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 »
Warren Goes After Trump Yet Again
5 hours ago

When it comes to name-calling among America's upper echelon of politicians, there may be perhaps no greater spat than the one currently going on between Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Donald Trump. While receiving an award Tuesday night, she continued a months-long feud with the presumptive GOP presidential nominee. Calling him a "small, insecure moneygrubber" who probably doesn't know three things about Dodd-Frank, she said he "will NEVER be president of the United States," according to her prepared remarks."We don't know what Trump pays in taxes because he is the first presidential nominee in 40 years to refuse to disclose his tax returns. Maybe he’s just a lousy businessman who doesn’t want you to find out that he’s worth a lot less money than he claims." It follows a long-line of Warren attacks over Twitter, Facebook and in interviews that Trump is a sexist, racist, narcissistic loser. In reply, Trump has called Warren either "goofy" or "the Indian"—referring to her controversial assertion of her Native American heritage. 

Congress Passes Chemical Regulations Overhaul
8 hours ago

The House on Tuesday voted 403-12 "to pass an overhaul to the nation’s chemical safety standards for the first time in four decades. The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act aims to answer years of complaints that the Environmental Protection Agency lacks the necessary authority to oversee and control the thousands of chemicals being produced and sold in the United States. It also significantly clamps down on states’ authorities, in an effort to stop a nationwide patchwork of chemical laws that industry says is difficult to deal with."

GOP Could Double Number of Early Primaries
8 hours ago

"Leaders of the Republican Party have begun internal deliberations over making fundamental changes to the way its presidential nominees are chosen, a recognition that the chaotic process that played out this year is seriously flawed and helped exacerbate tensions within the party." Among the possible changes: forbidding independent voters to cast ballots in Republican primaries, and "doubling the number of early states to eight."

Kasich Tells His Delegates to Remain Pledged to Him
10 hours ago

Citing the unpredictable nature of this primary season and the possible leverage they could bring at the convention, John Kasich is hanging onto his 161 delegates. "Kasich sent personal letters Monday to Republican officials in the 16 states and the District of Columbia where he won delegates, requesting that they stay bound to him in accordance with party rules."

House GOP Changes Rules for Spending Measures
10 hours ago

"Speaker Paul Ryan is changing the rules of how the House will consider spending measures to try to prevent Democrats from offering surprise amendments that have recently put the GOP on defense. ... Ryan announced at a House GOP conference meeting Tuesday morning that members will now have to submit their amendments ahead of time so that they are pre-printed in the Congressional Record, according to leadership aides." The change will take effect after the Memorial Day recess.