BS: American Civil War - recommended books?

Subject: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Will Fly
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 10:17 AM

One of the problems of being taught history in English schools in the mid-50s was that it was very often presented in a "good" v. "bad", simplistic fashion, with obvious British biases. So, in the English Civil War, for example, Cromwell and the Roundheads were "bad" and Charles I and the Cavaliers were "good". Similarly, the American Civil War was presented as a battle about slavery, with the "bad" South versus the "good" North.

However, history and politics is rarely that simplistic and, with retirement looming, I'm interested in improving my historical knowledge in certain areas. I'd like to read some books, old or new, which give a good, detached analysis of the causes and the outcomes of the struggle - and wonder if 'Catters have recommendations.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 10:57 AM

I would suggest:

1. Gods and Generals

2. The Killer Angels

3. The Last Full Measure


Those 3 books form a trilogy that tells the story of the military campaigns in the Civil War from beginning to end, and with plenty of coverage of the primary characters on both sides. That war was partially about slavery, partially about state's rights, partially about relative proportional representation in Congress, partially about rapidly developing industrialization (in the North) versus an old agrarian society (in the South)....very much about money (as usual)...and political power (as usual). The emotional issue to provide as a strong motivator for people in the North to go and fight was the slavery issue. People aren't so likely to go and fight over crass issues of who gets the money and political power...but they will fight over a moral issue like slavery, that's for sure.

There were both ethical issues and pragmatic issues. There were many good people and a few scoundrels on both sides. There was right and wrong on both sides. The side that was weaker in numbers and industrial strength inevitably lost after several years of bitter, absolutely terrible warfare, most of it fought on Southern ground. More Americans died in that war than in all the other wars the USA has fought.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Micca
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 11:32 AM

Will, I would also very strongly reccommend "The American Civil War" (TV series on DVD) of Ken Burns, it gives the Big Picture I felt quite well and gave me much more of an understanding of both the events during, and the issues leading up to the Civil War and has given me an idea of some of the experts and historians on the subject to explore further when I have more time, such as the Late Shelby Foote, who impressed me muchly.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Goose Gander
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 11:32 AM

Battle Cry of Freedom by James McPherson is a good place to start. Not the whole story, but an excellent introduction.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: alanabit
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 12:54 PM

Bruce Catton's "A Stillness At Appamattox" is the best - and most disturbing account I have read of the war. You can read about it here.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 12:57 PM

That sounds excellent from the synopsis, alanabit. I had not known of Mr Catton's books, and I will have a look at them.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Terry McDonald
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 01:08 PM

There's also Brian Holden Reid's 'The Origins of the American Civil War' which looks at events and politics during the three decades preceding the outbreak of war.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 01:15 PM

I agree with both 'Battle Cry of Freedom' and 'A Stillness at Appomattox'

BCoF is the best one volume history I have read.
ASaA is volume three of a trilogy about the Army of the Potomac. The account of Spotsylvania was pretty intense.

A note about the three works mentioned by Little Hawk. Those are works of historical fiction. If that is your cup of tea then have at them. I have heard good things about them, they are said to be pretty true to the real story, but I prefer my history straight. I tried to read 'The Killer Angels' once but didn't like wondering which bits had been invented to move the story along.

Bruce Catton also wrote a trilogy covering the entire war 'The Coming Fury' 'Terrible Swift Sword' and 'Never Call Retreat'

Shelby Foote wrote a narative history trilogy as well that is very readable. Foote's sentiments are with the South, Catton's are with the Union.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: catspaw49
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 01:20 PM

There are many good books and many written in the day that make for good reading. Not everyone will agree on any author and will often argue the merits and flaws of the their works, but let me suggest two excellent writers on the War Between the States.

Although he has been suggested above by Alan for "A Stillness at Appamatox," I would suggest your best read by Bruce Catton is his historical chronological trilogy of:

**The Coming Fury (1961)
**Terrible Swift Sword (1963)
**Never Call Retreat (1965)

These books are not just the war or dry history. Catton loves anecdotal stories and this series also focuses in on the economics and social effects of the war along with the politics that drove it.

The other author I like is Shelby Foote. Catton was born in the north and Foote in the south but ther is no real biias on either part but their own heritage does occasinally come through with both men. Shelby Foote has a number of great books but for the best overall history, like in Catton's case, the three volume set titled "The Civil War: A Narrative" is excellent. Generally only sold as a set, they are:

**The Civil War: A Narrative. Vol 1: Fort Sumter to Perryville
**The Civil War: A Narrative. Vol 2: Fredericksburg to Meridian
**The Civil War: A Narrative. Vol 3: Red River to Appomattox


Finally, for what might well be the best single volume telling, I'd say James McPherson's "Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era" is the best. It's a part of a series but this one volume covers the war pretty well.


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: catspaw49
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 01:23 PM

Well great minds think alike KB! I was still typing and you beat me to it but our opinions seem to agree........Now the real question------Who do you like......Foote or Catton? LOL

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: ard mhacha
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 01:38 PM

Shelby Footes books are a must read, I would agree with Micca the TV series by Ken Burns is excellent.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Lighter
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 01:39 PM

Bruce Catton was one of the most highly regarded Civil War historians of the 1950s and '60s. He was also a wonderful prose writer. All of his book are outstanding.

There are too many worthwhile historical accounts to list. MacPherson is certainly accurate in his facts, but he may be a little too idealistic in his outlook.

Harry S. Stout's "Upon the Altar of Freedom" shows why neither side needed to carry out a rabid propaganda campaign: the preachers and the papers did it for them.

Two of the most realistic novels(though long): "The Crater," by Richard Slotkin; and "Andersonville," by Mackinley Kantor. Offhand, I can't think of an outstanding novel about the Civil War home front, North or South, but there has to be one. (Not "GWTW.")

Most interesting movies: "Gods and Generals" (yeah, I know, they hated it) and "Glory."   "G & G" is mainly about Stonewall Jackson, but IMO captures the romantic atmosphere of the 1860s (though certainly not for the slaves). I think that's what most of the critics couldn't handle: the 1860s were *not* the 1960s or even the 1990s. A lot of people found "G & G" too long and talky. The battle of Fredericksburg is quite something.

"Glory," about the first regiment of African-American soldiers, seems more like our world. The history is reasonably accurate for a movie, too. It also has less talk, making it easier to take.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: open mike
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 04:11 PM

i think the writer of the lewis and clark story...Undaunted Courage has written about the Civil War. His name is Stephen Ambrose if i recall correctly.

http://www.amazon.com/Americans-at-War-Stephen-Ambrose/dp/0425165108

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Jamming With Ollie Beak (inactive)
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 04:19 PM

Ken Burns series The Civil War is available on DVD, well worth watching

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 04:23 PM

spaw, I actually prefer Foote even though I am a Union Man. He has a Southern slant but doesn't bludgeon the reader with it. He is from Mississippi if I recall so having a southern slant is to be expected.

Personally I really enjoy reading regimental histories, diaries and letters. These bring the realities of the war to life in way the sweeping histories, even the best of them, just can't match.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Lighter
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 06:38 PM

Foote is a good historian too, but his books require a significant time commitment.

Catton wrote a one-volume history of the entire war called "This Hallowed Ground." That may be the best one-volume intro for someone who hasn't read much already.("A Stillness at Appomattox" is a classic too, but only covers the last year of the war.)

Catton (1899-1978) had the advantage of knowing several Union Civil War veterans in his childhood. So he was a little closer to how they felt - or said they felt.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Severn
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 07:46 PM

For making the military campaigns come alive, anything by Stephen W. Sears or (the man with the best name ever for a military historian) Wiley Sword.

Emory Thomas is another one you can't go wrong with.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Rapparee
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 09:33 PM

"Lee's Lieutenants" for a study of the command in the Confederate Army. None better on the subject than this 3-volume work.

The movie "Gettysburg" is based on "Killer Angels" and I find it excellent.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Uncle Phil
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 09:54 PM

Several books sprang to mind when I saw the title of the thread, but all of them have already been mentioned. I agree that Battle Cry of Freedom by James McPherson is a great place to start. There is so much written about the US Civil War that it's easy to get lost in the details. Reading McPherson first will give you some context – national and international politics, economics, overall military strategy – that will help when reading the other works.
- Phil

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 10:34 PM

Lighter--McPherson "too idealistic"? Specifics on that?   

I found that McPherson got both details and the sweep of the topic--a amazing achievement in one volume.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 10:35 PM

"an amazing"

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Lighter
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 10:54 PM

McPherson's book is fine. In fact, I endorsed it!

I just seem to remember (from many years ago) feeling that he could have been a little more skeptical of the professed idealism of the times. Sorry I can't be more specific. It was just a feeling.

It certainly shouldn't put anybody off the book.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 11:04 PM

I thought he was appropriately hardnosed on all the factors involved. Particularly good--among many other topics-- on the ticklish legal questions Lincoln had to wrestle with as a result of not declaring war, which he of course could not do--POW problems for instance.

Also good on anti-war figures and movements:   "Fire in the Rear".

His book is definitely the indispensable first step to any understanding of the war.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: JedMarum
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 11:20 PM

There are so many to read - written by great minds with lyrical hands - but if you are looking for a peak at the intentions and personal impressions of the alternate side (that is the side of the argument less played) - I would start with reading "Kate Cumming; Diary of a Confederate Nurse."

Kate was a Scottish immigrant to the US. She was very bright, educated, deeply thoughtful and deeply partisan. You will see a side to this period you never saw before.

Likewise, read William McCarter's Memoir - "My Life in the Irish Brigade" for great insights into the personal experience of a thoughtful individual - who had deep feeling about the war years, and an eloquent pen. McCarter was also an immigrant (Irish) and fought for the Union.

You'll find both titles at Amazon.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 20 Aug 09 - 11:40 PM

I read a book earlier this year about Stonewall Jackson, the premise of which was that he was probably the best general on either side and, had he not been shot by accident, might have changed the course of the war. A secondary premise was that he was severely held back by both Lee and the politicos, such as Jefferson Davis, keeping him from achieving all he could have done.
Unfortunately, I cannot recall the name and the book has been loaned out.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: robomatic
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 12:00 AM

I endorse spaw's comments re: Catton and Foote. Catton's books came out around the Centennial of the Civil War.

