Civil War in Memory

History and memory are not two completely different concepts, nor are they the same. However, they are two concepts that can function both independently, or can be brought together in different ways that allow for a better understanding of a situation, event, or an object. When memory is brought into the field of history, it can add to a historian’s sources and understanding, but it can also completely challenge his or her work. Memory can be interpreted and conceptualized in many different ways, including as or for an individual, for a group, or even as a reality. This is important to understanding the monuments in Indianapolis, specifically the one in Garfield Park and the one located in Crown Hill Cemetery (Cubitt, 2007, 3; 27).

Understanding how and why places, events, and people are remembered is a process that involves both the understanding of memory, and the understanding of history. Both fields are important because they are frequently intertwined: memory becomes history, and history becomes memory. This intermixing of these two fields is blatantly evident as we use primary sources to recreate the past, but is also a part of many cultures that we easily pass over. While history and memory can not be peeled apart, the subfields that they create can be studied.

Memory Arguments are a part of history and memory that come from a firm foundation is both areas. The term "memory arguments" was termed during the research of this project to categorize specific theories and areas of study that show individuals struggling or fighting for a specific way of remembering, or for a specific memory. These are not special to the American Civil War, and can be seen in other areas of history. These arguments come from what we know as “history” about the past, as well what we “remember” about the past. When these two sections of information come together, they often allow us to view events differently than if we were only using one field. What makes Memory Arguments even more important is that they are usually started in the immediate years following an event, when people who survived or witnessed (or the next generation) are still living and actively dealing with their memories, as well as watching those that are younger develop their own sense of history and memory. This process never ends.

The reasons why Camp Morton has been forgotten can not be specifically identified, only speculated on. While the Official Records and newspaper articles are strong primary sources, they lack the first-hand memory that comes with diaries and journals, as well as the personal experiences of prisoners. Memoirs are often seen as less than diaries because they were written much later, and many influences could have acted on the individual’s memory, so they are often put aside. Camp Morton has few diaries that were produced by prisoners, and some of those works only mention Camp Morton for a fleeting few weeks or months, or deny the reader any real information beyond the day’s ration and a statement on how cold it was. In short, these diaries and journals are lacking depth and information. Another issue with the diaries and journals can be attributed to the small number of officers and educated men to be held at Camp Morton. Many prisons that had more educated men often seem to have a higher rate of diaries, correspondence, and artifacts left behind. Libby Prison and Johnson Island are often seen among these. While Camp Morton is not the only Civil War prison that has had this fate, it is one whose fate can be explained. While there is information available on Camp Morton, the primary sources coming from prisoners during their imprisonment is sparse, and some of what does exist is of little help to historians attempting to better understand the prison. This is not the fault of the prisoners; many of who were more than likely not well educated, and probably lacked the necessary resources to keep a diary. However, to the detriment of their stories and memories, the memory of Camp Morton has been mostly lost to time, not available for study, and never to be retrieved.

While a significant portion of the United States was dotted with POW camps and prisons during the Civil War, there are few that have survived, and survived well at that, in the memories and history of this country. While few if any have been completely wiped from the history books, there are some that only surface with a significant amount of work involved. There is a strong belief that prisons located in the South have been better remembered, with special emphasis on Andersonville Prison (Camp Sumter). These beliefs however, go beyond prisons, and extend into the whole of Civil War history and memories. On both sides these beliefs are supported by arguments.

Memory Arguments take their foundation in both memory and history, being firmly planted in both, while also intertwining. The three arguments that follow come mostly from those who experience events first-hand (and sometimes their next generation). These arguments, it should be noted, are not only applicable to Camp Morton, or even the American Civil War. These arguments are frequently applied to other events, most often the Holocaust and Nazi concentration camps.

