La presente ricerca si è proposta di evidenziare le strategie di integrazione ovvero le pratiche di cittadinanza adottate in favore di un particolare segmento dei fenomeni migratori internazionali attuali: quello dei minori stranieri che soli varcano le frontiere del nostro paese alla ricerca di generiche migliori condizioni di vita. La conoscenza del loro patrimonio culturale e l'analisi delle procedure di accoglienza e di integrazione adottate nelle società di accoglienza, rappresentano una sfida stimolante nella prospettiva della disciplina antropologica, da sempre considerata la scienza 'dell'altro' e della 'differenza culturale' (Callari Galli, 2005). In generale, l'importanza di tale studio è resa evidente certamente dai numeri sempre più consistenti di minori stranieri non accompagnati presenti nel nostro paese, ma ancor più dalla necessità di ridefinire le strategie dell'integrazione sociale complessive se non si vuole alimentare quella che già dagli anni 70 è stata definita da alcuni criminologi come una "una bomba sociale a scoppio ritardato" (Bovenkerk 1973, cit. in Barbagli 2002, p. 31); tanto è la posta in gioco. Sebbene la letteratura sulle seconde generazioni e in particolare quella sui minori stranieri non accompagnati sia ormai cospicua tanto in Italia quanto a livello internazionale, mancano ancora monografie antropologiche su singole nazionalità immigrate soprattutto che siano capaci di accedere, investigare ed indagare il controverso universo emozionale dei minori. La presente ricerca nasce dall'esigenza di colmare questo gap esperienziale assumendo come protagonisti una frangia specifica della categoria minorile: i giovani di origine marocchina che si innescano su uno specifico segmento delle attuali tratte migratorie transnazionali, l'asse Khourigba – Roma. In accordo con le recenti acquisizioni degli studi antropologici (Persichetti, 2003; Riccio; 2007; Capello, 2008) si è ritenuto inoltre opportuno procedere con uno studio multisituato capace di ricomprendere al suo interno i due aspetti del binomio migratorio: il contesto di partenza e quello di arrivo dei giovani migranti. "Prima di diventare un immigrato, il migrante è sempre innanzitutto un emigrato" scrive il sociologo algerino Abdelmalek Sayad (2002) intendendo con tale affermazione che emigrazione ed immigrazione sono due facce della stessa realtà. Uno studio dei fenomeni migratori cioè dimentico delle condizioni di origine si condanna ad offrire degli stessi solo una versione parziale e connotata etnocentricamente. L'etnografia, iniziata nel 2006 e terminata nel 2008, è stata quindi integrata da due viaggi in Marocco con l'intenzione appunto di cogliere quella parte di vissuto fatto anche di suoni, colori, immagini altrimenti non "accessibile" e non "trasmissibile" nel solo contesto di accoglienza. Chiaramente si è fatto largo uso di metodologie qualitative (osservazione partecipante, focus group, interviste in profondità) in quanto maggiormente adatte ad indagare in profondità le complesse dinamiche caratterizzanti i vissuti esperienziali; a cogliere le sfumature di contesto e di restituire per queste stesse ragioni un quadro vivo e frastagliato fuori da logiche pre- costituite. La restituzione delle testimonianze raccolte - grazie a un capillare lavoro di conoscenza della realtà romana dell'immigrazione e a un 'patto' etnografico molto forte intrattenuto con i giovani testimoni nonché con gli operatori che in molte occasioni se ne fanno carico - fa risaltare gli aspetti non solo politico-culturali della questione, ma anche l'intreccio di emotività e fragilità che si cela al centro della loro condizione di minori non accompagnati. La particolare condizione di vulnerabilità di cui sono vittima deriva certamente da una condizione giuridica fortemente "incerta", ma anche dal doppio ruolo sociale che il minore straniero non accompagnato assume su di sé: come "minore" è soggetto di un tradizionale percorso pedagogico, come "straniero" è un pericolo per l'ordine pubblico. La tutela "naturale" viene in questo modo costantemente infranta o finisce per dissolversi in uno spazio che non può essere indirizzato o controllato su logiche o prassi proprie dell'ordine nazionale. Soggetto "anomalo" e "sovversivo"quindi, il minore straniero non accompagnato, spesso relegato negli ambiti bui e marginali delle metropoli odierne, con la sua stessa presenza pone seri interrogativi rispetto alla capacità della nostre società di accoglienza di produrre coesione sociale e di riformulare le regole del gioco di un sistema che sia realmente inclusivo delle parti. Adolescenti (e) immigrati la cui vita si svolge su rotte transnazionali. Il loro percorso è intessuto di piccole casualità - incontri, parole, piccoli gesti - che ne determinano l'intrigo. Sono storie fatte di alternanza di successi e sbandamenti, integrazione e devianza, intreccio di trame che si snodano sul confine tra ciò che è lecito e ciò che non lo è. Minori al "bivio", dunque, qualcuno dice, "tra integrazione e rimpatrio". Questi giovani, figli di una diaspora migratoria che ha tessuto legami sociali internazionali in vari continenti, tendono a pensarsi come cittadini del mondo e possono immaginare il loro futuro in Italia, nel paese d'origine, così come in un altro luogo, conoscono la fatica dell'adattamento, e stanno imparando a gestirlo; sanno che la loro "differenza", le loro conoscenze di un'altra lingua, cultura e religione, il loro aspetto, le loro esperienze non sempre facili di socializzazione, potranno rivelarsi un limite o una risorsa. E' questa nuova consapevolezza che si sta faticosamente facendo strada oggi tra le coscienze a far sperare oggi in un destino per loro diverso da quello vissuto dai loro coetanei delle banlieues francesi o delle inner cities britanniche, dove l'essere cresciuti in quartieri in cui problemi sociali e esistenziali simili tendono a sovrapporsi, ha portato molti giovani a sentirsi collettivamente parte di una generazione tradita e sacrificata, maturando così rancore sociale e desiderio di imporsi, attraverso un'identità fiera o desiderosa di ricreare una sua purezza. La scommessa di una integrazione sociale riuscita per i giovani stranieri cresciuti nel nostro paese, ma ancora più per i minori stranieri non accompagnati, si gioca essenzialmente quindi nelle reti dell'assistenza sociale e quindi nella scuola. Tale scelta pur essendo molto lontana dal conseguimento degli obiettivi economici, e quindi dall'ottemperamento del mandato migratorio, consente di rivendicare principi e ragioni di "somiglianza – uguaglianza" con i compagni di scuola autoctoni; confronto prima pressoché impossibile data la clandestinità cui sono di sovente costretti i minori stranieri non accompagnati e la peculiarità del tipo di lavoro svolto dai marocchini, quello ambulante, per sua natura itinerante e fortemente stigmatizzato dall'opinione comune. Nonostante le evidenti lacerazioni che questa scelta comporta in termini di: rottura con vecchi schemi di comportamento; ridefinizione dei ruoli all'interno della famiglia, nell'ambito societario di arrivo, così come in quello di appartenenza; riapporpiazione della propria identità, questa strada sembra a tutt'oggi l'unica in grado di preservare questi giovani migranti o di stornarli dal destino di devianza e marginalità che spesso si apre loro come scelta obbligata. La ricerca consta di due parti: la prima rende conto della letteratura in materia di seconde generazioni e la seconda restituisce i risultati dell'etnografia. In particolare il primo capitolo affronta i termini generali della questione con l'intenzione di chiarire i diversi misunderstanding che costellano il dibattito in materia di immigrazione attraverso una lettura critica della letteratura nazionale e internazionale. Il secondo e il terzo capitolo si occupano rispettivamente della normativa europea e italiana. Quanto al primo contesto sono evidenziate le diverse pratiche adottate in materia di ingresso dei minori stranieri non accompagnati all'interno dei confini di alcuni Paesi membri di vecchia e nuova immigrazione (Francia, Inghilterra, Germania, Belgio e Spagna) e posti in luce i gaps presenti così come le falle del sistema; quanto al contesto italiano, si mettono in rilievo le criticità che gli apparati giuridici presentano rispetto a una realtà concreta del fenomeno caratterizzata, come è ovvio, da straordinaria fluttuanza e informalità. Il quarto capitolo è stato dedicato alla scuola in quanto considerata la vera fucina del cambiamento sociale per la sua capacità di rappresentare l'occasione primaria di formazione linguistica, di costruzione di reti interne al Paese di accoglienza, di apprendimento di concetti e modalità didattiche ad esso omogenee; un paragrafo a parte è stato riservato all'inserimento lavorativo essendo questo il principale movente della migrazione di questi giovani. Infine il quinto capitolo si è prefisso di indagare il contesto di provenienza dei minori intervistati, il Marocco, ricostruendo l'eredità del passato coloniale, le scelte economiche del Marocco Indipendente, i fattori di push and pull dietro i flussi migratori di ieri e di oggi. Il quadro finale ha permesso di sondare la salute del sistema. Riconoscere diritto di parola e di ascolto dell'infanzia e dell'adolescenza ha significato fare un passo importante in avanti nella comprensione della loro soggettività, consentendo di fare emergere tutti quegli aspetti di conformità, progressivo adattamento ovvero di riottosità rispetto tanto alla propria comunità di appartenenza quanto alla società di arrivo. Considerare i minori come "soggetti di diritto" ha significato in altre parole ripensare sotto un altro punto di vista l'organizzazione e le strutture profonde che quella società regolano con il merito di porre in luce aspetti e problemi inediti, frizioni interne al gruppo normalmente sfuggevoli e molto riposte ed elementi di scarto rispetto a un modello omogeneo e granitico di una data cultura. Occorre sobriamente riconoscere che non si danno più né immigrati né emigrati, ma "pari" cittadini (o spiranti tali) che tessono relazioni effettivamente ed affettivamente collegate in un unico destino interdipendente. La consapevolezza di questo richiede competenza, intelligenza, impegno e determinazione nelle scelte operative da intraprendere; l'altra faccia della medaglia è solo devianza ed emarginazione. ; The following research is aimed to underline the strategies of integration and the practices of citizenship utilized in favor of a particular segment of the actual international migratory phenomenon: the one about foreign minors who alone pass the borders of our country to search for better conditions of life. The knowledge of their cultural background and the analysis of the procedures of the ways in which one is welcomed and the integration adopted by the receiving countries represent a stimulating challenge from the anthropological perspective, always considered the science of "cultural differences" (Callari Galli, 2005). The importance of this study is obviously given forth by the increasing numbers of "separated" minors in our country, but moreover by the necessity to re-define the strategies of social integration tout court if we don't want to feed what has, since 1970, been defined by some criminologists as a real "time bomb" (Bovenkerk 1973, cit. in Barbagli 2002, p. 31). Although nowadays both of the international and Italian literature, about the second generation and in particular those that talk of separated minors are conspicuous, we are still missing anthropological monographs on single nationalities of immigrants able to access, investigate and inquire into the complex emotional world of these minors. The following research was born from the necessity to fill in this experiential gap assuming as its subject a specific part of the category of minors: youth of Moroccan origin that are situated on a particular segment of the transnational migratory trades, the axis Khourigba- Rome. According to the recent anthropological acquisition (Persichetti, 2003; Riccio; 2007; Capello, 2008) it became appropriate to proceed with a multi-situated study able to embrace both of the aspects of the migrants lives: the context of origin and the context of arrival of the young migrants. "Before becoming an immigrant, the migrant is always an emigrant" wrote the Algerian sociologist Abdelmalek Sayad (2002), intending by this affirmation that immigration and emigration are both faces of the same reality. A study of the migrant phenomenon that forgets or leaves behind the condition of origin of immigrants people is condemned to offer only a partial and ethnocentric version of this phenomenon. The ethnography, started in 2006 and finished in 2008, has been integrated by two journeys in Morocco with the purpose to investigate those part of lives – made principally also by sounds, colors and images - not "accessible" and "communicable" in the receiving countries. Clearly the research has required a large use of qualitative methodologies (participant observation, focus group, interview in depth, etc) because of their characteristic to be more adapted to investigate the complex dynamics typical of the lived experience; to catch the shades of content and to give back, for these same reasons, a lively and unusual picture out of rules and schemes prior established. The feedback from the gathered stories – by a meticulous work which consisted in the knowledge of the Roman immigrants reality and a strong ethnographical "pact" with the minors on one hand and the social operators on the other – has brought to light not only the political and cultural aspects of the phenomenon, but moreover the tangle of sensitiveness and fragility hidden behind their condition of separated minors. The particular condition of vulnerability of which they are victims firstly came from an "uncertain" juridical condition, but more so by the double rule that the separated minor assumes on himself: as a "minor" he is subject to a traditional pedagogic approach and as a "stranger" he is considered dangerous to the public order. The natural guardianship which they should enjoy is continuously breached and threatened and dissolves in vague promises and empty rituals. Separated minors are "anomalous" and "subversive" subjects who too often are relegated to the dark and marginal spheres of the actual metropolis. Furthermore, their own presence, even if it is made invisible by the viewpoint of the system, impose serious and urgent questions to contemporary society; in respect of our capacity to produce social cohesion and re-formulate the rules of a game which has to be really inclusive in all its parts. It compromises the global issues of our society. Adolescents (and) immigrants who are living their lives on transnational routes. Their course is woven together by many little causalities - encounters, words and simple gestures that determine its outcome. These are stories made up of alternations of successes and disbandment, integration and deviance, a tangle of plots that lie on the border of what is licit and what is not. Minors on a "crossroad", some say, between "integration and repatriation". These young, son of numerous migratory diasporas that have banded together into international social links in many continents, tend to think themselves as citizens of the world and are able to imagine their future in Italy, in their own country or everywhere. They have lived the fatigue of adaptation and are learning to manage it. They know that their "difference" - the knowledge of another tongue, culture, religion, their physical appearance, their experiences of socialization, not always so simple and immediate - can be either a limit or a resource. Is this new consciousness - that nowadays is hardly rousing our consciences - to leave us the hope in a different destiny from that lived by their residing in the French banlieues or in Britain's inner cities. These communities, where to be brought up in districts in which social and existential problems tend to overlap, has brought many young persons to feel part of a generation betrayed and sacrificed and to foster social resentment and wishes of revenge through an identity that is proud and intent on recreating its original purity. The bet of a successful social integration for the young people growing up in our country, but moreover for the separated minors, is played on the circuits of social assistance and then on the capacity of school to create cohesion as an agency of socialization. This choice, though it is really far away from the fulfillment of their economic objectives and then from the attainment of the migratory cause, allows them to claim principles and reasons of " similarity – equality" with their coetaneous friends of school. This is a kind of comparison that was impossible before because of the irregular condition to which separated minors are often obliged and the peculiar characteristics of the type of job done by Moroccan people, usually pitchmen, from its nature an itinerant job hardly stigmatized by common opinion. Although the evident lacerations that this choice implies in terms of breaking old schemes of behaviours; redefinition of rules in the family, in the society of arrival (as well as in the society of origin); re-appropriation of one's own identity; this road appears uniquely to be able to preserve these young migrants from the solitude of a destiny otherwise made up of deviance and marginality. The research consists of two parts: the first one proposes a general framework about second generation literature and the second one provides the results of the ethnography. In particular, the first chapter copes with these questions in general terms with the intent to clarify the different misunderstandings in the debate about immigration, through a critical reading of national and international literature. The second and third chapters talk respectively of the European laws concerning separated minors and the Italian ones. In regard to the first context, it underlines the different practices adopted about the entry of separated minors in the territories of several old and new European immigration countries (such as France, Britain, Germany, Belgium and Spain) and point out the gaps and problems of these systems. As regards the Italian context, instead, emphasize is put on the critical points of the actual juridical systems in respect to a reality of the phenomenon characterized, as obviously it is, by remarkable unbalance and changeability. The fourth chapter has been dedicated to the school because it is considered the real forge of the social changing in its capacity to represent the primary occasion of: linguistic training, constructing of intern links in the receiving countries, learning of concepts and didactic modalities homogenous to it. A specific paragraph has been reserved to the introduction to the working environment because it is the main reason of the migration of these young people. The fifth chapter is aimed to investigate the context of provenience of minors interviewed, the Moroccan Country, reconstructing the heredity of the colonial past, the economic choices of the Independent Morocco, and the factors of push and pull behind the migratory flows of yesterday and today. The final picture is used to verify the health of the system. Recognizing the right of "speech" and "listening" to infancy and adolescence has meant to make an important step forward in the knowledge of their individuality, making arise all aspects of conformity and progressive adaptation or, on the contrary, their rebelliousness to their own culture as well as to the receiving society. In other worlds, considering minors "subjects of right" has meant rethinking the organization and obscure structures that manage the same societies in which they live, with the merit to point out aspects and elements of forsaking respect to a homogenous and given model of a culture. Nowadays more than ever it is necessary to admit that there are no more immigrants or emigrants, but "equal" citizens (or aspirant ones) who weave together elements of every type in a unique interdependent destiny. The consciousness of this claim calls for competence, intelligence, dedication and determination in the choice to engage; the rest is made by deviance, frustration, marginalization. ; Dottorato di ricerca in Tutela e Promozione dei Diritti dell'Infanzia (XXII ciclo)
Inclusive innovation seeks to expand access to essential goods and services, thereby improving quality of life, and enhancing economic empowerment through knowledge creation, acquisition, adaption, absorption, and deployment efforts targeted directly at the needs of excluded populations. Inclusive innovation is of high relevance for the Chinese authorities, but the concept is new to the Chinese government from both conceptual and policy perspective. So far China has emphasized frontier innovation, yet has recognized the importance of inclusive innovation in addressing increasing disparity between the rich and poor. In China many efforts are being made in the domain of inclusive innovation, but there is no clear strategy and implementation plan. This report aims to help build awareness and set the stage for the potential implementation and operationalization of inclusive innovation policy in China and possibly in other countries. This report is presented in four Chapters and an Executive Summary. Chapter I presents the concept of inclusive innovation and why it is relevant for China. Chapter II discusses the current landscape for inclusive innovation in China. Chapter III presents international experience and examples. Chapter IV outlines some policy options for consideration by the Chinese authorities.
The American Civil War is one of the defining events in American history. Abundant studies cover every aspect of the conflict, from strategic analysis to the material culture of uniforms. Even with thousands of academic studies, each adding a new interpretation, there remains still unexplored territory. This study's objective is to expand upon and connect these previous interpretations to produce another tier in understanding a specific chapter of the war. The question posed centers on not the Confederate strengths but the Federal weaknesses. Research shows how the failure and limitations of Union strategy, policy, and the inability to logistically sustain massive offensives opened the way for the Confederacy to capitalize on, and turn the tide of the war. Furthermore, how did the Confederate strategies both militarily and politically have the greatest success and influence on the Kentucky and Maryland Campaigns and the overall outcome of the war? ; Master of Arts in Military History ; Capstone Autumn 1862 The High Tide of the Confederacy Colin E. Zimmerman A paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts in Military History Norwich University MH562 Capstone Paper Dr. Wesley Moody 23-August-2020. 2 Thesis: The American Civil War is one of the defining events in American history. Abundant studies cover every aspect of the conflict, from strategic analysis to the material culture of uniforms. Even with thousands of academic studies, each adding a new interpretation, there remains still unexplored territory. This study's objective is to expand upon and connect these previous interpretations to produce another tier in understanding a specific chapter of the war. The question posed centers on not the Confederate strengths but the Federal weaknesses. Research shows how the failure and limitations of Union strategy, policy, and the inability to logistically sustain massive offensives opened the way for the Confederacy to capitalize on, and turn the tide of the war. Furthermore, how did the Confederate strategies both militarily and politically have the greatest success and influence on the Kentucky and Maryland Campaigns and the overall outcome of the war? It will be necessary to answer this question through a multilayered approach. Instead of viewing the Kentucky and Maryland campaigns on the tactical level, which has already consumed most of the historiography on the topic, this study will instead find an explanation to this question through political, logistical, organizational, leadership personalities, and economic components and how they dictated the overall strategic picture and framework. When synthesizing all these components together, one potential answer generates: the grand Confederate offensive in the autumn of 1862, a direct result of botched Federal strategic measures and limitations, divided political policies, and the Union's struggling logistical capabilities; indicated the high tide of the Confederacy. Through battlefield victories and seizing the initiative in direct and indirect courses, Confederate leadership allowed the Southern field armies to exploit the Federal weaknesses culminating in the Kentucky and Maryland campaigns. 3 These campaigns offered the Confederacy its only realistic chance of ending the war on political and strategic terms that favored the South. An examination of each specific component and its relation to the Confederate high tide's theory is therefore essential to back this new interpretation. Political Factors of the North, South, and Europe; and its Benefit to the Confederacy in 1862: All wars, especially civil wars, are political in their foundation, influence, and execution. In "On War," Carl von Clausewitz states that "the political object, as the original motive of the War, will be the standard for determining both the aim of the military force and the amount of effort to be made." 1 This axiom applies to events in the autumn of 1862 since political factors dominated the motivation of strategy. The Confederacy's legitimacy resided within its field armies continued existence. Their ability to gain military victories that supported both the strategic and political realms was the essential component that needed to be sustained if the South was to remain independent. The North was in a completely different predicament, as the rival political factions, Republican's and Democrat's, each with its own opinion on the objective goals and the conduct of the war, could not in the early phase of the war come to common ground as to what the specific nature, cause, plan, and purpose of the Civil War was. The North was a nation at war without complete unification of mind, and purpose, which presented a weakness that could ultimately undo its efforts. Complicating matters for President Abraham Lincoln, and his party's agenda, was the fact the Northern Democratic party held just over 45% of the popular vote of free and border states in the 1860 election. 2 In short, the President and his administration existed only in a 1 Carl von Clausewitz, On War, Translated by Colonel J.J. Graham. New York, NY: Barnes & Noble, 2004. 10. 2 James McPherson, Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988. 506. 4 narrow margin and needed to conduct the war in a way suitable to keep the two very different mindsets exhibited by both the Republicans and Democrats in agreement. The Kentucky and Maryland campaigns occurred while changing Republican ideas on the persecution of the war and mid-term congressional elections, which proved to be a significant juncture in Northern and foreign politics. To be sure, the summer and fall of 1862 were extremely delicate times for Lincoln and the Republicans, and they could not afford any negative setbacks. Lacking any precedent to draw on, the Lincoln Administration delicately approached the rebellion by seeking the destruction of Confederate armies and exempting the Southern population from the burdens of war by respecting the civilians' constitutional rights and property. Historian Mark Grimsley captured the conviction of the policy by pointing out that the Lincoln administration renounced any intention of attacking slavery; and the government's assumption that most white Southerners were lukewarm about secession, and if handled with forbearance, would withdraw their allegiance from the Confederacy once Union armies entered their midst. 3 This policy known as conciliation, therefore, served as the beat to which Union forces marched off to war. Not all Northern generals and radical Republicans embraced this; however, the policy served as the first step in an evolutionary process that would eventually culminate in "hard-war." The effects of conciliation created favorable conditions for the Confederacy from which they were able to exploit the "limited war" shortcomings of the Union and surge forward into the fall offensive and their high tide. These shortcomings manifest in several different forms: leadership, strategic limitation, and foreign and domestic political pressure. Unfortunately for the 3 Mark Grimsley, The Hard Hand of War: Union Military Policy toward Southern Civilians, 1861-1865. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. 3. 5 Union, the combination of these factors exposed themselves in a negative light nearly all simultaneously, creating a perfect opportunity for the Confederates to take advantage of the drawbacks and pursue victory. Fueling the fire was the Lincoln Administration's policy regarding the appointment of military governors in captured territory. The issue arose when these cities, such as Nashville, were turned into massive supply centers for Union armies, resulting in intense rivalries between city and country, neighboring communities, and whites and blacks as they competed for jobs and dominance. 4 Henry Halleck, George McClellan, Don Carlos Buell, the key leaders of the Federal armies in 1862, generated the most immediate consequences stemming from the shortcomings of conciliation from as these three adherents to firm Democratic principles and military strategy are most responsible for creating the opportunity for a Confederate offensive. Generals Halleck, McClellan, and Buell are often portrayed by historians as lacking the "killer instinct," especially when compared to Ulysses S. Grant, William T. Sherman, and Phil Sheridan. However, a more accurate analysis finds them as men who followed the conciliation policy almost to the letter for political, personal, or logistical reasons. Halleck himself wrote the Elements of Military Art and Science, where he harped on the capture of strategic points, incurring the least number of casualties and damage as possible as the primary strategy of winning a war. Ironically, Halleck, the most influential Union general in 1862, believed that warfare was unjustifiable in most cases and should only be conducted with the utmost caution. 5 As General in Chief, Halleck had a significant influence on the conduct of operations of the Union forces. Each of these three 4 Grimsley, The Hard Hand of War, 35-36; Scott Nelson and Carol Sheriff, A People of War: Civilians and Soldiers in America's Civil War, New York: Oxford University Press, 2007. 88. The reference to negative leadership refers to the actions of Nathaniel Lyon and Francis Blair; who introduced "harsh" measures in 1861 prematurely which led to a brutal guerilla war and other political ramifications. 5 Henry Wagner Halleck, Elements of Military Art and Science: Course of Instruction in Strategy, Fortification, Tactics of Battle, Embracing the Duties of Staff, Infantry, Cavalry, Artillery, and Engineers, Adapted to the Use of Volunteers and Militia, Third Edition, New York: D. Appleton & Company, 1862. 7-9. 6 commanders prescribed to similar variants of Halleck's theory, whose universal core value of caution above all else acted as the catalyst to create the conditions for the Confederacy to crest in the fall of 1862. While the reigns of military success were in McClellan's and Buell's hands during the Maryland and Kentucky campaigns; Halleck made two major errors in 1862 that are directly responsible for igniting the Confederate offensives. The first was his overabundance of caution in taking Corinth, allowing the Confederates to slip away and then failing to retain the initiative by pushing to Vicksburg while simultaneously failing to capture Chattanooga. The second major failure was his inability to harness his granted power and force McClellan to speedily and effectively send his army to the aid of John Pope, eliminating any opportunity for a combined assault on Lee's smaller army. 6 The Democratic principles these generals prescribed to differed in many respects from Lincoln and the Republican agenda on the idea of the war. Each strongly believed in the preservation of the Union yet favored winning the war by the least drastic measures, the least number of casualties, and on a platform acceptable to their Democratic party beliefs. 7 For instance, McClellan wrote Buell, upon the latter's elevation to command of the Army of the Ohio: "bear in mind that we are fighting only to preserve the integrity of the Union and to uphold the power of General Government….be careful so to treat the unarmed inhabitants as to contract, not widen, the breach existing between us & the rebels." 8 Additionally, Generals Pope, Grant, and Rosecrans, who likely weren't as politically polarized as the former three, contributed to the growing political dissension in 1862 in their own right. Therefore, by their actions, federal military leadership did more to subvert the Union military from ending the war quickly and 6 Russel F. Weigley, A Great Civil War: A Military and Political History, 1861-1865, Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2000. 135-136. It is arguable whether or not the Army of the Potomac could have arrived in its entirety rapidly enough to join with Pope. However, personal and in-house political agendas did not move the efficiency along any faster. 7 Weigley, A Great Civil War, xix-xxi. 8 Grimsley, 64. 7 dividing political tension based on faction theology more than any other public figures in 1862. One of the more notable incidents that fit into the framework of subversion was Grant's debacle at Shiloh, which brought strong opposition from anti-war Democrats, causing cautious leaders such as Halleck and McClellan to tighten their grip and fear repeat attacks. Most detrimental in this respect was the administration's and Halleck's decision to temporarily bench Grant during the Corinth episode, then subsequently leaving him in a position where he could not act with his usual aggressiveness against Stirling Price and Earl Van Dorn. Before his removal as General in Chief, George McClellan wrote Halleck then in charge of western forces, "The future success of our cause demands that proceedings such as Grant's should at once be checked. Generals must observe discipline as well as private soldiers. Do not hesitate to arrest him at once if the good of service requires it, & place CF Smith in command." 9 Grant's "recklessness" at Shiloh created quite the stir on the home front, which as a result, political rivals of the Lincoln Administration, sought to break down Grant as a way to spread discontent and fit the anti-war platform. They harped on the high number of casualties, the surprise of the Confederate attack, and the black eye to the seemingly unstoppable Union war machine. The backlash reached Washington, prompting a response from the Administration. In a telegram to Halleck, Secretary of War Stanton wrote, "The President desires to know why you have made no official report to this department respecting the late battles of Pittsburg landing. And whether any neglect or misconduct of General Grant or any other officer contributed to the sad casualties that befell our forces on Sunday." 10 The battle of Shiloh became the first political debacle that militarily opened the door for the Confederacy to take the offensive in the fall of 1862. 9 Nancy Scott Anderson and Dwight Anderson, The Generals: Ulysses. S. Grant and Robert E. Lee, Avenel: New Jersey, 1987. 230. 10 Anderson, The Generals, 241. 8 The most immediate politically charged consequence materialized in Halleck's handling of the advance on Corinth, which exemplified his standard cautiousness with added paranoia of avoiding another repeat of Shiloh. 11 The delicate politically charged caution continued even after the successful capture of Corinth in Halleck's decision to send Buell, over Pope or Grant to seize Chattanooga. Halleck's snail-like cautious advance on Corinth, and the decision to send Buell to Chattanooga, allowed the disorganized Confederate army to withdraw from Corinth, establish a new commander in the form of Braxton Bragg, who in turn brought reorganization, discipline, and professionalization to the Army of Mississippi; which proved to be the genesis of Bragg and Smith having the ability to advance into Tennessee and Kentucky. 12 Military shortcomings turned political disasters in the Eastern Theater during the summer of 1862, soon overshadowed Shiloh, and added dramatic momentum and opportunity to the rise of the Confederate high tide in the war's primary theater. McClellan and his Army of the Potomac, having suffered political harassment in late 1861 into the spring of 1862, began their downward political spiral with the Army of the Potomac's loss of initiative and strategic defeat during the Seven Days Battles on the Peninsula. The setbacks along the James River coupled with the black eye at Shiloh, and the defeat of Federal forces in the Shenandoah Valley in the spring of 1862 had devastating political effects, which left the North and European powers believing that all hope for the Union resided with McClellan and his Army of the Potomac. The proximity of the Union and Confederate capitals made the Eastern theater a hot spot for journalists and policymakers on both sides, who saw the region as the deciding factor in the Civil War's outcome. This army's setback at the gates of Richmond did more to influence how events 11 Larry J. Daniel, Days of Glory: The Army of the Cumberland, 1861-1865, Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2006. 85. 12 Thomas Lawrence Connelly, Army of the Heartland: The Army of Tennessee, 1861-1862, Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2001. 188-194. 9 unfolded in the east in 1862 in both the strategic and political sense, both foreign and domestic. 13 The shortcomings on the Peninsula stymied the Union's hope to quickly end the war while making the voices of "Peace Democrats" louder and the political situation even more delicate. As if the Lincoln Administration did not already have enough burdens, both England and France, whose neutrality was necessary for the Union war effort, began to openly question the North's ability to subdue the South and end the rebellion. 14 Stonewall Jackson's brilliant campaign in the Valley, coupled with the Army of Northern Virginia's ferocious performance on the Peninsula elevated Southern patriotism, and simultaneously dampened Northern morale, convincing many on both sides that Southern victory was achievable. 15 Colonel Charles Marshall, Lee's Assistant Adjutant General believed that Robert E. Lee's emergence onto the scene was the greatest benefit to the Southern cause. He equated Lee's leadership on the Peninsula to that of a color bearer bravely advancing his banner towards the enemy. On political matters Marshall correctly believed that the Northern people were impatient for a speedy victory and that the Federal Government expressed this sentiment in its policy on conducting the war. However, this policy was forcefully and forever altered with the aggressive Lee's emergence onto the scene, whose plan called for carrying on the war indefinitely until the Confederacy achieved victory. Marshall outlined this plan as designed to, "frustrate the enemy's designs; to break up campaigns undertaken with vast expense and with confident assurance of success; to impress upon the minds of Northern people the conviction that they must prepare for a protracted struggle, great sacrifices of life and treasure, with the possibility that all might at last be of no 13 Stephen W. Sears, To the Gates of Richmond: The Peninsula Campaign, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1992. 355. 14 McPherson, Battle Cry of Freedom, 554-555. 15 Peter Cozzens, Shenandoah 1862: Stonewall Jackson's Valley Campaign, Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2008. 507-508. 10 avail; and to accomplish this at the smallest cost to the Confederacy." 16 This leadership change at such a critical moment proved to be the dawn of turning Confederate fortunes in the east. Public opinion and political reactions to the Union failure on the Peninsula were mixed; however, strong opposition towards McClellan emerged and created discord among the rival Democrats and Republicans, each of whom found outlets to accuse the other of the responsibility of the campaign's failure. 17 Amid this political turmoil, Lincoln, in an effort to offset the discord introduced Major General John Pope, who only managed to escalate political dissension to a fever pitch with his disastrous Northern Virginia campaign. 18 In the Western Theater, the emergence of Braxton Bragg also came at a critical juncture in juxtaposition with the events occurring in the east. Bragg took command of the Army of Mississippi at one of its darkest hours, and through exemplary organizational skills, reshaped the Army of Mississippi into a professional, disciplined force capable of delivering a lethal blow. With such a force, Bragg was able to look to more risky opportunities that would offset the Union strategic gains in the west and regain Tennessee and perhaps set the stage for Kentucky.19 Private Sam Watkins of the 1st Tennessee recorded the positive change in morale from the melancholy atmosphere at Corinth to when new lifeblood in the army emerged. "We were in an ecstasy akin to heaven. We were happy; the troops were jubilant; our manhood blood pulsated more warmly; our patriotism was awakened; our pride was renewed and stood ready for any emergency; we felt that one Southern man could whip twenty Yankees. All was lovely and 16 Charles Marshall, Lees Aide-De-Camp: Being the Papers of Colonel Charles Marshall Sometime Aide-De-Camp, Military Secretary, and Assistant Adjutant General on the Staff of Robert E. Lee, 1862-1865, Edited by Gary W. Gallagher, and Frederick Maurice, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2000. 74. 17 Sears, To the Gates of Richmond, 346-347. 18 John J. Hennessy, Return to Bull Run: The Battle and Campaign of Second Manassas. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1999. 468-472. 19 Earl J. Hess, Banners to the Breeze: the Kentucky Campaign, Corinth, and Stones River, Lincoln, Neb.: University of Nebraska Press, 2010. 19-22. 11 the goose hung high." 20 Although the Confederates had suffered initial setbacks early in 1862, the advantages afforded by conciliation, cautious Federal leadership, and the emergence of Lee and Bragg allowed for a reversal of fortunes. In 1862 Southern patriotism was running high; the idea of independence and the Confederate soldier's superiority was at its wartime peak. 21 Lee's decision to invade Maryland was political in nature. Maryland Campaign historians, Joseph Harsh, Scot Hartwig, Stephen Sears, James Murfin, and Ezra Carman while differing on strategic matters, all agree that Lee's primary purpose was to secure a decisive victory which would gain the South the political victory; either in the form of Northern domestic politics or international recognition and or intervention. The application of political pressure to Lee's offensive outweighs all the deficiencies faced by his army in the logistical realm, and further illustrated his grasp on the delicacy of Northern political division. Clearly, he understood this division and had faith that his smaller, ill-supplied force had a chance to deliver a blow that would fracture the Northern populace and produce an outcome that favored the South. General Lee suggested his understanding of such matters in a letter to President Jefferson Davis while in Dranesville on September 3. "The present seems to be the most propitious time since the commencement of the war for the Confederate Army to enter Maryland.….if it is ever desired to give material aid to Maryland and afford her and opportunity of throwing off the oppression to which she is now subject, this would seem the most favorable." 22 The domestic and foreign political objectives acting as primary motives for the "invasion," were in that instant equal to the strategic goals which accompanied them when 20 Samuel R. Watkins, Company Aytch or A Side Show of the Big Show: A Memoir of the Civil War. Edited by Ruth Hill Fulton McAllister. Nashville, TN: Turner, 2011. 45. 21 Joseph T. Glatthaar, General Lee's Army: From Victory to Collapse, New York: Free Press, 2008. 207; James Longstreet, Battles and Leaders of the Civil War, Edited by Ned Bradford. New York: The Fairfax Press, 1979. 263. 22 United States War Department, The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies. Vol. 19. Washington: Govt. Print. Off., 1880. 590. 12 defining the military value of the campaign; this is a unique feature to the Maryland Campaign and its condition for victory, while only a secondary task in Kentucky. In contrast historian Edwin Coddington paints a different picture for Lee's purposes in the Pennsylvania Campaign of 1863. Coddington outlined that Lee, in this part of the war, contended with the new Federal doctrine of "hard war" and emancipation, eliminating the decisive battle matched with the political advantage that existed in 1862. Therefore, Lee's only real option was to defeat the Army of the Potomac in detail, earning a strategic victory rather than a political one. 23 Such a task required adequate logistics, and a complete and total battlefield victory, two factors that eluded the Confederacy during the war. Such victory conditions presented to Lee in 1862 were unique and would never materialize again in any substantial form. Political division in the North was at fever pitch in the late summer of 1862; evidence of the discord's depth is apparent in everything from personal letters through Northern news outlets. Robert E. Lee, an avid reader of Northern papers, understood this notion and sought to exploit it. Domestically, Northern Democrats maintained a loud voice in critical regions and states, which only grew more robust and more resilient with each military shortcoming and failure. August and early September saw a heightened level of panic and discouragement in the North, with Pope's defeat and Lee's invasion of Maryland, while at the same time Kirby Smith's Confederate Army of Kentucky demonstrated against Cincinnati. Pennsylvania was understandably the most unnerved due to its proximity to Maryland and vital war infrastructure, and its Republican governor Andrew Curtin's demand for 80,000 troops to defend his state embodied it. Additionally, the mayors of the influential northern cities of Harrisburg, Philadelphia, and 23 Edwin B. Coddington, The Gettysburg Campaign: A Study in Command, New York: Simon and Schuster. 1968. 6-7. 13 Baltimore were alarmed, fearing their respective city was the target of Lee's advancing legions.24 In Cincinnati, the situation turned somewhat drastic. After destroying the Union forces at Richmond, Kentucky on August 30, Kirby Smith as a result had a clear road to the Ohio River. Understandably Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio all worried what Smith's next move would be while they scrambled to organize bodies of troops. General Lew Wallace arrived in Cincinnati, declared martial law and quickly set about organizing a defense. 25 With panic to the extremity of declaring martial law, the Northern population began to question their ability to win the war openly. Prominent figures such as George Templeton Strong, Samuel Galloway, Reverend Robert Laird Collier, and Senator Garrett Davis, spoke not only for themselves but also for the majority of the people by openly challenging President Lincoln and his administration on their ability to conduct the war. The accusations included Lincoln's unfitness for the Presidency, the constant change of military leadership in the east, which showed instability and was severely hurting morale in the North. Demands also arose that there be a complete reorganization of the Administration. 26 The Lincoln Administration's threat of a draft, unless an additional 300,000 volunteers could be raised created further tension. The idea of a draft disgusted many Northerners; however, with "patriotic" spirit enticed by bounties, nine-month service, and the threat of draft, the ranks of new regiments began to fill in late summer of 1862, only hitting forty-five percent of the intended quota. 27 The Union soldiers themselves cast a gloomy mood over the situation and expressed their views with varying levels of disgust. Lieutenant Elisha Hunt Rhodes of the 2nd 24 David H. Donald, Lincoln, New York, NY: Touchstone, 1996. 373. 25 Vernon L. Volpe, "Dispute Every Inch of Ground": Major General Lew Wallace Commands Cincinnati, September 1862." Indiana Magazine of History 85, no. 2 (1989): 139. 26 Donald, Lincoln, 373. 27 McPherson, Battle Cry of Freedom, 492. 14 Rhode Island expressed in his diary that: "I fear we are no nearer the end of the war than we were when we first landed at Fortress Monroe five months ago." 28 Captain Francis Donaldson of the 118th Pennsylvania captured the mood in Washington: "We are constant witness of the sad plight of the Army of the Potomac, as thousands of Genl. Pope's troops in great demoralization are ever passing the Fort in retreat to Washington. The poor old Army of the Potomac, how I pity it." 29 Captain Henry Pearson of the 6th New Hampshire also expressed his views in the aftermath of Second Manassas: "You need not be surprised if success falls to the rebels with astonishing rapidity." 30 Brigadier General Marsena Patrick's opinion bordered on insurrection: "There is a general feeling that the Southern Confederacy will be recognized & that they deserve recognition." 