The Roar of the Guns

           

           By 9:00am on the morning on July 9, 1864 the Battle of Monocacy was in full swing. It

was around this time that the roar of artillery began to echo across the fields of the Best Farm.

Some of the first shots of the battle came from Confederate Artillery that had deployed along the

ridges of the Farm. Today this is the location of the current Visitor Center. The objective that

these Confederate Batteries had was to dislodge the Union forces under General Lew Wallace

across the Monocacy River. Eventually Union Artillery in the form of Captain Alexander’s

Baltimore Battery would respond to this fire as well as the Confederate Infantry that was starting

to engage Union Skirmishers that had advanced across the river. 

         

          The role of artillery at Monocacy is quite interesting and during my internship I had manly 

opportunities to talk to visitors about what these guns did. It would always be after one of my battle 

overview programs that I would offer those who went on it to learn about what roles cannons played 

in battle during the Civil War. When I wasn’t busy in the visitor center I often found myself in the 

battlefield's achieves/library looking up and reading about artillery in the Civil War. Some of these 

books were about individual batteries which fought at Monocacy. Others were about the role of 

artillery during the course of the war. Some of my most treasured moments of my internship were the

discussions I had with the rangers about the topic. I remember how once it was Rangers Matt &

Brain as well as myself had a very detailed discussion of artillery during the war and eventually

we found ourselves in the library going through books to help us answer questions we had. 

              All this has helped me when I have had the honor of bringing people out the cannon outside 

of the Visitor Center to run gun drills to show how a cannon would be fired during the Civil War. The

last time I did this it was a group of thirty private school kids and they enjoyed it very much. One

thing I have noticed through this, is that by having a visitor stand in the spot of one of crew

members on a gun crew and to handle something like a sponge staff is to have them interact with

the history of the site on a deep level. It helps makes the history of the battle come alive for them

as they get to know a more personalized view of what the battle was like for those who fought in

it in 1864.             

What I Learned at The Maryland Room

History is often viewed as something for dry academics and classrooms but increasingly history has been thrust in the public sphere. As history grows into an increasingly public battleground when the actions of the past are debated, the need for Public Historians increases dramatically. A key component of Public History is of course the public, an unpredictable and sometimes emotional group that will test the will of any historian. To be an effective historian in this new era requires interaction with people that may hold deeply entrenched beliefs on the past or historical figures and thus requires strong interpersonal skills that can only be gained through immersion. The Maryland Room is a public resource, a place for locals and travelers to come and do research on history or genealogy. As such I met a great variety of people, a British couple that lived in Dubai, Kentuckians chasing their roots and Californians trying to substantiate the Revolutionary era roots of their family. These people were nice enough but encountering information that seems to disprove their family stories or challenged their beliefs on the past led to awkward conversations.

Being able to navigate the realities of history and maintain a positive public relationship is key to Public History. Public History functions more like a business than academic history, customer service techniques and public speaking are infinitely more important when operating in the public arena. The take away for me from this experience has been simply that history is not mine, yours or anyone’s but that doesn’t stop people from emotionally investing in the past in a way that makes researching for a client either immensely gratifying or potentially awkward. Remembering that Public History is by and large an exchange that occurs in the public space is incredibly important, never change the facts or obscure the truth but instead perhaps utilize interpersonal techniques to deliver the news with a softer touch. I learned therefore to remember that what are dull facts to me, are the pride and joy of a family which if proved wrong requires tact to approach.

Mount Vernon Post 3

Mount Vernon Post 3




In my final post about my internship at Mount Vernon I will discuss what changes can be made to the interpretation of slavery at Mount Vernon as well as some of the obstacles that prevent those changes. As I mentioned in Post 2, Jennifer Eichstedt and Stephen Small labelled Mount Vernon’s presentation of slavery as segregated knowledge in their study Representations of Slavery. Eichstedt and Small noticed that the mansion tour was white-centric and seldom mentioned slavery. When slavery was mentioned by the guides, it was either with euphemisms or passive language. The Slave Life tour was an extra tour that went more in depth regarding slavery, but still focused on George Washington’s relationship to the slavery more than the enslaved people themselves. Since then, Mount Vernon has included slavery in the mansion tour and changed the focus of the Enslaved People of Mount Vernon tour to the enslaved people. Some of the changes made at Mount Vernon seem to be in direct response to observations made in Representations of Slavery. New history interpreters are trained to use the term enslaved people instead of slaves, and are warned against the use of euphemisms and passive voice.

