Posts Tagged ‘Courtney Tollison’

Courtney Tollison

The view of July 4 from afar

by Courtney Tollison

No Comments    |   Email to Friend    |   Print    |   RSS 2.0
Jul
1

I am in the midst of a three-week journey throughout northern India. I am with nine other professors from liberal arts colleges across the United States and we are visiting sites of religious, cultural, and historical significance.

The objective of the program sponsored by ASIANetwork and funded by the Mellon Foundation is for us to incorporate what we learn and experience into our classrooms. I am currently in Varanasi, the city along the River Ganges.

I am very far from home, but am constantly making connections with upcountry South Carolina.

Varanasi is in the northeastern part of India, and is the closest our group will be to Shamshernagar, a town which hosted an American and British air base during World War II.

As part of the Upcountry History Museum’s World War II Oral History Project, my students and I interviewed Greenville native Harold Gallivan, who was stationed at Shamshernagar during the war. From the base, he flew the C-109, which was essentially a B-24 that had been converted to haul nearly 3,000 gallons of high-octane aviation gasoline.

The plane became known as the “C- one oh boom” because of the spectacular explosion that would occur upon crash landing. He and other Allied pilots and crew were here to fly high altitude aerial supply missions over the Himalayan Mountains (an often perilous endeavor they called “flying the Hump”) to deliver fuel into China to thwart the westward expansion of the Japanese. Their efforts in the China-Burma-India theater of World War II are some of the most under recognized of the war.

During my travels, I am also mindful that, at home, the Fourth of July is approaching. Last week, a historian at a university in Delhi said to our group, “You Americans were smart to throw off the British when you did.”

Others have said to us, “you got rid of the British and then they came over here to bother us!” The historian in me cringes a bit at this chronology and oversimplification but the point of these statements is clear.

India gained independence from Great Britain in 1947, during an era of post-World War II decolonization. Many of the former European colonial powerhouses simply could not manage to rebuild their infrastructure and economies in the aftermath of the war and maintain their colonies abroad. Furthermore, the efforts of Mahatma Gandhi, widely considered the father of independent India, and others cannot be underestimated.

In India, the influence of the former colonial presence remains.

In the US, we are much further removed from this phase of our history. We tend, and especially in South Carolina, to focus more on the Civil War, a conflict that fractured our country less than a century after we gained independence.

We all know that the opening shots of the Civil War were fired off the coast of our state. Less known, however, is the fact that many conflicts from the American Revolution were fought in South Carolina. Several of those sites have been preserved and are maintained by the National Park Service.

Within a two hour’s drive from Greenville are Kings Mountain and Cowpens, two important battles of the Southern Campaign of the American Revolution.

Throughout the colonies, British General Charles Cornwallis tried aggressively to recruit loyalists to the British crown; his efforts were challenged by Rev. Richard Furman, who traveled throughout South Carolina and the South recruiting patriots. Furman, for whom Furman University is named, was eloquent and successful in his efforts, and allegedly Cornwallis placed a price of one thousand pounds on Furman’s head.

British loyalists were defeated at King’s Mountain, and months later, some of Cornwallis’ troops were defeated at Cowpens. Soon thereafter, Cornwallis surrendered to General George Washington near Yorktown. In 1782, he returned to England as part of an exchange for Henry Laurens, for whom Laurens County is named.

Four years later, Cornwallis received another extremely significant appointment from King George III. He was named Governor General of India, where for the next several years he proceeded to “bother” others who would remain firmly entrenched in the vast British Empire long after the American Revolution.

Cornwallis’ legacy in India and throughout the empire is extensive, and includes a Hindu college he founded in 1791 here in Varanasi.

Travelling throughout India has certainly provided new perspective, not only on the fact that American patriots declared our independence 235 years ago, but that veterans such as Harold Gallivan and so many others have and continue to travel to the far corners of the world to maintain it.

Happy Fourth of July!

