.

The situational nature of identity is even more obvious for people of
African descent or white ethnics.  For instance, documents from Gabriel's
Rebellion or the numerous freedom petitions of black patriots suggest that
many African Americans had an expansive vision of liberty and equality
partially derived from the rhetoric of the Revolution, but one that didn't
necessarily square with the understanding of most white Virginians.

Kristyn Ankrom mentioned the state militias.  I found that the militias in
Richmond were hotbeds of Unionist rhetoric in the 1840s and 1850s.  Richmond
companies visited and hosted Northern militiamen many times in the late
antebellum period, traveling to Philadelphia, Washington D.C., Baltimore,
and New York, but never traveled southward.  They used union symbols in
flags and toasts, usually in combination with state symbols.  By the way,
I'm speaking of volunteer companies.  The old state militia system had
pretty much fallen into disrepair by that time, and had been replaced in
reality (if not on paper) by such units as the Richmond Light Infantry Blues
and Richmond Grays (or Greys).

Gregg Kimball



-----Original Message-----
From: David Kiracofe [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 1:59 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Hampton (Virginia) National Cemetary: 757.723.7104


In regard to the recent discussions of state versus national loyalties,
the truth seems to lie somewhere between the two poles of "my country is
Virginia" (Randolph of Roanoke) and "I am not a Virginian but an
American" (Patrick Henry -- please excuse the rough paraphrasing).  Many
Virginians in the antebellum era saw Virginia as their identity, & loved
to celebrate all things Virginian (like famous native sons, their
colonial past, Pocahontas, etc.), but they still turned out for the
national 4th of July -- and not just because George Washington was a
Virginian.  Gregg Kimball's fine work on Richmond shows how important
national identity was for people in the growing metropolis.

Identifying with one's native state was not contrary to such a national
identity.  Most people in the United States saw their national identity
as Americans founded on the union of states created under the
Constitution of 1787.  The doctrine of states' rights did not become
anti-union until Lincoln made it so with his insistence that the union
was perpetual and indisoluable.

And even then though the Civil War did not destroy the tug of state
loyalities -- particularly in the south, but really everywhere in the US;
if state loyalty had diminished, people wouldn't identify themselves with
such descriptions as "10th generation Virginian."

David Kiracofe
A Virginian amongst the Carolinians

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2


LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US