While Mount Vernon deserves credit for making changes to its interpretation of slavery, it could still benefit from changes. The next level above segregated knowledge in Eichstedt and Small’s study is relative incorporation. In order to be categorized under relative incorporation sites had to provide non-degrading or perfunctory information on slavery, information about the individual lives of the enslaved, acknowledge that the elevation of the enslavers resulted in the subjugation of the enslaved, and complicate the master-enslaver narrative (Eichstedt and Small, 204). Although Mount Vernon’s presentation of slavery has improved, I do not think it falls under relative incorporation. Eichstedt and Small stated that one of the biggest obstacles preventing sites from being labelled under relative incorporation is that, “the quality of the tour and the information imparted vary with the docent leading the tour” (Eichstedt and Small, 213).

I have shadowed and overheard many different historical interpreters at Mount Vernon and I have found this to be true. Before being cleared as historical interpreters, prospective guides have to give the tour to my boss. One of the requirements to be cleared is to mention an enslaved individual in each room. For example, Caroline Branham and Molly have to be mentioned while in the Upper Hall. Although this is a requirement to be cleared, after you are cleared there is much less oversight. I have found that cleared historical interpreters are less consistent in mentioning the enslaved. The worst offenders are the historical interpreters who have been at Mount Vernon longer than my boss and have experienced the changes made to the presentation of slavery. While some have accepted the changes, others are more resistant and cite their seniority as the reason for their resistance. My boss is aware of those interpreters and is hoping to phase them out, but, due to their seniority, has to wait until they retire.

In some cases, when history interpreters fail to mention the enslaved people it is due to a lack of time. The ideal length of interpretation for each room is a minute and a half. However, the more people there are the less time for interpretation. For instance, on closed-door mode the interpretation is a minute and a half and the visitors actively pause in each room. On open-door mode the interpretation is still a minute and a half, but the visitors do not actively pause. During highlights mode, the interpretation is reduced to a minute. Finally, on viewing mode, the interpretation is reduced to thirty seconds. Despite the given time frames, other than closed-door mode, the focus is moving people in and out of the mansion. When the time for interpretation is reduced, historical interpreters usually cut down their interpretation. If interpreters are required to say three objectives in the room for closed-door mode, by viewing mode, they are only saying one. In almost every case, the objective that is cut is the one pertaining to the enslaved individuals. For example, the required objectives for the Central Passage during closed-door mode are to discuss the Central Passage as the house’s hub of activity, the role of the enslaved butler Frank Lee, the key to the Bastille, and identify each room. By viewing mode, historical interpreters are usually only identifying the space and each room before the visitors are on to the next space. My boss and other supervisors are aware of this dilemma and encourage interpreters to attempt to mention the enslaved people. The logistics of moving people through the mansion often works against presenting slavery during the mansion tour.

One of the reasons the objectives on the enslaved people are so easily cut is in part due to the fact that there is little substance behind the objective. In the New Room, interpreters have to mention that enslaved people moved the furniture around to accommodate whatever was being hosted in the room, but the focus of the room is the farming theme and Washington’s vision for the United States. In most instances, the objectives on slavery seemed forced. This is not to say that they should not be mentioned, but there should be more detail behind them. One glaring example is the kitchen. While in the kitchen, interpreters are supposed to mention Nathan and Lucy, the two enslaved cooks in 1799. The only other specific detail to Nathan and Lucy is that Lucy was married to Frank Lee and they had three children who lived upstairs. I found this to be a failure in the presentation of slavery. One of the other enslaved cooks was Hercules. Hercules was Washington’s favorite cook and he took him to Philadelphia for his presidency. Hercules caught on that Washington was rotating his enslaved people out of the state every six months to avoid their claim for freedom and confronted Washington. Washington acquiesced and did not always send Hercules home every six months. Hercules escaped from Mount Vernon on Washington’s birthday in 1799 and was never recaptured. The story of Hercules is perfect for the kitchen. Not only is it told in the area where he worked, but it also gives him agency and opens a discussion on the enslaved people at Mount Vernon who did escape. Some interpreters make the excuse that Hercules should not be presented, because he was not the cook in 1799 and the house is presented as it would have looked in 1799. While this is true, these same interpreters never fail to mention that the Marquis de Lafayette stayed in one of the rooms in the Upper Hall, even though he stayed in that room in 1784. One of the problems preventing more substance to the inclusion of enslaved individuals is the lack of information on most of them. However, although less is known about them than Washington, the interpreters are telling less than we do know. Charlotte is mentioned in the Back Hall as one of Martha’s enslaved seamstresses, but is not mentioned that she is one of the enslaved people that Washington had whipped by an overseer.



