What do you think?
Rate this book
In the Presence of Mine Enemies: The Civil War in the Heart of America, 1859-1864
Our standard Civil War histories tell a reassuring story of the triumph, in an inevitable conflict, of the dynamic, free-labor North over the traditional, slave-based South, vindicating the freedom principles built into the nation's foundations.
But at the time, on the borderlands of Pennsylvania and Virginia, no one expected war, and no one knew how it would turn out. The one certainty was that any war between the states would be fought in their fields and streets.
Edward L. Ayers gives us a different Civil War, built on an intimate scale. He charts the descent into war in the Great Valley spanning Pennsylvania and Virginia. Connected by strong ties of every kind, including the tendrils of slavery, the people of this borderland sought alternatives to secession and war. When none remained, they took up war with startling intensity. As this book relays with a vivid immediacy, it came to their doorsteps in hunger, disease, and measureless death. Ayers's Civil War emerges from the lives of everyday people as well as those who helped shape history—John Brown and Frederick Douglass, Lincoln, Jackson, and Lee. His story ends with the valley ravaged, Lincoln's support fragmenting, and Confederate forces massing for a battle at Gettysburg.
But at the time, on the borderlands of Pennsylvania and Virginia, no one expected war, and no one knew how it would turn out. The one certainty was that any war between the states would be fought in their fields and streets.
Edward L. Ayers gives us a different Civil War, built on an intimate scale. He charts the descent into war in the Great Valley spanning Pennsylvania and Virginia. Connected by strong ties of every kind, including the tendrils of slavery, the people of this borderland sought alternatives to secession and war. When none remained, they took up war with startling intensity. As this book relays with a vivid immediacy, it came to their doorsteps in hunger, disease, and measureless death. Ayers's Civil War emerges from the lives of everyday people as well as those who helped shape history—John Brown and Frederick Douglass, Lincoln, Jackson, and Lee. His story ends with the valley ravaged, Lincoln's support fragmenting, and Confederate forces massing for a battle at Gettysburg.
498 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2003
58 people are currently reading
749 people want to read
About the author
Edward L. Ayers
107 books49 followersEdward Ayers is President Emeritus of the University of Richmond, where he now serves as Tucker-Boatwright Professor of the Humanities. Previously Dean of Arts and Sciences at the University of Virginia, where he began teaching in 1980, Ayers was named the National Professor of the Year by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching in 2003.
A historian of the American South, Ayers has written and edited 10 books. The Promise of the New South: Life After Reconstruction was a finalist for both the National Book Award and the Pulitzer Prize. In the Presence of Mine Enemies: Civil War in the Heart of America won the Bancroft Prize for distinguished writing in American history and the Beveridge Prize for the best book in English on the history of the Americas since 1492. He was awarded the National Humanities Medal in 2013.
A pioneer in digital history, Ayers created "The Valley of the Shadow: Two Communities in the American Civil War," a website that has attracted millions of users and won major prizes in the teaching of history. He serves as co-editor of the Atlas of the Historical Geography of the United States at the University of Richmond's Digital Scholarship Lab and is a co-host of BackStory with the American History Guys, a nationally syndicated radio show and podcast.
Ayers has received a presidential appointment to the National Council on the Humanities, served as a Fulbright professor in the Netherlands, and been elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences
A historian of the American South, Ayers has written and edited 10 books. The Promise of the New South: Life After Reconstruction was a finalist for both the National Book Award and the Pulitzer Prize. In the Presence of Mine Enemies: Civil War in the Heart of America won the Bancroft Prize for distinguished writing in American history and the Beveridge Prize for the best book in English on the history of the Americas since 1492. He was awarded the National Humanities Medal in 2013.
A pioneer in digital history, Ayers created "The Valley of the Shadow: Two Communities in the American Civil War," a website that has attracted millions of users and won major prizes in the teaching of history. He serves as co-editor of the Atlas of the Historical Geography of the United States at the University of Richmond's Digital Scholarship Lab and is a co-host of BackStory with the American History Guys, a nationally syndicated radio show and podcast.
Ayers has received a presidential appointment to the National Council on the Humanities, served as a Fulbright professor in the Netherlands, and been elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews
December 10, 2009
In the Presence of Mine Enemies is the first of a projected two volume history of the impact of the Civil War in the Shenandoah Valley. This volume begins with John Brown’s raid on Harpers ferry and ends with the first battle of Gettysburg. The central materials on which Ayers bases his account are drawn out of the extensive collection of primary source documents from Augusta County, Virginia and Franklin County, Pennsylvania. These materials are available in full online at the University of Virginia’s Valley of Shadow Project, http://valley.vcdh.virginia.edu. There is also a companion volume and CD-ROM titled The Valley of the Shadow: Two Communities in the American Civil War.
Men and women from the highlighted counties participated in some of the major events of the approach to war and the campaign in the eastern theater, including: the planning of John Brown’s raid in Franklin, PA, the Republican campaign for Lincoln, the Virginia Secession convention (which although initially reluctant in the end helped to unite the south) and Stonewall Jackson’s Valley Campaign. Jeddidiah Hotchkiss, Jackson’s surveyor, and John Imboden, who led the South’s guerilla campaigns, were from Augusta and Franklin County sent a disproportionate share of its black residents to the initial Negro regiments. But more than the story of the participants, Ayers’ account is a record of the reactions to the war of those who remained at home. Joseph Ellis sums up the author’s aims aptly, if somewhat floridly, on the back cover, “Ayers gives us a raw slice of the Civil War that defies all magisterial and moralistic renditions. Here is what it looked, felt, and smelled like in one bloody corridor of the struggle, before the messy confusion that is war had congealed into more coherent and comfortable categories.”
The material for this “raw slice of the civil war” is drawn primarily from letters, diaries, local newspaper accounts written by residents of the two counties. The story is well carried and the primary materials do provide new insights and a richer texture than is found in the typical survey. For an experienced reader there is some drag as well warn material is rehearsed, but this ensures that the novice student will not be lost. After the introduction to the region, there is a clear bias in favor of the South in the depth and breadth of source materials covered. A large part of the Northern story is drawn from the competing local newspapers of the Democratic and Republican parties which were bound to over-represent the polemical. Ayers has significantly less material from diaries and letters for the North as for the South. Not that Ayers is by any means a Confederate sympathizer, he simply seems somewhat more interested in the continuities and contradictions in the Southern experience of the war.