31 Lieutenant Charles Seton Fleming of the 2nd Florida Infantry, in a letter home to his mother describing the aftermath of the Second Manassas campaign, echoed Patrick's views when he wrote: "Our victory is complete, even the Yankee prisoners acknowledge it." 32 Lieutenant Colonel Henry Hubbell of the 3rd New York wrote in August 1862: "I am not sure that it would not be a good thing to have the rebels get possession of Washington however, as it might waken up the north to the fact that we are having a war in earnest, and not merely playing soldier…. We have got men & means enough in the north to put an end to this war in 90 days, if they would only go at it in earnest and let politics & the nigger alone." 33 28 Elisha Hunt Rhodes, All for the Union: A History of the 2nd Rhode Island Volunteer Infantry in the War of the Great Rebellion. Edited by Robert Hunt Rhodes. Lincoln, RI: A. Mowbray, 1985. 69. 29 Francis Adams Donaldson, Inside the Army of the Potomac: The Civil War Experience of Captain Francis Adams Donaldson. Edited by J. Gregory Acken. Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 1998. 104. 30 D. Scott Hartwig, To Antietam Creek: the Maryland Campaign of September 1862. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2019. 134-135. 31 Ibid., 134-135. 32 Francis P. Fleming, A Memoir of Captain C. Seton Fleming: of the Second Florida Infantry, C.S.A., Reprint 1985: Jacksonville: Times-Union Publishing House, 1884. 66. 33 Simon P. Newman, "A Democrat in Lincoln's Army: The Civil War Letters of Henry P. Hubbell." The Princeton University Library Chronicle 50, no. 2 (1989): 155-68. 157. 15 Hubbell eluded to the growing discord of racial issues that many Democrats saw as an unnecessary and politically charged motive to a war that was supposed to be strictly for preserving the Union. Nevertheless, this issue began to transform the cause of the war in the summer of 1862, adding only more weight to a very delicate political situation. Hubbell's feelings weren't isolated; instead, the sense that the war was taking on a new front to end slavery infuriated many Northerners. Hubbell's views on racial matters and slavery were not limited to himself, in fact, the stiffest opposition to war that had anything to do with freeing slaves came from the Midwest states; where racism was an epidemic culturally, especially in the Army of the Ohio. The talk of national emancipation led hundreds of men to desert and, in some cases, join the Confederacy. 34 Sentiments similar to these echoed across the Union armies and, undoubtedly, were shared by family and friends on the home front. Some individuals turned bitter, and perhaps extreme, which reflected political, ideological, and sectional differences in the North, which under the pressure of a seemingly collapsing system reared its ugly head. The term "invasion" has been used several times thus far, especially by the Union's most publicized general, George McClellan. This term and others related to it divided the minds of many of those who had significant power to dictate the war. Abraham Lincoln, at no point, recognized the Confederacy as a legitimate entity. He always maintained that the Southern States were in rebellion and needed to be brought back into the Union. Interestingly, his senior generals in 1862, mostly Democrats, saw the Confederate offensives as invasions, insinuating their conscious or subconscious recognition that Confederate armies were "foreign invaders" intent on doing harm, which helped fuel the panic, frustration, and seemingly lost Union cause ideology. 35 34 Daniel, Days of Glory, 101. 35 Andrew Pooley, "Shoo-ing the Geese: Lincoln and the Army of the Potomac, 1862-1863." Australian Journal of American Studies 21, no.2 (2002): 86-100. 86-87. 16 Jefferson Davis, the Confederate cabinet, Robert E. Lee, Braxton Bragg, and all the other high-ranking Confederate officers comprehended the growing Northern political disunion. This is evident in the decision to approve a Confederate offensive and the string of strategic goals associated with it. The Army of Northern Virginia, for example, fulfilled its duty of defeating the Federals time and again, completely reversing the tide of the war in the east. As Robert E. Lee sat at his headquarters in the aftermath of Chantilly, it had become abundantly clear that he now possessed the opportunity to strike the decisive blow against whatever Union army would oppose him in Maryland or Pennsylvania, which would likely result in some sort of peace talks. 36 Lieutenant Colonel Edward Porter Alexander Chief of Ordnance in the Army of Northern Virginia saw the picture as clear as Lee. Referring to the army, we wrote: "His [Lee's] army had, that magnificent morale which made them equal to twice their numbers, & which they never lost even to the surrender at Appomattox. And his confidence in them, & theirs in him, were so equal that no man can yet say which was greatest. And no old soldier need ask a prouder record than is implied in that fact. By going into Maryland Gen. Lee could at least subsist his army for a while upon the enemy, & he doubtless hoped, too, for a chance to force the Federal army to come out & fight him under favorable conditions." 37 Confederate officer William Allan, reverberated Alexander's sentiments when he wrote of the Army of Northern Virginia: "its spirit at this time was high. A series of brilliant successes had given it unbounded confidence in itself and its leaders, and the ragged dirty soldiers hailed with joy the advance across the Potomac." 38 The comparison of the Federal and Confederate views as indicated from primary sources, on 36 Hartwig, To Antietam Creek, 52-53. 37 Edward Porter Alexander, Fighting for the Confederacy: The Personal Recollections of General Edward Porter Alexander. Edited by Gary W. Gallagher, United States: The University of North Carolina Press, 2000. 139. 38 William Allan, The Army of Northern Virginia in 1862, Reprint: Middletown: DE, 2020. 273. 17 leadership and the progress of the war at the beginning of the Maryland Campaign were clearly in favor of the South. The leadership of Don Carlos Buell is a prime example of political dissatisfaction, both on the home front and in the army. While McClellan was unpopular with the Administration, he still held favor with most of his officers, and certainly the rank and file of the army and the nation. Buell, however, faced contention on three similar fronts – The Indiana bloc, the general and field officers of the First Division, and the supporters of Alexander McCook, one of his corps commanders. Much of the disgust with Buell occurred during the Kentucky Campaign. This break in unified efforts favored the Confederate cause, particularly in swaying popular opinion in Kentucky. Republican Indiana newspapers ripped into Buell's leadership, declaring that he was completely mishandling the pursuit of two Confederate armies that were ripping up Kentucky and potentially heading towards Indiana, Ohio, or Illinois. Some newspapers called for his immediate dismissal, and a few even demanded he be shot. 39 When comparing Lee and his army to Buell and his, there formulates a fascinating dissection of the polar extremes in popular and political opinion. Lee and his men were on the top of their game, while Buell's forces were at a low ebb. Using these two examples as the basis of measurement, it becomes apparent that overall, the Confederate forces enjoyed a much higher sense of public support and favorability then their Union counterparts did at that particular moment in the war. Scholars have hotly debated the prospect of European powers, particularly England and France intervening and mediating an end to the conflict. The idea of such a prospect was undoubtedly the primary goal for the Confederate strategy in the autumn of 1862. It is essential to view the idea of European intervention in the simplest of forms. The Southern strategy partly 39 Daniel, 128-129. 18 hinged on it, as can be observed via strategic decisions and public opinion, the North, however, feared the prospect. Intervention and mediation on any level would, in the end, be more beneficial to the South, and the Lincoln Administration would appear as incapable; in short, it would be a disaster for the North and Republicans. 40 The onset of a "cotton famine" and the scandal of the Trent affair occurred amid all the politically charged events in 1862, resulting in the British sending an additional 11,000 men to Canada and forcing Lincoln to tread lightly in foreign political matters. 41 Historian Max Beloff believed that the possibility of British intervention was extremely likely in 1862, mainly due to the North's refusal to make anti-slavery sentiments the basis of their cause, instead still focusing on the preservation of the Union, which only supported the pro-Southern faction in Parliament. 42 An examination of Southern newspapers and other editorials, shows public opinion in the South at the beginning of the war was universal in the belief that Great Britain would be forced, through the power of cotton, to intervene either by raising the blockade or by recognizing the Confederate States as an independent nation or perhaps both. 43 Regardless of the likelihood of actual intervention or recognition, the idea of it greatly influenced Confederate leaders, particularly Lee, who notated such objective goals in his correspondence with Davis. Davis agreed outlining his desires in a communication to Lee on September 7. He reminded Lee that the Confederacy was waging war solely for self-defense. Through the eight points he outlined as the guiding principles for the field armies to abide by, Davis continually revolved his doctrine around political objectives whose chief purpose were to achieve peace with the United States. If the South maintained a self- 40 McPherson, 444. 41 Nelson, A People at War, 166. 42 Max Beloff, "Historical Revision No. CXVIII: Great Britain and the American Civil War." History, New Series, 37, no. 129, (1952): 40-48. 42. 43 Schuyler Dean Hoslett, "The Richmond Daily Press on British Intervention in the Civil War: A Brief Summary." The William and Mary Quarterly 20, no. 1 (1940): 79-83. 80. 19 defense posture, with the objective of peace through battlefield victory; then the likelihood of positive European intervention on their behalf had a much higher probability, which in turn could possibly bring a speedy end to the war with terms that favored the Confederacy. 44 Logistical Concerns and Organizational Components: While the South always lagged behind the North in terms of finance, economy, manufacturing, manpower, and many other logistical concerns, the disparity was narrower in 1862 than in the coming years. As a point of contention, several trends and circumstances in the Union war effort benefited the South more than it aided the Union on the grand stage. Concerning logistics, Clausewitz's maxim states: "The dependence on the base increases in intensity and extent with the size of the Army, which is easy to understand. An Army is like a tree. From the ground out of which it grows it draws it's nourishment; if it is small it can easily be transplanted, but this becomes more difficult as it increases in size….When therefore, we talk of the influence of the base on the operations of an Army, the dimensions of the Army must always serve as the scale by which to measure the magnitude of that influence." 45 This axiom is precisely the predicament of the Northern war effort in the first two years of the war. The logistical portion of this study will examine the condition and availability of uniforms and equipment, quality of weaponry then in circulation, training and experience of soldiers, and finally the ability of each government to produce and supply its troops effectively. A logistical understanding is crucial for understanding the obstacles and conditions faced by the armies and how it dictated their effectiveness on campaign and immediate tactical ability on the battlefield in 1862. The South, as previously stated from the very beginning of the war, was behind its 44 OR, vol 19, 1: 598-599. 45 Clausewitz, On War, 353-354. 20 opponent in logistical matters; however, the North in 1862 was not at the climax in its ability of production and supply, and therefore lacked significantly in certain areas. However, it is essential to note that the limitations of the Federal logistical system by the fall of 1862 were only a few months shy of efficiently supplying the vast number of troops in the field. The first evidence of a marked change in the Union's logistical ability emerged in the Chancellorsville Campaign's genesis, after the winter of 1862-63. 46 Accepting the notion that the Confederate armies were in rough shape logistically; it is important to note that the primary leadership in the field was acutely aware of the shortages. However, the unfolding opportunity demanded a military strike that outweighed logistical concerns. Therefore, an examination into the Federal system's shortcomings is necessary to show the benefits it offered toward the Confederacy. The United States Army in the Antebellum period contained roughly 15,000 men of all arms. Compared with an army of 600,000 men in 1862, it is understandable that there would be significant shortcomings and hurdles to overcome in a nation that, as a rule, did not trust professional armies nor want to foot the bill for one. Nevertheless, the North had a clear advantage when it came to industrialization and manufacturing. Over one million Northerners worked in industrial jobs, ten times more than their Southern counterparts. Furthermore, the North contained roughly 100,000 factories compared to the South's 20,000. 47 Yet, as already pointed out, the prewar army was tiny and supplied with uniforms and equipment solely from the Schuylkill Arsenal in Philadelphia. Additionally, the arsenals producing firearms were limited, with all those existing in the South subsequently seized upon secession, having fewer firearms available to Northern regiments. 48 The North, therefore, would have to raise and equip an army 46 Stephen Sears, Chancellorsville, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1996. 71-75 47 Matthew S. Muehlbauer and David J. Ulbrich, Ways of War: American Military History from the Colonial Era to the Twenty-First Century. New York: Routledge, 2018. 174-175. 48 Joseph E. Chance, The Second Texas Infantry, From Shiloh to Vicksburg, Austin: Eakin Press, 1984. 16, 24. 21 primarily with outdated weapons and with an industrial system that wasn't geared toward war manufacturing. The North's only saving grace was its economic might. 49 Economically it is crucial to understand that the Union that won the war in 1865, was not the same financial institution nor economy in 1861 and 1862. It was in major part due to the Legal Tender Act of 1862 and the National Currency Act of 1863, that the North was able to pay for the sustainment of the war; yet it took time for these acts to take effect. Therefore, in 1862 financially, the North was undoubtedly at its weakest; many of the state and municipal banks, especially those in border states, had closed their doors, while millions of businesses and private civilians hoarded gold. 50 The Union was only able to field the armies it did in 1861-1862 because of its ability to pay for the conversion and development of machinery needed for equipment, weaponry, and uniforms while relying initially on its prewar militia. Faced with arming a massive army overnight, the United States was forced to arm many of its regiments with outdated firearms, such as the M-1842 Smoothbore musket, and the M-1816 Flintlocks that were converted to percussion, in addition to supplementing itself with foreign weapons, from Britain, Belgium, France, Austria, and others. These weapons except those from Britain, proved to be severely outdated compared to the technology available in the 1860s. The importance of recognizing the sub-standard firearms is their effectiveness on the battlefield and the potentiality of changing the outcome in a crucial moment in a battle. In an era of the rifled musket that was accurate from 250-300 yards, a typical smoothbore musket ranged from 80-100 yards. A significant portion of Federal troops were armed with outdated weapons in the Maryland and Kentucky Campaigns. A focus on any of the principal engagements in that time frame will show that regiments armed 49 McPherson, 442-445. 50 Nelson, 132-133. 22 with such weapons were in certain circumstances ineffective on the immediate tactical plane, and perhaps beneficial to their adversary. The disparity of weapons had begun to improve for the North in 1862; however, the infusion of nearly 300,000 volunteers during the summer of 1862 created a logistical gap once again. Many of the existing regiments in the army still shouldered outdated weapons, and now with legions of new men forming, these troops found themselves supplied with weapons that were unequal to the rigors of Civil War combat. Of this second wave of new recruits, the 12th New Jersey Volunteers serve as an excellent microcosm to examine the Union's logistical deficiencies in the rush to arm new recruits in 1862. Initially, the Jerseymen expected to receive the celebrated Enfield rifle; instead, they ended up with the inferior Austrian Lorenz, which was later exchanged in Washington for the equally outdated 1842 Springfield musket, although they saw this as an improvement over the detested Austrian rifle. 51 While every regiment's experience is different, the new wave and veterans alike in 1862 experienced some level of logistical deficiency that impacted their abelites on campaign or in battle. Aside from weapons, much of the equipment in the Army of the Potomac and the Army of the Ohio at the beginning of the Confederate offensives were at the end of its serviceable life span, due to months of active campaigning, and the inability to properly re-muster the army on a large scale because of the continuity of Confederate aggressiveness, which certainly affected their performance as a cohesive fighting force. Brigadier General Abner Doubleday who commanded a brigade at Second Manassas submitted requisitions to replace equipment and clothing just before the onset of the Maryland Campaign, noted in disgust: "owing to the great number [of other officers] making requisitions, mine were not filled and we were soon obliged to 51 Edward G. Longacre, To Gettysburg and Beyond: The Twelfth New Jersey Volunteer Infantry, II Corps, Army of the Potomac, 1862-1865, Hightstown: Longstreet House, 1988. 24. 23 take the field deficient in everything." 52 This sentiment was backed up by Captain James Wren of the IX Corps, who wrote that the men in his division "looked very bad, being Lousey, Dirty & Almost naked & worn out." 53 The soldiers in the Army of the Ohio were in equally if not worse shape. The vast distances covered by the Western Theater's armies created long supply lines, which fell victim to frequent raids from rebel cavalry. T.J. Wright of the 8th Kentucky Infantry noted in his diary that the Army of the Ohio was: "the hungriest, raggedest, tiredest, dirtiest, lousiest and sleepiest set of men the hardships of this or any other war ever produced." 54 While it is certain that the Confederates were in equally bad situations logistically, they had the benefit victory behind them in the east, and in Bragg's army's case, high morale. Another major struggle for the Federals in 1862 was the ability to get the supplies to its armies. The reason is not one specific aspect, but rather a compilation of bureaucracy, corruption, and lack of precedent to draw off. McClellan's army on the Peninsula had to be supplied from the sea, Pope in command of the Army of Virginia never took the time to ensure his troops had everything they needed, and Buell's army along with the rest of the western forces contended with long supply lines originating in Cairo Illinois, that were frequently raided by Confederate cavalry. The 16th Maine Infantry is a classic example of the suffering that occurred in a system that was outside its capabilities in 1862. The regiment's adjutant and historian Abner Small wrote: "How those men suffered! Hunger, daily felt, was nothing compared with it. Men of education, of refinement, and wealth, who willingly and cheerfully gave up home, with all its love and comfort, for country, made to feel degraded for want of clothing!" Small then describes 52 Hartwig, 137. 53 Ibid., 137. 54 Kenneth W. Noe, Perryville: This Grand Havoc of Battle. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2011. 89. 24 the horrendous conditions: "…without shelter, without overcoats, shoeless, hatless, and hundreds without blankets; and through all that long, sad, and weary tramp, we were jeered at, insulted, and called the "Blanket Brigade!" 55 While examples like this are on the extreme, the narrative fits when assessing the entire logistical picture of the Army of the Potomac in September 1862. The term logistics also dovetails into organizational tables. Aside from sharing similar shortcomings in the area of supply and outdated weaponry, Lee's Army of Northern Virginia was by far the superior force in leadership, experience, and organization when compared with McClellan's force. By September 2, 1862, nearly 61 percent of Lee's infantry had fought in three or more major battles, and 81 percent fought in two or more. All of his 184 infantry regiments were veterans of at least one battle. Not only were Lee's regiments superior in this regard, but his brigade commanders were highly efficient as well. Twenty-seven of Lee's forty brigades were veterans of two or more major battles, while the remaining thirteen had fought in either the Seven Days or Second Manassas. On the divisional level, the highest official level of organization at that point for the A.N.V.; all of the eleven divisions had seen at least one battle. 56 The Union leadership backed this notion up as well. It was widely accepted, and a point still argued amongst historians, that the Southern fighting man was superior. This mythology has far back as the American Revolution corroboration has its roots in early Confederate victories, particularly at First and Second Manassas, the Shenandoah Valley, and the Seven Days battles. These victories generated an aura of invincibility around the Army of Northern Virginia that transcended into the minds of the Federal troops. 57 In fact Lee, true to form was in the first days of September 1862, the living epithet of Baron De Jomini's maxims, "the general should do 55 Abner Ralph Small, The Sixteenth Maine Regiment in the War of the Rebellion, 1861-1865. London: Forgotten Books, 2015. 38. 56 Joseph L. Harsh, Taken at the Flood Robert E. Lee and Confederate Strategy in the Maryland Campaign of 1862. Ashland: The Kent State University Press, 2013. 39-40 57 Pooley, "Shoo-ing the Geese", 88. 25 everything to electrify his own soldiers, and to impart to them the same enthusiasm which he endeavors to repress his adversaries….in general, a cherished cause, and a general who inspires the confidence by previous success, are powerful means of electrifying an army and conducing to victory." 58 In contrast, McClellan's forces reformed into the Army of the Potomac, could not boast anything near the statistics of the Army of Northern Virginia could. September 1862 was the most disorganized and weakest the Army of the Potomac would find itself in the duration of the war. This school of thought canceled out, at least temporarily, any deficiencies faced by Lee's forces. When George B. McClellan rode out of Washington to take command, he found three very different organizations, each with its own command, divisional, brigade, artillery, cavalry, transportation, and quartermaster structures. Additionally, the newly formed regiments, many of whom were only a few weeks old, were rushed to the front and infused into the disorganized mess. Organizing these separate organizations into one effective command would weeks if not months, McClellan would be forced to do it in a matter of days, while in motion, in addition to planning a short-term strategy to deal with Lee. 59 The chaos of the reorganization is apparent in the 5th New York Volunteers' experience. Historian Brian Pohanka related an instance of the 5th as they passed McClellan on the march toward western Maryland: "As they marched, General McClellan reined up beside the troops of Warren's brigade. 'Well, and how is the Old Fifth this evening?' he asked. 'First rate, General, but we'd be better off if we weren't living so much on supposition." 60 Even though he had the bigger force, the disorganization and confusion associated with the rapidity of the Maryland Campaign denied the general his army's full might 58 Baron De Jomini, The Art of War, Translated by Capt. G.H. Mendell, and Lieut. W.P. Craighill, Radford: Wilder Publications, 2008. 30-31. 59 Hartwig, 133-136. 60 Brian C. Pohanka, Vortex of Hell: History of the 5th New York Volunteer Infantry. Lynchburg, VA: Schroeder Publications, 2012. 369. 26 on the battlefield. In different circumstances these obstacles may have been overcome had McClellan had time to prepare. Robert E. Lee sensed his enemy's weakness and used it as part of his foundation to seek permission from President Davis to invade Maryland. "The two grand armies of the United States that have been operating in Virginia, though now united, are much weakened and demoralized. Their new levies, of which I understand 60,000 men have already been posted in Washington, are not yet organized, and will take some time to prepare for the field." 61 Lee identified that his logistical situation was terrible, however, he recognized the unfolding opportunity in front of him. "The army is not properly equipped for an invasion of an enemy's territory. It lacks much of the material of war, is feeble in transportation, the animals being much reduced, and the men are poorly provided with clothes, and in thousands of instances are destitute of shoes. Still, we cannot not afford to be idle, and though weaker than our opponents in men and military equipment's, must endeavor to harass if we cannot destroy them. I am aware that the movement is attended with much risk, yet I do not consider success impossible, and shall endeavor to guard it from loss." 62 The amount of stock Lee put into the Federals logistical organization is apparent. In fact, if taken as a whole, his reliance on the overall Federal weakness is one of his only justifications for his ill-supplied and smaller force to go on the offensive. Additionally, these logistical matters, both of his own and the Federal weakness, coincide directly with Lee's desire to deliver a decisive blow to the Federals quickly. There was not a better opportunity to do it and expect fruitful results, then while the Army of Potomac was at its weakest moment, structurally, organizationally, numerically, and logistically. 61 OR, vol 19, 1: 590-591. 62 Ibid., 590-591. 27 Lee's conclusion of the ill-preparedness of the new Union regiments applies not only to the troops in his sector but also to those in the Western Theater. Much like Lee's army within reach of Washington, Kirby Smith's small army in Kentucky created a panic and proved Lee's theory on the reliability of new soldiers. Kirby Smith successfully and thoroughly destroyed an equally sized Federal force of raw recruits at Richmond, Kentucky, on August 30, 1862, eliminating them from the military equation. Historian Kenneth Noe termed the battle of Richmond as "the most lopsided Confederate victory of the war, as Kirby Smith's men inflicted casualties so staggering that entire Union brigades ceased to exist." 63 With Smith's incursion into Kentucky, a vacuum of chaos erupted in the region, in particular, Ohio. The microcosm of Cincinnati infuses both the political and the serious logistical problems faced by the North in 1862. Historian Vernon Volpe pointed out, "Although the influx of [Union] volunteers was inspiring, with it came a shortage of arms, ammunition, and other equipment needed to outfit the troops properly." 64 This example was echoed across the entire Kentucky region in 1862. Although McClellan's army outnumbered Lee with a total of roughly 87,000 men, twenty percent of his infantry were raw, having been in the army just a handful of weeks and had not even come close to mastering the level of proficiency needed in drill and tactics to be effective on a Civil War battlefield. 65 Even though the Federals were able to put fresh regiments into the field, it became an issue of quantity versus quality. The unfortunate story of the 118th Pennsylvania Volunteers is a classic case in point of these raw troops' ineffectiveness. Arriving to the Army of the Potomac just a few days before the battle of Antietam, the men prepared to enter their first engagement on September 19 at Shepherdstown. Their regimental historian 63 Noe, Perryville, 39. 64 Volpe, "Dispute Every Inch of Ground", 146. 65 Hartwig, 139. 28 wrote: "The teachings of the battalion-drill near Sharpsburg on the previous day [September 18] now had practical application." The 118th's Colonel stated in his official report that: "We returned their fire as fast as possible, but soon found that our Enfield rifles were so defective that quite one-fourth of them would not explode the caps." 66 The 118th's story, while extreme is not unique, another raw Federal regiment the 128th Pennsylvania found itself in an even worse circumstance, owing to its lack of training. The 128th Pennsylvania arrived at the army just days before as well and were assigned to the newly organized XII Corps, which itself contained some of the highest proportions of raw troops. During the battle of Antietam, the new regiment found itself in Miller's Cornfield and due lack of basic drill unable to maneuver itself back onto its brigade in the face of onrushing Confederates. Officers and sergeants from experienced neighboring outfits were sent to try and move the bewildered regiment all to no avail. In the end, the 128th was left to its fate and was nearly destroyed, having no effect on the enemy and only weakening their own brigades' position. 67 Stories similar in nature can be found across the Army of the Potomac on every sector of each battlefield during the Maryland Campaign, each in the midst of their own mishaps allowing the Confederates a level of superiority while hindering their supporting elements an opportunity to exploit any gains. Don Carlos Buell's Army of the Ohio experienced similar circumstances with green regiments as its eastern counterpart. In a letter to Kirby Smith, Bragg detailed his understanding that Buell's men were in rough shape and utterly demoralized. These circumstances, Bragg believed, offered the South a greater benefit of success. 68 The raw, ill-trained, ill-equipped, and completely unprepared 105th Ohio, 123rd Illinois, and 21st Wisconsin infantry regiments were 66 Survivors' Association 118th (Corn Exchange) Regt., P.V., History of the Corn Exchange Regiment 118th Pennsylvania Volunteers,62. 67 Stephen W. Sears, Landscape Turned Red. New York: Ticknor & Fields, 1994. 206. 68 United States War Department, The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies. Vol. 16: Part 2. Correspondence, Washington: Govt. Print. Off., 1880. 754. 29 all glaring examples of this shortcoming. The 123rd Illinois found itself in a similar predicament as the 128th Pennsylvania at Antietam, exposed and on its own, and fell victim to veteran Confederate troops bearing down on them. The 105th Ohio, equally as green, found itself thrown into the breach in the midst of the 123rd Illinois collapse. Private Ayre of the 105th remarked: "…could not form into a proper line and after going through several maneuvers in order to do so we became mixed and confused." In similar fashion to the 123rd Illinois, the 105th Ohio was quickly stampeded by their Confederate attackers. 69 Much like the inferiority of outdated weapons, untrained, raw troops could not perform to a tactically sufficient level to keep par with the rapid pace and constantly changing conditions of a Civil War battlefield. While plenty of experienced units did exist in the Union armies, it is clear the inexperienced ones created more problems, affording the Confederate forces golden opportunities to exploit immediate tactical advantages they likely would not have had, had they been fighting experienced, or even trained troops. On the other side of the coin, the copious amounts of raw units severely hampered any notion gaining a decisive victory or rapidly following up a pursuit. This is evident in the in the results of Antietam and Perryville, both of which were Confederate tactical victories, and the speed at which Lee and Bragg's armies were pursued. The armies' organization is important when looking to understand the advantages and disadvantages and how this affected a particular side's likelihood of victory. The experience level and the amount of subpar weaponry in both the armies of the Potomac and Ohio was only one issue, their organizational structure in both leadership and how its units were grouped confounded their problems and offered the Confederates another edge over their opponent pushing the scale further in favor in the equation of obtaining a victory. As previously stated, the 69 Stuart W. Sanders, Maney's Confederate Brigade at the Battle of Perryville, Charleston: The History Press, 2014. 53-54. 30 Army of the Potomac during the Maryland Campaign was a conglomeration of several different organizations. It contained the II, V, and VI Corps the original Army of the Potomac, the re-designated I and XII Corps, the Army of Virginia, and the newly dubbed IX that had served on the North Carolina coast. Although there were certainly experienced troops and leaders in each of these components, they each spoke a different organizational "language." 70 George McClellan certainly had the most difficult task of any field commander regarding the organization of his army. Not only did he have three different organizations to mold together as a cohesive fighting force, but he also had the additional struggle of doing it on the fly in a military and national emergency. Therefore, although the Army of the Potomac was a potent fighting force, and managed to engage the Confederates, its capabilities in terms of operational effectiveness were severely limited. Buell's circumstances were much more appealing. His Army of the Ohio had remained intact as a cohesive fighting force since its formation; however, he received additional reinforcements from Grant, and a host of new regiments, diluting its effectiveness as an organization. The Army of the Ohio's real organizational issues manifested in the senior leadership's quirks, rivalries, and lack of cohesion. 71 The use of cavalry in both McClellan and Buell's forces paled in comparison to the South. This issue stemmed from the Federal government's inability to recognize the importance of that specific branch early in the conflict. Overwhelmingly, the cavalry found its commands broken apart and scattered across the army, acting in various guard and staff related duties. Those commands retained to perform the primary tasks of nineteenth-century, reconnaissance, screening, and raids were too few and spread out to have any significant impact on the outcome 70 Hartwig, 133-135. 71 Steven E. Woodworth, Nothing but Victory: The Army of the Tennessee, 1861-1865. New York: Vintage, 2005. 216. 31 of the Maryland and Kentucky Campaigns. 72 Although they lacked in cavalry ability the Federals were unquestionably superior in artillery. Union guns, although far superior to that of the South were severely flawed organizationally in 1862. Circling back to the theme of different organizational structures in McClellan's force, the arrangement of this branch varied, causing communication issues, and leadership vacuums. In common with the cavalry, the prominent artillery structure in 1862 in both the Army of the Potomac and Army of the Ohio, lacked a unified system of command; instead, most batteries were the responsibility of brigade commanders or divisional commanders. Therefore, at critical moments batteries could only take orders from infantry commanders and were presented with the difficult task of coordinating mass firing on specific targets. 73 While it may seem trivial, such inefficiency in employment and "bureaucratic red tape" of military organization prevented the cavalry and artillery from performing at its maximum potential which no doubt contributed to the shortcomings of the Union armies in 1862. The Confederate military organization also had its flaws; however, as previously noted, the experience level of Confederate forces as a whole were much higher and able to adapt to a situation more efficiently. Partly this had to do with the smaller size of the forces overall, and the Confederate authorities' choice to disperse recruits and conscripts across seasoned units rather than raise new organizations. The cavalry of J.E.B. Stuart, John Hunt Morgan, and Nathan Bedford Forrest for instance were vastly superior to their Federal counterparts in every respect. These commands were led well, centralized, and overall contained extremely efficient horsemen, which had proven themselves time and again on the battlefield. 74 Confederate artillery was 72 Hartwig, 155-158. 73 Curt Johnson and Richard C. Anderson, Jr., Artillery Hell: The Employment of Artillery at Antietam, College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 1995. 53; Daniel, 146, 148-150. 74 Hartwig, 88-90; Hess, Banners to the Breeze, 24. 32 generally inferior in respect to quality of mechanics, yet, the branch retained a slight advantage over its foes in its organization. Lee's artillery was organized on the divisional level, allowing for easier deployment, and concentrated fire, as the Army of Northern Virginia, did not have a corps structure during this time, division commanders held greater authority in placement and employment of artillery. Furthermore, several groups of divisions fell under an unofficial "wing" structure, allowing Jackson and Longstreet to concentrate guns further. 75 Bragg organized his army different than Lee's army. Bragg operated with two wings or corps, broken down into several divisions. His army maintained an organized and effective cavalry force; however, their weakest point was the artillery. Only fifty-six guns accompanied the Army of Mississippi into Kentucky compared to Buell's 147 guns. These Confederate guns like the Federals were assigned to individual brigades, same as its Federal counterpart, eliminating opportunities to converge fire effectively. 76 Understanding the organizational structure of an army allows for a realistic understanding of what that force is capable of; how it moves in the larger scheme of a campaign; and the benefits and challenges of its employment on the tactical level. Assuming the forces involved were all organized in the same fashion, with identical structures is detrimental in interpreting the ebb and flow of battles and campaigns. A clear picture of how a field army operates through an organizational table is, therefore, paramount. Using Lee and McClellan as examples illustrate the nature of this point. In the Maryland Campaign, Lee was able to give more direct orders to independent division commanders, therefore reducing somewhat the natural confusion begot of transferring and disseminating orders through multiple tiers of officers. On the other hand, McClellan had to give orders to "wing" commanders, who then cut the orders to corps 75 Johnson, Artillery Hell, 41-47. 76 Noe, 370-373, 381-382. 33 commanders then down to the divisional level, doubling the amount of personalities the orders had to go through compared to Lee's forces. It is clear from watching the battles of Antietam and Perryville's tactical evolution that the commanding generals' intent was time and again ineffectually carried out due to communication breakdown and misinterpretation of orders on both sides. Having only scratched the surface of the organizational components of only four of the principal armies involved in the fall of 1862, it becomes clear that each differed in how it chose to conduct its internal operations. However, it is equally apparent from this brief examination, that Confederate forces in the fall of 1862 were better organized and tactically more efficient than their Federal counterparts in Maryland and Kentucky, therefore lending an edge to overall Confederate success and perhaps victory. Strategic Considerations: The strategic components are unquestionably the most important when ascertaining why the fall of 1862 was the Confederacy's high tide. Having looked at the political, logistical, and organizational components and internalizing how each affected the grand design of Confederate strategy in 1862, this section will now tie these components together and shed light on how each influenced strategic decision and guided the final results of the campaigns. A clear understanding of what strategy is necessary to further examine this section. Clausewitz defines strategy as: "the employment of the battle as the means towards the attainment of the object of the War." 77 The "attainment of the object" is the crucial cog in accepting the purpose and direction of operations in Maryland and Kentucky. The strategic composition of these campaigns was different in what they sought to obtain as their achievable goal. Lee's objective was political in its foundation; his 77 Clausewitz, 133. 34 campaign didn't revolve around the occupation of land or control of any specific feature; instead, it sought a climactic battle with a decisive battlefield victory in which Lee was willing to risk his army in a desperate gamble. 78 Bragg and Smith's Kentucky incursions were much more multilayered on an operational platform. While some sort of showdown battle was necessary for the west, it was not the immediate goal, only a potentiality; instead, the relief and re-establishment of Tennessee was paramount with a secondary objective of the "liberation" of Kentucky. The second tier of goals included the control of rail and river systems as a means to eliminate the Union's ability to supply its forces and occupy any portion of the Upper or Deep South. The most significant strategic gain for the South in 1862 existed in Tennessee and Kentucky. Proof of this importance is shown through the fact that six of the seven Confederate field armies would make this region their primary objective in the fall of 1862. These six armies included the commands of Generals' Braxton Bragg, Kirby Smith, Earl Van Dorn, Stirling Price, William Loring, and Humphrey Marshall. Confederate control and or occupation of Tennessee and Kentucky offered benefits and a platform for victory that the remaining Confederate states collectively couldn't offer. Having been the first state to fall under Federal control, Tennessee's recapture would be a major morale boost for the Confederacy nationally and particularly to the large amount of Tennessee regiments that made up Bragg's army. The most significant benefit, however, resided in Tennessee's industrial capability, as it contained the ability to produce more raw items for the war effort then the rest of the Confederacy combined. 79 Confederate control 78 Harsh, 25; OR, vol 19, 1: 598-599. 79 Connelly. 5-15. The importance of Tennessee to the Confederacy is undeniable. Connelly argues that the region was the largest concentrated area for the production of war materials in the Confederacy. The region by 1864 had produced 22,665 pounds niter. Additionally, the area contained a significant source of lead, and was the chief producer of gunpowder in 1861. Tennessee also contained a vast number of factories that repaired old weapons, manufactured new small arms, cartridges, percussion caps, and other equipment. By the fall of 1861, Nashville plants alone turned out 100,000 percussion caps daily, with some 1,300,000 caps produced weekly. The region boasted on the two major Confederate sources of livestock, the other being 35 would, therefore, help in stabilizing the struggling logistical and economic constraints faced in the South. Additionally, the state's rail system would allow for the re-establishment of a direct connection to North Carolina and Virginia and the ability to ship supplies and material to the Confederate forces in the east. Conversely, the loss of Tennessee would be a major blow to Union morale, as its loss would have undone and nullified the Federal campaigns in 1861 and early 1862. 80 Kentucky also offered significant gains for the South. It was generally believed, particularly by the Confederate government's higher echelons, that the majority of Kentuckians were sympathetic to the Southern cause and would rally to Confederate banners if field armies were able to move into the region and strategically hold it. Logistically Kentucky offered a substantial increase for the South, particularly in animals, forage, and transportation options. Like Tennessee, Kentucky contained major river systems and rail lines that would drastically increase movement for the South and partially cut off the mid-west states from the rest of the Union. Politically, Kentucky, a vital border state under Confederate control, could be crippling to Northern domestic and foreign political views. In theory, this political aspect played on a successful campaign in Maryland, another vital border state. More immediately, Kentucky offered the western Confederate armies an opportunity to turn the war from one of defense to one poising them on the edge of invasion of critical Northern states, Ohio, Illinois, and Indiana. Such a turn in the circumstances would be devastating for the Union, particularly politically. The Illinois town of Cairo on the Mississippi River, in 1862 was serving as the logistical launch point for the Union armies in the west; prolonged Confederate control of Kentucky would likely force the Shenandoah Valley in Virginia. More pork was raised in Tennessee save Missouri than any other state. Agriculturally, Middle Tennessee in 1860 produced an average of more than a million bushels of corn making it a leader amongst its sister states. 80 Connelly, 3-6. 36 the Federals to find an alternative method of supplying the troops in Corinth and other points in the Southern heartland. As long as the Federals controlled these regions, they would continue to pin the Confederacy in the Deep South denying them of access to vital infrastructure, maneuvering room, and favorable victory conditions. Braxton Bragg and Kirby Smith had to go on the offensive if they were to alleviate the situation by the very nature of the circumstances. As Lee's army with Richmond, their backs were on the doorstep of the Deep South, and they had no room to maneuver. Fortunately for the South, the western offensive was born out of an opportune moment of Halleck's caution that was strategically seized upon by Confederate commanders. In the necessity of the moment, launching an offensive like Lee during the Seven Days battles was the only beneficial option and a necessary risk if the war was going to be taken off the doorstep of the Deep South. Robert E. Lee on the other end of things saw himself and his army as the most important entity in the Confederacy at that moment. In his mind, the only scenario for Confederate victory rested in his hands alone. He showed this belief in dispatches and letters throughout the campaign in an effort to orchestrate movements across the Confederacy to complement his objective. In a letter to Jefferson Davis, he noted his desire to see his suggestion on what he felt Loring's command should do in the Kanawha Valley, in an effort to support his operation. 81 Lee did not stop with Loring; however, days prior, he communicated his victory at Manassas and planned offensive to Braxton Bragg and requested that Bragg pass the information along to Kirby Smith for further coordination. It was Lee's desire that these western armies gain similar victories to his at Manassas, that when added together may be enough to secure Southern 81 OR, vol 19, 1: 594. 37 victory.82 Lastly, he demonstrated his understanding of the confused state of Federal forces in Washington and the need to seize the initiative before the opportunity was lost. Like Kentucky, Maryland was a vital border state, not for its potentiality in resources, but rather for its geographic relation to Washington. Any serious Confederate incursion into the state would be life-threatening to the Union, and therefore demanded desperate measures on the part of Northern armies to repel such an advance. 83 Lee's leadership has been often criticized during the Maryland Campaign from historians and even shocked his subordinates, Jackson, and Longstreet. 84 Lee was certainly aggressive and was known for taking risks; however, he was not a foolish man, and never committed his army to a disaster, at least not one he foresaw. Comparing his stratagem throughout the rest of the war, it's probable to conclude that his movements were well thought out, with the least amount of risk generated from the objective demands of the campaign. Even in moments of reaction to McClellan, Lee always retained the initiative in Maryland. In the aftermath of Seconded Manassas and Chantilly, it was the opinion of many in both military and civilian leadership that a final showdown somewhere north of the Potomac River was all that was needed for Confederate victory. 85 If Lee was a poker player, he was taking his hand and going all in, he could only hope the Federals floundered. General Longstreet understood the gravity of the moment when he wrote: "When the Second Bull Run campaign 82 OR, vol 19, 1: 589. 