A Sikh Regiment for the British Army?

Sikh soldiers have a long and distinguished place in military history. During the Anglo-Sikh Wars of the 1840s, the Sikhs proved to be the most formidable opponents the British ever encountered in India. Having been incorporated into the British Empire, the Sikhs proved to be just as impressive fighting on behalf of that Empire as they had in fighting against it. They served during the Indian Mutiny of 1857, in Afghanistan and along the Northwest Frontier, in various colonial campaigns in Africa and Asia, and in all major theaters of both the First World War and the Second World War. Ten Sikh soldiers have won the Victoria Cross, Britain's highest award for gallantry. Few peoples have a military tradition as worthy of praise as that of the Sikhs.

 

There are today more than half a million Sikhs in the United Kingdom, a mutually beneficial legacy of the British Empire. However, fewer than two hundred Sikhs currently serve in the British military, which has often had difficulty in meeting its manpower needs in recent years. This has led to the proposal that the a dedicated Sikh unit be raised from among the Sikh population of the United Kingdom. Perhaps starting on a small scale, with a single reserve company, it could eventually expand into a genuine regiment, taking its inspiration from the glorious traditions of the Sikh regiments of the past.

 

This is an outstanding idea. After all, there are already regiments of Scottish, Welsh, and Irish soldiers. The British army still recruits soldiers from Nepal for its two Gurkha battalions. Why would be wrong with having a regiment raised from Britain's Sikh community? Not only would it benefit Britain's military, a strong force for good in the 21st Century world, but it would contribute to fostering a positive multicultural society while remaining true to traditional British values.

 

The Sikh community in Britain seems generally supportive of the proposal, opining that it will encourage Sikh enlistment and help rectify the lack of Sikh representation in the army. Baron Singh of Wimbeldon, Director of the Network of Sikh Organizations and probably the most recognized Sikh community leader in Britain, has expressed his endorsement of the plan. Some commentators have even suggested that the proposal was designed by the Conservative-led government to win support from the Sikh community with an eye to next month's general election.

The forces of political correctness, of course, have mobilized against the proposal, asserting that the creation of an all-Sikh regiment is somehow racist. The idea of a Sikh military unit also dusts off memories from Britain's imperial past and there are several people who insist that everything to do with the British Empire must be condemned and despised.

Such poo-pooers should be ignored. The idea of a Sikh Regiment for the British Army is a good one and it deserves a chance.

My Friend, Livy

The other day, I pulled out my copy of Livy's book Ab Urbe Condita Libri (Books from the Founding of the City), which I had thumbed through many times during my days as a history graduate student. In the English-speaking world, we generally call it, quite simply, "Livy's History of Rome." It was written in the late 1st Century BC and the early 1st Century AD, during the reign of Emperor Augustus. Livy attempted a monumental task; nothing less than an entire history of Rome and its people from the legendary founding of the city down to his own time. Sadly, the majority of Livy's books have been lost and only about a quarter of the history has survived down to the present day.

What's left, though, is magical. Reading it makes one feel like they are stepping into another world.

Some of the stories about which Livy writes are well-known to educated people. Aeneas and the arrival of his Trojan refugees on the shores of Italy. The rightful rulers Romulus and Remus being cast into the Tiber River by an evil uncle and rescued by a great she-wolf. The treason and agony of Coriolanus, whom Livy had immortalized sixteen centuries before Shakespeare got his hands on him.

Other stories told by Livy are not especially well-known to modern audiences, but are no less enthralling.  The hero Horatius defending a critical bridge by himself against a powerful Etruscan army. The drama of the Battle of Lake Regillus. The three hundred and six members of the Fabii family (Livy can be very specific) going off by themselves to fight the enemy city-state of Veii.

