CWGK is proud to announce the hiring of three new Graduate Research Associates (GRAs) who will complete editorial work on the project this year. This year’s GRAs are Daniele Celano (PhD Candidate, University of Virginia), Kevin McPartland (PhD Candidate, University of Cincinnati), and Rachael Nicholas (PhD Student, West Virginia University). Daniele, Kevin, and Rachael will each annotate 120 documents this coming year. Their work will take them across records pertaining to a widely documented murder case in Caldwell County, the bureaucratic paperwork of civil appointments, and an assortment of petitions that passed across the desk of Governor Bramlette between 1863 and 1865.
To learn more about these three scholars (as well as all the previous GRAs) check out the CWGK Graduate Research Associate page. You can also see the map at the top of this page for a quick reference of the home institutions for each of the past and present GRAs.
Overview: The Kentucky Historical Society and its project the Civil War Governors of Kentucky Digital Documentary Edition (CWGK) seek three graduate students who are passionate about the study of nineteenth-century America, the resurrection of marginalized voices, and are eager to learn more about digital history. With the generous support of the National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC), a branch of the National Archives, CWGK will be able to hire three Graduate Research Associates (GRAs) to conduct editorial work for the project from over the period February 1, 2021 to January 31, 2022. GRAs are compensated with a production-based stipend of $4,000 and can work remotely from their home institutions.
Each GRA will annotate 120 assigned documents and spend approximately 250 hours on this work over the course of the year. All applicants must be a graduate student who have completed at least one semester of a M.A. program in history, or a related humanities discipline (doctoral students/candidates preferred, but not required). Experience with nineteenth-century United States history or documentary editing is also preferred, but not necessary. The new GRAs would continue a successful four-year program that has involved 14 other young scholars and digital humanists.
CWGK is an annotated, searchable, and freely-accessible
online edition of documents associated with the chief executives of the
Commonwealth from 1860 to 1865. However, CWGK is about more than the nominal
governors; it is about reconstructing the lost lives and voices of tens of
thousands of Kentuckians who interacted with the office of the
governor during the war years. Collectively, the staff of CWGK identify,
research, and link together every person, place, and organization found within its
corpus of documents. To see the project’s work to date, visit discovery.civilwargovernors.org.
Each GRA will be responsible for researching and writing
short entries on all of the individuals, places, organizations, and
geographical features found in their assigned 120 documents. On average, each
CWGK document contains fifteen entities and such documents require
approximately two hours to complete.
The GRA position is more than just editorial work, it is an opportunity to diversify professional skills, engage with relevant digital humanities projects, and participate in a process that shapes how scholars and the public understand the Civil War era. Throughout their appointment, GRAs will meet weekly with the CWGK team, discussing editorial policy, working on document annotation, and studying the field of Civil War history more broadly.
Each GRA will work remotely. Interaction with the documents
and the writing of annotations will take place in a web-based annotation tool
developed for CWGK, which can be accessed from any location. CWGK will make use
of online research databases to make its work efficient and uniform. Other
archival sources may be of value but are not required by the research
guidelines. Securing access to the paid databases required by CWGK
(Ancestry.com, Fold3.com, and ProQuest Historical Newspapers: Louisville
Courier Journal) is the responsibility of the GRA. If regular institutional
access to these databases is not available to the GRA through a university or
library, it is the responsibility of the GRA to purchase and use a subscription
to these databases. KHS will not reimburse the GRA for any travel, copying, or
other expenses incurred in CWGK research.
Materials and Evaluation: An application should consist of
a narrative statement of professional ability and experience with digital
history in the form of a cover letter, a CV, and two letters of recommendation.
Additional supplementary materials that demonstrate capacity in the evaluation
factors may also be included, these may include, but are not limited to:
examples of other digital projects, writing samples, or proof of editorial
Application materials should be submitted to Dr. Chuck Welsko, Project Director at firstname.lastname@example.org by January 5, 2021. Any questions about the application or application process can also be directed to Dr. Welsko.
The Kentucky Historical Society will evaluate the applicants
based on the following factors, as demonstrated through their applications
Research Experience (70 points): Describe your
familiarity with research in nineteenth-century U.S. history. Describe some
projects you have undertaken. What sources have you used? Have you been
published? Have you interpreted historical research in forms other than a
scholarly peer-reviewed publication? Discuss how a digital archival experience
differs from your traditional archival experience.