83 Ezra A. Carman, The Maryland Campaign of September 1862, Vol. I: South Mountain. Edited by Thomas G. Clemens, El Dorado Hills, CA: Savas Beatie, 2012. 19-21. Carman was present at the battle of Antietam and dedicated his life to research and study of the Maryland Campaign in the post war years. Carman's work was able to capture not only the historical timeline of events, but offered an emotional aspect not seen in other works. This emotional component while subtle is an important tool in internalizing the mindset of Union soldiers and perhaps the North itself. 84 James Longstreet, Battles and Leaders of the Civil War, Edited by Ned Bradford. New York: The Fairfax Press, 1979. 265. Longstreet claims that aside from himself, that General Jackson was also taken back from the boldness of Lee's designs on the Maryland Campaign, while at a meeting in Frederick MD, September 9th. 85 Harsh, 60-63. Multiple historians have agreed on this point. James Murfin considered the battle of Antietam to be the most important battle in American history, and one of the most decisive in world history. Ezra Carman portrays the campaign as requiring desperate action for the North, while Scot Hartwig, Stephen Sears and James McPherson center on the political undertone. 38 closed, we had the most brilliant prospects the Confederates ever had. We then possessed an army which, had it been kept together, the Federals would never have dared attack." 86 Lee's confidence in his army was surely the determining factor in his choice to assume the offensive into Maryland, and no doubt behind his reasoning to push the army as hard as he did in the maneuvering and fighting that took place in Maryland. The General expressed his confidence in the men and the importance of the offensive in General Order No. 102. on September 4: "This army is about to engage in most important operations." He further outlines the necessity of respecting private property, and the desire for his commands to lighten their supply encumbrance to allow them to move quickly and efficiently. 87 When coupling the logistical and organizational shortcomings, the political factors reinforced by his troops' confidence and his in them proved to be the energy from which the Maryland Campaign was executed. The offensives themselves presented each of these commanders a complicated set of obstacles and decisions to overcome while ensuring they offered the best possible benefit to their cause with the least amount of risk towards their army. This is certainly one of the most challenging aspects of being a commander in charge of any offensive-minded campaign. Johnston at Shiloh, Burnside at Fredericksburg, Hooker at Chancellorsville, and Hood in Tennessee all failed to capitalize on this principle. The fact that Lee and Bragg achieved the scale of operational measures they did is a testament to their leadership and ability to seize control and direction of a developing situation. If the argument is to be maintained that the Maryland and Kentucky campaigns provided the South the best chance the South had of winning the war, then proof of this claim must lay within the strategic composition of the campaigns themselves. If taken in this context, then it must be understood that every move Lee, Bragg, and 86 Longstreet, Battles and Leaders of the Civil War, 263. 87 OR, vol 16, 2: 592. 39 Smith, along with the supporting roles of Loring, Marshall, Price, and Van Dorn were calculated if not on a grand scale, certainly on an individual level. Unlocking the purpose of the maneuvers, and their relation to strategic success will illustrate the continually changing dynamics and environment of each campaign, and how these generals continually altered their designs to fit the goals of their strategic objectives. The evolving strategic situation in the months leading up to the campaigns created the conditions under which the operations in Maryland and Kentucky were governed. Understanding the Confederate forces' strategic focus for needing to assume the offensive will outline the gravity and weight they placed on the outcome of these fall campaigns. The most measurable strategic potential in 1862 existed in the Western Theater. As already stated, the economic and logistical importance of this region necessitated an aggressive action on behalf of the South if the Confederacy was to survive. The first attempt at recovering control of Tennessee occurred in April with the battle of Shiloh. While tactically a Confederate failure, the aftermath of the fighting created adverse reactions from the Northern press and transposed into Halleck's overall cautious and slow pursuit towards Corinth. Halleck, after taking Corinth, was faced with limited choices on where to move next. Due to political and doctrinal restrictions of conciliation and Halleck's theory on war, the massive Union army was not able logistically to move into the Deep South. The only real move available to the Federal forces in the summer of 1862, was a lateral one east towards Chattanooga. 88 With Bragg at Tupelo and Kirby Smith's small command at Chattanooga, the path of success for an aggressive officer to take Chattanooga, a major supply hub for the South, was wide open. Halleck foiled this opportunity by sending Buell's command to accomplish the task. The slow-moving cautious Buell initially created consternation among 88 Daniel, 86. 40 Confederate leadership, yet once the pace of his progress was realized, the same trepidation turned into an opportunity. 89 Clausewitz described the potential for a reciprocal effect to take place should an army go on the offensive; however, he counterweighs that thought with pointing out that an army in a precarious position with the opportunity to gain a substantial amount should jump on the opportunity if one should be presented. 90 Certainly, Bragg and Smith applied a variation of this maxim into their decision to go on the advance. The term "invasion" is the defining ideology that bound both major theaters of war and other Confederate objectives in the fall of 1862. Clausewitz wrote that even if the complete overthrow of the enemy is impossible, which it was for the Confederacy, then the only other real option of winning a war is to conquer a portion of the enemy territory. In conquering the enemy territory, the invader has the opportunity to weaken the enemy's resources, crippling their ability to sustain an army. By carrying the war in enemy territory, the conditions will further the enemy's expense and ultimately lead to peace negotiations. 91 The term "invasion" generates a delicate question concerning what an invasion actually is, and how it fits into the American context, particularly in the political spectrum in 1862. Baron De Jomoni, whose military maxims were dominant in nineteenth-century America, distinguished what an "invasion" actually is. Breaking down the idea of an offensive, he wrote that: "…an invasion occurs against a great state whose whole or significant portion of territory is attacked. If only a province or moderate line of defense is attacked, then it is an offensive, and if such actions are limited only to a confined operation, then it is termed an initiative." 92 Indeed then, if taken in this context, 89 Connelly, 200-201. 90 Clausewitz, 707. 91 Clausewitz, 706. Neither of the primary Confederate armies had the ability to "conquer" Federal territory. However, the last part in reference to Clausewitz maxim was the adaptation applied by the Confederacy in its strategic goals. 92 Jomini, The Art of War, 54. The difference in the definition in understanding the purpose of the Confederate objective is critical. Many historians point to the Army of Northern Virginia's strategic goals as fitting into the framework of an 41 Confederate efforts militarily were an offensive and an invasion only in the political spectrum. Although the press and even the top military minds used the term invasion quite frequently in the North, there is nothing in the Confederate strategic framework of 1862, that fit the definition of invasion, Lee himself in a letter to Jefferson Davis on September 4, used the term expedition implying that his foray had a specific purpose and would be short. 93 Due to logistics alone, Confederate forces across the board could not sustain the long-term goals of an invasion. However, the Clausewitzian maxim of a "strategical attack" was within reach and achievable according to the conditional logistical framework. Much of the success for the Confederates relied on the superiority of its troops, and the avoidance of exhausting itself with an over achievement of objectives. 94 The window of opportunity was narrow, operationally because of logistics, but more importantly, because of politics. The two most significant benefits afforded to the Southern cause in 1862 were the Congressional fall elections and European superpowers. If Confederate forces could score a major political victory in the east, and both a strategic reversal coupled with a political coup in the west, then perhaps Northern voters would come to resent the war and vote for "Peace Democrats" in November, and more advantageously draw England and France in as mediators or some other influential role, to end the war. It is apparent that the pressure to act decisively if not at least aggressively before November was of paramount importance. While it is debated as to how far the European powers would intercede, what is certain is that the Confederacy banked part of its strategic decisions both politically and militarily on intervention. 95 Just as apparent was the frustration and delicate invasion, yet when looking at that particular army's logistics and Lee's strategic goals only the Jominian maxim of offensive fits the framework. 93 OR, vol 16, 2: 591-592. 94 Clausewitz, 601. 95 McPherson, 534-535. 42 statesmanship which had to be executed on behalf of the Union to convince the English mainly that the war was nothing more than a rebellion that the Republic could put down on its own. 96 However, this did not appear to be the scene in the late summer of 1862 with Union defeats and setbacks continually piling up. Lee retained the initiative by keeping the enemy guessing what his next move and true objective was. According to Henry McClellan, J.E.B. Stuart's adjutant, that as late as September 13, Federal forces maintained the: "utmost uncertainty regarding Lee's movements and intentions." 97 Lee designed his army's movements to draw out the Federals from Washington. By crossing at Leesburg, his army was initially east of the Catoctin Mountains and a direct threat to Washington and Baltimore, it was this crossing point that directly forced the disorganized Army of the Potomac to leave the defenses prematurely, and more importantly to force Lincoln's hand in placing McClellan back in overall command. 98 The key to the Army of Northern Virginia's movements was speed and mobility, thus the reasoning for Lee's series of orders, which included provisions for shoeless Confederates to remain at Winchester, a lightening of supplies, and an insistence that straggling be strictly forbidden. Lee's next major objective after crossing the Potomac River was to move on Frederick. A Confederate presence in a substantial pro-Union area was a direct insult to the North, and would only further press the Army of the Potomac to hurry faster in order to "repel the invasion" and "save the nation"; while most importantly for the Confederates, continually limit the progress of McClellan organizing his army into a capable force on the battlefield. 96 Nelson, 163-168. 97 H.B. McClellan, The Life and Campaigns of Major-General J.E.B. Stuart: Commander of the Cavalry of the Army of Northern Virginia, Edison: The Blue & Grey Press, 1993. 113. 98 Harsh, 98; OR, vol 16, 2: 604-605. Letter from Lee to Davis on September 12 justifying is reasoning for crossing his army east of the mountains. 43 Lee's grand strategy was working so far; his movements northward from Richmond had stripped the Atlantic states of their Union occupiers to concentrate on Lee's Confederate force, while at the same time sending the Federal strategy of war into complete chaos as they scrambled to deal with the offensive. Lee believed that if he launched an unrelenting offensive, the Federals would be compelled to abandon their widely scattered smaller campaigns, which were gradually eating away the frontiers of the Confederacy; and, as a result, be forced to concentrate their columns in response to his initiatives. 99 Lee's movement into the western part of the state, via Frederick and into the Middleton and Pleasant valleys, opened the Shenandoah Valley up momentarily, which assisted Loring's advance in western Virginia, by isolating the small Federal commands in that region. In addition to freeing up Loring to make an offensive, Lee's army in western Maryland split the Federal war effort in half. The Army of the Potomac was now confined in environs around Washington, while Federal forces in the Western Theater had no direct route to reinforce McClellan. 100 The simultaneous advance of Lee, Loring, Marshall, Smith, and Bragg effectively drove a wedge between the Union field armies, while Price and Van Dorn's forces kept Grant fixed at Corinth. 101 Bragg and Smith's columns made their march through eastern and middle Tennessee and into Kentucky at an incredible speed, leaving Buell's army to have to hustle to catch up. 102 Kirby Smith realized the opportunity in front of him early on and moved his men forward roughly the same time Lee's men were preparing to destroy John Pope's forces near Manassas, beginning the Kentucky Campaign. Union Brigadier General George W. Morgan's command held the vital Cumberland Gap, which historian Earl Hess christened the "Gibraltar of the West." 99 Harsh, 116. 100 Hartwig, 162-163. 101 Harsh, 96-97; Hess, 31-35. 102 Hess, 57,62,64. 44 The Gap itself served as a platform for the Federals to invade East Tennessee, and as long as it remained in Federal hands, the Deep South, particularly Chattanooga and Atlanta, would be under constant threat. 103 Reducing this garrison was the first lynchpin in breaking Federal control and regaining Tennessee for the South. Smith, now free to maneuver feinted around the gap and threatened the supply lines, forcing a Federal withdrawal; he then turned his legions northward and moved into Kentucky. Smith moved through the eastern part of the state and pushed Heth's division as far as Covington, directly across from Cincinnati, sending that city and southern Ohio into a panic. 104 With Smith's small army running almost unmolested in Kentucky, Bragg's larger army moved through Middle Tennessee via Sparta feinting towards Nashville, forcing the Federals to concentrate there, while strategically widening the gap between Buell's command and Southern forces in Kentucky. Bragg, before departing to Chattanooga, left behind roughly 35,000 men in two separate commands under generals Stirling Price and Earl Van Dorn. These commands had a twofold objective. Their primary objective was to contain the Army of the Tennessee at Corinth, and once Bragg and Smith were in position, launch an offensive of their own against Grant, defeat him, and then rapidly march to connect with Bragg's army. 105 Bragg and Smith exposed the weakness in the Federal policy of limited war with its preoccupation of taking landmarks and reliance on cumbersome supply lines and within less than a months' time-reversed almost a year of Union progress in the west, in respect to subjugating the Upper South. Unlike John Bell Hood's offensive into Tennessee in late 1864, which, while certainly an emergency, did not deviate Sherman from his plans of marching to the sea. 106 In 103 Hess, 7-8. 104 Volpe, "Dispute Every Inch of Ground", 141. 105 Noe, 29. 106 Eric A. Jacobson and Richard A. Rupp, For Cause and for Country: A Study of the Affair at Spring Hill and the Battle of Franklin, Eric A. Jacobson, 2013. 42. 45 1862, this simply was impossible for Federal forces. Sherman operated under a "hard war" doctrine that allowed him to subsist off the land and changed his objective from key city centers to making war on the Southern people, through the destruction of their local economy, food subsistence, and ability subsist in a normal capacity. 107 Sherman effectively narrowed the war to the immediate doorstep of the Southern People. As a result the individual citizen was forced to deal with their own survival, and naturally the bigger picture of the Confederacy became less important. Union forces in 1862 did not have the same conditional framework, and by default, would be forced to pursue any Confederate force and meet it on the battlefield. Even though the fall of 1862 didn't produce the hoped-for victory conditions, strategically, the Confederates were more successful in this period than at any other part of the war. The results of this success were more apparent in the Western Theater than in the east. However, certain components in the Eastern Theater changed as well. The most significant measurable success emerged in time bought for the Confederacy, and a prolonged timetable for the Northern plan of war. In the summer, Federal plans in the west called for the capture of Vicksburg and Chattanooga, the latter of which was in progress when the offensive started. 108 It is highly probable that if able, the Federal forces would have moved on Vicksburg in the summer of 1862, and perhaps forced its capitulation much sooner. 109 However, this is only speculation, yet, the reality is this operation was certainly delayed by the events that occurred in Kentucky and the aggressive nature of Price and Van Dorn. Kentucky was only one variable in stymieing the Federal drive toward Vicksburg. Just as important were the aggressiveness of Price and Van Dorn at the battles of Iuka and Corinth in October. Although Confederate defeats, the outcome of 107 Charles Royster, The Destructive War: William Tecumseh Sherman, Stonewall Jackson, and the Americans, New York: Alfred A. Knopf Inc. 321-328. 108 McPherson, 511-512. 109 Woodworth, Nothing but Victory, 243-244. 46 these battles managed to temporarily check the Federals, prompting an end to any realistic campaign season in Mississippi. At least for the foreseeable future, the Mississippi River remained open by way of Vicksburg, and Union strategy incomplete, in which case was Price and Van Dorn's big contribution. 110 Bragg and Smith failed to hold Kentucky and or convert her into a Confederate state. However, as the logistic concerns show, the state's complete occupation, with the available forces, was genuinely impossible. In all the engagements that had taken place, the Southerners had the better day. Kirby Smith's army completely routed Federal forces at Richmond in August, and Bragg's army captured the garrison at Munfordville. Before and during the campaign John Hunt Morgan's cavalry had wreaked havoc in Kentucky, capturing supplies, disrupting communications, and pushing to the Ohio River virtually unchallenged. 111 Even Kentucky's principle battle at Perryville was the better day tactically for the Confederates. More than anything, Kentucky showed the weakness of Buell, limited war, and the Union's inability to protect vital territory adequately under a conciliation policy. While in the end Bragg and Smith left, they did so generally unmolested, which showed Buell's unwillingness to fight another pitched battle. Therefore, this aftermath was certainly nothing for the Union to be proud of. In truth Buell did not drive Bragg and Smith out of Kentucky, rather the limitations of logistics and the realization of strategic objectives forced the Confederates back to Tennessee. 112 Although Braxton Bragg is surrounded by much controversy and sharp opinions on his leadership capabilities, one must look past emotion and see the facts as they present in the strategic element. While indeed, the Confederates failed to hold Kentucky, they did succeed in 110 Woodworth, 239-240. 111 Hess, 12. 112 Noe, 333. 47 regaining portions of Tennessee. In particular, Middle Tennessee by way of Murfreesboro, which sat astride the Nashville and Chattanooga Railroad, and was seen as the key to the wealthy Stone, Duck, and Elk River valleys. 113 Historian Thomas Connelly pointed out, which was already previously noted, that Tennessee was by far the most critical state in terms of manufacturing to the South. Although the entire state wasn't in Confederate hands, over two-thirds of it was, and most importantly, the opportunity to secure the very vital Nashville and Mississippi River corridor remained a possibility for a future campaign. 114 The primary focal point in the interpretation of the Kentucky Campaign is the Confederate failure to remain within that state. However, the key phrase narrows down to opportunity and potential. If taken in this context, the Confederate forces in July were backed into a corner. However, come October, these same forces had managed to throw the Federal forces off balance and regain a significant portion of lost territory, changing the entire atmosphere and flow of the Western Theater. In short, the success of the Kentucky Campaign is that it allowed the Confederates to move from the verge of defeat to a position where the fate of the Western Theater was up in the air, which only a decisive campaign would bring to a conclusion. 115 The fall of 1862 was the last chance the Confederates had at securing Tennessee permanently during the war. While the Western Theater was more significant in terms of strategic gain and leverage, the Eastern Theater added its own momentous shift in the flow of events. Unlike the west, the Eastern Theater was very narrow, as it existed in the space between Richmond and Washington. In strategic terms, the region was harrowing regarding maneuvering room and logistical sustainment. In one sense, Lee and his army were successful in pushing the Army of the Potomac 113 Peter Cozzens, No Better Place to Die: The Battle of Stones River, Chicago: University of Illinois, 1990. 8. 114 Connelly, 16-22. 115 Cozzens, No Better Place to Die, 12-14; Hess, 116. 48 away from the gates of Richmond, along with wrecking the Army of Virginia, while lastly temporarily clearing the smaller theaters, such as the coast and Shenandoah Valley of Federal forces. 116 While this situation may have provided an opportunity in the west, it meant little or nothing in the east. The fact is, Lee understood his primary objective either consisted of breaking the Northern will to fight through battlefield victory or by the complete destruction of the Union army. 117 Lee's primary objective in Maryland was to bate the Federal forces into a showdown fight. He was successful in this mission by just crossing over the Potomac River. The location of Washington in the southern portion of Maryland across from Alexandria made an incursion in Maryland a threat for the Federal government. 118 Unlike the west, where a fair amount of effort was required for Bragg and Smith to march their armies the distance required to Kentucky, the Army of Northern Virginia did not have to move far to accomplish its mission. Another key component to Lee's strategic objective was the lack of overhead in its long-term goal. Unlike the Western Theater, there was no pressure for Lee to specifically secure any particular region, as the Confederacy in the east had not lost any of its production capabilities nor any significant amount of land to Federal occupation. Therefore, the Confederate movements' direction wasn't necessarily guided by a specific purpose, but rather by the necessity of strategic gains which were designed to draw out the Army of the Potomac in a state of haste and unpreparedness. However, whereas the Kentucky Campaign had different aspects of measurable success, the 116 Harsh, 19-20. 117 Murfin, 63-64. 118 Harsh, 23; Murfin, 36-40; McPherson, 555-556. All the major historians who focus on the Maryland Campaign point to this as a major component to deterring the outcome and purpose of Lee's strategy. 49 Maryland Campaign had none, only a single purpose that demanded a climactic clash to determine its outcome. 119 At no other point in the war did Lee have such an advantage and control of the initiative. Arguably, his combination of subordinate officers was the best in their position as a whole than at any other point. His army was operating off a long track of victory, the length of which they would not experience again. 120 And most importantly, the Maryland Campaign was truly the only time in which Lee would have direct control of the flow of events; in Richmond, he had acted out of desperation, in Northern Virginia, Fredericksburg, Chancellorsville, the Overland Campaign and Petersburg he counteracted his opponents moves, and at Gettysburg, he committed to a battle that was dictated by the Federals. In September of 1862, Lee was the composer of the campaign and the master of ceremonies, he and he alone decided when and where the climactic battle would be fought. 121 All too often, the argument arises that the Army of the Potomac moved quicker than Lee expected, and caught him off guard, forcing him to settle and fight an unprepared battle at Sharpsburg. This theory would make sense if Lee's strategic objectives were multilayered like Bragg or Smith. Nevertheless, this theory doesn't match up to his sole objective of a decisive engagement. As seen with logistical circumstances, Hagerstown was likely the limit for the army in terms of range, Lee, therefore, had decided to make the principle stand somewhere in that area. 122 Two factors make this apparent, the choice to reduce Harpers Ferry and Martinsburg, which are necessary for military doctrine, and the choice to have the army lay around Frederick 119 OR, vol 16, 2: Correspondence between Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis, September 8, 1862; Harsh, 119; Alexander, Fighting for the Confederacy, 139. 120 Hartwig, 126-127. 121 Harsh, 57-59. 122 Carman, The Maryland Campaign of September 1862, Vol. I ,108-111; Harsh, 190; Hartwig, 116-117; Murfin, 113. All of these sources for reasons ranging from realistic logistical concerns to Lee's strategic initiative point towards the area of Hagerstown as the realistic goal of the Confederate offensive. 50 for several days. 123 If the plan had been to fight somewhere else or keep the Federals at a distance, these two factors fit the mold. The truth is that Lee wanted a fight, and he wanted it quick, the geography of Western Maryland affords a great opportunity to a defending army, which was Lee's primary tactical vision. 124 Looking at the scope of the Army of Northern Virginia's movements in the campaign, there a few abundantly clear facts that warrant Lee's strategic designs. It's already been stated that Lee's intention was to draw out the Army of the Potomac, which he did by simply crossing into Maryland, and ushered the emergency by crossing east of the mountains. 125 The next key was the layover or taunting of the Federals by having his army remain in Frederick for several days. The decision to reduce the Harpers Ferry garrison, while militarily necessary, also doubly acted as part of the "national emergency" which further put pressure on McClellan and his army to move with haste. 126 The battle of South Mountain, while a Confederate defeat, opened the way for the Federals to move over the range and meet Lee on the ground of his choosing. 127 South Mountain is interesting, particularly for strategic reasons. The choice to leave one division under D.H. Hill to hold the three passes stretched over ten miles indicates that Lee didn't intend to stop the Federals there and expected them to take the position. A decisive battle along the South Mountain range would not have been beneficial for Lee to meet his objectives. His army would not have been able to counterattack effectively due to terrain, and maneuvering room would have been limited. Although Lee initially considered scrapping the campaign due to the longer than expected siege of Harpers Ferry, once the garrison did fall, he was able to 123 Harsh, 147-150; Hartwig, 211-212, OR, vol 16, 2, 603 (Special Orders 191) 605-608. 124 Allan, 201-205; Harsh, 98-99; Marshall, 148-150. 125 Marshall, 146. 126 Brian Matthew Jordan, Unholy Sabbath: The Battle of South Mountain in History and Memory September 14, 1862, New York: Savas Beatie, 2012. 80-85. 127 Jordon, Unholy Sabbath, 301. 51 concentrate his forces in the area of Sharpsburg. 128 It may not be that Lee specifically wanted to fight at Sharpsburg, but the lay of the land and the tactical and strategic components of it, offered natural terrain on which to fight a decisive battle. 129 The Antietam battlefield offered several very strong defensive opportunities. First was the Antietam Creek, which was wide and deep enough to stop infantry from crossing unless over a bridge. The terrain, particularly on the southern end of the battlefield, is very suitable for a defending force, along with the ground near the center of the battlefield. On the northern end, the terrain is its weakest for defense; however, the entire battlefield, especially the northern end, is very suitable for artillery employment. Lee's position at Antietam Creek was without question formidable. 130 Whereas the events in Kentucky were one of maneuver, Maryland hinged on the tactical climax. Therefore, both forces needed to clash and soundly defeat the other to end the campaign. The battle of Antietam itself ended in a draw, and the opposing lines virtually remained the same. 131 Having realized the day after the engagement that McClellan wasn't likely to attack again, and understanding that his position offered no benefits for his army to attack, Lee promptly withdrew back into Shepherdstown, Virginia, (West Virginia) intending to regroup his army and re-crossing the Potomac River near Williamsport to again sue for a decisive battle. The Confederate's were blocked by several determining factors though, the two primary factors being McClellan's choice to move the VI Corps north towards Hagerstown to block a crossing, and a large amount of straggling that has taken place since the start of the 128 Allan, 320. 129 Harsh, 301-303. 130 Phillip Thomas Tucker, Burnside's Bridge: The Climatic Struggle of the 2nd and 20th Georgia at Antietam Creek, Mechanicsburg: Stackpole Books, 2000. 47-54. 131 Ezra Carman, The Maryland Campaign of September 1862, Vol. 2: Antietam. Edited by Thomas G. Clemens, El Dorado Hills, CA: Savas Beatie, 2012. 501. 52 campaigning that had severely reduced Lee's army from upwards of 70,000 men down to roughly 45,000. 132 While Lee did not thrash McClellan's army at Antietam to the extent his strategic objectives called for, the opportunity for a Confederate political victory was not entirely gone. In fact, Lee's offensive convinced Britain and France that Northern armies could never restore the Union, and they contemplated mediation, which would have constituted de facto recognition of the Confederacy. 133 Moving away from the narrow view of Lee and Maryland it is important to note that Bragg's army had achieved a significant victory on September 17 at Munfordville the same day the battle of Antietam was raging. While Lee's army was more or less locked in a stalemate in Maryland, the western Confederate forces still very much retained the initiative in Kentucky. If a successful outcome in Kentucky occurred, perhaps that would be enough to enhance the stalemate at Antietam into a negative outcome for the Union. 134 Lee did not wait in position along Antietam Creek, for events to develop in Kentucky, he didn't have to. By simply moving back across the river and McClellan's inability to pursue for logistical reasons, Lee still very much posed a serious threat, especially with re-crossing into Maryland if need be. Looking at the outcome of the Maryland Campaign and the factors involved in the forces' genetic composition, Lee's army achieved all that could reasonably be expected of it. Certainly, due to its size, it would be impossible to annihilate the Army of the Potomac, yet, by remaining together and gaining the tactical victory, that would have to be enough. 135 132 Murfin, 306. 133 McPherson, 546. 134 Earl J. Hess, Braxton Bragg: The Most Hated Man in the Confederacy, University of North Carolina Press, 2016. 63. 135 Ezra Carman, The Maryland Campaign of September 1862. Vol. III: Shepherdstown Ford and the End of the Campaign. Edited by Thomas G. Clemens, El Dorado Hills, CA: Savas Beatie, 2012. 20-21. 53 Truly then the lynchpin of the 1862 Confederate offensive rested on the shoulders of Bragg and Smith. 136 Lee's offensive and climatic battle of Antietam would have held little or no importance if the events west of the Appalachian's hadn't been taking place in the manner they were. The ultimate failure of Bragg and Smith in Kentucky was their inability to link their armies together. The process involved in making this happen didn't occur until it was too late. 137 Regardless of why this juncture of uniting these armies didn't occur, the important point was that they retained the initiative until the battle of Perryville. Unlike Lee, Bragg and Smith didn't necessarily have to defeat Buell or Wright's local forces, but rather they just needed to exist in Kentucky. Smith's forces had cleared out Morgan and what pitiful resistance Wright was able to scrape together. Buell's army lingered exhausted and timidly in the western part of the state. Bragg and Smith controlled in theory over two-thirds of the state in the last weeks of September into October. 138 The high tide of the Confederacy occurred not at Antietam, but in the days before Perryville. Up until this date, the South had been successful in relieving Richmond, Chattanooga, Vicksburg, the Carolina coast, Shenandoah Valley, western Virginia, and Northern Virginia of any significant Federal occupation, or military operations. The Confederate armies were at its maxim of manpower, at least in theory, if not in actual employment and contained men who were wholly more experienced than their counterparts. Most importantly, the South had been successful universally of maintaining a Confederate wide offensive initiative. When looking at the battles of South Mountain, Richmond, Munfordville, Antietam, and Harpers Ferry, only 136 Hess, Braxton Bragg, 64. 137 Noe, 328-329. 138 Daniel, 128-129; Hess, 62-64; Noe, 104. 54 South Mountain had been a Federal victory and Antietam a draw, while the rest were complete decisive Confederate victories. The battle of Perryville long considered the principal battle of the Kentucky Campaign was neither decisive nor climatic. 139 The battle itself was fought only by portions of the armies, on ground that held no real strategic value to the overall goals of the campaign. However, the legacy of Perryville resides in Bragg's choice to withdraw his army from Kentucky in its aftermath. Leaving aside Bragg's personality, leadership issues, and his subordinates, the important aspect to look at is what was actually accomplished by his army. It's already been stated that Bragg and Smith's offensive knocked the Federal plan of war back a few pegs and opened up at two-thirds of Tennessee for the foreseeable future. Confederate goals upon entering Kentucky were unclear and varied in design between Bragg and Smith. 140 Perhaps the largest draw was establishing the state as Confederate, which they quickly understood wasn't a popular option amongst the people. That being the case, Confederate field armies could only subsist for so long in hostile territory until they would, by necessity, be forced to withdraw to friendly Tennessee. 141 Therefore, without the support of the majority of Kentuckians to endorse a Confederate government, the continuation of a Southern army within the state offered no benefit to the Confederacy. 142 Bragg and Smith's only true strategic failing was their inability to link together and deliver a decisive blow against Buell. If looked at in the context of the genetics of an ocean wave, the advance into Kentucky was the last little bit of the wave that rolls into the edge of the beach. It neither has the momentum nor the power to damage anything of significant strength. However, the break or 139 Noe, 343. 140 Hess, 56-57. 141 Connelly, 228; Noe, 334. 142 Noe, 336. 55 impact of the wave that occurs just before hitting shore tends to denote the power of the temporary effects inflicted within that particular wave's life span. Sticking with the ocean wave analogy, the Confederate wide offensive in the fall of 1862 was the last ocean wave before the tide changed. The lifespan of the Confederacy would perish in the calm time between the next high tide. Conclusion: The interpretations of the Civil War, its key moments, critical players, and even the purpose of the conflict, vary in many different extremes, platforms, and algorithms. Surely there were other critical moments of the war, in which the Confederacy could have theoretically changed the outcome or moments in which Union forces could have ended the war much sooner. The progress of the war is a fascinating storyline of complete unpreparedness through a series of excruciating growing pains that led to the high efficiency of conducting war. Looking at the grand scope of the conflict, particularly the logistics of the opposing sides, even the most novice student of the struggle can recognize that the Confederacy was severely behind in every aspect and shouldn't have waged war. 143 However, the fact remains they did, and the reality is any Southern hope for victory resided in the slowness, unpreparedness, and political deadlock of the North's ability to wage war. The true window in which to view why the fall of 1862 was the Southern high tide occurs in the aftermath of the campaigns themselves. The first and most critical component was the issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation. The bold political move forever changed the direction and intent of the war. For the South, it had devastating consequences, as it eliminated 143 McPherson, 312-316. 56 any dream of European intervention, and essentially made the Confederacy an island left to its own. The proclamation also bled into the second crucial component, which truly had its roots at the beginning of 1862; however, it had become fully developed by the closing days of 1862, and that is the abandonment of "limited war" principals and the acceptance of "hard war" doctrine. 144 Militarily the South would never mount such a broad offensive again nor one with so much potential to gain from it. Lee's Pennsylvania Campaign in 1863, while more famous, did not have the potential as nine months prior when he crossed into Maryland. 145 Lee in June of 1863 was acting independently, while Confederate armies in the west were giving ground rapidly and losing Vicksburg. 146 Even with Confederate victory at Chickamauga, Bragg nor his predecessors could ever mount an effective counterthrust to regain vital Tennessee. 147 Hood's Tennessee Campaign in 1864 offered the closest opportunity; however, his cause was pyrrhic and traded the destruction of Georgia for the hope of gaining Tennessee. 148 The commencement of the Overland Campaign in 1864 saw the end of Lee's ability to mount a counterattack that had won for him on previous battlefields. With his numbers dwindling, and the Union's production capabilities at its height, continuing supply of reinforcements, and Grant's power to coordinate multiple armies upon Lee, forced the Confederate leader to dance to the tune of Grant's strategy. 149 144 McPherson, 567. 145 Coddington, The Gettysburg Campaign, 4-8. 146 Edwin C. Bearss and J. Parker Hills, Receding Tide: Vicksburg and Gettysburg the Campaigns that Changed the Civil War, National Geographic Society, 2010. 266. 147 Steven Woodworth, Six Armies in Tennessee: The Chickamauga and Chattanooga, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1998. 144. 148 Jacobson, For Cause and for Country, 524. 149 Gordon C. Rhea, The Battle of the Wilderness May 5-6, 1864, Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1994. 9-10, 12-13, 22. 57 The Maryland and Kentucky Campaigns were episodes that the Union could not afford to lose. Certainly, Union armies, especially in the east, met multiple setbacks, defeats, and disasters throughout the war; however, a loss at this critical juncture in each theater would have produced devastating consequences from which the North could not recover. The brilliance of these campaigns resides in the fact that neither side could afford a negative outcome, and a victorious outcome for either side had the power and capabilities to change the entire trajectory of the war. The Maryland and Kentucky Campaigns do not have a true decisive victor in respect to the definition, yet, the rate at which the Union declared victory and the rapidity with which it instituted new measures both politically and militarily showed the emergency the events in the fall of 1862 produced for the North. 150 An acceptance of that notion coupled with political density, logistical pitfalls, organizational hurtles, and strategic objectives, will clearly indicate that the fall of 1862 in the course of the Maryland and Kentucky Campaigns, along with their supporting offenses was the high tide of the Confederacy, and the moment the Civil War changed trajectory in both political and military senses, which was the beginning of the Confederacy's defeat. 150 Muehlbauer, Ways of War, 197-200. 58 Bibliography Secondary Sources: Anderson, Nancy Scott and Dwight Anderson. The Generals: Ulysses. S. Grant and Robert E. Lee. Avenel: New Jersey, 1987. Bearss, Edwin C. and J. Parker Hills, Receding Tide: Vicksburg and Gettysburg the Campaigns that Changed the Civil War, National Geographic Society, 2010. Beloff, Max. "Historical Revision No. CXVIII: Great Britain and the American Civil War." History, New Series, 37, no. 129, (1952): 40-48. Brauer, Kinley J. "British Mediation and the American Civil War: A Reconsideration." The Journal of Southern History 38, no. 1 (1972): 49-64. Carman, Ezra Ayers. The Maryland Campaign of September 1862, Vol. I: South Mountain. Edited by Thomas G. Clemens, El Dorado Hills, CA: Savas Beatie, 2012. Carman, Ezra Ayers. The Maryland Campaign of September 1862, Vol. 2: Antietam. Edited by Thomas G. Clemens. El Dorado Hills, CA: Savas Beatie, 2012. Carman, Ezra Ayres. The Maryland Campaign of September 1862. Vol. III: Shepherdstown Ford and the End of the Campaign. Edited by Thomas G. Clemens. El Dorado Hills, CA: Savas Beatie, 2012. Chance, Joseph E. The Second Texas Infantry, From Shiloh to Vicksburg, Austin: Eakin Press, 1984. Coddington, Edwin B. The Gettysburg Campaign: A Study in Command, New York: Simon and Schuster. 1968. Connelly, Thomas Lawrence. Army of the Heartland: The Army of Tennessee, 1861-1862. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2001. Cozzens, Peter. No Better Place to Die: The Battle of Stones River, Chicago: University of Illinois, 1990. Cozzens, Peter. Shenandoah 1862: Stonewall Jackson's Valley Campaign. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2008. 59 Daniel, Larry J. Days of Glory: The Army of the Cumberland, 1861-1865. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2006. Donald, David Herbert. Lincoln. New York, NY: Touchstone, 1996. Glatthaar, Joseph T. General Lee's Army: From Victory to Collapse. New York: Free Press, 2008. Grimsley, Mark. The Hard Hand of War: Union Military Policy toward Southern Civilians, 1861-1865. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. Halleck, Henry Wagner. Elements of Military Art and Science: Course of Instruction in Strategy, Fortification, Tactics of Battle, Embracing the Duties of Staff, Infantry, Cavalry, Artillery, and Engineers, Adapted to the Use of Volunteers and Militia, Third Edition, New York: D. Appleton & Company, 1862. Harsh, Joseph L. Taken at the Flood Robert E. Lee and Confederate Strategy in the Maryland Campaign of 1862. Ashland: The Kent State University Press, 2013. Hartwig, D. Scott. To Antietam Creek: the Maryland Campaign of September 1862. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2019. Hennessy, John J. Return to Bull Run: The Battle and Campaign of Second Manassas. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1999. Hess, Earl J. Banners to the Breeze: the Kentucky Campaign, Corinth, and Stones River. Lincoln, Neb.: University of Nebraska Press, 2010. Hess, Earl J. Braxton Bragg: The Most Hated Man of the Confederacy. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2016. Hoslett, Schuyler Dean. "The Richmond Daily Press on British Intervention in the Civil War: A Brief Summary." The William and Mary Quarterly 20, no. 1 (1940): 79-83. Jacobson Eric A. and Richard A. Rupp, For Cause and for Country: A Study of the Affair at Spring Hill and the Battle of Franklin, Eric A. Jacobson, 2013. Jomini, Antoine Henri. The Art of War: A New Edition, with Appendices and Maps. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1971. Jordan, Brian Matthew. Unholy Sabbath: The Battle of South Mountain in History and Memory September 14, 1862, New York: Savas Beatie, 2012. Longacre, Edward G. To Gettysburg and Beyond: The Twelfth New Jersey Volunteer Infantry, II Corps, Army of the Potomac, 1862-1865, Hightstown: Longstreet House, 1988. 60 McClellan, H. B. The Campaigns of Stuart's Cavalry. Edison, NJ: Blue and Grey Press, 1993. McPherson, James. Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988. Miller, Donald L. Vicksburg: Grants Campaign That Broke the Confederacy. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2020. Muehlbauer, Matthew S. and David J. Ulbrich, Ways of War: American Military History from the Colonial Era to the Twenty-First Century. New York: Routledge, 2018. Murfin, James V., and James I. Robertson. The Gleam of Bayonets: The Battle of Antietam and Robert E. Lees Maryland Campaign, September 1862. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 2004. Noe, Kenneth W. Perryville: This Grand Havoc of Battle. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2011. Pohanka, Brian C. Vortex of Hell: History of the 5th New York Volunteer Infantry. Lynchburg, VA: Schroeder Publications, 2012. Pooley, Andrew. "Shoo-ing the Geese: Lincoln and the Army of the Potomac, 1862-1863." Australasian Journal of American Studies 21, no.2 (2002): 86-100. Rhea, Gordon C. The Battle of the Wilderness May 5-6, 1864. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1994. Royster, Charles. The Destructive War: William Tecumseh Sherman, Stonewall Jackson, and the Americans. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1991. Sanders, Stuart W. Maney's Confederate Brigade at the Battle of Perryville, Charleston: The History Press, 2014. Sears, Stephen W. Chancellorsville. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1996. Sears, Stephen W. Landscape Turned Red. New York: Ticknor & Fields, 1994. Sears, Stephen W. To the Gates of Richmond: The Peninsula Campaign. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1992. Tucker, Phillip Thomas. Burnside's Bridge: The Climatic Struggle of the 2nd and 20th Georgia at Antietam Creek, Mechanicsburg: Stackpole Books, 2000. Volpe, Vernon L. "Dispute Every Inch of Ground": Major General Lew Wallace Commands Cincinnati, September 1862." Indiana Magazine of History 85, no. 2 (1989): 61 Von Clausewitz, Carl. On War. Translated by Colonel J.J. Graham. New York, NY: Barnes & Noble, 2004. Weigley, Russell Frank. A Great Civil War: A Military and Political History, 1861-1865. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2004. Woodworth, Steven E. Nothing but Victory the Army of the Tennessee, 1861-1865. New York: Vintage, 2005. Primary Sources: Allan, William. The Army of Northern Virginia in 1862, Reprint: Middletown: DE, 2020. Alexander, Edward Porter. Fighting for the Confederacy: The Personal Recollections of General Edward Porter Alexander. Edited by Gary W. Gallagher, United States: The University of North Carolina Press, 2000. Battles and Leaders of the Civil War Volumes 1-4, edited by Robert Underwood Johnson, and Clarence Clough Buel. New York: The Century Company, 1885. Donaldson, Francis Adams. Inside the Army of the Potomac: The Civil War Experience of Captain Francis Adams Donaldson. Edited by J. Gregory Acken. Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 1998. Fleming, Francis P. A Memoir of Captain C. Seton Fleming: of the Second Florida Infantry, C.S.A., Reprint 1985: Jacksonville: Times-Union Publishing House, 1884. Marshall, Charles. Lees Aide-De-Camp: Being the Papers of Colonel Charles Marshall Sometime Aide-De-Camp, Military Secretary, and Assistant Adjutant General on the Staff of Robert E. Lee, 1862-1865. Edited by Gary W. Gallagher, and Frederick Maurice. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2000. Newman, Simon P. "A Democrat in Lincoln's Army: The Civil War Letters of Henry P. Hubbell." The Princeton University Library Chronicle 50, no. 2 (1989): 155-68. Rhodes, Elisha Hunt. All for the Union: A History of the 2nd Rhode Island Volunteer Infantry in the War of the Great Rebellion. Edited by Robert Hunt Rhodes. Lincoln, RI: A. Mowbray, 1985. Small, Abner Ralph. The Sixteenth Maine Regiment in the War of the Rebellion, 1861-1865. London: Forgotten Books, 2015. Survivors' Association 118th (Corn Exchange) Regt., P.V., History of the Corn Exchange Regiment 118th Pennsylvania Volunteers,62. 62 United States War Department. The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies. Vol. 19. Washington: Govt. Print. Off., 1880. Tourgée Albion W. The Story of a Thousand: Being a History of the Service of the 105th Ohio Volunteer Infantry in the War for the Union, from August 21, 1862, to June 6, 1865. Edited by Peter C. Luebke. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press, 2011.Watkins, Samuel R.Company Aytch or A Side Show of the Big Show: A Memoir of the Civil War. Edited by Ruth Hill Fulton McAllister. Nashville, TN: Turner, 2011
