St. Martin's Day and the Festival of Lanterns

A 4th Century Bishop's Life Still Celebrated Today in Germany

Dec 19, 2009 Michael Streich

The first canonized saint not associated with martyrdom, Martin of Tours left a legacy celebrated by children's lantern parades throughout Germany since the Middle Ages.

The tradition of children walking through German cities with lighted lanterns on the eve of St. Martin’s feast day (November 11), is traced to the early Middle Ages. Celebration of St. Martin’s was revived significantly in the 15th Century, perhaps accounting for the 16th Century parallels been St. Martin and the Protestant reformer, Martin Luther. Luther mythology also helps to explain why the often called “lantern festival” became popular in North Germany, which was predominantly Protestant.

St. Martin of Tours Life and Miracles

Born ca. 316 BCE in Pavia, Martin followed his father into military service for Rome, becoming a member of a cavalry unit. After being posted to Amiens in Gaul, Martin converted to Christianity. The conversion came after Martin cut his tunic in half, giving a part to a beggar. In a subsequent dream, Christ appeared to him, wearing the beggar’s tunic. According to mythology, at Martin’s conversion, a nimbus or shining aura appeared around his head. In the 16th Century, woodcuts and broadsheets depicting Martin Luther also displayed a nimbus, leading to suggestions of parallels between him and the saint; Luther was born November 10th and named for Martin of Tours.

Martin of Tours established the first Christian monastery in Gaul. His tireless efforts in working on behalf of the poor and converting pagan peoples to Christianity ultimately led to his appointment as Bishop of Poitiers, a promotion he resisted. Martin of Tours was also a strong voice against Arianism.

St. Martin’s appointment as bishop occurred in 371. According to legend, he fled and hid himself in a hut containing geese. The geese, however, convinced him that his place was as bishop. This story led to the roast goose that became a traditional favorite on November 11th. According to Protestant mythology, the tradition of eating roast goose and cabbage on St. Martin’s Day stems from Martin Luther’s visit to Nordhausen. Two separate tales have the reformer invited to feasts where roast goose was consumed.

Lanterns and “Laternen Lieder”

Laternen lieder are lantern songs. Throughout Germany the winter feast of St. Martin’s finds children and parents making lanterns to carry through the streets at night in large groups called “trains.” This lantern train associates light during the autumnal festival with Martin of Tours. One of the songs begins, “Holy Saint Martin was a good man; he gave the children candles and lit them by his own hand.” The Catholic nature of the festival was kept by Northern Protestants and the cause is again attributed to Martin Luther. While in Nordhausen, Luther lit candles on St. Martin’s Day and put them in the windows.

The lantern festival is often compared to American Halloween which comes ten days earlier. Like at Halloween, children often receive sweets and tiny pastries from people watching the parade of lanterns and hearing the many lantern songs. At least one German writer has pointed out that while American Halloween is highly commercial, St. Martin’s celebrations still point to a non-commercial message tied to giving to the poor.

One popular lantern song is called, “A Beggar sat in the Cold Snow,” and tells the story of St. Martin’s generosity. Most lantern songs – lieder, are more secular in nature, comparing the lantern’s light to the stars and the moon. Perhaps the most popular children’s song begins, “lantern, lantern, Sun and Moon and Stars.” [1] In the High Middle Ages, St. Martin’s Feast Day rivaled and competed with St. Nicholas’ Day on December 6th. Both pre-Christmas festivals point to common elements associated with Christmas such as light and giving.

St. Martin’s Day Endures in Germany

The November 21st 2009 edition of the German language Staats-Zeitung, published in New York for American German readers, contained six different articles on contemporary St. Martin’s celebrations in cities like Cologne and Dinslaken. One of the oldest traditions in Christian Europe, the train of lanterns is destined to endure with future generations.

[1] “Laterne, Laterne, Sonne, Mond und Sterne…”

Sources:

• John Delaney, Dictionary of Saints (Doubleday, 1980)
• R.W. Scribner, Popular Culture and Popular Movements in Reformation Germany (London: the Hambledon Press, 1987)
• Traude Walek-Doby, “How the Geese Made St. Martin a Bishop,” New Yorker Staats-Zeitung, Number 47, November 21, 2009.

