Battling for Manassas: The Fifty-Year Preservation Struggle at Manassas National Battlefield Park

Table of Contents

Foreword

Acknowledgements

Introduction

Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Chapter 4

Chapter 5

Chapter 6

Chapter 7

Chapter 8

Chapter 9

Chapter 10

Chapter 11

Bibliography

Appendix I

Appendix II

Appendix III

Appendix IV

Appendix V (omitted from on-line edition)

Appendix VI

Appendix VII

Appendix VIII

Manassas Chapter 4

Park Additions

Permanent Museum Exhibits

Concurrent with attempts to acquire the historic Dogan and Stone houses, Hanson revised his 1939 museum plan in preparation for erecting permanent displays. Work on museum exhibits had stalled during World War II, but by summer 1946, the National Park Service had allocated almost $15,000 for designing and assembling the interpretive sections of the museum. Francis Wilshin, a staff historian at Fredericksburg, assisted Hanson with this effort. The exhibits that eventually graced the museum tied directly to the battlefields themselves, explaining for visitors how such structures as the Stonewall Jackson statue and Henry House are connected to the Civil War events. [22]

Hanson and Wilshin drew on their considerable expertise in their museum prospectus. They divided the task so that Hanson wrote about the historical events surrounding the Civil War battles and the current park interpretive program, especially the self-guided tours and how to improve them. Wilshin drafted the voluminous section—totaling almost 150 pages—on the park museum itself and discussed the different exhibits that he and Hanson envisioned. Wilshin also provided an extensive bibliography to serve as a reference for checking the historical accuracy of any details that might surface as the Park Service developed the displays. [23]

The museum exhibits that Hanson and Wilshin proposed in 1947 reflected in many ways the preliminary museum development plan that Hanson had written in 1939 for the Bull Run Recreational Demonstration Area. Both plans outlined the significant campaigns of First and Second Manassas, noting the important commanders involved and the decisive battle tactics they employed. In both plans Hanson suggested using a large relief map to indicate the changing terrain and how it influenced the movements of troops. Both plans also called for relic cases to show such items as the types of weapons used and the confusing array of uniforms worn by both sides. Neither plan ventured far in subject from the Civil War battles themselves, allowing visitors to draw their own conclusions about the long-term results of the war. [24]

Fig. 7. The 1949 museum displays, including the diorama illustrating the moment when Brig. Gen. Thomas J. Jackson received his famous nom de guerre, gave park visitors important background information that they then used to explore the battlefield. (National Park Service photo)

In keeping with the 1939 plan, Hanson and Wilshin geared their exhibits to casual visitors who stopped at the Manassas National Battlefield Park while touring the metropolitan Washington area. These visitors needed a quick digest of the battles to supplement sometimes sketchy knowledge of the Civil War and to appreciate the significance of the Manassas encounters in the larger context of American history. As Wilshin remembered later, he used illustrations, artifacts, and contemporary newspaper accounts in the museum exhibits so that visitors got a feel for the story. A proposed diorama in the museum would show the moment during the First Battle of Manassas when Stonewall Jackson obtained his famous nom de guerre and would connect the statue to the actual events and make them real. Armed with this background information, visitors could better appreciate the tour of Henry Hill and other sections of the park. [25]

Park Service personnel introduced some significant modifications to Hanson's and Wilshin's museum plan that incorporated newer technologies and methods. These changes included an electric perspective map of the theater of war in northern Virginia and moving the proposed diorama to a less prominent position in the museum. Hanson questioned the use of the electric map because the benefits of its novelty would be contradicted by its expense, limited point of view, and complicated nature. Relief maps allowed greater freedom for speakers to describe tactics, in his opinion. Hanson wanted the diorama to remain situated in a central location of the main museum room, next to the relief map, to provide viewers with an understanding of the geography of the area. Other details, such as the use of a large display area to compare the magnitude of the Civil War with World Wars I and II, seemed to Hanson to use too much of the museum space for a concept that could be visualized relatively simply. [26]

Fig. 8. Superintendent Joseph Mills Hanson and Park Service historian Francis Wilshin incorporated portraits of significant actors in the battles and the weapons they had used into the 1949 museum displays to give park visitors an understanding of the human side of the Civil War. (National Park Service photo)

Hanson and Wilshin checked the historical accuracy of the exhibits as museum laboratory personnel at Ford's Theater and Fort Hunt translated their ideas into tangible displays. The two historians conducted field studies to determine the orientation point for the diorama, and they expressed concern when the First artist's conceptions failed to include the proper numbers of troops or an accurate rendering of the terrain. Their interpretation of the source material did not serve as final authority, though. Ronald Lee, as chief of the History Division, differed with Wilshin on the level of artillery fire and position of troops for the diorama, and Lee's interpretation took precedence. Following Hanson's retirement, Wilshin continued to provide historical assistance, checking the accuracy of wall text and suggesting items for inclusion in the cases. [27]

Construction of the wall cases for the exhibits began in January 1949, and the museum opened to the public on Memorial Day weekend. Thanks to good publicity in the Sunday editions of the Washington and Baltimore papers and excellent weather, Superintendent Myers found the park "inundated" with visitors who left "highly complimentary" comments in the guest register. Local officials, impressed with the exhibits, instructed the Prince William County schools to have all students above third grade tour the park museum before school closed for the summer. The first bus load of high school students arrived on 31 May. [28]

Fig. 9. Park historians manipulated the light switches of the electric map to illustrate troop movements in the Northern Virginia Theater of the Civil War for school groups and other park visitors. (National Park Service photo)

Instead of crowding floor space with exhibits, the Park Service used wall cases containing explanatory text, illustrations, and artifacts. This arrangement allowed visitors the opportunity to view panels of interest to them, gain important background information, and then explore the battlefields. The first room off the administration building lobby focused on the overall causes of the Civil War and key events during First Manassas, while the smaller second room contained the electric perspective map and room for a projector and lecturing space. Colorful panels compared the textbook tactics commanders had been trained to use and the troop movements during the First Battle of Manassas. Portraits of significant actors in the battles, including Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson, and personal memorabilia of Generals James B. Ricketts and Fitz John Porter provided a human side to the history. Guns, swords, and uniforms gave evidence of the implements soldiers used in the battles. The electric map and the diorama, the latter much reduced in size from Hanson's and Wilshin's original plan, placed the exhibit artifacts in the larger setting of the northern Virginia terrain. [29]

http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/mana/adhi4c.htm