Scourged Back
A historic image known as “The Scourged Back,” showing the whip-scarred back of an enslaved man named Peter, has been ordered removed from US exhibits under Trump’s directive, sparking outrage from historians. National Portrait Gallery

President Donald Trump has ignited fierce backlash after ordering federal officials to remove one of America's most powerful Civil War photographs from national parks - the haunting 1863 image of an escaped slave's scarred back that helped turn public opinion against slavery.

The photograph, known as 'The Scourged Back', or 'The Scarred Back', shows a man identified as Peter (sometimes called Gordon) displaying horrific keloid scarring across his back from brutal whippings.

The image became instrumental in exposing slavery violence during the Civil War and was one of the most powerful abolitionist images of its time.

According to The Washington Post, the removal forms part of sweeping changes targeting what the Trump administration calls 'corrosive ideology' at national parks across America. The Post confirmed that the photograph has already been taken down at Fort Pulaski National Monument in Georgia.

What is 'The Scourged Back' and Why Does It Matter?

The photograph captures a pivotal moment in American history. In March 1863, Peter escaped from Captain John Lyons's Louisiana plantation after enduring savage beatings from overseer Artayou Carrier. He fled barefoot through swamps and creeks for ten days, evading bloodhounds by rubbing onions on his body to mask his scent, according to historical records at the Library of Congress.

When Peter reached Union forces at Baton Rouge, military doctors examined him and discovered the extensive scarring. Photographers William D. McPherson and Mr Oliver documented his wounds on 2 April 1863, creating what would become one of the Civil War's most circulated images, as documented by the National Portrait Gallery.

The photograph appeared in Harper's Weekly on Independence Day 1863, just after the Battle of Gettysburg. Theodore Tilton, editor of The Independent, declared the image should be 'multiplied by 100,000 and scattered over the States', noting it told slavery's story more powerfully than any written account could achieve.

Trump's Executive Order Targets 'Divisive' Historical Content

The removals stem from Executive Order 14253, 'Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History', signed by Trump on 27 March 2025. The directive instructs the Department of the Interior to eliminate materials that 'inappropriately disparage Americans past or living' from federal sites.

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum has ordered parks to review all interpretive materials, including exhibits, signs, films, merchandise and bookstore items. Staff must document content deemed to 'disproportionately emphasise negative aspects' of American history without acknowledging 'national progress'.

The order affects multiple historic sites beyond Fort Pulaski. Harpers Ferry National Historical Park in West Virginia, where abolitionist John Brown led his famous 1859 raid, faces the removal of more than thirty signs discussing slavery. Philadelphia's President's House Site, where George Washington kept nine enslaved people, must revise its exhibits by Wednesday's deadline.

Museums and Historians Unite Against Historical Censorship

Leading historians and preservation groups have condemned the administration's actions. Alan Spears, Senior Director for Cultural Resources at the National Parks Conservation Association, stated: 'Great countries don't hide from their history. They learn from it and when necessary, they confront it.'

The American Historical Association released a statement warning against political interference in museum work, emphasising that 'only historians and trained museum professionals are qualified' to review historical content. The organisation stressed that the Smithsonian Institution remains 'among the premier research institutions in the world, widely known for the integrity of its scholarship'.

Sarah Weicksel, executive director of the American Historical Association, told The New York Times that suggesting otherwise 'is an affront to the professional integrity of curators, historians, educators and everyone involved in the creation of solid, evidence-based content'.

Why This Historic Photo Changed America

Peter's photograph provided irrefutable visual evidence of slavery's brutality at a crucial moment in the Civil War. After publication, he enlisted in the US Colored Troops. He reportedly fought bravely at the Siege of Port Hudson in May 1863, marking the first time African American soldiers played a leading role in assaulting a central Confederate position.

The image contradicted propaganda depicting slavery as benign, helping shift Northern public opinion towards abolition. Mathew Brady's studio and others reproduced the photograph as cartes de visite, small photographic visiting cards that spread the image nationwide.

Artist Arthur Jafa has incorporated versions into recent installations, whilst the National Portrait Gallery, Metropolitan Museum of Art, and Library of Congress all maintain prints in their permanent collections. The photograph remains essential for teaching about the reality of American slavery.

Public Response and Legal Challenges Expected

California parks received approximately 300 public comments through federally mandated review signs posted this summer. According to documents obtained by the National Parks Conservation Association, visitors overwhelmingly praised existing exhibits about Indigenous history and slavery, with many condemning attempts to sanitise difficult truths.

Preservation groups are preparing legal challenges if removals expand to federal museums, such as the Smithsonian. The National Park Service operates under the 1916 Organic Act and the 1966 National Historic Preservation Act, which mandate the preservation and accurate interpretation of American history.

A National Park Service spokesperson confirmed to multiple outlets that 'all interpretive signage in national parks is currently under review', stating materials that fail to provide 'broader context' about American progress could 'unintentionally distort understanding'.

White House Defence

The Trump administration insists the order is not designed to erase history but to provide a 'balanced narrative' highlighting both national struggles and achievements.

Trump supporters argue many exhibits focus too heavily on negative themes, while critics counter that sanitising history for political purposes risks distorting the nation's past.