Where exactly did Lincoln stand at Gettysburg?

[David Lockmiller]

New York Times - 11/19/2022

Since the 1990s, visitors to Gettysburg National Cemetery have been told the hallowed spot actually lies just over an iron fence, in Evergreen Cemetery, the town’s burial ground. But Christopher Oakley, a former Disney animator turned Civil War sleuth, has combined intense analysis of 19th-century photographs with 21st-century 3-D modeling software to argue that Lincoln was standing inside the national cemetery after all.

His research was unveiled on Friday at the Lincoln Forum, a gathering of some 300 scholars and enthusiasts who meet in Gettysburg each year, during the run-up to the official commemoration of Lincoln’s address on Nov. 19. As he clicked through his presentation, there were whispered “Wows,” capped with a standing ovation.

In an interview before the presentation, Harold Holzer, the group’s chairman, called Oakley’s research “ingenious,” and catnip for members, for whom discovering the exact location “is as crucial as discovering where Moses got the Ten Commandments.”

[Dave B]

Very interesting. My desire to stand exactly where Lincoln stood is why I visited Mount Pulaski, Illinois courthouse in 2019. You can't get a more precise location than that 2nd floor courtroom, except for his Springfield home.

[David Lockmiller]

Additionally, the article reads:

The most famous of the photographs is attributed to David Bachrach, who was positioned in front of the speaker’s platform. Discovered in the 1950s by Josephine Cobb, an archivist at the National Archives, it remains the only undisputed image of Lincoln at Gettysburg — seemingly taking his seat on the platform hatless, his head bowed.

The photographers may have missed Lincoln’s speech, but sometimes they inadvertently captured one another, providing clues to their exact position. During a preview of his research, Oakley pulled up one of Gardner’s shots, zooming in on a window in the Evergreen gatehouse to point out a blurred figure and a box: the photographer Peter Weaver with his camera, he said.

Oakley’s research had its snarls, starting with the Bachrach photo. “That one took me three years to figure out,” he said.

For one thing, when he lined up the tops of people’s heads in his 3-D rendering, their feet were buried ankle-deep in the ground. Then, last month, he found a National Park Service report confirming that in 1934, the ground had been regraded, raising it about eight inches.

[Mathematics, geometry, photography, the study of history, and stubbornness is what it takes to find out the truth.]

[STS Lincolnite]

Christopher Oakley’s talk at the Lincoln Forum Symposium (where he publicly revealed the results of his work to locate the speaker's platform at Gettysburg) was recorded. Eventually it will be aired on c-span (and be available to stream online). Once available, I would highly encourage everyone to watch. His talk received a standing ovation from the audience. There are lots of great talks given year in and year out at that symposium, but to my recollection that was only the second time a standing ovation was given in my 11 years attending. Christopher is a friend and I had been privy to his findings for some time…and still his talk blew me away.

In reading the New York Times article that David alluded to above, I also read through the comments on the piece. One of the topics of brought up there was whether or not where Lincoln actually spoke from was important or not. There certainly were differing opinions. So, I would love to have a similar discussion here.

Is the spot where Lincoln delivered the Gettysburg Address important or not? Why or why not?

I have my thoughts but I will wait for a few others to get the discussion going before I weigh in.

I look forward to hearing others' thoughts!

[Dave B]

I would say it's important only to those who deem it important. I don't see how it's important in and of itself.
I always like to know precisely where something occurred.

[RJNorton]

I second Dave.

[Rob Wick]

Important in the sense that it matters to humanity? Obviously not. Important in the sense of being as accurate in history as possible? I think so. Given the sanctity of Lincoln's memory in our society, we want to be as close to him as is possible. Even though many of the places we think Lincoln saw are not correct. A prime example is the Old State Capitol in Springfield. Given that the building underwent a major renovation when Sangamon County moved out very little if anything from Lincoln's time exists. That doesn't stop thousands of people a year in visiting the site.

If we knew the exact site where the speaker's platform was located it would be of service to truthfulness in history, but not much else.

Best
Rob

[Dave B]

Good post as always.

I enjoyed visiting the Lincoln Home in Springfield and the Mt Pulaski Courthouse mainly because I know that Abraham Lincoln was there. Not in the vicinity but THERE.

I once asked Dodge City authorities if Front Street, including the Long Branch Saloon, is located exactly where the original was. No, the original site is several blocks away and they gave me exact locations. But now knowing that, I'm less likely to visit Dodge City, Kansas.

[Gene C]

I'm with you Dave B regarding the Mt Pulaski Courthouse. My wife isn't quite the Lincoln fan that I am, but when we visited that courthouse on one of our Springfield Tours and stood in the courtroom where Lincoln stood, it made a real impression on her, and me to. That, and walking down the street in the early evening where the Lincoln home is. It's magical.

So be sure to join us this spring (shameless plug) for the next Springfield Tour. We will be sure to visit a site that has a spot where Lincoln stood or sat (or a spot nearby)

[Dave B]

When my wife and I went to Mount Pulaski, Illinois in June of 2019 we were the only ones in the courtroom. I sat there quite awhile.

[STS Lincolnite]

My initial thoughts were similar to what has been posted. I personally do feel it’s important. I feel like if I can stand where an historical figure stood, I have a more tangible connection to the past. Just like when I go to a museum and see an artifact. It was there then, and it is here now. Again, that tangible connection. For me, it makes history more “alive.” These of course are general observations maybe relevant only to me. (By the way, as Gene mentioned in a previous post in this thread, there are wonderful opportunities to "walk in Lincoln's footsteps" if you join us for our next Springfield visit... )

A couple of additional things about this specific site/location in Gettysburg.

I had a conversation with a friend, and she brought up an idea about the importance of the location of this particular site. We always think about the importance from our perspective – individually and looking back 150+ years. But in this case, what if we consider it from Lincoln’s perspective. What did he see when he looked out from that specific spot? How did what he saw affect his speech or how did it affect him emotionally? Would speaking from an alternate location have otherwise affected what he said or how he felt? Considering these, I think there is more inherent importance to the site – and even a more exact location. Some people in the NYT comments said that the place isn’t important, it’s the words that are important. The words are certainly important – but that shouldn’t have to mean the location of the platform isn’t. Why should it be just one or the other? The place and how it impacted the words seems important too. Had Lincoln just written dedicatory remarks while in Washington and sent them to be read instead of attending and personally delivering the remarks, I don’t think the “Gettysburg Address” would be the same speech we know today.

[STS Lincolnite]

Christopher Oakley's talk on the location of the speaker's platform at Gettysburg, delivered in November at the Lincoln Forum Symposium, is now available online for viewing.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?524210-2/2...ttysburg#!

His talk was excellent! I will be watching it again when I get a chance.

[AussieMick]

I know Lincoln was very self-effacing immediately after the speech. But we do know that he worked long and hard on it and made several changes to it. I do not believe that he could have been unaware of the importance, but more especially, of the quality of the speech. He was too intelligent a speech-giver and too astute to have not known what impact it would have then and for years to come.

That's just my opinion obviously ... and I have to say some of his other speeches appear to me, in 2023 admittedly, as laborious, repetitive, and ... well, boring. I regard, though, the Gettysburg Address as one of the (if not 'the') greatest ever speeches.