Part one of an interview with Settimio "Babe" Pellechia. Part of this interview has been redacted as per Mr. Pellechia's wishes. Topics include: Family history. How his parents came to the United States from Italy and settled in Leominster, MA. His father's work at the Leominster Button Company and then as an ash collector. Babe's memories of growing up in Leominster during the Depression. His father's construction work. The work his siblings did. What it was like for Babe working with his father on construction jobs. How his brothers turned the construction business into a concrete block manufacturing business. The different businesses Babe started and worked in. What the Lincoln Terrace neighborhood was like when Babe was growing up. His mother mainly spoke Italian and knew very little English. Speaking Italian in the home. What his mother was like. The types of food his mother would prepare. Babe's work in the motel business. What life was like when Babe was running an ice cream shop and a motel. His children's education. ; 1 BABE: And [DeMazzio]… [Icelano], and then after would actually be Joseph… Enrico. LINDA: Enrico? BABE: Enrico. LINDA: Enrico. BABE: Uh oh, we got caught. Enrico, and then myself, and then Olga. LINDA: Hi, I'm Linda. SPEAKER 3: Hi nice to meet you. BABE: Now there wasn't -- of course Dave passed four years ago. There was another DeMazzio [unintelligible - 00:00:53] Icelano. LINDA: Oh, there were two others that died? BABE: Well, they died at the age of three and one in the same weekend. LINDA: Okay. BABE: Before the others. That's why they renamed the others. LINDA: They renamed -- so. I'll put that in here there were two others. You want that in there? There was another one DeMazzio that died and they named it the next one DeMazzio. And Icelano was one that died, and they named the next one Icelano. SPEAKER 3: I would like that in there. LINDA: Okay. SPEAKER 3: [Unintelligible - 00:01:21] you should have hired her. LINDA: How are you, Tina? TINA: Oh good. I'm… LINDA: Now, your marriage. BABE: Now, there's a bad part. You had to spoil it. October 5, 1945. I'm sorry, October 6, 1945. LINDA: Uh-oh. SPEAKER 3: I was just waiting. I didn't want to say anything. LINDA: October 6, 1945 and you married Augustina, what? SPEAKER 3: Traini. BABE: T-R-A-I-N-I. 2 LINDA: Augustina Traini. BABE: This comes out of that because [unintelligible - 00:02:01] that's part of the book [unintelligible - 00:02:05]. SPEAKER 3: Babe, you're going to have to do this because -- I'm sorry, I have a class. I'm teaching down the college, so… BABE: What was that last one? LINDA: Your children, the names of your children. BABE: Okay, Linda… LINDA: Another Linda. BABE: And Barry David. LINDA: And Barry David. Residential history. Now, you lived on Grove Avenue. BABE: The different places we lived? Well, we started in Lincoln Terrace where I was born, and Miller Street, [Union] Street. After Union Street we went to Sterling, Westminster, to Grove Avenue, and then over here. LINDA: Norfolk, okay. BABE: I missed one, Litchfield Street. LINDA: Where was that at? BABE: That would before Union. LINDA: Litchfield? BABE: Litchfield. Is it recording now? LINDA: Yes. BABE: Then I can't joke as I go on. LINDA: Oh, you can joke. I just wanted to make sure that… BABE: Had I graduated it would've been the class of '40. LINDA: Okay. Work history. What did you do? Your father? BABE: What did I do? I started with contracting with my father. My father was a contractor, so I fit in that very good. And then I was self-employed in the following businesses: Babe's Ice Cream, Dennison Motel, West [unintelligible - 00:04:06] Motel, and Babe's Miniature Golf, subdivision of the real estate [unintelligible - 00:04:07] houses. LINDA: Subdivision of real estate? For housing? 3 BABE: Mm-hmm. That's all I did. LINDA: What about Blocks? BABE: Yes, true. That was another corporation. These were all my own. Blocks was a corporate… LINDA: That was with your father? SPEAKER 3: At least she remembered. LINDA: Contracting with father, Blocks -- was that the name of it? BABE: Well, Blocks was the name of the four brothers. SPEAKER 3: It's a great thing you guys are doing, you know. I'm so glad you got that older woman, that 100 year old lady, 106. Thank God you got her before she went. LINDA: We got a little bit. You didn't get to see her [unintelligible - 00:05:09]. SPEAKER 3: Not me. It was someone who was working before. BABE: To show that we're not always hiding. That first sheet down there, what's that say? SPEAKER 3: This one? BABE: Yeah. SPEAKER 3: The Joy of Growing Up Italian? BABE: No, no, the one above it. SPEAKER 3: American? BABE: No, what's the next one you have there? SPEAKER 3: This one, the Americans? BABE: Oh, that's what you had. [Unintelligible - 00:05:26] LINDA: Babe, my next question here is St. Anne the Church, and that's St. Anna. You always belonged to St. Anna Church? BABE: Off and on. LINDA: Off and on. SPEAKER 3: Yeah. BABE: And now it's off. SPEAKER 3: I'm just going to say bye. And I'll see you. LINDA: Good luck. Nice meeting you. [Unintelligible - 00:05:58] 4 BABE: It was a pleasure. SPEAKER 3: I got pineapples for my still life. LINDA: You're going to paint still life? SPEAKER 3: No, they're drawing. It's a drawing class that I'm taking [unintelligible - 00:06:05]. BABE: Before -- do you want to shut it for just a minute? SPEAKER 3: Not on there, so… LINDA: Thank you, Ann. I would have checked. Okay, we have to start again. I'm Linda Rosenblum with the Center for Italian Culture. It's Tuesday, October 30th at 1:20 p.m. We're with Babe Pellechia, and Rosa Farrell is with me, and we're at his home at 27 North Fourth Drive in Leominster. Hi, Babe. Thanks for letting us come and interview you. I thought that you could tell me a little bit about your parents first. Are they the ones that came to Leominster? BABE: Yes. My father came to Leominster in 1906, and… how far do you want me to expand on that? What he did? LINDA: Sure. Well, first of all, where did he immigrate from? BABE: From Rome. LINDA: Rome? Did he travel with your mother? BABE: No, she came in 1909. LINDA: Okay. Who did he travel with? BABE: He just came on his own, I believe, at that time or whatever, people were coming. He left from Roma and landed in New York then came to Leominster. LINDA: Do you know why he came to Leominster? BABE: You know, that's one of the questions we never asked him, and I'm still trying to find out why he came to Leominster. It must be because of friends; that's where most of them was. You know, there was quite a colony of the Santa Maria Del Combo, and that's from the section of Italy where they came from. So it could have been from other friends where he… 5 LINDA: What do you call that, Santa Maria? ROSA: Del Campo. Santa Maria Del Campo. BABE: It's an Italian organization. ROSA: The particular region in Italy. LINDA: So, close to Rome? BABE: It's south of Rome. It's actually -- El Vita, and [unintelligible - 00:08:00]… which is part of -- give me a minute. My notes over there, please, these little papers here. It's [unintelligible - 00:08:17] Costa Lata. C-O-S-T-A, L-A-T-A, I believe it is. And that's where most of them came from. LINDA: And I had just read in some of the papers over here that he studied industrial agriculture when he was in Rome? Did you know that? BABE: He was a farmer, whatever that may mean. You know, like I say, [unintelligible - 00:08:41]… authority, and that sometimes these things happen like a good friend of ours that was a garbage collector, and he did wonderful things. The city of New York gave him an award, and they said he is a sanitation engineer. And the guy got up and says I am a garbage collector. So I don't think he did much studying at that age because there was -- things were pretty rough there in Italy. LINDA: Did he ever tell you any stories of Italy? BABE: Oh yes. LINDA: Would you like to share some? BABE: Well, he would say the way they used to work and so forth, and their living conditions, which was pretty rough at that time. That was the reason why they came here. Of course, supposedly our roads were paved with gold, and that's out there. But he was always a very hard worker and always wanted to do more, learn more, do more, which he did do in his life. Like the first thing he did when he came in to Leominster was he headed down to Leominster Button Company, which is near, 305 Whitney Street, and they're called [unintelligible - 00:10:01] now. And he was a rubber of buttons and combs. They used ashes, and it's surprising that 6 they [unintelligible - 00:10:11] health in that year one of the filthiest jobs that -- the men worked, and this is outlined -- let's see, this is put out by the Board of Health of Massachusetts. LINDA: So he was called a rubber? BABE: Mm-hmm. LINDA: Did you remember him explaining what he did? BABE: Well, what it is, you take the buttons or the combs or whatever they're working on [unintelligible - 00:10:37] was turtle, made from turtle then [unintelligible - 00:10:39], and what the ashes and what the wheels going at the RPMs that it does go, and the water, that polishes up, really polish it. But of course if you got water and ashes and a wheel going you know what that does to the person, and that's what he did for a few years. Surprisingly though in 1914 he sold that fine ashes -- this was a business for him. LINDA: So he realized that there was a use for that ash. BABE: Mm-hmm, and they got him out of that filthy working conditions. LINDA: I'm wondering what does an ash dealer mean? What would he do with the ashes? BABE: You go around and pick up the ashes from people's home, 10 cents a barrel, bring them down and screen it through a screen that water won't go through, and that's what they used for rubbing. That's the compound that they used for rubbing these plastic -- not plastic but the horns or hooks or whatever they were doing. LINDA: Did he get that idea from someone else, to go and collect the ash? BABE: Well, he got the idea from being in business. He got some wagons to collect the ashes, which were -- and the rubber district was a good business at the time, and then he felt that he had that, why not screen the ashes and sell it to the industries, which he did. Another byproduct of that too that the -- when you screen the ashes you always get the coal that never burnt, and half of Lincoln Terrace was the Italian Colony. He used to go down and pick up the coal, and it kept a lot of people warm up there 7 at that time, so that they would go down -- it was on Middle Street where they did that. So [unintelligible - 00:12:33] he helped out a lot of people by letting them go and they go through these screenings and pick out all the little black diamond gold that heats the house, and that was it. LINDA: So this 75 Lincoln Terrace, was that where you lived, or … BABE: That's where I was born, and that's where we lived at the time. LINDA: So he actually -- I just want to make sure that we get this on tape, so sorry to keep asking you… BABE: That's all right. LINDA: It's an old art, and it's not easily explainable. So he would go around to people's homes, or… BABE: Yes. Because everybody burnt coal in those days. You'd call up and you'd go there and then take the barrels out where -- which as he said was very, very heavy, because you'd either have to go up the stairs if they didn't have an outside door or to the bulkhead or something like that, and he aggravated at some people to get more ashes in the barrel [unintelligible - 00:13:26]. And so that's more weight, and then you couldn't screen it. Other than that he had the horse and wagons, put them on, bring them down -- the screening plant was on Millet Street, which is just off of Lincoln Terrace, and there he would screen what he picked up from the people's homes and separate it and sell the extra fine screened ashes to industry. And he shipped it to a few places all over the United States at the time. LINDA: Where did he get the money to begin this type of a business? BABE: By what most foreigners other than Puerto Ricans, saved their money [unintelligible - 00:14:09] saved their money and do it that way. LINDA: So at this time was he married? BABE: Probably should strike that out. That isn't too nice to say, but it's already on tape. 8 LINDA: Well, it's going to be edited. BABE: Okay. LINDA: What did I ask -- was he married to your mother by this time? BABE: Oh yes, he married my mother in 19… I'll put my glasses on. It would help, wouldn't it? LINDA: Okay, but we can figure out the dates later. BABE: Hmm? LINDA: We can figure out the dates later. BABE: Okay. LINDA: So we'll figure it out. So can you tell me a little bit about growing up on Lincoln Terrace? BABE: It's a good thing that we didn't know better. We enjoyed ourselves. It was a happy life and so forth, but I just wonder what would happen today if children had to go through what we did. Our fun would be getting in a sandbank and digging holes and whatever we could find, cups and make objects out of it. We'd play baseball. Whoever had the baseball and the bat would be the one that would pick the teams and when we'd play and how we'd play. And it was -- on today's standard it was really very, very rough living at the time. We had no entertainment to speak of. We hardly go to movies only it was only a nickel to go to the Gem Theater; we didn't get there too often. And the main highlight, or one of them, was at Christmastime at the -- one thing my father would do, he did everything for Christmas. You know, for food and things like that. And one of the big games as I remember would be getting the table like this and putting sawdust on it, and he'd hide coins in the sawdust, and you each had a shape to pick out a shape where you'd want hoping to get more coins than your brothers and sisters and so forth. So that was one of the fun things that we did. 9 But myself as I grew up I always had a tendency to follow him and get involved with his work. By that time [unintelligible - 00:16:36] he was in the contracting. He was more doing contracting at that time, became a contractor. So I always followed him around on jobs and things like that. So I learned more. I think even for myself I think I grew up real fast as far as a youngster. LINDA: Is that partly because you were the seventh son? BABE: No, because that's what I wanted to do. LINDA: Explain to me though what your name means again. BABE: Settmio is seven in Italian, and that's what it means. It's just that the Sette is seven, and that's where the name comes from. LINDA: So I forgot now. You're the seventh son or seventh child? BABE: Seventh son in rotation. LINDA: And how many sisters? BABE: Out of eleven. There was three girls in the family. LINDA: So by the time you came around your family already had six boys? BABE: Yes. I was the seventh and the last boy in the family. LINDA: So how were your brothers' lives different than yours? Were they harder? Were they… BABE: Oh yes. Well, my oldest brother was quite active in the business and so forth. He did all that. But then my next brother was a -- he worked very, very hard, and entertainment was out as far as that got. No vacations and things like that. It was strictly, as I remember it, when -- don't forget I'm entering about the time, well, 8 years old and that was the beginning of the Great Depression. I remember that quite well. The families were living on $12 a week, quite a few of them, which is what the welfare would give you. LINDA: So during the Depression your father was working? BABE: Whenever [unintelligible - 00:18:44] work. Yeah, he was doing contracting, whatever work he could get. On one job he was a supervisor for doing some work at city hall, and this is choosy but you have to do it 10 by the WPA program at the time. And to do a [unintelligible - 00:19:02] for city hall you did it at the time but they send them 30 men. You know, other people that were on the WPA, and they were on top of one another so my father had to let them be -- he had them closing doors, open doors and sweeping, everything but working because they were all in one another's way. But he was a supervisor at that time. But he did work like that there and then we plowed snow in the wintertime—there was income from plowing the snow, keeping the truck busy. Then he did odd jobs as they came up, but nothing -- it was a tough time. To backtrack, my father was very, very successful up until 1929. He owned 33 houses, and one by one he lost them all because people didn't have money to pay the rent and the banks wanted their money and they would just keep taking the house. You know, the foreclosing, keep doing that. LINDA: So he owned 33 homes and he lost every single one? BABE: All but the one we were living in. LINDA: Oh. BABE: Yeah. LINDA: How did he afford to buy 33 houses? BABE: Because he got to be a good-sized contractor. Like he built – he had the contract for all the concrete work in the Leominster post office, which was quite a job in those days. In 1926 he built the Main Street garage down on -- he did the fence around St. [Lido's] cemetery, which is quite a sizeable job, and he built numerous homes. In those days the first homes he built, regular homes like on Lincoln Terrace, there's probably eight homes up there that he built and was sold for the big sum of $2,800. LINDA: Wow. BABE: That's what they were at that time. In fact, numerous times, her dad would work for my father on his trade. You know, blocks and bricks, plastering 11 so that he and [unintelligible - 00:21:22], whenever they had a job that required brickwork and plaster and so forth, they were the first two that he called to do the work. So you see we would all get things first class with first-class people. But he couldn't -- the Depression was too much for everybody at that time, not only him. LINDA: Before we go on, let's back up a little bit. He came to this country, he started -- he used ash to rub buttons et cetera, then he opened his own business selling ash. BABE: He started that, yeah. LINDA: Right. So what kind of time frame are we talking about? BABE: I beg your pardon? LINDA: What's the time frame that we're talking about? BABE: [Unintelligible - 00:22:05] LINDA: Where was it, 1914? BABE: Yeah. LINDA: So he was selling ash in 1914, and then he went into the construction business? BABE: I can give you year by year. Let me show you. See, this is the -- you know, all the concrete work on this job there's his -- do you see that there on the box [unintelligible - 00:22:27] and Company? LINDA: Mm-hmm. Oh that's interesting. That's in '29, so this was a bad time. BABE: No, that was the good time; the beginning of the bad started right after that. So that the -- well, he worked the button shop, at Leominster Button… then he -- let's see as we go along here. Okay, now in 1913 he put a grocery store in the house. LINDA: He put a grocery store in your house? BABE: Well, [unintelligible - 00:23:14] to sell groceries, yeah. LINDA: So at 75 Lincoln Terrace? BABE: Yeah, that's still 75 Lincoln Terrace. And then of course he got both here the ashes and the grocery that he did. LINDA: So who's running the grocery store? 12 BABE: My mother. LINDA: Oh, was it your mother? BABE: Yeah. It's just on Lincoln Terrace a small street though, there wasn't -- no store, like you think of stores today. And it keeps on changing. Now right now, then in 1916, he added trucking to that too. LINDA: Trucking? So that's when he's an ash dealer though? BABE: No, he started with regular trucking after that. Sand and gravel and so forth at that time. LINDA: So again, he'd buy the sand and gravel, and then… BABE: No, we had our own pit. LINDA: You had your own pit? BABE: Yeah. He owned the land down on Miller Street, which was back in there. LINDA: So at least we understand the chronological. BABE: Hmm? LINDA: At least we understand it a little bit more, I think. I was going from the ash business right to building. BABE: [Unintelligible - 00:24:43]. LINDA: That makes more sense. We get into trucking, gravel and sand, and then construction. And he would build these buildings himself? BABE: He did all kinds of construction work. He even built the 38 -- he had the contract for the bridge on [unintelligible - 00:25:05] Street in Pittsburgh, which was Route 2A at the time. ROSA: He put the sand and the gravel and the ashes. Didn't he make his own blocks, make blocks for construction? BABE: Started making blocks around 1920. That was part of the… LINDA: So he would use the materials that he was gathering or buying and selling? So who would he sell the blocks to? Or would he use the blocks for his own building? BABE: He would use the blocks or sell them to whoever needed them. LINDA: And how would he make the blocks? 13 BABE: From our own pit, with the sand and gravel we had there on North Smith. He would make the blocks at that time. LINDA: Was it a mold, or did people do them… BABE: It's a machine, the machine that the mold would take care of it. LINDA: What was the name of the construction company? BABE: Pellechia and Company. LINDA: Pellechia? Did they have many people working? BABE: At some times he had quite a few people. LINDA: You don't have to worry so much about those dates, because I can look through that after. I'm just trying to understand how someone comes here from nothing and owns 33 homes. BABE: It was 1925. LINDA: Sand and gravel, ashes and store. So he goes from his buggy to his truck. Now, who's Charles? BABE: That's my oldest brother. LINDA: Your oldest brother. Okay, so your brothers went into business with him? BABE: Yep. LINDA: All six of them? BABE: We all worked for him. We all worked for him. We built a lot of gas stations, too. We had quite a team. Because amongst the team there was my father, who strictly did supervisory work, figured the job and things like that. And then we had Charlie, who was [unintelligible - 00:27:09] equipment as well as piping and so forth; Red was a great laborer; Rico was a carpenter first class; I was a mason, but what I picked -- I went to trade school to be a mason, you know. So when we would get on a job we were pretty much able to do quite a bit of it ourselves. LINDA: Now, who's Red and Rico? Are those brothers? Red and Rico? BABE: Brothers. LINDA: So those are nicknames? BABE: Mm-hmm. LINDA: For who? 14 BABE: Well, DeMazzio and Enrico. LINDA: And where did you get your nickname? BABE: Babe? After 11 kids it's time to call somebody Babe. No, my sister Lena gave it to me as she said when I was a baby at that time. LINDA: So how did your brother Red learn how to build pipe for -- what did you say that he did? BABE: When you run a gas station there's a lot of pipings involved. You know, water and gasoline and so forth. That was how he -- my brother Red was a hard worker and the one that never asked for too much and always -- education-wise Red was very, very limited. In fact, one of the side stories on that is he couldn't learn his general orders in the Army, and as a result of it, on his record, they said he would never be anything other than a private, and he couldn't get any Class A pass. So they went overseas, and he had two companies that he was in that were completely all injured or so forth, and he became the top sergeant of the whole group. So he knew what to do when it was important. He had the smarts for that, but as far as the learning he just didn't have the ability to learn. LINDA: So, how did you all learn and know -- was it, were you apprenticed? Did you have any kind of… BABE: No, no you just learned from one another. That's how [unintelligible - 00:29:19] families just keep going, and it was just, you know, you started off -- and our father knew what was what and we picked it up real fast and just kept going on it. LINDA: Can you tell me or share with me an early experience of working with your father? BABE: Well, I just started, just jumped and started doing it. In fact, I was 15 years old and I built the gas station on the corner of Walnut and Main Street in Leominster. I was supervisor and so forth because they had other jobs, but it all came natural. I just enjoyed it and I just did it. In fact, 15 when I was with the trade school, at the end of the school year I was in the brick mason department, and the instructor told me, "Don't come back; you're wasting your time." LINDA: Wow. And is that why you didn't go back? BABE: Well, I had to go to work. LINDA: Well, bring me back though to a day when you're working with your father. What was it like? Did you all kind of disperse and go to different jobs? BABE: Go to different jobs. He never drove, so one of us had to drive him. One thing about him he was very honest, and he was very thorough. In fact whether we were doing a job contractor or day work he would even tell us, you do the same thing whether it's day work or contract, even if you lose money. So you know, with a bringing up like that, you can't go wrong. So of course when I was very young and we were doing a lawn on Berne Avenue, and we had the big roll that you use to roll with, and I was very young and the roll was banking, and I'll never forget I came close to the bank and I couldn't hold the roll, and it went down and right through a flower garden. That was one of the unpleasant days. [Unintelligible - 00:31:33] let me know that I did wrong. He never hit us or anything like that. But I was worried for a while on that score. But then I'd go figure jobs and then he'd take me with him, because I'm the one that probably liked it the most and did it the most. That was good days. I enjoyed it. I never resented -- I think he taught us an awful lot, so we couldn't lose with that combination. And with a mother that would watch us like we're all just a baby -- whether you're six years old or 40 years old, she wouldn't go to sleep until you were in the house. It was good times under the conditions. As I said though, we didn't know better. If I did that like -- I know that many a times on the job when things 16 were that the -- come time to eat and all we had the money for was probably a cheese sandwich or something like, that you know, just limited, which is -- my son now later on was putting in overhead doors, he had a business he did that, and he was developing by the South Shore there and he came home and he said, "Dad, you know I forgot my money today," he says, "I didn't eat." "What do you mean you didn't have no money at all?" He said "Well, I only had a dollar." I said, "You know, you still could have had a cheese sandwich." He said, "Dad, those days are gone." So that's the difference. LINDA: So, when you'd go with your father to figure jobs you said, did someone call him? Not call him probably, but contact him to build something? BABE: Yeah, people would call from his advertisement. He did advertise, and they'd call him too. You know, a lot of people wanted bids; you have to bid it. So I'd go with him a lot of times and do the bidding and help him do the bidding and so forth. As I grew older. LINDA: So would he write a contract out and then have a company sign it, or…? BABE: Most of the time you just did it with the individual, it was all by -- in those days everything was with a good shake hand, which they meant. Very rarely was there a contract drawn up. Unless it was a big job, and then they'd have that. LINDA: And who was his competitor? BABE: A lot of competitors. There was a lot of competitors. Must have been -- Leominster probably had about 15 to 20 contractors at the time when it got to contracting. LINDA: Were there any other Italians? BABE: Oh yeah. There was probably half a dozen or so I think Italians. LINDA: Did your father apprentice anyone? Did anyone begin working with him and then venture out on their own? BABE: Well, we wouldn't call it apprentice. They just did that, which is the American way to do things. You never met anybody better than 17 themselves, so that -- yeah, we had somebody. I mean, that never bothered him. LINDA: How long did your father do this kind of work? BABE: Until he retired at about age -- he stopped working I think at about age 60. LINDA: And did the company survive? Did the sons take it over? BABE: Well, what happened, we kept the thing going quite a while. Even by that time, the brothers, we went into the manufacturing of concrete blocks on a real production method. We used to manufacture quite a few a day, and that became our sole business then. LINDA: So tell me about that then. BABE: Well, we came back from the Army, and with the -- three of us were veterans, and we got a loan from the government on the G.I. Bill, and we bought this production machinery and put up a whole plant and went into manufacturing of concrete blocks all type on full production. We used to make at that time about 4,000 blocks a day and get out -- plus the building supplies that went with it. And my father first saw [unintelligible - 00:36:15] he gave us the land and he also would watch the building of it when we did that. That was in 1945. In 1946 we started selling the blocks from our new plant. LINDA: And what was the name of the company? BABE: Blocks Incorporated. LINDA: Blocks Incorporated. And you and your three brothers started… BABE: And myself yeah. [Unintelligible - 00:36:42] Well, there were three veterans, but then one wasn't there. One didn't go into the Army and he was part of the corporation. LINDA: So four brothers plus yourself? BABE: No, four brothers. LINDA: Oh, four brothers. Three [unintelligible - 00:36:55]. So you would make these blocks and then sell them to… BABE: To whoever wanted to buy them. LINDA: Do you have advertisement for that company too? 18 BABE: Yeah. LINDA: Good. And how long did you do this? BABE: We did it up until 1979. LINDA: Oh, so what happened to the business? BABE: Well, at the age of all of us at that time it was time to liquidate it, and we did. We just sold off the -- we had an auction for the equipment, we sold the real estate, and by that time we were all -- other than myself all my brothers were ready to retire. Well, one other brother, the one next older to me, he had passed away. So it was just the two oldest brothers, and it was too much at that time to run the business of that, because we built another plant after that. The original plant was at -- our second plant we were doing 8,000 a day, so -- but it's, it was competitive, and getting out to sell them and everything else, it was quite a job. So I decided -- well, what happened was actually while I was out doing all my things at the time, I left. I was still part owner, but I left to do my motels and everything else with it, and they did get in trouble financially. And I went in and helped them straighten it out again, and when we straightened it out. That's when I told them we're selling the business, and so that's what we did. So we sold it in good graces [unintelligible - 00:38:47]. LINDA: So did any of your sons -- well, you have one son, but you must have some nephews. They didn't want to take over the business? BABE: We tried and it didn't work out. My son actually went to college and so forth, so he didn't fit into that. Then my -- there weren't too many boys in the family [unintelligible - 00:39:12], and Red had two boys, and one didn't want nothing to do with it all, and the other tried and he didn't like it. So it really was limited as to who could run it after that. LINDA: Now, did you sell the blocks locally or out of state, too? BABE: Well, out of state, New Hampshire, we sell New Hampshire. And we made a special block that we did one delivery in New York City with a special block, but we also had -- my brother had invented a new face for the blocks, and the -- it was a glazed block, and we did manufacture them, 19 and there are three school in Leominster have them. The Army has it in Leominster, and we sold a school in Gill, Mass. and [unintelligible - 00:40:07] and in Worcester, so that we did do quite well with that glazed block, which did very, very good. But like I say, age probably got that business why we finally sold it. LINDA: So the blocks though were they pretty standard size? BABE: They were all standard. LINDA: And then it only changed when your brother invented the glaze? BABE: Well, they were a standard block; it was just something added to it. LINDA: Added. Did he patent that invention? BABE: We worked on patenting it, but surprisingly when you patent something, there's always something close to it. In other words they did a whole lot of research on it and we didn't think it was patentable at the end, because the concrete goes way back year and years and years, and there's always somebody that did something close to it that you -- it just wasn't patentable. LINDA: So how did he develop the glaze? Do you know? BABE: Just working at it. In other words he just -- that was Joe, and Joe was the one in the family that was probably ahead on thinking of doing things and so forth. He was the one that always experimented, in other words, come up with ideas of doing special things. LINDA: So during the time as you're part owner of this company, you did other things. Can you explain? BABE: Did he do other things? LINDA: Yes. BABE: Yes, I did all those things that you wrote down in the book there. There were a few of them. LINDA: Yeah, I know. But could you explain some of them? BABE: Okay. What do you want me to start off? Which one, the first one, the ice cream place? 20 LINDA: Is that the first one that you started? BABE: Maybe I had a little of father in me that you do different things, you know. I went to an auction, and they had an ice cream machine, a brand new one, at the auction for sale, and I bought it for $1,000. And before I left, the salesman that sold it from the Mills Company came there and he found out that I bought it, and he offered me $1,500 for it. The minute he said that I immediately said if this thing is worth $1,500 to the salesman, I'm going to see what this machine will do. And I built an ice cream place around it. That was the beginning of Babe's Ice Cream at the time. LINDA: And where was that located? BABE: On Route 12. LINDA: Route 12. BABE: [Unintelligible - 00:42:44] started that, which is very interesting. We were going to open up on July 4th, and this was in 1950. On July 2nd it was one of those hot, miserable days, miserable, real miserable, [unintelligible - 00:42:56]. And this busload pulls in. There was 38 people on the bus, and one came out. They were monks from Rhode Island of the Vow of Silence, and one came in and he said could he please have 38 glasses of water. So my wife and I packed up 38 sandwiches, 38 ice creams, 38 cold drinks, and the bus leaves. And as the bus is going out of the circular driveway, there's a bus leaving, people just funneled in. And of course I knew most of them, and they said, "Babe, how can you be so lucky that you aren't even open and you get them by the busload?" not knowing what happened. And I said I hope I don't get too many busloads, I don't want to close before I get -- so that's how we started that there. But it growed real fast after that, just kept on growing and growing and growing. It meant nothing to sell a thousand ice cream cones on a Sunday afternoon. LINDA: So you knew nothing about ice cream? 21 BABE: I knew nothing about ice cream. I knew nothing about motels, and I built a motel and ran that. I bought another motel and ran that. But the -- I didn't know anything about subdivisions, but I did that. I think a lot of my father's in me. In other words, you just keep going. As long as you do what's right, work hard, you accomplish it. In other words I won't take no for an answer when it comes to trying to do business. Because I've had people, when I went into the [unintelligible - 00:44:41] and doing hardware, I didn't mention that one. When we were doing hardware, in other words it was on the wholesale level to sell to contractors. I did that, and that was very, very difficult because they felt that I should have went to school, you know, because you got to know what hardware's proper for certain jobs. You've got to know your fire codes and so forth. And a lot of people in the beginning wouldn't sell me. They said in other words we don't want to sell to you, you do things wrong and it could come back to us. So I made it clear to them if I got to go from here to California I'm going into the business and I'm going to buy the stuff. You're either going to sell it to me or somebody else is going to sell it to me. And what that did, I got them, built up that business, which was real good. So I just did it. I think maybe I was just blind. I just went into some of these things. We got kind of carried away. We're supposed to be talking on the Italian Colony, aren't we? ROSA: This is all part of that. LINDA: This is all part of it. But as far as getting the ice cream machine and maybe the motel, were you just in the right place at the right time? Just kind of… BABE: That's probably the story of my life, yeah. I think that -- I really believe the gift of the seventh son really played a part on me. Because everything always works out. 22 LINDA: So would you like to tell us a little more about Lincoln Terrace? You're the first person I've interviewed, I'm thinking, isn't it true that grew up on Lincoln Terrace? BABE: You read this book? LINDA: I've looked at it. I haven't finished it. BABE: You haven't finished it? LINDA: No. BABE: Our family's mentioned in that quite a few times. But first of all he just about hit it on the way it was, you know. It was close-knit, Lincoln Terrace, and it was different than what today is. If you did something wrong and somebody scolded you and you went back and told your parents that the neighbor or whoever it was did this to you, you would get a call down again from him. It isn't that knock at the door saying what -- like today, you got assault and battery like that. In other words, they all watched one another. It was really a family unit up there. So you couldn't do anything wrong, and if anybody came on the street that wasn't part of the street, everybody knew about it and they watched them. So it was quite a neighborhood, it really was. And like I say, we enjoyed the -- now, the early part of it is I can look the -- they all had gardens the way they all had pigs in the back of the house, and when the fall of the year come they would all slaughter and they'd all help one another. I got that on film by the way, 8 mm. LINDA: What, the slaughtering the pigs? BABE: Yeah. LINDA: Oh, that's interesting. Now, was there a smokehouse? BABE: No. They did things themselves. They take the hams and they make the prosciutto out of those. You know how they do that? LINDA: Nuh-uh. BABE: Actually, they take the hind of the pig, and they really salt it and pepper it, all that it will take, and then they put it in most cases in the cellar up 23 against some beam or another beam, and then with a hydraulic jack or whatever kind of a jack, they keep squeezing it until the ham starts this big until it [unintelligible - 00:48:37] that big, but the salt and the pepper is actually curing it out. You heard of that, did you? No? So they did that. They made the meat, they made the sausages. Very few people used to cook the blood. We never did that, but a few of them did and make the… use that. But the whole pork chops, the whole thing, they saved every bit of it. LINDA: Now, did most people have a pig? BABE: In Lincoln Terrace they did. LINDA: They did. BABE: Yep, in those days. LINDA: So they'd all get together on one day and … BABE: They always worked together. Helped one another do things. LINDA: Was that day called something in particular? BABE: No. LINDA: No. BABE: No, and then like the -- I got a large grapevine. See, the whole hill did [unintelligible - 00:49:37] grape used to make his own wine. Then they all had big gardens. And another thing the Italian women up on Lincoln Terrace, on tomato time they would actually make tomato paste. I don't know if you ever saw that. They would have all these boards of pine nice and clean, they spread all the tomato on it, and then put one of those nets on it that they used to cover babies in a carriage to keep the flies out and so forth. And just by working that they made their own tomato paste. And they'd do all different things like that, you know, which they don't do today. It's easier to go to the store today and buy it. 24 LINDA: So when they slaughtered the pig and they made the prosciutto and et cetera… BABE: [Unintelligible - 00:50:24]. LINDA: When they slaughtered the pig, how did they store the -- how did they store what they had made? BABE: Mostly in the cellar. The meats [unintelligible - 00:50:34] like they'd make the sausage and they'd hang them up to dry. They had them covered and they'd hang them up to dry, and they would dry until they dried out with the [unintelligible - 00:50:45] it was all ice boxes what they had then, you know. But they'd have a place in the cellar which was damp enough or so forth that would last -- none of it wasted; they certainly ate it all before anything got to be wasted. LINDA: Was there any trading between families? BABE: I wouldn't say so, no. They had it all. They would give it to somebody like that, but there wouldn't be any trading. If somebody needed something, they would give it to them. LINDA: For some reason I can't remember what you call this, but when you dig out, let's say, a little hill when you keep food in it, what is that called? BABE: They didn't do that. They had it all in the cellar. ROSA: They just used the cellar cold. They can't do it today -- you can't do it today with the heat in the houses, but in those days the cellars were damp and cold sausages could be strung up in the rafters. And prosciutto. They made their sausages with the tubing, I remember seeing them. LINDA: Was that a long process, making the sausage? BABE: Well you got a 300-pound pig; you got a little work to do. You've got quite a bit of meat there to… ROSA: They'd grind it … LINDA: Now, was that woman's work, men's work? BABE: Oh, they all worked. The women did the cooking. They did a lot of that there, and the women probably -- some of the women would put the 25 [rosin] in the hot water to clean the hair of the animals. Hot water and rosin [unintelligible - 00:52:29] take the hair all off. LINDA: Was the skin used for anything? BABE: Yeah, they cooked that up. ROSA: Salt pork. BABE: Yeah. LINDA: So that's really what salt pork is? BABE: There was no waste. Probably threw the hoof away, didn't use that. ROSA: The head. LINDA: Did they throw the head away, or did they use part of it? BABE: Some people ate the head. Yeah some did. We didn't. ROSA: The ears, too. BABE: They all had chickens. LINDA: [Unintelligible - 00:53:05] throw the head away! BABE: And they all had chickens. In fact, my mother had her own little hobby [unintelligible - 00:53:11] times she had chickens and the eggs, and you know, feed the family, and if there's any eggs over she would sell them to the neighbor. So she would do that. My mother never learned to speak English too well even though she did the answering for my father, but it was -- my father could interpret what she would say even though she was saying it wrong. Like there was a company called Bowen and Fuller in Leominster, and my father always said this to people that they called my mother and have your husband come, we've got some deliveries to make, and she asked what company they said Bowen and Fuller. She said "Damn Fool?" He said no, Bowen and Fuller. She asked two or three times and yes. So my father came home, and she said, "Damn Fool wants you to pick up." So he knew them when he went there. The guy says, [unintelligible - 00:54:09] your message and the guy says yes. But they did understand one another. Of course the guy knew that she wasn't doing it to insult him 26 or anything. She didn't know any different on that. But she never learned the -- very, very little English. My father, working with the French people, he learned to speak French, and he learned the English right away, and of course he had the Italian. LINDA: Well, what about you and your brothers and sisters? Did you speak Italian? BABE: We understood it and so forth. They can speak it, but very [unintelligible - 00:54:50], and I can understand quite a bit what happens. Incidentally the three oldest children went to a French school at that time, and they learned French also. LINDA: What school? St. Cecelia's? BABE: St. Cecelia's, yeah. They went three years and then the French people needed a school for themselves and they transferred to St. [unintelligible - 00:55:14] school. LINDA: Now, I heard some people tell me that they weren't allowed to speak Italian in their homes after they learned English at school. Was that true for your family? BABE: Nope. No, we always spoke it. But my wife now, when she came over -- she came from Italy, and I didn't -- and when she came home with the school -- she's not from here, she's from Pennsylvania. But she refused to learn English until the teachers got -- one friendly teacher, "But why don't you want to learn?" She says, "I won't be able to speak to my mother and father then." She thought she'd lose the English. And after that day she made all kinds of honors in school. So she -- but in our house, now, my children, two of them they didn't speak -- we never spoke in Italian, but -- so we [unintelligible - 00:56:12] secret family thing when you're in front of the children, we'd speak Italian, my wife and I, not to be heard, but that's all done now because my daughter went out and became a professor of Italian history, so that brought us out. We can't even… 27 LINDA: So was it important for your family, your father and mother, for their children to assimilate, to become more American? BABE: We never discussed that. I don't think that ever came a thing -- you do the best you can do. That was about the biggest teaching that my father ever gave. Do the best you can do, stay out of trouble. And the other thing he always was a stickler for was he said you always respect authority. He said if someone does something wrong you respect it, you do it when you come home, you tell me about it, and I will take care of it. Of course it was just [unintelligible - 00:57:06] he never did anything everything after it, but meanwhile he kept peace in the family. LINDA: So he didn't want you to confront an adult; he would. BABE: Nope, and you know, in most cases you don't win with authority. You listen to it, and that's it. LINDA: So tell me about your mother. What was she like? BABE: My mother was strictly a loving for her children. She'd do anything for us. To quote my wife, which we shouldn't put on tape… LINDA: You don't want to? BABE: No, I'll tell you what my wife says about my mother. If it's not on tape. LINDA: If it's not on tape, okay. BABE: One of the things that happened though before [unintelligible - 00:57:56] we got married, my wife would go with my sister shopping and so forth. And in our house everybody -- they're all married now, but everybody would end up at the kitchen table at nighttime after the day's work, and my mother would -- you know, there was just the two of them, my mother and father at home, but there was always two or three pounds of spaghetti made, and we'd all eat there and then go home and say we're not hungry. But there was this one day we're there and my wife and my sister went shopping. They were late when they came in, so my brother-in-law and I said so let's have some fun. So the minute they came in, I says "Tina, where have you been? You know I worked all hard all day. I come home 28 and I want to eat." And so she says, "Well, we shopped." And my mother spoke up, she says, "That's not right. You got to feed your husband when he comes…" Well, then my brother-in-law to my sister says the same thing, you know. And my mother spoke up, and maybe she had something important to do. Same conversation. So -– but she was [unintelligible - 00:59:07] she was sick for a while. She had lost one eye too, and so for a while she was a -- but she could find -- after that she could find things that we couldn't, with that one eye. We would lose something and she would find it, even a pin or something like that, but… LINDA: Did she come from -- she came from Italy but differently than your father? I mean … BABE: Three years later. 1909 she came. LINDA: Did she come directly to Leominster? BABE: Well, she landed in Boston. Now, how she got there from Italy I don't have any information on that. LINDA: Do you know how your parents met each other? BABE: Probably out in the farm someplace, I would guess, because that's all they did; they were farmers. Even the woman worked the farms out there and so forth. So, a lot of them out there worked in [unintelligible - 01:00:03] actually who worked for the people that owned the land. LINDA: Where? BABE: In Italy. LINDA: Oh, they knew each other in Italy? BABE: Oh yeah. LINDA: Oh. 29 BABE: When she came here she -- well, that picture there shows her when she came in 19 -- with her children there, that's the picture when she came in 1909. LINDA: Okay. BABE: One of those. LINDA: Okay, so they knew each other in Italy? BABE: Yeah, they got married in Italy. They got married in Italy. LINDA: Then came here separately. BABE: Yes. LINDA: Not at the same time? BABE: No. LINDA: Okay, I didn't understand that. Did they have children [unintelligible - 01:00:45]? BABE: Yeah, yeah. This one here it was 1910 when she came. There was three of them. There was the three. They would be 1, 2, 3 that she came back with. Of course she came here in 1909, 1910 there was another one added at that time. LINDA: So your father came without the family first and then brought them over? BABE: They all did that. They all boarded. If you will look at the directory, they all, the Italians all boarded someplace. They -- none of them had their own home or anything like that in the beginning, so their wives came over and then they would find a place. LINDA: So growing up and you're working with your father, did you work six days a week? BABE: Sometimes seven. Not too often, but sometimes we'd have things to do and we'd do it. So in other words you have to realize when I got to the working age, I was in the Depression, actually. So you took it as you could get it as far as work is concerned. LINDA: Did you work out during the daylight hours? 