I'd add his book: "Grant Moves South" to the list. And the Civil War series by the Burns Brothers was some of the finest television ever done in the U.S.

For some writing of the time, I'd recommend the short, acerbic works of Ambrose Bierce. He's kind of the American Saki, with memorable short stories, some set in the Civil War.

Also "The Red Badge of Courage" by Crane which I think was post Civil War but not by a lot.

The United States has been changed by several critical periods, none greater or more desperate than the Civil War with the possible exception of the War Of Independence.

Which brings me to the English Civil War, a period I find absolutely fascinating. I think without the English Civil War there would not be an independent United States.

I'm open to suggested reading on it.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: catspaw49
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 12:55 AM

I think my favorite (amd many others as well) text from the times is "Company Aytch." Sam Watkins, a confederate soldier writes with pathos and humor about the war.   It was originally written for a newspaper in Columbia, Tennessee and I think it was called "Report from Co. Aytch" at the time but whatever it was it stands as possibly the very best account of the life of these men. This covers mainly the war in the west (meaning Tennessee back then) from Shiloh to Atlanta with notable stops at Nashville, Chickamauga, and Chattanooga.

I lived in both Nashville and Chattanooga and used to spend many hours at Chickamauga. I am forever taken with the terrain through the plateau and into the mountains at Chattanooga. I thought often of men making this trek in the late winter and spring with piss poor shoes, wet woolen clothing (or less), blankets the same, living on limited food with both armies ill supplied overall....................It was indeed a different breed of men.


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Will Fly
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 02:32 AM

Well - what riches! My sincerest thanks to all the suggestions in this thread. My retirement present from work will, I know, include a fairly substantial book voucher from Amazon or somewhere similar - and I now have a fairly extensive selection of titles to choose from!

There might even be a collation of Matthew Brady prints into a volume somewhere...

Many thanks again!

Will

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Severn
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 03:46 AM

The collection of Brady photos I have is in a biography called "Mathew Brady: Historian With A Camera" by James D. Horan. The National Historical Society's "The Image Of War: 1861-1865" series volumes are good photographic histories.

To narrow some things down with the authors I mentioned above, Sears largely covers the Eastern theatre of war while Sword covers the "Western" theatre (still East of the Mississippi, though).For Steven A Sears, try, "To The Gates Of Richmond: The Pennensula Campaign", "Chancellorsville" or "Landscape Streaked With Red: The Battle Of Antietam" For Wiley Sword, try "Mountains Touched With Fire: Chattanooga Besieged, 1863".

For a rare comprehensive view of what was happening West of the Mississippi clear to the West Coast, try Alvin M.Josephy's "The Civil War In The American West" which tells about battles, politics, Indian Wars, the railroads and other things that were happening concurrently with the better known events back East and ties them into perspective nicely.

For Emory Thomas, his "Bold Dragoon:The Life Of J.E.B. Stuart" or "The Confederacy As A Revolutionary Experience" are good places to start.

For everyday life in both capital cities, "Reveille In Washington" by Margaret Leech and Ernest B. Fergurson's "Ashes Of Glory: Richmond At War" are both excellent.

Among the best Regimental Histories are "The 20th Maine" by John J. Pullen and "The Last Full Measure: The Life and Geath of the First Minnesota Volunteers" by Richard Moe on the Union side and James I. Robertson, Jr.'s "The Stonewall Brigade" and William C. Davis'"The Orphan Brigade: The Kentucky Confederates Who Couldn't Go Home" for the Confederate side.


Bell I. Wiley's "The Life Of Johnnie Reb" and "The Life Of Billy Yank" and Reid Mitchell's "Civil War Soldiers: Their Expectations And Their Experiences" are good books on the life of the individual soldier.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: ard mhacha
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 04:22 AM

The photographic history of the Civil War publisher The Blue and Grey Press 1987, is a massive collection of a wide range of photos, as I am interested in old photos the 5 books containing two volumes in one are a treasure. They contain a large number of Matthew Brady`s work.
A kind friend in Redding California brought them all the way to this corner of Ireland,a very heavy load and very much appreciated.
Of interest to the members of this Site are the songs and poems included in volume 5.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Lighter
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 08:47 AM

Stephen Crane wasn't born till 1871. Whatever the virtues of "The Red Badge of Courage," personal experience isn't one of them. Sam Watkins wrote in 1882 and "Company Aytch" is online:

http://books.google.com/books?id=HyhCAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA9&dq=%22company+aytch%22#v=onepage&q=%22company%20aytch%22&f=false


Ambrose Bierce was present at the battle of Shiloh in 1862, but didn't start writing fiction about the Civil War till many years later. His bitter recollection of "What I Saw at Shiloh" (1881) is worth reading. And it's free:

http://books.google.com/books?id=9Zepl6EEquwC&pg=PA234&dq=bierce+%22what+I+saw+of+shiloh%22&as_brr=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false

Walt Whitman was a hospital volunteer in Washington, and he wrote a few memorable poems about the war. Herman Melville, author of "Moby Dick," was a civilian, but he wrote what I think are the greatest Civil War poems: "The College Colonel" and "The March into Virginia" being possibly the best. Though written in a kind of Shakespearean voice, I'd say they're timeless.

The Bell I. Wiley books are indispensible for soldier life. The seamy side of it is covered in Thomas Lowry's "The Story the Soldiers Didn't Tell," based entirely on court-martial records.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Jamming With Ollie Beak (inactive)
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 09:43 AM

William A. Frassanito's book Antietam: The Photographic Legacy of America's Bloodiest Day, published in 1978.

Antietam has been described as the bloodiest single-day battle in American history, with a total of about 23,000 casualties on both sides.

Olivia Beak (Ms)

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Severn
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 09:47 AM

Correction: I gave Stephen W. Sears as Stephen A. Sears by mistake in my second post.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Rapparee
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 10:00 AM

"The Landscape turned red" by Stephen Sears is an excellent study of Antietam (and you should know this battle, the bloodiest of the ACW and possibly the bloodiest in US history).

"An Uncommon Soldier" by Lauren Burgess is the story of a woman who served as a man in the New York Volunteers -- one of many.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Rapparee
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 10:02 AM

Oh, and while you're at it, don't forget the war in Missouri, Texas, Arkansas, Kansas...or the Battle of Vickburg or the naval actions.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Severn
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 11:19 AM

Rapaire's right. "Landscape TURNED Red" I couldn't find the book and posted the title wrong. Sorry!

Daniel E. Sutherland's "The Expansion Of Everyday Life 1860-1876" Tells about the rapid changes in civilian life during the War and during the years afterward. His "Seasons Of War:The Ordeal Of A Confederate Community 1861-1865" focuses on civilian life in Culpepper County, Virginia as the War raged in and around it.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Greg F.
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 11:32 AM

Hullo!

All of the books ( with the exception of the fictional treatments and "what if" stories) mentioned are excellent, and will provide a good chronicle of the events, battles, strategy etc. of the American Civil War.

However, if you're seeking to UNDERSTAND the Civil War, you'll need to cast your net a bit wider.

Two excellent recent books are Faust, Drew Gilpin : This Republic of Suffering 2008 and Foner, Eric (editor):
Our Lincoln: New Perspectives on Lincoln and His World 2008. And of course Doris Kearns Goodwin's Team of Rivals, which is much more than a "Lincoln biography".

There are so many others, its impossible to list them here, but do take a look at Foner's other books as well as those by Leon Litwack, Franklin Moss, Harold Holzer, Ir Berlin, Eugene Genovese, William Loren Katz, Catherine Clinton, Herbert Gitman, William Styron, Frederick Douglass and Solomon Northrup, to name but a few.

Its a fascinating and complicated story. Have fun!

Greg

-------

LH: I'm surprised to note you're still beating that "states rights" dead horse. That myth and the whole "Lost Cause" fairytale were debunked years ago as the white-supremecist nonsense they are.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Goose Gander
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 12:44 PM

So much has been written about Lincoln, much of it myth-making (I'm afraid Doris Kearns Goodwin approaches this) and/or demonization (see anything written by Thomas Dilorenzo). It may be time to go directly to the source. I recommend Lincoln on Race and Slavery edited by Henry Louis Gates.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Greg F.
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 01:09 PM

...myth-making(I'm afraid Doris Kearns Goodwin approaches this)

Don't be afraid. Her book is one of the best documented that's been written in a VERY long time. Its clear that she LIKES Lincoln and admires him, but "myth-making"? Hardly.

The Gates book is an excellent work, too & should be read along with Goodwin's.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 09:11 PM

We clearly have a misunderstanding of some sort about that, Greg. ;-) Perhaps I should PM you about it rather than having this thread devolve into a bunch of inappropriate and hostile political arguments. Let's stick to discussing the good books about the Civil War, shall we?

I just got one Bruce of Catton's books out of the library, and it's turning out to be excellent.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Rapparee
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 09:18 PM

Of COURSE it's excellent! You got it out of a library, didn't you??

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 09:34 PM

I don't know if you would consider fiction as a additional alternative to reading history, but here is a suggestion:

"Proud New Flags"
"Our Valiant Few"
"Blue Hurricane"

These books comprise a trilogy of the Civil War by master story tell, F. Van Wyck Mason. I read them over forty years ago, at least the first two. One gets a rousing story with a wonderful sense of time and place...they are well researched As I recall, they are told somewhat from a Southern viewpoint, but encompass most of the period.

The novels are semi-sequels to Mr. Mason's four volumes on the American Revolution written in the '30s and '40s, in that descendants of characters from those novels show up in the Civil War books.

Each book stands on its own, and I found each a pleasure all those years ago.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 11:15 PM

I don't know why anybody would want to read fiction on this topic when there is such an incredible wealth of good nonfiction.

As far as the slavery issue is concerned, the statement that "slavery was the strong motivator for people in the North to go and fight" is so simplistic as to be misleading.   As McPherson (p 312) makes clear, at the start neither the North nor South, for different reasons, emphasized slavery as the crucial issue. On 4 July 1861, Lincoln, not for the first time, said he had "no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with slavery in the States where it exists."   In the South the hope was for quick recognition or other assistance in Europe, especially by Britain, and the approach was portraying Southerners as fighting for "the sacred right of self-government" (and a steady supply of cotton to Europe).