The Election of 1900

American Imperialism and the Full Dinner Pail

August 17, 2009 Mike Streich

 By 1900 the United States had entered global affairs as a colonial power, espousing imperialism as a matter of national interest & security, despite Democrat opposition.

By the time of the presidential election of 1900, much had changed in the United States. Although William Jennings Bryan, the Democratic contender, attempted to resurrect the gold-silver debate, the issue was no longer important. What had changed, however, was America’s expansion in the Caribbean and the Pacific following the successful completion of the 1898 Spanish-American War and the annexation of Hawaii. Imperialism would become the dominant issue, although most Americans identified more strongly with McKinley’s “full dinner pail.”

William McKinley and the Republican Party in 1900

The “Splendid Little War,” as John Hay called it, gave the United States hegemony over former Spanish colonial islands. America’s “March of the Flag” had added Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines, despite fierce Filipino resistance that would result in a lengthy and bloody war of conquest and occupation.

But there were Americans that saw American imperialism as contrary to national principles and the fabric of democracy. Bryan capitalized on the issue, despite his support of the treaty with Spain ending the war. Republican Senator George Hoar, in his Autobiography, claimed that the Senate would never have been able to ratify the treaty without support from Democrats and Populists who were encouraged by Bryan after he came to Washington with the express purpose of supporting the treaty.

Theodore Roosevelt for Vice President

Teddy Roosevelt did not want to be Vice President. His service during the war as a “Rough Rider” turned him into a national hero. But he was content to serve as Governor of New York and was planning a reelection campaign at the time of the Republican National Convention. Roosevelt, however, was a reformer and, as such, posed a threat to the Republican Party boss of New York, Tom Platt.

Tom Platt worked behind the scenes to secure the VP nomination for Roosevelt to get him out of New York. In this, he was opposed by Mark Hanna and McKinley. Hanna was again the National Chairman and the “king-maker” of the election. Utterly devoted to his friend McKinley, he mistrusted Roosevelt. “Don’t any of you realize that there’s only one life between that madman and the presidency,” he declared as public opinion gathered to force the nomination.

Roosevelt was sincere in his refusal to accept the nomination, but in the end bowed to the deluge of Republican Party sentiment. After his nomination, Hanna said to McKinley, “Your duty to the country is to live for four years from next March.” Unfortunately, McKinley would be assassinated at the Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo, NY in 1901, making “that damned cowboy” president.

The Campaign of 1900

Bryan, as he had done in the election of 1896, traveled the nation giving speeches. But unlike 1896, both Teddy Roosevelt and Mark Hanna took the Republican message to the people. Hanna, who was once caricatured as the instrument of the trusts, had mellowed and crowds took to him, viewing him as a common American with their best interests at heart.

Roosevelt, however, was the phenomenon who championed McKinley and American interests. During his nomination speech of McKinley at the Philadelphia convention, Roosevelt stated that McKinley “stands for honesty at home and for honor abroad.” This same message resonated with voters.

The election results gave the Republican Party its greatest victory since 1872. William McKinley’s subsequent assassination in mid-1901 propelled Theodore Roosevelt into the White House, the first VP in American history to be reelected in his own right after the term ended in 1905. Roosevelt’s two terms would greatly enhance American prestige internationally and force progressive reforms domestically.

Sources:

• Paul F. Boller, Jr. Presidential Campaigns From George Washington to George W. Bush (Oxford University Press, 2004)
• Edmund Morris, Theodore Rex (New York: Random House, 2001)
• James Ford Rhodes, The McKinley and Roosevelt Administrations 1897-1909 New York: the Macmillan Company, 1922)
• Page Smith, The Rise of Industrial America: A People’s History of the Post-Reconstruction Era (Penguin Books, 1984)

Copyright Michael Streich. Contact the author to obtain permission for republication.

 

Anti Imperialist League And US Foreign Policy

Opposition to Philippine Annexation and the Platt Amendment

The Anti-Imperialist League represented the ideologies of prominent American writers, educators, and Mugwump Republicans opposed to the extension of US hegemony.

As the Spanish American War drew to a close in 1898, a group of influential Americans representing the Northeastern intelligentsia met in Boston’s Faneuil Hall to form the Anti-Imperialist League. The League opposed the Treaty of Paris, the Platt Amendment, and the occupation of the Philippines. As the Philippine War began in 1899, the League publicized atrocities committed by American troops against the Filipino people. Most Americans, however, rejected the ideologies of League members and supported imperialist policies.