Ayers’ primary conclusions are as follows. In the border North, Lincoln may have won, and opposition to slavery was real but there were few true abolitionists and a large share of the population were Democrats who had no qualms with slavery as long as it stayed down south. However, once the issue was forced by the Secessionists at Fort Sumter, a strong Northern national feeling developed and there was widespread agreement on the need to defeat the rebels. The Democrats did keep up a raucous political debate, but the primary claim was that they would do a better job of winning the war than the Republicans (shades of the current conflict in Iraq). They also strenuously opposed linking the war to abolition as that would prevent any reconciliation with the south and hordes of unskilled, unwashed ex-slaves would stream into the north disrupting white life and livelihood. In other words, Northern racism was unmistakable.
As the conflict neared in the South, Virginians were strongly unionist, the Augusta representatives voicing some of the strongest union support in the initial stages of the Virginia convention. Once again however, once the die was cast at Fort Sumter (from the South’s perspective it was, of course, Lincoln’s doing). The Virginians too lined up their full support behind the Confederate national cause. Ayers is adamant in pointing out that the initial unionism of the Virginians in no way indicated opposition to slavery. Rather they argued that conflict with the North was the greatest threat to their peculiar institution, a position proved right in the end. The South was far more uniform in their public support for the Confederate administration, but in private many Virginians resented their burden as the fighting ground of the war when the deep south leaders would be prime beneficiaries of a victory.
Probably most interesting in Ayers’ account is the speed with which passionate nationalism developed on each side as soon as hostilities broke out. Although no one wanted to be the cause of a battle in which the outcome was so uncertain, once begun there was almost a sense of relief at the chance to settle a conflict which had been brewing for so long. I am reminded of the passion of the young men of Europe marching off to the trenches of WWI. And though in both cases passion soon turned to horror, once begun no one knew how to stop except through total victory.
But are these conclusions really so new? Ayers’ main target as a “magisterial and moralistic rendition” is James McPherson’s classic work, The Battle Cry of Freedom. And although Ayers’ more detailed review of the source material provides a greater sense of the uncertainty of living through the war, the general conclusions outlined above are little different from those in McPherson’s account.
I do plan to read the second volume when it appears and together these books could make an interesting centerpiece for a college level class on the Civil War, especially considering the pedagogical value of the associated Valley of Shadow Project. However, this is not quite the grand retelling of the Civil War that was advertised.
Men and women from the highlighted counties participated in some of the major events of the approach to war and the campaign in the eastern theater, including: the planning of John Brown’s raid in Franklin, PA, the Republican campaign for Lincoln, the Virginia Secession convention (which although initially reluctant in the end helped to unite the south) and Stonewall Jackson’s Valley Campaign. Jeddidiah Hotchkiss, Jackson’s surveyor, and John Imboden, who led the South’s guerilla campaigns, were from Augusta and Franklin County sent a disproportionate share of its black residents to the initial Negro regiments. But more than the story of the participants, Ayers’ account is a record of the reactions to the war of those who remained at home. Joseph Ellis sums up the author’s aims aptly, if somewhat floridly, on the back cover, “Ayers gives us a raw slice of the Civil War that defies all magisterial and moralistic renditions. Here is what it looked, felt, and smelled like in one bloody corridor of the struggle, before the messy confusion that is war had congealed into more coherent and comfortable categories.”
The material for this “raw slice of the civil war” is drawn primarily from letters, diaries, local newspaper accounts written by residents of the two counties. The story is well carried and the primary materials do provide new insights and a richer texture than is found in the typical survey. For an experienced reader there is some drag as well warn material is rehearsed, but this ensures that the novice student will not be lost. After the introduction to the region, there is a clear bias in favor of the South in the depth and breadth of source materials covered. A large part of the Northern story is drawn from the competing local newspapers of the Democratic and Republican parties which were bound to over-represent the polemical. Ayers has significantly less material from diaries and letters for the North as for the South. Not that Ayers is by any means a Confederate sympathizer, he simply seems somewhat more interested in the continuities and contradictions in the Southern experience of the war.
Ayers’ primary conclusions are as follows. In the border North, Lincoln may have won, and opposition to slavery was real but there were few true abolitionists and a large share of the population were Democrats who had no qualms with slavery as long as it stayed down south. However, once the issue was forced by the Secessionists at Fort Sumter, a strong Northern national feeling developed and there was widespread agreement on the need to defeat the rebels. The Democrats did keep up a raucous political debate, but the primary claim was that they would do a better job of winning the war than the Republicans (shades of the current conflict in Iraq). They also strenuously opposed linking the war to abolition as that would prevent any reconciliation with the south and hordes of unskilled, unwashed ex-slaves would stream into the north disrupting white life and livelihood. In other words, Northern racism was unmistakable.
As the conflict neared in the South, Virginians were strongly unionist, the Augusta representatives voicing some of the strongest union support in the initial stages of the Virginia convention. Once again however, once the die was cast at Fort Sumter (from the South’s perspective it was, of course, Lincoln’s doing). The Virginians too lined up their full support behind the Confederate national cause. Ayers is adamant in pointing out that the initial unionism of the Virginians in no way indicated opposition to slavery. Rather they argued that conflict with the North was the greatest threat to their peculiar institution, a position proved right in the end. The South was far more uniform in their public support for the Confederate administration, but in private many Virginians resented their burden as the fighting ground of the war when the deep south leaders would be prime beneficiaries of a victory.
Probably most interesting in Ayers’ account is the speed with which passionate nationalism developed on each side as soon as hostilities broke out. Although no one wanted to be the cause of a battle in which the outcome was so uncertain, once begun there was almost a sense of relief at the chance to settle a conflict which had been brewing for so long. I am reminded of the passion of the young men of Europe marching off to the trenches of WWI. And though in both cases passion soon turned to horror, once begun no one knew how to stop except through total victory.
But are these conclusions really so new? Ayers’ main target as a “magisterial and moralistic rendition” is James McPherson’s classic work, The Battle Cry of Freedom. And although Ayers’ more detailed review of the source material provides a greater sense of the uncertainty of living through the war, the general conclusions outlined above are little different from those in McPherson’s account.
I do plan to read the second volume when it appears and together these books could make an interesting centerpiece for a college level class on the Civil War, especially considering the pedagogical value of the associated Valley of Shadow Project. However, this is not quite the grand retelling of the Civil War that was advertised.