It's fascinating to try to draw the line in Livy between what is real and what is purely legendary. Livy himself understood this and says many times that he is unsure if whatever anecdote he is relating can be considered factual. He states quite openly that the stories of Aeneas and Romulus are probably mythical and that he personally doubts the account of Horatius defending the bridge. On the other hand, two thousand five hundred years from now, will anyone believe the story of Washington crossing the ice-choked Delaware to surprise the Hessian garrison at Trenton? The very fact that even the most outlandish stories in Livy's great tale just might be true, or at least based in truth, gives a certain excitement to the whole thing.

Was there really a tyrannical king named Tarquinius Superbus? Was he really overthrown by a Roman hero named Lucius Junis Brutus? Was there really a reluctant dictator named Cincinnatus, who could have made himself king but decided, in an unprecedented display of civic virtue, to retire back to his farm? The tantalizing answer is: maybe.

Moreover, we know that the general course of Livy's narrative is true. There really was a series of wars between the Romans and the various enemies described in his books: Latins, Volscians, Aequi, Hernici, and others. When one reads Livy and passes through his descriptions of these battles and sieges, it as though one is being allowed to glimpse, ever so briefly, into a historical shadow land.

There's a modern phenomena of large numbers of people becoming devoted fans of fictional literary "universes". We see this with the Lord of the Rings book, Star Wars, Star Trek, and numerous others. I have occasionally felt this pull myself; my wife never lets me forget that once, when I was a foolish boy nearly two decades ago, I attended a Star Trek convention. But I confess I have never understood this obsession with fictional universes. Real ancient history, written by historians who actually lived two millennia ago, is so much deeper and more sophisticated, besides having the infinitely desirable quality of being at least largely true. I love reading Tolkien as much as anyone, but it's peanuts next to reading Livy. Or, for that matter, reading Herodotus, Thucydides, Plutarch, Sallust, Polybius, Suetonius, or Tacitus.

What's amazing is that these priceless pieces of historical literary are so easy to obtain. Many of them can be downloaded free of charge on e-book readers. Paperback versions, perhaps discarded by short-sighted graduate students, can be found for one or two dollars in most used book stores. Even brand new copies can be purchased for the price of a cheap meal. I honestly cannot think of a better way to spend money.

Next time you have a quiet evening, I urge you to pour yourself a glass of wine (an Italian red, preferably), sit down in a comfortable chair, and open up a copy of Livy. You won't regret it.

Ten Ways to be a Good Citizen

It's long been a national pastime to disdain our elected officials as either inept mediocrities or as corrupt crooks. In doing so, we are probably right. In my admittedly unscientific estimate, roughly 45% of office-holders are inept mediocrities, 45% are corrupt crooks, and only about 10% are decent people genuinely trying to do the right thing.

I am an eager participant in the disparage-our-politicians-as-much-as-possible, but I have to wonder if our enthusiasm for doing so is a society-wide psychological defense mechanism. By projecting so much anger and resentment onto the politicians, we divert our own attention away from our own shortcomings as citizens. And there are lots of those. All too often, we ignore our own responsibilities as citizens out of sheer laziness. While it's easy to blame the ineptitude and corruption of politicians for all our ills, it is equally important for us to look into the mirror. After all, it has been truly said that every people gets the government that they deserve.

In this spirit, let me suggest ten things each one of us could do in order to be better citizens.

1. Vote
This seems pretty simple. Showing up to cast your vote on Election Day is the most fundamental duty of every citizen. If you don't vote, you are not doing your duty to yourself or your fellow citizens. Anyone who claims that they don't vote because they don't know enough about the candidates is guilty of gross negligence, since it's an easy matter to pick up a newspaper or voter guide and learn all one needs to know about the different candidates.

It is true that the two major parties usually don't give us candidates worth voting for, but generally one of the two choices is better than the other. Voting for the lesser of two evils is always preferable to not voting at all. And one always has the option of casting a protest vote for a third party candidate.

Moreover, voting is something of a sacred act. There's nothing like the feeling of standing in line at the polling place with one's fellow citizens, taking part together in the democratic process. It is the oxygen of a republic.