Fortunately, my boss is open to changes to the presentation of slavery at Mount Vernon. However, there is only so much he can do when faced with logistics and profit. One change that can make the presentation of slavery less segregated is including the Enslaved People of Mount Vernon tour in the price of admission. While this sounds good in theory, there are not enough trained guides to give the tour to all of the visitors who come to Mount Vernon in a given day. One of the alternatives, which Mount Vernon does, is include the Lives Bound Together exhibit with the price of admission. Most of the information that is presented during the Enslaved People of Mount Vernon tour comes from this exhibit, but the information is still segregated from the exhibit on Washington’s life. Overall, Mount Vernon must continue to work towards improving the presentation of slavery. The mansion tour is still too white-centric, the Enslaved People of Mount Vernon tour costs extra, and the Lives Bound Together exhibit is separate from the main biographical exhibit on Washington. Washington’s home is the ideal platform to discuss slavery during the Revolutionary Era and slavery’s relation to the founders, and Mount Vernon still has work to do in order to achieve this.

A Repository of Stories

During my time at the Maryland Room we received a donation from the local community college that took several weeks to comb through. Dr. Bruce Thompson, the honors coordinator at Frederick Community College had been compiling an oral history collection for years which was a project that he continued on from another professor at Hood College. This collection was primarily focused on the Civil Rights Movement, especially the actions and living conditions in Maryland. In addition a large number of the oral histories were conducted with World War II, Korean War, Vietnam Way and Desert Storm veterans were among the records. In cataloging this collection, which numbered over 300 individual packets, we had a few challenges, the first was entering every packet into an excel spreadsheet which included interviewee, interviewer, the type of media, topic and if there was a release form. After cataloging all the info in the packets, we were left with a box of loose tapes, cassette tapes, mini cassette, DV8 and a whole host of odd formats that all needed to be matched to the proper interviewee. This became somewhat problematic as some of Dr. Thompson’s students had interviewed the same person resulting in the staff having to listen to the tapes to ascertain the student’s name. We could not however listen to all the tapes, since a few release forms stated that the contents of the oral history could only be reviewed after the interviewee’s death, we were unable to fully catalog several entries and in one case we simply returned the interview to the family based on the wishes expressed in the release form.

Activist Daryl Davis with Roger Kelly

The most interesting aspect of the oral history collection was the pair of interviews done with Roger Kelly, the now deceased Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan in Maryland. Three students conducted two interviews with Roger Kelly in Thurmont, Maryland wherein Kelly tried to paint a gentler picture of the KKK. In the hour long interviews, Kelly claimed that the Klan wasn’t about violence or racial superiority but rather a desire for segregation. Kelly opened advocated for a separation of the races but it appeared that perhaps his time with Daryl Davis had persuaded him that white superiority was simply a fairy tale. The interviews sound incredibly strange when compared to the history of violence that has come to define the Klan. In closing both of his interviews, Kelly made the same plea, that the world would understand that the Ku Klux Klan was no longer the violent, hateful organization it once was but rather was now a preservationist society intent on preserving their “culture”. It was strange to listen to someone who openly claimed membership in the most vile of America’s hate groups try to espouse unity and an end to violence. The pleas of Roger Kelly simply did not seem genuine but offered a window in the evolution of racial hatred through the 1990s. What an incredible piece of history that I might have missed if not for my internship.

BMI Internship Post #3 

Installation  - some progress, some delays

While progress has been made on the window installation, it has taken longer than I had both expected and hoped.  The consultant and I have worked out what we want on the text panel and that has been approved by the BMI’s director, Anita Kasoff. 