September 17, 2008
In the Presence of Mine Enemies examines the collected archives of two counties in the Great Valley of the United States. Ayres shows that in both Franklin County, Pennsylvania and Virginia’s Augusta County, the Civil War never was a clear-cut issue of right vs. wrong, slave vs. free, state vs. nation. Ayers’ argues that contingency is present throughout the events leading up to the Civil War, an insight that contests the often accepted view that southern succession was inevitable. He shows how these neighboring counties could diverge so sharply with thoughts on the coming of war and the loss of life. His examination may be confined to these two regions, but Ayers covers much temporal and thematic ground. Focusing between Fall of 1859 and Summer of 1863, there are few aspects of the Civil War that Ayers fails to at least touch upon. He considers the events leading up to secession, cultural responses to the upcoming war, mobilization letters from the front, newspaper articles and personal recollections. In short, Ayers has captured the Civil War from the perspectives of two counties that remained geographically close while not necessarily ideologically in step.
Ayers assumes a unique position to make such a comparison between these two counties. His methodology relies on a giant archive amassed by him and colleagues at the University of Virginia. In fact, the Valley of the Shadow online archive of Civil War documents exclusively comprises the sources from which Ayers draws his conclusions. This approach makes Ayers’ book a remarkable contribution to the historiography of the Civil War: it unmasks the authority of historians by making the primary documents from which conclusions are drawn no more than a mouse-click away. Put simply, the easy accessibility of primary documents makes In the Presence of Mine Enemies an interesting historical read from which young historians could learn much about the use of primary source documents.
More advanced scholars, however, may find drawbacks to this type of approach. First, Ayers seems so fixated on revealing the nuances of local life and opinion in his study that he leaves little (if any) room for critical analysis most historians require. Second, some scholars might take issue with Ayers “voice over” approach to chapters, one in which he concludes sections with italicized syntheses of that section’s collection of stories. Academics might take issue with this approach because Ayers draws wide reaching conclusions about how people viewed the Civil War from the collections of only two counties in an arguably similar geographic region. For instance, Ayers’ analysis says little about perceptions of the war in the Deep South, or in industrial New England. Also, this book’s clean and direct prose and propensity of pictures makes it ideal for lay readers, or perhaps this is a work intended to inspire undergraduates about the historical process. But Ayers draws such sweeping conclusions from the collections of only two counties, which is exactly what historians should not practice in their scholarship.
If readers address the book on its own terms—namely, as an innovative and beautifully written work that compares the lives and opinions of two counties during the Civil War—it is a success. In the case study of two counties in Virginia and Pennsylvania, Ayers theme of contingency seems apparent from page 1, and he should convince readers that perhaps the Civil War need not have gone any sort of “natural” course. Yet, Ayers omissions of greater historical movements—such as the market revolution, the impact of liability litigation on American worldviews of labor, the rise of northern industrialism, westward expansion, and northern economic dominance (just to name a few examples)—makes this history of the Civil War incomplete at best. Luckily, Ayers plans on addressing life after the Civil war in these counties in his next project. Hopefully, his analysis will touch upon the issue of racism, as well as the before-mentioned omissions, in his second act.
Ayers assumes a unique position to make such a comparison between these two counties. His methodology relies on a giant archive amassed by him and colleagues at the University of Virginia. In fact, the Valley of the Shadow online archive of Civil War documents exclusively comprises the sources from which Ayers draws his conclusions. This approach makes Ayers’ book a remarkable contribution to the historiography of the Civil War: it unmasks the authority of historians by making the primary documents from which conclusions are drawn no more than a mouse-click away. Put simply, the easy accessibility of primary documents makes In the Presence of Mine Enemies an interesting historical read from which young historians could learn much about the use of primary source documents.
More advanced scholars, however, may find drawbacks to this type of approach. First, Ayers seems so fixated on revealing the nuances of local life and opinion in his study that he leaves little (if any) room for critical analysis most historians require. Second, some scholars might take issue with Ayers “voice over” approach to chapters, one in which he concludes sections with italicized syntheses of that section’s collection of stories. Academics might take issue with this approach because Ayers draws wide reaching conclusions about how people viewed the Civil War from the collections of only two counties in an arguably similar geographic region. For instance, Ayers’ analysis says little about perceptions of the war in the Deep South, or in industrial New England. Also, this book’s clean and direct prose and propensity of pictures makes it ideal for lay readers, or perhaps this is a work intended to inspire undergraduates about the historical process. But Ayers draws such sweeping conclusions from the collections of only two counties, which is exactly what historians should not practice in their scholarship.
If readers address the book on its own terms—namely, as an innovative and beautifully written work that compares the lives and opinions of two counties during the Civil War—it is a success. In the case study of two counties in Virginia and Pennsylvania, Ayers theme of contingency seems apparent from page 1, and he should convince readers that perhaps the Civil War need not have gone any sort of “natural” course. Yet, Ayers omissions of greater historical movements—such as the market revolution, the impact of liability litigation on American worldviews of labor, the rise of northern industrialism, westward expansion, and northern economic dominance (just to name a few examples)—makes this history of the Civil War incomplete at best. Luckily, Ayers plans on addressing life after the Civil war in these counties in his next project. Hopefully, his analysis will touch upon the issue of racism, as well as the before-mentioned omissions, in his second act.
February 26, 2008
The author was one of my professors at UVA. This book is absolutely wonderful and details the Civil war from both the South's and North's perspective. The book reads more like a story than a history lesson (even though I thoroughly enjoy both!)
November 3, 2018
I've read many books on the Civil War. This was one of the more unique as it attempted to focus on the pre-war period and first half (it ends just before Gettysburg) through the prism of two counties: Augusta, VA and Franklin, PA. The version I read is hardback and says 1859-1863. A lot of research clearly went into this, as there numerous primary sources, letters, newspapers, speeches. The complexity of the pre-war politics is well detailed. It gets a little simpler once the war starts but of course other issues arise. Not sure I have ever read a more nuanced explanation of the role of slavery in the south, its perception in both north and south and its sometimes subtle, sometimes gargantuan role in what transpired. Highly recommended, not so much for the military history (which is often a backdrop anyway) but the real, human side of this great tragedy.
December 26, 2017
A novel approach to telling the story of the years leading up to Civil War as Dr. Ayers presents detailed stories of two communities. One in Virginia and the other in Pennsylvania, they are separated by only a few miles, but by different attitudes, economies and reasons for fighting.
July 31, 2017
Although I have some questions about the author's framing of his narrative, which stops abruptly just before the Battle of Gettysburg, overall I would say that this is a very good book. There is a lot that is notable and worthwhile about this book in terms of the way it looks at the effect of the war on the common people of the United States through a microhistorical look at Augusta County in Virginia (home of Staunton) and Franklin County in Pennsylvania (where Chambersburg is located). The author has a particular strong view of the hatred that the Civil War inspired between what would have otherwise been fairly close neighbors [1] under normal circumstances. It just so happens that they were on different sides of a border, and for all of their similarities, the presence or absence of slavery as a key element of their socioeconomic system made a big difference. The author manages to subtly critique the effects of slavery on the South while also showing himself to be a brave defender of the military prowess of Confederates, especially at the beginning of the war. This point is worth coming back to.
