Would the Confederacy Have Celebrated the Fourth of July?

July 4, 1861, was a day of ambivalence for many Southerners.

James River, Virginia. On Confederate gunboat TEASER captured on July 4, 1862.
National Journal
Brian Resnick
See more stories about...
Brian Resnick
July 3, 2014, 1 a.m.

“It is like the an­niversary of a di­vorced couple’s wed­ding.”

That’s how a re­port­er in the New York Times de­scribed Ju­ly 4, 1861, the first In­de­pend­ence Day of the Civil War. And much like a failed mar­riage, it was un­clear which side would re­tain what was once shared. Should the Con­fed­er­acy have their own Ju­ly Fourth as well? After all, without the ini­tial break­away from Bri­tian, their re­volu­tion wouldn’t be pos­sible.

The writer — an ur-Dav­id Brooks of sorts — con­tin­ued in a thought ex­per­i­ment: What might a Con­fed­er­ate Fourth of Ju­ly cel­eb­ra­tion look like?

It would be simply the old one, such as we have been ac­cus­tomed to all our lives, and then a se­quel dir­ec­ted against the United States. Liberty, in­de­pend­ence, Brit­ish op­pres­sion, Co­lo­ni­al mis­gov­ern­ment, would ap­pear in their old places, and then would come “Part the Second,” con­sist­ing of in­dig­nant com­plaints against the Free-soil­ers, and their vi­ol­a­tion of South­ern rights, joined to­geth­er like the land­ing at Torbay and the Gun-powder Plot in the ser­vice we have al­luded to. The tyr­ants of the old speeches would do duty again with a new one ad­ded. It will now be King GEORGE, Lord NORTH, and Pres­id­ent LIN­COLN.

Like the shared bib­lic­al fig­ure Ab­ra­ham in Is­lam, Juda­ism, and Chris­tian­ity, the Found­ing Fath­ers would make it in­to the found­ing sagas of each coun­try. The story would di­verge from there.

In a 2009 pa­per in the Journ­al of South­ern His­tory, his­tor­i­an Paul Quigley wrote that while some South­ern­ers were con­flic­ted with cel­eb­rat­ing the hol­i­day, ac­know­ledge­ment of the day con­tin­ued on. In Char­le­ston, S.C., he points out, a spe­cially ap­poin­ted five-mem­ber com­mit­tee de­cided that “pub­lic pro­ces­sion, sol­emn ora­tion, and polit­ic­al ban­quet ought to be omit­ted on the present oc­ca­sion,” but of­fices would would be closed for the Fourth.

Be­fore the war, the mean­ing of the hol­i­day was already tak­ing on dif­fer­ent fla­vors. In the North, ab­ol­i­tion­ists used its lan­guage of free­dom to call for the end of slavery. In the South, se­ces­sion­ists used its lan­guage of will­ful re­bel­lion to call for a new state, in­cit­ing that the North had not lived up to the De­clar­a­tion of In­de­pend­ence’s prom­ise. Quigley goes on to ex­plain how the Fourth of Ju­ly am­bi­val­ence was “part of their at­tempt to re­solve ten­sions between south­ern­ness and Amer­ic­an­ness.”

But most im­port­antly, the Fourth of Ju­ly rep­res­en­ted a shared cel­eb­ra­tion and an iden­tity the North and South could re­join after the war.

Dur­ing the first half of the nine­teenth cen­tury, In­de­pend­ence Day settled in­to a less overtly par­tis­an oc­ca­sion. Cel­eb­ra­tions took stand­ard­ized forms: the ringing of bells and the fir­ing of sa­lutes; the clos­ing of busi­nesses and stores … the read­ing aloud of the De­clar­a­tion; and the con­sump­tion of food and al­co­hol.’

In their very uni­form­ity, these rituals con­sti­tuted im­port­ant ele­ments of early Amer­ic­an na­tion­al­ism, in the South as well as the North. This was the day of the year when, ac­cord­ing to nu­mer­ous re­ports, the Amer­ic­an people were sup­posed to for­get their dif­fer­ences and come to­geth­er in a uni­fied cel­eb­ra­tion of their great na­tion.

So maybe the Fourth of Ju­ly saved the Uni­on, or at least provided a basis for a re­newed na­tion­al iden­tity after re­con­struc­tion. “They had sep­ar­ated from the cent­ral gov­ern­ment formed by the Amer­ic­an Re­volu­tion­ary gen­er­a­tion but wished to claim the her­it­age of that gen­er­a­tion,” Quigley wrote.

And when the war was over, that her­it­age was something they could still hold on to. The di­vorced par­ents got back to­geth­er.

What We're Following See More »
In Dropout Speech, Santorum Endorses Rubio
2 days ago

As expected after earlier reports on Wednesday, Rick Santorum ended his presidential bid. But less expected: he threw his support to Marco Rubio. After noting he spoke with Rubio the day before for an hour, he said, “Someone who has a real understanding of the threat of ISIS, real understanding of the threat of fundamentalist Islam, and has experience, one of the things I wanted was someone who has experience in this area, and that’s why we decided to support Marco Rubio.” It doesn’t figure to help Rubio much in New Hampshire, but the Santorum nod could pay dividends down the road in southern states.

Rubio, Trump Question Obama’s Mosque Visit
2 days ago

President Obama’s decision to visit a mosque in Baltimore today was never going to be completely uncontroversial. And Donald Trump and Marco Rubio proved it. “Maybe he feels comfortable there,” Trump told interviewer Greta van Susteren on Fox News. “There are a lot of places he can go, and he chose a mosque.” And in New Hampshire, Rubio said of Obama, “Always pitting people against each other. Always. Look at today – he gave a speech at a mosque. Oh, you know, basically implying that America is discriminating against Muslims.”

Cruz Must Max Out on Evangelical Support through Early March
2 days ago

For Ted Cruz, a strong showing in New Hampshire would be nice, but not necessary. That’s because evangelical voters only make up 21% of the Granite State’s population. “But from the February 20 South Carolina primary through March 15, there are nine states (South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and North Carolina) with an estimated white-Evangelical percentage of the GOP electorate over 60 percent, and another four (Texas, Kansas, Louisiana, and Missouri) that come in over 50 percent.” But after that, he better be in the catbird’s seat, because only four smaller states remain with evangelical voter majorities.

Rubio Now Winning the ‘Endorsement Primary’
2 days ago

Since his strong third-place finish in Iowa, Marco Rubio has won endorsement by two sitting senators and two congressmen, putting him in the lead for the first time of FiveThirtyEight‘s Endorsement Tracker. “Some politicians had put early support behind Jeb Bush — he had led [their] list since August — but since January the only new endorsement he has received was from former presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham.” Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that fueled by resentment, “members of the Bush and Christie campaigns have communicated about their mutual desire to halt … Rubio’s rise in the polls.”

Sanders: Obama Is a Progressive
1 days ago

“Do I think President Obama is a progressive? Yeah, I do,” said Bernie Sanders, in response to a direct question in tonight’s debate. “I think they’ve done a great job.” But Hillary Clinton wasn’t content to sit out the latest chapter in the great debate over the definition of progressivism. “In your definition, with you being the gatekeeper of progressivism, I don’t think anyone else fits that definition,” she told Sanders.