Project Experience (30 points): Describe any work you
have done in the editing of historical documents. Discuss how a project such as
CWGK maintains balance between thorough research and production schedules. Have
you worked on other collaborative projects in the field of history or
otherwise? Describe the importance of time management and deadlines in your
work. Describe your understanding of and/or experience with the Digital
Humanities. From what you know of the CWGK project, how does it fit with
current trends in the field? What do you hope to gain from working on the CWGK
On and around June 19, many African American communities
across the United States will celebrate Juneteenth, the jubilant recollection
of slavery’s destruction in the United States. Given the current intersection
of race, politics, and Civil War Memory, the Civil War Governors of Kentucky (CWGK)
team wanted to make its contribution to that discussion by doing what it does
best: offering historical documents, perspective, and the opportunity for
individuals to learn more about the nation’s past.
The CWGK staff support the Kentucky Historical Society’s
message about the recent national
conversations, protests, and debates regarding race and the lives of African
Americans. Today’s events are part of a long, unbroken sequence of
connections stemming from the institution of slavery and the earliest
foundations of American History. It is impossible to divorce the lives of the
formerly enslaved and the legacies of slavery from our memory about the Civil
War and its aftermath.
Below are links to resources that CWGK has available on our
site or that our staff members have helped create over the years. Where
appropriate, I have provided interpretive context to help guide you through
these documents and larger materials. This is not an inclusive list of what
CWGK offers, but represents a starting point to broaden our interpretation and
understanding of the Civil War, slavery, and the lives of African Americans in
Without question, the most deeply utilized part of CWGK is
our work on Caroline Dement. A self-emancipated woman from Tennessee, who made
her way to Louisville with the United States Army, Caroline was placed in the
house of the Levy family until her master could claim her. While in the Levy
household, Blanche, a young child under Caroline’s care, died from strychnine poisoning.
The family accused Caroline of intentionally poisoning the child and a jury
agreed before influential Louisvillians petitioned Governor Thomas Bramlette
and secured her pardon. Although she disappeared from the historical record
after leaving the Jefferson County Jail, Caroline’s story appears in one of
CWGK’s exhibits, a short documentary, and a journal article.
Article: Carole Emberton, “Disciplined Imagination” and the Limits of the Archive, in the Register of the Kentucky Historical Society, Vol. 117, No. 2: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/732592
Over the years, CWGK staff have devoted their time and
interpretive expertise to blog posts that address different aspects of African
American history pulled from documents found on our site. Here are a handful of
those posts, and in the future, please visit our blog for more:
CWGK has more than 10,000 digitized and transcribed documents on our site. Below are a handful (but certainly not all) that pertain to African Americans, slavery, and emancipation. As you will note, most of these sources talk about, but rarely come from African Americans themselves. Furthermore, these documents often deal with African Americans in precarious positions—as freedom seekers trying to escape the cruelty of slavery, as suspects in violent crimes, or wrapped up in the punishments of white Kentuckians.
This affidavit touches on the punishment of abolitionists who attempt to help two enslaved individuals to escape
Despite all of the resources at our disposal, it is important to acknowledge that CWGK still knows more about white Kentuckians (especially white males) than their African American counterparts. A larger portion of this imbalance comes from realities of nineteenth-century life. Enslavement not only robbed African Americans of their personal freedom, rights, and personhood, but it also deprived countless enslaved men and women of an education. For every Frederick Douglass who learned to read and write while enslaved, innumerable other African Americans had no access to an education, as the practices of enslavers denied enslaved men, women, and children any semblance of humanity—monetarily, educationally, or personally.
CWGK attempts to tell the story of all ordinary Kentuckians, not just the nominal governors who frame our project’s temporal and administrative boundaries. We are, unfortunately, limited by the pervasive silence that dominates archival, political, and social spaces across an uncomfortable breadth of American history. CWGK, and this resource list, are an attempt to redress that imbalance. We have made good strides in drawing out the voices and experiences of black Kentuckians, but there is still much more work to do. We look forward to offering you that perspective in the future.