The book is organized in a very interesting way, with six parts covering the period between 1859 and 1863 with titles taken from the six verses of Psalm 23. Switching back and forth between the fractious politics of the border North and the border South, in the main the author appears to want to draw parallels between the two sections and to show how both areas were radicalized by the war and its progress, and how both expressed their uncertainty and opposition to what was going on in the national government. The author shows a deep understanding of the primary documentation of the two counties being investigated, in newspaper editorials and letters and diaries and census data and the like, but sometimes the author appears to get bogged down in the details and is unable to draw wide enough conclusions. Sometimes he is so intent on showing the specific bits of information that he neglects the importance of looking at the broader scope of the war. Having a knowledge of the local and narrow history does not deny the existence of broader trends and conclusions, after all.
In reading this book, I was struck by how detailed the book was about the beginning of the Civil War, and how long unionism lasted in Augusta County, for example, and yet how abruptly the book ended between Chancellorsville and Gettysburg. There seems to be a good reason for it, though. The author is a historian of the New South, and seems to have a certain amount of patriotism for the South. In his desire to paint Augusta as the equal of Franklin county, despite the fact that it was economically inferior, the author stops at the high point of the Confederacy, not reflecting on the losses that Gettysburg inflicted on the area, and certainly not wanting to continue through the destructive campaign of 1864 and the final defeat of the Confederacy in 1865. Apparently even 150 years after the end of the Civil War, such matters are too difficult for a patriotic son of the south to squarely face in his own historical writings. I find this to be of great interest, because it suggests that the author wishes not to expose his own bias or subject his own beloved region to an analysis that would only bring to light its degradation in the light of its folly for rebellion, just as Unionists at the beginning of the Civil War pointed out. Even when one's prophecies are right, sometimes it is too difficult for others to admit it.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2017...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2016...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2014...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2017...
The book is organized in a very interesting way, with six parts covering the period between 1859 and 1863 with titles taken from the six verses of Psalm 23. Switching back and forth between the fractious politics of the border North and the border South, in the main the author appears to want to draw parallels between the two sections and to show how both areas were radicalized by the war and its progress, and how both expressed their uncertainty and opposition to what was going on in the national government. The author shows a deep understanding of the primary documentation of the two counties being investigated, in newspaper editorials and letters and diaries and census data and the like, but sometimes the author appears to get bogged down in the details and is unable to draw wide enough conclusions. Sometimes he is so intent on showing the specific bits of information that he neglects the importance of looking at the broader scope of the war. Having a knowledge of the local and narrow history does not deny the existence of broader trends and conclusions, after all.
In reading this book, I was struck by how detailed the book was about the beginning of the Civil War, and how long unionism lasted in Augusta County, for example, and yet how abruptly the book ended between Chancellorsville and Gettysburg. There seems to be a good reason for it, though. The author is a historian of the New South, and seems to have a certain amount of patriotism for the South. In his desire to paint Augusta as the equal of Franklin county, despite the fact that it was economically inferior, the author stops at the high point of the Confederacy, not reflecting on the losses that Gettysburg inflicted on the area, and certainly not wanting to continue through the destructive campaign of 1864 and the final defeat of the Confederacy in 1865. Apparently even 150 years after the end of the Civil War, such matters are too difficult for a patriotic son of the south to squarely face in his own historical writings. I find this to be of great interest, because it suggests that the author wishes not to expose his own bias or subject his own beloved region to an analysis that would only bring to light its degradation in the light of its folly for rebellion, just as Unionists at the beginning of the Civil War pointed out. Even when one's prophecies are right, sometimes it is too difficult for others to admit it.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2017...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2016...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2014...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2017...
May 28, 2019
In the Presence of Mine Enemies must first be greeted with hefty applause and open-mouthed awe. Immense primary source research went into the creation of this impressive tome, research which has been made readily available to any eager student via the web. The book is a work of social/political history, taking as its subject the experience of sectional politics in the lead up to and conflagration of the Civil War by the citizens of two communities in the Shenandoah Valley separated by the Mason-Dixon line.
The concept for the work and its depth is remarkable, exciting, educational, and inspiring. There is a lot of grist in these pages, especially with regard to the strange and mercurial turns of political sentiment around the 1860 election and the subsequent secession crisis. A reader learns an amazing amount of detail about unionist southerners, conservative northerners, political infighting within communities, etc. The book takes up the story from the antebellum and brings it through the eve of Gettysburg.
There are, alas, shortcomings to the effort laid out in these pages. In the Presence of Mine Enemies is deeper and more evocative in the early going than in the later chapters. As it goes, it tends to focus more on military conflict and less on the home front. I have nothing against formal military history, indeed I quite enjoy reading it, but in a work of social and political history, it is more shallowly told than in a dedicated work and seems rather tangential. As the history of the war developed, I longed to hear more about farming conditions, local elections, infighting among newspapers, economic hardships, the role of women in industry, etc. Ayers touches on many of these issues, but the depth of the narrative narrows as it goes. Perhaps this is a result of what people recorded in the sources. (I have found, in my own primary source foragings, that people tend to record military events in their writings during war, rather than relating mundane events, more is the pity.) Nevertheless, I often found myself lamenting the lack of home front social and political details in the later chapters. Moreover, the heavy political emphasis of this work sometimes obscures fascinating dimensions of social and personal history. I would have enjoyed more personal development of some of the principal source writers, which they may or may not have provided in the documents they left behind. When the blockade resulted in shortages in the South, which goods were most in demand? What sorts of compromises did citizens make? How did people cope with the demoralization of casualties? There is a lot of grist that falls between the margins.
All of this aside, Ayers has made an enormous contribution with this book. Examining the microcosm of two communities divided by war, he shines a scintillating light on the political vicissitudes of local communities. By choosing conservative communities with strong ties to the opposite side, he exposes many untold stories in dire need of examination. He also writes with good structure, offering details and summary in flowing, clear prose with just enough personal details to keep a lay-reader engaged while enthralling an academic.
In the Presence of Mine Enemies is a great history. I think it could have been still stronger and more widely readable and engaging, but that hardly obscures or overshadows its scope, depth, and intellectual rigor. I would like to imagine that its appearance will inspire other works, continually broadening and deepening our understanding of this most crucial chapter in American history!
