> An even better use is the proposed Museum of the Confederacy > branch museum proposed for Ft. Monroe. Amen! (Except I myself wouldn't say "better.") Waite Rawls, who directs the MOC, is a regular at Fort Monroe planning events, and he has a big cheering section (with me among the most vocal). I've said this before in this forum, though not in the context of the slavery museum at Fort Monroe, but when you think about it, Virginia's present Historic Triangle's Jamestown, Williamsburg, and Yorktown encompass the earliest settlement, the colonial years, and the Revolution -- but that combination leaves out the profoundly formative Civil War. With the Monitor Center nearby, a Fort Monroe involving both a slavery museum and a branch of the Museum of the Confederacy could anchor not a Historic Triangle but a Historic Quadrangle. (Anyone interested in that idea might want to see a June 2007 Richmond Times-Dispatch op-ed in which I proposed it: http://www.cfmnp.org/JuneteenthAsSubmitted.htm .) This fall, the new Ken Burns series on America's national parks will air. Maybe by then Governor Kaine and the others who seek to perpetrate the mediocritization of Fort Monroe will wake up. If they could argue financial necessity, they'd at least have a case. But they can't. Even if you don't care about historical, cultural, recreational, architectural and environmental enrichment -- that is, even if you only care about financial enrichment for Hampton and the region -- a Fort Monroe with national stature is a better plan. Steve Corneliussen Poquoson, Virginia ______________________________________ To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html