In late 1863 George C. Hallet provided a prophetic statement on the future study of the Civil War in Kentucky. That November he appealed to state authorities in Frankfort for military assistance in order to counter pro-Confederate guerrillas operating nearby. More importantly, in his letter, Hallet noted that the “history of this stupendous rebellion is yet to be written and to be written in all truthfulness, the future historian must look to the public archives among which he will find the evidences of outrages committed on both sides” throughout the war. For a digital humanities project such as CWGK, it would be difficult to locate a quote that better encapsulates the need for such a collection. Despite the contemporary utility of Hallet’s words, his appeal underscored the chaotic nature of wartime Kentucky.
Unlike other Border States or contested spaces in Civil War America, where irregular violence followed the presence of Union troops and emancipation, Kentucky offered a more chaotic, often unpredictable flurry of guerrilla warfare. Part of that violence came from the operations of pro-Confederate guerrillas who resisted Union control and wartime policies. Another came from state-endorsed guerrilla hunters who pursued those irregular Confederates across the state. If we take Hallet’s words seriously, little distinguished the guerrilla from the guerrilla-hunter. Both used murder, terror, and questionable (or openly defiant) interpretations of military law to achieve their own ends. The result was a violent landscape rife with unpredictability and something more akin to modern military conflicts in the Middle East, rather than the common battlefields and gallant soldiers of Civil War mythos.
How then should can we teach the chaos of Kentucky’s Civil War? This post offers suggestions on how educators might use CWGK to discuss guerrilla warfare in Kentucky (or the Civil War Era more broadly) with students in advanced high school or college settings.
1) The first step is provide students with a framework for
what we traditionally understand the violence of the Civil War Era to
represent. There are a few ways to approach this:
Provide primary sources that discuss military combat (Samuel R. Watkins’ memoir Co. “Aytch”: The First Tennessee Regiment or a Side Show to the Big Show and Percival Oldershaw’s report in the Official Records of the War of the Rebellion Vol. 16, page 1064, both discuss the Battle of Perryville from a Confederate and Union perspective).
Alternatively, you could look for a locally-based primary source, from a library, special collection, or a newspaper account like chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/
Show the students a video clip—either from a documentary (such as Ken Burns’ Civil War or the History Channels’ Civil War Journal) or from a film (such as Glory or Gettysburg).
Regardless of the route, the primary goal is to make sure that students have a base understanding that most of the Civil War involved sizable armies engaging in structured combat. Especially early in the war, this involved the armies marching onto a battlefield and engaging in organized ranks until one (or both) sides retired from the field of battle.
Richard J. Browne to Thomas E. Bramlette: Browne records how Confederate guerrillas attacked and terrorized Washington County, Kentucky in late 1864, robbing citizens and murdering former Union soldiers at home.
Z. Wheat to Thomas E. Bramlette: Wheat writes on behalf of Edwin Terrell. Hired by Union officials, Terrell was a guerrilla hunter who killed a several Confederates, but was arrested for murder late in teh war. Bramlette, one of the men possibly responsible for hiring Terrell, denies Wheat’s request for a pardon. (See Hulbert “The Rise and Fall of Edwin Terrell, Guerrilla Hunter, U.S.A.,” Ohio Valley History, for a discussion of Terrell’s career as a guerrilla hunter).
3) This should build toward a discussion that compares and contrasts the traditional perceptions of warfare during the Civil War (step 1) and Kentucky’s guerrilla warfare (step 2). Here are some questions (with some of my own thoughts) that you can use to guide a conversation about irregular warfare.
How does the war appear different on the traditional battlefield and on an irregular front?
This is a simple question to initiate the conversation so that students can formulate thoughts on the different forms of combat during the war. I would use this question for students to summarize their thoughts on the materials they had read and draw comparisons.
Who participated in these different forms of military action?
The key here is to lead students to the realization that guerrilla warfare guerrilla violence could strike anywhere and at anyone, bringing civilians in as targets of both the Union and Confederate armies on the battlefield. In contrast, traditional military engagements mainly brought armies into conflict. While those traditional engagements can and did intersect with civilian populations, by and large, civilians were not the targets. Civilians who were especially vulnerable were those who aided Confederate guerrillas, Union soldiers returned from the front lines, as well as African Americans both enslaved and free.
What forms of violence are justified during war?
Any answer to this question is complicated as students might argue vastly different perspectives built off their personal experiences and beliefs. Some might say that war itself is immoral, while others could argue that any action that defeats the enemy is justified by victory. I would use this question to evaluate how contemporaries discussed what was acceptable in wartime: D. H. Dilbeck’s A More Civil War: How the Union Waged a Just War (UNC Press, 2020) is a good place to look for a recent discussion on this topic.