The concept for the work and its depth is remarkable, exciting, educational, and inspiring. There is a lot of grist in these pages, especially with regard to the strange and mercurial turns of political sentiment around the 1860 election and the subsequent secession crisis. A reader learns an amazing amount of detail about unionist southerners, conservative northerners, political infighting within communities, etc. The book takes up the story from the antebellum and brings it through the eve of Gettysburg.
There are, alas, shortcomings to the effort laid out in these pages. In the Presence of Mine Enemies is deeper and more evocative in the early going than in the later chapters. As it goes, it tends to focus more on military conflict and less on the home front. I have nothing against formal military history, indeed I quite enjoy reading it, but in a work of social and political history, it is more shallowly told than in a dedicated work and seems rather tangential. As the history of the war developed, I longed to hear more about farming conditions, local elections, infighting among newspapers, economic hardships, the role of women in industry, etc. Ayers touches on many of these issues, but the depth of the narrative narrows as it goes. Perhaps this is a result of what people recorded in the sources. (I have found, in my own primary source foragings, that people tend to record military events in their writings during war, rather than relating mundane events, more is the pity.) Nevertheless, I often found myself lamenting the lack of home front social and political details in the later chapters. Moreover, the heavy political emphasis of this work sometimes obscures fascinating dimensions of social and personal history. I would have enjoyed more personal development of some of the principal source writers, which they may or may not have provided in the documents they left behind. When the blockade resulted in shortages in the South, which goods were most in demand? What sorts of compromises did citizens make? How did people cope with the demoralization of casualties? There is a lot of grist that falls between the margins.
All of this aside, Ayers has made an enormous contribution with this book. Examining the microcosm of two communities divided by war, he shines a scintillating light on the political vicissitudes of local communities. By choosing conservative communities with strong ties to the opposite side, he exposes many untold stories in dire need of examination. He also writes with good structure, offering details and summary in flowing, clear prose with just enough personal details to keep a lay-reader engaged while enthralling an academic.
In the Presence of Mine Enemies is a great history. I think it could have been still stronger and more widely readable and engaging, but that hardly obscures or overshadows its scope, depth, and intellectual rigor. I would like to imagine that its appearance will inspire other works, continually broadening and deepening our understanding of this most crucial chapter in American history!
March 19, 2020
Ayers tells the story of the Civil War from the perspective of two counties in the Great Appalachian Valley. Franklin County and its largest town Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, border the Mason-Dixon Line. Barely, one hundred miles "up the valley" to the southwest lies Augusta County, Virginia and it's largest town, Staunton. In 1859, most white folk in Augusta County probably have more in common with the folk in Franklin County than they do with the white citizens of the Deep South—with one huge exception: slavery. Ayers shows how most people in both these counties hoped and firmly believed, even as tensions escalated in 1859-1861, that compromises would be reached and the Union preserved. He conveys their shock, disappointment, and then anger as their hopes of unity crumble and they prepare to go to war.
Although we can be tempted to think that civil war over slavery was inevitable, Ayers expertly portrays the uncertainties and contingencies of those times. He persuasively argues that slavery was the central underlying cause of the conflict, but also demonstrates how little support there was for abolition in the North and especially in a border county such as Franklin. He also shows how strong the desire for Union was in Augusta County and in Virginia in general, as that state held out for compromise right up until Lincoln's call to raise troops to put down the rebellion in the Deep South after South Carolina attacked Fort Sumter.
Almost overnight the attitudes of whites in both counties harden and hatred takes root. The animosity grows and flowers as native sons from both places leave home and the number of maimed and killed grows dashing hopes of a quick resolution to the conflict. In addition to the conflict between North and South, the contempt of Northern Democrats for Republicans and their "absurd" policy of abolition was on full display in Franklin County. The disdain for and bigotry towards African-Americans, both slave and free, in Franklin County is evidence that the idea of a society with equality between the races was as unbelievable for many in the North as the South.
Once the fighting begins much of it takes place in Virginia and in or near the valley containing Augusta County. Ayers details both the military campaigns in this region and the devastating impacts on the civilians in Augusta County. At the end of this book, the first in "The Civil War in the Heart of America," trilogy, the Confederates invade Pennsylvania, including Franklin County, on the eve of the momentous Battle of Gettysburg.
I look forward to reading The Thin Light of Freedom: The Civil War and Emancipation in the Heart of America, Ayers' story of the remainder of the war and its aftermath in these two very similar and yet very different counties in the "Heart of America."
Although we can be tempted to think that civil war over slavery was inevitable, Ayers expertly portrays the uncertainties and contingencies of those times. He persuasively argues that slavery was the central underlying cause of the conflict, but also demonstrates how little support there was for abolition in the North and especially in a border county such as Franklin. He also shows how strong the desire for Union was in Augusta County and in Virginia in general, as that state held out for compromise right up until Lincoln's call to raise troops to put down the rebellion in the Deep South after South Carolina attacked Fort Sumter.
Almost overnight the attitudes of whites in both counties harden and hatred takes root. The animosity grows and flowers as native sons from both places leave home and the number of maimed and killed grows dashing hopes of a quick resolution to the conflict. In addition to the conflict between North and South, the contempt of Northern Democrats for Republicans and their "absurd" policy of abolition was on full display in Franklin County. The disdain for and bigotry towards African-Americans, both slave and free, in Franklin County is evidence that the idea of a society with equality between the races was as unbelievable for many in the North as the South.
Once the fighting begins much of it takes place in Virginia and in or near the valley containing Augusta County. Ayers details both the military campaigns in this region and the devastating impacts on the civilians in Augusta County. At the end of this book, the first in "The Civil War in the Heart of America," trilogy, the Confederates invade Pennsylvania, including Franklin County, on the eve of the momentous Battle of Gettysburg.
I look forward to reading The Thin Light of Freedom: The Civil War and Emancipation in the Heart of America, Ayers' story of the remainder of the war and its aftermath in these two very similar and yet very different counties in the "Heart of America."
June 8, 2019
Part social history, part war chronicle, part social commentary all bound together by the luminous narrative of Edward L. Ayers. “In the Presence of Mine Enemies: The Civil War in the Heart of America, 1851-1859” is a brilliantly conceived and expertly told story of the Civil War, specifically through the eyes of the citizens who lived in Franklin County, Pennsylvania and Augusta County, Virginia.