30 BABE: Oh yeah. We generally got home [unintelligible - 01:02:06] unless there was an emergency job you stayed later. We'd get home about five, five thirty from a job, start at eight o'clock in the morning. LINDA: And then you would eat dinner with your parents? BABE: Mm-hmm. LINDA: And who made the dinner? BABE: My mother. LINDA: What about your sisters? BABE: They were married by that time. Don't forget, they were completely -- they were much older than I was, so they were -- by the time that I started eating, you know, they were married. LINDA: So tell me what kind of things you ate. The types of things your mother made. BABE: All the good things that I like. LINDA: Which is what? BABE: She made spaghetti, pasta [la jour], even polenta. I know you know what that is. LINDA: Mm-hmm. BABE: In those days that was a poor man's meal. Today you go in restaurants you pay a fancy price for it. LINDA: I should have said no, I don't know what it is so you can explain to us on tape. I'll have to get that sometime. So what's polenta? BABE: Lentils, I like lentils. She used to make that, different soups. I'm sorry, what did you say? LINDA: What's polenta? What is it? BABE: Corn -- mush is what it is, actually. LINDA: How would she serve that? BABE: We'd put it on the board, on the table, you spread it all over a board, and then what we'd do, the fun we'd have is try to decide what we're going to carve, and everybody would just carve whatever shape we wanted. And another thing she'd do too at times would be so we would eat all of it, 31 she'd put meat in the middle, and you had to work your way. If you didn't work your way you wouldn't get to the meat. You know, whether it was a meatball a piece of pork chop something like that. LINDA: So it was kind of polite eating. You eat from the outside in? You don't just dig in. BABE: No, no you have to work your way in, clean the road as you go. But on holidays, surprisingly, my father would do the cooking. I know on Easter especially he would make the ham and fix it all up and put the garlic in it and so forth. He always did that. LINDA: Now, during the Depression, did you eat meat at all, or was that really a luxury? BABE: It was a luxury. LINDA: Were different foods prepared on a Sunday compared to the rest of the week? BABE: Yes, Sunday you would have a bigger meal. And during the height of the Depression, we'd probably get oranges at Christmastime, maybe a banana at Christmastime. The rest of the year you didn't need it, so you didn't get it. LINDA: Do you want to go back to your jobs then? BABE: My jobs? LINDA: Yeah, jobs. BABE: Such as? LINDA: Or your companies or your interests. Like the motels. How did you get involved in the motels? BABE: Well, we went out to get some materials. It was in New Jersey, picking up some pallets for the block plant at that time, and it was next door to a motel, the pallets and so forth, and I started talking to the fellow and so forth. And [unintelligible - 01:05:44] the business, and now I had the ice cream place, I had the tourist stopping, so the brain just clicked in it would be nice to have a motel in Leominster. We had none. That was the first one. So that's what I did. I built a motel. 32 LINDA: Where did you build it? BABE: On Route 12 right next to my ice cream place. So that -- I didn't have any money at that time, so that was a problem. I went to the bank, it was the first bank I went to, told them I wanted $25,000, to borrow $25,000, said what are you going to do and I explained. They said you can't do that for that price. I said oh yes, I can I buy all my materials wholesale, and I do all the work myself. And he said well, in that case you have to give me a list of what it's going to cost you because I can only loan you 80 percent of what you're going to pay. So my answer to him was you really don't want me to build the motel, do you? But I fought it. Like I say, I made up my mind I was going to fight it and I did, so I just kept going and we built it. LINDA: So did you end up borrowing the money from a bank? BABE: Oh yeah, I got money from a bank—not that bank though, another bank. But then I started with eight rooms and built another eight and built another eight, and then four more on that same site, and so that worked out good. That was a good business. LINDA: And you kept the ice cream business in addition? BABE: Yeah. LINDA: So who ran the motel? BABE: Hmm? LINDA: Who ran the motel? BABE: I did. There was nobody else to run it. My wife was busy with the children at that time. LINDA: I thought there were only 24 hours in a day! That's why I'm asking. BABE: Well, I still slept three hours. You get up in the morning at eight o'clock. About eight we'd go have some breakfast and then close about two o'clock. Three nights a week I'd make ice cream until about three or four o'clock in the morning. Then with the motel beside it, you get -- break up during the night, people checking in late, so that was the schedule for a number of years. 33 LINDA: Where were you living at this time? BABE: We built a house in back of the motel and ice cream place. LINDA: Okay. So did you advertise for the motel? BABE: Yeah, we did advertise on that. LINDA: So who was staying in the motel, people visiting? BABE: We had -- mostly it was a commercial motel and we had mostly salesmen, engineers, buyers. It was all very good class of business that we had, and tourists and so forth, but we had quite a reputation that we even had quite a few of the national companies that if they were within 50 miles of our place such as Gates Rubber from Colorado, Singer Sewing Machine, if any of their people were within 50 miles of our motel, we had direct billing with them, they'd stop with us. But we made it very, very comfortable for them, because we learned very early that a salesman or an engineer or anybody that's traveling alone is the most lonesome guy in the world. So the thing that we would do is if a guy comes in and he could be with the plastic industry, he's alone, somebody else we know is in the motel in the plastic business he's alone, we have them meet one another. They'd go out and from then on they'd come back, because they knew that it was always -- they were going to meet somebody there instead of just sitting in a room all night long. And we built up a wonderful business that way. In fact, even -- we had a regular customer of ours once got in an automobile accident, and he couldn't go back home and we were full, and we asked [unintelligible - 01:09:51] two people of other customers that one of our customers was in an accident and can't go home, would you mind packing up and leaving? They did. LINDA: Wow. BABE: You know, which is so unusual. We explained what it was, but even that was a family affair that they would. It was a lot of fun. We had a lot of 34 fun doing that. One of the regulars that came in would we would always be pulling jokes, stuff like -- one time he brought somebody in and my wife was in Florida with her mother at the time, so I don't know what made me do it, but this guy was saying I've got to meet your wife, I hear so much about it from the other guys. So I said, yeah, but you know, when you talk to her she's hard of hearing, so then I pick up my wife and I said this wonderful guy from Chicago is in room 9. Wonderful guy. He was doing management surveys for the [unintelligible - 01:10:58] on Adams Street. So I told Tina he's hard of hearing. So now when they come in, they're all there, because they always -- we had a lawn area that we sit at, and so I said, Tina there's the guy, so, "How are you," and they're hollering like two idiots back and forth, and everybody starts laughing. But it was good for a joke. But they all accepted it as such, and that's it. Now, the one I got to say on the ice cream place now, I'm going to take a [unintelligible - 01:11:30] had his favorite place. I gave ice cream to every church in Leominster but my own. We'll have to continue. LINDA: We were talking about you had a story about churches and giving ice cream. BABE: Yes, I gave ice cream to every church in Leominster but St. Anne's, my church. Because what would happen, even the synagogues, the Jewish would call up and they want ice cream, how much is it. And I'd say $5 a tub. When I'd bring it up I'd give them a receipted bill. My own people, when they'd call, they'd say, "Oh, we can buy it for $4.50," so I never had the opportunity to give it to them, right? LINDA: Really? BABE: That was in six years I think I gave to every church in Leominster but my own. Now, I never told them I was going to give it to them for nothing. They asked me what the price was. The price was $5 a tub. So I guess that's all right. We all still made it. 35 LINDA: How long did you keep the ice cream? BABE: From 1950 to 1958. LINDA: And what about the motel? BABE: Motel, sold that in '64. LINDA: You had two didn't you? BABE: Yep, sold the other one about the same time. The other one I bought. I didn't build the other one. LINDA: And what was that, West… BABE: West [unintelligible - 01:12:59] Motel. LINDA: Is that the one that's across from -- well, it's Sam's now -- I mean, not Sam's, Walmart. Is that the one? BABE: No, it's up further. It's at the junction of 110 and 12. LINDA: All right. So again, give me an idea of what a day was like for you when you owned both the ice cream shop and the motel. BABE: Hectic. Get up in the morning, help out at the place… you know, noon time was busy there and so forth. And then at night start checking in people at the motel, then come back and make the ice cream. Like I said, I did all my building in the wintertime, too. [Unintelligible - 01:13:48] like I built the motel myself, I did that all. And the other thing we did during that time again was one summer, which was really -- my wife got me involved, and we built -- with the people of Leominster now, they're very generous; we built a swimming pool for the Nazareth Home for Boys. So I'm the owner, I'm doing the blocks, and I'm doing all the rebuilding of it. And people always like to have fun, and I had fellows working for me, a police officer mowing my lawn at the motel and stuff. And I know that the day I laid blocks I was just about dead, and I come home and [unintelligible - 01:14:35] is really doing good you hired people to do work for you, you're getting lazy. 36 But that was all, it was a lot of work, just busy, busy. But I enjoyed it. I think someone said one time that work won't kill you, and it didn't. LINDA: It sounds like your wife was supportive. Very supportive. BABE: Yeah, she is. She did. She had to take care of the children, and she also, at the same time, she was taking care of her sister's. She was one of the waitress I had. She had to waitress, she took care of their two children too, then at night she would come up and help with serving customers. Although she was a troublemaker. She's the one that liked to joke with the customers. For example, we used to have -- a new product came out, the ketchup that you squeeze it, the pump it, they called it. On Saturday night we'd get those big gang of dancers come in, dress suits, ties. So this one guy was trying to get the ketchup on and it wouldn't work on a hamburger. We said, "Tina, why don't you throw these away? They don't work." So she says, "You don't mind if I squeeze it at you?" "Go ahead," he says, so of course, ketchup all the way down his face. She never worked on Saturdays, but one Saturday she's working and one of our good customers from Connecticut would come by every Saturday with his wife and family going to New Hampshire camping. I'm outside talking to the guys and he came out and said, "You know, I don't know who that new waitress you got, but you better fire her or you won't have no customers left." I said, "Which one?" I said, "I can't fire her, she owns it!" But it was always funny, and I think that's what kept it going. It wasn't -- we enjoyed it, and that's probably what kept us going. We didn't look at it as a job or as work. We looked at it as something to do, and we were happy while we did it. LINDA: Did you have many employees? 37 BABE: Well, probably on the weekends was the most. It was probably about eight or nine of us on a weekend working. LINDA: Working at the ice cream shop, or… BABE: As far as the motel, it only required -- two girls would work just in the morning. That was separate girls, you know. A few hours they would have the rooms all ready. Then my children, we had the miniature golf. LINDA: Oh, that's right did. You built the miniature golf next to the ice cream shop? BABE: Yeah. LINDA: Now, where did you get that idea? BABE: I saw one, and I thought it would be nice to have, so I built one. LINDA: So, again, would that be the first miniature golf place in Leominster? BABE: No, there had been one for years and years up on North Main Street behind the bowling alleys. The motel was the first one in Leominster. LINDA: Well, then tell me about building the miniature golf. You actually designed it and built it? BABE: No, I didn't design it. The people I bought the equipment from did the designing of it. But I built it, I put it in there. Everything was designed by them, and I bought all the fixtures and so forth from them. LINDA: And then your children worked there? BABE: Yeah. LINDA: So how did you and your wife feel about education for your children? BABE: We felt tops for education. We probably made a couple of mistakes educating our children. To be very honest, I think St. Ann's, my son went there, and I think that was a mistake because there was [unintelligible - 01:18:44] 60 kids in the first grade. And had he went to where I went to school, they had 11 children. It would have been almost like a private tutoring. So what we did with him to pick up, we sent him to Julie Country Day afterwards, which is a private school, and from there he went to Worcester Academy. LINDA: I guess I'm interested to know how something like that happens. 38 BABE: Like what? LINDA: Like that you went to the 9th grade, you said, and your father is an immigrant who came over here to work so hard, and you know, he may not have had much schooling, and then all of a sudden your son is going to Worcester Academy. BABE: Because I wanted him to go there. LINDA: Because you wanted him… BABE: Oh yeah. LINDA: And why did you want him… BABE: In fact, [unintelligible - 01:19:34] when people ask me what I did I say I'm a bum. And of course my son must have heard me two or three times and, I know when he was ready to go to college, he said, "Dad, I don't want to go to college. I want to be a bum." I said, "You're going to be an educated bum." And he went to college, which he did very, very good [unintelligible - 01:19:51]. But no, we felt that the he lacked the basic knowledge at the very beginning. /AT/pa/mlb/es
Not Available ; The land resource inventory of Hire Shindhogi microwatershed was conducted using village cadastral maps and IRS satellite imagery on 1:7920 scale. The false colour composites of IRS imagery were interpreted for physiography and these physiographic delineations were used as base for mapping soils. The soils were studied in several transects and a soil map was prepared with phases of soil series as mapping units. Random checks were made all over the area outside the transects to confirm and validate the soil map unit boundaries. The soil map shows the geographic distribution and extent, characteristics, classification, behavior and use potentials of the soils in the microwatershed. The present study covers an area of 526 ha in Koppal taluk and district, Karnataka. The climate is semiarid and categorized as drought - prone with an average annual rainfall of 662 mm, of which about 424 mm is received during south–west monsoon, 161 mm during north-east and the remaining 77 mm during the rest of the year. An area of about 83 per cent is covered by soils and 17 per cent by habitation and water bodies, settlements and others. The salient findings from the land resource inventory are summarized briefly below. The soils belong to 9 soil series and 16 soil phases (management units) and 5 land management units. The length of crop growing period is 200 mm/m) in available water capacity. An area of about 18 per cent has nearly level (0-1%) and 65 per cent area has very gently sloping (1-3%) lands. An area of about 44 per cent has soils that are slightly eroded (e1) and 39 per cent moderately eroded (e2) lands. An area of about 9.0) in soil reaction. The Electrical Conductivity (EC) of the soils is non-saline (0.75%) in 32 per cent area of the soils. Available phosphorus is medium (23-57 kg/ha) in entire area of about 83 per cent in the microwatershed. About 2 per cent of the soils are medium (145-337 kg/ha) and 81 per cent soils are high (>337 kg/ha) in available potassium content. Available sulphur is high (>320 ppm) in the entire area of the microwatershed. Available boron is low (0.5 ppm) in about 48 per cent area and 35 per cent are medium (0.5-1.0 ppm). Available iron is sufficient (>4.5 ppm) in 81 per cent and deficient (0.6 ppm) in about 60 per cent area. Available manganese and copper are sufficient in all the soils. The land suitability for 31 major agricultural and horticultural crops grown in the microwatershed were assessed and the areas that are highly suitable (S1) and moderately suitable (S2) are given below. It is however to be noted that a given soil may be suitable for various crops but what specific crop to be grown may be decided by the farmer looking to his capacity to invest on various inputs, marketing infrastructure, market price and finally the demand and supply position. Land suitability for various crops in the microwatershed Crop Suitability Area in ha (%) Crop Suitability Area in ha (%) Highly suitable (S1) Moderately suitable (S2) Highly suitable (S1) Moderately suitable (S2) Sorghum 70 (13) 283 (54) Sapota 18 (3) - Maize 1 (<1) 351 (67) Pomegranate 18 (3) 335 (64) Bajra 18 (3) 334 (64) Musambi 70 (13) 283 (54) Groundnut 17 (3) 57 (11) Lime 70 (13) 283 (54) Sunflower 70 (13) 283 (54) Amla 18 (3) 391 (74) Red gram 18 (3) 272 (52) Cashew 17 (3) 1 (<1) Bengalgram 52 (10) 301 (57) Jackfruit 18 (3) - Cotton 70 (13) 283 (54) Jamun 18 (3) 272 (52) Chilli 18 (3) - Custard apple 70 (13) 338 (64) Tomato 18 (3) - Tamarind 18 (3) 273 (52) Brinjal - 410 (78) Mulberry 18 (3) 207 (39) Onion - 75 (14) Marigold 18 (3) 334 (64) Bhendi - 410 (78) Chrysanthemum 18 (3) 334 (64) Drumstick 18 (3) 392 (74) Jasmine 18 (3) - Mango 18 (3) - Crossandra 18 (3) 79 (15) Guava 17 (3) 1 (<1) Apart from the individual crop suitability, a proposed crop plan has been prepared for the 5 identified LMUs by considering only the highly and moderately suitable lands for different crops and cropping systems with food, fodder, fibre and other horticulture crops that helps in maintaining productivity and ecological balance in the microwatershed. Maintaining soil-health is vital for crop production and conserve soil and land resource base for maintaining ecological balance and to mitigate climate change. For this, several ameliorative measures have been suggested for these problematic soils like saline/alkali, highly eroded, sandy soils etc. Soil and water conservation treatment plan has been prepared that would help in identifying the sites to be treated and also the type of structures required. As part of the greening programme, several tree species have been suggested to be planted in marginal and submarginal lands, field bunds and also in the hillocks, mounds and ridges. That would help in supplementing the farm income, provide fodder and fuel, and generate lot of biomass which in turn would help in maintaining the ecological balance and contribute to mitigating the climate change. SALIENT FEATURES OF THE SURVEY The results indicated that 38 farmers were sampled in Hire Shindhogi micro watershed among them 7 (18.42 %) were marginal farmers, 10 (26.32%) were small farmers, 11 (28.95 %) were semi medium farmers and 5 (13.16%) were medium farmers. Apart from these 5 (13.16%) landless farmers were also interviewed for the survey. The data indicated that there were 96 (51.06%) men and 92 (48.94%) were women among the sampled households. The average family size of marginal farmers was 5, small farmer was 5, semi medium farmer was 5, medium farmers were 6 and for landless farmers it was 4. The data indicated that 43 (22.87%) people were in 0-15 years of age, 73 (38.83%) were in 16-35 years of age, 55 (29.26 %) were in 36-60 years of age and 17 (9.04%) were above 61 years of age. The results indicated that the Hire Shindhogi had 31.38 per cent illiterates, 1.06 per cent functional literates, 33.51 per cent of them had primary school education, 5.32 per cent of them had middle school education, 13.30 per cent of them had high school education, 7.45 per cent of them had PUC education, 0.53 per cent of them had ITI, 1.60 per cent of them had degree education and 5.32 per cent of them had other education. The results indicate that, 84.21 per cent of households practicing agriculture, 5.26 per cent of the household heads were agricultural labourers and 2.63 per cent of the household heads were doing private service. The results indicate that agriculture was the major occupation for 45.21 per cent of the household members, 21.28 per cent were agricultural labourers, 0.53 percent were in government service, 2.13 per cent of them were in private sector, 22.34 per cent of them were students and 0.53 per cent were housewives. In case of landless households 30 per cent were agricultural labourers, 5 per cent were private services and 40 per cent were students. In case of marginal farmers 50 per cent were agriculturist, 21.88 percent were agricultural labour and 25 per cent were students. In case of small farmers, 54.35 per cent of the household members were practicing agriculture and 17.39 per cent of them were students. In case of semi medium farmers 45.61 per cent of the household members were practicing agriculture and 19.30 per cent of them were students. In case of medium farmers, 48.48 per cent of the household members were performing agriculture, 18.18 per cent of them were agricultural labour and 21.21 per cent of them were students. The results showed that 1.06 per cent of them participated in Sthree Shakthi Sangha, 0.53 per cent of them participated in user group and 98.40 per cent of them have not participated in any local institutions. Landless, small and medium farmers were found to have no participation in any local institutions. Marginal and semi medium farmers were found to participate in one or the other local institutions. 2 The results indicated that 73.68 per cent of the households possess Katcha house, 7.89 per cent of them possess Pucca house and 21.05 per cent of them possess Semi Pacca house. 100 percent of the landless farmers possess Katcha house. The results showed that 5.26 per cent of the households possess radio, 76.32 per cent of the households possess TV, 7.89 per cent of the households possess DVD, 42.11 per cent of the households possess Mixer grinder, 44.74 per cent of the households possess bicycle, 26.32 per cent of the households possess motor cycle, 5.26 per cent of the households possess auto, 2.63 per cent of the households possess car and 78.95 per cent of the households possess mobile phones. The results showed that the average value of radio was Rs.400, average value of television was Rs.4968, the average value of DVD/VCD Player was Rs.2333, mixer grinder was Rs.2381, Auto was Rs.42500, bicycle Rs.1323, motor cycle was Rs.33150, Car was Rs. 250000 and mobile phone was Rs.1266. The results showed that about 23.68 per cent of the households possess plough, 28.95 per cent of them possess bullock cart, 2.63 cent of the households possess seed/fertilizer drill, 10.53 cent of the households possess tractor, 23.68 per cent of the households possess sprayer, 36.84 per cent of them possess weeder, 5.26 per cent of them were possess chaff cutter and 2.63 per cent of the households possess JCB/Hitachi. The results showed that the average value of plough was Rs.1655, the average value of bullock cart was Rs. 21072, the average value of seed/Fertilizer drill Rs. 15000, the average value of tractor Rs. 375000, the average value of sprayer was Rs.2655, the average value of weeder Rs. 69, the average value of chaff cutter Rs.1800, the average value of JCB Rs.1000000 and the average value of duster was Rs. 8000. The results indicated that, 31.58 per cent of the households possess bullocks, 26.32 per cent of the households possess local cow and 2.63 per cent of the households possess crossbred cow and buffalo respectively. The data showed that, in case of marginal farmers, 33.33 per cent of the households possess bullock and 50 per cent of the households possess local cow. In case of small farmers, 20 per cent of households possess bullock and local cow and 10 per cent possess buffalo. In case of semi medium farmers, 54.55 per cent of the households possess bullock, 18.18 per cent possess local cow and 9.09 per cent possess buffalo. In medium farmers, 20 per cent of the households possess bullock and 60 per cent possess local cow. The results indicated that, average own labour men available in the micro watershed was 2, average own labour (women) available was 1.64, average hired labour (men) available was 5.03 and average hired labour (women) available was 5.36. The results indicated that, in case of marginal farmers, average own labour men available was 1.71, average own labour (women) was 1.29, average hired labour (men) was 4.57 and average hired labour (women) available was 5.43. In case of 3 small farmers, average own labour men available was 1.90, average own labour (women) was 1.80, average hired labour (men) was 4.50 and average hired labour (women) available was 4. In case of semi medium farmers, average own labour men available was 1.82, average own labour (women) was 1.55, average hired labour (men) was 6.27 and average hired labour (women) available was 7.09. In medium farmers average own labour men available was 3, average own labour (women) was 2, average hired labour (men) was 4 and average hired labour (women) available was 4.20. The results indicated that, 65.79 per cent of the household opined that hired labour was adequate and 21.05 per cent of the household opined that hired labour was inadequate. About 71.43 per cent of the marginal farmers, 80 per cent of small, 63.64 per cent of semi medium and 100 per cent of the medium have opined that the hired labour was adequate and 28.57 per cent marginal farmers, 20 per cent of small farmers and 36.36 per cent of semi medium farmers were opined that hired labour was inadequate. The results indicated that, 1 person was migrated from micro watershed that belonged to medium farmer category. Total migration in the micro watershed was only 0.53 per cent. The results indicated that, people have migrated on an average of 390 Kms and average duration was 12 months. I.e. medium farmers have migrated 390 kms and on an average for 12 months. The results indicated that, job/work was the only reason for migration for all the migrants. The results indicated that, improved quality of the life and construction of house were the positive consequences of migration. The results indicated that, households of the Hire Shindhogi micro watershed possess 36.16 ha (64.11%) of dry land and 20.24 ha (35.89%) of irrigated land. Marginal farmers possess 4.21 ha (90.43 %) of dry land and 0.45 ha (9.57%) of irrigated land. Small farmers possess 9.25 ha (84.04%) of dry land and 1.76 ha (15.96 %) of irrigated land. Semi medium farmers possess 15.01 ha (63.53%) of dry land and 8.62 ha (36.47 %) of irrigated land. Medium farmers possess 7.69 ha (44.93%) of dry land and 9.43 ha (55.07 %) of irrigated land. The results indicated that, the average value of dry land was Rs. 343378.10 and average value of irrigated was Rs. 409856.06. In case of marginal famers, the average land value was Rs. 510625 for dry land and 1122727.25 for irrigated land. In case of small famers, the average land value was Rs. 434,356.96 for dry land Rs. 512,211.99 for irrigated land. In case of semi medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 246,467.10for dry land and Rs. 406,059.19 for irrigated land. In case of medium famers, the average land value was Rs. 331500 for dry land and the average land value was Rs. 360,583.94 for irrigated land. 4 The results indicated that, there were 11 functioning and 10 defunctioning bore wells in the micro watershed. The results indicated that, bore well was the major irrigation source for 28.95 per cent of the farmers. The results indicated that on an average the depth of the bore well was 31.25 meters. The results indicated that, in case of marginal farmers there was 0. 45 ha of irrigated land, in case of small farmers there was 1.85 ha of irrigated land, semi medium farmers were having 7.81 ha of irrigated land and medium farmers were having 15.62 ha of irrigated land. On an average there were 25.72 ha of irrigated land. The results indicated that, farmers have grown Bajra (6.89 ha), Banana (0.71 ha), Bengal gram (2.85 ha), Chilly (0.45 ha), Cotton (1.01 ha), Green gram (0.83 ha), Sorghum (1.62 ha), Maize (8.12 ha), Onion (0.93 ha), Red gram (4.45 ha), Sugandaraja (0.40 ha) and Sunflower (9.51 ha) in kharif season and Bajra (0.81 ha), Bengal gram (3.29 ha), Cotton (1.21 ha), Maize (5.09 ha), Sunflower (1.23 ha) and Sorghum (16.28 ha) in Rabi season. Data showed that, marginal farmers have grown Bengal Gram, chilly, bajra, cotton, Maize and Sorghum. Small farmers have grown Bajra, Green gram, Maize, Red Gram, Sunflower, Sorghum and Bengal Gram. Semi medium farmers have grown Bajra, Banana, Cotton, Bengalgram, Maize, Redgram, Sugandaraja, Sunflower and Sorghum. Medium farmers have grown Bajra, Bengal gram, Sorghum, Maize, onion, Red gram and Sunflower. The results indicated that, the cropping intensity in Hire Shindhogi micro watershed was found to be 76.82 per cent. In case of Marginal farmers it was 87.10 per cent, for small farmers it was 100 per cent, in case of semi medium farmers it was 78.94 per cent and medium farmers had cropping intensity of 61.78 per cent. The results indicated that, only 10.53 per cent of the households have bank account and savings respectively. Among marginal farmers 28.57 percent of them possess both bank account and savings respectively. Small farmers possess 9.09 per cent of both bank account and savings correspondingly and medium farmers possess 20 of bank account and savings in that order. The results indicated that 28.57 per cent marginal farmers, 9.09 per cent of semi medium farmers and 20 per cent of medium farmers have borrowed credit from different sources. The results indicated that, 50 per cent of the households have availed loan from Grameena bank and Commercial bank respectively. The results indicated that marginal farmers have availed Rs. 27500, semi medium farmers have availed Rs. 55000 and medium farmers have availed Rs.100000. Overall average credit amount availed by households in the micro watershed is 52500. 5 The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households have borrowed loan for agriculture production from institutional source. The results indicated that, agriculture production was the main purpose for which semi medium farmers have borrowed loan from private credit. The results indicated that 100 per cent of the households have unpaid their institutional loan. Results indicated 50 percent of the households have unpaid their loan and 50 percent of the households have fully paid their private credit. The results indicated that 25 per cent of the households were opined that they were forced to sell the produce at low price to repay loan in time and 75 per cent of households were not given any opinion on institutional source of credit. The results indicated that 50 per cent of the households were opined that the rate of interest was high in non-institutional credit and 50 per cent of households were not given any opinion on non-institutional source of credit. The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for bajra was Rs. 23881.74. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 22503.93. The net income from bajra cultivation was Rs. -1377.81, thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.94. The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for maize was Rs. 30364.35. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 32931.72. The net income from maize cultivation was Rs.6626.43, thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.08. The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for sorghum was Rs. 18449.10. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 27728.81. The net income from sorghum cultivation was Rs. 9279.71. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.5. The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for bengalgram was Rs. 29334.18. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 48503.01. The net income from bengalgram cultivation was Rs. 19168.83. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.65. The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for redgram was Rs. 32495.55. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 30698.57. The net income from redgram cultivation was Rs. -1796.98. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.94. The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for cotton was Rs. 63323.50. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 50427.06. The net income from cotton cultivation was Rs. -12896.44. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:0.8. 6 The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Onion was Rs. 34570.60. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 34515.28. The net income from Onion cultivation was Rs. 55.32. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.0. The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Sunflower was Rs. 28043.53. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 73693.85. The net income from Sunflower cultivation was Rs. 45650.32. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.63. The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Banana was Rs. 25564.87. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 105858.The net income from Banana cultivation was Rs. 80293.13. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:3.41. The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Chilly was Rs. 69680.27. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 75447.27. The net income from Chilly cultivation was Rs. 5767. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:1.08. The results indicated that, the total cost of cultivation for Green gram was Rs. 26706.19. The gross income realized by the farmers was Rs. 72900.97. The net income from Green gram cultivation was Rs. 46194.78. Thus the benefit cost ratio was found to be 1:2.73. The results indicated that, 39.47 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was adequate and 7.89 per cent of the households opined that dry fodder was inadequate also the data revealed that 39.47 per cent of the farmers opined that green fodder is adequate and 7.89 per cent of the farmers opined that green fodder is inadequate. The results indicated that the average income from service/salary was Rs. 8578.95, business Rs. 5157.89, wage Rs. 4368.42, agriculture Rs. 53161.32 and non farm income Rs. 6842.11and dairy farm Rs. 5018.42. The results indicated that the average expenditure from service/salary was Rs. 2289.47, business Rs. 2631.58, wage Rs. 1552.63, agriculture Rs. 31,815.79 and dairy farm Rs. 1921.05. The results indicated that, sampled households have grown 53 coconut trees, 20 lemon trees and 1 mango tree in their field and also grown 1 coconut tree in back yard. The results indicated that, 2.63 per cent of the households are interested in growing horticultural crops which include 14.29 per cent marginal farmers. The results indicated that, households have planted 90 Neem, 8 Banyan trees and 2 people trees in their field and also grown 27 Neem tree in the backyard. The results indicated that for 2.63 per cent of the households were dependent on government subsidy for irrigation facility and 5.26 percent of the households were have their own fund for additional investment. 7 The results indicated that, Bajra, Chilly, Green gram Cotton and Onion were sold to the extent of 100 per cent. Banana, Bengal gram, Sorghum, Maize, Red gram and Sunflower were sold to the extent of 72 per cent, 96.30 per cent, 98.36 per cent, 85.30 per cent, 91.67 per cent and 95.19 per cent respectively. The results indicated that, 65.79 percent of the households have sold their produce to agents/ traders, 34.21 percent of the households sold their produce in local/village merchant, 31.58 percent of the households sold their produce to regulated market and 7.89 percent of the households sold their produce to cooperative marketing society and contract marketing arrangement respectively. The results indicated that 57.89 per cent of the households have used cart as a mode of transport, 71.05 per cent have used tractor and 2.63 per cent have used Bus and Truck respectively. 5.26 households have used head load as a mode of transport. The results indicated that, 5.26 per cent of the households have experienced the soil and water erosion problems i.e. 14.29 percent of marginal farmers and 9.09 percent of semi medium farmers. The results indicated that only 5.26 per cent of the households have showed interest in soil testing i.e. 14.29 per cent of marginal farmers and 9.09 per cent of semi medium farmers have showed interest in soil testing. The results indicated that, 5.26 per cent of the households have adopted field bunding which includes 14.29 per cent of marginal and 9.09 per cent of semi medium farmers. Farm pond was adopted by 2.63 per cent of the households i.e. 9.09 per cent of the semi medium farmers. The results indicated that, 100 per cent of the households who adopted farm pond opined that farm ponds are good, 50 per cent opined that field bunds are good and another 50 per cent of the households have opined that field bunds are slightly damaged. The results indicated that 5.26 per cent of soil conservation structure is constructed by farmers on their own and 2.63 per cent of the soil conservation structures are constructed by the farmer's organization. The results indicated that, 84.21 percent used fire wood, 10.53 percent of the households used LPG and 2.63 percent of the households used Biogas as a source of fuel. The results indicated that, piped supply was the major source for drinking water for 50 per cent, 31.58 per cent of households used bore well water and 15.79 per cent of households used bore well water. The results indicated that, electricity was the major source of light for 97.37 per cent of the households in micro watershed. The results indicated that, 34.21 per cent of the households possess sanitary toilet i.e. 60 per cent of landless, 14.29 per cent of marginal, 50 per cent of small, 18.18 per cent of semi medium and 40 per cent of medium had sanitary toilet facility. 8 The results indicated that, 81.58 per cent of the sampled households possessed BPL card, 7.89 per cent of the sample households possess APL card and 7.89 per cent of the households have not possessed BPL card. The results indicated that, 34.21 per cent of the households participated in NREGA programme which included 100 per cent of the landless, 28.57 percent of the marginal, 30 per cent of the small, 9.09 per cent of the semi medium and 40 percent of the medium farmers. The results indicated that, cereals, pulses, oilseeds, vegetables, fruits, milk, Egg and meat were adequate for 89.47 percent, 39.47 percent, 18.42 percent, 47.37 percent, 42.11 percent, 55.26 percent, 31.58 percent, and 13.16 percent of the households respectively. The results indicated that, cereals, pulses, oilseeds, vegetables, fruits, milk, egg and meat were inadequate for 7.89 per cent, 57.89 per cent, 50 per cent, 28.95 per cent, 34.21 per cent, 28.95 per cent, 44.74 per cent and 52.63 per cent of the households respectively. The results indicated that, Lower fertility status of the soil was the constraint experienced by 15.79 per cent of the households, wild animal menace on farm field (39.47%), frequent incidence of pest and diseases (34.21%), inadequacy of irrigation water (18.42%), high cost of Fertilizers and plant protection chemicals (36.84%), high rate of interest on credit (47.37%), low price for the agricultural commodities (18.42%), lack of marketing facilities in the area (31.58%), inadequate extension services (5.26%), lack of transport for safe transport of the agricultural produce to the market (60.53%), less rainfall (89.47%) and Source of Agritechnology information(Newspaper/TV/Mobile) (57.89). ; Watershed Development Department, Government of Karnataka (World Bank Funded) Sujala –III Project
Part one of an interview with Joseph Addante. Topics include: Joseph's family history. His parents were separated during WWI and reunited in Fitchburg, MA. The birth of Joseph's siblings and Joseph (he was the youngest). Catholic education. Americanization classes taught by Margaret Kelty. Speaking English and Italian. His father's experience trying to bring his mother (Joseph's grandmother) to the United States. Visiting relatives in Italy. How his father came to the United States. Family political differences in Italy. The villages in Italy where his parents grew up. The work his father did as a shoemaker in Italy and in Fitchburg. ; 1 SPEAKER 1: The Center for Italian Culture at Fitchburg State College, the [unintelligible - 00:00:06] project. It's Tuesday September 4th 9:30, 9:45 am. Our first interviewee is Joe Addante at his home at 535 South Street Number 22-2. Thanks Joe for taking time again to talk with me. I was hoping that you could give me some biographical information, specifically when you were born. What your birth name is. I was wondering is it Joseph or is it Giuseppe? JOE ADDANTE: I was born on the 25th of August in 1926 at 2:00 a.m. in the morning, by my father's little log that I found. They named me Joseph Bartholomew Addante; Bartholomew because the 24th of August is the big feast day in my father's village. There's a church that was built in 1100 or 1200 and it's a historical site in that area. And that's how I got the name: Joseph from my father, and Bartholomew from the feast day. SPEAKER 1: Mm-hmm. JOE ADDANTE: Uh, I was born in Fitchburg. I was the fourth child that my parents had. They had one in Italy that my father never saw again, that died when he was three or four years old. My mother and father were separated for 10 years because of World War I. My mother rejoined my father in 1920 in Fitchburg, and in 1922 my sister Mary was born, '23 my sister Rose was born. And three years later a son was born, which was a source of joy to my dad. And we grew up together. Uh, also living with us were my two uncles for a number of years, because they had come also from Italy. And I jokingly say I grew up with three fathers, my uncle Rocco and my uncle Dominic. Rocco has a son Rocco Jr., and Uncle Dominic remained a bachelor and was never married. Um, from there we lived on the Water Street lane, which was part of what was called "The Patch" in those days. I attended St. Bernard Grammar school, which was a Catholic parochial school for St. Bernard Parish. However, since my father's brother was a Franciscan priest, he was anxious for us to have a Roman 2 Catholic education. And being acquainted with Monsignor Donnelly, who was pastor of St. Bernard at that time, we were given the privilege of attending the quote unquote Irish parochial school. I graduated grammar school there, then I attended St. Bernard, which then became the Central Catholic High School, graduating in 1944. SPEAKER 1: Okay. I was hoping that you could go back a little bit. Last week when I was here… JOE ADDANTE: Yes. SPEAKER 1: You mentioned something about your mom and dad; your father had to wait nearly 10 years to bring your mother over. Is… did I hear that correctly? JOE ADDANTE: Yes, well, when my mother arrived of course the family started. And as I said, my sisters were born and so was I. My recollection of my early childhood goes back to about 1931 or '30 when I was probably five or six years old. My recollection is going to Americanization classes with my mother. Uh, these were held at what was the Registry of Motor Vehicles building, and the upstairs was sort of a classroom hall kind of arrangement where classes were given in English for immigrants, and also Americanization, which in today's terminology would be called Instructions for Assimilation. Very interesting, because the woman that taught this was Margaret [Kelty]. Margaret [Kelty] was a legend in her own time. Probably one of the most foremost people in adult education in the United States by the time she died. I remember fondly her talking about the 500 Basic English words – which I wonder why they can't be used today – done by some professor from England that came over here. She adopted that technique, and with the use of these 500 words apparently one could communicate and get along. 