What differentiates soldiers from guerrillas/guerrilla-hunters?
This question touches on the earlier questions. While some guerrillas and guerrilla-hunters were supported by state or national governments, most operated well outside the confines of military law. Soldiers participated in a chain of command and acted as an extension of their government. Guerrillas could do the same, but also integrated personal and pecuniary motives into their actions. (Of course, if we look at the Fort Pillow Massacre, where Confederate soldiers brutally executed African American Union troops, guerrillas/guerrilla-hunters were not the only individuals who operated outside of normal, acceptable warfare).
Ultimately, these resources and questions offer a loose framework to use in a classroom setting. Feel free to substitute your own sources, readings, or questions. Hopefully, in these difficult times, this presents ideas for how educators can complicate how students understand military action in Civil War Kentucky.
 George C. Hallet to Daniel W. Lindsey, 24 November 1863, 37th – 76th Regiments Enrolled Militia Primary Source Documents (1861-1866), Box 80, Folder 863-64 FULTON COUNTY Recruiting and Raising Company 40th Rgt. Ky. Militia, Kentucky Department of Military Affairs, Frankfort, KY. Accessed via the Civil War Governors of Kentucky Digital Documentary Edition, discovery.civilwargovernors.org/document/KYR-0002-022-0011, (accessed May 13, 2020).
 Andrew Fialka, “Guerrillas in the Archive: Kentucky’s Irregular War through the Governor’s Eyes,” The Register of the Kentucky Historical Society Vol. 116, No. 2 (Spring 2018), 209-36.
 Joseph M. Beilein Jr., “The Terror of Kentucky: Sue Mundy’s Highly Gendered War against Convention,” The Register of the Kentucky Historical Society, Vol. 116, No. 2 (Spring 2018), 157-82; Matthew Christopher Hulbert “The Rise and Fall of Edwin Terrell, Guerrilla Hunter, U.S.A.,” Ohio Valley History, Vol. 18, No. 3 (Fall 2018), 42-61. See also The Civil War Guerrilla: Unfolding the Black Flag in History, Memory, and Myth. Edited by Joseph M. Beilein Jr. and Matthew C. Hulbert (Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 2015).
In June of 2017 over a dozen eminent historians of the Nineteenth Century South and Civil War Era made their way to Frankfort as part of the Civil War Governors of Kentucky Symposium. The Kentucky Historical Society, along with guest convener Amy Murrell Taylor, organized a series of presentations based on research from the CWGK archive. Last summer, with the assistance of Amy Taylor as guest editor, Stephanie Lang (and over the years, former editors of the Register, David Turpie and Patrick Lewis), arranged those presentations into a special issue of TheRegister of the Kentucky Historical Society. Those essays probed the depths of CWGK and offered valuable insight into wartime Kentucky, as well as the means through which digital platforms offer new interpretive possibilities for the study of mid-nineteenth century America.
As COVID-19 compels Americans to adapt to new social practices and realities, academic presses, journals, and sites of discourse have gladly opened their founts of knowledge to eager readers. The Kentucky Historical Society happily joined in that scholastic endeavor by making all our digital issues of the Register, dating back to 2010, available on ProjectMuse. If you have not looked at those issues, click right here. In addition, as a means to fill the void of the delayed Kentucky Derby (at least partially that is), KHS launched a derby-themed competition for select issues of the Register available online (take a look at this round of contestants from the most recent issue and vote here).
To compliment that larger
institutional endeavor, I reached out to Amy Taylor and Stephanie Lang (then
Associate Editor, turned Editor of the Register)
so they could share their experiences and ponder deeper reflections of their
work on that issue. With hearty thanks to both Amy and Stephanie for their
contributions, here are their thoughts on the CWGK special issue of the Register. I provided them with a handful
of questions, below each of which, I have provided their response (AMT or SML).