2. Read about American history, especially the Revolution
It's shocking to me how little the average citizen of our nation knows about its history. Our educational system doesn't do it a very good job of teaching us about it when we are children, but there is nothing preventing us from educating ourselves. Any bookstore or library is filled with outstanding and enjoyable books about American history. Not only does learning about it make one a better citizen, but it is a much more enjoyable way to spend time than playing a computer game or watching in inane television show.

In particular, to be a good American citizen, one should learn about the history of the American Revolution. I think that if one knew more about the political struggles waged by Samuel Adams, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and others, they would be less willing to tolerate the direction in which modern politicians are dragging out country. In addition, the more one reads about the struggles faced by George Washington's army during the course of the war, the more one is inspired to get up out of the chair and do something to help our country.

3. Read the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers
Okay, this is a bit more specific, but there is no better way to get into the heart of American political philosophy than to read the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers. They're easily available in paperback for a tiny price and, of course, you can always check them out of the library for free.

The Federalist Papers consist of 85 essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay in 1787 and 1788 in an effort to persuade the state of New York to ratify the Constitution. Hamilton wrote most of them, Madison wrote the best of them, and Jay wrote those that dealt most with foreign policy. They are among the most articulate and insightful statements of political philosophy ever written and, considering the context in which they were written, are especially relevant to the United States.

The Anti-Federalist Papers are different in that they do not represent a single, unified project. They were written by various anonymous authors in different states in an attempt to sway public opinion against ratification of the Constitution. They consist of the letters of "Brutus" and "Cato" (probably the New York politicians Robert Yates and George Clinton), the essays of "Centinel" (probably the Pennsylvanian Samuel Byran), the letters of "The Federal Farmer" (never positively identified), and many other pieces. There's not full agreement on what should be considered part of the Anti-Federalist Papers, but several collections have been published. One of the best pieces was a report issued by the dissenting minority of the Pennsylvania ratification convention, which they wrote to express why they opposed the Constitution. Although the Anti-Federalists failed to prevent the ratification of the Constitution, they succeeded in ensuring that a Bill of Rights would be enacted, for which all Americans owe them an infinite debt.

Together, the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers are a tour de force of political philosophy, dealing with the proper level of power that government should have over our lives. To gain a proper understanding of the need for a strong military, the powers of taxation, political factionalism, the need for checks and balances, legislative representation, and a vast number of other questions, one can do no better than to read the Federalist Papers and Anti-Federalist Papers.

The powers-that-be would rather people have their minds numbed to uselessness by watching cable network news or frivolous reality television. After all, if citizens truly studied the political ideals on which our nation was founded, they might get the dangerous idea that they, and not the politicians, are the ones who are supposed to be in charge.

4. Know who your elected officials are and how to get in touch with them. Then, do so.
Only about a third of Americans know the name of their representative in Congress and fewer know the name of their representatives in their state legislature. This is just pathetic. It takes a matter of seconds on the Internet to find out exactly who your representatives are on the federal, state and local levels. That so few Americans know the identities of their representatives is a disgrace and one of the most telling failures of modern America.

So, know who represents you. Once you do, it's easy to find out how to contact them through email, letter, or phone. The realities of modern life mean that you are far more likely to speak to a staff member whose job it is to speak to constituents, but that's better than nothing. And if you are persistent or form a large group concerned about a single particular issue, you can usually get through to the actual office-holder.

The next time you want to complain about a political issue, no matter what it is, stop for a moment and think about how to let your elected representative know how you feel about it. If you upset over the state sales tax, write your state representative an email to complain. If you want to complain about lack of action on climate change, write a letter about it and mail it to your congressman's office. If you are upset about your child being given too much homework, call your representative on the school board. And there is nothing stopping you from calling the local district office and setting up a personal meeting, either.

5. Tune out cable network news, political talk radio, and most political blogs
Back when smallpox still existed, it was generally considered inadvisable to visit places that had been infected by the disease. Following the same logic, a good citizen should avoid infectious sources of pseudo-news like cable network news and political talk radio. They do not provide any meaningful content or information and exist only to make people angry at or frightened of manufactured or imagined problems. After all, angry or frightened people are more likely to keep tuning in, which means continued ad revenue. This is why they have evolved into an absurd "crisis of the month" format that is going to be looked upon with horror by historians of the future.