The premise of this history is simple: how did the issue of slavery and the threatened dislocation of a Civil War impact 2 communities, one in the North and the other in the South? Using primary sources that have been carefully collected and preserved by historians in The Valley of the Shadow Project, Professor Ayers ingeniously views the Civil War through the eyes of Unionists, Confederates, Copperheads, Republicans, Democrats, Slaves, soldiers, plantation owners, the poor, widows, shopkeepers, politicians, and Presidents.
The depth of perspective that can be gained from such an intimate view of the war is stunning. Reading Ayers’ book becomes an empathic enterprise. History lives through those who lived that history. And the impact is at once emotional and enlightening. Ayers ability to tell a story is partly due to his command of facts on the ground but also through his command of the English language. Ayers’ prose simply shines as his fast-paced narrative floats effervescently page after page.
Ayers reminds us how war affects people, how it destroys parts of society even as it seeks to transform the status quo. This thoughtful book is a welcome edition to the Civil War library of anyone who wishes to think deeply of the war’s impact on people, on States, on Nations and on ways of life. This book will taken you in on the first page and will not let you go until the end, until you realize that the book ends at Chancellorsville on the eve of Gettysburg. And then, like me, you will begin to read volume 2 entitled “The Thin Light of Freedom.” I would write more but my book is waiting. Happy reading!
The premise of this history is simple: how did the issue of slavery and the threatened dislocation of a Civil War impact 2 communities, one in the North and the other in the South? Using primary sources that have been carefully collected and preserved by historians in The Valley of the Shadow Project, Professor Ayers ingeniously views the Civil War through the eyes of Unionists, Confederates, Copperheads, Republicans, Democrats, Slaves, soldiers, plantation owners, the poor, widows, shopkeepers, politicians, and Presidents.
The depth of perspective that can be gained from such an intimate view of the war is stunning. Reading Ayers’ book becomes an empathic enterprise. History lives through those who lived that history. And the impact is at once emotional and enlightening. Ayers ability to tell a story is partly due to his command of facts on the ground but also through his command of the English language. Ayers’ prose simply shines as his fast-paced narrative floats effervescently page after page.
Ayers reminds us how war affects people, how it destroys parts of society even as it seeks to transform the status quo. This thoughtful book is a welcome edition to the Civil War library of anyone who wishes to think deeply of the war’s impact on people, on States, on Nations and on ways of life. This book will taken you in on the first page and will not let you go until the end, until you realize that the book ends at Chancellorsville on the eve of Gettysburg. And then, like me, you will begin to read volume 2 entitled “The Thin Light of Freedom.” I would write more but my book is waiting. Happy reading!
May 12, 2019
First off, Ayers’ book won two of the most prestigious prizes that can be awarded by the American historical profession: the 2004 Bancroft Prize and the American Historical Association’s Albert J. Beveridge Award. Ayers writes well, and in any case, an author would have to be an unusual bungler to write a totally boring book about the American Civil War. Nevertheless, although this is a good book, it is not a great one.
Ayers describes the conflict through the stories of two counties in the Great Valley, one in Pennsylvania and the other in Virginia, based on one of the earliest history websites, the Valley of the Shadow Project hosted by the University of Virginia. Many things can be learned about the home front of the Civil War through such a study, although they are not necessarily the things that the author intends the reader to learn.
For instance, Ayers offers repeated examples of obtuse newspaper commentary on the War, including seemingly logical but totally erroneous predictions about the effects of the Emancipation Proclamation. One can almost predict that when journalists are quoted, they will be saying something dumb. It is hard to imagine an academic history of a recent war in which the media could be so thoroughly derided.
Nevertheless, there are weaknesses to treating a national event by emphasizing local history. For one thing, national events often have to be worked around the story of the two counties because major actions of the War frequently take place off-stage. Ayers also introduces a good many people to his readers, but few are treated at the sort of length that can make them rounded individuals. (Jedediah Hotchkiss, Lee’s mapmaker, is an exception.)
Usually I either read histories quickly or give them up, but Ayers I read slowly. Like eating my vegetables, I knew reading the book was good for me. But it’s no page-turner.
Ayers describes the conflict through the stories of two counties in the Great Valley, one in Pennsylvania and the other in Virginia, based on one of the earliest history websites, the Valley of the Shadow Project hosted by the University of Virginia. Many things can be learned about the home front of the Civil War through such a study, although they are not necessarily the things that the author intends the reader to learn.
For instance, Ayers offers repeated examples of obtuse newspaper commentary on the War, including seemingly logical but totally erroneous predictions about the effects of the Emancipation Proclamation. One can almost predict that when journalists are quoted, they will be saying something dumb. It is hard to imagine an academic history of a recent war in which the media could be so thoroughly derided.
Nevertheless, there are weaknesses to treating a national event by emphasizing local history. For one thing, national events often have to be worked around the story of the two counties because major actions of the War frequently take place off-stage. Ayers also introduces a good many people to his readers, but few are treated at the sort of length that can make them rounded individuals. (Jedediah Hotchkiss, Lee’s mapmaker, is an exception.)
Usually I either read histories quickly or give them up, but Ayers I read slowly. Like eating my vegetables, I knew reading the book was good for me. But it’s no page-turner.
December 21, 2020
If I wanted to describe Edward L. Ayers's In the Presence of Mine Enemies in one word, that word would be tedious. The premise is quite interesting: comparing and contrasting the experiences of the people living in the border counties on the eve, and during the first years, of the American Civil War.
To that end, he has selected Franklin County, Pennsylvania, and Augusta County, Virginia. Ayers has then painstakingly reconstructed the events and times from original sources: newspapers, letters, legal documents, diaries, and other public and private records.
The first section of the book is devoted to showing how similar the people and places are. Ayers does this, if anything, too well. Until half the men went off to fight in blue and the other half in gray, I could not keep the counties straight. He switches between them frequently and I often had to reread entire pages to make sure I knew which county was the focus of a particular episode.
These early chapters are also dry. The political arguments - whether recounted in newspapers or personal letters - simply do not make for compelling reading. There is little new material about John Brown's raid or the abolitionists' growing impatience, or the presidential election of 1860.
Ultimately, the firsthand accounts of war and the homefront do save the latter parts of In the Presence of Mine Enemies. In the end, though, this is a book for those who are interested in the original source material, and not simply a primer on the big early battles.
To that end, he has selected Franklin County, Pennsylvania, and Augusta County, Virginia. Ayers has then painstakingly reconstructed the events and times from original sources: newspapers, letters, legal documents, diaries, and other public and private records.
