Three historians spent several days last week at the Andrew Johnson National Historic Site and shared their viewpoints on its educational aspects Saturday evening.

The visit by the historians was arranged by the Association of American Historians at the request of Lizzie Watts, superintendent of the Johnson site, said Susan Ferentinos, of Bloomington, Ind., public history manager for the AAH.

Watts said she personally learned a great deal from interacting with the historians, and had some of her assumptions challenged. However, none of the historians claimed to be an expert on Andrew Johnson.

Several of those involved, whether historians or park staff, "had their ideas and beliefs challenged" during vigorous discussions over several days, Watts said.

She called the process "a success," and said some of the less-costly suggestions made by the historians can be implemented fairly easily, at little expense.

The park superintendent also said "good interpretation" of a historical site grows with input from historians, "and grows with time."

She said it was useful to learn how historians who have trained since the site was created now view Johnson, the nation's 17th president, and his controversial presidency from 1865 to 1869.

Ferentinos said her organization has organized "a couple dozen" similar teams for other national parks. She said this one was "particularly exciting and enjoyable" because of the "lively engagement" of those involved, including the park staff.

Ferentinos introduced:

* Dr. Benjamin Hufbauer, an art historian from the University of Louisville and author of the recent book, Presidential Temples, a study of presidential libraries.

* Dr. Andrew Slap, of East Tennessee State University, who was introduced as the author of The Doom of Reconstruction: The Liberal Republicans and the Election of 1872.

(In that election, Grant was re-elected president, winning the popular vote. Horace Greeley had been nominated by both the Liberal Republicans and the Democrats, only to die before the electoral college cast its votes.)

* Dr. Leigh Fought, who teaches at Montgomery College in Silver Spring, Md., and specializes in the history of women and slavery. She is the author of Southern Womenhood and Slavery: A Biography of Louisa S. McCord.

All three were asked to make recommendations based on what they had learned during their visit.

* Hufbauer called the Andrew Johnson National Historic Site "a treasure" that preserves a crucial period of American history.

Hufbauer was applauded by the audience of about 25 at the General Morgan Inn when he said, "In the long run, there probably should be a national reconstruction museum" built around the Andrew Johnson National Historic Site.

The Reconstruction period that followed the Civil War "needs to be explored more fully" in the site's displays and educational offerings, Hufbauer said, and he indicated that Johnson's home is a logical place for such a museum.

Hufbauer said that the "well-made" 14-minute films shown at the visitors center are too short and probably need to be about 25 minutes long.

He said 14 minutes is not enough time to introduce Andrew Johnson, the Civil War, and Reconstruction, all of which are complex and intertwined.

"The story is compelling and needs to be told more fully," Hufbauer said, with more depth about Johnson's opposition to the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

The 13th Amendment abolished slavery "or involuntary servitude except as a punishment for crime ..."

The 14th Amendment declared, "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges and imunities of citizens of the United States"...

The 15th Amendment assures that "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude."

Slap, speaking longest, commended Watts for inviting scholars to critique the park.

"I am not a Johnson scholar," Slap said, though he specializes in Reconstruction history.

However, he continued, "The reason why Johnson is important is because of his presidency, and the important part of his presidency is Reconstruction."

Slap said "changes in Reconstruction historiography" need to be included in how the park interprets Johnson.

From Reconstruction until the 1950s, Slap said, Reconstruction "was considered a tragic era" and a failure in its attempt to "make blacks and whites equal" in America.

That interpretation "makes Johnson a hero" for resisting Reconstruction, he said. In this view, Johnson is also seen as "no match" for the Radical Republican "juggernaut" of northern congressmen at the time.

More recently, "a whole generation of scholars has taken issue" with that interpretation, Slap said, especially since the Civil Rights movement in the 1960s, and the Vietnam era.

That scholarship, led by James McPherson, whom Slap called "the dean of Civil War scholarship," portrayed Johnson as "a despised racist" and white supremacist. Slap said that interpretation has carried sway for 30 or 40 years.

Slap said the park's film and displays "hearken back to the traditional interpretation" of Johnson as a failed hero.