3 But above and beyond that, Margaret was a genuinely helpful person. She was the daughter of a pharmacist who had a drugstore in the area and in his time had learned to speak Italian to better serve his Italian-American clientele. Margaret has sort of been a legend in the memory of most of us in that particular period of history. She and her sister were always a helpful part of the community and probably helped bridge the differences between the Italian community, if you will, and the Irish community at a time when some saw the Italian movement as a quote unquote Latin invasion. Also at that time there were other people who were quite helpful to the Italian community. Miss [Courtney] and her sister, they were schoolteachers, and of course in those days they were unmarried. And also there was a Mary [Bartley] who was the principal of the Nolan School. These people all had a meaningful role and a large role in helping the Italo-Americans, or the newly arrived Italian immigrants, to get adjusted to the American way of life, learning the language and the expressions, and also sort of acted as a bridge in many cases between them and their Irish neighbors. SPEAKER 1: So how old were you when you remember going to these Americanization classes? JOE ADDANTE: Probably between five years old, six years old. Just prior to the first grade, and then also sometimes even after the first grade because some of them were conducted in the evening. SPEAKER 1: Was that your introduction to English, or did you hear it from friends? JOE ADDANTE: Well, we grew up speaking both languages without actually recognizing there was a difference. We spoke Italian at home; spoke English with our friends without even giving it a thought, frankly. Some of our friends who were attending the Immaculate Conception School had to learn French because the classes were conducted in French in those days. And some of 4 them grew up speaking English, Italian from home, and French from school, which became an advantage to them. SPEAKER 1: But prior to school you were probably living in an Italian neighborhood where there was… JOE ADDANTE: There was English spoken. My father, bear in mind my father had been 10 years before my mother had arrived. He had already become, I believe, a citizen. And he ran a checkbook, ran a business and spoke English in a very passable way, so that he did speak quite a bit of English at home in addition to Italian, hopefully encouraging my mother in her English, which she picked up very readily and read almost all the novels of those days, the classics. I remember her reading to me from Les Misérables in English, which I had forgotten until I saw the play in London and it all came back to me. Yeah. So my father was a very – and mother both, they were very literate people and they loved…they had read many of the classics in Italian and were sort of rediscovering them in English. SPEAKER 1: So tell me more. I tried to ask you this just a few minutes ago but your father, how he tried to get your mother to America and he had some sort of resistance or some… JOE ADDANTE: No. No. That was his mother. My father had no problem in those days getting his wife over here. But at the end of World War II my father had a love for bringing back his mother to this country, because he and both my uncles could have taken care of her very easily. But in going through the immigration papers it became complicated, and it dragged out. And my grandmother died in Italy without ever having seen her son again, and I never got to know her. And my father lost interest and decided never to return to Italy. It was a sad thing, because I had kind of hoped to go with him. In fact the first thing I did, meaningful thing, after his death was to go to Italy and to find out where his sister was, and my uncles, and the village and the home where he, the house where 5 he was born. And I have visited several times since. And I managed to bring my Franciscan uncle to this country for two visits, and so I began to bridge the communications between the cousins and uncles and aunts and that sort of thing. SPEAKER 1: So did Dominic or Rocco ever go back to Italy? JOE ADDANTE: Yes, my uncle Rocco went back in 1937, was married, and he had the same sad experience my father had. He was separated from his wife for 10 years until the end of World War II. When she came here then his son was born, Rocco. My uncle Dominic managed to go back a couple of times because he wanted to visit his sister, who was alive then, and his brother, which he did; then that was his last visit. SPEAKER 1: Okay. Now your father, how may siblings did he have? He had three brothers and… JOE ADDANTE: My father was from a family of 10 children. I think there were seven survivors: my father and his sister and three brothers that I knew, and another sister that I never knew but I met her children, and another sister that I never knew that survived to adulthood, if you will, you know. SPEAKER 1: And their names? JOE ADDANTE: Oh. SPEAKER 1 Do you remember them? JOE ADDANTE: My father's name was Joseph, his sister's name was Agatha, who was an extremely lucky woman in the very early days survived a double mastectomy and lived to be 85 or 86 years of age. SPEAKER 1: In the old country? JOE ADDANTE: In the old country, so it was done back in the days when surgery was primitive by today's standards. Then there was my uncle Rocco, was next. And I think there are a couple of sisters in between. One was [Anina]. To go down the list there was my father, Agatha, I think [Anina], Rocco, and then there was another sister whose name I don't remember, then my uncle 6 Dominic, and then my uncle Francesco who became the Franciscan. That I recall in the names and a couple others. SPEAKER 1: So I read somewhere that in the old days that a lot of marriages were arranged, but your father wished to choose his own wife? JOE ADDANTE: My father was a very independent person. He chose his own wife in a very romantic way and courted her with poetry. My father had a poetic flair. And I think he passed it on to his children, because we all love poetry. But the one problem was that they were of opposite political parties in their families. And my father's main reason for leaving Italy was not so much the opportunity, because he was a craftsman. He made handmade shoes and there was always a lot of work for him. So rather than stay home and get involved in squabbles, he left. He wrote to a friend of his who was in Maine. And the friend never answered but just sent him a ticket. I think it was a $35 steerage ticket in those days. My dad arrived in this country in 1910 and never went back. He landed in Boston, not Ellis Island. And then from there he went to Connecticut and got work with the railroad, because there were some Italian men that would take care of him as far as the language was concerned, while he was trying to learn English. And he stayed there for about three months. And they had an Italian daily newspaper in those days published in Italian for the immigrants. There were many such newspapers just like the Finnish [Raivaaja Press] here. There was an ad in the paper by a shoemaker in Fitchburg by the name of [Sisino], who was looking for a shoemaker. So my dad came to Fitchburg and he was here till he died. He worked for about four months with this man and because he could not arrange to have his evenings off to go to night school to learn English, he quit the job because his primary interest was in learning English. He got another job working at one of the 7 mills; I think the [Beuline] Mill was the name of it. And he worked there for a short period of time, finally saved enough to get a little shop started. And by 1912 he was able to send for his brother to help him in the business. And by 1915 he had bought a building of his own. Tried to send for my mother, World War I broke out and that became an impossibility until the 1920s when my mother and my other Uncle Dominic came together from Italy. SPEAKER 1: Mm-hmm. Now, what about the political party? Can you tell me more about – he didn't want to become involved in any squabbles in Italy and that his wife… JOE ADDANTE: Yeah, my father was not much of a political animal. He saw politics for what it was, in many ways, but not a very… in his mind a very constructive thing anyway. More than that I never heard. I guess he did like my uncle. My mother's brother was a very political person and very active. And I think the… if there was any antagonism it was between my mother's brother and my father's family, if you will, being opposing political persuasions. Whether it was conservative or liberal in those days I don't know. I never really got a handle on it. But my uncle Luigi, my mother's brother, was mayor of three villages at the same time. Because, you know, you had to be a property owner in order to run for political office and you had to be a property owner before you could vote. It was a democracy, but it was a selective democracy in those days. But he was very active, and his wife had died with only one surviving child after having gone through many pregnancies. So it was he and his daughter who actually grew up with my mother as a sister, although she was a niece, because my uncle was the oldest and my mother was the youngest of a large family; but they were the only two survivors. In those day that was not uncommon. And Giovannina, who was my mother's cousin, was almost like her sister and they grew up together 8 and they used to communicate a lot. But then my mother joined my dad here in 1920. But the political thing was not something that my father was interested in and he just got away from it. I think that is the best thing he did because he thoroughly enjoyed this country. SPEAKER 1: Now his wife, your mother, was from the same small village? JOE ADDANTE: Oh yes, they were practically across-the-street neighbors. I mean, the village today has only a population of about 1000. And in those days it was probably a little bigger because they had larger families, and it was mainly an agricultural village to begin with. It is now still slightly agricultural but more on a hobby basis and it has become the weekend place for those that grew up in the village and sought work in the cities nearby. And they go back there on weekends and they fixed up the maternal and paternal homes into the weekend places to rest and enjoy. It's very interesting what they've done with the village, because it has become a very pretty, enjoyable place, because there is very little work being done there except a few tomato plants here and there, and olive trees and that sort of thing. SPEAKER 1: Tell us the name of the village. JOE ADDANTE: The name of the village is [Carpineto Sulla Nora] because it's on the [Nora] River and it's in the province of [Piscada], which is on the Adriatic side of Italy and it is basically central Italy; almost directly East of Rome. SPEAKER 1: Okay. And what region would that be? JOE ADDANTE: That would be [Abruzzi], is the province. The [regione] is province. It is [Piscada]. They refer to their states as regions and then what we call counties they call provinces. SPEAKER 1: Right, so the region is… JOE ADDANTE: And what we call counties they call parishes. [La Paroche de]… SPEAKER 1: Okay.9 JOE ADDANTE: Yeah. SPEAKER 1: So your father, he learned the craft from his father? JOE ADDANTE: From his father, who had learned it from his father. No, but my father was actually apprenticed out, and he had to serve a three-year apprentice in order to be a master craftsman in those days. And he had to live and became almost like an indentured servant when you were an apprentice. You lived away from home, you lived with the master, and after the three years you came back home and you were considered a guild member kind of thing. SPEAKER 1: Where was he sent? Do you know? JOE ADDANTE: Probably 20 miles away. And I never got the name of the town. The only thing I ever heard was he did not enjoy the meals because they weren't like his mothers. [Laughter] SPEAKER 1: They never are. Now, why would your father not have learned from his father? JOE ADDANTE: It just wasn't done. It wasn't done in terms of you wouldn't be recognized as a true craftsman if you learned from your father. Although my father did teach his brothers, but that's the way it was done, and it cost money. He had to pay for it, and it was sort of a tuition, if you will. And that was done mainly for shoemakers, tailors, cabinetmakers, bearing in mind in those days you could not go out and buy finished furniture that easily, or even caskets for the dead. You know, these people had the cabinetmakers. My mother would tell me that they would have coffins half finished and they would just finish them for the day of the funeral. SPEAKER 1: Okay. JOE ADDANTE: Shoes had to be made, my father would actually go out to these large estates where they had tenant farmers and that sort of thing and they would make shoes for everybody there. They would stay probably a week. They would make 10 or 15 pairs of shoes and repair their saddles and all leatherwork. It was a whole kind of activity. And they would do that for 50 or 60 10 miles around. Very interesting kind of… they would go, they'd pack their tools, pack a mule, go off and get this work done and come back. SPEAKER 1: Did they work on the leather itself? JOE ADDANTE: Oh yes. They didn't tan it; they bought tanned leather. But then they would start from scratch. They made their own patterns, their own lasts, they did their own measurements. It was incredible. My father could look at a foot and with a piece of tape he would make a last to make a shoe. But that's the way they were trained, you know. SPEAKER 1: Now, did he continue doing that when he came here? Did it change much? JOE ADDANTE: When he came here the polio was a very prevalent problem, and he made a lot of shoes for polio victims, or he modified a lot of shoes. Then he got into the actual shoe repairing. In fact I, much of that influence rubbed off of me and I got interested in being a podiatrist because of that. I could see him put lifts on shoes. I remember I made my first pair of shoes with my dad when I was about nine or 10 years old, helping him out and learning how to do it. I sort of grew up with it. And my uncles worked with him and then we had three shoe repair shops going at one time. My dad also wholesaled leather and heels, and nails, and stitching material for the shoes. He became a finder. So he covered the whole gamut of the shoe thing. SPEAKER 1: Just so we can record this, tell me what the process was that you remember. For example, when someone wanted a pair of shoes they would come and see your father or his brothers and…? JOE ADDANTE: The first thing they would do is have them stand up on a piece of paper and they would outline the foot. And then – and my dad did this without half the education I had in terms of this. But he says, "You know, when you put the weight on the foot that is the real size." And he would measure this out. Then he would measure the girth of the foot, just like the waist of a11 body, around the foot. Then he'd also measure around the ankle and he got these measurements. Then if he had a ready-made last, he could use that. If he didn't he'd have to make one or modify one, because he had certain basic ones that had been pre-made, because manufactured lasts began to come out. They were made in [Lynn], Mass. In fact [Lynn] was apparently the foundation of the shoe trade in the United States. Then he would modify that. Then he would proceed to make a pattern of the leather and the lining. Now this was done in our living room, if you called it that. My father had this sewing machine, and this is where we could cut the patterns out and then assemble the upper of the shoe, and then he'd put it on the last. Now, putting that on the last, you cut off an insole that you put on the bottom of the last which would be the sole, the bottom of the foot. Then the leather was drawn over that. Then it was stitched and a welt was put on, called a Goodyear welt because that was an American process. And it was stitched by hand, and then to that was fastened the sole. And that was the intriguing part, because when you had a polio victim one foot usually was, or one leg would be shorter than the other, or sometimes you had to put a weight because as a shriveled-up limb, as a result of the polio, would not grow unless it was pulled on. So by adding weight to the shoe, as the youngsters would try to run it would pull on that leg and encourage a little extra growth. And I remember weighing those things and they were half a pound, or a pound or three pounds, whatever it was, to try to bring that leg to its fullest capacity, even though it had been affected by the polio.12 So there were a lot of interesting little details involved, but that is basically it. And then though we put the eyelets on, there was a machine that put the eyelets and laces and sometimes we had to cut laces and cut a special tip on, because on some of these patients they had a higher type of shoe: sort of a semi-boot like a trucker boot effect to hold it on a shriveled limb. SPEAKER 1: Were there different styles that people could choose from? JOE ADDANTE: Not as it is today. Far from it. Far from it. In fact, I remember the transitional period when shoes went from being nailed to being stitched. Because they would use little tacks, the old tacking shoemaker. When the machines came in, I think my dad was one of the first ones to have an electric stitching machine in New England. And other people who did shoes in the area would bring them to him. They'd do everything else but stitch them, and he would stitch them on the machine and he got a fee for stitching these shoes for them. SPEAKER 1: Where did he buy that machine? JOE ADDANTE: He couldn't buy it. SPEAKER 1: Oh, he had to… JOE ADDANTE: He couldn't buy it. He had to get it from the Goodyear stitching company and there was a royalty, there was actually a stitch meter. And you paid by the stitch. They would come and read the meter. And in fact his company, the Goodyear stitching company, not the rubber company, they actually were sued after World War II. It went that long before people were allowed to buy them because it was considered a monopoly and they were cracked. But the insidious part of it all, which was very unfair, following World War I they started making these machines. They were on royalty in this country, but they were being sold overseas, so that the overseas shoemakers began to compete with ours in a very unfair way, because the foreign laws did not protect the copyright, the patent laws that we have here. That was an interesting… SPEAKER 1: Must be. So how was it that your father was given this? 13 JOE ADDANTE: Well, he read about it and decided he needed one. He was sort of an avant-garde kind of person anyway. He got it. He had to pay for it. He couldn't own it outright. You had to buy it but then you have to pay the royalty on it, so it was a two-way hook-up, you know [laughter]. SPEAKER 1: So was he…did he follow…did he do each step of the shoe or did he do some of it and then handed it over to his brothers, or…? JOE ADDANTE: Well, they all did. They worked together. SPEAKER 1: They worked together? JOE ADDANTE: They worked independently, and they worked together. And sometimes it would be like a little mass production line on a small scale. One would do one and one would do the other, depending what they were doing that day. And of course to run these machines, you had to heat them up. They were gas fired because rosin was in there and rosin had to be… you had to melt the rosin till it was soft, because when the thread went through there to give it strength, it was dipped in and out of the rosin. So they didn't run that stitcher every day. They would run it like three times a week. So the other days would be in preparation for that. Much like the old tailors did when they had the steam presses. They would get all their work done, and they would press on Tuesdays and Thursdays, or Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. I used to see that in the neighboring tailor's shop. That was an interesting experience, too./AT/ca/sg
Higher education (HE) systems worldwide are faced with three main challenges: providing young people with the skills required by the job market; improving access to high quality services; and seeking out new sources of financing to cope with the growing student demand. This document will provide evidence on the need to seek sustainable financing strategies for countries in Middle East and North Africa (MENA), whether they are high income economies, such as the oil producing countries, or low to middle income economies. Chapter one presents an overall description of HE graduates and the many challenges they face in their transition into the workforce. The different elements that affect this transition are discussed and special attention is given to the mismatches between labor supply and demand. Chapter two analyses the current levels of spending on HE, projects the future financing gaps taking into account the need to continue expanding access and improving quality and relevance, and provides a framework for funding approaches linked to meeting access, equity, and quality goals. Chapter three outlines ways of using current funds in more effective ways, emphasizing the need to align financing allocations with policy goals. Innovative funding allocations that link funding to performance and demand- as well as supply-side mechanisms are discussed. Chapter four discusses different ways to diversify sources of funding and presents alternative methods of cost-sharing. The chapter emphasizes the equity measures needed for cost-sharing mechanisms, such as student fees, and provides an overview of student loan programs used in MENA and elsewhere. Chapter five discusses the role of private provision of HE, and how this can be an alternative to increase access and quality, provided the necessary regulatory and quality controls are in place. Chapter six describes an alternative source of funding not yet common in MENA, namely the use of philanthropic resources to build endowments to support HE.
Although Sub-Saharan Africa has some of the worst nutrition indicators in the world, nutrition remains a low priority on the policy agendas of many African governments. This despite the fact that proven interventions are known and available and that investment in them is considered a cost-effective strategy for poverty reduction. This case study is one in a series seeking to understand (1) what keeps African governments from committing fully to reducing malnutrition, and (2) what is required for full commitment. It documents how the Ghanaian government has addressed the issue of malnutrition since Independence, examines what political and institutional factors have prevented full commitment, and identifies what conditions have moved the nutrition agenda forward at different points in time. The primary objective of this study as well as the series as a whole is to help African governments, development partners, and nutrition and health practitioners identify, understand and address the political and institutional obstacles preventing sustainable progress in nutrition.
Part one of an interview with Rev. Monsignor Leo J. Battista.Topics include: The Monsignor's family history and how his parents came to the U.S. from Italy. His father's work experience as a water boy on the Clinton Dam and then as a barber. The Monsignor's education at Holy Cross and at Grand Seminary in Montreal. The history of his assignments with the Church. Speaking Italian at home and learning different languages. Attending the Italian missions in Clinton, MA. Fighting cancer around the time he was ordained. Working at St. Anna's in Leominster. The Monsignor's experiences as an Italian living, going to school, and working in different places. His father's experiences being and Italian immigrant. Local social clubs. What his mother's life was like as a house wife. The importance of education to his family. ; 1 LINDA: … Rosenbaum for the Center of Italian Culture. It's Thursday, September 13th, 2001, and we are at the home of Monsignor Battista. I would like him to just introduce himself and his address, and then we'll get started with the interview. LEO: Good morning. My name is Monsignor Leo Joseph Battista. I live at -- I reside, rather, at 35 Julio Drive in Shrewsbury at a facility known as Southgate, which is an independent living home for retirees. LINDA: I thought that we could start with just you telling us a little bit about yourself. For example, your date of birth, and… LEO: I was born on December 27th, 1923 in a small town called Clinton, Mass, which is not too far from here. And I was born of two Italian [non-born] parents, both having come over from Italy—my father, Vincenzo Battista, and my mother, Maria Perrone Battista. My father came over here when he was just 13 years old and began to work as a worker at the Wachusett Reservoir. LINDA: What is that noise? LEO: That's the bird. On the clock. LINDA: Oh, I see. Okay. Try if it will shut up. I wasn't sure if that was a real bird. LEO: No. LINDA: Okay. I'm sorry. So you were explaining when your father was arriving? LEO: He arrived in 1908, I believe he got here. He came over with his dad, and they settled in Clinton because of work that was being done on the Wachusett Reservoir at the time. And he worked here -- he worked there for several years and then went on to take up the trade of being a barber. My mother, of course, she was born in Italy. And I believe she came over here in -- she came after she married my father. My father went back to Italy to marry her. And then she came over, and she was always a homemaker. She never worked outside the home. LINDA: Which village were they from in Italy?2 LEO: They were from a place called Delianuova, which is in the province and region of Calabria. And they were from the large province of Calabria and in the smaller district of Calabria called Reggio. And their little town was in the mountainous area, and it was called Giulinova. LINDA: About their experiences in Italy? LEO: Well, they would from time to time, just how they worked. Not too much though, when I stop and think of it. Because my father was very young, he hadn't had much opportunity to find work there. But he – so, he didn't have any job from there. He just came over here looking for job, looking for work with his dad. And my mother was just a homebody, so to speak. She was just from a family of -- I believe there were seven in her family. She was one of the girls in the family, had two brothers and four sisters. And she just worked around the home. She never really had any kind of a job over there or anything. And they would talk about the different things they would do, the picnics that they would go on and the festivities that they would attend and tell us about those things. There wasn't too much exchange as to what they did over there. LINDA: Did you father ever share with you the voyage? How old was he when he came here? LEO: He was only 12. LINDA: He was 12 in age when he came. LEO: He didn't say too much about that…just that they came over. He didn't go into much detail about it. And I don't know, for some reason or another, we never really asked too much about his trip over other than he came over by way of a boat with his dad. They certainly didn't travel first class. They were part of the immigrants who came landing in New York and getting off at Ellis Island.3 And that was an interesting thing. I often wondered why they used to call him James when his name was Vincenzo. And he then related the story to me one time that the officials at the immigrant registration desk had difficulty in understanding the name Vincenzo. And to them it sounded like James for some reason, Vince for James. So they put down James Battista. And so he kind of assumed that name here; and as he went along in labor, he was more commonly known as James Battista rather than his real name, Vincenzo Battista. But it was one of those mix-ups at the point of immigration registration that I think many Italian people went through. I mean, the people here were just in a hurry to register the people coming in, and if they didn't catch the name in the way it came across to them, they would put in what they thought they heard. And people got these different names from time to time. LINDA: So he worked as a laborer at Wachusett Dam? LEO: He worked as a laborer at the Wachusett Dam as a water boy because he was just, you know, 12 or 13 years old. And then after working there for a while, he was able to get a job in the Lancaster Mills, which was in Clinton at the time. That was a big copper company, and he worked there as a laborer for a while. But then he had the opportunity to pick up the trade of barbering. And I don't know how it was that he picked up barbering, he just seemed to want -- he liked that trade for one reason or another. He never did it as an apprentice in Italy, which was common in Italy. Before you did anything, any kind of work, you always worked as an apprentice for a number of years, and you gradually grew into and then being able to go on your own. Now, whether it was in carpentry or masonry or brickwork or barbering or 4 shoe work, that's the pattern; that's the way they trained over there. They trained as apprentices for a number of years. I remember when I used to help him at the barbershop when I was in high school. And he always used to consider my beginning as an apprenticeship. And then he would tell me about how he had to be an apprentice for a number of years and how he had to just watch the fellow work; that he was training with cut hair before he actually did cut any hair or attempt to make any attempt on cutting hair or trimming people's hair. And I used to be very impatient with that, just standing next to him watching him cut hair and trim people's hair. And I would be going up -- but he said you have to watch the technique, the way it's done. And he then explained that that's just the way an apprentice goes. And at the time, too, there was such a thing as an apprentice license in barbering. You couldn't get a license, a full complete license, until you had accomplished your apprentice training. So going back to his work, that is the way he learned, and then he went into barbering and then was able to open up his own barbershop. LINDA: And where was that located? LEO: It was -- I think it was located in Depot Square in Clinton right next to the railroad station. And he had quite a few really important people that used to come to him. For example, Senator David I. Walsh was one of his customers. And I can remember him going up to the site of David I. Walsh's house when the senator was in town, and he would go up there to either cut his hair or shave him and so forth. And another one of his major customers was Congressman Philip J. Feldman, who used to always come to the barbershop to have his hair cut, or he'd get a shave.5 And I remember how I used to like -- well, I wasn't around when Senator Walsh, David I. Walsh, was coming in, but I was around, working around the barbershop when Congressman Feldman was, and I used to like to kind of prepare him for my father's work on him, like getting him ready to have his hair trimmed and so forth or shaved. Because he used to always give me a nice big tip at the end even though I did nothing but just lather him up or put the apron on around him to protect him from the hair that might have fallen on him. LINDA: So you were expected to become a barber? LEO: Well, my father never expected me. He thought it would be good for me to learn the trade, and if I wanted to do it, to follow his footsteps. But he left it up to me pretty much as to what I wanted to be. And so he never -- I just helped him out. He had other barbers, too. But I used to help out too in the busy time on Saturdays and the weekends. But he never put any pressure on me to be a barber. I think he wanted something more for me because he would always encourage me about studying and to study and to go to school. And one of his high events, one of his great hopes and mission was that I would go to Notre Dame University. He was always talking about Notre Dame, going to Notre Dame. But to go to Notre Dame at that time when I was growing up and in school, in high school, it was during the Depression, and that would cost a great deal of money. And so in my deliberations about where I was going to go to the school or pick, I felt that I would have to go to school around here someplace and commute to school, you know, not to live on campus or that because I didn't think my family could afford supporting me as a boarder in college some place. LINDA: So which school did you go to? LEO: Well, I was all set to go to Boston College, and the reason for that was because generally there was a cost factor. I had a sister who was married and lived in Boston, and I felt I could live with her and commute to school 6 on the trolley, on the tram in Boston. And I was all set and scheduled to go there and accepted. But then one day -- I was an altar boy, and after sitting a mass, one of the priests at the parish said to me, "Have you ever been to Holy Cross?" And I said, "Up to Holy Cross?" And I said, "No." And he said, "Well, I've got to go up there." He says, "You want to take a ride up and see the school?" And of course, at that time I was -- I knew quite a bit about Holy Cross, and so father used to follow their football team and the like. So it was kind of a challenge to go up and take a look at them. Well, when I went up there and I walked around with him and I saw Holy Cross, the whole atmosphere at Holy Cross presented itself in a different manner than Boston College did. And I mean, it seemed to be more scholastically appropriate, I mean. So far as I was -- when I went to BC with my brother-in-law, that visit, it was during the year and there was a lot of commotion, a lot of activity, and a lot of things going on. It didn't seem like I was in academia, you know. But when I went up to Holy Cross with the priest, Father O'Connell, it was -- everything was quiet and there weren't too many people around. It was very [contemporary], so to speak, and I was really impressed with Holy Cross. And so I said to Father O'Connell, I said, "I like this school very much." And he says, "Come on, let's go and get an application." And so I went into the Dean's office, the Dean of Admissions, with him and we got an application. And I filled it in, and I was accepted. And after a few days, I got a letter saying that I was accepted to go there. So that's how I picked. And I felt it was close to Clinton, and I could commute from Clinton to Holy Cross maybe much better than being all the way down in Boston, so. LINDA: How did you commute? Did you have a… LEO: When I graduated from…7 LINDA: Put your hands further. Okay. LEO: When I graduated from high school, my father decided to go look at cars. He decided to buy me a car for graduation. A very good friend of his was a dealer, had taken this car in, and it was a 1937 Plymouth. And it was owned by a young woman who very seldom used it, and there wasn't very much mileage. And he got a terrific buy at the time. I think he paid $315 for it. So that was my graduation gift from high school, which enabled me then to use it to commute to Worcester every day to Holy Cross. And at the same time, there was already a young man in the town who was going to Holy Cross, and so knowing that I had a car, they asked if he could ride with me, and they would pay me so much a week for transportation. And that enabled me to keep the car up and get the gasoline and all that sort of thing. And that was every day, so that's how we used to travel to Holy Cross. LINDA: When you entered Holy Cross, did you… LEO: When I entered Holy Cross, I said that I would -- I put down that I wanted to be a priest or a doctor, let's say medicine or the priesthood. And I would take the AB pre-med course in case I wanted to switch, but it also would enable me to go on for a study of priesthood too because they were the same courses, practically speaking, until you get up into your junior year where you began to take more of the chemistry and biology and so forth. And so I went in with that intention, either to be a doctor or to be a priest. And what was, you would say, the deciding factor at all -- well, I was having stronger, really, desire to be a priest. But I liked medicine because I had two sisters who were nurses, had trained, and I used to get -- hear a lot about medicine and so forth, and that always kind of interested me.8 But then the war -- the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941, and that was the year I began Holy Cross in 1941, having graduated high school in '41; and in September I went to Holy Cross. And when the Japs attacked Pearl Harbor in December, then -- at the time at Holy Cross, they were just starting -- it was their first year of starting the NROTC, the Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps, and I was tempted to go into that. But then I said, if I go into that, how often -- that would interfere probably with my going ahead to be a priest. So I said I'd wait. But then when the war came, everybody on campus wanted to do something and get into -- be [in place], so to speak. All my classmates were either in the NROTC or they were joining up in the army or the navy or the marines or what. So I went up to join the Naval Air Corps, the D5, and I went into the office where you would sign up and fill your application in to join the D5 Program, which was naval training for air training. And when we -- this other young man with myself -- came up with me… we both had the same idea. Well, when we went in to see the priest who was taking the application, he looked over the thing, and he looked over what our admissions records said. So he turned and he said, "On this admission record you have here that you wanted to be a priest or to study medicine." And he said, "Do you still have that desire?" And I said, "Yes." He says, "Well, why are you signing up for this program?" And I said, "Because everyone else is entering the service." So he took my application and he ripped it up. And he said, "Listen," he says, "Uncle Sam will get all the men he needs in order to fight this war. But the church will need priests in order to serve these men. And if that's your desire, then you go and study for the priesthood."9 And shortly after that, about a month or so after that happened, a letter came down from the bishop in Springfield saying that if there were any young men at Holy Cross who wanted to study for the priesthood, they should now make plans to enter the seminary in the fall, in September. And so I went to see my pastor, and then plans were made for me to go into the seminary. LINDA: So was that in… LEO: No, I was at Holy Cross for three years. LINDA: Three years. LEO: Three years. Because we had gone -- this was in '43. Yeah, by the time I went into my third year and we were totally -- but after -- it was '42 when I went in to sign up for the -- well, I just thought that what he had said that he knew more about life than I did, and I always felt that they were always giving us proper direction. And so I thought, well, this might be the hand of the Lord telling me something, and maybe my time will come to share in some capacity or another, which, you know, it did later on because there again, too, then I was turned down from being a chaplain because I had an operation for cancer. I had a radical resection on my neck. I had three malignant tumors. And when I went to the navy, I went down in Boston to a Navy ad, and the bishop assigned me, called me into going to serve as a chaplain, and they refused my application on the grounds that I was -- I had cancer. LINDA: What year was this? LEO: Yeah, it was in 1951. It was the Korean War. So -- and then -- but that was years later. I always -- after I was ordained, I always felt at the time, well, not that I was being patriotic or anything, but I felt that all my classmates and the young men in my time had gone in and done their duty to the country and served. And so here was my chance in '50, in '51, and I was a priest, and I would go volunteer and then do my part. So I did. I volunteered, and when the bishop called me in to say that he was charging me to go and serve as a chaplain, I went down, but I was turned down.10 LINDA: Okay. Now when you left Holy Cross -- you left in 1943 to enter the seminary? LEO: Seminary. LINDA: And where did you go to seminary? LEO: We were all assigned to the Grand Seminary in Montreal, which was attached to the University of Montreal. LINDA: [Unintelligible - 00:26:40] LEO: No, our bishop then, Bishop O'Leary at the time, for some reason favored the seminary in Canada feeling that it was a very strict seminary, very rigid seminary, and that if you could last it out, then you really had a vocation. He felt that you really had the vocation. And they were very strict. But also there was -- it really wasn't because of the rigidity of the program, and it was a good program. But you know, intellectually it was a good program. But also, there were a lot of French people in the Springfield area, in the Springfield Diocese. And he felt very strongly that it wouldn't hurt to know one other language, for you as a priest to know another language in this area, which proved to be very true because after getting ordained, I used to hear a lot of French confessions even though I was in an Italian parish in Leominster. Parishioners from St. Cecilia would always come over to St. Anna's to confession. When I would go in to celebrate, even though I was in St. Mary's, the people at Notre Dame and Sacred Heart used to come to St. Mary's for confession. You know, another parish for confession. LINDA: Now why is that? LEO: And they were French. LINDA: Did they go to another parish because they didn't feel… LEO: Well, I think one of the things was that maybe they felt a priest in another -- it would be more private for them, you know? So they would come. And then there were other -- then too, it was the proximity of where they 11 were living. And sometimes our parishes were closer to them, the actual living residence, you know, for them to come to us. Those who lived would come to us. They wouldn't have to walk so far. LINDA: So you're saying that you did learn the French language? LEO: Oh, yeah. You had to then because in the seminary, everything was in Latin. Your books were in Latin. Your oral examinations were in Latin. Your written examinations were in Latin. Your texts were in Latin. Your class lectures were in Latin. And the only other language you heard was French. The spiritual lectures at night were in French. So you had to get to learn French. You know, we had to take French in the class, during classes there too. LINDA: Had you taken French at Holy Cross? LEO: I had taken French in high school. But at Holy Cross, I had taken the canon in Latin and Greek. But I never took French in college. But when we went up there, those two years, we had to study French. LINDA: So seminary school was two years? LEO: No, it was six years. LINDA: Six years. LEO: Six years. LINDA: Okay. LEO: So it was two years of philosophy and four years of theology. LINDA: That time, it must have been 1946. LEO: I was ordained -- I was ordained in December of '48, actually '49 was… LINDA: And where was this? LEO: My first assignment was in St. Thomas-a-Becket. LINDA: Where was that? LEO: In South Barre, Mass. LINDA: So maybe five months after that before you went to… LEO: I went from there to Leominster as an assistant, what we used to call a curate, the assistant curate. And I went down -- I went from there, from 1949 to 1951. So in 1951, I went to Leominster. And I went to St. Anna's 12 in Leominster in 1951 to 1953. And in 1953, I was then transferred to St. Mary's in Southbridge. And then in 1955, I was assigned to the Office of Catholic Charities in the diocese in Worcester; and I remained in Catholic Charities from 1955 to 1987. And then in '87, I was assigned to St. Anna's in Leominster, and then as pastor until 1992. No, no, no. Wait a minute. 1995. LINDA: '95? LEO: 1995. LINDA: And what happened after that? LEO: I was retired. LINDA: Retired. First of all, Italian. Did you speak Italian? LEO: I spoke a little at home. I used to speak with my mother, but my father always spoke English, so I didn't speak -- he didn't speak. My mother never really learned English. She would always speak Italian to us. She never even spoke any broken English but strictly Italian. 'Course we understood her. And then when I went into high school, I studied Italian. LINDA: When you were in high school? LEO: They started a new course, when I was in high school, teaching Italian in the public school system in Clinton. Then I took a couple of years of Italian there. That was funny. I was taking Italian, French, Latin, and English. And I used to sometimes get them confused a little bit, like sometimes my French teacher would say, "Well, that's an Italian word you're saying, not a French word." I had the facility to learn languages, and so I didn't mind it. I took -- I started learning languages and there just didn't seem to be any strain to the learning, you know, French or Italian or what. Then when I went to college at Holy Cross, my first three years at Holy Cross, I took Italian as a second language. LINDA: Did your mother urge you to become a priest?13 LEO: They always looked favorably upon it. They left it up to my decision. They never pushed me into it or anything like that. But they were always -- encouraged me along the way, you know, of what my intention was. My father was one who always said, "Well, you continue with school, and when the time comes, when you decide to be what you want to be, then we will do all we can to have you follow through." So my mother wasn't one that really, you know, would push us one way or another other than to be good and learn to do what is right in school and so forth. My mother never had much of an education herself in Italy and coming over here. Education was not a paramount factor in her life. She would just be very happy to see you succeed and so forth. I can find an example in the fact that they would go to mass and learn -- go to mission, canon missions and things like that, and their respect and reverence for religion before the Lord. I think those were the things that were the models for me. LINDA: Explain the Italian missions. LEO: Italian missions were -- because in Clinton, everything was in English. Every once in a while for the Italian immigrants who didn't speak English, the priest, the pastor used to have what they called a mission, Italian mission, and he would invite Italian-speaking priest into the parish for a week. And he would give a mission, like a retreat, you know, for just the Italian people so that they could go to communion and then go to confession, fulfill their obligations. See, at that time, it used to be like that you go at least to confession at least once during the year to fulfill your Easter duty and things like that. And this was the idea. This enabled them to go and speak with the priest, hear their language, hear the Word of God being preached to them in their 14 language that they understood, because a lot of them didn't understand English. LINDA: I had thought that the masses were said in Latin. LEO: They were said in Latin, but the sermons were always in English. Yeah. LINDA: So there wasn't an Italian-speaking sermon. LEO: No. The only ones at that time. There was one in Worcester. LINDA: Was that Our Lady of Mount Carmel? LEO: Yeah. And then there was one in Fitchburg. Those were the only two places during my growing up. And then later on, in 1937, St. Anna's in Leominster re-founded as a parish. But prior to that, there were only two locales in this area that had an Italian-speaking priest: Worcester, and later, Mount Carmel, and St. Anthony's in Fitchburg. LINDA: Now, when St. Anna's… LEO: You know, mother would go up every once in a while to go to confession there. But she would always attend mass at St. John's in Clinton. Because at that time, even though the sermon was in English, then the object was to attend mass, which was in Latin. And during the mass, they would pray and say their rosary and things like that. They had more personal devotion in celebration of the mass rather than in the sermon. The mass meant more to them than what was being said in the sermon. That was their faith, they were communing with the celebration of the mass, receiving communion, saying the rosary and prayers, and that meant more. Those were the acts of devotion, I think, for them. LINDA: Must have been… LEO: In Leominster. Yeah, I always worried more -- your first time or the ∂second time? LINDA: First time. LEO: Yeah. I was hoping that when I was ordained I would be assigned there. But for some reason or another -- I guess I was ordained thinking I was going to succumb to cancer. I had had the cancer operation my last year in the seminary, in my fourth year, and they didn't know whether I would be 15 living to be ordained in my class or whether they would ordain me before my time and before the rest of my class because of the nature of my illness. And at that time, when you were operated on for cancer, you had the -- they used to say the cure came -- wouldn't come until five years later. You had to wait five years to know whether you really got it or not. And so at that time, when I was first ordained, I know that the priest, the pastor who was at St. Anna's, wanted me to go there. LINDA: And who was that? LEO: It was Monsignor Gannon, Father Gannon. And I wanted to go there, too, because I liked him very much. But the bishop had other plans. He sent me to this small parish in South Barre, thinking, I suppose, for health reasons, it would be better for me to be in a small parish. But once Bishop O'Leary passed away and Bishop Wright became the bishop at the diocese, and Father Gannon or Monsignor Gannon then became the Chancellor of the Diocese, I was then sent up to St. Anna's in Leominster where he wanted me before and where I wanted to go before. So I was thrilled. To answer your question, I was thrilled to be at St. Anna's. I always loved that parish and still do. INDA: When you think of St. Anna's, what comes to your mind? LEO: Well, just I liked the people there, and I just liked everything about the spirit that prevailed there. I think I was young at the time, and the people were very cooperative. And no matter what you turned your hand to, it turned into success. And it was a source of great joy and great happiness for me to be working among these people and in the course they were going. LINDA: Were you the first Italian priest to be there? LEO: I was the first Diocesan Italian. When I was -- there was a pastor there when Monsignor Gannon went to become Chancellor, Father John Bassey then became the first Italian priest at St. Anna's, and I became the second.16 LINDA: Were your parents… LEO: Yeah. LINDA: How did they feel about you? LEO: Oh, they liked that. They enjoyed that, because they knew a lot of people too from the area, from Leominster. Leominster and Clinton are very close to one another. And there were a lot of mutual friendships that they had in this area. So they were very pleased with my being there. LINDA: What kinds of duties did you have, first as assistant? LEO: Well, you did everything, you know. You were in charge of the religious education. And you were having the altar boys, to take care of training the altar boys at the time. You had the religious education classes for the children who were going to public schools, setting up the classes for that and the courses for it. You had all of the duties, you know, like visiting the sick and going up to the hospital. At that time, at that time too we had, you know, a lot of activity for the youngsters, the different basketball teams that you were in charge of. But then also putting on activities, different activities. Each year, we put on a minstrel show, and we'd be involved in a lot of the direction of that. So there were all kinds of spiritual activities that you were involved in. You had your hand in almost everything except the administration in the parish. You really did all other work that was assigned to a parish and to a priest. LINDA: So it was much like being a pastor? LEO: Right, right, right. It was very active, very fulfilling. I enjoyed the task, I really did. As I said, the people were great. I mean, they cooperated. One of the great things was having a Humane Society, which was for men. I had the Men's Society; the pastor had the Women's Society. We had built ourselves up to over 400, about 450 men. We used to go to communion as a group every year. Every month we'd have 17 [unintelligible - 00:46:22] Sunday. That was a great joy and task, but I enjoyed it, at Leominster. And the other great thing was I had great rapport with the young people, and especially the high school youngsters and the football team. I used to hear their confessions before the football games. They used to come to communion every Saturday morning before the game. And you'd have all these young high school kids come in to confession on Friday night and then coming to mass on -- even public school kids. We even had the parochial school kids. And they'd come to mass on Saturday morning and they'd receive communion and go home and play football games in the afternoon. That was another wonderful thing that happened that I did. LINDA: Was there a school affiliated? LEO: At that time, no. But that was another great accomplishment that I was there to initiate the beginning of a school and to be in charge of developing a parochial school in the parish that we started. And then the task of setting up the classrooms for the