The first section of the book is devoted to showing how similar the people and places are. Ayers does this, if anything, too well. Until half the men went off to fight in blue and the other half in gray, I could not keep the counties straight. He switches between them frequently and I often had to reread entire pages to make sure I knew which county was the focus of a particular episode.
These early chapters are also dry. The political arguments - whether recounted in newspapers or personal letters - simply do not make for compelling reading. There is little new material about John Brown's raid or the abolitionists' growing impatience, or the presidential election of 1860.
Ultimately, the firsthand accounts of war and the homefront do save the latter parts of In the Presence of Mine Enemies. In the end, though, this is a book for those who are interested in the original source material, and not simply a primer on the big early battles.
October 31, 2017
"Simple explanations, stark opposites, sweeping generalizations, and unfolding inevitabilities always tempt us, but they miss the essence of the story, and essence found in the deep contingency of history. To emphasize deep contingency is not to emphasize mere change, all to obvious in a war, but rather the dense and intricate connections in which lives and events are embedded." (xix)
"In their [the unionists'] eyes, the politics of grievance was the politics of fools and madmen, people who could not tolerate the ambiguity of the world, the complexity of history, or the tangle of human motivation." (92)
"Many Northerners had felt certain that nonslaveholders would vote against secession, would resist serving in the army, and would love the Union more than the Confederacy. At every step the North had been wrong. Many white Southerners had felt certain that Northern workingmen and immigrants would rebel against the capitalists and the abolitionists the Southerners blamed for starting the war. That too had been wrong." (233)
"The same sense of moral and material superiority emanated from the northern interaction with Confederate prisoners. ... A nagging question haunted, though: How could such people be defeating us?" (274-5)
"'[T]hey have been so often whipped that they always begin half whipped, and give up at light reverses'" (quoting Jedadiah Hotchkiss, 380)
"In their [the unionists'] eyes, the politics of grievance was the politics of fools and madmen, people who could not tolerate the ambiguity of the world, the complexity of history, or the tangle of human motivation." (92)
"Many Northerners had felt certain that nonslaveholders would vote against secession, would resist serving in the army, and would love the Union more than the Confederacy. At every step the North had been wrong. Many white Southerners had felt certain that Northern workingmen and immigrants would rebel against the capitalists and the abolitionists the Southerners blamed for starting the war. That too had been wrong." (233)
"The same sense of moral and material superiority emanated from the northern interaction with Confederate prisoners. ... A nagging question haunted, though: How could such people be defeating us?" (274-5)
"'[T]hey have been so often whipped that they always begin half whipped, and give up at light reverses'" (quoting Jedadiah Hotchkiss, 380)
March 3, 2019
I don't typically include "books for work" on here, but I'm including this one because I think it would appeal to someone with a more casual interest in the Civil War. The book stems from an interesting project--it does pretty in-depth research of two counties, one north and one south, before and during the US Civil War. The narrative tone is strong, but Ayers intersperses the words of the people in these counties with sections that help set broader context politically and militarily in the country, so you should be able to have some understanding of what these people are responding to, even without a strong grasp of the Civil War.
This is actually the third time I've read it, and I still really enjoy it. Most of the sources Ayers uses are newspapers, letters, and diaries, and so you do begin to feel that you understand the people in here and a little bit of the world in which they live. Most of my students (who bothered to read it) seem to have enjoyed it too, because it is far from "textbook-y."
This is actually the third time I've read it, and I still really enjoy it. Most of the sources Ayers uses are newspapers, letters, and diaries, and so you do begin to feel that you understand the people in here and a little bit of the world in which they live. Most of my students (who bothered to read it) seem to have enjoyed it too, because it is far from "textbook-y."
June 18, 2018
I wanted to read this because the author is one of the hosts of the Back Story podcast, and because its focus is on the perspective of people in two counties throughout the Civil War. It's a wonderful way to write history, and I think is done really well. However, while Ayers does try to focus on some major characters when appropriate, it was difficult for me to stay engaged without a consistent through line. I recognize this as just a factor in writing history that includes the perspective of people who weren't "major" figures - regular people's letter are less likely to have been preserved or to have much on-going "plot." It just made this a slow read for me. Compounding that was the alarming amount of resonance that the thoughts and writings of the time period had to today, and not in a good way. I'm torn about reading the second book, which was published last year and covers Gettysburg to the end of the war. Again, it's interesting, but slow going for me.
April 19, 2019
The premise of this book was very interesting — to tell the story of the American Civil War in the point of view of ordinary people. However, the execution of this book was not what I expected. In short, it could not hold my interest. I liked how Ayers starts at the local level and explores the lives of people on a national level, but the stories at the local level in my opinion were static and uninteresting.
However, his use of primary sources, like newspapers, diaries and town records was excellent. I could pinpoint the thorough research Ayers had conducted to write this book. I also liked his style of writing — how he used statistics, direct quotes and wording in italics to generalize ideas.
In conclusion, the idea of this book is very interesting, yet when I read it, it just wasn’t what I had anticipated. However, I did learn quite a lot about the Civil War still, in particular from Augusta County, Virginia and Franklin County, Pennsylvania.
However, his use of primary sources, like newspapers, diaries and town records was excellent. I could pinpoint the thorough research Ayers had conducted to write this book. I also liked his style of writing — how he used statistics, direct quotes and wording in italics to generalize ideas.
In conclusion, the idea of this book is very interesting, yet when I read it, it just wasn’t what I had anticipated. However, I did learn quite a lot about the Civil War still, in particular from Augusta County, Virginia and Franklin County, Pennsylvania.
December 4, 2025
(Read for HIS 200)
It is days like these I wish I could put half a star. Give this book four and a half stars. This Ayers work is pretty phenomenal. It is such a fantastic study with HUNDREDS of sources from "Valley of the Shadow." The book is intriguing and at many times reads like a fiction book. Ultimatley Ayers' revisionist narrative is in many ways convincing and this book serves as its backbone.
Now, here's the thing. You can theoretically not read the book and get the same primary sources for free from the "Valley of the Shadow" website. However, I think the book does a fantastic job at putting those sources into a narrative.
It is days like these I wish I could put half a star. Give this book four and a half stars. This Ayers work is pretty phenomenal. It is such a fantastic study with HUNDREDS of sources from "Valley of the Shadow." The book is intriguing and at many times reads like a fiction book. Ultimatley Ayers' revisionist narrative is in many ways convincing and this book serves as its backbone.
Now, here's the thing. You can theoretically not read the book and get the same primary sources for free from the "Valley of the Shadow" website. However, I think the book does a fantastic job at putting those sources into a narrative.