The first argument is that of fear. During the American Civil War, it was believed that the horrors of Civil War prisons was an isolated incident, something that came out of the war and would more than likely never be known to “mankind” again. However, the Holocaust and the fresh horrors of the concentration camps that doted the landscape of Germany brought new fears (Cloyd, 2010, 111). These fears stemmed from the realization that Civil War prisons were no longer an isolated incident, and that similar actions could be taken against human beings in other places, and in the present and future. Some feared the horrors of prisons were then a part of modern warfare, while others much later have considered Civil War prisons as being the precursors to Nazi concentration camps (Speer, 1997, xiv). While there is no way to prove or even begin the argument that Nazi concentration camps were indeed modeled off of these prisons, similarities can be seen in the treatment of prisoners.

The second argument that forces Civil War prisons to be remembered is the “remembering to not forget” argument. Most everyone has a fear relating to death, that in death he or she will be forgotten, or that he will forget someone that he loved or cherished in some form. This fear drives individuals to preserve the memories of individuals or groups of people against oblivion (Cubitt, 2007, 49; Bluestein, 2008, 272). This fear becomes even more important with the realization that historian Drew Gilpin Faust points out, “Civil War Americans lived the rest of their lives with grief and loss,” as well as searching to “provide endings for life narratives that stood incomplete, their meanings undefined” (Faust, 2008, 266; 267). This is important for multiple reasons. First, it has been noted by historians that later generations of Jews (whether their family was directly a victim to the Holocaust or not) felt unaffected by the Holocaust, and this can also be applied to individuals of other religions who learned about the Holocaust (Linenthal, 1995, 8; Bluestein, 2008, 269). This is also seen in the former Confederacy in the years following the Civil War: following generations “accepted the defeat and interpreted the war differently,” leading to the Lost Cause (Foster, 1987, 4). This is important because individuals who live through an event, with special attention on the Holocaust and Civil War prisons, do not want their story to go unheard, or for their children or grandchildren to feel that the event did not in any way affect them. Preserving memories and maintaining the immediate and overwhelming significance of these events could help later generations to understand the importance, and continue to preserve the memories for the coming generations.

The third and final argument for remembering Civil War prisons is responsibility. The argument of responsibility can become an uncertain and difficult argument. There are many answers to who is responsible for Civil War prisons, and none of the answers are incorrect. In his work Portals to Hell, Lonnie Speer sums up Civil War prisons, “Within a short time neither government could cope with the problems created by such a high concentration of people in such small areas or the lack of coordination within the prison system,” but this statement does not specifically blame either side (1997, xiv). This is a theme through Speer’s work; he lumps all the prisons, both North and South into a group of atrocious places, frequently leaving the reader to check his notes to see to which prison he is referring. By not pointing to specific prisons or individuals Speer’s work falls into the theory that when individuals are answerable to a higher power (very often their government or the military), the responsibility for those individuals’ actions is also placed on that higher power (Bluestein, 2008, 125). However, while much of the blame for Civil War prisons is placed on the respective belligerents, individuals do often take much of the responsibility still.

These arguments lay a very basic and intricate groundwork for why all Civil War POW camps and prisons should be remembered. All of the prisons, not matter how popular or obscure they now are, they fit into all three arguments. Camp Morton, being a POW camp was a place that horrors happened and it falls into the category of a supposed precursor to concentration camps; it then later on becomes a place that individuals who were held there did not want to forget, and that others felt the need to memorialize; and finally, there has always been and always will be the argument of responsibility — were the prisoners unruly, were the guards cruel, and what about the plethora of commandants that came and went from Camp Morton. All of these issues have at one point or another been of great concern to some, but have always fallen by the wayside on the road to remembrance.

Camp Morton is no exception to these arguments. Being located in the North and used to hold Confederate POWs, it was a place that both existed within and contributed to the Treasure of Virtue argument, and it was part of those who had to accept defeat must deal with, like all Northern prisons. Being a prison Camp Morton contributed doubly to those attempting to maintain a proper memory of the war — it was both a rallying point for POW survivors and for Southerns taken a sectional stance on the situation. However, much like the memory arguments that have already been discussed, these issues surround Camp Morton were only important for a short time and to a select few, despite the importance of Camp Morton.