 The consultant and I also worked on the photographs for the background graphic.  We added a few and took a few out.  Out of the 45 or so photographs, most of them date from the 1930s-1970s.  We really needed more photographs on either end to really fill out the story of women working in the 20^th century.  The BMI has a collection of over 50,000 photographs that were taken by BGE starting in 1921 and going into the late 1970s.  But I needed photographs that dated both before and after the ones from BGE.  With advice from the archivist, Matt Shirko, I used the archives finding aids to identify some Baltimore companies that were founded earlier than 1900, probably had women working for them, AND had there were photographs in their archival material here. I managed to find several from C&P Telephone, Esskay meats and Pompeian Olive Oil, so that solved that problem.  The later photographs were actually harder to find.  I did find some in a couple of company annual reports but it took a lot longer than I expected.   The list of photographs has been sent to the graphic designer and she is working on the design now.  I am very anxious and excited to see what she comes up with.

In my last blog, I reported on the making of arms (mostly) for the dress forms that will be going into the window.  I finished that last of the 5 dress forms today.

The garment on each form was chosen to match garments worn by women in the photographs that were chosen for the background mural.  The earliest garment dates from the 1910s and is a typical cotton day dress. It matches pictures of women in offices and in factories. The next dress dates from the 1930s which I paired with a cotton apron and cap – this matches pictures of women in factories and bakeries. 

On the left is a nurses’ uniform and dates from the 1940s -1950s.  I will pair it with a nurses’ cap, nursing school pin, and pin from Bon Secours Hospital.  The cap and nursing school pin are on loan from the sister of the director of collections and exhibits.  This suit dates from the early 1980s and is a prototype made by Jos. A. Bank and they w  She will be accessorized with items used by a beautician.  This outfit is turning out to be a real favorite – it’s so awful, it’s great.  We’ve all had a good laugh over it.

ere trying to gain a foothold in the women’s market. On the right is c. 1975 polyester jumpsuit that the manufacturer recommended either for a factory worker or beautician.

This has been a real learning experience for me.  It had taken longer to get the text panel written and approved than I expected.  Also finding the additional photographs added extra time I hadn’t planned for.  The installation has been moved back until January.  But I am excited about getting it all done and I think it’s going to look really great.   I have been getting great feedback from others who have seen the dress forms in progress and they are also excited about how the final installation will look.

Debbie Farthing

MSA 3

So I figured that for my final post I would give my overall evaluation of the internship at the State Archives and also provide some insight as to what they look for in the interns.  As far as my overall experience goes, I would have to say that it was extremely good.  The people that work there are extremely accommodating and were willing to help whenever I needed it.  Not having any kind of degree in library science, I learned a lot about how the archive as a whole works.  While my internship was with one of the departments that handles the every day operations of the archive, and much of what I did was very repetitious and monotonous, I feel that I probably got more practical experience than many of the other interns who worked in different departments (with the exception of the IT department).  I was able to get a good feel of what an archivist is really responsible for.  From Reorganizing entire sections of the archive, to the mundane task of labeling and identifying records.  This was really the no frills internship that provided me with the best idea of what I can expect when I enter the workplace.  You also get the opportunity to shadow in any of the other departments there, so even if you do get one of the positions in a "boring" department you can get away from that for a bit.  Also, chances are that whatever you are working on will include at least one of the other departments.  Many of the dockets I worked with were rotting out, so I got to spend a lot of time in the conservation department during my internship.  As I got to know the people in that department, they also started to include me in on some of their other projects.  They took me up to the Archive warehouse where they keep a lot of the really delicate items that need better environmental control that the main archive in Annapolis.  Overall, it was a lot of fun, and I looked forward to going into work every day.
As far as what the Archive is looking for in terms of interns goes, I would have to say that any prior experience in any kind of library or archive setting is the first thing they look for.  From what I can tell, this is the differentiating factor.  They get hundreds of applications every year and they brought on about ten paid interns this summer.  From what I could discern, every one of the interns had some kind of experience in the department that they applied for.  For the previous year I had been volunteering at the B&O Museum archive.  The person who got the job in the preservation department had experience repairing antique books, several of the interns hired to work on the research projects they have going on had either been already working on the project or had done research into similar topics.  So the best advice I can give, is that if you want an internship there, find a place to volunteer for six months or so just to get some experience.   While this won't guarantee you a position there, it will likely put your application ahead of many of the other applicants.  Also, when applying, you have the ability to pick three departments that you would like to work in.  Don't be afraid to select one of the departments that might seem boring or not what you want to do.  If you are able to get in one year doing something you might deem as boring, it betters your chances the following year.  They tend to hire the same interns year over year if possible because they are familiar with you at that point.  They also offer unpaid internships throughout the year.  From what I could tell, those interns are likely to get hired for the summer internships as well. I would also like to say that while jobs there are extremely difficult to come by they do hire many of their former interns for full time positions.  One of the IT workers had just graduated 6 months before I started there, many of the people in my department had also been former interns.  My supervisor told me to stay in contact because if a position opened up in his department he wanted me to apply for it (hasn't happened yet).

