When controversy in 2015 engulfed our community about the Confederate statue of the Talbot Boys in front of the Talbot County Courthouse in Easton, I did not devote a word in this weekly column about it. I held no position. I was torn.
While I condemned a statue on public property commemorating the Confederate forces in the Civil War, I also adhered to the concept that it is foolhardy to rewrite history. The 84 local soldiers named on the statue fought bravely for a cause in which they believed—though it was a corrupt one based on retaining the evil institution of slavery and white supremacy. Slavery repressed and imprisoned blacks in a system that brought great riches to white property owners throughout the South and Mid-Atlantic.
Some readers may wonder why I am resurrecting an issue settled by the county council after months of hearings and furious letter-writing in The Star Democrat. Discussion over the proposed removal of the Talbot Boys monument was part of national revulsion over the shameful killing of African–Americans in a Charleston, SC church.
I changed my mind after recently reading eloquently passionate and reasoned words spoken by Mayor Mitch Landrieu before the removal in mid-May of four monuments in New Orleans paying homage to Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis, and P.G.T. Beauregard.
I now view the propriety of the Talbot Boys statue in a harsher light. I also realize that my epiphany will make little or no difference.
We see no monument in front of the courthouse referring to slave auctions that took place there. This omission certainly would represent, if not the erasure of history, the purposeful ignorance of it. While I hardly suggest such a monument, I think thought should be given to an unvarnished view of history—if that’s the primary argument behind retaining the Talbot Boys.
In explaining the reasoning behind the removal of four monuments in New Orleans, a place well known as America’s largest slave market, Mayor Landrieu said:
“The historic record is clear; the Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis and P.G.T. Beauregard statues were not erected to honor these men, but as part of the movement which became known as The Cult of the Lost Cause. The cult had one goal—through monuments and through other means—to rewrite history to hide the truth, which is that the Confederacy was on the wrong side of humanity…these men did not fight for the United States of America. They fought against it. They may have been warriors, but in this cause, they were not patriots. These statues are not just stone and metal. They celebrate a fictional, sanitized Confederacy, ignoring the death, ignoring the enslavement and the terror it actually stood for.”
Revisionist history states that the Civil War was not about slavery but about states’ rights. Confederate states were not fighting, so the argument goes, to retain slavery but their rights to govern and conduct themselves as they wished. This is hogwash.
In Mayor Landrieu’s powerful speech, he cites remarks made by Alexander Stephens, vice president of the Confederacy, in which he said, “the cornerstone (of the Confederacy) that rests upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.”
Stephens’ words sound eerily similar to those spoken by Adolph Hitler. It’s critical to remember that no statues of Hitler stand as reminders of history. It was an unforgivable blight that never will go away. Concentration camps stand as a grim reminder of human terror and unconscionable behavior.
While I have no desire to stir the cauldron, I do think that the African-American mayor of Richmond, VA, Levar Stoney has developed a workable solution to the awful story of slavery and the horrific human and physical damage imposed by the Civil War as symbolized by statues that define Monument Avenue in the former capital of the Confederacy.
The theme is always the same. The monuments in Richmond and elsewhere represent false history set deceptively in stone and bronze. They pay tribute to military heroes and political figures in enabling Jim Crow discrimination and repression to continue.
Mayor Stoney has recommended interpretation—historical context—to accompany the monuments. The purpose is to perpetuate truth, not revisionist history. Some sort of explanation would provide the “other side” of history.
At some point, I suggest that county government and community leaders consider a plaque or sign beside the Talbot Boys monument to address the horror and stain of slavery. While I applaud the bravery of the Confederate soldiers, I believe the omission of a monument to Union soldiers is glaringly wrong and misguided.
The presence of the Frederick Douglass statue does not provide equal treatment; it stands on its own in honoring a person who gained national fame for his eloquent abolitionist writings and speeches
Some might say that our community has had its dialogue—and that’s true. The county council members strove to listen to all viewpoints and make a reasoned decision. I do not intend to criticize the county council. I do suggest, however, paying attention to actions taken by other jurisdictions.
History should reflect the truth. Even if it is inconvenient.
Columnist Howard Freedlander retired in 2011 as Deputy State Treasurer of the State of Maryland. Previously, he was the executive officer of the Maryland National Guard. He also served as community editor for Chesapeake Publishing, lastly at the Queen Anne’s Record-Observer. In retirement, Howard serves on the boards of several non-profits on the Eastern Shore, Annapolis and Philadelphia.