Courtney Tollison

South Carolina and the Civil War

by Courtney Tollison

No Comments    |   Email to Friend    |   Print    |   RSS 2.0
Jan
14

The Civil War is still being fought–150 years after secessionists fired on Fort Sumter in Charleston harbor.   The sesquicentennial of the Civil War has again brought the spotlight of national media attention on the continuing debate over  why South Carolinians elected  to leave the Union and fight a prolonged war.

Much of the debate has been inspired by provocative events such as the Secession Ball held in Charleston in mid-December. The Ball, sponsored by the Confederate Heritage Trust and held in accordance with the 150th anniversary of South Carolina’s secession from the Union, was overwhelmingly deemed celebratory and contentious by the media and other groups, such as the Fort Sumter/Fort Moultrie Trust.  That such events have fostered conflicting perceptions of the war’s causes and its effects has shown yet again how the past is often a contested terrain.

Divergent media headlines illustrate the continuing controversy.  The New York Times’ recently published an article titled “Secession Defended on Civil War Anniversary” while a recent edition of  The Tennesean included an opinion piece encouraging readers to “Commemorate the Civil War, but in a Balanced Manner.” No event in American history has sparked more debate, inspired more passion, or cost more lives than the Civil War. Even the name itself generates disputed discussion: some prefer the “Civil War,” while others opt for the “War Between the States” or “The War of Northern Aggression.”

The continuing debate centers on the essential cause of the decision by eleven states to secede from the Union: a defense of the principle of states’ rights, or a defense of slavery. On December 17, 1860, delegates to the South Carolina Secession Convention effectively ended the state’s  relationship with the Union. One week later, Convention delegates passed the “Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union.” This document announced that South Carolina had “resumed her separate and equal place among nations,” and offered a detailed explanation of why and how the delegates rationalized their actions. Over the next several months, other states produced  similar statements, and the Confederate States of America was formed in February 1861. Events from the decade leading up to secession and the Declaration  itself point to the preservation of slavery as the primary motivating factor  for secession, justified by historical evidence and constitutional arguments relating to the rights of individual states within the Union.

In 1850, the United States Congress debated the balance of slave and free states in the Union, the Fugitive Slave Act (which required the return of runaway slaves to their owners) passed, and states’ rights advocate John C. Calhoun died. In response to  Congressional actions, South Carolina planter Edward B. Bryan championed secession in a state where nearly 60 percent of the people were enslaved, and he very publicly set the stage for conflict when he dramatically proclaimed: “Give us slavery or give us death.”  That same year, several slaveholding states convened to consider secession, but decided against such a radical step. In 1851,  secessionists  from Beaufort declared that “…we regard domestic slavery as the safeguard of political freedom. Therefore it is now the solemn duty of the Southern States to sever the tie that binds us to a Union already practically sundered, and to unite in a slaveholding Confederacy, maintaining as a fundamental principle, the perpetual recognition of that institution.”  In 1856, the governor of South Carolina demanded the reopening of the African slave trade.  In 1858, South Carolinians were so paranoid about northern efforts to abolish slavery that the state legislature passed laws to discourage northerners from traveling to the state. Early in 1860, politicians throughout South Carolina threatened that if a Republican won the presidential election  they would organize a state  convention to initiate secession.

The original Ordinance of Secession passed at that convention in December of 1860 has been displayed across the state in recent weeks, making appearances at various locations and events, including the Secession Ball. It is the Ordinance’s lengthier and less well known companion document, however, that provides greater detail about the historical and legal causes which “induce[d] and justified]” the state  to take such monumental action.

The Declaration mentioned the increasing “encroachments” of the federal government on the state and the worrisome implications of Lincoln’s recent election, a man “whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery.”  It argued that since northern states had neglected to follow Congressional legislation relating to the return of slaves to their owners, and Congress had ceased to enforce its own laws in regards to non-slaveholding states, the government had become destructive to the ends for which it was founded, and thus South Carolina was released from her obligation to that government. The federal government’s unwillingness to enforce protections relating to slavery provided what South Carolina secessionists perceived to be a legitimate constitutional basis for leaving the Union.

Yet, the justifications argued in the Declaration beg an obvious question: would South Carolina have left the Union had there been no institution of slavery?