News---1862 Person of the Year On American History TV, CSPAN3.

AHTV Looks at "Person of the Year" for 1862, CSpan 3, Saturday February 25, 2012.

Each year, Time magazine selects a person who had the most influence on events during the previous twelve months. If the same question were posed in 1862, who would Time have selected as the Person of the Year?

Five historians will ponder that question and present their candidates for Person of the Year 1862 at a forum organized by Museum of the Confederacy and hosted by the Library of Virginia. American History TV will have LIVE coverage of the day-long event. Nominees are kept secret until the historians announce their candidates. At the end of the day the audience will vote on the nominees for Person of the Year 1862 and the winner will be announced.

Historians presenting nominations are:
James McPherson, Civil War Scholar & Princeton University History Professor Emeritus [nominated David Farragut]

David Blight, Director of Yale University’s Center for the Study of Slavery, Resistance & Abolition [nominated Frederick Douglass]

Robert Krick, Former Chief Historian at Fredericksburg & Spotsylvania National Military Park [nominated Thomas Jackson]

Brig. Gen. John Mountcastle (Ret.), Former U.S. Army Chief of Military History [nominated George B. MCClellan]

Emory Thomas, Civil War Scholar & University of Georgia History Professor Emeritus [nominated Robert E. Lee]

We’ll also open our phone lines and take tweets during the day so viewers can talk directly with the historians about their nominations, and propose their own candidates. This is the second forum of its kind by the Museum of the Confederacy & the Library of Virginia. Last year, the audience voted Abraham Lincoln as the winner of Person of the Year 1861. This year continues the 150th Anniversary of the Civil War, which lasted from 1861-1865.

Text Source with CWL edits: AHTV

CWL: Yes I am disappointed that Lincoln didn't get at least a nomination for the EP. The excuse of 'well Lincoln got a nod last year' is pretty weak. The Emancipation Proclamation changed the entire war and the issue with which it dealt was one of the main causes of the war

Can't argue with any of the nominations, though I think that the nomination of Jackson was light. But of course the event was sponsored by Virginians and the host mentioned VMI about ten times. If you invite one of the Kricks or Emory Thomas you know what they are coming with. I think McClellan's nomination by Mountcastle, a Virginian was a surprise but fair; Mountcastle, the presenter, is a U.S. Army brigadier general, so there you are.

I enjoyed and agreed with McPherson's nomination of Farragut. New Orleans was the largest city in terms of population, the largest port, and the location of the U.S. Mint. The loss was as significant as the loss of Richmond would have been.

Blight's nomination of Douglass was a fine effort and convincing but he made in the Q & A an egregious statement about the current Republican Party that was extraneous to conversation and cheapened his nomination of Douglass.

For myself, Grant is worthy of a nomination. Grant's work at the Forts Henry and Donelson, the Battle of Shiloh, and the campaign that ended at Chickasaw Bluffs probably changed the war more than Jackson's Valley Campaign and Second Manassas.

A Pennsylvania or New York sponsored event would come up with a different list of nominees. Invite presenters such and as Guelzo or Holzer and you would have foregone conclusions about a Lincoln nomination.