Civil War Round Tables and Allied Organizations as Credible Sources of Local History
Emerging Civil War welcomes Andrew C.M. Mizsak
Every community in America has someone or something about which they like to brag. And the Wikipedia page for such topics is more than happy to oblige what is believed to be that fact. Oftentimes, that information is true… sometimes it is the basis of urban legend… and every now and then, as my students call it, it is a “bologna sandwich.”
Civil War Round Tables and our history partners have the opportunity to promote accurate and factual history, but also have an obligation to convey information that is both truthful and verifiable.
When I first got involved in the Civil War community, my colleagues, Dr. Curt Fields and Dr. Rick Weil, advised me to “read, read some more, and when you have finished reading the material, read it again.” Their point being that every time one goes through the information – whether it is biographical, the flow of a battle, after-action accounts, or even anecdotal evidence – there is a chance you will pick up yet another nugget of information you did not recognize during your initial round of review.
Learning is an evolutionary process. It is perfectly acceptable to evolve on a position or a fact pattern (as long as you remember the famous adage of the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan: “You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own set of facts”), and you can expand on your analysis and opinions, as long as the facts remain as the facts.
In previous postings, I have shared how Round Tables and allied historical organizations can be a resource to our communities. The accurate study and interpretation of historical information is precisely one of the things we can do that will add value and benefit to our localities. Our Round Table organizations often include members whose talents and knowledge are both deep and wide.
How does that help our respective organizations within our communities? Branching out to engage in public history, we have more opportunities to share those important stories with credible and verifiable facts that community members might find interesting. Just remember, those facts and those stories that you share must be able to be proven through a credible source (not Wikipedia, per se, but the list of sources at the bottom of the page if that is your initial source search).
As we close in on 2026, we will be exposed to more and more information about the semiquincentennial of the United States – America 250. We should embrace this unique opportunity to share our local history with our neighbors. Unlike 1976, where it was all about the bicentennial of the American Revolution, there is the opportunity in 2026 for our local communities to share how our fabric of the historical narrative fits into the greater tapestry of American history. Just remember… accuracy matters.
Part of what makes history enjoyable is that which is the stuff of legend, and those legends are great when you are sitting around the campfire with your friends because there is nary any fact check occurring. However, when you are engaging with the public, and can be fact-checked on the spot, there is neither time nor room for statements to be made up or embellished. Taking license with the facts could damage the credibility of your organization’s reputation. Your organization then suffers the opportunity to be an asset to your community.
I share these tips with my students when it comes to academic research. In our current times, a tarnished reputation is hard to shake. And when you are engaging in public history as a representative of your organization, you do not want to bring any ill-repute upon them or you. I have met plenty of people who have had the best of intentions when sharing public history, but have earned the dubious honor of having an estranged relationship with the truth.
Check those facts. Be solid in your research. Tell the truth.
That will help you and your organization become a public history resource and a better community partner.
Andrew C.M. Mizsak is a member of the Board of Directors, CWRT Congress, Commander, James A. Garfield CWRT in Ohio, and Adjunct Professor of Political Science at Lakeland Community College.
Unfortunately Ezra Carman and all the other authors who relied on him completely missed the battle of Fox’s and Turner’s Gaps. Confederate deaths had to be at least 1,000. Hood was half a mile west of Carman’s claimed location. Overwhelming Union victory!
Interesting article, Andrew hits the point by declaring the most important issue or factor is accuracy. But it maybe a two way street, the one traveled by the lecturer and one followed by the those in the audience. I am a avid participant in our local Round Table (Williamsburg chapter) and being one who is willing to probe the lecturer’s facts and sometimes his opinions by asking questions that pertain to the subject being discussed adds to the quest of what we all want, namely a more complete understanding of the matter being analyzed.