Two competing narratives of the Civil War and the Southern Reconstruction will intersect once again this week.

This time, national attention over the opening of the nation's first-ever lynching memorial will serve as the backdrop.

Grand opening ceremonies in Montgomery for the National Memorial for Peace and Justice and the Legacy Museum will take place on Thursday, slightly more than one week after the Confederate monument debate re-emerged, dropped into the primary elections by Gov. Kay Ivey.

The two narratives - social justice and the Lost Cause - are likely headed for a collision during this year's gubernatorial campaign and in the halls of the state Capitol.

Some historians and social advocates believe Alabama could become the next "Ground Zero" over the debate of Reconstruction-era artifacts displayed in public venues.

This week, political celebrities from Al Gore to John Lewis arrive in Alabama for the memorial's opening. Oprah Winfrey has already toured the new museum.

The whole spectacle is set to occur in Montgomery, in a city that has long been associated with a split personality slogan: "Cradle of the Confederacy, Birthplace of the Civil Rights Movement."

"The two versions of history exist in tension, because one celebrates a nation that was established to perpetuate white supremacy and the other celebrates those who sought to dismantle white supremacy," said Fitz Brundage, chair of the Department of History at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. "And Montgomery, of course, is 'Ground Zero' for both."

Said Joshua Rothman, chairman of the history department at the University of Alabama, "The narratives sit side-by-side. When they are brought into the conversation with each other, you realize the narrative becomes more complicated than 'Yes, we have both.'"

Ivey campaign ad

The dueling discourse was on full display in gubernatorial politics last week, thanks to Ivey's campaign ad released on Tuesday in which the governor says that "folks in Washington" and "out-of-state-liberals" should not instruct Alabamians on what it should do with historical monuments.

The ad prompted fierce response from the NAACP, which accused Ivey of previously thwarting productive conversations about race relations. In addition, the Montgomery-based Southern Poverty Law Center has also pounced, calling Ivey's campaign ad "shameful."

Ivey's ad is a defense of the Alabama Memorial Preservation Act of 2017, which she signed into law 11 months ago. The same law is subject to an ongoing legal spat between the state and the city of Birmingham over the city's construction of a plywood barrier around a Confederate soldiers' monument at Linn Park.

Ivey's campaign, in the face of criticism from the NAACP last week, defended the law: "Our ad highlights a law that was passed by the Legislature and signed by the governor to protect all our historical monuments. We can't - and we shouldn't - change, erase or tear down our history. We should learn from all of it."

State Sen. Gerald Allen, R-Tuscaloosa, was the sponsor the preservation act during last year's legislative session. He applauded Ivey's campaign ad in an AL.com Guest Voices piece Friday. He also defended it during an interview with media personality Katie Couric during a recent episode of her National Geographic program, "America Inside Out."

"We've seen a wave of political correctness sweep the nation, and too often, these attempts have resulted in re-writing of the American story," Allen said. "This politically-correct movement to strike whole periods of the past from our collective memory is divisive and unnecessary."

The SPLC is angling to see what kind of legal challenges can be brought against a law that prohibits the removal of monument, memorial streets or buildings that have been on public property for more than 40 years. That includes most, if not all, of the Confederate monuments in Alabama.

"One of my personal concerns about this law is that it just doesn't prohibit any entity from removing these monuments for slavery, but it also stops schools from being able to be renamed," said Rhonda Brownstein, legal director with the SPLC. "It's particularly horrific that we are essentially forcing African American school children to attend schools named after men who fought to keep them enslaved."

One of those schools, Robert E. Lee High School in Montgomery, is over 80 percent black.

Said Brownstein: "Cities and school districts should have the authority if they chose and the community wants it, to remove the names of the people who fought to enslave their (ancestors)."

Preservation elsewhere

Alabama isn't the only state with a law protecting its monuments, artifacts or names.

In Virginia, home to the infamous "Unite the Rally" protest in which 19 were injured and one was killed, state law bans cities that attempt to "disturb or interfere" with historic monuments or memorials.

Virginia state lawmakers, earlier this year, killed efforts to change its laws. Pro-statue speakers compared the efforts to a cultural purge akin to burning books.

North Carolina also has a law on the books that prevents the permanent removal of most Confederate monuments on state and local property without legislative approval. Mississippi also has a law that prevents removal of monuments unless they block drivers from seeing the road.

Polling shows many white Southerners support efforts to protect the monuments. A NBC poll, released earlier this month, shows that 61 percent of Southerners oppose removing the Confederate monuments from public spaces. In Alabama and Mississippi, the support is 65 percent.

In August, a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll showed that most Americans support preserving the monuments in public places. But that poll also showed the issue is polarizing: Whites and Republicans largely supported preservation, while Democrats and minorities backed removal.

Republicans, who dominate state legislatures in the Deep South, have punished cities that have done away with the monuments. One recent example occurred last week in Tennessee, where the Republican-controlled House pulled $250,000 from the city of Memphis for its bicentennial plans as punishment for actions last year that led to the removal of two Confederate statues in public parks.

One Republican lawmaker compared the city's actions to the Islamic State in which the terror group destroyed ancient sites in Syria. A Democratic lawmaker countered by saying the Republicans orchestrated a "vile" and "racist" act.

Partisan split

The partisan split over the monuments is evident in the Alabama governor's race, where Republicans and Democrats hold opposing views.

The three Republicans opposing Ivey during the June 5 primary, all agree that historical monuments of any kind should be protected.

Huntsville Mayor Tommy Battle, Alabama State Senator Bill Hightower of Mobile and evangelist Scott Dawson of Birmingham, stated their positions during Wednesday's GOP debate hosted by Reckon by AL.com at the Lyric Fine Arts Theatre in Birmingham. Ivey did not participate.

