Post Reply 
Blog Posts about Mary Lincoln
03-06-2020, 12:41 AM
Post: #13
RE: Blog Posts about Mary Lincoln
(03-05-2020 04:09 PM)Amy L. Wrote:  Sorry it these points have already been made, but - Some rhetorical questions -
I just finished 'Honor's Voice', by Douglas Wilson. I cannot speak to his sources, but in this book it seems he attempted to dash almost every pre-'43 assumption that's been made.

Yes. And I think he did a very good job trying to make sense of it, but I ultimately wasn't satisfied with it. At the moment, I forget all my specific quibbles, but reading it made me decide to try writing a series for reddit's unresolved mysteries discussion community. They had started doing historical mysteries as well as true crime, and some of the people there are really good at noticing overlooked things. I thought fresh eyes might help, and wanted to lay out my own thoughts. For various reasons, I didn't end up finishing it, but I may try again. Instead of repeating what I think, I'll link to it.


As an update, at this point, I am pretty sure the Jane Bell letter was "forged", which would seem to make a difference. It would be easy for a Lincoln buff to see an opportunity to do this, and the wording closely tracks existing sources. It reads as though it is contrived, and a few years ago one Lincoln scholar sent out a call for the original, leading me to believe others have realized this. The same may be true for some of the other letters--this was (and probably to some extent still is) trivially easy to do, and the market for new gossip is always present, and people want to believe. The famous Ann Rutledge letters debacle in The Atlantic was quickly uncovered because it was so poorly done, and even then it got published. Someone with more skill and knowledge could have made a killing in that environment.

I'm also still convinced we are missing literary references. A huge amount of cultural knowledge evaporated between the world wars. I suspect this has to do with the professionalization of the press and the triumph of "objective" reporting. Most writers were seemingly incapable of taking newspapers from the 1800s as anything but literal and authoritative, and all of Lincoln literature is messed up by this mistake. The press was very playful and personal, on the whole, until World War I. The Civil War era was the peak of this, and the press had way more power than the government. This didn't compute for people living inn a more conservative time where that power relation was reversed. I was stunned by what the editor of John Hay's diary wrote in a footnonte:

Quote: “From the Hay diary it would appear that throughout the Civil War it was not uncommon to place journalists in important military and public positions whence they could write for the paper with a view to directing public opinion . . . We are accustomed to think of government propaganda as having been developed during the World War.”

Historians of secretaries of state thought the concept of media manipulation was developed during the World War?!? I have no idea how this could have come as a surprise to him---it is the most obvious thing in the world if you read the papers and letters of that time. I talk about this with regard to Wikoff. This was normal practice, not considered shameful nor even hidden from the public in most instances. It wasn't really government propaganda because no one expected straight news, and the government didn't really control the information. They gave access in exchange for what they hoped would be favorable or at least accurate and non-abusive press.


Quote:1. What happened on the 'Fatal First'? Is the only referrence to it twice, in correspondences with Speed? Why does this fatal event have to have something to do with Lincoln? Could Speed have trespassed against someone? (aka Sarah Rickard?)

I go into this in my reddit post, and I think this was one of the complaints I had with Wilson's version. I think he only says it once, but it was a relatively common figurative expression. Wilson points out Speed's store closed on January 1, 1841. But the quote is:

Quote:I am not going beyond the truth, when I tell you, that the short space it took me to read your last letter, gave me more pleasure, than the total sum of all I have enjoyed since that fatal first of Jany.'41. Since then, it seems to me, I should have been entirely happy, but for the never-absent idea, that there is one still unhappy whom I have contributed to make so. That still kills my soul. I can not but reproach myself, for even wishing to be happy while she is otherwise. She accompanied a large party on the Rail Road cars, to Jacksonville last monday; and on her return, spoke, so that I heard of it, of having enjoyed the trip exceedingly. God be praised for that.

Why would he immediately turn to talking about Mary Lincoln after that reference if it is about Speed's store? And if it was about something else and he was just making a self-absorbed comment about his personal problems, there's no reason he would have gotten over it the next day and been entirely happy about everything else.

Quote:

2. Wilson speculated that Mary was planning to announce her engagement to Lincoln at a party hosted by the Edwards, and then Lincoln's cold feet didn't show up. (is the only proof of their '41 engagement Speed's verbal interview, where he said, he recommended to Lincoln - go to her instead of writing a letter?).

It's really hard to make sense of Herndon's notes, to know what was his speculation and what was a quote, and all that. Speed said they were engaged in late 1840, that it was over by 1841, I think. Others supported that timeline, but no one is very exact. I'm pretty sure Herndon's notes never mention him asking Speed, "so what was the fatal first?" which you think would be natural. There is just a general lack of follow up questions on some things that i can't make sense of. This was a national discussion by 1872, and yet no one turns up letters in which it is discussed by any of the main players. No one asked Speed or the Edwardses for clarification? I do think that a possible announcement at a party is plausible, and a relative claimed that is what happened, but the account is iffy. But all the contemporary focus is on Lincoln's wretchedness, not Mary's.

I found some new courtship-related stuff, which I hope to post soon.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
Blog Posts about Mary Lincoln - kerry - 03-01-2020, 12:50 PM
RE: Blog Posts about Mary Lincoln - kerry - 03-01-2020, 08:27 PM
RE: Blog Posts about Mary Lincoln - Anita - 03-02-2020, 08:26 PM
RE: Blog Posts about Mary Lincoln - kerry - 03-02-2020, 11:02 PM
RE: Blog Posts about Mary Lincoln - Steve - 03-04-2020, 01:18 AM
RE: Blog Posts about Mary Lincoln - kerry - 03-04-2020, 01:58 AM
RE: Blog Posts about Mary Lincoln - Steve - 03-04-2020, 06:45 PM
RE: Blog Posts about Mary Lincoln - kerry - 03-04-2020, 07:11 PM
RE: Blog Posts about Mary Lincoln - Amy L. - 03-05-2020, 04:09 PM
RE: Blog Posts about Mary Lincoln - kerry - 03-06-2020 12:41 AM
RE: Blog Posts about Mary Lincoln - Steve - 03-10-2020, 03:40 AM
RE: Blog Posts about Mary Lincoln - kerry - 03-10-2020, 10:09 PM
RE: Blog Posts about Mary Lincoln - kerry - 03-12-2020, 05:39 PM

Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)