Fort Morgan

Tags

Alabama History, American Military History, Fort Morgan, history

Fort Morgan is located 22 miles west of Gulf Shores, AL and also reachable via the Mobile Bay auto ferry located on Dauphin Island (notably, the same auto ferry President Obama rode while visiting the gulf coast after the BP oil spill disaster). After the War of 1812 with the threat of British and Spanish invasion, the U.S. reexamined its national security. In 1815 Congress allotted 8.5 million dollars to the construction of fortifications on the coastal regions of the U.S. The construction of Fort Morgan began in 1818. After a work force of mostly slaves placed over 40 million bricks, the fort was completed in 1834. Fort Morgan played a key role in the Civil War during the Battle of Mobile Bay. After two weeks of being under siege from Union forces the fort finally surrendered.            

 

The fort was also active in the Spanish-American War, World Wars I and II. During 1895-1904 concrete artillery batteries were added to the fort and additional military building were added from 1899 to 1910. A museum of Mobile Point American military history that includes details from 1845 to 1945 is located within the fort. Many of the exhibits feature items from the soldiers that served at the fort. The site offers such experiences as guided tours and a yearly reenactment. The fort is also part of a bird sanctuary, and contains both a fishing pier and picnic area. 

Advertisements

Different Conclusions

Tags

historical method, history

In order for history to be 100% accurate historians would have to replicate it instead of representing it. Gaddis describes this as an impossible task. From this one can perceive how it is not unusual for historians to view the same events and end up with different conclusions. Historians unable to replicate must represent smaller parts of history. For example, in representing the motives for continental soldiers enlisting and remaining in the military three respected historians, Lender, Royster and Knouff, deduce different conclusions. Lender insinuates that continental soldiers enlist for patriotic reasons, but once this fades they remain enlisted to obtain their own self-interest. Royster attacks Lender’s ideas stating that Lender’s representation is inadequate. Royster concludes that patriotism which does not fade, not self-interest, was the key motive for continental soldiers enlisting and remaining enlisted. Knouff gives credit to both Lender and Royster, but asserts they have missed the true key motive of continental soldiers. Knouff states that a since of localism drove civilians to enlist. Also, those continental soldiers felt a need to fight as enemy forces threatened the communities in which they, the continental soldiers, lived in. Through the thesis set up by Lender, the antitheses written by Royster and Knouff’s synthesis we can see the basic form of academia at work. These historians choose to represent facts and sources that would best persuade readers to accept their individual theses. Through adding and excluding information that would or would not assert their representations as correct or others representations of the same event as incorrect, different conclusions were inevitably formed. 

The Reality of Time Travel: A Historic Perspective

Tags

Gaddis, history, John Gaddis, time travel

When the notion of time travel pops up I immediately think of a certain DeLorean  with that capability. Time travel is an exciting idea, but more than likely should be left up to the more adventurous, such as Michael J. Fox.  At first thought a historian’s dream would be to time travel. The ability to transverse all periods of time,  to accurately record historic events and shed new light on standing controversies would be fantastic. Then reality punts the historian in the face.  A historian is a human. John Gaddis in his book The Landscape of History points out two obstacles immediately restraining the typical time traveling historian. The “everyday life” of that time in which the need for survival may occupy a majority of the day. Also, Gaddis makes obvious the limited perspective of which a single human is capable of recording history as perceived through their own senses (Gaddis 3-4). In addition to not having to face these obstacles, present day historians have three additional advantages over time travelers.

A time machine may allow someone to control the destination they arrive at in terms of the time and location in which they arrive. However, they will have no control of the outside world at their destination. A historian basically has control of everything. Gaddis uses the term “selectivity” to describe this and states that historians, “impose a significance on the past, not the other way around.” Historians have the ability to select and focus on whatever they deem relative, important and/or interesting. They can simply leave out everything that is not. Thus creating a representation of history in their own perspective(Gaddis 22-23).

Simultaneity, something that would require much more than a time machine (perhaps a device similar to the one used to link the brains of rats in the Miguel Nicolelis experiments and multiple identical clones of oneself), is a privilege that historians are bestowed with.  Instead of being limited by human senses, the amount of historical references available allows historians to view many happenings occurring within the same length of time and the development  of a particular point through an extended amount of time. This allows a historian to remain comfortably in his present spot and (although not physically) to be in multiple places and times all at once(Gaddis 24-25).

Unless future time machine developers install a god-like button and a ant-like button, or something of that nature, that would allow the time traveler to become an efficient surveyor of both the macroscopic and microscopic world then historians oust time travel once again. Historians are allowed to scale whenever they so choose. They may observe the smallest, most mundane detail to the largest, most catastrophic anomalies. Something that is of a smaller scale, a time traveler may simply look over or deem insignificant. However, a historian could take this same small detail and possible relate it to a much larger scale proving the great significance of it(Gaddis 25-26). 

Do not time travel in order to become a better historian. Gaddis’ ideas of selectivity, simultaneity, and scale give clear advantages to the present day historian looking back over history as opposed to the time traveling historian fumbling around to survive and to actually make any significant historical writings.

American Military Strategies

Tags

american history, history

Weigley explains in his essay, How Americans Wage War: The Evolution of National Strategy, American military strategy dating back to the Indian wars and ending with future military tactics. Two key strategies emerged from the Civil War: Grant’s strategy of the total destruction of the opponent’s fighting power and Sherman’s tactic of destroying the economy and morale of those who supported the enemy. These ideas remained unchanged and were implemented during WWII. American forces overpowered the German forces in France and caused mass havoc to the German economy in moral using bomber warfare. Again the American military used Grant’s and Sherman’s strategies in dealing with Japan. The U.S. Navy wiped out the Japanese navy and the bombing of Hiroshima resulted in a devastating blow to Japanese moral and economy. In these wars the American military sought a common objective, the unconditional surrender of their enemies. In both instances they were a success. If one thing has remained consistent within national strategy is that same objective of seeking unconditional surrender whish was made apparent in the Indian wars, the Civil War and in WWII. However, post WWII it has become unlikely that wars will reach the same magnitude of the “all-out” wars that have taken place throughout American military history. Thus, strategies have changed to smaller tactical units who use fewer resources and still maintain the peace. These modern military approaches are not an entirely new idea. George Washington and Winfield Scott both avoided larger battles and using their limited resources won smaller battles with large political objectives in mind. Also, in the Southern Campaign during the Indian wars George Crook used guerilla tactics to successfully fight against Indians.  All American military strategy has its roots back in the early years of American history with an ongoing evolution from large scale total war in past centuries to smaller tactical groups fighting present day.