"I treasure our history, good or bad," said Hightower, saying that his daughter traveled to the Auschwitz concentration camp site in Poland and "it radically changed her life."

He said, "Some parts are ugly, and some are not. We don't want them vandalized and destroyed."

Dawson echoed former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's take in support of preserving the statues. "You have to be careful (on efforts to) erase history. How far do we go? The heritage of Alabamians, it's important to everyone. I would protect the monuments. I am going to protect the monuments."

Battle said the monuments in Alabama "reflect our history, whether you like our history or don't like our history."

But he said that the discussion about monuments is a distraction, brought up by Ivey, at a time when she won't attend the GOP governor debates.

Tuscaloosa Mayor Walt Maddox, one of the leading Democratic challengers for governor, agreed with Battle's take.

"At a time when rural hospitals are closing, opioids are ripping apart communities and our roads and bridges are crumbling, the issue Kay Ivey decides to highlight is Confederate monuments," said Maddox.

He said that Confederate monuments should be kept in museums.

"Accuracy and historical balance must be assured because, as we know too often in the Jim Crow era, these monuments were placed in defiance of basic human and civil rights," he said. "It's important we celebrate and recognize citizens and events that unite us, not divide us."

Sue Bell Cobb, former chief justice to the Alabama State Supreme Court, said she's concerned that Ivey's ad - which she calls "grandstanding" - may hamper the state's ability to attract development.

"Companies from out-of-state who are interested in locating in Alabama want to be sure they are making a sound investment, and monument drama will only serve to give pragmatic business leaders pause," she said.

James Fields, a former state lawmaker from Cullman, said the governor is trying to create a divisive issue at a time when she will not debate her opponents.

Said Fields: "We need to teach history in the classrooms, not the courtrooms. She knows that."

Democratic dispute

Despite the criticism from Democrats running for governor, little was done this legislative session to alter the preservation act.

And at least one Democrat looking to usher in change is blaming her own party for inaction.

"The Democrats need to stand up and be Democrats if they are serious about making change in the state of Alabama," said state Rep. Juandalynn Givan, D-Birmingham, who sponsored three bills addressing the act - one which called for its complete repeal, and another that would allow cities to opt out of it.

Her bills did not go anywhere during the legislative session.

"We have many, many issues that we are fighting, and I believe we should take positions, tough positions," Givan said. "And it cannot be those who chose to sprinkle the sugar on that we choose to take."

Said Nancy Worley, the chairwoman of the Alabama Democratic Party: "It did not seem to be an issue in the legislative session. The Republicans, I would give them credit at one thing, they are masterful at seizing emotional issues that hits people's hot buttons in terms of a current issue that does nothing to help people. It's showcasing."

Richard Fording, a political science professor at the University of Alabama, said the issue is "too much of a hot potato" for Democrats. He said the party, itself, is more mobilized than it has been in a long time following last year's special Senate election victory by Democrat Doug Jones over Republican Roy Moore.

"There is somewhat of a risk in mobilizing Republican opposition by raising this issue in this state," said Fording. "It's probably not going to be effective anyway."

But Givan said the Democrats are losing an opportunity to fight back against the supporters of the monument act.

And she said the opening of the EJI's lynching memorial and museum can spark "new life" into the debate.

"Those (Confederate) monuments speak of an era where someone said my black wasn't good enough and isn't beautiful enough and I didn't matter as a person or I didn't matter as a human," she said. "That was that era and that was how those men thought."

'Terrible idea'

Indeed, the debate over the fate of Confederate monuments - which stand in 56 of the state's 67 counties - boils down to a historical perspective of when they were constructed.

David Blight, a Yale University historian of the Civil War and Reconstruction, said one of the things often overlooked in the monument debate is that "these monuments were also in some ways primarily celebrations of the South's perceived victory over Reconstruction."

Said Blight: "To place a Confederate monument in your courthouse lawn or park was to honor the dead, no questions about it, especially those common solider monuments. But they were also a way to say, 'We defeated Reconstruction,' and defeated what the North tried to do in taking over the South. It's all over the rhetoric of the 'Lost Cause' movement and these unveiling speeches."

It's also included on the inscription of Alabama's most prominent monuments, highlighted by the 1898 Confederate memorial at the State Capitol in Montgomery: "The knightliest of the knightly race who since the days of old. Have kept the lamp of chivalry alight in the hearts of cold."

"We easily forget that in the consciousness of the people in the era, and many of them lived Reconstruction, this is what was at stake: Who was going to control race relations?" Blight said. "You honor the Confederate soldier and leadership and while we may have lost the war, we won the victory over Reconstruction."

He added, "In that sense, that's why these monuments matter and those issues are still with us whether it's race and equality and whether it's federalism."

Blight, though, said he supports preserving the "common soldier monuments" and that monuments should go untouched in cemeteries.

He believes the national furor in 2017 over the monuments, which led to destruction of a Civil War statue in cities like Durham, N.C., is something that historians frown upon.

"Just destroying them is a terrible idea," he said.

But the fate of the monuments depends on what kind of unknown events that may rise. For instance, Alabama removed Confederate flags above the capitol grounds in 2015, amid a rash of similar actions elsewhere following a massacre at a Charleston, S.C. church perpetrated by a white supremacist.

"(Former) Governor Robert Bentley said we would take the flags down from the statehouse grounds," said Rothman, the historian at the University of Alabama. "That made people angry, but they moved on."

Blight said the debate is likely not to resonate with much of the general public, even if it re-emerges publicly.

"People go by monuments every day in their lives and don't know what they are until there is some kind of politics to the issue around them which is what we've been learning since Charleston," said Blight. "It takes events to focus on these things."