Most political blogs, similarly, are screed sheets written by misguided or silly people who don't really know enough about what they are talking about to comment upon it intelligently. Some are actually quite excellent, but most are idiotic. Find the good ones and follow them. Avoid the other ones like the plague.

Newspapers (yes, they still exist) remain the best source of news and e-book readers are giving them a new lease on life. I personally try to read my local paper, the Austin-American Statesman, every morning. For national news, I try to read the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal. Each has a different editorial slant, but both maintain high standards of journalistic integrity. By doing this rather simple thing, I feel much better informed about what is happening in the country and the world than anybody who spends endless hours watching cable network news or listening to political talk radio.

6. Observe national holidays
It takes a few dollars and a few minutes to purchase an American flag and set up a bracket so that you can display it from the front of your house. The National Flag Foundation provides a comprehensive list of national holidays on which it is appropriate to fly your flag and the proper etiquette for how to do so.

Also, just observe the holidays themselves and not just by having friends over for a cookout. Read the Declaration of Independence on July 4. Read the Preamble to the Constitution on September 17. Take flowers to a military cemetery on Memorial Day. Do something to honor veterans on Veterans Day (see #8, below). Do something to make sure that you embrace national holidays as something more than a day off from work.

7. Cheer on American athletes at the Olympics and the American team at the World Cup
Albert Einstein once said, "Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind." He was quite right and, as a German Jew, he certainly knew what he was talking about. But there is a big difference between nationalism and patriotism. Nationalism is about denigrating other nations and their people, while patriotism is about taking pride in one's own. Only the weak-minded think that they are the same thing.

The Olympic Games and the World Cup celebrate patriotism while rejecting the base instincts of nationalism. We can take pride in the achievements of our American athletes while respecting the athletes of other nations. How much better it is to compete in athletic competitions than fighting on the battlefield? How much better to respectfully shake hands than to smash one another with fists?

The glory of our athletes in international competition is part of the glory of America. It should be celebrated.

8. Support nonprofits that help veterans
Lots of self-righteous people make a lot of noise about "supporting the troops" and then never actually do anything that supports them. If you ask me, these people are worse than those who don't support the troops at all, since to neglect they add the sin of hypocrisy.

There are lots of nonprofit organizations focused on helping veterans or active-duty soldiers. Far too many of them are borderline scams, with a ridiculous ratio of administrative expenses to funds actually devoted to service programs. Others have mission statements so broad and vague that they are incapable of focusing on anything in particular. Donating to these kinds of groups, sadly, is usually a waste of money.

For all the badly run nonprofits, however, there are several that do outstanding work. Two that stand out to me are Homes For Our Troops and Fisher House. Homes For Our Troops builds specially adapted homes for soldiers who had received debilitating wounds in Iraq or Afghanistan. Fisher House provides families of servicemen with free housing near medical facilities where their loved one is receiving treatment. Both of these groups have received excellent ratings from charity watchdog groups and provide a specific and focused service of crucial importance. If you're serious when you say you want to support the troops, give to these two groups.

9. Visit and help preserve national battlefields
There are literally hundreds of places around the country where American soldiers fought and died in the battles of the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, and the Civil War. There can be no more moving experience for a good citizen than to walk across these pieces of hallowed ground. Whether you walk the ground where Americans fought for freedom against British troops and Hessian mercenaries at Saratoga, or wander among the hills where Americans slaughtered one another in a terrible civil war at Gettysburg, nothing gives a better sense of what it means to be an American than to visit our national battlefields.

Several of these battlefields have been well-preserved by the National Park System or the various state governments. Most, however, are not protected at all from the pressures of real estate development and, in some cases, strip mining and other industrial activities. My father and I recently visited the battlefield at Cedar Creek in the northern Shenandoah Valley to attends the events of the 150th anniversary of the engagement. As moving as the experience was, it was diminished mightily by an enormous industrial facility dedicated to limestone mining that loomed over the battlefield.