Mount Vernon Post 2

This past month I have been looking into how Mount Vernon has presented slavery in the past and how it has changed, so I could figure out how it could be improved. The first formal acknowledgement of the enslaved community at Mount Vernon was in 1928 when a memorial stone was place at the Slave Burial Ground by the Mount Vernon Ladies Association. This then progressed to the reconstruction of the Greenhouse Slave Quarters in 1962, but without much interpretation (Interpreting Slavery at Museums and Historic Sites, 23). In 1983, Howard University added a much more prominent memorial to the Slave Cemetery. The first Slave Life tour was then offered in 1995. According to my boss, however, the interpretation of both the Slave Cemetery and the Slave Quarters were neglected until a 2001 Washington Post opinion article, which mentioned that the Slave Quarters lacked interpretive signs and the cemetery was overgrown.

In Representations of Slavery: Race and Ideology in Southern Plantation Museums, Jennifer Eichstedt and Stephen Small analyzed the presentation of slavery in 122 former plantations between 1996 and 2001. Mount Vernon was one of the sites they visited, but they did not specify the exact date. Eichstedt and Small employed participant observation when they visited the plantations, so they did not engage the docents about slavery, they waited to see what would be included (Representations of Slavery, 18). Eichstedt and Small grouped the plantations into four different categories: symbolic annihilation, trivialization and deflection, segregated knowledge, and relative incorporation. Mount Vernon fell under segregated knowledge. Segregated knowledge is when slavery is presented, but the information is separate from the main, white-centric narrative. The house tour was very white-centric and seldom mention enslaved people. When it did, it was usually in the passive voice, for example, “the food was made here,” while in the kitchen. Slavery was discussed during the Slave Life tour, but these tours were only offered between April and October and required visitors to pay extra (174). Since the house tour was white-centric and the Slave Life tour was not included in the general admission price, visitors had to choose whether or not they were exposed to slavery. Eichstedt and Small found that only 10 to 20 percent of the total visitors take Slave Life tours (199).



When my boss started at Mount Vernon in 2008, slavery was still being presented as it was during Eichstedt and Small’s study. At the time, Mount Vernon was trying to find a new way to conduct the house tour and, in doing so, change how slavery was presented. Initially the house tour revolved around all of the items in the house and did not mention George Washington’s biography much. It then transitioned to focusing on Washington’s life, but neglected items in the house. It is now a combination of both, telling the story of Washington through the rooms and the items in the house. In 2013, my boss and the Director of Interpretation sought to incorporate slavery into the house tour as well. Historical interpreters are giving objectives for each room in the house, which they are required to discuss. My boss and the Director of Interpretation made one of the objectives for each room pertain to slavery. For example, in the kitchen, historical interpreters are required to mention the enslaved cooks, Hercules, Nathan, and Lucy. The Slave Life tour was also renamed the Enslaved People of Mount Vernon tour. Instead of being offered four times a day April through October, the Enslaved People’s tour is now offered year-round, four times a day April through October, and two times a day November through March. However, it is still not included in the general admission price. The original Slave Life tour was still very Washington focused. It discussed Washington’s relationship to slavery and how his actions affected the enslaved people. The current Enslaved People’s tour is much more focused on the individual stories of the enslaved. While Mount Vernon’s presentation of slavery has changed significantly, it still has a long way to go. I am curious to see if Eichstedt and Small would still put Mount Vernon in the segregated knowledge category, or if the changes have moved it towards relative incorporation.