Even after the Emancipation Proclamation, fighting slavery was not a popular motivator for most whites in the North. The Proclamation was also in large part tailored for foreign, especially British, consumption. A clear mark of the unpopularity of defeating slavery as a motivator is the draft riot of 1863--that is, definitely after the Proclamation. Poor draftees, especially Irish, were being told by their political leaders, e.g. Democratic Governor Seymour of New York, that they were being drafted so blacks could come north and take their jobs.

A simplistic approach is to be shunned in studying the Civil War--or any historical issue.

As far as other books, I believe that after reading McPherson, the best approach in other books is a narrow focus.

I found Stonewall Jackson, by James I Robertson, to be an eye-opening portrayal of the man--I was particularly fascinated by the complex relationship he had with his men--they appreciated his leading them to victories, but he had no problem ordering deserters to be shot--and even "a soldier verified by two other men as straggling for the second time in the battle was to be executed promptly" (Robertson p 653).   His religiosity is also striking.   

I'd also recommend The Rebel Raiders, by James deKay, on the career of the "Alabama" and the other raiders of the "Confederate navy"---and on the machinations behind their construction and departure from Britain, especially the British government's sins of omission in letting this occur.

And, of course, a host of other books on any number of specific aspects of the war.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Aug 09 - 11:50 PM

You are quite right in what you say, Ron.

"As McPherson (p 312) makes clear, at the start neither the North nor South, for different reasons, emphasized slavery as the crucial issue. On 4 July 1861, Lincoln, not for the first time, said he had "no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with slavery in the States where it exists."

The primary issue for the North in that war was to restore the Union and put down a secessionist movement which was, in Northern terms, both illegal and unacceptable. (and that is the way secessionist movements are virtually always regarded by nation-states)

The primary issue for the South was to assert their right TO secede, and their right to existence as a sovereign nation separate from the North.

Those 2 positions were completely irreconcilable. Thus you had a war, one which could end only in the defeat of the South or in its emergence as a separate nation-state.

Was slavery one of the crucial issues in that war? Yes. It was one among several crucial issues, but one which the politicians on both sides appear to have initially regarded as a hot potatoe which they would rather not handle or refer to in any way. That's because the White people of that era day were not about to go out en masse and die so that Black people could be either free or enslaved, but they sure as hell were ready to out en masse and die for what they saw as their country.

Based on a good deal of reading I have done already on this war, I would say this:

The average Northern soldier did not fight to free the slaves...he fought to save and restore the Union from secessionist "rebels". The average Southern soldier did not fight to maintain slavery...he fought to defend his home ground against what he saw as a Northern invasion and preserve the Confederacy. The primary and overwhelming motivator on BOTH sides was simple abd very fervent patriotism to the land and the society that one had grown up in and was familiar with, and that is why they both fought so damn hard...and why they both felt so utterly justified in a moral sense.

Lee, for instance...you know what Lee was fighting for? He was fighting for "Virginia". He said that more than once and he meant it. He was, first and foremost in his own mind, a Virginian, and that is what he fought for in that war. Once Virginia had declared for the Confederacy, the die was cast as far as Robert E. Lee was concerned. Had Virginia declared for the Union, however, then Lee would have accepted Lincoln's open offer to him and taken command of the Union Army at the start of the war!

There was a tremendous loyalty to one's home state in that era, absolutely tremendous and way beyond what you see today...in fact, it played merry havoc from time to time with the South's ability to organize its armies effectively as a united national army, and it was a real thorn in Jefferson Davis's side, and probably a bit of a problem for Lincoln too from time to time.

They (the vast majority of them) didn't think like we do now...not about race, and not about many other things. People's values have changed a lot in the last 150 years in North America.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 01:17 AM

Ironically enough, Greg, I couldn't resist the impulse myself to get sucked into making some more political comments! Ron said some things that interested me so much that I could not hold back. (sigh)

A study of the bizarre 4-way election campaign of 1860, the results of which basically made secession and civil war inevitable, can provide for some interesting reading.

See this wickipedia article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1860

Here's a quote from the summary at the beginning (I added the italics):

The United States presidential election of 1860 set the stage for the American Civil War. The nation had been divided throughout most of the 1850s on questions of states' rights and slavery in the territories. In 1860 this issue finally came to a head, fracturing the formerly dominant Democratic Party into Southern and Northern factions and bringing Abraham Lincoln and the Republican Party to power without the support of a single Southern state.

Hardly more than a month following Lincoln's victory came declarations of secession by South Carolina and other states, which were rejected as illegal by the then-current President, James Buchanan and President-elect Abraham Lincoln.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 01:43 AM

"I don't know why anybody would want to read fiction on this topic when there is such an incredible wealth of good nonfiction."

It's true there is an incredible wealth of good non-fiction on this --and other--topics. That does not negate that fiction has another, insight or emotion to add. One might just as well say why read John Steinbeck, there's so much good reportage, exposes and news reels out there regarding the depression.

Why sing songs about historic events...or current events?

Ron, you really disappoint with that comment.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Tangledwood
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 05:41 AM

Will, if you're a reader of fiction you're probably familiar with Bernard Cornwall's novels on Waterloo, the Napoleonic era and Indian peninsular wars. They're very readable, spin a good yarn and, as far as I know, they're also pretty well researched. He has a series on the American Civil War. I've just enjoyed reading Rebel; whether or not it could be considered "educational" somebody better informed should judge.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Will Fly
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 06:19 AM

I'm aware of the "Sharp" books - the UK TV series over here is very popular and, from what I can tell, very good.

Oddly enough, another fictional character, from the Victorian novel "Tom Brown's Schooldays" - Flashman - has been reincarnated in the excellent novels by the late George MacDonald Fraser. His research was also excellent, and I believe one of the Flashman novels is set against the background of the American Civil War.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Greg F.
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 08:27 AM

As McPherson (p 312) makes clear, at the start neither the North nor South, for different reasons, emphasized slavery as the crucial issue.

Bullshit. Absolute unmitigated bullshit.

Apparently you (and apparently McPherson?) have never read the South Carolina Ordinance of Seccession(available on line), any of the other states' ordinances (also available on line) or the writings & speeches in Congress of Jefferson Davis, Alexander Stephens, John C. Calhoun, et.al.(pertinent excerpts available on line).

This is the problem I mentioned above in that focusing on "the war" alone without adequate study of the ante-bellum north & south will present a skewed and inaccurate picture.

... this thread devolve into a bunch of inappropriate and hostile political arguments.

I dunno about "inappropriate", LH- after all, the war itself was a political arguement. And trying to get at the truth- rather than perpetuate myths- would seen "appropriate" to me.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: JedMarum
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 11:16 AM

Yes Spaw - I'd forgotten about "Company Aytch." Great Book!

I think one is better of, beginning with the subjective readings. There's plenty of great history - and so many of the factual, academic accounts - but starting out with a good understanding of the opinions and observations of a few, eloquent individuals is a great way to start.

... and I love the Bruce Catton books! Great history, well written!

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: JedMarum
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 11:56 AM

Wow. I'm convinced!

And all this time I thought it was about slavery, state's rights and economic disparity.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: olddude
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 12:11 PM

Will
I have the complete collection of Harper's Magazine from the reporters right on the front lines. The articles go from the start of the war to the end. And on site reporting on each of the major battles. It is a historical collection (not the originals but republished in book form)


You are most welcome to borrow it, Just return when finished

Dan

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 12:13 PM

That's exactly my concern, Greg, getting at the truth. It's fashionable for people to interpret past history according to meet the emotional needs of present political trends. When they do so, they mythologize and misunderstand past history. Slavery was a key issue between North and South, no doubt about it, but the South did not secede to preserve slavery...they seceded because they felt they were losing in the great game of political power sharing (in Congress and in the federal government) to the much more populous and rapidly industrializing North. They were becoming politically marginalized due to a smaller population base. The North did not launch the war to end slavery either, they launched the war to restore the Union to its original boundaries and members.

Slavery was, however, a vital emotional and ethical issue which greatly contributed to ill feeling between South and North, particularly when it came to opening up the new territories in the West...because the population was sharply divided between pro-slavery and anti-slavery people...so each time a new territory was approaching statehood there was a ferment of unrest and violence on the part of those 2 groups...each one of them hoping to from and run the emerging state government.

What that war was really about was power-sharing. Those who felt they were losing out in the power-sharing game seceded.

This sort of thing happens a lot in nations. In Canada, for example, the West (Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba) has long been alienated against more populous Ontario and Quebec...again because of proportional representation based on population in our legislature (parliament). When such concerns reach a breaking point, as they sometimes do, that's when you can find a secessionist movement arising. If it succeeds, it almost always results in a shooting war, because nations do not seem inclined to just let one part walk away. The concept of "divorce and separation" does not seem to be tolerable to nation-states or political entities...I guess because they just can't stand giving up an existing sense of jurisdiction. The one who wants to leave always gets called a "rebel", and is treated as a criminal. The one who wants to maintain the Union always gets called an oppressor or a tyrant, and is treated as such by the secessionists. I can well understand how both sides feel about it. ;-) It makes sense, strictly from their point of view.

Now, Greg, I am just as much in favor of racial equality and the historical fight for equal rights by the Black community as you are. It is ludicrous to suggest that I am somehow in favor of White supremacy. What I am commenting on in the Civil War is simply that there were many reasons behind fighting that war, and that people's attitudes at that time were quite different from today. Millions of them were ready to die to preserve the Union...or defend the Confederacy...and the primary reason they were ready to do that was instinctive patriotism to the land they were born upon not their desire to end or preserve slavery.

There were a few great social idealists at the forefront of the very justifiable cause to end slavery, no doubt, and there were some outright fanatics too, like John Brown, but the main issue for most ordinary people was either to restore the Union's sovereignty over the whole country...or to defend the separate sovereignty of the Southland. They were fighting for their sense of national identity and their sense of "homeland".

That's what most soldiers in most wars really fight for, when you get right down to it. They fight for their country.

Even American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan are under the bizarre impression that they are defending America and protecting the freedom of Americans by killing Iraqis and Afghans on the other side of the world! How they could believe anything so absurd and unlikely really boggles the mind, but that's what they tell themselves.

