Book Review: The World Will Never See the Like: The Gettysburg Reunion of 1913
The World Will Never See the Like: The Gettysburg Reunion of 1913. By John L. Hopkins. El Dorado Hills: Savas Beatie, 2024. Hardcover, 197 pp. $32.95
Reviewed by Jon Tracey
In his first book, communications professional John L. Hopkins explores the 50th anniversary of the battle of Gettysburg and the grand reunion that occurred there in 1913. For a sweltering week in June and July, over 50,000 aged veterans (not limited to those originally present at Gettysburg) and tens of thousands of onlookers and support staff descended upon Gettysburg. Unlike the warlike manner with which many had arrived in decades before, this time they came to celebrate peace in their own ways.
Hopkins reviewed a number of archives and secondary sources to record the event, its often-last-minute planning process, and the stories of the people who attended. Readers are not expected to have an encyclopedic knowledge of Gettysburg; when places, units, or people are introduced, he provides enough explanatory historical detail to provide context to readers. Putting his news and media background to use, Hopkins draws extensively from newspapers, and his insider view means that he is not afraid to point out when period writers did not accurately represent either the 1863 battle or the 1913 events.
The 1913 reunion is intrinsically tied to the concept of historical memory, which is the way that groups and individuals choose to remember the past. History and memory are constructed, and this reunion was part commemoration, part celebration, and part stage for its leaders and participants to shape the way the war was remembered. Hopkins understands this and dives into these complications rather than just presenting schedules of events and occurrences. This is particularly notable in his sections dedicated to either Daniel Sickles, the legacy of James Longstreet as presented by his widow at the reunion, or the chapter dedicated to the event’s most famous moment, the recreation of Pickett’s Charge by veterans culminating at The Angle.
During the chapters on the messy planning process, he repeatedly shows conflicts within the committees as they debated allowing displays of the Confederate flag, whether gray uniforms could be worn, and even whether African American veterans would be allowed to attend. Hopkins does not shy away from discussion of the Lost Cause and shows how the reunion fit the mold of reconciliation through brushing slavery and causes of the war under the rug in favor of generic praises of martial manhood. He references other works on the topic in his easily accessible footnotes and draws direct comparisons between them and reunion speeches. He also offers numerous accounts by those infuriated by the display of Confederate imagery and language such as a bar brawl that culminated in a Confederate veteran stabbing Union men who took offense at his racial insults against Abraham Lincoln, reminding us that reconciliation was not universal (136).
Still, his acute assessment of the 1913 reunion and its relationship with Lost Cause reconciliation does not mean he dismisses the significance of the event or denigrates it. He concludes that “the reunion had been a chance for these men to gather in unprecedented numbers with fellow veterans who understood it all, perhaps for the last time,” noting that it was an incredible event that was profoundly meaningful to thousands of people (176). It is a worthy addition to the small amount of secondary works on the reunion, taking the time to both summarize the event’s organization and happenings as well as slowing down to grapple with some of its complexities.
Jon-thank you for this review. The reunions and the development of the national battlefield parks have always fascinated me. These stories tell as much about our country at whatever point in time (1913 in this case) as about the war itself. The perspective of the veterans is difficult to comprehend. Many of them were probably never more than ten miles from their homes before they enlisted, but participated in the major event in our country’s history. Fifty years later, they came back to remember, but also probably to try to wrap their heads around everything that had happened since then. It’s also sobering to me to realize that the younger of these veterans were not much older than I am today.
Thanks, Jon. I’m so glad that you enjoyed the book and found it a worthwhile contribution to the larger story of Gettysburg. The reunion really was an extraordinary event and I tried to do justice to its many subplots and layers of meaning.
John, thanks for the kind words. In a previous job and various written articles, I often tackled the ways veterans remembered and commemorated Gettysburg. A solid monograph that outlined the planning and events while critically grappling with the messier aspects was sorely needed! Happy to have it on my shelf.
Its a shame we have lost the comity and reconciliation we once had. “During the reunion, Gov. Louis B. Hanna of North Dakota told the story of one Confederate veteran who passed away in a Northern state. Former Union soldiers, now in the Grand Army of the Republic, buried the Confederate at a GAR cemetery. At the grave side, the GAR commander said:
““We cannot understand why this man fought for the Stars and Bars while we fought for the Star and Stripes. But it is enough to know that each man fought for the right. And now, in the spirit of charity and fraternity, we lay him to rest, the Gray beside the Blue.”
Now, we as a society blame the individual Confederate for his cause. I am sure this burial would – or the kind words – not have occurred today.
Tom
Tom, I think you missed a key point of both my review and the original book – that reconciliation was not a universal. To think thus is to minimize both the people who chose not to reconcile, as well as those who indeed chose to, such in your example. By assuming it was common across everyone one forgets the choices the veterans of both sides made personally as to whether they would or not.
Whatever it was, its gone now.
Tom
Thank-you John — great review… i have read enough newspaper editorials and GAR pronouncements to know that the ideal of reconciliation was not universal among Union veterans … they had no problem with the reunion … but had a big problem with the display of the Confederate battle flag and the erection of Confederate state monuments … and there’s an understandable dichtomy there … Union vets could respect the soldierly virtue and valor of there former foes while distaining the symbols and commeneration of their cause … i have a great-great grandfather from a PA infantry regiment and have often wondered what he thought about this reunion.
Just so, Mark. If you haven’t read it already, Caroline Janney’s Remembering the Civil War offers a really thoughtful and thorough examination of (as the subtitle says) “reunion and the limits of reconciliation.” And she’s a terrific writer.
Pennsylvania, not surprisingly, sent by far the largest contingent of veterans to the 1913 reunion — 22,103. New York was a distant second at 8,500. Among the former Confederate states, Virginia had the largest delegation: 3,278.
thanks for the recommendation on Jannney’s book … i am going to get your book as well, sounds fascinating … in addition to the human interest stories, the other thing that intriques me is the logistics of the encampment … thousands of just about everything and then worrying about the old soldiers, many of who liked to take a drink, wondering around southern PA in the July heat, amazing!
Thanks, Mark! Hope you enjoy reading it half as much as I did researching and writing it.