January 17, 2019
A truly enlightening view of the Civil War. Researched thoroughly with personal accounts leading up to and during the civil war. The contrast of the two counties in the valley one below and one north of the Mason Dixon line in close proximity to one another was a perfect way to demonstrate the opinions and emotions of the times. I would highly recommend this book.
Kimbrough Jennings
Kimbrough Jennings
November 4, 2025
A good book of the Civil War up until the Battle of Gettysburg. The author compares the trials of both soldiers and non-combatants from two diverse locations: Franklin County PA and Augusta County GA. Especially interesting is tons of original source material with details of the home front and the war’s stressful battles.
January 24, 2020
A view of the Civil War on the home front in border communities on either side of the Mason-Dixon line in Pennsylvania and Virginia. Very well-researched and enlightening with ground-level details of the local populations.
July 6, 2023
An interesting and well written account of two counties, one North and one South of the Mason Dixon line, and their involvement in the years leading up to the American Civil War and this first few years of the war.
November 12, 2024
I experienced the pleasure of meeting Dr. Ayers this past summer at a workshop. The man carries a magic for written and verbal storytelling, backed by primary evidence. This book further displays that talent. I learned a lot from the angles and evidence taken by Dr. Ayers in producing this book.
February 7, 2020
Such a lucid, impressively researched narrative history of two Civil War counties that were so close but so far apart. How I wish I’d read this when it first came out.
December 2, 2020
This is the most insightful book I've read on the events leading to the Civil War
August 23, 2023
Interesting history of the civil war from the perspectives of Franklin County, PA and Augusta county, Virginia.
July 26, 2024
Some interesting tidbits but lots that I skipped over.
September 29, 2024
A good perspective on the war told from two different communities tied together with a common valley. I thought the southern country of Augusta was covered more thoroughly though.
January 3, 2026
Writing is very good. Attentive to different perspectives.
November 25, 2021
Insightful, well written, and full of interesting primary sources. Focuses on two border communities. I like this method because it shows more accurately what war is like. Rumors. Rumors. Devastation. Then the war moves onto someplace else. These two communities are good samples for the two nations. This book helped me to understand the politics leading to the war and the politics that effected the conduct of the war. Demonstrates how quickly opinions can change due to one event, and how war radicalizes people. This is all made clearer by focusing on the same people and primary sources from these two towns. Like all excellent history I'm shocked by the similarities to my time. (The partisan political language used in the media.) And I'm also shocked by the almost incomprehensible differences. (They are defending slavery not as a necessary evil but as a biblical good.)
"War turned out not to be merely policy by other means, but a force all its own, carrying people to places otherwise impossible and unimaginable."
What I learned: The 54th Massachusetts recruited men from all over the North. Both sides had riots and desertions and recruiting problems. The confederacy used the draft first. Lee marched North twice. The southern armies benefited from multiple seizures of enemy stores. America is better off today because the war was not as short as people had initially hoped. After the battle there was an aurora borealis in Fredericksburg Virginia!
"War turned out not to be merely policy by other means, but a force all its own, carrying people to places otherwise impossible and unimaginable."
What I learned: The 54th Massachusetts recruited men from all over the North. Both sides had riots and desertions and recruiting problems. The confederacy used the draft first. Lee marched North twice. The southern armies benefited from multiple seizures of enemy stores. America is better off today because the war was not as short as people had initially hoped. After the battle there was an aurora borealis in Fredericksburg Virginia!
December 11, 2012
I really enjoyed this. One of the things that I always wanted to know about the Civil War was how exactly secession happened in places like Virginia and North Carolina...the northern parts of the south. Because these states didn't secede right away. The deep south seceded and then Virginia argued about it for a while, and that arguing period interested me. And that, really, is the point of this book. Ayers structures the book around a county in Virginia and a county in Pennsylvania, only a couple hundred miles from each other. What he puts together is a social history of the coming of war, basically, a history from the ground up - he looks at newspapers, diaries, letters, speeches, all sorts of sources. The book is about contingencies...how did this war that no one seemed to want become a war that everyone was invested in fighting? How did pro-Union people in the south become such vehement Confederates, and how did northerners who were initially comfortable with slavery come to decide that the war SHOULD end slavery after all?
Ayers does a really nice job tying all these people together, and it seems all the more impressive if you go to the valley of the shadow project website and read some of the primary sources yourself. This project was set up online in conjunction with this book, and you can read a ton of these sources on the website, as they have been digitized. Ayers had a lot of material to work with, but he keeps the narrative humming and all the gears spinning. I would recommend this to people who want to know more about the Civil War but don't know what to read because there are so many books about every aspect of the war by amateur historians, and a lot of them (not all, but a lot) are not very good. This is a good one.
Ayers does a really nice job tying all these people together, and it seems all the more impressive if you go to the valley of the shadow project website and read some of the primary sources yourself. This project was set up online in conjunction with this book, and you can read a ton of these sources on the website, as they have been digitized. Ayers had a lot of material to work with, but he keeps the narrative humming and all the gears spinning. I would recommend this to people who want to know more about the Civil War but don't know what to read because there are so many books about every aspect of the war by amateur historians, and a lot of them (not all, but a lot) are not very good. This is a good one.
August 30, 2016
In his book "In the Presence of Mine Enemies", Edward Ayers takes two typical counties during the Civil War, one from the South and one from the North, and compares and contrasts them. In the early 90's, Ayers started the "Valley of the Shadow" project. After choosing two counties linked by the Shenandoah Valley, Franklin to the north of the Mason-Dixon line and Augusta to the south, Ayers obtained relevant documents from both counties during the Civil War period, transcribed them with the help of an army of UVA students, and put them all on the internet. The project alone is remarkable, and has become a valuable online resource for the war, but Ayers went a step further. He dug through the collection that he himself created and used selected resources to write a history that compares and contrasts the counties. His results in some cases are typical and fit the stereotypes for each side, but they are simply astonishing in others. What is most noticeable in the end is that the two counties weren't all that different at the start of the war, and both became almost completely devoted to the side they were fighting for.
Ayers has written a book that successfully uses micro-history to tell the reader about individual people and events while maintaining the wider context and relevance to the Civil War period as a whole. With "In the Presence of Mine Enemies" Ayers has made a valuable and lasting contribution to Civil War scholarship.
Ayers has written a book that successfully uses micro-history to tell the reader about individual people and events while maintaining the wider context and relevance to the Civil War period as a whole. With "In the Presence of Mine Enemies" Ayers has made a valuable and lasting contribution to Civil War scholarship.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews