First, a great interactive map of Sherman's March to the Sea.

When you get your history from the movies, you get what you paid for: lost.

Friday night, I was watching "Glory" with my youngest brother (who isn't that young, just "younger"). Frankly, I love that movie. Not because it is the most historically accurate, but because I rather like movies with a simple message, that, while touching on some aspects of man's duel nature even while he tries to be his best, still draws the line between bravery and cowardice, honor and disgrace, heroes and villains.

The same way I always love John Wayne movies. His westerns and his war movies. Call me a philistine or a rube, what have you, but these kinds of movies speak to me more than any movie called "Chocolate" ever did.

I also love historical period pieces that try to convey something about the clothes, the attitudes and day to day life of the people in that period. Someday, someone is going to make a movie about our time and young people will marvel at the "ancient" technology and ideas that were the beginning of their own.

[continued in flash traffic]

Four other images in the film that were straight off of iconic paintings, prints and monuments about the 54th and other black regiments were: Morgan Freeman standing on the parapets of Battery Wagoner, waving the flag; Col. Shaw (Matthew Broderick) being shot, surrounded by his black troops; towards the end, post Shaw's death, Carey Ewes character, surrounded by black troops in "action" positions, rifles with bayonets "at the charge", flags flying behind their heads (right before they are blown away by rebel cannon movie image); and, finally, the final image of Shaw's body being thrown in the trench with his black troops, a black soldier thrown on top of him, their positions as if sleeping at peace - brothers in blood.

Those are great images, but, as I noted, allegories. There were no polaroid or hand held video cameras. As many know, eyewitness accounts during battle are sometimes unreliable and often varied. Newspaper accounts were useful, but sometimes sensationalized. Thus, artists would use these allegories to represent the battles. Creating, in the end, some of the mythology of American history.

"Glory" was not a documentary. The movie, using iconic, allegoric images, was an allegory in and of itself, attempting to represent the advent of black troops into Union forces, their motivations, their tribulations, their bravery and, in the end, the contribution of black Americans to our nation, our freedom. If you can appreciate those facts, the movie is some great entertainment set in an historical period that might actually make people interested in that time and the people.

An interesting conversation with my brother who is not a history buff. The film leaves off with images of Shaw and his black troops being thrown into a ditch by the still remaining rebel troops. My brother asked me what happened to the other "white troops" that the general had promised would come behind the 54th.

The movie left out some considerable pieces of the battle in order to focus solely on the courage of the 54th in leading the assault on Wagoner. One of the things that it left out was that the 54th was not alone in assaulting the fort. Neither did it explain that one of the important factors was the waxing and waning of the tide across the only spit of sand that led to the fort. The fort itself was surrounded by water and marsh lands (swamp) on three sides continuously and on four sides when the tide was in. That's why it was called "Morris Island". After the battle had raged on for some hours, the tide began to come in and cut off those troops from safe and quick retreat. While the water was not so deep it couldn't be forded, it caused slow going through wet, sucking sand.

Six thousand Union soldiers were used to assault the fort along with the 54th, over two days of bombardment and assault. Of the six thousand, 1515 casualties were taken. Over two hundred from the 54th alone that accounted for half of their forces, including Col. Shaw. Sgt Willaim Carney was awarded a belated Medal of Honor in 1890 for his bravery during the assault. Carney carried the flag up the parapets and urged the 54th on into the fort. He was wounded three times, but refused to drop the flag or allow it to be captured by enemy forces. He was finally able to withdraw, bringing the flag with him.

What you could take from the movie was the reality that the fortifications and bunkers at Wagner were so well designed that nearly 12 hours of bombardment had done little to attrit forces, destroy weapons or significantly damage the fort's walls (a good representation in the movies of the less than glorious survival in such a fort can be seen in "Cold Mountain" with Jude Law and Nicole Kidman). The frontal assault of any fort in the age of gun powder is suicidal and a serious waste of forces unless, as on D-Day, the objective is so important, the casualty rate becomes acceptable. The taking of Charleston was important, but not necessarily the need to take Wagner. It was one of several strategic blunders that General Gilmore undertook during the Civil War (see Oulestee, Fl).

Eventually, Gilmore decided to circumvent Wagner and Morris Island. The fort turned out only to be important to protecting the harbor and city from invasion or bombardment from the sea, not necessarily protecting it from assault from land. While Gilmore had to explain the loss of forces at Wagner in reports, he was never punished or relieved from duty. With the kinds of losses each side was taking at many battles, Gilmore's losses were a drop in the bucket.

My brother also asked, based on the movie's representation, if the white troops had left the black troops to die due to some form of racism that allowed Gilmore to sacrifice them readily to save white troops. As noted, the movie does not portray any white troops with the 54th other than some NCOs and officers. I went over the truth of the battle again and noted that there may have been a concern about racism in the assault, but it was more likely that Shaw wanted to combat the over all general racism within the Union Army and the "soft bigotry" of the North by undertaking to lead a suicidal mission. Whether it was Shaw's plan to show the over all equality of the black troops to the white troops or simply to show that his troops were equal can only be inferred by his letters. Whether he had a grand strategy or not, the death of so many of his black troops along with their bravery in continuing to assault the fort under horrible conditions did, in fact, move the Union Army to accept more black recruits and units. It also led to some mitigation of the anger among northern citizens that so many whites were dying for the freedom of inferior black men. Here, the black man was fighting for himself.

However, it took many more wars for military strategist to realize that trench warfare and frontal assaults on fortifications was no longer effective. German's opened the Battle of France by circumventing the Maginot Line. Equally, the acceptance of black troops as effective fighting forces by the general military and public took even longer before institutionalized segregation was finally ended.

I still love the movie, "Glory". It had some great historical perspective, fantastic imagery and told artfully the condition of the black freeman who fought in the union army. But, it is a movie and it is important to remember that when watching any movie and attempting to divine history from art.