De Equis

An event this weekend has got me thinking about horses. 

The moment before the surprise: Golden Tempo, far left, moves up from outside to join the pack in the home stretch. Courier Journal photo by Matt Stone. Fair use.

Golden Tempo, a 23-to-1 longshot colt, won the Kentucky Derby. He came from dead last at the far turn, outrunning seventeen other horses—including half a dozen who may have thought they were contending for the lead—to win by a neck. It was a breathtaking performance.

For some reason, the name Silky Sullivan came to mind. 

Silky Who?

Silky Sullivan (1955-1977) was a racehorse who became famous, in the days of my youth, for starting slow and then gobbling up incredible distances to win races. “Called the ‘California Comet’ and often ridden by Hall of Fame jockey Willie Shoemaker, Silky Sullivan once fell 41 lengths behind the field yet still won by three lengths, running the last quarter in 22 seconds,” according to Wikipedia. That was only one of many come-from-far-behind victories. “Of his 27 career starts, he was in the money 18 times with 12 wins, 1 place, and 5 shows.”

Silky Sullivan became a household word. So much so that if somebody was the last arrival at a party or meeting, somebody else might call, “Here comes Silky Sullivan!”

Silky Sullivan on his fourth birthday, with new owner Kjell Qvale. Public Domain.

As a three-year-old, in March 1958, Silky won the Santa Anita Derby by three-and-a-half lengths after being 26 lengths behind. He was favored to win the Kentucky Derby two months later, but on that occasion, he made “only a brief and ineffectual bid,” losing to co-favorite Tim Tam. When his racing days were over, he was purchased and cared for by horse lover Kjell Qvale.

I am no expert on horses. Like most people these days, I did not grow up around them, never learned to ride, and have no idea how to care for a horse. Up close, I am timid of them, because they are so big. But there is something real and compelling about a horse, at once majestic and homely. 

A Horsey World

Only a few generations back, most folks knew quite a bit about horses—how to handle them, what they needed, what they could do. 

That was essential knowledge from the time horses were domesticated, about four thousand years ago, until the invention of the motor car when my grandparents were young. Nowadays, however, unless you’re an Amish farmer, you have to go considerably out of your way to own, ride, drive, or care for horses. 

Up through about the end of the nineteenth century, most people were farmers, and farmers used horses for all sorts of things. Not only were they ridden—they pulled wagons, sleighs, plows, and early-generation farming machines such as McCormick’s reapers. 

Young Clydesdales showing off their muscles. Photo by Bev Sykes, licensed under CC-BY-2.0

Regular plowing could be done by regular horses, but if you had heavy sod to break and did not have oxen to pull the breaking plow, you needed draft horses—outsize, heavily-built steeds whose muscles had muscles. The best-known breeds of draft horses were Belgians, Clydesdales, and Percherons. But it’s only in the past two to three hundred years that most modern horse types emerged through selective breeding. Before that, a horse was a horse (of course, of course!). 

Horses were also used for purposes other than farming. They pulled delivery wagons and streetcars. City dwellers might keep a horse or two to pull a buggy for running about town.

U.S. Army soldiers load horses into boxcar, World War I. U.S. Army Transporation Museum. Fair use.

The Army used horses—lots of them. A million and a half horses and mules are estimated to have died in the U.S. Civil War—two or three times the human death toll. They continued in use, for combat and for transporting men and supplies, through World War II. French boxcars in World War I were stenciled with the legend, “40/8,” to show they could hold forty men or eight horses. 

Many military leaders were horsemen—notably, General Ulysses S. Grant. Grant was not only a rider par excellence, he had a special affinity with equine ways from childhood on. Assigned as a quartermaster during the Mexican-American war, Grant decades later confided in his Memoirs, “I am not aware of ever having used a profane expletive in my life; but I would have the charity to excuse those who may have done so, if they were in charge of a train of Mexican pack mules at the time.” 

Speaking of Horses

I often think how the ubiquity of horses, before the twentieth century, has influenced our language. Old-timers like me grew up with expressions like, “Hold your horses,” because older people used those expressions. 

If you don’t know what “hold your horses” means, it’s an appeal to patience, a warning to wait. In other words, cool your jets.