Now, people in the American Civil War....they had real reasons for such sentiments. They WERE genuinely fighting for their homelands (as they defined them). When you see a foreign army marching across your border, you fight for your homeland, and you do it with all the strength at your command.

That's why I respect and honour both sides in that war, quite regardless of the slavery issue....but, yes, slavery was wrong, utterly wrong, completely wrong, and it eventually had to be ended...one way or another.

If there'd been no Civil War, slavery in the South would have ended anyway for practical economic reasons as well as the obvious ethical ones, but probably about 20 or 30 years later, I think. Debates about whether that would have been better or worse than what did happen could become quite complex...and I think would shed a great deal of heat, but not much light, so I'm not inclined to even bother debating about that. It's all just hypothetical anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 12:24 PM

As I said, neither the South nor the North emphasized slavery as the main reason for fighting.   Greg, there was a reason the South did not. And it is precisely the reason I cited--they hoped for European, especially British support. Also, had the "Trent" affair not been settled by cooler heads than the first reactions indicated, it's possible the UK would have in fact supported the South in a more direct way than the "sins of omission" which made possible the career of the "Alabama" and her sister ships.   

There was a huge difference between the attitudes of the Southern leaders and what they put out for public, especially foreign consumption.

It was in fact obvious to all parties that the South was fighting to maintain slavery but that did not stop many prominent British politicians from identifying with it.   And Southern statesmen tried to make this as easy as possible.

You need to simmer down and realize history is bit more complex than you seem to believe.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 12:34 PM

And Sunset John, the original question was on understanding the Civil War.   It seems painfully obvious that the first step should be collecting facts--which you cannot do in reading fiction--since the author obviously has no obligation to provide them. Clearly, the more facts there are in a work of fiction, the more convincing the story.   But if your first goal is not entertainment but learning, it should be blazingly clear nonfiction is the way to start.

It's also clear just from this thread that many people have simplistic views of the Civil War--which could be in large part remedied by reading more history--not fiction.

I actually find history so riveting that I'm not even tempted to read fiction.   YMMV.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 12:47 PM

One has to look at different levels.

What were the politicians' major concerns that would lead them to engage in a war? (power-sharing concerns and national jurisdiction)

What were the business and financial communities' major concerns in supporting that war? (financial concerns)

What were the concerns of the social idealists in the abolitionist movement? (ethical concerns)

What were the ordinary public's major concerns in going to fight on that war's battlefields?

I'm suggesting that the ordinary public was motivated primarily by patriotism to their perceived homeland(s).

When you deal with politicians and financiers and business people, however, patriotism may play some part indeed, depending on the individuals...but sheer pragmatism usually plays a much larger part.

The British might, for strictly pragmatic reasons, have supported the South for instance and engaged in a war against the Union...even though slavery was illegal in the British Empire decades before the 1860s and was ethically offensive to Britons.

Such things often happen. Pragmatism outweighs ethics in time of war (and most of the rest of the time too).

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 12:56 PM

Lincoln made a calculated gamble with the Emancipation Proclamation--that the anti-slavery forces in the UK were strong enough so that the Proclamation would close the door to Southern support by the UK, and that this would offset the likely negative reaction in the North---since as I indicated, pro-black sentiment in the North was by no means universal--e.g. the 1863 draft riots.   Note also that the Proclamation had no effect in any state except those in rebellion on 1 Jan 1863. But as McPherson points out (p 558:) "Lincoln acted under his war powers to seize enemy resources; he had no Constitutional power to act against slavery in areas loyal to the United States."

Re attitudes of Northern soldiers: again McPherson (p 497):   "While northern soldiers had no love for slavery, most of them had no love for slaves either".    As one New York soldier put it:   "we must conquer first & then it's time to talk about the damned niggers."   And Greg, I would bet that Prof. Gates' book confirms this.


Lincoln did win his gamble.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 01:08 PM

Bingo! You nailed it, Ron. Lincoln's gamble was a risky one, but it worked. A well-timed move on his part.

If people insist on looking at that era through the rose-tinted and passionate glasses of present political perceptions regarding racial equality, then they will not understand what the heck was going through most Americans' minds at the time of the Civil War. My impression is that most of the White population in the North in the 1860s saw Blacks as FAR from equal to Whites, and they were most certainly not willing to risk their own lives fighting to end slavery in the South. But they were very much willing to risk their lives fighting to defeat "the damned rebels" and restore the Union.

Southerners were equally willing to risk their lives to preserve the Confederacy's independence from the North. Maybe even more so in their case.

Is that very sad from the point of view of a Black person? Yes!    It's very sad period...but it's typical of the way human beings generally are. They look out for "their own" first. They look out for "others" a long time after that.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 01:09 PM

The British would not in fact just for pragmatic reasons have entered the war on the side of the South--for all sorts of reasons, including the strong anti-slavery forces in the British citizenry--even many who themselves were economically dependent on the South. Again, history is complex. But combined with visceral emotional reaction when national honor or sovereignty was seen as attacked-- (and by an uncouth Mammon- chasing upstart-- (the North), it could have happened.   Highest danger points were the "Trent" affair and the time when it looked possible that the North, fearing the Laird "rams" could break the blockade of the South--naval men on both sides of the Atlantic felt this-- would send US Navy ships up the Mersey to destroy the "rams" at anchor.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 01:20 PM

As I recall--could be incorrect here-- at the time of the"Trent" affair, there was in fact talk that the North might invade Canada. And British troops were sent to Canada to forestall any such plans.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 01:24 PM

Agreed, Ron. There was considerable danger of the North rashly provoking the British into a war which would have been based on British national pride. If so, it would have been a disaster for the North...and perhaps for the British also, but to a lesser extent, I would think.

The North benefited enormously from its naval supremacy during the Civil War. They would not have been in that position long if they had taken on the British...and the benefit to the South from that would have been profound.

Oddly enough, a distant relative of my Mother's (a Canadian) volunteered for the South in that war, went down and served in the Confederate armies, and died fighting. I don't know why he identified with the South, but it could have been for any number of reasons. As far as slavery goes, there was no support at all for that in Canada at the time, as it was illegal throughout the British Empire.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Lighter
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 01:25 PM

>>I'm suggesting that the ordinary public was motivated primarily by patriotism to their perceived homeland(s).<<

I believe you're quite right, Little Hawk. What most interesting about this is that Northerners almost by definition had to be more idealistic - and nationalistic.

In simple terms, the South wanted to be left alone to do its thing. Had the North allowed "the erring sisters" to go, there would have been no Civil War, or certainly not much of one. As soon as the Northern armies began to maneuver on Southern soil, the pragmatic motive of "defense of our homes" became the primary Southern motivation to fight.

But except on a handful of occasions, Northern homes and lands were not threatened. The North fought chiefly for three idealistic reasons:

1. preservation of the entire Union as the world's first and only republican, contstitutional democracy (and therefore as an inspiration for the rest of the world).

2. punishment of traitors, who, for their own selfish (non-idealistic) reasons, were ready to subvert that democracy.

3. an end to slavery.

As everyone knows by now, abolition wasn't high on the list. Which, BTW, doesn't mean that Northerners generally thought slavery was a *good* idea; but Southerners, since only a minority held slaves, may not have thought it was such a great idea either - just one they were stuck with - the way things were and they couldn't be changed.

A contemplative slave-holding Southerner was really in a bind. He or she might believe that slavery was inhuman (though it's many used the bible to prove it wasn't), but on the other hand it would be a tough decision to give up that free labor and hthe lifestyle it supported, especially since nobody else was doing it. One reason people like Washington and Jefferson only freed their slaves in their wills may well have been because they knew they'd be ostracized if they did it while they were alive. Furthermore, based on the primitive concepts of "race" and "humanity" current in the era, plus the well-known human propensity for revenge, most Southerners were terrified of what might happen if the slaves suddenly went free. Even the Times of London editorialized that the Emancipation Proclamation was nothing more than a Yankee instrument to encourage slave rebellions throughout the South, with a predictable slaughter of law-abiding whites. The Times believed that such a strategy was fiendish.

So sometimes idealism works out (the Northern victory) and sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes you have to be a visionary hero (as by freeing your slaves) just to avoid being, by default, one of the million SOBs who were certain they weren't doing anything wrong.

That's life in the swamp.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 01:41 PM

That's a very well thought out post, Lighter. Good analysis on your part.

If people would stay calm and look at all the complex factors that came into play when people served some losing (or winning) cause in past history, they wouldn't be so quick to judge and condemn those many people who served (whichever side they happened to be on).

The tragedy of war is that the vast majority of people involved sincerely believe that they are fighting for the right, fighting for what is just and good, and defending something of real value. And off they all go to the slaughterhouse...certain of their own side's honor and goodness. That's tragedy on a grand scale.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 01:56 PM

I don't think Jefferson freed his slaves in his will. If he did, the will was ignored. Joseph Ellis: American Sphinx, p 289:   "...on January 15,1827, when the estate and slaves of Monticello were put up for auction".   Jefferson had huge debts at his death.


And Washington was indeed much bolder. But even he kept the slaves' emancipation a secret. And in fact he could only free 123 of Mt Vernon's 316 slaves: "forty others were rented; the rest were the property of the Custis estate and would go to the Custis heirs after Martha's death":   Henry Wiencek:   An Imperfect God, p 354.

He also specified that his slaves were not to be freed until after Martha's death--in large part since there were marriages between his slaves, and those of Martha, whom legally he could not free.

Obviously this would not solve the problem of the breakup of slaves' families, but just postpone it.   However, this "was a tacit appeal to Martha and the Custis heirs to join him in emancipating their slaves along with his." (Wiencek p 354).

This had the effect however of causing Martha to fear that his slaves might kill her to hasten their freedom. ( This seems completely unrealistic, considering the barbaric fate of any slave who killed his or her owner.)

Washington's plans for his slaves were remarkable:   "Virtually every emancipation plan proposed in Washington's time included forced exile for the freed slaves to Africa or the West Indies. Washington insisted that no one be exiled;   the slaves had a right to live on
American soil". (again Wiencek).