first two classes, the pre-primary and the first grade, and building the classrooms for them and later on laying the plans for the school. So that happened in my time. And I remember saying to the bishop that this was the only thing that the parish lacked at the time was our own parish school. LINDA: When did the school open? LEO: It opened in 1951. LINDA: Was that when you were assigned to Leominster? LEO: It opened up in '53, I'm sorry… '53. LINDA: Okay. You accomplished all that in two short years? LEO: At the school, yeah. Like the first and second grade, but then I was transferred after -- then following that, the school was built. Right after I left, they started to build a school for the other grades that were to follow. LINDA: Okay.18 LEO: There were really no major areas of concern, I don't think, other than they wanted their parish, and then they wanted various services. They wanted educational programs for their children, religious educational programs for their children. And they were very -- the women were tremendous at St. Anna's. St. Anna's Society was a terrific group of women who worked hard and who ran spaghetti suppers and raised money in order to build and redecorate the church and keep different things going to provide for a rectory. And they were very tremendous and very, very much engaged in the parish in order to keep things moving and growing and building. It was really nice and remained -- it was impressive, you know. And at that time when I was there, they had a great program of religious devotions and activities and social activities that brought them together and enabled them to have a wonderful spirit within the community and the parish. LINDA: How did you feel -- I mean, not St. John's but Holy Cross? LEO: It didn't bother me at all. I mean, I just was treated very fairly. I never felt any kind of bias against me or toward me. And I felt I had every opportunity that everyone else did there. I don't think I was looked down upon in any way because I was Italian. I think the whole atmosphere was very good. It was all up to you to do what you -- I was going to Holy Cross because it was a good school and [congregation]. And I never had any -- being Italian never bothered me because there were so many other kids in my class that were Italian. LINDA: At Holy Cross? LEO: At Holy Cross. Especially, you know, from New York and the New York area, other areas of the country. It didn't bother me, you know. LINDA: Did you feel the same way at the seminary? LEO: At the seminary, it was the same. I really never felt that the Italian got in the way, you know, being Italian. The way people accepted you and 19 treated you was, you know, it was [unintelligible - 00:52:51]. You know, you may have to take this off. LINDA: Okay. We had an interruption. We stopped just for a few minutes to make sure that this is working. So please stand by. Okay. LEO: All right. LINDA: Did your parents always feel as accepted as you did, do you think, being Italian? LEO: I think my father had a hard time in the beginning when he came over because at that time, I know he had trouble going to church, in the upper church, that they were not allowed to go up and attend mass in the upper church. LINDA: What does that mean, the upper church? LEO: Well, at St. John's, there was a lower -- there was a church, a lower church and an upper church. You know, two floors, two levels. And in order to go into the upper church -- I think he used to have some troubles because if you didn't have what you called the coinage, the coin of the realm to go in, you were told to go downstairs to mass. And that bothered him. But then after a while, that changed, and it never endangered my father's faith. But it was very hard for him to take initially to be restricted as to where he would go in church, you know. So, you get over that. But I am… LINDA: And when did that stop? LEO: Oh, I think that stopped when he was older, when he was able -- when he became more [unintelligible - 00:55:10] and had the money to pay the initial [unintelligible - 00:55:14] lying on that seat, what they used to call the arbitrary fee in church. And he went in. 20 But see, the Gannon people never had to use money or to give money initially. The state financed the churches usually, so the people were never asked for money. LINDA: Let's stop for one minute, please. LEO: Yeah. LINDA: Linda Rosenbaum again, and we have continued the interview. … explaining about your father, how he felt a little different than you about being Italian because of probably the period of time. LEO: Right. LINDA: And you explained the church in Clinton, and then you were explaining the churches where they were not funded by the people. LEO: Right. And so that was strange for an immigrant, and especially Italian immigrants, to come over here and be expected to give money in order to go to church, for a seat fee and things like that, because they never had that practice in Italy. And at the time, they just didn't understand it. And they weren't ready for it then. But once he got on to the fact that this was the way it is here in this country, then he began to pay for his seat fee, as they called it, the pew fee, and then he -- then there was no problem at all. Although at times -- you see, in Clinton, Clinton was strongly Irish. It's an Irish community, a lot of Irish in Clinton at the time. The Polish had their church, and there weren't many French people in Clinton. The majority were either the Irish Catholics and Italian Catholics. I remember that's where Protestant people, especially in certain sections of the town. So at first there was -- at times, it was difficult to be -- yeah, some people would probably show great prejudice against the Italians in Clinton. In growing up, you know, sometimes you'd hear it. You know, you'd get a flavor of it. But it never seemed to be that much, and my father never 21 made much of it. He never, you know, exposed us to any difficulty in this regard or complained about any difficulty in this regard. He got along very well. He had a wonderful personality and then being a barber, he was well-liked in town, and he got along very well. And then they used to have their own little Italian community, their clubs, and they would go together and sit down, have their own socialization periods together. They would play cards or they'd have their own little friendly meetings in their clubs. And so it didn't seem to bother anyone. But every once in a while, you might get a flare-up of the Irish, being a little strong against the Italians. LINDA: Can you remember anything specific? LEO: Nothing really. I don't remember anything, none that I ever got hurt by, you know. You know, you just have that idea of having experienced or heard it said, you know, or some remark made. But then, you'd say, oh, it's that individual. It's not that whole class of people. It's that individual that has prejudice or bias. But there were feelings, there's no question about it, at times. Because you were Italian you didn't get the jobs or you didn't get the positions in school and things like this, you know. The teaching positions, the Italians didn't get a job as a teacher because of… But that was all political then because they would -- you had to run for an office or have somebody in office to kind of vote you in on the school committee. That was kind of a political thing where the majority of people voting for these committee members were Irish, and they would be the ones who would be in charge of making decisions for these appointments. So it was pretty hard to break the barriers there. But after, you know, really after the war, a lot of that all came crumbling down, you know. LINDA: After World War II?22 LEO: Yeah. During -- you know what I mean, everyone was involved in the war. And all families were there, and young men from all nationalities were involved, and so that whole idea of [unintelligible - 01:01:47] hear this, sometimes I did. But I know I didn't, no more than some place. Some of the Irish Leprechaun Club, you know, I was an honorary member of the Leprechaun Club, you know. LINDA: When was that? Was that in Clinton? LEO: Yeah. Yeah, that was some years ago now. But you know, I think that's -- you wouldn't see that, I don't think, around here now because they're in all kinds of professions in Clinton. LINDA: Uh-huh. LEO: And activities, and so… LINDA: So was that quite an honor, getting an award from the Leprechaun Club? LEO: Well, it was -- to me, it kind of showed that the biases were diminished, you know; that those who were not Irish were getting an award from this Irish Society, so to speak. LINDA: Do you remember about the year that you were awarded this? LEO: No, [unintelligible - 01:02:58]. LINDA: We can look for it later and I can insert that information. But it was not while you -- was it while you were living in Clinton? LEO: No. LINDA: No? LEO: No, I was there, but it was after I was a priest. LINDA: Okay. You were a priest. LEO: Yeah. LINDA: So tell me a little bit about the social clubs you had mentioned. I was thinking of a few things. A, there wasn't an Italian parish in Clinton. LEO: They had the Sons of Italy, the lodge of the Sons of Italy. And one group of Italians gravitated toward that. And then… LINDA: You mean from a particular region?23 LEO: Yeah. They'd be from different regions, you know, or different ideas, you know. There were those who felt that a man should have control of what the society has to say. They didn't want to be paying dues to national societies, you know. And for nationals to be taking away some of the money from the town in order to be supported. That was like -- that was the other group, what they called the Liberty Society; they [had too many progressive] Liberty Society. They were a group of Italians who felt that they had their own social group. But they would run things on their own, and whatever monies they made and so forth would benefit just them. And they would develop their own programs, their own health programs and sick programs and their activities, social activities programs. And so there were the two factions: The Sons of Italy and the Liberty Society. And there were groups, different groups, depending on who you were, and sometimes what sections of Italy you came from that was going to be different, these different groups. But it enabled the groups to have something, and they felt strength in their group, their union, and they were able to do things and accomplish things that would benefit them. So they were pleased with this. LINDA: Which group did your parents…? LEO: My father first belonged to the Sons of Italy, but then he decided to form and become a member of the other group, the Liberty Society. They didn't feel to try to be tied in on a national level. They felt that they could do more for themselves by having their own little organization of their own. LINDA: So did you say that he was a founding member? LEO: Yeah, he would have been a founding member in the Liberty Society. LINDA: And what year was that? LEO: Oh, boy. That would have been in the '30s sometime, early '30s. LINDA: And did your mother get involved with any of these societies?24 LEO: My mother was very -- was never very socially inclined, you know, in that respect. She was a homebody. Her home was everything. Her home and her family were everything, and her own little circle of friends. She had her own little circle of Italian ladies. LINDA: Were they all child-raising like her? LEO: No, no, they weren't. But they were in the neighborhood. They were Italian women in the neighborhood. They were never [unintelligible - 01:06:54], no. They were at different ones, some were in average homes. LINDA: Was there ever a language problem between the Italians? LEO: Between the Italians? LINDA: The different dialects? LEO: Not really. LINDA: No? LEO: No. I never encountered any. But my mother just would -- like, when I used to try to get my mother to go out to dinner, you know, she would always say, "No, we can eat at home." She just wasn't a really social butterfly. She was a hard worker and a great cook. Everyone used to love to come there to eat. LINDA: What kinds of things did she make? LEO: Oh, she'd make everything—[gnocchi], ravioli, lamb, all kinds of spaghetti, tortellini, manicotti, lasagna. She was a tremendous cook. One year we had the bar mitzvah. She made eggplant, you know, parmesan, veal cutlets, you know, all these wonderful foods, different types of chicken, cacciatore. She did all kinds of Italian cooking. And she used to bake, make her breads. She -- my mother used to get up early in the morning and prepare meals, you know. We only had a meal -- we always had three meals, you know, one with lunch and one with dinner at night. But then… LINDA: Was it just your sister?25 LEO: And my uncle. My mother's brother lived with us. Yeah. My four sisters. LINDA: Oh, four sisters. LEO: Yes. Four sisters and myself. [Unintelligible - 01:09:07] LINDA: Were you also the youngest? LEO: No, I was next to the youngest. But I always would get the choice piece. My mother would always make sure I was well taken care of. That used to get me angry at times because I didn't like to be shown favoritism at times. But she -- as I say, she didn't like going to these social -- these clubs. She just stayed at home. I don't know if she was shy or what. I think she was just happy in her home with her family, going with her family, going with her little group of friends. She had three or four Italian ladies, and they would come here. I remember them going out every week, they would make the circle, you know, go from one house to the other houses, spend the afternoon with each other and gab and knit and crochet. And then they had their little cordial drink, you know. And it was good. You know, it was always a great consolation. You know, you always come home and she'd always be there, you know. You never came home from school to an empty house or something. But she was always there. And if she wasn't there, you knew where she was. You knew she was at [the neighbor's], you know, this lady or that lady's home, whoever's turn it was. LINDA: It sounds like education was very important to your family. Was it important to your sisters as well? LEO: Oh, yeah. My father -- yeah, my sisters all -- they all wanted to learn, my sisters. One went to -- two went to training in the same business. One went to Boston College and earned a degree in nursing. And the other went to Georgetown and earned her degree in nursing. Then they went on and got their master's degree.26 And then my younger sister went to business school, you know. She picked up the business. She first started out as a lab technician, but then she didn't like it. And she then picked up a secretarial course. And then my oldest sister was a hairdresser. She wanted to be a hairdresser, so -- but my father always kind of encouraged education. He realized he didn't have it. And had he had an education, he would have done more. But he really maintained that we should go ahead and have a -- he encouraged us to go on. LINDA: What kinds of personal… LEO: Personal? Well, as a priest, it's kind of hard to tie into too many personal -- I got along. I tried to get along with everybody. I spoke up on personal things. They used to drive me around because we didn't have cars at that time. Wherever I wanted to go places or do something, I'd have to rely on somebody driving me, you know. LINDA: What were their names? LEO: One was [Analita Tarsey]. And then there was [Ben Veeny], and then the men of the parish. And [Bucky Angelini]. And [Chuck Antelushi]. He's around -- would be helpful to [unintelligible - 01:13:43]. Do you know Ann? LINDA: I don't know her. LEO: Yeah. And her husband. They're in this area. [Unintelligible - 01:13:58] Priest, you know, very personal. She'd do a lot to help me out. And then I was getting teachers for teaching religious classes, you know, religion classes. We had asked her to serve in this capacity. And I remember when I went back as pastor, I wanted her to become the president of the [Sahara] Society, which she did and did very well. And then when I suggested her name for Our Father's House for the homeless in the Fitchburg area, then she became the chairperson for three terms. So 27 I don't know how many terms she had. She must have been the chairperson for the [Madison] Society for a good ten years. Yeah. LINDA: What type of social clubs were there? LEO: They were -- each, it seemed that each province, different provinces of Italy -- you had the [Markagerian], the Singer or Giovani group where they had their own little social club. You had these -- I already said Giovani Club. We had the Santa Maria, their own convent, they were another group from Point [Saray] and St. James and those places. And then you had the Costo Novito, their group. And then other -- there were probably about three or four different. Salladini, the [Giovani], the Salladini Society. They were people from Pretaria and Commo and those places. Yeah, I would say there were about four or five major social clubs, Italian social clubs in Leominster. The only thing that ever united them was the church, you know. Otherwise, they would stay by themselves out here, you know. But the only thing that they kind of worked together on and would get behind together would be the church. And that was the unifying factor that brought them together in Leominster. They never -- and that was a funny thing, you know. You'd see them, the American Giovani would have their own club, the [Vergini] would have theirs. And then you have all the other people. I mean, they were all different groups. And, but then the church brought them together, and they'd get behind the church. And they were very strong and good. They worked together. They worked well together for the church then. But now most of those -- see, those were the old-timers. Today, you don't -- among the young, you don't see that. You don't see those clubs now in Leominster.28 But that was a way for them meeting together. You know, when they came over as immigrants, in the twenties and thirties, this is where they found their strength, in unity, in their own social gatherings, in their groups. Because, you know, no one else would bother with them, you know. LINDA: It's remarkable that they were able to contribute to not only -- there were conflicts there? LEO: Between each other? LINDA: In the church. LEO: In the church, no. LINDA: Perhaps… LEO: The church -- well, the reason was in the church, they had tremendous pastors. They had great leaders. They were with Monsignor Gannon, who first organized and founded St. Anna's Church. He was dearly, dearly revered by the people, and they would do anything for him. And then so on with the pastors who came along. I must say, they were very dedicated and devoted and loyal to their church and to their priests. They were always nice. They did church communion and would get along very well. LINDA: Did we -- I'm sorry. Go ahead. LEO: No, I just remembered, like the Holy Name Society when there were 450 members. And they'd each have their group line up and come to church, and they were from all different sections of Italy. They were unified in that communion of faith./AT/pa/ke/es
AN ANALYSIS OF THE RELEVANCE OF ENGLISH MATERIALS IN TEXTBOOK ENTITLED "PATHWAY TO ENGLISH" FOR SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL GRADE X TO THE 2013 CURRICULUM Laras Ratnasari English Study Program FBS Surabaya State University larasratnasari@gmail.com Ririn Pusparini, S.Pd., M.Pd. Lecturer of English Study Program FBS Surabaya State University rrn.puspa@gmail.com ABSTRACT Recently, by Peraturan Pemerintah No.32 Th. 2013 the educational system of Indonesia has launched the 2013 curriculum. Due to the new launched curriculum, there are several changes in some parts of education, including the material. Textbook is one of the materials which have to give deep attention. A research from McGrath (2006) showed that mostly English language teacher use textbook as their main sources of teaching. Therefore, textbook should be matched with curriculum applied. However, selecting the best textbook is considering difficult for some teachers. Although there are many textbooks which are claims suitable with the 2013 curriculum, there is no guarantee whether the textbook is relevant to the standard competences of the 2013 English curriculum. To solve this problem, the researcher focused this study: 1) to describe the relevance of the materials in textbook entitled "Pathway to English" to the 2013 English Standard Competence in term of cognitive aspects, 2) to describe the relevance of the materials in textbook entitled "Pathway to English" to the 2013 English Standard Competence in term of psychomotor aspects. This study was designed in descriptive qualitative research. The instrument used to collect the data is observation in the form of checklists. After being analyzed, it is found that all chapters in the first semester successfully cover the indicators of cognitive aspects in the basic competences three. Meanwhile, some of the materials are irrelevant in terms of psychomotor aspects. After all, the researcher argues that this textbook is still appropriate to be used, since the materials are mostly relevant with the 2013 curriculum. This textbook is still suitable to be used in order to help teacher and students in the process of teaching and learning. Key words: analysis, relevance, materials, textbook, the 2013 Curriculum ABSTRAK Baru-baru ini, melalui Peraturan Pemerintah No.32 Th. 2013 pemerintah Indonesia meluncurkan kurikulum 2013. Karena adanya peluncuran kurikulum baru ini, ada beberapa perubahan dalam beberapa bagian di sistem pendidikan termasuk di material. Buku teks adalah salah satu material yang harus diberi perhatian. Riset dari McGrath (2006) menunjukan bahwa sebagian besar guru bahasa Inggris menggunakan buku teks sebagai sumber utama dalam mengajar. Oleh karena itu, buku teks haruslah sesuai dengan kurikulum yang berlaku. Namun, memilih buku teks terbaik itu tidaklah mudah bagi beberapa guru. Meskipun banyak buku yang mengklaim sesuai dengan kurikulum 2013 namun, tidak ada jaminan apakah buku itu benar-benar relevan dengan kompetensi dasar dari kurikulum 2013. Untuk mengatasi masalah ini, peneliti memfokuskan penelitian ini: 1) untuk mendeskripsikan kesesuaian material buku teks berjudul 'Pathway to English' dengan kompetensi dasar bahasa Inggris kurikulum 2013 sesuai dengan kognitif aspek, 2) untuk mendeskripsikan kesesuaian material buku teks berjudul 'Pathway to English' dengan kompetensi dasar bahasa Inggris kurikulum 2013 sesuai dengan psikomotor aspek. Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah deskriptif kualitatif. Instrumen yang digunakan untuk mengumpulkan data adalah observasi dalam bentuk checklist. Setelah dianalisis, ditemukan bahwa semua bab dalam buku teks ini dapat memenuhi semua indikator dari kognitif aspek dalam kompetensi dasar tiga. Sedangkan, sebagian material ada yang tidak sesuai dengan psychomotor aspek. Meskipun demikian, peneliti berargumen bahwa buku teks ini masih cocok untuk digunakan, karena sebagian besar materinya telah sesuai dengan kurikulum 2013. Buku teks 'Pathway to English' ini masih bisa digunakan untuk membantu guru dan murid dalam proses mengajar dan belajar. Kata kunci: analysis, relevance, materials, textbook, the 2013 Curriculum Introduction Realizing the importance of English language in globalization era, recently, Indonesian government has implemented English subject into the academic curriculum as a compulsory subject to be taught in Junior and Senior High school. Recently, by Peraturan Pemerintah No.32 Th. 2013 the educational system of Indonesia has launched the 2013 curriculum. This new launched curriculum is a school based curriculum, an operational curriculum which is constructed, developed, and implemented by each education unit (school). The aim of this curriculum is preparing Indonesian people to be religious, productive, creative, and innovative. Furthermore it is hoped that they also can give contribution for their social life, nation, country and world civilization. Due to the new launched curriculum, there are several changes in some parts of education. As stated by Richards (2001:103), Curriculum changes are of many different kinds. Curriculum may affect teachers' pedagogical values and beliefs, teachers' understanding of the nature of language or second language learning, or their classroom practices and the use of teaching and learning materials. Among several changes in education parts teaching material also need to be adjusted because it is one of the most important factors in teaching and learning process. This argument is supported by Richards (2001). He argues teaching materials are regarded as a key factor in most language programs. Teaching materials can be developed from many learning sources, one of it is from textbook, thus, it also need special attention regarding its changes toward recent applied curriculum. The adjustment of textbook to the recent curriculum should be conducted because English teachers tend to display a strong reliance on textbook usage. In a research by Richards, Tung & Ng as cited by Lawrence (2011) they conducted a research with 149 local secondary school English teachers, it was reported that textbook were one of the primary sources of teaching material. Only 28% of the total respondents have claimed that they have made a significant use of self-developed teaching materials. In addition for the use of textbook in English language teaching, the research from McGrath (2006) also showed that mostly English language teacher use textbook as their main sources of teaching. The study involved 75 teachers of English, mainly English teachers of secondary schools, and several hundreds of secondary school students. It was found that teachers mostly think that the use of textbooks is important. The wide use of textbooks in the local ELT classroom is understandable as given the fact that material (textbooks) are not simply the everyday tools of the language teacher, they are embodiment of the aims, values and methods of the particular teaching and learning situation (Hutchinson: 1987). A good textbook should be reflected the curriculum which is applied. It is because there is a strong relationship between both of them. The relationship of textbook and curriculum can be described as water and fish, or as the two sides of coin, two but one, one but two (Tarigan and Tarigan, 1986: 66). It should be matched with the goal of the curriculum and be able to support curriculum and facilitate the process of teaching and learning. Every curriculum has their own goals which have to be reached by students as the sign of their success and expertness in their education. One of the goals in curriculum is instructional objective. It describes what behavior and ability that the students need to reach after teaching and learning process. Instructional objective should depict the learning objective which is expected from the students. The learning objective which is expected is behavior change of the students. The forms of students' objective behavior are classified into three domains by Bloom et. al.(1956). They named it as "The taxonomy of educational objectives". Objectives could be placed in one of three major domains or classification; (1) Cognitive, (2) Affective, and (3) Psychomotor. Thus every textbook written nowadays should be applied those three objectives as one of qualification of a suitable textbook based on 2013 curriculum because it is the recent curriculum applied in Indonesia. Despite the need of a suitable textbook for teachers and students, selecting an appropriate textbook with a good quality and curriculum matched is not easy. Cunningsworth and Green in Lawrence (2011) stated that the increasing of textbook on the market makes it difficult to choose the right textbooks. Therefore, the selection of textbook should be conducted seriously because it can have massive impact on the teaching and learning process as teachers would make references to the textbooks. (Cunningsworth, Harmer, McGrath in Lawrence, 2011). One wrong step in choosing an appropriate textbook can lead into the failure in teaching and learning process. It is supported by Mukundan (2007) that the quality of a textbook might be so important that it can determine the success or failure on ELT courses. Unfortunately, not all textbooks are written in a good quality in terms of its appropriateness with teacher and students' need or its compatibility with applied curriculum. Teachers as the determiner of teaching process in class sometimes careless in choosing the right textbook for their students. In line with this argument, McGrath (2002) showed that textbooks are often purchased without careful analysis. Frequently, a textbook selection is not based on its intrinsic pedagogical value, but the perceived prestige of the author or the publisher, or skillful marketing by the publishers. The books are printed in attractive covers or teachers only blindly use the best-selling textbooks which are used in many other places. (McGrath 2002) It is regrettably consider the significant of textbook in teaching and learning process. There are various textbook written by expert writers which are claimed based on the 2013 curriculum. However, though the textbook written by professional writers are usually of good quality in terms of organization, packaging and design, they tend to be lacking in qualities of being creative and imaginative (Tomlinson, 2003). Besides, the urgency to evaluate ELT textbooks written for the new curriculum on its pedagogical fitness with the recommended instructional objectives has become an urgent concern as many local English teachers have displayed heavy reliance on textbooks in their daily teaching (Lawrence, 2011). There are some previous studies related to the textbook analysis. Some of them are Widiarto (2009) and Fauzi (2012). They analyse the relevance of textbook materials with 2006 English Standard Competence. Widiarto (2009) found that there are some conformity of the text materials in the textbook. However, not all of the text materials which are suggested in standard isi 2006 are developed in four language skills in the textbook. Meanwhile, Fauzi (2012) found that all of reading materials are not relevant to the 2006 English Standard Competence. It did not provide any explanations, examples, and exercises in order to make the students really understand about the texts being learnt. Thus, it is proven that not all the textbook used are relevant to the curriculum. In addition, although the 2013 curriculum is already applied in Indonesian education system, there is still lack analysis of textbook which based on the 2013 Curriculum, since the 2013 curriculum is still fresh launched in 2013. According to those reasons stated, this study is aimed to analyze and figure out the relevance of materials of English textbook entitled "Pathway to English" for Senior High School published by Erlangga with the 2013 English Standard Curriculum in terms of Cognitive and Psychomotor aspects. RESEARCH METHOD Since this study deals with analysis of the content of the textbook especially in the form of document book, a descriptive qualitative research design will be implemented. Furthermore, Ary, D. et.al (2010: 423) stated that qualitative research mostly relies on words only minor use of numbers. Thus, the data which was derived is in the form of document from textbook then those data were described in the form of words without using statistical calculation. The object and the source of the data of this study is an English textbook entitled "Pathway to English" for Senior High School Grade X Published by Erlangga. This textbook is written by Th. M. Sudarwati and Eudia Grace. The textbook consists of 11 chapters and 248 pages. The materials of each unit are organized into 8 parts; (1) listening, (2) speaking, (3) reading, (4) writing, (5) grammar, (6) values, (7) cultural awareness, and (8) ways to say it. The researcher focused on just one book and all of the activities in the textbook in the scope of first semester, therefore, the research only focused at chapter 1 until chapter 5. The data gained from this research then analyzed using two research instruments. The first instrument was the researcher herself as the main instrument to collect the data. As stated by Ary,D. et.al (2010: 421) The primary instrument used for data collection in qualitative research is the researcher him- or herself, often collecting data through direct observation or interviews. The second instrument was the observation in the form of checklist. The data from this study was collected through several steps of observation. First, the researcher determined the textbook which is going to be analyzed through some survey on various textbooks which claimed based on the 2013 Curriculum on its cover. Second, the researcher read and observed the content of the textbook thoroughly. Third, the researcher will compare the content of the textbook with the 2013 Curriculum in terms of cognitive and psychomotor aspects. After being collected, the data was analyzed through some steps. First, the researcher analyzed the relevance of the materials with the cognitive aspects which are contained in the 2013 English Standard Competence. Second, the researcher analyzed the relevance of the materials with the psychomotor aspects which are contained in the 2013 English Standard Competence. Third, the researcher described and elaborated the analysis. The last, the researcher determined the conclusion. RESULT AND DISCUSSION The Relevance of 'Pathway to English' Textbook to the 2013 English Standard Competences In this section there will be some example of the tables of observation sheet and also the discussion to figure out the results of the relevance of 'Pathway to English' textbook material with the 2013 English Standard Competences. Each observation sheet for cognitive aspect in basic competence three is consisted of three columns. The first column will be divided into three aspects of the 2013 English curriculum, including Topic, Text structure, Language feature and also Social function. The second column is the example of activity in the textbook which is suitable with the 2013 English curriculum. the last column is the relevance of the material. for tables of psychomotor aspect in basic competence four it is also consisted of three columns but the first column will be divided into two aspects. It is including Topic and indicators only. The researcher used the third and fourth basic competences to analyze the relevance of the textbook material. The basic competences then broke down into sub-basic competences. In the following tables, the sign (√) means that the sub-basic competency and the material are relevant. Meanwhile, the sign (-) means the material are not relevant with sub-basic competence. The Relevance of the Materials with the Cognitive Aspects The table below is the result of the analysis of the relevance of textbook material with the 2013 curriculum in terms of cognitive aspects. Table 1. The conformity of textbook materials with the cognitive aspects The Relevance The Third Basic Competence Relevant All chapters in first semester Partly Relevant - Irrelevant - According to the table above, it can be seen that there is no partly relevant or irrelevant materials in chapter one to chapter five. All the materials in those chapters are relevant to the 2013 English curriculum in terms of cognitive aspects in basic competences three. All materials successfully provided the indicators needed in each sub-basic competence including the topic, the text structure, the language features and also the social function. The Relevance of the Textbook Materials with the Psychomotor Aspects Table 1. The conformity of textbook materials with the cognitive aspects The Relevance The Third Basic Competence Relevant 4.2.1, 4.2.2, 4.3.1, 4.3.2, 4.4.1, 4.4.2, 4.5.1, 4.5.2, 4.6.1, 4.6.2 Partly Relevant 4.1.1 and 4.1.2 Irrelevant - In the table above, it can be seen that there are some materials which are relevant and partly relevant with the psychomotor aspects in basic competence four. The relevant material successfully provided the indicators needed in each sub-basic competence four. The irrelevant materials cannot cover all the indicators in the sub-competences 4.1.1 and 4.1.2 both of the chapters do not include indicators 'Find the purpose of the text' which is one of the indicators of understanding the text. Thus, it can be concluded that the textbook materials is partly relevant with the basic competence four. CONCLUSION & SUGGESTION Conclusion The conclusion from the analysis can be subtracted into two points. The first point is the materials in the textbook 'Pathway to English' are all relevant with the cognitive aspects which are contained in the 2013 English Standard Competence. There are ten analysis tables for basic competences three. From all the ten tables, the researcher found that all the materials are relevant to the sub-competences in basic competences three. Therefore, the researcher concluded 'The Pathway to English' English textbook is relevant to the 2013 English curriculum in terms of cognitive aspects which are shown in basic competences three. Meanwhile, in the second point the researcher concluded that the materials in the textbook 'Pathway to English' are quite relevant with the psychomotor aspects in the 2013 English Standard Competence. There are twelve tables for the analysis of basic competences four. From twelve tables, there are two tables which showed that the materials in this textbook are not fully relevant to sub-competences which are tables for sub-competences 4.1.1 and 4.1.2. Another ten tables showed that the materials are relevant because it contains the materials for the sub-competences. According to the analysis above, the final conclusion states that material in the textbook 'Pathway to English' is still quite relevant with the 2013 English curriculum in terms of cognitive and psychomotor aspects. Since, the researcher found the materials which are relevant to sub-basic competence are more than the irrelevant one. Therefore, the researcher argues that this textbook is appropriate to be used as the aid material in English teaching and learning process. Suggestions After the analysis of this textbook 'Pathway to English', the researcher would like to give suggestions for: a) For teacher, they should be aware of what kind of textbook which is most suitable with their need. Since the process of teaching and learning depend on the curriculum, the teacher should be selective and careful to choose the most suitable textbook which covers the curriculum aims. The selected textbook should support the curriculum to achieve the instructional objectives. b) For the textbook writers/publishers, they have to apply the criteria in developing the materials. For this period of time, the materials should be in line with the 2013 English Standard Competence stated in the 2013 curriculum. Furthermore, the writers/publishers should be able to serve the high quality textbook which is able to fulfill all of the indicators, topics, language features, text structure and the social functions related to the competences. c) For the textbook writer of 'Pathway to English', they should concern more in conducting questions related to sub-competences understanding the texts. In order to be able to cover all the indicators stated in the sub-competences. d) For further research, the researcher hopes that in the future there will be another research regarding to analyze textbook with the 2013 Curriculum. The next researchers can conduct their research for the same textbook but focus on the activities in second semester. Otherwise, they can conduct research for another textbook with different grade. REFERENCES Ary, Donald. et.al. 2010. Introduction to Research in Education.Canada: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Bloom B. S. 1956. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc. Byrd, P. 2001. Textbook: Evaluation for Selection and Analysis for Implementation. In M. Celce-Murcia (Eds.), Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (3rd ed., pp. 415-427). US: Heinle&Heinle. Fauzi, Arif. 2012. An analysis of Reading Materials in "Interlanguage: English for Senior High School Students XI (Science and Social Study Programme)" Published by The National Education Departement as An Implementation of The 2006 English Standard Competence. UNESA: Unpublished Thesis. Hutchinson, T. 1987. 'What's Underneath?: An Interactive View of Materials Evaluation'. In L. Sheldon. (Ed). ELT Textbook and Materials: Problems in Evaluation and Development (pp. 37-44). Oxford: Modern English Publications. Lawrence , W. 2011. Textbook Evaluation: A Framework for Evaluating the Fitness of the Hongkong New Secondary School (NSS) Curriculum. Department of English City University of Hongkong: Hongkong. McGrath, I. 2002. Materials Evaluation and Design for Language Teaching. Edinburgh: Edinburg University Press. Mukundan, J. 2007. Evaluation of English Language Textbooks: Some Important Issues for Consideration'. Journal of NELTA, Vol 12 No1&2: 80-4. Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Dan Kebudayaan No.69 Th. 2013 . 2013. Kerangka Dasar Dan Struktur Kurikulum Sekolah Menengah Atas/Madrasah Aliyah. Jakarta: Mendikbud. Richards, Jack. 2001. Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. USA: Cambridge University Press. Tarigan, H. G and Tarigan, D. 1986. Telaah Buku Teks Bahasa Indonesia. Bandung Angkasa. Tomlinson, B. 2003. Developing Materials for Language Teaching. London: Continuum. Widiarto, Yos. 2009. A Study On The Relevance of English Textbook "Look A Head" Materials with Standar Isi 2006. UNESA: Unpublished Thesis.
Die Inhalte der verlinkten Blogs und Blog Beiträge unterliegen in vielen Fällen keiner redaktionellen Kontrolle.
Warnung zur Verfügbarkeit
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Blogbetreiber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie einen Blog Beitrag zitieren möchten.
John M. Hobson on Eurocentrism, Historical Sociology and the Curious Case of Postcolonialism
International Relations, it is widely recognized, is a Western discipline, albeit one that claims to speak for global conditions. What does that mean are these regional origins in and by themselves a stake in power politics? This Eurocentrism is often taken as a point of departure for denouncing mainstream approaches by self-proclaimed critical and postcolonialist approaches to IR. John Hobson stages a more radical attack on Eurocentrism, in which western critical theories, too, are complicit in the perpetuation of a dominantly western outlook. In this extensive Talk, Hobson, among others, expounds his understanding of Eurocentrism, discusses the imperative to historicize IR, and sketches the outline of possible venues of emancipation from our provincial predicament.
Print version of this Talk (pdf)
What is, according to you, the biggest challenge / principal debate in current International Relations? What is your position or answer to this challenge / in this debate?
In my view, there are two principal inter-related challenges that face IR. The first is the need to deal with the critique that the discipline is constructed on Eurocentric foundations. This matters both for critical and conventional IR. The latter insists that it works according to value-free positivistic/scientifistic principles. But if it is skewed by an underlying Western-centric bias, as I have contended in my work, then the positivist mantra turns out to constitute a smokescreen or veil behind which lies the dark Eurocentric face of conventional IR. And of course, if Eurocentrism in various forms infects much of critical IR, then it jeopardizes its critical credentials and risks falling back into problem-solving theory. For these reasons, then, I feel that the critique of Eurocentric IR and international political economy (IPE) poses nothing short of an intellectually existential challenge to these disciplines.
The second inter-related challenge is that if we accept that the discipline is essentially Eurocentric then we need to reconstruct IR's foundations on a non-Eurocentric basis and then advance an alternative non-Eurocentric research agenda and empirical analysis of the international system and the global political economy. This is a straightforward challenge vis-à-vis conventional IR/IPE theory but it is more problematic so far as critical IR/IPE is concerned (which is why my answer is somewhat extended). The more postmodern wing of the discipline would view with inherent skepticism any attempt to reconstruct some kind of (albeit alternative) grand narrative. And the postmodern postcolonialists would likely concur. It is at this point that the thorniest issue emerges in the context of postcolonial IR theory. For however hard this is to say, I feel that simply proclaiming the Eurocentric foundations of the discipline does not hole its constituent theories deep beneath the waterline; a claim that abrades with the view of most postcolonialists who view Eurocentrism as inherently illegitimate either because it renders it imperialist (which I view as problematic since there are significant strands of anti-imperialist Eurocentrism and scientific racism) or because they conflate Eurocentrism with the unacceptable politics of (scientific) racism (which I also find problematic notwithstanding the point that there are all manner of overlaps and synergies between these two generic Western-centric discourses, all of which is explained in my 2012 book, The Eurocentric Conception of World Politics). The key point—one which will undoubtedly get me into a lot of trouble with postcolonialists—is that I feel we need to recognize that in the end Eurocentric IR (and IPE) theory constitutes a stand-point approach, just like any other, and its merits or de-merits can ultimately only be evaluated against the empirical record, past and present (notwithstanding the points that I find Eurocentrism to be deeply biased and that what I find so deeply galling about it is its dismissive 'put-down' modus operandi of all things non-Western, wherein all non-Western achievements are dismissed outright, alongside the simultaneous (re)presentation of everything that the West does as progressive and/or pioneering).
So the second principal challenge facing the discipline—one which will no less get me into trouble with many postmodern/poststructuralist thinkers—is the need to reconstruct an alternative non-Eurocentric set of disciplinary foundations, which can then generate fresh empirical narratives of the international system and the global political economy. For my view is that only by offering an alternative research agenda and empirical analysis of the world economy can IR and IPE be set free from their extant Eurocentric straitjackets and the Sisyphean prison within which they remain confined, wherein IR and IPE scholars simply re-present or recycle tired old Eurocentric mantras and tropes in new clothing ad infinitum. For if nothing else, the absence of an alternative reconstruction and empirical analysis means that IR and IPE scholars are most likely simply to default to, or retreat back into, their Eurocentric comfort zone. Accordingly, then, the battle between Eurocentrism and non-Eurocentrism needs to be taken to the empirical field and away from the high and rarified intellectually mountainous terrain of metanarratival sparring contests.
How did you arrive at where you currently are in your thinking about International Relations?
Another way of asking this question would be: what influenced you to become a non-Eurocentric thinker? I get asked this question a lot, especially by non-white people. A good deal of this is related to my life-experience, much of which is sub-conscious of course and both too personal and too detailed to openly reflect upon here (sorry!) More objectively, the initial impetus came around 1999 when I came across a book on Max Weber by the well-respected Weberian scholar, Bryan Turner, in which he argued inter alia that Weber's sociology had Orientalist properties; none of which had occurred to me before. Following this up further I became convinced that Weber was indeed Eurocentric, as was Marx. More importantly, I came to see this as a huge problem that infected not just Marx and Weber but pretty much all of historical sociology (which was reinforced in my mind when I came to read James Blaut's books, The Colonizer's Model of the World (find it here), and Eight Eurocentric Historians). So I set out to develop an alternative non-Eurocentric approach to world history and historical sociology as a counter (which resulted in my 2004 book, The Eastern Origins of Western Civilisation).
Two further key IR texts that I became aware of were L.H.M. Ling's seminal 2002 book, Postcolonial International Relations and Naeem Inayatullah and David Blaney's equally brilliant 2004 book International Relations and the Problem of Difference, both of which led me to explore further the Eurocentric nature of IR and later IPE. But it would be remiss of me not to mention the influence of Albert Paolini; a wonderful colleague whom I had the pleasure to know at La Trobe University in Melbourne back in the early 1990s before his exceedingly unfortunate and premature death (and who, I must say, was way ahead of the game compared to me in terms of developing the critique of Eurocentrism in IR (see his book, Navigating Modernity (1997)). However, it would be unfair to the many others who have influenced me in countless ways to single out only these books and writers, though I hope you'll forgive me for not mentioning them so as to avoid providing yet another overly extended answer!
