A 19th century flag disrupts leadership at an Illinois museum and sparks a state investigation

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) – The Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum is once again in the spotlight after the manager failed to consult the collections committee before purchasing a 21-star flag described as a rare banner marking Illinois’ admission to Museum in 1818. The Union is questioned.

The purchase of the flag through an online auction for more than $15,000 spurred an investigation by the Illinois Office of the Executive Inspector General into the money used for the purchase. The purchase also led to divisions within the Springfield museum’s leadership and may have resulted in the firing of an employee who said the acquisition bypassed procedures.

The 7 ft by 5 by 6 ft 5 (2.26 m by 1.96 m) flag is called the “Grand Luminary” because its 21 stars are arranged in a star shape. The museum believes it represents Illinois as the 21st state, said spokesman Christopher Wills.

Such flags are rare because the design was changed a year later when Alabama and Maine joined the Union.

But Jeff Bridgman, a respected vexillologist or flag expert, told The Associated Press that its design and materials indicate the flag was produced decades later, during the Civil War, and may be a Southern-excluding flag whose stars represent states that remained loyal to the Union.

Bridgman, who has about 3,000 flags in stock, mostly from the 19th century, says they do not date back to 1818.

“If it were,” he said, “I would be looking for it at auction.”

This is not the first possible blow to the museum’s credibility.

A prized purchase of an alleged Lincoln hat valued at $6.5 million fell through when evidence linking it to the 16th president was questioned. In 2019, the director was fired for sending a copy of the Gettysburg Address written in Lincoln’s handwriting to an exhibition in Texas hosted by conservative political commentator Glenn Beck without consent.

According to documents provided to the AP as part of an open records request, on November 6, the museum’s head of acquisitions, Ian Hunt, submitted a request to the executive director to seek the 21-star flag.

The flag was part of the prestigious Zaricor flag collection. Hunt won the Nov. 13 auction, and the museum paid $15,625 for the flag using the King Hostick Trust Fund, a fund intended to fund state historical research and artifact acquisition.

Museum policy requires that purchases over $2,000 be submitted for prior consideration to a collections committee made up of department heads. The panel did not meet regularly due to staff vacancies, but met to consider the flag on December 7, three weeks after purchasing it, and voted 7 to 2 in favor.

Then-Secretary Eldon Yeakel and Research Director Brian Mitchell voted “no.” Mitchell declined to comment to the AP. Staff comments at the bottom of the vote recording document include concerns about the flag’s authenticity and storage.

The committee vote would have been closer had the acquisition not been finalized, Yeakel said. The museum fired Yeakel on May 6, citing his poor job performance and policy violations, but he blamed it on his “no” vote. Wills declined to comment.

Yeakel told investigators with the Executive Inspector General that the flag purchase improperly bypassed the commission’s approval. They asked him if he knew of any fraud or abuse in the transaction and whether King Hostick funds were used. He told them he knew of no fraud or abuse or details about Hostick’s money or its purpose.

Two museum employees, one current and one former, told the AP that their complaints to the inspector sparked the investigation. They asked for anonymity for fear of retaliation.

Neil Olson, general counsel for the inspector general, declined to comment on the investigation. The office has not published any findings.

In the event of misconduct, the inspector general’s office may recommend corrective measures, including discipline or dismissal. The inspector may also conduct a criminal investigation or refer the investigation to the appropriate law enforcement agency.

Wills said the museum was not made aware of any complaints to the inspector general but was “expressly allowed” to use Hostick’s money for the flag. He acknowledged that Hunt had made an “error” in proceeding without the committee’s consideration, but noted that museum policy only requires the committee’s “recommendations” on expensive purchases.

After the late Ben Zaricor purchased the flag in 1995, he had it examined by renowned vexillologist Howard Madaus. Madaus determined that in 1818–20 the flag was made entirely of cotton.

Bridgman considered Madaus, who died in 2007, a respected colleague and friend, but he said Madaus was wrong.

Although Bridgman did not see the flag in person, he said high-resolution photos show the blue canton is made of wool or a wool blend, which is typical of Civil War-era flags. It is worn in long, narrow holes.

“Cotton doesn’t do that. Wool definitely does,” Bridgman said.

A 2003 report by respected conservator Fonda Thomsen concluded that at least part of the flag is made of wool, but “the flag has not been studied sufficiently to draw any conclusions.”

Museum officials have not yet inspected the flag, which was delivered to a historic preservation company for stabilization and cleaning to ensure its durability. Estimated maintenance cost is $18,000.

The AP asked other vexillologists to examine photos of the flag and assess its age. Only one replied. Dave Martucci of Washington, Maine, said by email that he was familiar with the flag and believed the “design, construction and size” indicated 1818, not 1861.

Regardless of the history, Wills said the flag has a “solid pedigree” and is a sound investment.

“We are always open to learning more about this,” Wills said. “And if it turns out to be from a different era and has a different history, that’s what it will be. We will tell this story. And it just happens that this story is good too.