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Paul Burke
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 02:05 PM

Any reading into the history of the American Civil War/ the War Between The States has to start much further back than 1860. The English (and Scottish) settlements and plantations of the 17th century, some consequent on the inability to pay off English civil war troops; how tobacco became the export crop; how the American colonies partly missed out on the English Enlightenment of the late 17th Century, and consequently got their enlightenment from France; the use of "Virginia" as a destination for criminals, and the relationship of the resulting poor Whites with Black slaves; the fatal compromises necessary to make the Revolution cohere; the unrequited love Mr Whitney had for Mrs Green and its unforeseen consequences; the ever- present reservoir of unlimited lands to the West; crooked judges and growing callous acceptance of "realities".

The battles are the least of it, a sad catalogue of egotism, rivalries, incompetence, brutality and utter waste, and finally an emancipation so deliberately botched that it took another century to free the slaves.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Lighter
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 02:12 PM

Looks like TJ freed two slaves during his lifetime and several more in his will. He also allowed a couple more to escape without pursuit:

http://www.monticello.org/plantation/lives/freed.html

I guess I was recollecting one of my old schoolbooks that seemed to imply that he freed more in his will. (Undoubtedly one of the "liberal lies" that Fox inveighs against in school textbooks.)

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Greg F.
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 02:16 PM

LH: First off, don't go citing Blog-O-Pedia to me as a source for anything. Sure way to get me to ignore whatever point you're trying to make.

Secondly, I've been involved in studying( several advanced degrees) and teaching 19th C. American history (college level plus)for for over 45 years, so don't adopt that lecturing "let me tell you how it really was, stupid" tone with me, Boyo.

Thirdly: ...but the South did not secede to preserve slavery.. Sorry, but that's EXACTLY what they they did. Yes, there was a "state's right" they were concerned about: the right to own slaves. Yes, they were concerned about threats to the southern economy, and "The "Southern Way Of Life"- both of which were supported by, and dependent upon- you guessed it, racial slavery. Yes, they were concerned about what you call "power sharing" i.e., maintaining superior or at least equal numbers of individuals in Congress because if the North gained a numerical advantage in votes SLAVERY would be outlawed in the territories and, they feared, eventually throughout the country.

I just don't have the time to go thru and correct each and every one of your other facile explanations & fallacies. What you accuse me of, i.e., over-simplyfying things - is exactly what YOU are doing and your sweeping generalizations, tho convenient, simply aren't supported by the historical evidence. Your assumptions about how and why people acted as they did 150 years ago are also in many cases absurd- again, you're falling victim to the 'presentism' you accuse me of..

You need to read a bit more widely; less in popular histories & more in scholarly works & primary source material. And not just about "The War" but the pre-war and post-war decades.

+ + +


RON: if you're talking about the propaganda the South put out, rather than root causes, then I'm with you 100%.

It was in fact obvious to all parties that the South was fighting to maintain slavery...

But, apparently not obvious to LH.

The British would not in fact just for pragmatic reasons have entered the war on the side of the South

No-one at the time imagined they would "enter the war" as a combatant. There was, however, substantial political and popular support for the Confederacy in Britain- especially in the industrialized north, dependent upon southern cotton, and Britain came damn close to official recognition of the Confederacy, which is what Lincoln & Co were concerned about & trying to prevent..

Was the North racist? Of course it was. The vast majority of U.S. citizens -including Lincoln and most of the White abolitionists - did not consider Blacks the social or intellectual equal of Whites. But that did not necessarily mean that they were comfortable with, or wouldn't or didn't fight to end the institution of slavery which many who didn't consider it a moral evil (and there were more of these than popular literature would have you believe) thought an economic threat to their livliehoods.

You need to simmer down

I never simmered up- that's in your head.

...realize history is bit more complex than you seem to believe.

Et tu, Ronus.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 02:31 PM

Greg--I'm the one constantly pointing out simplistic statements.   I'm afraid you make some of them.   If you disagree with any of my facts, let's have yours--with source.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 02:34 PM

And Greg, I don't believe I've stabbed you unexpectedly.   Perhaps you need to check your references.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 09:59 PM

Oh, be assured, Greg...I am crawling off in complete and abject humility before your assume and authoritative academic credentials and weeping in the corner! ;-)

Would you consider tutoring me in history for a small monthly stipend?

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Greg F.
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 10:08 PM

If you disagree with any of my facts, let's have yours--with source.

I have no bone to pick with the 'facts' you've posted- apparently all drawn from a single work by McPherson? My problem is the assumptions you make & the rather arcane conclusions you draw from those facts.

And Greg, I don't believe I've stabbed you unexpectedly.   Perhaps you need to check your references.

????? I've no idea what you're trying to say. Can you put this in English?

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Greg F.
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 10:12 PM

Would you consider tutoring me in history for a small monthly stipend?

No. I'd do it for free, but you don't have the necessary background.

Oh, and by the way, piss off.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Tangledwood
Date: 22 Aug 09 - 10:42 PM

It seems painfully obvious that the first step should be collecting facts--which you cannot do in reading fiction--since the author obviously has no obligation to provide them. Clearly, the more facts there are in a work of fiction, the more convincing the story.   But if your first goal is not entertainment but learning, it should be blazingly clear nonfiction is the way to start.


It is no more valid to say that fiction is false than it is to say the non-fiction is true. Both depend on the authors intentions, research, integrity, bias, sources and so on. Where does a non-fiction author gather the facts? What relative weighting is given to the diary of a front line Confederate soldier compared to the memoirs of a Union general?
The reader maybe has as much responsibility as the author in dedcidng "The Truth", but a well written novel makes it easier to gain an overall impression than a dry reference book. The reader may then choose to delve deeper into specific details if he so wishes.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Will Fly
Date: 23 Aug 09 - 04:09 AM

I'm sorry that this thread seems, in part, to have sparked off a second civil war - between 'Catters. No intention on my part, I can assure you. I hope that calm prevails, and repeat my thanks for the mine of information here - and it's very obvious that, like many other subjects, people who post on this forum are knowledgeable, passionate and articulate.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Lighter
Date: 23 Aug 09 - 10:21 AM

I can't let this go by.

Fiction doesn't have to observe facts. A writer of fiction is free to make up anything for the sake of the story.

Nonfiction is accountable to facts. The writer is not free to make them up or make them conform to an imaginary story.

No one can ever assume that something in a work of fiction "really happened." Maybe it did, but not even the author says it's true.

Of course, nonfiction writers make mistakes Some writers of alleged nonfiction (often nowadays on "New Age" topics) will just make things up as they go along, and others - notoriously those who worked on the Great Soviet Encyclopedia and similar totalitarian works - have an overpowering interests in following some party line.

However, those are not normal situations. You can't believe everything a historian tells you, but the odds are it's true, and if it isn't, someone else will soon contest it.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Aug 09 - 11:55 AM

Never mind about all the squabbling on this thread, Will Fly, it always happens when anyone starts talking about the Civil War here. The main thing is that you now have a list of excellent books, mostly non-fiction and a few fiction, that you can read to satisfy your interest in the American Civil War.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: robomatic
Date: 23 Aug 09 - 02:10 PM

The war of words for 'causation' whether the war was fought over 'freedom' for the South versus 'dominance' for the North has gone on since before the Civil War itself.

I was taught in no uncertain words in junior high school in the outskirts of Boston that the issue was 'slavery'.

Some, maybe most, of the Americans of Southern origin (and they happened to be of Caucasian extraction) have attempted to make the point with me that the Constitution did not deny them the power to secede, that the States had rights and it was in defense of these rights that they resisted the unconscionable and agressive encroachments of the North.

I happen to feel that, as Lincoln hoped, 'right would make might' and that the Civil War itself and de facto settled the issue in favor of Union.

Lincoln stated the case, as was his wont, with the best logic and the fewest words:

"Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it."
The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume III, "Letter To Henry L. Pierce and Others" (April 6, 1859), p. 376.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Aug 09 - 08:52 PM

Telling words indeed! Lincoln had a real rhetorical gift.

The major beef the South had, as far as I'm concerned, was how badly their society was damaged by things like Sherman's closing campaign in Georgia and the utterly corrupt activities of the northern Carpetbaggers who went down there to loot and exploit the place during the Reconstruction period. As far as the war itself went, though, they brought that directly upon themselves through their own combativeness and their often quite unrealistic arrogance. If much cooler and wiser heads had prevailed in the South during the 1850s and the very early 1860s, the whole terrible thing could have been avoided.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: GUEST,bflat
Date: 24 Aug 09 - 12:16 AM

I recommend Doris Kearns Goodwin's book Team of Rivals. It details the life of Lincoln and his mastery during his presidency. It is spellbinding in the events that held the nation in a most precarious balance.

Ellen

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Greg F.
Date: 24 Aug 09 - 08:14 AM

...the utterly corrupt activities of the northern Carpetbaggers who went down there to loot and exploit the place during the Reconstruction period.

Nonsense. Another shibboleth of long standing, which has been shown to be almost entirely bogus. Another myth that owes its origin to the southern "War Against The Blacks" which followed "The War Between The States". Its way past time this turkey was consigned to the trash where it belongs.

See- among many other excellent works on this subject - Eric Foner's "Reconstruction - America's Unfinished Revolution" 1988 ( also the works in the extensive bibliography thereof) and his "Freedom's Lawmakers : A Directory of Black Officeholders during Reconstruction" 1993 (ditto the bibliography)

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Aug 09 - 11:57 AM

Really? Seriously???

Hmm. Okay, fine, I'll look into that.

So are you saying that the tremendous bitterness in the South (which lasted well into the 20th century) was due simply to the fact that they lost that war, and not due to any unfair or extreme exploitation and damage to Southern society following the conflict?

Lincoln had promised "malice toward none, charity for all"...a noble promise...but then he was assassinated. Andrew Johnson seems to have tried to follow Lincoln's intentions in that in various ways, but he got attacked to the point of impeachment proceedings, didn't he?

"Johnson was nominated for the Vice President slot in 1864 on the National Union Party ticket. He and Lincoln were elected in November 1864. Johnson succeeded to the Presidency upon Lincoln's assassination on April 15, 1865.