In response to a question later, he said he believes Johnson himself would be pleased with the way he is portrayed.

Slap said he would prefer to see the park "move past some of the current historiography" and show the period not only from Johnson's perspective, but from that of his opponents, without attempting to judge either.

Johnson opposed the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments to the U.S. Constitution on what he felt were constitutional grounds, Slap said, because a lot of states were not represented when they were passed, and because Johnson believed those amendments gave too much power to the central government.

Slap said he believes it is a "disservice [to history] to wipe out [in park displays and interpretation] the issue of white superiority" and statements by Johnson to the effect that America was and should be "a country for white men" because if Johnson were to come back today, "I think he would embrace those words."

Though Johnson saw himself as a defender of the Constitution, Slap said "quite a few Republicans in the North" at the time felt "King Andy" was attacking the Constitution by attempting to nullify congressional overrides of his vetoes of the Freedman's Bureau and the "Civil Rights" amendments.

Slap said a better understanding of "the conditions of freedom" during Reconstruction would make it possible to present the time without vilifying one group or the other, or vilifying Johnson.

The ETSU professor said he believes that America attempted to do so much through Reconstruction that, overall, the effort was successful even though it failed in its ultimate goal.

Dr. Fought said that, "Although I've learned so much, I've come away with a lot of questions," which she said is a good thing for a historian.

The National Park Service is in essence attempting to present a biography of Johnson, she said.

Fought said she found it interesting to learn more about Johnson's views on slavery, since he was "a former apprentice who ran away from apprenticeship," built an amazing political career, and accumulated substantial real estate holdings.

She said she would like to see the Johnson site research and present more about "where women convened" in the community, since Johnson's tailor shop is presented as a place where men gathered to swap political views.

She also would like to be able to learn more at the site about how women asserted themselves in Greeneville society in Johnson's day.

Fought said she would like to see more about Johnson's daughter, who served as first lady instead of her mother, and more about how that daughter came back to Greeneville after the presidency and set up housekeeping for her father -- entering into contracts, and so forth.

Fought said she would like to see the national historic site here present how Johnson saw the capabilities of women in the world.

The historians were asked to comment on things they felt the Andrew Johnson site is doing well.

Slap said he especially liked the tour of the Johnson Homestead, where he found the tour guides very knowledgeable and "very engaging with questions."

The site "is incredibly well preserved," Slap said, "and does a great job of telling the story of Andrew Johnson's family." He said his suggestions would expand on what is already preserved and presented.
Hufbauer said small things such as being able to lift Johnson's clothes iron and see how heavy it is helped him with his understanding of "the difficulty" of life at that time. He said Johnson's preserved tailor shop was, to him, a great resource.

Hufbauer commended the staff for their energy, their sense of humor, and their "desire to teach."

Fought (who agreed to replace another women's history specialist on short notice) said she came not knowing much about Andrew Johnson and found, to her surprise: "Oh my! He's interesting!"

She said that Abraham Lincoln is often portrayed as almost saintly, but "Andrew Johnson is interesting because he's not sainted."

She said Johnson was badly neglected in courses she has taken on the Civil War and Reconstruction, and she now wants to know much more about him.

Fought also said that she has a high regard for the site's staff, describing them as "people who care passionately about this figure. That goes a million miles."

She also said she found the use of contemporaneous documents and periodicals in displays to be effective and informative.

She said she was impressed that Civil War graffiti on the wall of Johnson's home has been preserved and can be seen. "The graffiti on the wall brings the visitor into the work of the historian," Fought said.

She also praised the fact that visitors are asked to "make a choice" in balloting on Johnson's impeachment.

One questioner asked whether Johnson ever fathered children by his African-American slaves.

Slaps said that, if so, it is not presented in the literature. Watts said that, although there are rumored "stories" to that effect, there has been no documentation of any such children.

Larry Kelley, a local storyteller, said words such as "racist" and "white supremacist" are "things I don't want to believe" about Johnson.

Such words are very powerful, and need to be used with care because they carry such harsh meanings today, he said.

Watts said "one of the greatest challenges of telling history is telling it in the context of the times," for hearers who live in a different time.