The Anti-Imperialist League Includes Old School Republican Leaders

The League’s Platform begins with the statement that, “imperialism is hostile to liberty and tends toward militarism, an evil from which it has been our glory to be free.” [1] Members of the League believed that imperialism was contrary to the fabric of American democracy, pointing out that the nation had gained independence by fighting against Great Britain, a colonial power.

Some saw the extension of American hegemony as ultimately resulting in a weaker nation. Harvard University professor Moorfield Storey, a League member, took his cue from ancient history: “When Rome began her career of conquest, the Roman Republic began to decay.” [2] According to Warren Zimmermann, the League saw the extended occupation of Cuba and the annexation of the Philippines as a “perversion of American values.” [3]

Andrew Carnegie, the Gilded Age steel magnate who had come from Scotland as a youth to pursue the American Dream, bankrolled the League. One of the few business connected members, Carnegie asked, “Are we to exchange Triumphant Democracy for Triumphant Despotism?” Other League members included Mark Twain, Charles Francis Adams, Jr., and Senator George Hoar, the venerable Massachusetts Senator.

Carl Schurz Supports the Anti-Imperialism League

A key leader and founder of the League was Carl Schurz, another immigrant who, at age 23, had fled Germany in the wake of the Revolutions of 1848. Schurz was an early supporter of the new founded Republican Party in the early 1850s and became a friend of Abraham Lincoln. Serving in the Civil War as a Major General, Schurz went on to become a Cabinet Secretary under James Garfield and a Senator from Missouri. Schurz, a Mugwump since 1884, was the conscience of the League.

The Platt Amendment and the Annexation of the Philippines

The Platt Amendment gave the United States the right to intervene in Cuba whenever a perceived threat became apparent to the US government. Coerced into putting the Platt Amendment into the new Cuban Constitution, Cubans viewed the document as a mockery of full sovereignty. Although the League opposed the Amendment, some members supported it like Senator Hoar who voted in favor of the Amendment in the Senate.

Far more serious was American conduct in the Philippines. The League denounced “the slaughter of the Filipinos as a needless horror” and published examples of atrocities. The Gardener Report of 1902, a secret accounting of American acts of brutality in the Philippines compiled by Major Cornelius Gardener, was made public by a Senate Committee chaired by Senator Henry Cabot Lodge. The report seemed to justify everything the League had been saying.

The League followed up the release of the Gardener Report with the publication of the confession of Major C. Waller, whose graphic stories included detailed use of water torture by American soldiers. [4] The methods employed were identical to modern forms of similar torture known as “water-boarding.” The tenacity of the League in popularizing such stories forced President Teddy Roosevelt to demand a full explanation and accounting of the military.

Assessment of the League Shows a Lack of Popular American Support

Although the League was unable to redirect American foreign policy, its statements prevailed upon the national conscience, reminding Americans and their leaders that unique values characterized the United States. The presidential elections of 1900 and 1904 demonstrated that Americans supported imperialism and American foreign policy endeavors. But the League did not fail. Keeping in the forefront the moral debate on imperialism, the efforts of its members may have mitigated American actions.

Sources:

[1] Platform of the Anti-Imperialist League.

[2] Quoted in First Great Triumph: How Five Americans Made Their Country a World Power, by Warren Zimmermann, (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2002), p. 341.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Edmund Morris, Theodore Rex (Random House, 2001), see pp. 99ff.

Also:

Hans L. Trefousse, Carl Schurz: A Biography (Fordham University Press, 1998).

Copyright Michael Streich. Contact the author to obtain permission for republication.

 

Commodore Dewey Sinks Spanish Fleet at Manila 1898

• Jan 26, 2011
• Michael Streich

1 COMMENTS
JOIN THE CONVERSATION

USS OLYMPIA IN 1898 - US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IMAGE

U.S. action in the Philippines during the Spanish War resulted in a greater global presence showcased by a navy equal in power to other imperialist nation.