As president he took charge of Presidential Reconstruction – the first phase of Reconstruction – which lasted until the Radical Republicans gained control of Congress in the 1866 elections. His conciliatory policies towards the South, his hurry to reincorporate the former Confederates back into the union, and his vetoes of civil rights bills embroiled him in a bitter dispute with some Republicans.[4] The Radicals in the House of Representatives impeached him in 1868 while charging him with violating the Tenure of Office Act, a law enacted by Congress in March 1867 over Johnson's veto, but he was acquitted by a single vote in the Senate"


Do you really believe that the South was not treated in an unnecessarily punitive way following that war? Losing sides are usually treated pretty badly after a major war, because the victors take revenge in various ways, and the business people among the victors sieze advantage for their own profit.

I don't think people usually grasp what that is like unless they themselves have been on the losing end of a major war and have been occupied by a foreign conqueror. It's not a pleasant experience, no matter how you look at it, and it's not an experience that ordinary people deserve to go through (no matter what their leaders led them into). Has anyone here had that experience? If so, they'd be less inclined to place all righteous moral condemnation upon ONLY the losers in any given war, yet give complete moral carte blanche to the winners...as if they were spotless from beginning to end in their own behaviour.

I think there were significant errors and misdeeds on both sides in that war...and in the Reconstruction period that followed.

At any rate, let's discuss it in a reasonable way, Greg, and not start personally attacking one another again, okay? I'm simply discussing viewpoints on history...I am not trying to prove that you are a bad person...or a stupid person...or anything of that sort.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Aug 09 - 12:51 PM

Northern anger over the assassination of Lincoln and the immense human cost of the war led to demands for harsh policies. Vice President Andrew Johnson had taken a hard line and spoke of hanging rebel Confederates. In late April, 1865 he was noted telling an Indiana delegation that, "Treason must be made odious... traitors must be punished and impoverished ... their social power must be destroyed." However, when he succeeded Lincoln as President, Johnson took a much softer line noting, "I say, as to the leaders, punishment. I also say leniency, reconciliation and amnesty to the thousands whom they have misled and deceived,"[17] and ended up pardoning many Confederate leaders and ex-Confederates to maintain their control of Southern state governments, Southern lands, and black people.[18]

His class-based resentment of the rich appeared in a May 1865 statement to W.H. Holden, the man he appointed governor of North Carolina: "I intend to confiscate the lands of these rich men whom I have excluded from pardon by my proclamation, and divide the proceeds thereof among the families of the wool hat boys, the Confederate soldiers, whom these men forced into battle to protect their property in slaves."[19] In practice, Johnson was not at all harsh toward the Confederate leaders. He allowed the Southern states to hold elections in 1865, resulting in prominent ex-Confederates being elected to the U.S. Congress; however, Congress did not seat them. Congress and Johnson argued in an increasingly public way about Reconstruction and the manner in which the Southern secessionist states would be readmitted to the Union. Johnson favored a very quick restoration, similar to the plan of leniency that Lincoln advocated before his death.


[edit] Break with the Republicans: 1866
Johnson-appointed governments all passed Black Codes that gave the freedmen second class status. In response to the Black Codes and worrisome signs of Southern recalcitrance, the Republicans blocked the re-admission of the ex-rebellious states to the Congress in fall 1865. Congress also renewed the Freedman's Bureau, but Johnson vetoed it. Senator Lyman Trumbull of Illinois, leader of the moderate Republicans, took affront at the Black Codes. Trumbull proposed the first Civil Rights bill.

Although strongly urged by moderates in Congress to sign the Civil Rights Bill, Johnson broke decisively with them by vetoing it on March 27. His veto message objected to the measure because it conferred citizenship on the freedmen at a time when eleven out of thirty-six States were unrepresented and attempted to fix by federal law "a perfect equality of the white and black races in every State of the Union." Johnson said it was an invasion by federal authority of the rights of the States; it had no warrant in the Constitution and was contrary to all precedents. It was a "stride toward centralization and the concentration of all legislative power in the national government."[20] Johnson, in a letter to Governor Thomas C. Fletcher of Missouri, wrote, "This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President, it shall be a government for white men."[21]

The Democratic Party, proclaiming itself the party of white men, North and South, aligned with Johnson.[22] However the Republicans in Congress overrode his veto (the Senate by the vote of 33:15, the House by 182:41) and the Civil Rights Bill became law.

The last moderate proposal was the Fourteenth Amendment, also authored by moderate Trumbull. It was designed to put the key provisions of the Civil Rights Act into the Constitution, but it went much further. It extended citizenship to everyone born in the United States (except Indians on reservations), penalized states that did not give the vote to freedmen, and most importantly, created new federal civil rights that could be protected by federal courts. It guaranteed the federal war debt and voided all Confederate war debts. Johnson unsuccessfully sought to block ratification of the amendment.

The moderate effort to compromise with Johnson had failed and an all-out political war broke out between the Republicans (both Radical and moderate) on one side, and on the other Johnson and his allies in the Democratic party in the North, and the conservative groupings in the South. The decisive battle was the election of 1866. Johnson campaigned vigorously, undertaking a public speaking tour of the north that was known as the "Swing Around the Circle"; the tour proved politically disastrous, with Johnson widely ridiculed and occasionally engaging in hostile arguments with his audiences.[23] The Republicans won by a landslide (the Southern states were not allowed to vote), and took full control of Reconstruction. Johnson was almost powerless.

Historian James Ford Rhodes has explained Johnson's inability to engage in serious negotiations:

As Senator Charles Sumner shrewdly said, "the President himself is his own worst counselor, as he is his own worst defender." Johnson acted in accordance with his nature. He had intellectual force but it worked in a groove. Obstinate rather than firm it undoubtedly seemed to him that following counsel and making concessions were a display of weakness. At all events from his December message to the veto of the Civil Rights Bill he yielded not a jot to Congress. The moderate senators and representatives (who constituted a majority of the Union party) asked him for only a slight compromise; their action was really an entreaty that he would unite with them to preserve Congress and the country from the policy of the radicals. The two projects which Johnson had most at heart were the speedy admission of the Southern senators and representatives to Congress and the relegation of the question of 'negro suffrage' to the States themselves. Himself shrinking from the imposition on these communities of the franchise for the colored people, his unyielding position in regard to matters involving no vital principle did much to bring it about. His quarrel with Congress prevented the readmission into the Union on generous terms of the members of the late Confederacy; and for the quarrel and its unhappy results Johnson's lack of imagination and his inordinate sensitiveness to political gadflies were largely responsible: it was not a contest in which fundamentals were involved. He sacrificed two important objects to petty considerations. His pride of opinion, his desire to beat, blinded him to the real welfare of the South and of the whole country.[24]


Theodore R. Davis' illustration of Johnson's impeachment trial in the United States Senate, published in Harper's Weekly.
[edit] Impeachment

[edit] First attempt
There were two attempts to remove President Andrew Johnson from office. The first occurred in the fall of 1867. On November 21, 1867, the House Judiciary committee produced a bill of impeachment that consisted of a vast collection of complaints against him. After a furious debate, a formal vote was held in the House of Representatives on December 5, 1867, which failed 57-108.[25]


[edit] Second attempt
Main article: Impeachment of Andrew Johnson

The 1868 Impeachment ResolutionJohnson notified Congress that he had removed Edwin Stanton as Secretary of War and was replacing him in the interim with Adjutant-General Lorenzo Thomas. Johnson had wanted to replace Stanton with former General Ulysses S. Grant, who refused to accept the position. This violated the Tenure of Office Act, a law enacted by Congress in March 1867 over Johnson's veto, specifically designed to protect Stanton.[26] Johnson had vetoed the act, claiming it was unconstitutional. The act said, "...every person holding any civil office, to which he has been appointed by and with the advice and consent of the Senate ... shall be entitled to hold such office until a successor shall have been in like manner appointed and duly qualified," thus removing the President's previous unlimited power to remove any of his Cabinet members at will. Years later in the case Myers v. United States in 1926, the Supreme Court ruled that such laws were indeed unconstitutional.[27]

The Senate and House entered into debate. Thomas attempted to move into the war office, for which Stanton had Thomas arrested. Three days after Stanton's removal, the House impeached Johnson for intentionally violating the Tenure of Office Act.

On March 5, 1868, a court of impeachment was constituted in the Senate to hear charges against the President. William M. Evarts served as his counsel. Eleven articles were set out in the resolution, and the trial before the Senate lasted almost three months. Johnson's defense was based on a clause in the Tenure of Office Act stating that the then-current secretaries would hold their posts throughout the term of the President who appointed them. Since Lincoln had appointed Stanton, it was claimed, the applicability of the act had already run its course.


The Situation
A Harper's Weekly cartoon gives a humorous breakdown of "the situation". Secretary of War Edwin Stanton aims a cannon labeled "Congress" on the side at President Johnson and Lorenzo Thomas to show how Stanton was using congress to defeat the president and his unsuccessful replacement. He also holds a rammer marked "Tenure of Office Bill" and cannon balls on the floor are marked "Justice". Ulysses S. Grant and an unidentified man stand to Stanton's left.There were three votes in the Senate: one on May 16 for the 11th article of impeachment, which included many of the charges contained in the other articles, and two on May 26 for the second and third articles, after which the trial adjourned. On all three occasions, thirty-five Senators voted "guilty" and nineteen "not guilty." As the Constitution requires a two-thirds majority for conviction in impeachment trials, Johnson was acquitted; the 35-19 vote was one less than the majority required. A single changed vote for guilty would have convicted and removed Johnson from office. Seven Republican senators were disturbed by how the proceedings had been manipulated in order to give a one-sided presentation of the evidence. Senators William Pitt Fessenden, Joseph S. Fowler, James W. Grimes, John B. Henderson, Lyman Trumbull, Peter G. Van Winkle,[28] and Edmund G. Ross of Kansas, who provided the decisive vote,[29] defied their party and public opinion and voted against conviction.


