Things Lincoln never said

[Eva Elisabeth]

This is what her son and grandson recalled: “Mrs. Stowe, in telling of her interview with Mr. Lincoln...dwelt particularly on the rustic pleasantry with which that great man received her. She was introduced into a cosy room where the President had been seated before an open fire, for the day was damp and chilly. It was Mr. Seward who introduced her, and Mr. Lincoln rose awkwardly from his chair, saying, ‘Why, Mrs. Stowe, right glad to see you!’ Then with a humorous twinkle in his eye, he said, ‘So you’re the little woman who wrote the book that made this great war! Sit down, please,’ he added, as he seated himself once more before the fire, meditatively warming his immense hands over the smouldering embers by first extending the palms, and then turning his wrists so that the grateful warmth reached the backs of his hands. The first thing he said was, ‘I do love an open fire. I always had one to home.’ Mrs. Stowe particularly remarked on the expression ‘to home.’ ‘Mr. Lincoln,’ said Mrs. Stowe, “I want to ask you about your views on emancipation.’ It was on that subject that the conversation turned.” (Charles Edward Stowe and Lyman Beecher Stowe, Harriet Beecher Stowe: The Story of Her Life, pp. 202-203.)

"Regarding the “little woman” quote attributed to the president, Lincoln scholar Daniel R. Vollaro wrote that it is likely that the Stowe quote was invented by the family at a later date and no contemporary evidence of it." Original source is: Daniel R. Vollaro, “Lincoln, Stowe, and the ‘Little Woman/Great War’ Story: The Making, and Breaking of a Great American Anecdote", Journal of the Abraham Lincoln Association, Winter 2009, p. 18-34, but I couldn't find it onnline.
( http://www.mrlincolnswhitehouse.org/insi...ubjectID=2 )

Privately Abraham Lincoln often preferred to say "rebellion". He used "(great Civil) war" in his solemn speeches, but would he have used "great war" privately in a pun?

[RJNorton]

Hi Eva. I think this is the article you are referring to.

[David Lockmiller]

(02-09-2014 05:00 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  Hi Eva. I think this is the article you are referring to.

I should like to point out the prescient observations made by the author, Daniel Vollaro, in this piece published in the Journal of the Abraham Lincoln Association in the Winter 2009 issue. From the first and second paragraphs of this article:

1. [T]he quotation is entirely apocryphal, emerging from within Stowe family tradition without any textual support or verification from the author herself.
2. On the Internet, where historical summaries are often disconnected from their sources entirely, Lincoln's alleged words are rapidly hardening into unqualified historical fact.
3. How did an apocryphal story emerge as the main evidence for Stowe's cultural legacy before the Civil War? That question is seldom asked by scholars, who treat the quotation more as a treasured Stowe family heirloom than a problem text, footnoting it and then moving on.
4. Lincoln's greeting drifts in the same strata of pseudo-historical flotsam that increasingly defines that which is considered "historical" in the digital age. The story persists not because of its historicity . . . .

All of this discussion of apocryphal quotations reminds me of my many criticisms of Spielberg’s “Lincoln” movie that I have made on this website. In this increasingly digital age, who is going to be making the necessary corrections of mistakes to Lincoln history promulgated in Spielberg’s Lincoln’s movie? When?

In February, 2013, Leslie Stahl introduced the “60 Minutes” piece on Spielberg’s “Lincoln” movie with these infamous words: “The film is filled with things about our 16th President that we, who are not Lincoln scholars, did not know.” It is now one year later. Has 60 Minutes announced any “Lincoln history” corrections? No!!!

I, for one, am concerned that Spielberg's "Lincoln" movie history is going to be "harden[ed] into unqualified historical fact" in this increasingly digital age.

[L Verge]

As sort of a follow-up to your comments, David, I heard a news report last week about a study being conducted in Sweden (I think that was the country) on the effects that the internet and social media are having on this and future generations. The conductors of the study contend that the technological age of information is actually going to destroy humans' ability to think for ourselves. Bad information will be spread from pillar to post and passed through cyberspace without anyone questioning the sources and reliability.

Frankly, I can see that already happening with some people around me - including my straight-A grandson, whom I have to force to fact check. And, I will also admit that it was difficult to pull me away from my home set of Funk & Wagnalls of the 1950s in order to check out other sources

[Eva Elisabeth]

(02-09-2014 05:00 AM)RJNorton Wrote:  Hi Eva. I think this is the article you are referring to.

Thanks a lot, Roger!