To “saddle up” means you’re getting ready to go. 

Any political or other contest may be described as “a horse race.” 

To be “long in the tooth” means you’re old. It comes from the ancient practice of gauging a horse’s age by the apparent length of its teeth. Horses’ gums recede with age, making the teeth appear longer.

We talk about “harnessing” people’s talents and energies, in the hope of “spurring on” innovation. Unless, of course, we want to “rein it in.”

We rate automobiles and other engines and machines in terms of horsepower. It’s stunning to think how many horses a single car puts out of work. 

We talk of a person being “stubborn as a mule,” though most of us, unlike General Grant, have never needed to motivate a mule to productive effort.

An old term you don’t hear much but that still means something to some people is “come a cropper.” To say “he came a cropper” means he fell off a horse in the most spectacular way, catapulted over its head. But it’s used metaphorically to describe any spectacular failure in life’s endeavors. Why “came a cropper” means that, nobody seems to know exactly. But undeniably it’s a horsey term.

Will all these expressions, and others, be lost in another generation or two? That depends partly on how much longer we’ll have enough cash to fuel our cars.

So you see, Dear Reader—there’s a bright side to everything. That’s just horse sense. 

Blessings,

Larry F. Sommers

Your New Favorite Writer

Pandemic Politics

“Pandemic” was an adjective before it was a noun.

It means, “prevalent over a whole area, country, etc.; universal, general . . . .” It is usually applied to disease, thus giving rise to its use as a noun, “a pandemic,” meaning, “a disease which is pandemic.” But it could really be used for almost anything that is widely distributed over the world. 

Politics is pandemic. As was oft remarked of Chickenman, “It’s everywhere! It’s everywhere!” 

No, Fair Reader, you can’t escape it; for, as Aristotle observed, “Man is a political animal.”

In the midst of our current angst over COVID-19, President Trump has been accused of downplaying the threat. Trump’s opponents have been accused of weaponizing the fear of a dread disease. Players on both sides of the line of scrimmage are ripping up the Astroturf, wailing, “Unfair! They are politicizing a national disaster!” 

So, what else is new? 

If you read this blog regularly—a Recommended Best Practice—you may wonder, “Whence comes this commentary on current events? Is not this blog supposed to be about ‘seeking fresh meanings in our common past’?”

Okay, Dear Reader. You asked for it:

It Was Ever Thus

Politicians have made political hay out of all things sacred since the moment after time started. Many earnest combatants believe that everything is political; that exploiting all events to advance one’s political agenda is the purest form of service. (“You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that, it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”—Rahm Emanuel, 2008.)

Those who seek to serve society must understand the political context in which they operate. Military leaders, in particular, often feel that war should be exempt from politics. But they would be extremely foolish to suppose that it actually is.

General Promotions

Elihu B. Washburne U.S. Congressman, Secretary of State, Minister to France. Mathew Brady-Levi Corbin Handy photo. Public Domain.

During the Civil War, General Ulysses S. Grant showed a canny cognizance of the political winds which blew all around him. In that conflict, almost every general, North or South, was appointed and advanced politically. Even Grant, who demonstrated the highest ability, would never have received the opportunity to demonstrate that ability without the sponsorship of his local Congressman, Rep. Elihu Washburne. The Congressman put Grant in for a brigadier general’s star, immediately began thumping for his promotion to major general, and in every possible way championed Grant’s career.

In 1863, Grant was tasked with taking the city of Vicksburg, which President Abraham Lincoln saw as “the golden key” to unlock the Confederacy. Take Vicksburg from the rebels, and you re-open the Mississippi River to Union navigation. At the same time, you dreadfully complicate Confederate efforts to get men and materiel from the Trans-Mississippi West (Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas). Vicksburg in Union hands would be the beginning of the end of the rebellion.

Major General U.S. Grant. Public Domain.

Trouble was, Grant’s first try—aided by loyal subordinates Sherman and Macpherson and the ambitiously disloyal McClernand—had come to naught, for reasons beyond Grant’s control. “The strategical way according to the rule,” Grant wrote in his memoirs, “would have been to go back to Memphis; establish that as a base of supplies; fortify it so that the storehouses could be held by a small garrison, and move from there along the line of the railroad, repairing as we advanced, to the Yallabusha, or to Jackson, Mississippi.” 