The Civil War Trust has long done magnificent work in protecting Civil War battlefields by buying up real estate before it ends up in the hands of developers. In some cases, such as the battlefield at Franklin, Tennessee, it has purchased and torn up the parking lots and strip malls that blemish our nation's hallowed ground. Recently, it launched a project called Campaign 1776 to expand its work to battlefields from the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812. If you're interesting it protecting our nation's battlefields from being lost forever, consider becoming a supporter of these efforts.

10. Finally, just be a decent person
Okay, this is good advice generally, but it is also critical to being a good citizen. Don't talk during the movie. Wash your hands after using the restroom. Slow down to let other drivers change lanes. Don't use foul language. Put your grocery shopping cart in the designated return area rather than leaving it in your parking space. Don't yell at waiters or retail workers who make insignificant mistakes. Don't make offensive jokes. In short, don't be a jerk.

I think if people tried to follow these ten pieces of advice, it would have a very beneficial effect. We should all strive to be good citizens. If we do, we might revitalize our country and help it find its way back onto a proper course.

Why Isn't Every Person Enthralled By Space Exploration?

On Wednesday, the human race landed on a comet.

It's easy to type that sentence, but the simple and stunning reality is so amazing that it sends a shiver up my spine. The human race landed on a comet! More prosaically, a robotic mission by the European Space Agency called Rosetta set down a small lander, called Philae, on the surface of Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, following a ten year, four billion mile voyage. Never before has a space exploration mission been able to study a comet so closely. It promises to answer a huge number of questions we have about the big, dirty snowballs spiraling around our Sun and, as science goes, give us an even larger number of new questions.

There was drama aplenty. Philae's landing system failed, causing the plucky robot to initially bounce back off the surface and come down in a different and thus far unknown location. It ended up lying in the shadow of a cliff, preventing its solar panels from receiving sufficient sunlight and dooming its batteries to a quick demise. The engineers and scientists running the Rosetta mission desperately tried to find a solution, while racing against time to retrieve the critical scientific data before the batteries gave out. The brave little robot eventually did fall silent, but not before delivering enough science back to the European team to completely revolutionize our understanding of comets.

I find all this utterly fascinating and enthralling, but then I have always been absorbed by space exploration. Years ago, in what seems like a previous life, I engaged in a quixotic effort to create a political action committee designed to promote space exploration (it didn't work, sadly). To me, the quest to explore space draws on deep-seated, even primal, human emotions that have been hard-wired into us by evolution. It's the same thing that drove Ferdinand Magellan to attempt the circumnavigation of the planet, that drove, the Montgolfier brothers to soar upwards in their balloons, Meriweather Lewis and William Clark to explore the American West, and a generation of hardy explorers to risk their lives to reach the North and South Poles of the Earth.

James Cook, perhaps the greatest explorer who ever lived, put it best when he said, "Ambition leads me not only farther than any other man has been before me, but as far as I think it possible for man to go."

My question is simply this: why isn't every person enthralled by space exploration? Right now, even as I type this blog entry, two robot rovers, Curiosity and Opportunity, are scurrying across the face of Mars, while a veritable armada of orbiting robots send by many different nations circle overhead. The enormous Cassini orbiter are spiraling around Saturn, revolutionizing our understanding of the most beautiful planet in the Solar System. The New Horizons mission is en route to Pluto, while the Messenger mission continues its exploration of Mercury. The Dawn spacecraft, powered by a revolutionary ion engine, is moving through the asteroid belt. There are lots of exciting things happening in our Solar System these days.

We live in the greatest age of exploration and discovery since the 18th Century. Anyone with an Internet connection and an ounce of curiosity can follow the adventures of these intrepid robotic spacecraft, sharing in the drama and the excitement of discovery. Why, then, do so many people choose to waste their time watching crude reality television shows or playing frivolous computer games? You wouldn't choose to eat a cheap fast food meal when you could eat in a three Michelin starred restaurant, would you?