Lastly, you can access all twelve articles from the CWGK special issue here. Here’s a quick list of those authors and articles (who I also extend my thanks to for their work with CWGK in the past):
Stephen Berry, “Dwelling in the Digital Archive”
Lesley J. Gordon, “Deeds of Brave Suffering and Loft Heroism”
David Gleeson, “An Unfortunate Son of Erin”
Anne Sarah Rubin, “Literally Destroyed as a Housekeeper”
Amy Murrell Taylor, “Texts and Textiles in Civil War Kentucky”
Mark Wahlgren Summers, “The First Refuge of a Scoundrel”
Kenneth Noe, “Disturbers of the Peace”
Diane Miller Summerville, “The Exciting Circumstances of the Rebellion”
Crystal Feimster, “Keeping a Disorderly House in Civil War Kentucky”
Luther Adams, “Tipling Toward Freedom”
Carole Emberton, “Searching for Caroline”
Patrick A. Lewis, “The “Most Notorious” Mr. Jennings”
How did you get involved with the CWGK special edition of
AMT: I was invited by the editor, David Turpie, as well
as Patrick Lewis, who was managing the CWGK project at the time. I remember we
had an initial brainstorming session in which we decided to aim big and invite
some of the most innovative Civil War-era scholars around to contribute to the
issue. And fortunately, those scholars were receptive.
Between the Register staff
(Editors David Turpie and later Patrick Lewis) and the two of you how did you
all divide the editorial work on the issue and what was your involvement with
AMT: We quickly decided that the special issue would be
stronger if we pulled the contributors into a dialogue with one another. They
were all working with the same body of primary sources to write their pieces –
so there was potentially a lot to be gained from encouraging an exchange of
ideas in the middle of the process. We then decided to hold a symposium at the
KHS in Frankfort during the summer of 2017 and to invite the scholars to
present the preliminary results of their research in the CWGK archive. The
event was every bit as stimulating as we had hoped.
I focused initially on inviting the scholars and
connecting them to the CWGK and encouraging their work. The wonderful KHS
staff—from the Register editors, to the CWGK staff, to the folks
involved in education and community engagement—took care of the details of
putting the symposium together. They did a fantastic job, and we spent two days
in the Old State Capitol talking, sharing, and ultimately pushing one another
to think more creatively. We also had great meals and a stop at Buffalo Trace!
After the symposium, my editorial work involved
giving each article draft an in-depth reading on matters of interpretation,
while the Register staff took care of the rest. And that was a lot. We never would have
gotten to the finish line without the care and consideration that the staff
gave to each and every article. I am especially grateful to
Stephanie for bringing to the task both an eye for detail and an appreciation
of each author’s purpose. It was wonderful to work with such a dedicated
SML: Amy and Patrick played major roles in the very early conceptualization of the CWGK issue. My first involvement with the issue was shortly after I started working at KHS with the CWGK symposium Patrick organized, which brought together all of the authors in one room to explore the use and importance of digital humanities and share initial findings. As the issue developed, I worked with Amy and the authors on revisions, providing them with feedback and suggestions, and with the CWGK staff on sources. Once past the conceptualization and initial review stage, honestly the less glamorous and long day-to-day fact-checking, copyedits, correspondence and final questions, going through proofs fell to me – as it should be, in order to maintain the Register’s own editorial policies and overall direction. Working with guest editors is a partnership and certainly in this case, the collaboration with Amy not only allowed me (as an Appalachian historian) to learn more about the era but also sharpen my own skills and knowledge of digital humanities. But, most importantly for me, Amy was wonderful to work with and I feel I gained a colleague on many projects to come.
What are some of the benefits (and challenges) of joint
editorial work and how does that issue from working on individual scholarship?
AMT: From my perspective, the greatest payoff from this
partnership came at the beginning, at the point of conceptualization. Our
initial brainstorming prompted us to imagine this as a collective enterprise
rather than a series of individual projects. And in the end, I think each and
every article benefitted from the exchange and collaboration we put in place
through the symposium.
SML: For this
particular issue, working jointly with Amy was extremely beneficial for the
project. As a Civil War historian, researcher, and writer, she has strong
command of the field and historiography which allowed us to move the content of
the issue into new areas. She also has a strong network of connections which
not only brought new scholars to the project, but the whole editing experience
on my end was very collaborative and conversational – I enjoyed revising and
editing with Amy and the authors, working together to craft articles that
highlight the strength of digital humanities in research.
The main challenge of the issue for everyone involved was
thinking about how to use, research, and write about the ever-growing Civil War
Governors of Kentucky Digital Project. Thinking more broadly about how and
where to research, the CWGK project become the primary digital archive
for the authors, which pushed everyone into new modes of research and also
editing. Amy’s openness, along with all of the authors, to dive into the
project, pick a topic and use the CWGK digital archive, not knowing what they
might find (or not find), and craft an article from that was at first a large
unknown. But, the different areas of interest and different questions the
authors asked, the end result remains one of the top Register issues and
illustrates KHS’s strength in digital projects.