[RJNorton]

I find this the strangest meeting. Even the date is in dispute. Although we discussed December 2, 1862, in this thread, other sources give the date as November 25, 1862. This is the date given by Stowe biographer Phillip McFarland in Loves of Harriet Beecher Stowe. I checked Lincoln Day By Day and again there is no mention of Lincoln meeting with Stowe on November 25, 1862. There has been mention of William Seward introducing Stowe to Lincoln. I checked Walter Stahr's Seward: Lincoln's Indispensable Man and cannot find any mention of Seward ever meeting Stowe. There has been mention of Mary Lincoln inviting Stowe to the White House. I checked my Mary Lincoln biographies, and there is no mention of this. Noah Brooks, who arrived in the fall of 1862, does not mention Stowe. Neither do Hay or Nicolay.

Wasn't Harriet Beecher Stowe a "household name" because of Uncle Tom's Cabin? I just think it is amazing that there seems to be no independent corroboration of this apparent (my word, not the historians') visit other than the Stowe family itself.

[David Lockmiller]

(02-09-2014 05:43 PM)L Verge Wrote:  As sort of a follow-up to your comments, David, I heard a news report last week about a study being conducted in Sweden (I think that was the country) on the effects that the internet and social media are having on this and future generations. The conductors of the study contend that the technological age of information is actually going to destroy humans' ability to think for ourselves. Bad information will be spread from pillar to post and passed through cyberspace without anyone questioning the sources and reliability.

Frankly, I can see that already happening with some people around me - including my straight-A grandson, whom I have to force to fact check. And, I will also admit that it was difficult to pull me away from my home set of Funk & Wagnalls of the 1950s in order to check out other sources

That's the very point that I have been trying so long to make about the "Lincoln" movie. People are going to "weight" the source of information when they have so many choices to make as to credibility on any given subject. A Spielberg movie on "Lincoln"? That will be the Gold standard. Even "60 Minutes" (another "Gold Standard" of truth, except for the Benghazi story) began Leslie Stahl's broadcast story on the "Lincoln" movie with the words: “The film is filled with things about our 16th President that we, who are not Lincoln scholars, did not know.” After viewing both, what do you think the response would be if you asked your straight-A grandson if there were any problems with historical facts in Spielberg's "Lincoln" movie?

Add to this that Director Spielberg, playwright Tony Kushner, and Oscar winning actor Daniel Day-Lewis all "loved" Lincoln. Each and all did a thorough historical research on the subject matter of the movie; long before the movie began a conference of preeminent Lincoln scholars met to discuss Lincoln with Spielberg and Kushner; some of these preeminent Lincoln scholars acted as advisors on the actual making of the movie; and Spielberg recorded the ticking of Lincoln's actual pocket watch (with permission of the Smithsonian) for the making of the movie.

And, yet, there was in the "Lincoln" movie a scene showing Mary Lincoln berating the President of the United States, Abraham Lincoln, for not pushing hard enough to gain passage of the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. After seeing this section of the movie, what do you think your straight-A grandson would have to say about the character of President Abraham Lincoln? And, how would you go about correcting any misinformation that he had gained from watching Spielberg's "Lincoln" movie as to Abraham Lincoln, his actual relationship with his wife and Secretary of War, etc.? To what single scholarly resource would you direct your grandson to do his fact-checking on Spielberg's "Lincoln" movie?

I am not directing all of this to you personally. Please take no offense.

As you know from my earlier postings here on the "Lincoln" movie, I sent a letter to Leslie Stahl about the short comings of the "Lincoln" movie as to historical Lincoln facts. [No response.] And, after the "Benghazi" story broke in other major news media about this "60 Minutes" reporting failing, the chief executive over 60 Minutes, Mr. Fager, apologized to the public for the reporting errors. Thereafter, I sent to him a copy of my letter to Leslie Stahl on the deficiencies in the "Lincoln" movie segment. [No response.] Thereafter, I sent copies of my "Leslie Stahl" and "Mr. Fager" letters to Mr. Al Ortiz, the man who Mr. Fager appointed Executive Director of Standards and Practices at CBS News to "reduce the chances of a [Benghazi reporting fiasco] happening again." [No response.]

I have come to the conclusion that major news organizations will only admit their reporting mistakes when they absolutely have to do so. Another example of my failed efforts to correct a Lincoln historial fact was with the NY Times, the supposed "Gold standard" of truth in newspaper reporting. I tried several times to get the NY Times to print a retraction of the NSA Op-Ed hoax "Lincoln's Surveillance State" (July 5, 2013). I was "stonewalled."