However, “At this time the North had become very much discouraged. . . . It was my judgment at the time that to make a backward movement as long as that from Vicksburg to Memphis, would be interpreted, by many of those yet full of hope for the preservation of the Union, as a defeat, and that the draft would be resisted, desertions ensue, and the power to capture and punish deserters lost. There was nothing left to be done but to go forward to a decisive victory.

What Grant delicately omitted was that political powers in Washington wanted Grant removed and replaced with McClernand—an officer who, despite his loyalty to the Union, was unfit for high command. So long as Grant was actively campaigning against Vicksburg, it was not too hard for Lincoln to resist these demands for his scalp. But any movement that appeared to be a retreat—back to Memphis, for example—would  most likely seal his fate. I am not the first to suggest that if Grant had done anything other than what he did—go forward through the Mississippi lowlands with no established supply line, feeding his army off the land—he would have lost his job. So that’s exactly what he did.

Grant could not afford to ignore politics.

In the end, he found a way to win without losing his job.

So What?

How does this history apply to the present day? Simply in this: Those who wish to serve the country need to be entirely apolitical; but they cannot afford to ignore the politics of the situation.

There are a lot of players, political and otherwise. One is New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, an interesting figure. He is on the opposite political team from the president—but neither of them can afford to make trouble with the other in facing the coronavirus challenge, both for political reasons, and for the sake of people’s health.

Cuomo, like any experienced governor, knows quite a bit about handling emergencies. I saw him on TV the other day, revealing one of the key things about emergencies—a lesson I learned years ago as a worker in Wisconsin’s state emergency operations. There are two things, Cuomo said—I’m loosely paraphrasing—two things: One is the objective state of things: the resources, the damage, the things that need to be repaired; or in the case of a pandemic disease, the infection rates, testing kits, all that operational stuff. The other thing is the public perception of the situation. The latter is what drives rumors, panics, compliance with relief plans or the lack of compliance, etc. Often, Cuomo said, that second factor, the public perception, gets to be a greater problem than the disaster scenario itself. 

Cuomo is dead accurate on that. (Your New Favorite Writer’s note to self: Write a blog post sometime about the 1996 Weyauwega, Wisconsin, train derailment.)

The only thing leaders can do about the second factor, the public perception, is to provide a steady flow of factual information from official sources. Credibility is key. People know when they’re being lied to, and it’s the kiss of death in handling an emergency.

Anthony S. Fauci, M.D. NIAID photo, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

Enter Dr. Anthony Fauci, and his sidekicks Dr. Deborah Brix, Admiral Brett Giroir, and Surgeon General Jerome Adams. These people are the key medical players on the President’s Coronavirus Task Force. They are physicians with impeccable credentials and experienced public health leaders. Their usefulness on the task force is based on their ability to help move key decisions. But just as important is the straightness of their dialog with the American public as principal briefers of this ongoing emergency. 

What makes them useful is that they never say anything that is not factual. Their credibility is gilt-edged. It is a remarkable feat, day in and day out, to speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, from the epicenter of a hurricane of fear, anxiety, and political games. 

As Executive Branch employees, they work under the authority of President Donald J. Trump—a gargantuan figure and one who speaks in momentarily expedient approximations. Fauci ranks as a genius, saying what is true and correcting what is false, while affirming truths uttered by the president and never crossing swords with him over statements that may be less reliable. 

Without being himself a politician, Anthony Fauci knows how to survive in a tough political environment, giving good service and straight advice with an easy grace. 

He reminds me of Ulysses S. Grant, who made virtues of necessities and got the military job done without having to bother Abe Lincoln overmuch with messy details.

Funny how often parts of the present resemble parts of the past.

Blessings,

Larry F. Sommers, Your New Favorite Writer

Author of Price of Passage—A Tale of Immigration and Liberation.

Price of Passage

Norwegian Farmers and Fugitive Slaves in Pre-Civil War Illinois

(History is not what you thought!)