Congress declared war on Spain in 1898, precipitating what John Hay would call the “splendid little war.” In Hong Kong, Commodore Charles Dewey, commanding the U.S. Asiatic Squadron, received an urgent message from Washington, DC that read, in part, “Proceed at once to the Philippine Islands.” Dewey was ordered to destroy the Spanish fleet at Manila. Dewey’s subsequent actions would turn him into a national hero. Additionally, American naval prowess would take its place alongside that of the other great European powers. George Dewey’s defeat of the Spanish navy at Manila had long term consequences for a growing U.S. global presence.

Naval Preparations to Occupy the Philippines in the Spanish American War

The selection of George Dewey as commander of the Asiatic Squadron was the clandestine work of Theodore Roosevelt, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy. Dewey’s command was also recommended to President William McKinley by Senator Redfield Proctor (R-Vermont), a friend of Roosevelt and an expansionist. Dewey was 61 at the time with a long and distinguished service record.

In 1862, Dewey, at the age of 25, participated in the capture of New Orleans and later fought at Fort Fisher. His 1898 victory opened the doors to a presidential candidacy. Even before Congress declared war, Roosevelt had ordered Dewey to take his fleet from Yokohama in Japan to Hong Kong in anticipation of war with Spain.

American Naval Strength in Asia in 1898

Dewey commanded a strike force of nine ships from his flagship, the USS Olympia. The Olympia is a museum today in Philadelphia but has recently been considered for scrap. (Mercury News, January 11, 2011) Dewey’s flotilla contained seven warships that were vastly outnumbered by Spanish ships at Manila. The Spanish fleet, however, was antiquated.

Uncertainty over American Naval Goals in Manila Bay April – May 1898

American intelligence regarding Spanish strength in Manila was poor and unreliable. Dewey resorted to setting up his own intelligence network prior to sailing from Hong Kong. Additionally, with minor exception, U.S. naval strength remained untested, despite a prolonged program to modernize the fleet and add top of the line warships.

Dewey was aware that if his Spanish counterpart sailed into Subic Bay, reaching Manila without a fight would be slowed. Additionally, Americans worried about mines and Spanish coastal defenses. As Dewey steamed from Hong Kong, his British hosts in the Crown Colony doubted they would see the Americans again.

Dewey Arrives at Manila Bay and Destroys the Spanish Fleet

The Spanish naval commander, Admiral Patricio Montojo Pasaron, had indeed recognized the significance of Subic Bay and sent six warships to stop the approaching American squadron. The ships were antiquated and when a major warship developed problems, Montojo Pasaron returned to Manila. Dewey arrived at Manila by night and spent the morning hours shelling the Spanish fleet.

Almost out of ammunition, a final pass caused the Spanish to surrender. Dewey had the cables severed, cutting off any communication with the outside world after the Spanish commander refused to allow Americans its use. Not until a ship reached Hong Kong would the world know of the enormity of Spanish losses. Dewey emerged as the first hero of America’s most popular war.

Role of the Imperial Germans in the Philippines in 1898

Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany had long meddled in the global affairs of other European powers, seeking for Germany a “place in the sun.” Even before the sinking of the USS Maine in Havana Harbor, German warships steamed the Caribbean, seeking to exploit growing Spanish colonial weaknesses.

After the battle of Manila Bay, several warships of the German Asiatic Squadron entered the bay, much to the consternation of Dewey, who had been promoted to rear admiral. Dewey understood German goals in Asia, but was evasive in his replies. In Berlin, the Kaiser searched for some opportunity to benefit from Spanish defeat.

Dewey’s Tumultuous Reception by the American People in 1899

Admiral Dewey returned to the U.S., greeted by a thankful nation. At the end of September 1899, New York hosted a gala celebration that included a parade. The city erected a triumphal arch to honor Dewey which some newspapers compared to the arch of Titus in Ancient Rome. There was even talk of promoting a Dewey presidential candidacy.

Dewey, however, remained in the Navy and would serve his country well until his death in 1917. He had a candy named after him and numerous jingles celebrated his Manila victory. Dewey’s actions had two major long-term consequences. The United States emerged as an imperialist power as formidable as any European power, excepting Britain. The taking of the Philippines resulted in an extended occupation and civil war, costing thousands of American and Filipino lives.