[L Verge]

You are speaking to a used history teacher here, David, so I am on your side. I spent nearly a decade trying to get 8th and 9th graders to separate fact from fiction in U.S. history and government -- sometimes failing to distinguish between the two myself because every book seemed to say something different. Unfortunately, few students then had access to primary source materials - that is one area that the internet has improved upon, when you know where to look.

As for the failings of the press and media, don't get me started. It's best to let sleeping dogs lie until they can analyze politics (which now extends into all areas of society) fair and equitably to produce a well-informed citizenry. I just don't see that happening any time soon.

[Gene C]

(02-10-2014 11:20 AM)David Lockmiller Wrote:  That's the very point that I have been trying so long to make about the "Lincoln" movie. People are going to "weight" the source of information when they have so many choices to make as to credibility on any given subject. A Spielberg movie on "Lincoln"? That will be the Gold standard. movie.

You are right. This wasn't a documentry, although many people treat it like one. He took some poetic license. Like the scene in Jurasic Park, where the dinosaur eats the lawyer who is in the outhouse. It didn't really occur the way it was portayed on the screen. He probably just used a little poetic license.
(no offense intended to you lawyers out there)

[David Lockmiller]

(02-10-2014 11:54 AM)Gene C Wrote:  

(02-10-2014 11:20 AM)David Lockmiller Wrote:  That's the very point that I have been trying so long to make about the "Lincoln" movie. People are going to "weight" the source of information when they have so many choices to make as to credibility on any given subject. A Spielberg movie on "Lincoln"? That will be the Gold standard. movie.

You are right. This wasn't a documentry, although many people treat it like one. He took some poetic license. Like the scene in Jurasic Park, where the dinosaur eats the lawyer who is in the outhouse. It didn't really occur the way it was portayed on the screen. He probably just used a little poetic license.
(no offense intended to you lawyers out there)

Would the meal of a dinosaur eating a lawyer who is in an outhouse be considered a "dinosaur's sandwich"?

As to whether the playwright Kushner considered the "Lincoln" movie not to be any sort of documentary, you should watch Bill Moyers interview with Kushner on the "Lincoln" movie.

Bill Moyer's specifically asked Kushner about one scene after showing a clip of the scene. It was the scene showing Mary Lincoln berating the President of the United States, Abraham Lincoln, for not pushing hard enough to gain passage of the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. In reply, Kushner described the scene as a "provable truth" (which would indicate a "documentary" approach rather "poetic license"). In another thread, I quoted from Professor Burlingame's book demonstrating that Kushner's "provable truth" in this instance was "provably false."

[LincolnMan]

It's funny how quotes can go. I apologize that this isn't about a Lincoln quote. Yesterday I came across a great quote by George S. Patton:

"Never take counsel of your fears."

Nice, isn't it? Then I look more online and found the quote attributed to Andrew Jackson. Still a little more looking- and I found it attributed to Stonewall Jackson. Hey, what's going on here? Could all of them have said it? I suppose so. Well, when it comes to Lincoln quotes, it's very wise to take it with a grain of salt, do a little research, and know that it could be wrong. Such is our study!

[RJNorton]

(02-20-2014 12:32 PM)LincolnMan Wrote:  Well, when it comes to Lincoln quotes, it's very wise to take it with a grain of salt, do a little research, and know that it could be wrong. Such is our study!

So true, Bill. Example:

"If I knew that I had eight hours to chop a tree down, I would spend the first six sharpening my axe."

I see that quote everywhere (or a version of it) attributed to Lincoln, but there is no authentic source that I have ever found.

[LincolnMan]

Roger: I just looked the quote up on the web and it's everywhere. Of course, no source for attributing it to Lincoln is given. I suppose these things happen because somewhere at some point someone came across the quote and falsely (and unintentionally?) cited Lincoln as the author. From there it took on a life of its own-some of the quotes eventually being used by well-meaning credible individuals. The quotes become part of the Lincoln lore, don't they? Ronald Reagan giving the false Lincoln quote about fiscal responsibilty, for example. Perhaps it says something about Lincoln that so many false quotes are attributed to him. And I would guess that the quotes probably continue to enhance Lincoln as a wise man- not that he needs any further strengthening- his actual words and works speak for themselves.

[LincolnMan]

I once read or heard that Lincoln was served coffee and made a statement something like: "if this is coffee- bring me tea. If this is tea- bring me coffee."
Apparently, he didn't favor the beverage he was brought. Is there any truth to the statement as having been made by Lincoln- or something like it?

[RJNorton]

Bill, this is another of those attributed-to-Lincoln quotes that is carried on some web pages, but I've never seen a legitimate source for it.