The Rosetta-Philae mission to Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko is a reminder of what the human race can accomplish when we rise above the foul inanity that characterizes so much of the modern world and try to fulfill our real potential. It's worth celebrating.

A Sigh For The Eighteenth Century

In 1784, Thomas Jefferson was dispatched by Congress to serve as a diplomat in Europe. A major part of his diplomatic mission was to negotiate and conclude treaties of friendship and commerce with as many European nations as possible. Jefferson wrote out a draft treaty and spent several years trying to persuade the great powers of the Old World to sign on. To Jefferson's disappointment, few paid much attention. Only Prussia, then ruled by Frederick the Great, eventually signed the treaty.

I have always been especially intrigued by Article 23 of the treaty Jefferson wrote.

If war should arise between the two contracting parties, the merchants of either country, then residing in the other, shall be allowed to remain nine months to collect their debts and settle their affairs, and may depart freely, carrying offs all their effects, without molestation or hindrance. And all women and children, scholars of every faculty, cultivators of the earth, artisans, manufacturers and fishermen, unarmed and inhabiting unfortified towns, villages, or places, and in general all others whose occupations are for the common subsistence and benefit of mankind, shall be allowed to continue their respective employments and shall not be molested in their persons, nor shall their houses be burnt or otherwise destroyed, nor shall their fields wasted by the armed forces of the enemy into whose power, by the events of war, they may happen to fall; but if anything is necessary to be taken from them for the use of such armed force, the same shall be paid for it at a reasonable price.

When Benjamin Franklin was serving as Minister to France during the Revolutionary War, he was responsible for coordinating the activities of American privateers who were preying on British merchant ships. In the midst of all his myriad duties, Franklin took the time to instruct them what to do in the event that they encountered the ships of the legendary explorer James Cook, who had sailed from England on his third voyage of exploration in the South Pacific some time earlier. Here is what Franklin wrote:

A ship having been fitted out from England before the commencement of this war, to make discoveries of new countries in unknown seas, under the conduct of that most celebrated navigator, Captain Cook; an undertaking truly laudable in itself, as the increase of geographical knowledge facilitates the communication between distant nations, in the exchange of useful products and manufactures, and the extension of arts, whereby the common enjoyments of human life are multiplied and augmented, and science of other kinds increased to the benefit of mankind in general; this is, therefore, most earnestly to recommend to every one of you, that, in case the said ship, which is now expected to be soon in the European seas on her return, should happen to fall into your hands, you would not consider her as an enemy, nor suffer any plunder to be made of the effects contained in her, nor obstruct her immediate return to England, by detaining her or sending her into any other part of Europe or to America, but that you would treat the said Captain Cook and his people with all civility and kindness, affording them, as common friends to mankind, all the assistance in your power, which they may happen to stand in need of.

Just reading these words fills me with a sense of wonder. Jefferson and Franklin were both pragmatic and realistic politicians, well-versed in the shenanigans and dirty tricks by which men achieve their political objectives. Yet they possessed a vision and a sense of optimism that was the hallmark of their century and which is utterly absent in our own age.

One wonders what Jefferson and Franklin would have thought had they witnessed the total warfare of the last century. What would they have thought of unrestricted submarine warfare and mass use of chemical weapons, and massacres of entire populations during the First World War? What would they have thought of the area bombing of enemy cities and intentional slaughter of civilian populations in the Second World War? What would they have thought of the atomic destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the subsequent construction of nuclear arsenals so large they could have destroyed human civilization many times over?

Our own age has its share of wonders, not least in the realms of science and medicine. Yet we have also lost more than we'd probably care to admit. Jefferson and Franklin imagined that we could use the power to human reason to form society into something close to utopia. At the very least, we could make the world far better than it is. That was the dream of the Enlightenment. Yet after the world wars, after the Holocaust, after the creation of nuclear weapons, it's easy to see why the Enlightenment has been so thoroughly discredited.