Sources:

• Ivan Musicant, Empire By Default: The Spanish-American War and the Dawn of the American Century (Henry Holt and Company, 1998)
• G.J.A. O’Toole, The Spanish War: An American Epic 1898 (W.W. Norton & Company, 1984)
• Page Smith, The Rise of Industrial America: A People’s History of the Post-Reconstruction Era, Volume 6 (Penguin Books, 1990)
• Albert K. Weinberg, Manifest Destiny: A Study of Nationalist Expansionism in American History (The Johns Hopkins Press, 1935)
• Warren Zimmermann, First Great Triumph: How Five Americans Made Their Country A World Power (Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, 2002)

Copyright Michael Streich. Contact the author to obtain permission for republication.

 

Theodore Roosevelt's Vision in the Spanish-American War

• May 31, 2012
• Michael Streich

0 COMMENTS
JOIN THE CONVERSATION

ROOSEVELT'S PARTICIPATION IN THE SPANISH WAR LED TO THE PRESIDENCY - WIKIMEDIA PHOTO IMAGE

The Spanish-American War redefined America's global position and reach in 1898, conforming to Roosevelt's view of Americanism.

America’s most popular war helped heal old Civil War wounds and unify a nation, but it also opened new doors that tested the sincerity of freedom-loving people. The Spanish-American War represented efforts of men like Theodore Roosevelt whose vision of “Americanism” included a global reach guaranteed by a modern navy and brought to fruition with bold action.

The Coming of the Spanish American War

Although the destruction of the USS Maine in Havana harbor in February 1898 elicited widespread patriotism and revenge aimed at Spain and the long misrule of Cuba, business interests eventually supported war while America’s Protestant churches seized an opportunity to pursue the Gospel “Great Commission” in “far flung” places like the Philippines.

William McKinley’s election victory in 1896 occurred amidst growing anxiety over Cuba and Spain’s response to the latest outbreak of rebellion on the island. Republican victory also furthered the career ambitions of Teddy Roosevelt, whose appointment as Assistant Secretary of the Navy enabled him to actively pursue a war agenda tied to a wider, long-term vision of American imperialism.

Roosevelt’s Preparedness and Motivation

Throughout 1897, Roosevelt helped to prepare the nation for a war that he believed was both inevitable and needed. Every letter and speech was used to promote the necessity of war with Spain as well as the need for an American global reach supported by a strong navy, ideals taken from Admiral Alfred Mahan’s book The Influence of Sea Power on History. Roosevelt’s circle of influential friends like Senator Henry Cabot Lodge of Massachusetts helped spread the message of war with Spain.

Ordinary Americans were influenced by the “sensational” press, newspapers and magazines eager to sell issues supported by exaggerated and often outrageous headlines. Prominent publisher William Randolph Hearst, for example, spared no expense drumming up war fever in his presses.

By the time the Maine exploded in Havana, the truth behind the disaster didn’t matter. Despite a formal inquiry that resulted in no firm conclusions, most Americans, including Roosevelt, blamed Spain. By early 1898, Roosevelt had positioned the navy on a path to initiate hostilities against Spain: in Hong Kong, for example, the Pacific Asiatic Squadron under the command of Commodore Dewey, a Roosevelt appointee, was ready to destroy the Spanish fleet in Manila

Other Reasons for War with Spain in 1898

President McKinley, a devout Methodist, was not unfamiliar with the ravages of war. The last president of the 19th Century had participated in the bloody battle of Antietam and recalled the terrible conflict separating the nation a generation earlier. Some historians point out that Roosevelt was also influenced by the Civil War, haunted by the fact that his father had avoided military service by paying for substitutes. Others note that party unification was also a motive in 1898. Roosevelt and Lodge, for example, reviled William Jennings Bryan’s “Cross of Gold” vision for America as much as they did Spain’s colonialism.

America’s ambassador to Great Britain, John Hay, called it the “splendid little war.” The consequences, however, were enormous. The defeat of Spain following the short conflict and low casualty count resulted in American acquisition of Cuba, the Philippines, and Puerto Rico. The war also helped promote the image of Roosevelt who resigned his position in government to lead the “Rough Riders” as second in command.