Christmas Day amnesty for Confederates
One of Johnson's last significant acts was granting unconditional amnesty to all Confederates on Christmas Day, December 25, 1868, after the election of U.S. Grant to succeed him, but before Grant took office in March 1869. Earlier amnesties, requiring signed oaths and excluding certain classes of people, had been issued by Lincoln and by Johnson.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Goose Gander
Date: 24 Aug 09 - 01:04 PM

Back to recommended books, I'm personally interested in the subject of the border conflicts - in my opinion, that was the 'real' Civil War (the larger conflict was closer to a clash of civilizations). An under-researched and over-romanticized topic. A couple of books worth reading:

O'Brien, Sean Michael / Mountain Partisans: Guerrilla Warfare in the Southern Appalachians, 1861-1865

Fellman, Michael / Inside War: The Guerrilla Conflict in Missouri During the American Civil War

I'm usually not a fan of historical fiction, but Woe to Live On by Daniel Woodrell is worth reading (NOT the same thing as the cheesy movie Ride With the Devil, based upon Woodrell's novel).

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Aug 09 - 01:15 PM

"Ride With the Devil" was pretty disappointing. I'd be quite interested to read Woodrill's book.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Aug 09 - 01:19 PM

Pardon me. "Woodrell".

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Greg F.
Date: 24 Aug 09 - 05:50 PM

LH: first read the books, then we can talk. In the meanwhile:

Do you really believe that the South was not treated in an unnecessarily punitive way following that war? [emphasis mine]

On the whole, yes. Were there unnecessarily harsh incidents? Yes. Were they the norm? No.

...damage to Southern society following the conflict?

Is this a coded reference to giving civil rights to emancipated Blacks? That was what the South really couldn't stand.

RE: From: Little Hawk; Date: 24 Aug 09 - 12:51 PM Post

Source, please, and what does any of this have to do with "carpetbaggers"?

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 24 Aug 09 - 06:25 PM

"Is this a coded reference to giving civil rights to emancipated Blacks? That was what the South really couldn't stand."

Good lord, no. It is not.

I regard the emancipation of Blacks in the 1860s as having been fully justified, and I believe that all people should always have equal civil rights (along with their normal and equal obligations to obey the civil laws of their society, of course...or to suffer the legal penalties).

I believe everyone should have equal civil rights. That includes Blacks, Amerindians, women, and "gays" (as they are now called in the popular vernacular...which keeps changing). I want everyone to be emancipated and to have an equal voice at the voting booth. I have always wanted everyone to be emancipated. I also want equal rights for the poor and the homeless. If you look at what happens in the courts and in law enforcement in most countries including the USA, you will find that it doesn't necessarily work out that way...despite constitutional "guarantees".

You seem to still be looking for a closet "white supremacist" in me somewhere, Greg. You will not find one, because he doesn't exist.

My sympathies for the suffering and sorrow that ordinary Southerners (both White and Black) went through in the Civil War and its aftermath does not in any way link to even a shred of support on my part for the despicable institution of slavery...or for any form of enforced or implied racial inequality.

I don't have compassion for people solely based on which side they served on in some war, Greg. I have compaassion for all the people who served and who lost homes and loved ones...or who lost their own lives. The people on both sides in that war were often close relatives or longtime friends before the conflict. They were kin. It was an immense tragedy that crossed partisan lines and hurt everyone.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 24 Aug 09 - 10:19 PM

Well, Greg, since you claim to be a bit slow on the uptake-- (though a master of pointless foul language--facts and logic, not so much)--- , your reference should have been "Et tu, Rone?", and since the source of your attempted Latin phrase is painfully obvious, the original meaning is also obvious--and does not fit your context.   It's also not the nominative case. ( I'm putting myself in the second declension). You may want to brush up your Shakespeare, so to speak.

As for everything coming from McPherson, your reading skills need a bit of work. I've cited several other books.

And you also may want to broaden your own reading a bit.

You seem to believe many Northerners saw slavery as an economic threat to their livelihoods.   You have given precisely zero evidence for this.   Whereas it is painfully obvious that most Northern unskilled laborers were just fine with slavery in the South; they did not fear competition from Southern slaves. However, faced with the prospect of large numbers of freed slaves, the Northern laborers did have a deep fear; the prospect that huge numbers of former slaves would come North and take their jobs. This fear was fanned by unscrupulous politicians like Democratic Governor Seymour of New York. Yet again, the perfect illustration of this is the 1863 draft riot.

If you do in fact have evidence for your assertion, I'm sure we'd all like to hear it--with exact quote and exact source.   Not that we don't trust you to give a balanced perspective, of course.

For somebody who supposedly has been in the field for decades, you seem to have a remarkably unnuanced approach, and even an incurious mind. But I'm sure that's just an unfair perception, which you will remedy.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 24 Aug 09 - 10:23 PM

And, interestingly enough, both the unnuanced approach and the pointless foul language--usually the resort of somebody bankrupt of argument, are amply in evidence on other threads also. Funny about that.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Greg F.
Date: 25 Aug 09 - 12:08 AM

Hey, Ron-

You don't do irony all that well. Give it a rest. Ditto the phony collegiality

though a master of pointless foul language

Though I appreciate the compliment, you've obviously never listened to a real master of the genre. If your tender eyes shrink in horror at the sight of "bullshit", may I suggest you simply avert your eyes.

...of your attempted Latin phrase...

My attempted "Latin Phrase"???? ROFLMAO! Jesus wept. You've got to be kidding. And you've gone to the trouble of parsing and correcting it for me. PLEASE tell me you're kidding.You really are a piece of work.

you seem to have a remarkably unnuanced approach

This is a web forum, for chrissake, Ron, not a graduate seminar. I don't have the time for "nuance" or the desire to spend hours typing multi-page essays. If you'd like me to provide you with a reading list for home study, I'd be happy to do so. Or you could try continuing education courses at an institution of higher learning of your choice.

... it is painfully obvious that most Northern unskilled laborers were just fine with slavery in the South...

What's more painful is your ignoring the whole decades-long issue of the expansion of slavery in the Territories, which northern workers were far from "just fine" with. Its painful that you're not aware that there were also a substantial number of slaves who were skilled artisans. And its painful that you have the chronology of the NY draft riots and the influx of freed blacks into the North inverted.

If you do in fact have evidence for your assertion, I'm sure we'd all like to hear it...

We'll start you off with an easy one, Ron. Pick up Eric Foner's Politics and Ideology in the Age of the Civil War. Its short, an easy read, less than 200 Pages in its entirety. See especially Chapter 4 "Abolitionism and the Labor Movement in Ante-bellum New York". Then Chapter 5, "Racial Attitudes of he New York Free Soilers". Then Chapter 6, "Reconstruction and the Crisis of Free Labor". In each case, check the footnotes for each chapter and that will give you enough additional pertinent reading matter to keep you occupied for quite some time. If you work your way through these and out the other end, I'll gladly provide a more lengthly bibliography. You have only yo ask

If you think I'm going to do your work for you & distill it down to one-liners so you can take notes, you're sadly mistaken.

Have a nice day! & Let me know how the reading goes.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Greg F.
Date: 25 Aug 09 - 12:38 AM

Oh, and Ron, I forgot to mention your take on the 1863 Draft Riots & the situation of Blacks in NY is a bit superficial.

May I recommend Ira Berlin & Leslie M. Harris Slavery in New York New Press/Norton 2005 and David Gellman & David Quigley Jim Crow New York NY University Press 2003

Have fun.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Goose Gander
Date: 25 Aug 09 - 12:05 PM

For another look at African-Americans in New York, including a discussion of the Draft Riots, see A Respectable Woman: Public Roles of African-American Women in 19th-Cen. NY by Jane Dabel.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Aug 09 - 10:05 PM

First of all, Greg, let me congratulate you for manfully hauling yourself up from the gutter where it seems you spend a portion of your time. Perhaps, in your particular grove of academe, that passes for dialogue. Pobrecito.

So you will be capable of carrying on a civil debate after all?   On other threads too?   Hope springs eternal.

It is still of interest that you seem to immediately assume that if somebody disagrees with you, that person is not only wrong but evil. As LH pointed out,--quite civilly, thus in marked contrast to your patented apoplectic style--you had no cause whatsoever to imply that he endorsed a white supremacist viewpoint.   This sort of intolerance and tunnel vision is one of your more endearing traits.   You who claim to loathe religious fundamentalists seem to be all too willing to burn at the stake anyone who does not subscribe to your own secular catechism.

Re: Northern attitudes towards blacks:   I note with interest that you still have not provided any direct quote defending your statement that Northern laborers were afraid of competition from slave labor in the South. Perhaps you have a problem following instructions.

As I said, I have not read the Gates book you mentioned earlier--though I'll keep an eye out for it.   But I suspect strongly that he confirms that many Northern soldiers had the same racist attitude I noted in the NY soldier I quoted. Obviously attitudes changed over the course of the war, and many Northern soldiers came to enjoy their role as liberators, especially when any who also came in contact with Andersonville-like camps.

I don't claim to be the ultimate authority on this--or anything.   But I do believe that specific evidence is considerably better than bluster.   You might want to try it sometime.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Aug 09 - 10:07 PM

"especially any who.."

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: robomatic
Date: 25 Aug 09 - 10:34 PM

Hey Will:


this is how the civil war got started!
read a couple books and then join the fray!

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: GUEST,Will Fly on the Hoof
Date: 26 Aug 09 - 03:27 AM

LOL! I'm enjoying the thread immensely. Not for the Civil War-like qualities of the debate - simply for the wealth of viewpoints to be taken in. I'm off to bookshops soon and all of this will be rolling around in my head.

I have to admit to a sneaky liking - based on no logical thinking whatsoever - for the Confederacy. Robbie Robertson quoted Levon Helm's father,at dinner, as saying with all seriousness, "The South will rise again". When I mentioned that recently in conversation with Duck Baker, he grimaced and said, "I've lost count of the times I've heard that said". DB's from West Virginia - and now lives in England.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Aug 09 - 09:48 AM

Ron-

Gee Ron, you're the one seems to be getting his knickers in a twist. Simmer down, hey?

you seem to immediately assume that if somebody disagrees with you, that person is not only wrong but evil. As LH pointed out...you had no cause whatsoever to imply that he endorsed a white supremacist viewpoint.

Bullshit.

First off, Ron, learn to read for comprehension. I did not call LH a racist. What I did say, is that the "states rights" myth and the "lost cause " fairytale were the product of the racist "War Against The Blacks" launched by the south after they lost the War Between the States, and that both inventions had been thoroughly discredited. I responded to a PM from LH re: this and other points at some length and he seems to get it. You, apparently, do not. Your problem, not mine.