But despair is never useful. If Jefferson and Franklin could speak to us across the centuries, they would surely remind us that it's always within our power to make our world into what we truly want it to be. We have but to summon up the will to act.

Hallowed Ground and Highways

I don't like cars. I never have. They're loud, they're dangerous, they're smelly, they're bad for the environment, and they make walking around otherwise nice cities an exercise in frustration. If I really put my mind to it, I could think of a thousand different reasons for why I dislike cars. I would much prefer to travel by train or go really old-school and ride a horse. I think that the ascent of the automobile in the early 20th Century marked a significant diminishment of human civilization.

On top of all the many reasons why I dislike cars, I would add the fact the damage that they do to the physical and historical landscape of our nation. Allow me to explain.

I recently returned from a five-day trip to see Civil War battlefields in Maryland and Virginia with my father. Part of the purpose for the trip was to do research for my upcoming novel Shenandoah Fire, but it was also simply to have a good time with my dad and recreate some of the wonderful trips on which he took me when I was a boy. We visited nine different battlefields and also took in the battle reenactments associated with the 150th anniversary of the Battle of Cedar Creek. We also ate some wonderful food at local restaurants. All things considered, it was a lovely trip.

My father and I acting like kids at the Monocacy Visitor's Center.

The first battlefield we visited was at Monocacy in Maryland, just south of Frederick. The Battle of Monocacy took place on July 9, 1864. A scratch force of about six thousand Union soldiers hastily gathered by General Lew Wallace (most famous for being the author of Ben Hur) fought against the Confederate Army of the Valley, fourteen thousand strong, under the command of the colorful and irascible General Jubal Early. The Confederate force was marching on Washington D.C., whose defenses had been stripped of troops to reinforce the Army of the Potomac. The possibility of the Southern forces capturing the United States capital city was very real. Had they succeeded, the course of the history would have been very different.

A peaceful part of the Monocacy Battlefield

Wallace knew he was terribly outnumbered. Even worse, half of his small force was made up of poorly trained militia, while Early's men were some of the finest infantry in the world. Knowing that he could not hope to win the battle, Wallace's objective was simply to delay Early's advance long enough for reinforcements to arrive in the defenses of Washington. Wallace knew that he was engaged in a life-or-death struggle that might determine the fate of the nation.

All day, the two armies battered one another. Using his superior numbers, Early was able to outflank Wallace to the south and roll up the Union line. On the field between the Worthington Farm and Thomas Farm, a Confederate force led by General John C. Breckinridge (the major character of my novella Blessed Are The Peacemakers) engaged in an epic struggle with the Union division under General James Ricketts. Hundreds of men were slaughtered under the hot summer sun. Breckinridge eventually drove off the Union force, but only after they had delayed the Confederate advance for a few precious hours.

The Worthington Farm House

Jubal Early won the Battle of Monocacy. Yet it amounted to a defeat. When Early and his army formed up for an attack on Washington on the morning of July 12, they were too late. The defenses bristled with the rifles and bayonets of the VI Corps of the Army of the Potomac, which had arrived just a few hours beforehand. The courageous stand made by Wallace's small force at Monocacy had won the Union the time it desperately needed to reinforce the capital. Had the Battle of Monocacy not delayed Early's advance, he could have captured Washington on July 11. Years later, speaking of his men who had fallen at Monocacy, Wallace wrote, "These men died to save the National Capital, and they did save it."

On October 16, I walked for hours across the fields in and around the Worthington and Thomas Farms at Monocacy National Battlefield, thinking about the brutal battle that took place there, trying to imagine what it had been like, remembering the courage and heroism displayed by the men on both sides of the awful struggle. So many men experienced their last moments of life at this place. Some were killed instantly, others suffered terribly from grievous wounds before dying on the field or in the nightmare that was a Civil War hospital. How many thought of their wives and their children before they gave their last breath?

It was not easy for my mind to focus on such thoughts, however, as there were thousands of cars and trucks roaring past me at 70 mph, only a few hundred yards away.