The war put Roosevelt on a political path leading to the vice presidency in 1900 and, following the assassination of McKinley in 1901, the presidency. The Spanish American War also changed American global perceptions, turning the nation into an imperialist power. Unlike most everyday Americans, however, Roosevelt and those he influenced viewed the war and its consequences as part of a greater twentieth century vision.

Roosevelt’s Vision Shapes America’s Future

Roosevelt’s vision of “Americanism” gave a global foundation to foreign policy realities not fully comprehended until decades after he died. The notion that America has a duty to promote and defend freedom and justice is still motivation in the twenty-first century. In many respects, America’s most popular war, fought in 1898 for all of the wrong reasons, charted long-term foreign policy ambitions for the next hundred years.

References:

• Ivan Musicant, Empire By Default: The Spanish-American War and the Dawn of the American Century (Henry Holt and Company, 1998)
• Evan Thomas, The War Lovers: Roosevelt, Lodge, Hearst, and the Rush to Empire, 1898 (Little, Brown and Company, 2010)
• Page Smith, The Rise of Industrial America: A People’s History of the Post-Reconstruction Era, Volume 6 (Penguin, 1984)
• Dale L. Walker, The Boys of ’98: Theodore Roosevelt and the Rough Riders (Forge, 1998)

Copyright Michael Streich. Contact the author to obtain permission for republication.

 CIVIL WAR ANTHEMS AND TUNES

 Civil War Confederate songs help to understand why Southern men enlisted to fight the North. The 1860 census reveals that a mere 4.8% of Southern whites owned slaves. Many were yeomen farmers without slaves. Only in Mississippi and South Carolina did the percentage of slaves in the overall population exceed 50%. Historian James McPherson’s book, For Cause and Comrades: Why Men Fought in the Civil War, analyzes letters, diaries, and other written documents and concludes that many men joined the Cause as a nationalistic endeavor rather than fighting strictly for slavery. The songs of the Confederate South corroborate this theory.

 

Confederate Anthems

 

“We are a band of brothers, And native to the soil; Fighting for our liberty, With Treasure blood and toil…” So begins Harry McCarthy’s stirring 1861 tune, Bonnie Blue Flag, destined to become the second anthem of the Confederate States, behind the popular Dixie. Song lyrics reveal the mindset of average soldiers as they marched or spent days encamped, awaiting battle. Historian Richard Hartwell refers to them as, “tuneful symbols of Southern nationalism.” David Eicher writes that, “among the most significant ways in which soldiers expressed….feelings of unity, especially while on the march, was in song.”

 

Harry McCarthy came to New Orleans from Great Britain as an entertainer. Bonnie Blue Flag begins with a reference to Henry V and Shakespeare’s “band of brothers” battle speech. The analogy was obvious. Like Henry V, facing a vastly superior French army at Agincourt in 1415, the South was poised to defend its sovereignty against a foe that outnumbered them by thirteen million people. McCarthy’s “band of brothers” was a celebration of unity as well as an assurance of victory.

 

William Barnes’ 1864 Battle Cry of Freedom champions the idea of freedom and independence: “Their motto is resistance – ‘To tyrants we’ll not yield…” “Our Southern sky is brightening and soon we will be free…” Maryland, My Maryland begins by referring to the Northern “despot,” while The Flag of Secession, sung to the tune of the Star Spangled Banner, concludes the first stanza with, “Now the flag of secession in triumph cloth wave; O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.”  Confederate lyrics reinforced the imagery of a tyrannical North that paralleled the despot George III in 1776. Like the Founding Fathers, Southerners were fighting for the right to be free.

 

Dixie, the most popular Southern tune and the song most associated with the South, was written in 1859 by Daniel Decatur Emmett to be used in a variety show. It was rapidly adopted by both North and South and Abraham Lincoln counted it as his favorite tune. It came to be viewed at the Confederate national anthem after it was used to open Jefferson Davis’ inaugural ball. In July 1861 General Irvin McDowell’s men were singing Dixie as they advanced toward Bull Run. Repulsed by P.T. Beauregard and Joseph Johnston, Southern soldiers adopted the song as their own.

 

Revenge and Eulogies

 

Written after the end of the Civil War, James Randolph’s Good Ol’ Rebel Soldier declares, “…We got three hundred thousand before they conquered us.” The South I Love Thee More, also written after the war, is a eulogy that compares the defeated South to the coming of winter.

