On the west side of the monument, there are the names of Richmond County Residents killed in WW I. The WW I list has a category named 'Colored', and the names are in alphabetical order in each category. In the east facing side, the names of Richmond County residents killed in WW II are in alphabetical order, this time without a racial category.
There is no date on the monument, although articles in the Augusta Chronicle date its commemoration to May 30, 1954. Woodlawn Camp No 55 of the Woodmen of the World is the organization which erected it, according to an inscription in the base of the monument.
The monument is located in the median of Greene St, near the intersection with 10th St.
This is the list of resources that I've gathered:
- Pictures I took on May 24, 2007
- Gordon band, brass to lead dedication of war dead shaft, Augusta Chronicle, May 29, 1954
- WOW Camp Dedicates Monument to Richmond County War Dead, Augusta Chronicle, June 1, 1954
- NA holds Memorial Day services, Augusta Chronicle, May 30, 1972
- Heart, Spirit and Soul, Augusta Chronicle, May 31, 1972
- Woodmen honor U.S. veterans, Augusta Chronicle, March 16, 2007
- Monument had a definite beginning date, Augusta Chronicle, March 18, 2007
These are the most interesting questions I can think of regarding this monument:
1. Assuming the monument was created at one time, why would segregation be practiced for WW I and not WW II?
2. In the years since, including as recently as 2007 when the bench monument was erected, why has the city of Augusta or Woodmen of the World never done anything to change this monument or at least note somehow that the attitude of Augusta has changed since this monument's erection?
I would by lying if I claimed that I did not have an agenda for asking these questions. What is the appropriate policy for cities across our region which have monuments celebrating segregationists and the Confederacy?
- Slant Eye for the Round Eye's Take on Benjamin Ryan Tillman's Statue
- Notice that the South Carolina State Government web site does not mention Benjamin Ryan Tillman's Oppression of African-Americans
- Text of Proposed Legislation in South Carolina General Assembly Enjoining Removal of Tillman's Statue
- Georgia State Capitol Building
- Professor Bruce E. Baker of the University of London, the author of What Reconstruction Meant (University of Virginia Press, 2007), alerted me in private correspondence to the existence of the McKie Meriwether monument in North Augusta. Check out its entry in the Historical Markers Database.
And, yes, the fact that our environments are polluted, jails are overcrowded and schools are underperforming is more important than these monuments. But can't we fix these as well?
And let me make sure that I make clear that I don't want to embarrass the Woodmen of the World folks at all. If each person really knew our own ancestors' history, there's probably many things of which we would all be ashamed. And if we were honest, we've all done things in our lives of which we should be ashamed. And if we were really honest, then we've done something today of which we should be ashamed. So, seriously, I am not busting on the Woodmen.
March 16, 2011: There's a small blurb about this monument in a local publication, p. 32.
Well there are probably several reasons why the term "colored" is used to split the list of names for World War I but not World War II. The most likely of which I can think of has some root in segregation, but is far less discriminatory as one would think.
ReplyDeleteIn World War I, faced with the requirement to mobilize from scratch into a massive armed force on the ground in France, the United States fell back on the same process used in the Civil War. Regiments were recruited, drafted, and formed locally. White regiments were formed around local militias, with local augmentations, then sent to boot camp (and I am over simplifying that complex process mind you).
For blacks, that meant service in segregated "colored" units. These regiments, brigades, and divisions were the logical descendants of the USCT which served in the Civil War, with one major exception. In the Civil War the USCT were more 'ad hoc' organizations with ranks filled without regard to location, just who ever signed in for a unit. In World War I, these regiments were formed locally, in parallel to the white units. Of note, these were COMBAT units going to war. Not service support. The Army saw the black solder just as capable a rifleman as the white, just that it didn't want the two mixed.
In World War II, the system was a bit more complex. First the "locality" system was discarded early in the war. Many of the first units to see combat, based on the old National Guard system of the time, were locally formed. But after the first few waves of new recruits in 1942, the local flavor left most units. Second, the Army went out of its way at first NOT to send black soldiers into combat. Arguably, the army of 1942 was more racist than that of 1917, but I'll save that debate for the scholars. (The all black 2nd Cavalry division was mostly disbanded in 1942-43 before seeing combat.) Later in the war several all black infantry divisions were formed along with separate armored units, and did see action (and of course the Tuskegee Airmen are well known). But because of the bias, most black soldiers serving in World War II were relegated to support functions. Combat causalities (which the list here represents) were limited for black soldiers because of this factor.
So what you are seeing, I think, on the monument is not so much some point of blatant racism by those who placed the monument, but rather an attempt to factually present the nature of service of those veterans. In World War I, two sets of units were raised locally - one white, one colored. In World War II men were sent off to serve in the big "green machine" without any specific unit. Furthermore, it is quite possible that not a single black soldier is listed under the World War II heading, due to the restrictions and situations mentioned above.
Now, that said, let me get on my soap box regarding the "editing" of a memorial or monument. I'm decidedly in the "no way" camp. These monuments were placed by people at a point in time of our history. As such there is considerable context to the history as it is presented. The fact that whites and coloreds are listed separately for World War I indicates that those placing the monument felt for one reason or another there was a need to demonstrate a distinction. Was that distinction strictly based on skin color? Or was that based on service in different numbered units in the Army? That cannot be stated with clarity given the inscription.
In my opinion what should be done in this case is more interpretation. If my premise is correct (representation of segregated units), then perhaps an interpretive sign should be placed near the monument. One that discusses the "whys" and "wheres" of the names. That would indeed serve to first explain the inscription, but also serve as a stark reminder to us today where we came from and were we should move toward as a nation. You can't learn from mistakes by covering them up!
On that same line, the idea that monuments should be removed based on the revisions of history is not healthy. That would be akin to book burning. If we chose to "edit" the public displays of history based on our modern tastes, then we erase the context from which those monuments arose.
To a trained historian, a monument is like an artifact to the archeologist. If you remove the surrounding layer of sediment, it is hard to properly recognize the significance of the artifact.
A good example, there are several markers throughout the land for the Tuskegee Airmen. More than one reference the "not a single bomber lost" claim. Such claim has long since been disproved by the statistical evidence. Yet we should not start chiseling out the inscriptions. The presence of the claim on the marker tells us something about the people who placed the marker. It is up to us to do our homework and properly understand, even if it is to refute, the meaning of the marker.
Otherwise we'll end up with something like the story of this marker: http://cenantua.wordpress.com/2008/12/10/blotting-out-the-memory-of-a-formidable-foe/