The CWGK issue is a large issue, covering twelve articles from a range of historians on an equally diverse set of topics about Civil War Era Kentucky and digital humanities. What is one thing that you hope readers should come away with after reading this issue?
AMT: I hope they will see that Civil War-era Kentucky
is still fairly “unknown” – that there is a lot to be learned, a lot to be
discovered, and definitely a lot to be rethought. And maybe it will prompt
readers to explore the CWGK on their own and take on new research projects
SML: That is honestly a big part of
it – how we think about and use archives is changing, not only as more
resources are digitalized and available online but now as we shelter in place
and physical archives are not open. It allows us to be creative in accessing
materials and how we define collections. Each author in this issue
brought their own set of interests and focus to bear and their use of this new
digital realm illuminated new voices and new stories from everyday people like
us. And that is a strength of the CWGK issue – although the title seems
to highlight the governors themselves, the archive actually
gives a voice to thousands of Kentuckians writing in during the Civil War.
Their letters, military records, legal correspondence, etc. are deftly woven
together in the articles. Whether pleading for a pardon, communicating the
anguish of a guerrilla raid, calling attention to hunger, grappling with
what we today call PTSD – all of these articles brutally punctuate
the human experience of the Civil War and how the war was experienced in
a tumultuous border state. The articles in this issue ignite new
conversations and a call-to-research for future projects.
Following up on that question, in what ways does the CWGK issue
of the Register alter or complicate our understanding of Civil
War Kentucky and Kentucky history in general?
AMT: I’d prefer to focus on how it “complicates” –
because that, in the end, is what results from this special issue. The
interpretation of Civil War Kentucky, like Civil War history all over the
place, has suffered from simplistic and one-dimensional mythmaking over time.
The pieces in the Register shatter those myths in a big way—no one can
walk away from it assuming that Kentucky remained “neutral” and somehow aloof
from the violent struggle over slavery; no one can assume that Kentucky slavery
itself was somehow more moderate than the rest. Hopefully issues like this will
help open up readers’ minds by disturbing comfortable assumptions and raising
new questions about the state’s history. There is a lot of work that remains to
be done, and maybe this issue can help inspire more of it.
How do you think that digital documentary projects like CWGK
will change the landscape of writing articles and producing academic journals
over the next several years?
AMT: I think that projects like the CWGK most obviously
change things by opening up access to materials that many historians had not,
or could not, examine easily before. When I say “access,” though, I don’t just
mean that historians at a distance no longer need to travel to Frankfort,
Kentucky, to see the governors’ papers, and can instead pop them up on their
computer screen in San Francisco, California. That is true, of course, but what
I really mean is that users can now read and absorb and analyze the materials
in ways that could not be done in their traditional, analog format. For
starters, the CWGK has a wonderful search engine that enables a user to see
patterns across thousands of documents that remained nearly invisible before.
And its mapping of the social networks underlying this vast set of documents
enables users to see how people maneuvered through the very complex political
landscape that was Civil War Kentucky. All of this holds the potential to
produce truly pathbreaking scholarship.
What else would you want readers to know about the CWGK issue and the Register?
AMT: That I was greatly honored to play a role in bringing this issue to publication, and I thank the staff of the Register, past and present, for allowing me to play in their sandbox.
As COVID-19 forces schools to close or shift to online teaching, I wanted to take the opportunity to highlight some of those thematic lessons and educational resource that CWGK has made available over the past few years. With generous support from the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), CWGK has hired a research associate that developed many of these educational resources over the past two years. They pulled together activities and thematic lessons inspired by the 10,000 documents on the CWGK site to highlight the interpretive possibilities of our digital documentary edition. Given the current situation, these resources offer opportunities for educators to design larger lessons, inform conversations about mid-nineteenth century Kentucky, or fill the seemingly endless void between Netflix binges.
Teacher’s Page includes both themes and classroom packets. The themes are
short surveys of documents on CWGK connected to particular topics like women’s history, crime, agriculture, or religion with some
suggestions for activities. The classroom packets survey slavery
and murder, mental
health, and the 1864 Presidential
Election, while providing broader interpretation and activities. Given the
transition to remote education across the country, here are two activities that
educators could incorporate into their now virtual classrooms, with some
suggestions on how they might do so.
CWGK Agriculture Activity: CWGK’s agricultural activity asks participants to envision themselves as farmers in Civil War Era Kentucky. The activity has students assign points (representing the working hours of a day) to different agricultural pursuits on their fictional farms. Over the course of four phases (representing the four years of the Civil War) players draw event cards (developed from real events as discussed in CWGK documents) that represent the hardships brought on by everyday life and war. This includes everything from the requisition of supplies by either army, marauding guerrillas ransacking smokehouses, environmental challenges or disasters, droughts, freedom-seeking enslaved people, or requisitions from the army.
Converting to a digital experience: CWGK designed this activity to function as a board game, with students moving their pieces around, drawing cards, and simulating agriculture and life in wartime Kentucky. Yet, it is possible to use the game remotely.
Use a video-conferencing platform (such as Zoom,
Blackboard, Collaborate, or another video platform) to run the game live with
students with your camera facing the game board and have them roll dice (or you
roll for them to eliminate the possibility of cheating), and then move their
pieces and read the event cards accordingly.
Use a virtual tabletop platforms (such as
Roll20, Fantasy Grounds, Beyond Tabletop, or other systems) to upload a copy of
the map, have students join, and operate the game digitally.
The Election of 1864: Our second activity deals with the Presidential Election in 1864 that pitted incumbent Abraham Lincoln against former Union general, George McClellan. Kentuckians divided deeply over the election. Although a largely (but not exclusively) Union state, many slaveholding Kentuckians disdained the erosion of slavery and violation of civil liberties brought on by the Lincoln Administration. Further, questions of loyalty in a slaveholding border state, racial as well as gender influences, and political differences further prevented substantial portions of Kentuckians from voting.
Converting to a digital experience: To take this digital, I would suggest assigning roles to the students, having them read the documents particular to their role, and discussing (either live or through a chat function) how their character would vote in the 1864 or if they could.
Alternatively, it would be possible to connect this event to questions of political access in the 2020 election and the centennial of the Nineteenth Amendment. Students could research the evolution of political access or current questions of political participation to inform a larger discussion of voting rights in a longer scope of American history.
These are just suggestions to spark creativity—educators
know their students and curriculums far better than I do, so I am sure that there
are other opportunities to use these resources to educate students. If you have
recommendations, suggestions, or wish to talk further about this, please feel
free to contact me at email@example.com
or the CWGK team at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Stay safe and healthy, and I hope these resources might make teaching in these trying times just a little bit easier!
Greetings fellow scholars and enthusiasts of Kentucky history!
We hope this post finds you well given the current state of
local, national, and global affairs. The Civil War Governors of KentuckyDigital Documentary Edition (CWGK) team realizes that there is a great demand for online resources
among educators scrambling to assemble online classes, parents looking to
entertain children on an extended stay at home, and researchers separated from
the archive. CWGK is here to help as best we can.
To that end, CWGK plans on rolling out new blog posts in the
weeks to come that will include connections to current events (see Deborah
Thompon’s posts on civilian emergency responses after the Battle of Shiloh); interpretation of our documents; and educational resources
or activities for teachers and students.
Also, if you are looking for other ways to study Civil War
Kentucky, visit the CWGK
site to access our 10,000 digitized and transcribed documents.
You can also visit our For
Teachers page that includes educational activities or subject
guides that highlight the variety of documents in our collection.
In the days and weeks to come, check back with us as the CWGK
team, along with guest authors, add to our blog and offer you ways to make it
through this, to borrow liberally from one of documents, “vortex of perplexing [despondency],” while learning more about Civil War era Kentucky. We’ll
make sure to keep you posted through social media about new posts and other
news from our site.
Overview:The Kentucky Historical Society anticipates the ability to hire two Graduate
Research Associates (GRAs) familiar with 19th century United States history to
write short informational entries for the Civil War Governors of
Kentucky Digital Documentary Edition (CWGK). Each GRA will receive a production-based
stipend of $5,000 each and can work remotely from
their home institutions.
Each GRA will annotate 150 assigned
documents. Each GRA must be a graduate student in at least the second year of a
M.A. program in history or a related humanities discipline. These positions are
funded by a grant from the National Historical
Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC), a branch of the National Archives. As of this posting,
these positions are conditional, anticipating that the NHPRC will fund these
two positions next year. The new GRAs would continue a successful three-year
program that has involved 12 GRAs.
CWGK is an annotated, searchable,
and freely-accessible online edition of documents associated with the chief
executives of the Commonwealth, 1860-1865. Yet CWGK is not solely about the
five governors; it is about reconstructing the lost lives and voices of tens of
thousands of Kentuckians who interacted with the office of the
governor during the war years. CWGK will identify, research, and link
together every person, place, and organization found in its documents. This web
of hundreds of thousands of networked nodes will dramatically expand the number
of actors in Kentucky and U.S. history, show scholars new patterns and hidden
relationships, and recognize the humanity and agency of historically
marginalized people. To see the project’s work to date, visit discovery.civilwargovernors.org.
Scope of Work:Each GRA will be responsible for researching and writing short entries
on named persons, places, organizations, and geographical features in 150
documents. Each document contains an average of fifteen such entities. This
work will be completed and submitted to CWGK for fact-checking in sets
throughout the year, but no later than
December 31, 2020.
Research and writing will proceed
according to project guidelines concerning research sources and methods,
editorial information desired, and adherence to house style. This will ensure
1) that due diligence is done to the research of each entity and 2) that
information is recorded for each item in uniform ways which are easy to encode
All research for the entries must be
based in primary or credible secondary sources, and each GRA is expected to
keep a virtual research file with notes and digital images of documents related
to each entry. These will be examined regularly by the CWGK team as they fact
check the GRA output and turned over to CWGK at the completion of the work.
CWGK will fact-check all entries for research quality and adherence to house
style. CWGK projects an average rate of one document annotated per
two hours of work. Each GRA may expect their workload to be similar to
adding on another class for the semester. They should expect to complete an
average of 4 to 5 documents per week, though this may vary.
Each GRA will work remotely.
Interaction with the documents and the writing of annotations will take place
in a web-based annotation tool developed for CWGK, which can be accessed from
any location. CWGK will make use of online research databases to make its work
efficient and uniform. Other archival sources may be of value but are not
required by the research guidelines. Securing access to the paid databases
required by CWGK (Ancestry.com, Fold3.com, and ProQuest Historical Newspapers:
Louisville Courier Journal) is the responsibility of the GRA. If regular
institutional access to these databases is not available to the GRA through a
university or library, it is the responsibility of the GRA to purchase and use
a subscription to these databases. KHS will not reimburse the GRA for any
travel, copying, or other expenses incurred in CWGK research.
In order to maintain quality and
consistency as well as to foster a collegial and collaborative work culture,
CWGK will conduct weekly virtual “office hours” via Zoom, during which GRAs are
required to dial in, ask questions of staff, share expertise and research
methods, and make connections with their peers. Virtual attendance at these
office hours is mandatory, and multiple sessions may be offered to accommodate
schedules. Pending successful funding, CWGK anticipates the GRAs to begin in
early to mid-February.
The Kentucky Historical Society will
hold copyright for all annotation research as work for hire.
Evaluation Criteria:An application should consist of a narrative statement of
professional ability in the form of a cover letter, a CV, and two letters of
recommendation. Additional supplementary materials that demonstrate
capacity in the evaluation factors may also be included, these may include, but
are not limited to: examples of other digital projects, writing samples, or
proof of editorial experience.
Proposal materials should be submitted to Chuck Welsko at email@example.com no later than January 9, 2020. Should you have any questions about CWGK, the position, or the Kentucky Historical Society, please feel free to contact Dr. Welsko.
The Kentucky Historical Society will
evaluate the applicants based on the following factors, as demonstrated through
their applications materials:
Research Experience (70 points): Describe your familiarity with research in 19th century U.S. history. Describe some projects you have undertaken. What sources have you used? Have you been published? Have you interpreted historical research in forms other than a scholarly peer-reviewed publication? Discuss how a digital archival experience differs from your traditional archival experience.
Project Experience (30 points): Describe any work you have done in the editing of historical documents. Discuss how a project such as CWGK maintains balance between thorough research and production schedules. Have you worked on other collaborative projects in the field of history or otherwise? Describe the importance of time management and deadlines in your work. Describe your understanding of and/or experience with the Digital Humanities. From what you know of the CWGK project, how does it fit with current trends in the field? What do you hope to gain from working on the CWGK project?