the bookcase in the room, it is now in the smithsonian institution. those are the only known furnishings that where in the parlor. there was no interest in the rest of the house because i had nothing to do with the surrender proceeding. even though, general gibson had his headquarters there for a few days afterwards. i hope that answers your question about furniture. >> thank you. [applause] >> ron wilson has a bow, "the appomattox paroles." this tells how the shoulders received parole passes, and actually gives an alphabetical list of soldiers given their parole at appomattox. you can get ron to find us today. we will break for lunch here just a minute. if you have not already picked up one of these magazines, this is free. it is the park service publication with articles pertaining to the spring of 1865. as i said last night, the best article starts on page 24 and concludes on page 27. there are other good articles in here, including one by our curator, and that is on page 30. that is free. take that up while you are here. you always do a great job

the bookcase in the room, it is now in the smithsonian institution. those are the only known furnishings that where in the parlor. there was no interest in the rest of the house because i had nothing to do with the surrender proceeding. even though, general gibson had his headquarters there for a few days afterwards. i hope that answers your question about furniture. >> thank you. [applause] lee's surrender. pre--- please welcome professor varon. elizabeth: thank you. thank you very much. it is a pleasure to share the stage with these scholars. i am grateful to patrick for having included me. you gained great insight into the appomattox campaign and the surrender seen. i would like to turn our attention now to the immediate aftermath, to the political debate's bond by appomattox -- debate spawned by appomattox. i will argue lee and grant represented distinct visions of what the honorable peace would look like. they were fundamentally incompatible, contrary to a myth. they represented fundamentally incompatible visions of what the peace would look like