 

Southern Civil War songs speak of independence and freedom, of repulsing a conqueror and defending the home. The Flag of Secession predicts that, “the Northmen shall shrink from our warriors’ might….O’er the land of the freed and the home of the brave.”

Summary

The tunes of the Civil War reflected ideologies as well as a sense of comradery. Many of these tunes have endured. Despite the fact that Lincoln's favorite tune was Dixie, the very name of the highly popular Civil War tune is, in contemporary America, anathema and associated with the time of slavery. To a lesser extent, the same is true of other Southern tunes such as Good Ol' Rebel Soldier. 

American culture will have to make peace at some point with the past, separating history from on-going emotional responses tied to anachronistic ideologies. We are one people and need to work toward the reality of e pluribus unum. 

Originally published November 19, 2008 in Suite101 by M.Streich and is under copyright. Summary was updated November 18, 2020.

 

Amending the United States Constitution

Expanding American Freedoms Through Constitutional Changes

Jan 9, 2009 Michael Streich

Although the Constitution has been amended numerous times through a lengthy process, many proposed amendments never made it beyond the House of Representatives.

James Madison, a framer of the United States Constitution, wrote that, “In framing a system which we wish to last for ages, we should not lose sight of the changes which ages will produce.” [1] The Constitution has been amended only twenty-seven times. Although many amendments have been proposed over the course of American history since the ratification of the Constitution, only six other amendments were sent to the states but were never adopted. These included the most recent Equal Rights Amendment and an amendment regarding Congressional representation for the District of Columbia.

Amending the Constitution

The Constitution can be amended using two methods. The first method begins in the Congress. If two-thirds of the members of both chambers (House of Representatives and the Senate) vote for the amendment, it is sent to the various state legislatures. Three-quarters of the state legislatures must approve the amendment before it can be adopted. All twenty-seven current Amendments were adopted using this method excepting the Twenty-First Amendment.

The second method for amending the Constitution involves the convening of conventions. This method has never been used. A Constitutional Convention can be called by Congress or by the Petition of two-thirds of the states, resulting in conventions involving three-quarters of all states. In the case of the Twenty-First Amendment repealing Prohibition, established in the Eighteenth Amendment, the Amendment was ratified in 1933 through state conventions.

Amendments as a Response to Contemporary Issues

Members of the House of Representatives are usually the most vulnerable to constituent concerns, serving only two-year terms. Hence, it is fairly common to see amendments regarding contemporary issues arise frequently in this chamber. In recent years, members have discussed varying forms of a “Right to Life” Amendment, an Amendment criminalizing the desecration of the United States’ flag, and an Amendment defining marriage.

All three of the above noted proposed amendments came as a response to legal challenges and court decisions. Ever since Roe v. Wade (1973), conservatives have sought ways to reverse legal abortions. A “Flag Desecration Amendment” was proposed after two Supreme Court cases interpreted flag burning as protected under the Constitution’s guarantee of freedom of speech.

Amendments defining marriage as between a male and a female arose in response to several state actions, notably Massachusetts and California, which legalized same sex unions. Whereas some interpretations of Article IV of the Constitution regard the “Full Faith and Credit” clause as a means to force all states to accept such marriages if performed in another state, members of Congress sought to constitutionally eliminate such possibilities while at the same time defining “marriage” itself.

Amending Broadens Freedoms of Americans

Criticism of proposed amendments noted above usually involves the observation that amendments should broaden freedoms and not limit them through constitutionally enshrined discrimination. Beyond the Bill of Rights, subsequent amendments ended slavery, expanded the franchise, and generally gave citizens a greater voice in government by eliminating such voter restrictions as the poll tax.

Using the amending process to address contemporary social issues may, according to scholars, undermine the very nature of the amending process which may be, based on the Constitution’s framers, to more adequately complete the on-going process of governance and the expansion of personal freedoms as the ages progressed.

Sources:

[1] Edwin C. Rozwenc and Frederick E. Bauer, Jr., Liberty and Power in the Making of the Constitution (Boston: D.C. Heath and Company, 1963), p. 6.

Alfred H. Kelly and Winfred A. Harbison, The American Constitution: Its Origins and Development 5th Ed. (W. W. Norton & Company, 1976)

United States Constitution