Highway 270 carves through the core of Monocacy National Battlefield, right across the fields where the crucial fight between Breckinridge and Ricketts took place. It is a major thoroughfare leading from Washington D.C. to the northwest and is clogged with heavy amounts of traffic. Walking the battlefield, it was impossible to ignore the roaring of the tires and engines, the honking horns of frustrated drivers, or the smell of car and truck exhaust. The highway was like a smallpox scar on the face of the battlefield.

I'm sure that, for some topographical reason determined by some Department of Transportation bureaucrat in some Washington office, it made perfect sense to run Highway 270 right through the heart of the Monocacy battlefield. It probably saved money and a fraction of a second off the driving time of people using the highway. Yet I'm equally sure that the Department of Transportation bureaucrat never considered, even for a moment, what damage he was doing to the country and our collective historical memory when he drew the line on the map that crossed over the Monocacy battlefield. In all likelihood, he didn't even know what had transpired on the piece of ground.

Monocacy is far from the only battlefield scarred by roads and highways. During my trip, I visited the battlefields at New Market and Cedar Creek in Virginia; both battlefields are cleaved in half by Highway 81. Manassas Battlefield has constantly been threatened by highway construction as the suburbs of Washington D.C. expand ever outward, as have the cluster of battlefields around Richmond. The same can be said for literally dozens of other battlefields around the country, including some from conflicts other than the Civil War.

These bits of land, were so many men gave what Lincoln called "the last full measure of devotion", are hallowed ground. They deserve to be protected. Of the multitude of threats facing historical battlefields across the country, rerouting highways away from them would seem to be the most easily solved, for the politicians in Congress or in the state legislatures can simply decree that the highways not run across the land in question.

I don't like cars. I do like preserving the historical memory of our nation and remembering deeds of great courage. I don't think I'm saying anything radical when I end this blog entry with a simple assertion: highways should not be run through battlefields. That's all.

The Annoying Ubiquity of Television

Not long ago, just after church, I took my wife and daughter out to lunch at a local Mexican restaurant. We have often gone to this particular place in the past and have always enjoyed the good quality of the food, the decent prices, and the friendly staff. But today, my lunch was disturbed by the looming presence of a large, flat-screen television hanging menacingly from the ceiling just a few feet from our table.

The lunch itself was very nice (I had a beef chimichanga, in case anyone cares) and the staff was delighted by the cuteness of my eighteen-month-old daughter Evelyn. But no matter how hard I tried, I could not avoid the grim stare of the television, which seemed like some electronic beast from George Orwell's worst nightmare.

For some reason, the television was tuned to a station featuring nothing but infomercials. The first one apparently was advertising some kind of new dog leash that doesn't choke the animals during walks. The second was for an apparently revolutionary bra design, though its exact virtues were completely lost on me. The two infomercials repeated several times throughout the course of our lunch. Mercifully, the sound was off, though someone had unhelpfully turned the closed captioning on.

Another television was hanging in a different part of the restaurant, tuned to the same infomercial station. None of the patrons appeared to be watching, which led me to wonder exactly why the televisions were on in the first place. More importantly, why were the televisions even there at all? I can understand why a sports bar would need televisions in order to show games, but why would an ordinary Mexican restaurant need one? I eat out to enjoy good food and good conversation; if I wanted to watch television, I would have stayed at home.

I am reminded of the opening scene in Blade Runner, featuring gigantic blimp-like aircraft hovering over a dystopian Los Angeles as they pummeled the people with advertising using blaring speakers and beaming lights. Television is ubiquitous and increasingly difficult to avoid. Restaurants, airports, the waiting rooms of doctor's offices, even in elevators. Wherever people are, someone seems to want to deploy a television, turn it on, and crank up the volume.

This makes no sense to me at all. It's as if we have collectively decided as a society to position gas generators in every room designed to release nasty and rotten odors every few minutes. One would hope that we wouldn't put up with that. Perhaps one day we'll learn not to tolerate the unwilling ubiquity of televisions, either.