[ I wanted to post the PM exchange for the rest of the forum to see, but he refused to allow me to do so. I also don't think he needs you as a nanny- he's quite capable of speaking for himself.]

many Northern soldiers had the same racist attitude I noted in the NY soldier I quoted

Uh, Ron, I AGREED with you about this. Did you actually READ any of what I wrote?

...you still have not provided any direct quote defending your statement that Northern laborers were afraid of competition from slave labor in the South...

Bullshit.

I provided you with the titles of four of several dozens of volumes that speak specifically to that and the other the points I raised.( By the way, "in the South" is YOUR bowdlerized version & not what I said.) Read 'em and then we'll talk. History can't be reduced to the the "Readers' Digest" versions & the single sentence quotes and one-liners you seem to favor.

If you can't be bothered to educate yourself, then its pointless for me to continue with this.

I don't claim to be the ultimate authority ...

Bullshit.

Oh, but you do, Ron. If you don't claim the ultimate authority, pretty damn close. And then you proceed in your own supercilious smarmy mocking style to do precisely what you condemn in others: employ bombast & bluster instead of evidence. Its really very tiresome.

Its annoying, Ron, when people like yourself read one or two popular single-volume histories written for a mass audience about complex events and then claim to be able to discuss the finer points and nuances with authority.

So Ron, read the books, don't expect other people to do your work for you, put in a little effort, and then we'll talk. Till then, I'm through with playing your childish games

And finally:

...let me congratulate you for manfully hauling yourself up from the gutter where it seems you spend a portion of your time... So you will be capable of carrying on a civil debate after all?... Hope springs eternal.


Sorry to dash your hopes, but no - so fu$k off, $hithead.

And have a nice day.


PS: My incivility? Suggestion: Re-read your own postings.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Greg F.
Date: 26 Aug 09 - 10:24 AM

For folks other than Ron, two additional works might be of interest:

Blight, David W.: The Civil War in American Memory Cambridge MA 2001

and

Litwack, Leon: North of Slavery: The Negro in the Free States 1790-1860 Chicago, 1961

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 26 Aug 09 - 02:52 PM

Though I do not know the citations, it would be interesting to have a few more books about the War West of the Mississippi mentioned, as that seems to be a underserved area.

The trilogy by Honore Morrow, "Great Captain," is a very good popularization of Lincoln's later life with interesting characterizations of the people around him, as well as what ailed him.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Wesley S
Date: 26 Aug 09 - 03:49 PM

At the risk of suggesting - gasp - novels, I'll mention a series of mysteries by Owen Parry about a detective called Able Jones. He's a Welshman that had fought in India for the British army and eventually moves to the US where he volunteers for the Union Army when the war breaks out. The easiest book to find in the series is "Faded Coat of Blue".

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 27 Aug 09 - 08:09 AM

QED


Thanks for the book titles, Greg.    If you had only stuck to them instead of setting yourself up as the ultimate authority on the topic...

So it appears your natural habitat really is the gutter.   And you will never learn that foul language does not strengthen your argument--rather the opposite.

Nor does it seem you can learn to make dubious assertions, blissfully free from any evidence (e.g. Northern laborers feared competition from slave labor).   All you had to do was give one direct quote in favor of your view.   At that point I would have checked your logic and context--and your source for bias.   And of course to see if you had quoted it accurately. And we would perhaps have a reasonable discussion. Obviously "reasonable " is not in your vocabulary--on this or any other thread.


In fact, as I noted, you still see yourself as our would-be Torquemada. This doesn't really help you anywhere on Mudcat.

In fact your coarse, embarrassingly puerile attacks on Doug R, for instance, threaten to do the near impossible:   create sympathy for him.   And I say that as one who, like you, abhors his politics. You do not help the cause when, of you two, he comes off as the calm, reasonable one.

You claim you've been studying and teaching 19th century history for decades.   People can, and do, claim anything they want to on the Net.   Your attitude on this thread and elsewhere does not support your claim.   If it were true, pity any of your students. I wonder just why you're so bitter and frustrated. Of course last Saturday night you had nothing better to do than carry on a vendetta on Mudcat. Perhaps that's a clue.

And I also hope you have a wonderful day.   Things can't be as bad as you think.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Aug 09 - 08:57 AM

Ron-

You're making a fundamental mistake: that your opinion is of some consequence. I really don't give a fart in a high wind what you think. Never have.

My purpose in posting to this thread is and has been to 1: provide access to accurate information for people - unlike yourself - who are genuinely interested in exploring the topic, and 2: identify and counterract the worst of the bullshit posted by certain individuals.

'Tis YOU who chose to turn it into a personal contest, and I'm tired of it.

In closing, you seem to think that a single quote from a single author is some sort of magical validation. This is simply not so, and is a naive and simplistic view of history & historical documentation. I have repeatedly given you the opportunity & means to educate yourself, which you have chosen not to do. That's fine, but don't attack me for your own failings.

In the words of the old blues song:

"Before you accuse me
Take a look at yourself."

I ain't gonna work on Ronnie's farm no more.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Greg F.
Date: 28 Aug 09 - 06:39 PM

Regarding the western theater of the war:

Oscar Lewis, The War In the Far West 1861-1865 (1961). Aurora Hunt, The Army of the Pacific...(1951), Albert E. Castel, General Sterling Price and the Civil War In the West (1968), Hans Christian Adamson, Rebellion in Missouri 1861:Nathaniel Lyon and His Army of the West(1961) and Alvin Josephy, Jr., The Civil War in the American West(1991)

Several of these are quite old; there are likely newer studies, but I'm not familiar with them.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 29 Aug 09 - 01:04 PM

Sorry I haven't had a chance to get to this for a while.


"In closing...".    So that means, Greg, that you won't insist on the last word?   Somehow, I doubt it.

First, let me humbly beg forgiveness for having left out a crucial "not" in my last post. I really will have to proofread more carefully. I certainly did not mean imply that Greg cannot learn to make dubious assertions, blissfully free from support.   In fact, aside from pointless vulgarism, that is unquestionably his forte.



Perhaps, Greg, when you have stopped your furious spluttering, you can give the requested quote.

One of the ironies of this is that you started out fine. Your first post was quite worthwhile.   It was only when you started branding other posters as evil or total idiots that you showed you do not "play well with others". If you had only been satisfied with the position of primus inter pares, very likely nobody would have objected. But that's obviously not the role you envision for yourself. Well, on Mudcat, you may have to trim your sails a bit.

And if you make a foolish statement, you may well be called on it. Citing a book is no answer. Some of us believe in a level playing field, even if you don't.   If you can't give a direct quote when asked, your credibility suffers.

Most of the rest of us are always willing to learn. I myself am a humble seeker after knowledge---- though admittedly not above pricking a balloon.



Back to topic:   I also have another book to recommend, which I've just received:   Great Britain and the American Civil War, by Ephraim Douglas Adams.   This appears to be a source for many other books on the topic. It came up on another thread. And it is truly intriguing.   Just glancing at it , it's striking, for instance, how controversial the timing of various moves by Lord Russell is in his dealings with the crisis caused by the"Laird rams".

The book came out in 1924, and is crammed with footnotes. I'm definitely looking forward to reading it.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Lighter
Date: 29 Aug 09 - 04:15 PM

I've stumbled on this quote from John Adams which sums up the reasonably critically attitude:

"I have little faith in history. I read it as I do romance, believing what is probable and rejecting what I must."

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: robomatic
Date: 29 Aug 09 - 04:50 PM

Yeah, but remember that was John Adams, who signed the "Alien and Sedition" act. He was the 'W' of his era in some ways.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Peter T.
Date: 29 Aug 09 - 05:42 PM

A few other suggestions:

Soul of a Lion (or any of the biographies) of Joshua L. Chamberlain of Maine, such an interesting man.

Grant's Memoirs (available in Penguin and in the American Library Series) are incredibly well written.

Garry Wills (anything) but specifically Lincoln at Gettysburg. Probably the most profound reading of the Gettysburg Address and its meaning. Worth many reads.

Walt Whitman and the Civil War (a new book). Anything of Whitman's from this period. There are a number of anthologies of the prose.

Some slightly out of the way things: John Adams the composer has set Walt Whitman's The Dresser to music, and it is truly beautiful. The poem "On The Union Dead" by Robert Lowell is a major piece on the negro regiment (also the only good film about the Civil War I have seen, the rest (apologies to the sensitive) are crap.

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Peter T.
Date: 29 Aug 09 - 05:43 PM

My favourite history quote (don't know from where):

"History repeats itself, it has to, nobody ever listens."

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Aug 09 - 06:08 PM

Nyah Nyah! Ronnie didn't get the last word! Nyah nyah!

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Aug 09 - 06:39 PM

Probably the best bibliographic source on the Civil War is The American Civil War: a Handbook of Literature and Research
By Steven E. Woodworth (1996). From the foreword by James M. McPherson: "The single most important volume for anyone interested in the Civil War to own and consult.The first guide to Civil War literature to appear in nearly 30 years, this book provides the most comprehensive, up-to-date, and informative survey and analysis of the vast body of Civil War literature... "

RE: Adams' Great Britain and the American Civil War, 1925-
In passing, its interesting to note that the 1920's saw a massive resurgence of the Ku Klux Clan and was an era of particularly vicious racism. Between 1919 and 1922, 239 blacks were lynched by white mobs and many more were killed by individual acts of violence and unrecorded lynchings.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Lighter
Date: 29 Aug 09 - 08:25 PM

How he acted on what he *made* of his reading and in the political context of the time is a different issue. His remark about the reading of history is beyond partisanship.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Peter T.
Date: 30 Aug 09 - 10:04 AM

Glory is the name of the film about the negro regiment.

A new book with a whole lot of relevance is "Darwin's Sacred Cause" about the anti-slavery movement, particularly in Britain, but with a lot of interesting material on the theoretical arguments that were being generated by "scientists" concerning racial and species differences to support slavery and segregation. The book reminds us of the poisonousness of bad science.

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: American Civil War - recommended books?
From: Paul Burke
Date: 30 Aug 09 - 01:10 PM

Great Britain and the American Civil War, by Ephraim Douglas Adams

Was the answer Ephraim 42?