What would a student need to become a specialist in IR or understand the world in a global way?
This is an excellent but very challenging question and I want to try and make a succinct answer (though I shall build on it in some of the answers I will provide later on). The essential argument I make about 'thinking inter-culturally' is that while the more liberal side of the discipline thinks that its cosmopolitanism does just this, its Eurocentrism actually prevents it from fulfilling this. Because ultimately, cosmopolitanism wants to impose a Western standard of civilization upon the world, thereby advancing cultural monism rather than cultural pluralism. And this is merely the loudest expression of a spectre that haunts much of the discipline. But I guess that in the end, to achieve genuine cultural pluralism and to think inter-culturally requires us to take seriously how other non-Western peoples think of what their cultures comprise and what it means to them, and how their societies and states work along such lines. Dismissing them, as Eurocentrism always does, as inferior, backward and regressive denies this requirement outright. Interestingly, my great grandfather, J.A. Hobson flirted with this idea in his book, Imperialism: A Study (though this has largely escaped the notice of most people since few have read the more important second part of that book where all this is considered). But this is merely a first step, for as I will explain later on in the interview, ultimately thinking inter-culturally requires an analysis of the dialogical inter-connections and mutual co-constitutive relations between West and non-West which, in turn, presupposes not merely the presence of Western agency but also that of non-Western agency in the making of world politics and the global political economy.
All of which is clearly a massive challenge and I am certainly not advocating that the discipline of IR engage in deep ethnographical study and that it should morph into anthropology. And in any case I think that there are things we can do more generally to transcend Eurocentrism while learning more about the other side of the Eurocentric frontier without going to this extreme. I shall talk about such conceptual moves later on in this interview. One such theoretical move that I talk about later is the need to engage historical sociology (albeit from a non-Eurocentric perspective) or, more precisely global historical sociology. Again, though, I'm not advocating that the discipline should morph into historical sociology. And I'm aware that one of the biggest obstacles to IR making inroads into historical sociology is the sheer size of the task that this requires. It has always come naturally to me because that is where I came from before I joined the IR academic community. But there is quite a bit of historical sociology of IR out there now so I do think it possible for new PhD students to enter this fold. All of this said, though, I'm unsure if I have answered your question adequately.
The west is often seen as the source of globalization and innovation, which have historically radiated outwards in a process without seeming endpoint. What is wrong with this picture, and, perhaps more interestingly, why does it remain so pervasive?
In essence I believe this familiar picture—one which is embraced by conventional and many critical IR/IPE and globalization theorists—is wrong because this linear Western narrative brackets out all the many inputs that the non-West has made (which returns me to the point made a moment ago concerning the dialogical relations that have long existed between West and non-West). In my aforementioned 2004 book I argued that the West did not rise to modernity as a result of its own exceptional rational institutions and culture but was significantly enabled by many non-Western achievements and inventions which were borrowed and sometimes appropriated by the West. In short, without the Rest there might be no modern West. Moreover, while the West has been the principal actor in globalization since 1945, the globalization that preceded it (i.e., between 1492 and c.1830) was non-Western-led (as was the process of Afro-Eurasian regionalization that occurred between c.600 and 1492 out of which post-1492 globalization emerged). And even after 1945 I believe that non-Western actors have played various roles in shaping both globalization and the West, all of which are elided in the standard Eurocentric linear Western narrative of globalization.
But why has this image remained so persistent? This is potentially a massive question though it is a very important one for sure. Conventional theorists are most likely to disagree outright with my alternative picture in part because they are entirely comfortable with the notion that the 'West is best' and that the West single-handedly created capitalism, the sovereign inter-state system and the global economy. Critical theorists are rather more problematic to summarize here. But one that springs to mind is the type of argument that Immanuel Wallerstein (Theory Talk #13) made in a1997 article, in which he insisted that it be an imperative to hold the West accountable for everything that goes on in the world economy so that we can prosecute its crimes against the world. Arguments that bring non-Western agency in, as I seek to do, he dismisses as deflecting focus away from the West and thereby diluting the nature of the crimes that the West has imparted and therefore serves merely to weaken the case for the critical prosecution. I fundamentally disagree with him for reasons that I shan't go into here (but will touch upon below). But in my view it is (or should be) a key debate-in-the-making not least because I suspect that many other critical theorists might agree with him and, more importantly, because it brings fundamentally into question of what Eurocentrism is and of what the antidote to it comprises. Either way, though, critical theorists, at least in my view, often buy into the Western linear narrative, albeit not by celebrating the West but by critiquing it. All of which means that both conventional and many critical IR scholars effectively maintain the hegemony of Eurocentrism in the discipline though for diametrically opposed reasons; and which, at the risk of sounding paranoid, suggests a deeply subliminal conspiracy against the introduction of non-Eurocentrism.
Nevertheless one final but rather obvious point remains. For the biggest reason why Eurocentrism persists is because it makes Westerners feel good about themselves. And at the risk of sounding like sour grapes (notwithstanding very decent sales for my non-Eurocentric books), I have been struck by the fact that there seems to be an insatiable appetite—particularly among the Western public readership—for high profile Eurocentric books that celebrate and glorify Western civilization; though, to be brutally frank, many of these rarely add anything new to that which has been said countless times in the last 50 years, if not 200—notwithstanding Ricardo Duchesne's recent avowedly Eurocentric book The Uniqueness of Western Civilization as constituting a rare exception in this regard. All of which means that writing non-Eurocentric books is unlikely to get your name onto the bestseller list (though granted, the same is true for many of the Eurocentric books that have been written!)
International theory and political theory originates mainly from Europe, but makes universal claims about the nature of politics. How does international theory betray its situated roots and how do these roots matter for how we should think about theory?
I'm not sure that I can answer this question in the space allowed but I'll try and get to the broad-brush take-home point. I guess that when thinking about modern IR theory we can find those theorists who in effect advocate a normative Western imperialist posture even if they claim to be doing otherwise. Robert Gilpin's work on hegemonic stability theory is perhaps the clearest example in this respect. Anglo-Saxon hegemony, he claims, is non-imperialist because it always seeks to help the rest of the world, not exploit it. But the exercise of hegemony, it turns out, returns us to the old 19th century trope of the civilizing mission where Western practices and principles are transferred and imposed on non-Western societies in order to culturally convert them along Western lines. And this in turn issues from the assumption that the British and American interests are not selfish but are universal. This mantra is there too in Robert Keohane's (Theory Talk #9) book, After Hegemony, where cultural conversion of non-Western societies to a neoliberal standard of civilization by the international financial institutions through structural adjustment is approved of; an argument that is developed much more expansively in his later work on humanitarian intervention. And this trope forms the basis of cosmopolitan humanitarian interventionist theory more generally, where state reconstruction, which is imposed once military intervention has finished, is all about re-creating Western political and economic institutions across the world. I don't doubt for a moment the sincerity of the arguments that these authors make. But they can make them only because they believe that the Western interest is truly the universal. In such ways, then, IR betrays its roots.
Ultimately, Western IR theory constructs a hierarchical conception of the world with the West standing atop and from there we receive an image of a procession or sliding scale of gradated sovereignties in the non-Western world. For much of IR theory that has neo-imperialist normative underpinnings, it is this construction which legitimizes Western intervention in the non-Western world, thereby reproducing the legal conception of the (imperialist) standard of civilization that underpinned late 19th century positive law. Nevertheless, there has been a significant strand of anti-imperialist Eurocentrism within international theory (and before it a strand of anti-imperialist scientific racism, as in the likes of Charles HenryPearson and LothropStoddard). But once again, as we find in Samuel Huntington's famous 1996 book, The Clash of Civilizations—which comprises a modern equivalent of Lothrop Stoddard's Eugenicist texts, The Rising Tideof Color (1920) and Clashing Tides of Color (1935)—the West is held up as the highest expression of civilization, with non-Western societies viewed as socially inferior such that the West's mandate is not to imperially intervene across the world but to renew its uniquely Western civilized culture in the face of regressive and rampant non-Western regions and countries (particularly Middle Eastern Islam and Confucian China). Hedley Bull's anti-imperialist English School argument provides a complementary variant here because, he argues, it is the refusal of non-Western states to become Western wherein the source of the (unacceptable) instability of the global international society ultimately stems. All of which, as you allude to in your question, rests on the conflation of the Western interest with the universal. It is for this reason, then, that the cardinal principle of critical non-Eurocentrism comprises the need to undertake deep (self) reflexivity and to remain constantly vigilant to Eurocentric slippages.
In turn, this returns me to the point I made before: that IR theory does not think inter-culturally because it denies the validity of non-Western cultures. Because it does so, then it ultimately denies the full sovereignty of non-Western states. For one of the trappings of sovereignty is what Gerry Simpson usefully refers to as 'existential equality', or 'cultural self-determination'. It seems clear to me that the majority of IR theory effectively denies the sovereignty of non-Western states because it rejects cultural pluralism and hence cultural self-determination as a function of its intolerant Eurocentric monism. The biggest ironies that emerge here, however, are two-fold; or what I call the twin self-delusions of IR. First, while conventional IR theory proclaims its positivist, value free credentials that sit comfortably with cultural pluralist tolerance, nevertheless as I argued in my answer to your first question, this positivist mantra turns out to constitute a smokescreen or veil behind which lies the face of intolerant Eurocentric cultural monism. And second, it means that while IR proclaims that its subject matter comprises the objective analysis of the international system which focuses on anarchy and the sovereign state, nevertheless it turns out that what it is really all about is narrating an analysis of Western hierarchy and the 'hyper-sovereignty' of Western states versus the 'conditional sovereignty/gradated sovereignty' of non-Western states.
Linking your work to Lizée's as a critique of extrapolating 'universals' on the basis of narrow (Western) experiences, Patrick Jackson (Theory Talk #44) wrote as follows: 'Perhaps the cure for the disease that Hobson and Lizée diagnose is a rethinking of what "theory" means beyond empirical generalizations, so that future international theorists can avoid the sins of the past.' What is your conception of what theory is or should be?
As noted already, I am all in favor of developing non-Eurocentric theory. To sketch this out in the most generic terms I begin with the proposition that Eurocentric IR/IPE theory is monological, producing a reductive narrative in which only the West talks and acts. It is essentially a 'winner/loser' paradigm that proclaims the non-West as the loser or is always on the receiving end of that which the West does, thereby ensuring that central analytical focus is accorded to the hyper-agency of the Western winner. And its conception of agency is based on having predominant power. We find this problem particularly within much of critical IR theory, where because the West is dominant so it qualifies as having (hyper) agency while the subordinate position of the non-West means that it has little or no agency. In turn, particularly within conventional IR and IPE we encounter a substantialist ontology, where the West is thought to occupy a distinct and autonomous domain. From there everything else follows. And even in parts of critical IR and IPE where relationalism holds greater sway we often find that the West still occupies the center of intellectual gravity in the world.
My preference is for a fully relationalist approach which replaces the monologism of Eurocentrism and its reification of the West with the aforementioned conception of dialogism that brings the non-West into the discussion while simultaneously focusing on the mutually constitutive relations between Western and non-Western actors. It also allows for the agency of the non-West alongside the West's agency (even though clearly after c.1830 the West has been the dominant actor). This in effect replaces Eurocentrism's either/or problematique with a both/and logic, enabling us to reveal a space in which non-Western agency plays important roles without losing focus of Western agency, even when it takes a dominant form as it did after c.1830. In this way then, to reply to Wallerstein's argument discussed earlier, one does not have to dilute the critique of the West when bringing non-Western agency in for both can be situated alongside each other. While I could of course say much more here, these conceptual moves are paramount to me and inform the basis of my empirical work on the international system and the global political economy.
All in all, IR theory needs to take a fully global conception of agency much more seriously; structuralist theory in its many guises is necessary but is ultimately insufficient since it diminishes or dismisses outright the prospect or existence of non-Western agency. Moreover, I seek to blend materialism and non-materialism, which means that neither constructivism nor poststructuralism can quite get us over the line. Even so, blending materialism and non-materialism is not an especially hard task to achieve though IR's preferred ontologically reductionist stance certainly makes this a counter-intuitive proposition.
You combine historical sociology with international relations. What promises does this interdisciplinary approach hold? Why do we need historical sociologies of IR?
Following on from my previous answer I argue that a relationalist non-Eurocentric historical sociology of IR is able to problematize the entities that IR takes for granted—states, anarchy (as well as societies and civilizations)—in order to reveal them, to quote from the marvelous introduction that Julian Go and George Lawson have written for their forthcoming edited volume Global Historical Sociology, as 'entities in motion'. Indeed such entities are never quite complete but change through time. Here it is worth quoting Go and Lawson further, where they argue that
'social forms are "entities-in-motion": they are produced, reproduced, and breakdown through the agency of historically situated actors. Such entities-in-motion, whether they are states, empires, or civilizations often appear to be static entities with certain pre-determined identities and interests. But the relational premise, and perhaps promise, of GHS is its attempt to denaturalize such entities by holding them up to historical scrutiny'.
It is precisely this global historical sociological problematique that underpins the approach that I develop in a forthcoming book, provisionally entitled Reorient International Political Economy where inter alia, I show how many of the major processes of the global economy are never complete but are constantly mutating as they are shaped by the multiple interactions of Western and non-Western actors. To take the origins of capitalism or globalization as an example, I show how these have taken not a Western linear trajectory but a highly discontinuous path as West and non-West have interacted in complex ways.
A good number of IR historical sociologists have focused specifically on particular historical issues—especially that of the rise of the sovereign state in Europe. Such analyses have in my view proven to be extremely valuable because they allow us to puncture some of the myths that surround 'Westphalia' that populate standard or conventional IR reportage (particularly that found in undergraduate text-books). But ultimately I feel that the greatest worth of the historical sociology of IR project lies in using history (understood in historical-sociological terms rather than according to traditional historians' precepts) as a means of problematizing our understanding of the present international system and global political economy. Thus, for me, historical sociology is ultimately important because it can disrupt our understanding and explanations of the present. And I believe that this kind of inter-disciplinarity can bear considerable fruit (notwithstanding the difficulty that this task poses for IR scholars).
You famously criticized IR's Eurocentrism and argued for the need for inter-cultural thinking. What is inter-cultural thinking and how can it benefit IR?
As I already discussed what inter-cultural thinking is a bit before, I shall consider how it might benefit IR and indeed the world in various ways. First, if the rise of the West into modernity owes much of this achievement to the help provided by non-Western ideas, institutions and technologies, then acknowledging this debt could go a long way to healing the wounds that the West has inflicted upon the non-West's sense of self-esteem. Moreover, the hubristic claim ushered in by Eurocentrism, that the West made it to the top all by itself and that the very societies which helped it get there are then immediately denounced as inferior and uncivilized, significantly furnishes the West with the imperialist mandate to intervene and remake non-Western societies in the image of the West. So in essence, the help that the once-more advanced non-Western societies that the West benefited from is rewarded by 150 years of imperial punishment! Of course, IR scholars do not really study the rise of the West, but it is implicit in so much of what they write about. So acknowledging this debt could challenge the West's self-appointed mandate to remake the world in its own image as well as problematize many of the historical assumptions that lie either explicitly or implicitly within IR.
Second, and flowing on from the previous point, thinking inter-culturally means recognizing the manifold roles that the non-West has played in shaping the rise of Western capitalism and the sovereign state system as well as the global economy, as I have just argued, but also appreciating their societies and cultures on their own terms rather than simply dismissing them as unfit for purpose in the modern world. Less Western Messianism and Western hubris, more global understanding and empathy, is ultimately what I'm calling for. But none of this is possible while Eurocentrism remains the go-to modus operandi of IR and IPE. And this is important for IR not least because significant parts of it have informed Western policy, most especially US foreign policy.
Third, a key benefit that inter-cultural thinking could bring to IR is that while the discipline presumes that it furnishes objective analyses of the international system, the upshot of my claim that the discipline is founded on Eurocentrism is that all the discipline is really doing is finding ways to reaffirm the importance of Western civilization in world politics, defending it and often celebrating it, rather than learning or discovering new things about the world and world politics. I believe that only a non-Eurocentric approach can deliver that which IR thinks it's doing already but isn't.
You've said that 'what makes an argument [institutionally] Eurocentric…lies with the nature of the categories that are deployed to understand development. And these ultimately comprise the perceived degree of 'rationality' that is embodied within the political, economic, ideological, and social institutions of a given society.' In order to think inter-culturally, does IR needs new conceptions of rationality, or standards other than rationality altogether?
What an extremely interesting and perceptive question which has really got me thinking! Again, it's something that I've been aware of in the recesses of my mind but have never really thought through. Certainly the essence of Eurocentrism lies in the reification of Western rationality (or what Max Weber called Zweckrationalität) and its simultaneous denial to non-Western societies. But what with all the revelations that have happened in Britain in the last decade, where a seemingly never ending series of fraudulent practices have been uncovered within British public life—whether it be MPs' expenses scandals, banking scandals, newspaper scandals and the like—then one really wonders about the extent to which the West operates according to the properties of Zweck-rationality that Weber proclaimed it to have. Corruption and fraud happen in the West but clearly they are much more hidden than in those instances where it occurs in non-Western countries (notwithstanding the revelations mentioned a moment ago). But if one were to open the lid of many large Western companies, for example, and delve inside one might well find all sorts of 'rationality-compromising' or 'rationality-denial' practices going on. To mention just two obvious examples: first, promotions are often tainted by personal linkages rather than always founded on merit; and second, managers often mark out and protect their own personal position/territory even when it (frequently) goes against the 'rational' interests of the said organization.
To return to your question, then, one could conclude that many Western institutions are far less rational than Eurocentrism proclaims, which in turn would challenge the foundations of Eurocentrism. Of course, corruption and fraud are not unique to the West, but it is the West that proclaims its unique 'rational standard of civilization'. Whether, therefore, we need to abandon the term (Zweck) rationality on the grounds that it is an impossibly conceived ideal type remains the question. Right now I don't have an answer though I'll be happy to mull over this in the coming years.
You've written that engaging with the East 'creates a genuinely global history' and articulate a 'dream wherein the peoples of the Earth can finally sit down at the table of global humanity and communicate as equal partners'. Do you consciously operate with an 'ontology' of 'peoples' and 'civilizations' as opposed to 'individuals'? How do you conceive of the relationship between global humanity and plural peoplehood? Is there an underlying philosophical or anthropological view that you are drawing on in these and similar passages?
Certainly I prefer to think of peoples and even of civilizations rather than individuals and states, though I'll confess right now that dealing theoretically with civilizations and articulating them as units of analysis is extraordinarily challenging. At the moment I leave this side of things to better people than me, such as Peter Katzenstein (Theory Talk #15) and his recentpioneering work on civilizations. The term 'global humanity' concerns me insofar as it is often a politically-loaded term, particularly within cosmopolitanism, where its underbelly comprises the desire to define a single civilizational identity (i.e., a Western one) for 'global humanity'. In essence, cosmopolitanism effectively advances the conception of a 'provincial (i.e., Western) humanity' that masquerades as the global. So I prefer the notion of plural peoplehood, so as to allow for difference. I wouldn't say that I am operating according to a particular philosophical view although it strikes me that such a notion is embodied in Johann Gottfried Herder's work which, on that dimension at least, I am attracted to. But to be honest, this is generally something that I have not explored though it is something that I've thought that I'd like to research for a future book (notwithstanding the point that I'll need to finish the book that I have started first!).
In your reply toErik Ringmar, you draw on psychoanalytic metaphors to discuss the benefits of overcoming Eurocentrism, writing that, 'Eurocentrism leads to the repression and sublimation of the Other in the Self. Thus, doing away with Eurocentrism can end the socio-psychological angst and alienation that necessarily occurs through such sublimation.' How do you envision what we now call the West (or Europe) after its socio-psychological transformation? What does a world after angst and alienation look like? Is it possible, and is that the goal you think IR theory should aim at?
Another massively challenging and fascinating question, let me have a go. Since you raised the issue of socio-psychological/psycho-analytical theory (though it is something that I am no expert on), it has always struck me that Eurocentrism itself is not simply a construct designed to advance Western power and Western capitalist interests in the world. This seems too mechanistic. For recall that it was a series of largely independent sojourners, travel-writers, novelists, journalists and others rather than capitalists who played such an important role in constructing Eurocentrism. Something more seems to be at play. One can think of the battles between 'Mods and Rockers' or Skinheads and heavy metal fans in Britain in the 1960s and 1970s, who detested each other simply because they held different identities and prized different cultural values. Most importantly, I feel, the constant need to denounce, put down and dismiss the Other as inferior seems reminiscent of those kinds of people we sometimes meet who, in constantly putting down others to falsely elevate themselves to a position of superiority, ultimately reveals merely their own insecurities. The same issues, of course, underpin racism and Eurocentrism. The West rose to prominence in my view as a late-developer and having got to the top it very quickly came to view its duty as one of punishing all others for being different – all done, of course, in the name of helping or civilizing the very 'global humanity' that had done so much to help the West rise to the top in the first place! And to want to culturally convert everyone in the world according to the Western standard of civilization seems to be symptomatic of a deeply insecure mindset. A secure person or society for that matter does not feel threatened by, but openly embraces, difference.
Can we move beyond this stand-off given that such a mentality has been hard-wired within Western culture for at least three centuries? And ten if you count the sometimes terse relations between Europe and Middle Eastern Islam that emerged after 1095! We need to move beyond an identity that is based only on putting others down. It's 'bad karma' and, like all bad karma, damages the Western self, not just the non-Western other. But to transcend this identity-formation process requires us to do away with logocentrism; clearly a very big task. Nevertheless, that is exactly what my writings are all about. And it is something that I think IR theory needs to strive to achieve. Because IR theory is to an extent performative then I live in the hope, at least, that such a mentality might, just might somehow seep into international public life, though if it were to happen I strongly suspect that I would not be around to see it. Still, your question—what would a world beyond Eurocentrism look like?—though very important is nevertheless perhaps too difficult to answer without seeming like a hopeless idealist… other than to say that it could be rather better than the current one.
You write that 'IPE should aim to be an über-discipline, drawing on a wide range of disciplines in order to craft a knowledge base that refuses to become lost in disciplinary over-specialization and the depressing academic narcissism of disciplinary methodological differentiation and exclusion.' Why do you prefer that IPE should be the überdiscipline, instead of IR (or something else altogether), with IPE as a subset?
My degree was in Political Economy, my Masters in Political Sociology and my PhD in Historical Sociology and (International) Political Economy. Despite the fact that the majority of my academic career to date has been in IR research, I have always returned at various points to my old haunting ground, IPE (as I have most recently). I have always found IR a little alienating for its reification of politics, divorced from political economy. I'm not a Marxist, but I share in the view that political economy, if not always directly underpinning developments and events in the international system is, however, never far away.
The quote that you took for this question came from the end of my 2-part article that came out in the 20th anniversary edition of Review of International Political Economy. This was partly responding to Benjamin Cohen's (Theory Talk #17) 2008 seminal book, International Political Economy: A Intellectual History. One of the challenges that I issued to my IPE readership, echoing Cohen, is the need for IPE to return to 'thinking big' (in large part as a reaction to the massive contraction of the discipline's boundaries that has been effected by third wave American IPE, which labors under the intellectual hegemony of Open Economy Politics). In that context, then, I argued that IPE needs to expand its boundaries outwards not only to allow big or macro-scale issues to return to the discipline's research agenda but also to incorporate insight from other disciplines. For in my view IPE has the potential to blend the insights of many other disciplines that can in turn transcend the sometimes myopic or tunnel-vision-based nature of their particular constituent specialisms.
One of the implications of 'thinking big' is that IPE should be able to cover much of that which IR does… and more. Like Susan Strange, who expressed her exasperation with IR for its exclusion of politico-economic matters, so I feel that the solution lies not with IR colonizing IPE (which is not likely for the foreseeable future!) but with IPE expanding its currently narrow remit. If it could achieve this it could become the 'über-discipline', or the 'master discipline', of the Social Sciences, notwithstanding the point that my postcolonial and feminist friends will no doubt upbraid me for using such terrible terms!
Final question. Beyond the East outside the West, Greece is now being remade as the 'East' within the West, with a range of measures applied to it that had hitherto been the preserve for the 'East' or Global South. How can your work help to make sense of the stakes?
Your question reminds me of a similar one that I was asked in an interview for Cumhurieyet Strateji Magazine concerning Turkey's ongoing efforts to join the EU, the essence of my answer comprising: 'be careful what you wish for'. One of the things that I have felt uneasy about is the way, as I see it (and I might not be quite right in saying this), that European Studies (as a sub-discipline) sometimes appears as rather self-affirming, thereby reflecting the core self-congratulatory modus operandi of the EU. I am not anti-European or in any way ashamed to be Western (as some of my critics might think). But I'm deeply uneasy about the EU project, specifically in terms of its desire to expand outwards, not to mention inwards as we are seeing in the case of Greece today. For this has the whiff of the old civilizing mission that had supposedly been put to rest back at the time of the origins of the European Economic Community. Although Greece is a member of the EU (notwithstanding its non-European roots), it seems clear that what is going on today is a process of intensified internal colonization under the hegemony of Germany, wherein Greece is subjected to the German standard of civilization. All of which brings into question the self-glorification of the self-proclaimed 'socially progressive' EU project. And to return to my discussion of Turkey I recognize that candidate countries have their reasons for wanting to join the EU. But I guess that what my work is ultimately about is restoring a sense of dignity to non-Western peoples, in the absence of which they will continue to self-deprecate and live in angst in the long cold shadow of the West. All of which brings me back to the answers I made to quite a few of the earlier questions. So I would like to close by saying how much I have enjoyed answering your extremely well-informed questions and to thank you most sincerely for inviting me to address them.
Professor Hobson gained his PhD from the LSE (1991), joined the University of Sheffield as Reader and is currently Professor of Politics and International Relations. Previously he taught at La Trobe University, Melbourne (1991–97) and the University of Sydney (1997–2004). His main research interest concerns the area of inter-civilizational relations and everyday political economy in the context of globalization, past and present. His work is principally involved in carrying forward the critique of Eurocentrism in World History/Historical Sociology, and International Relations.
Related links
Faculty Profile at the University of Sheffield Read Hobson's The Postcolonial Paradox of Eastern Agency (Perceptions 2014) here (pdf) Read Hobson's Is critical theory always for the white West and for Western imperialism? (Review of International Studies 2007) here (pdf)
0 0 1 6773 38610 Danish Institute for International Studies 321 90 45293 14.0
In: Fazey , I , Schäpke , N , Caniglia , G , Hodgson , A , Kendrick , I , Lyon , C , Page , G , Patterson , J , Riedy , C , Strasser , T , Verveen , S , Adams , D , Goldstein , B , Klaes , M , Leicester , G , Linyard , A , McCurdy , A , Ryan , P , Sharpe , B , Silvestri , G , Abdurrahim , A Y , Abson , D , Adetunji , O S , Aldunce , P , Alvarez-Pereira , C , Amparo , J M , Amundsen , H , Anderson , L , Andersson , L , Asquith , M , Augenstein , K , Barrie , J , Bent , D , Bentz , J , Bergsten , A , Berzonsky , C , Bina , O , Blackstock , K , Boehnert , J , Bradbury , H , Brand , C , Böhme (born Sangmeister) , J , Bøjer , M M , Carmen , E , Charli-Joseph , L , Choudhury , S , Chunhachoti-ananta , S , Cockburn , J , Colvin , J , Connon , I L C , Cornforth , R , Cox , R S , Cradock-Henry , N , Cramer , L , Cremaschi , A , Dannevig , H , Day , C T , de Lima Hutchison , C , de Vrieze , A , Desai , V , Dolley , J , Duckett , D , Durrant , R A , Egermann , M , Elsner (Adams) , E , Fremantle , C , Fullwood-Thomas , J , Galafassi , D , Gobby , J , Golland , A , González-Padrón , S K , Gram-Hanssen , I , Grandin , J , Grenni , S , Lauren Gunnell , J , Gusmao , F , Hamann , M , Harding , B , Harper , G , Hesselgren , M , Hestad , D , Heykoop , C A , Holmén , J , Holstead , K , Hoolohan , C , Horcea-Milcu , A I , Horlings , L G , Howden , S M , Howell , R A , Huque , S I , Inturias Canedo , M L , Iro , C Y , Ives , C D , John , B , Joshi , R , Juarez-Bourke , S , Juma , D W , Karlsen , B C , Kliem , L , Kläy , A , Kuenkel , P , Kunze , I , Lam , D P M , Lang , D J , Larkin , A , Light , A , Luederitz , C , Luthe , T , Maguire , C , Mahecha-Groot , A M , Malcolm , J , Marshall , F , Maru , Y , McLachlan , C , Mmbando , P , Mohapatra , S , Moore , M L , Moriggi , A , Morley-Fletcher , M , Moser , S , Mueller , K M , Mukute , M , Mühlemeier , S , Naess , L O , Nieto-Romero , M , Novo , P , ÓBrien , K , O'Connell , D A , O'Donnell , K , Olsson , P , Pearson , K R , Pereira , L , Petridis , P , Peukert , D , Phear , N , Pisters , S R , Polsky , M , Pound , D , Preiser , R , Rahman , M S , Reed , M S , Revell , P , Rodriguez , I , Rogers , B C , Rohr , J , Nordbø Rosenberg , M , Ross , H , Russell , S , Ryan , M , Saha , P , Schleicher , K , Schneider , F , Scoville-Simonds , M , Searle , B , Sebhatu , S P , Sesana , E , Silverman , H , Singh , C , Sterling , E , Stewart , S J , Tàbara , J D , Taylor , D , Thornton , P , Tribaldos , T M , Tschakert , P , Uribe-Calvo , N , Waddell , S , Waddock , S , van der Merwe , L , van Mierlo , B , van Zwanenberg , P , Velarde , S J , Washbourne , C L , Waylen , K , Weiser , A , Wight , I , Williams , S , Woods , M , Wolstenholme , R , Wright , N , Wunder , S , Wyllie , A & Young , H R 2020 , ' Transforming knowledge systems for life on Earth : Visions of future systems and how to get there ' , Energy Research and Social Science , vol. 70 , 101724 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101724
Formalised knowledge systems, including universities and research institutes, are important for contemporary societies. They are, however, also arguably failing humanity when their impact is measured against the level of progress being made in stimulating the societal changes needed to address challenges like climate change. In this research we used a novel futures-oriented and participatory approach that asked what future envisioned knowledge systems might need to look like and how we might get there. Findings suggest that envisioned future systems will need to be much more collaborative, open, diverse, egalitarian, and able to work with values and systemic issues. They will also need to go beyond producing knowledge about our world to generating wisdom about how to act within it. To get to envisioned systems we will need to rapidly scale methodological innovations, connect innovators, and creatively accelerate learning about working with intractable challenges. We will also need to create new funding schemes, a global knowledge commons, and challenge deeply held assumptions. To genuinely be a creative force in supporting longevity of human and non-human life on our planet, the shift in knowledge systems will probably need to be at the scale of the enlightenment and speed of the scientific and technological revolution accompanying the second World War. This will require bold and strategic action from governments, scientists, civic society and sustained transformational intent.
In: Fazey , I , Schapke , N , Caniglia , G , Hodgson , A , Kendrick , I , Lyon , C , Page , G , Patterson , J , Riedy , C , Strasser , T , Verveen , S , Adams , D , Goldstein , B , Klaes , M , Leicester , G , Linyard , A , McCurdy , A , Ryan , P , Sharpe , B , Silvestri , G , Abdurrahim , A Y , Abson , D , Adetunji , O S , Aldunce , P , Alvarez-Pereira , C , Amparo , J M , Amundsen , H , Anderson , L , Andersson , L , Asquith , M , Augenstein , K , Barrie , J , Bent , D , Bentz , J , Bergsten , A , Berzonsky , C , Bina , O , Blackstock , K , Boehnert , J , Bradbury , H , Brand , C , Bohme , J , Bojer , M M , Carmen , E , Charli-Joseph , L , Choudhury , S , Chunhachoti-ananta , S , Cockburn , J , Colvin , J , Connon , I L C , Cornforth , R , Cox , R S , Cradock-Henry , N , Cramer , L , Cremaschi , A , Dannevig , H , Day , C T , Hutchison , C D L , de Vrieze , A , Desai , V , Dolley , J , Duckett , D , Durrant , R A , Egermann , M , Elsner (Adams) , E , Fremantle , C , Fullwood-Thomas , J , Galafassi , D , Gobby , J , Golland , A , Gonzalez-Padron , S K , Gram-Hanssen , I , Grandin , J , Grenni , S , Gunnell , J L , Gusmao , F , Hamann , M , Harding , B , Harper , G , Hesselgren , M , Hestad , D , Heykoop , C A , Holmen , J , Holstead , K , Hoolohan , C , Horcea-Milcu , A-I , Horlings , L G , Howden , S M , Howell , R A , Huque , S I , Canedo , M L I , Iro , C Y , Ives , C D , John , B , Joshi , R , Juarez-Bourke , S , Juma , D W , Karlsen , B C , Kliem , L , Klaey , A , Kuenkel , P , Kunze , I , Lam , D P M , Lang , D J , Larkin , A , Light , A , Luederitz , C , Luthe , T , Maguire , C , Mahecha-Groot , A-M , Malcolm , J , Marshall , F , Maru , Y , McLachlan , C , Mmbando , P , Mohapatra , S , Moore , M-L , Moriggi , A , Morley-Fletcher , M , Moser , S , Mueller , K M , Mukute , M , Muhlemeier , S , Naess , L O , Nieto-Romero , M , Novo , P , O'Brien , K , O'Connell , D A , O'Donnell , K , Olsson , P , Pearson , K R , Pereira , L , Petridis , P , Peukert , D , Phear , N , Pisters , S R , Polsky , M , Pound , D , Preiser , R , Rahman , M S , Reed , M S , Revell , P , Rodriguez , I , Rogers , B C , Rohr , J , Rosenberg , M N , Ross , H , Russell , S , Ryan , M , Saha , P , Schleicher , K , Schneider , F , Scoville-Simonds , M , Searle , B , Sebhatu , S P , Sesana , E , Silverman , H , Singh , C , Sterling , E , Stewart , S-J , Tabara , J D , Taylor , D , Thornton , P , Tribaldos , T M , Tschakert , P , Uribe-Calvo , N , Waddell , S , Waddock , S , van der Merwe , L , van Mierlo , B , van Zwanenberg , P , Velarde , S J , Washbourne , C-L , Waylen , K , Weiser , A , Wight , I , Williams , S , Woods , M , Wolstenholme , R , Wright , N , Wunder , S , Wyllie , A & Young , H R 2020 , ' Transforming knowledge systems for life on Earth : Visions of future systems and how to get there ' , Energy Research & Social Science , vol. 70 , 101724 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101724
Formalised knowledge systems, including universities and research institutes, are important for contemporary societies. They are, however, also arguably failing humanity when their impact is measured against the level of progress being made in stimulating the societal changes needed to address challenges like climate change. In this research we used a novel futures-oriented and participatory approach that asked what future envisioned knowledge systems might need to look like and how we might get there. Findings suggest that envisioned future systems will need to be much more collaborative, open, diverse, egalitarian, and able to work with values and systemic issues. They will also need to go beyond producing knowledge about our world to generating wisdom about how to act within it. To get to envisioned systems we will need to rapidly scale methodological innovations, connect innovators, and creatively accelerate learning about working with intractable challenges. We will also need to create new funding schemes, a global knowledge commons, and challenge deeply held assumptions. To genuinely be a creative force in supporting longevity of human and non-human life on our planet, the shift in knowledge systems will probably need to be at the scale of the enlightenment and speed of the scientific and technological revolution accompanying the second World War. This will require bold and strategic action from governments, scientists, civic society and sustained transformational intent.
In: Fazey , I , Schäpke , N , Caniglia , G , Hodgson , A , Kendrick , I , Lyon , C , Page , G , Patterson , J , Riedy , C , Strasser , T , Verveen , S , Adams , D , Goldstein , B , Klaes , M , Leicester , G , Linyard , A , McCurdy , A , Ryan , P , Sharpe , B , Silvestri , G , Abdurrahim , A Y , Abson , D , Adetunji , O S , Aldunce , P , Alvarez-Pereira , C , Amparo , J M , Amundsen , H , Anderson , L , Andersson , L , Asquith , M , Augenstein , K , Barrie , J , Bent , D , Bentz , J , Bergsten , A , Berzonsky , C , Bina , O , Blackstock , K , Boehnert , J , Bradbury , H , Brand , C , Böhme (born Sangmeister) , J , Bøjer , M M , Carmen , E , Charli-Joseph , L , Choudhury , S , Chunhachoti-ananta , S , Cockburn , J , Colvin , J , Connon , I L C , Cornforth , R , Cox , R S , Cradock-Henry , N , Cramer , L , Cremaschi , A , Dannevig , H , Day , C T , de Lima Hutchison , C , de Vrieze , A , Desai , V , Dolley , J , Duckett , D , Durrant , R A , Egermann , M , Elsner (Adams) , E , Fremantle , C , Fullwood-Thomas , J , Galafassi , D , Gobby , J , Golland , A , González-Padrón , S K , Gram-Hanssen , I , Grandin , J , Grenni , S , Lauren Gunnell , J , Gusmao , F , Hamann , M , Harding , B , Harper , G , Hesselgren , M , Hestad , D , Heykoop , C A , Holmén , J , Holstead , K , Hoolohan , C , Horcea-Milcu , A I , Horlings , L G , Howden , S M , Howell , R A , Huque , S I , Inturias Canedo , M L , Iro , C Y , Ives , C D , John , B , Joshi , R , Juarez-Bourke , S , Juma , D W , Karlsen , B C , Kliem , L , Kläy , A , Kuenkel , P , Kunze , I , Lam , D P M , Lang , D J , Larkin , A , Light , A , Luederitz , C , Luthe , T , Maguire , C , Mahecha-Groot , A M , Malcolm , J , Marshall , F , Maru , Y , McLachlan , C , Mmbando , P , Mohapatra , S , Moore , M L , Moriggi , A , Morley-Fletcher , M , Moser , S , Mueller , K M , Mukute , M , Mühlemeier , S , Naess , L O , Nieto-Romero , M , Novo , P , ÓBrien , K , O'Connell , D A , O'Donnell , K , Olsson , P , Pearson , K R , Pereira , L , Petridis , P , Peukert , D , Phear , N , Pisters , S R , Polsky , M , Pound , D , Preiser , R , Rahman , M S , Reed , M S , Revell , P , Rodriguez , I , Rogers , B C , Rohr , J , Nordbø Rosenberg , M , Ross , H , Russell , S , Ryan , M , Saha , P , Schleicher , K , Schneider , F , Scoville-Simonds , M , Searle , B , Sebhatu , S P , Sesana , E , Silverman , H , Singh , C , Sterling , E , Stewart , S J , Tàbara , J D , Taylor , D , Thornton , P , Tribaldos , T M , Tschakert , P , Uribe-Calvo , N , Waddell , S , Waddock , S , van der Merwe , L , van Mierlo , B , van Zwanenberg , P , Velarde , S J , Washbourne , C L , Waylen , K , Weiser , A , Wight , I , Williams , S , Woods , M , Wolstenholme , R , Wright , N , Wunder , S , Wyllie , A & Young , H R 2020 , ' Transforming knowledge systems for life on Earth : Visions of future systems and how to get there ' , Energy Research and Social Science , vol. 70 , 101724 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101724
Formalised knowledge systems, including universities and research institutes, are important for contemporary societies. They are, however, also arguably failing humanity when their impact is measured against the level of progress being made in stimulating the societal changes needed to address challenges like climate change. In this research we used a novel futures-oriented and participatory approach that asked what future envisioned knowledge systems might need to look like and how we might get there. Findings suggest that envisioned future systems will need to be much more collaborative, open, diverse, egalitarian, and able to work with values and systemic issues. They will also need to go beyond producing knowledge about our world to generating wisdom about how to act within it. To get to envisioned systems we will need to rapidly scale methodological innovations, connect innovators, and creatively accelerate learning about working with intractable challenges. We will also need to create new funding schemes, a global knowledge commons, and challenge deeply held assumptions. To genuinely be a creative force in supporting longevity of human and non-human life on our planet, the shift in knowledge systems will probably need to be at the scale of the enlightenment and speed of the scientific and technological revolution accompanying the second World War. This will require bold and strategic action from governments, scientists, civic society and sustained transformational intent.