What do you think?
Rate this book
The Militant South, 1800-1861
In The Militant South, 1800-1861, John Hope Franklin identifies the factors and causes of the South's festering propensity for aggression that contributed to the outbreak of the Civil War in 1861.
Franklin asserts that the South was dominated by militant white men who resorted to violence in the face of social, personal, or political conflict. Fueled by their defense of slavery and a persistent desire to keep the North out of their affairs, Southerners adopted a vicious bellicosity that intensified as war drew nearer.
Drawing from Southern newspapers, government archives, memoirs, letters, and firsthand accounts, Franklin masterfully details the sources and consequences of antebellum aggression in the South. First published in 1956, this classic volume is an enduring and impeccably researched contribution to Southern history. This paperback edition features a new preface in which the author discusses controversial responses to the book.
Franklin asserts that the South was dominated by militant white men who resorted to violence in the face of social, personal, or political conflict. Fueled by their defense of slavery and a persistent desire to keep the North out of their affairs, Southerners adopted a vicious bellicosity that intensified as war drew nearer.
Drawing from Southern newspapers, government archives, memoirs, letters, and firsthand accounts, Franklin masterfully details the sources and consequences of antebellum aggression in the South. First published in 1956, this classic volume is an enduring and impeccably researched contribution to Southern history. This paperback edition features a new preface in which the author discusses controversial responses to the book.
336 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1956
4 people are currently reading
260 people want to read
About the author
John Hope Franklin
131 books76 followersJohn Hope Franklin, Ph.D. (History, Harvard University, 1941; M.A., History, Harvard U., 1936; B.A., Fisk University, 1935), was the James B. Duke Professor Emeritus of History at Duke University. He also had served as President of Phi Beta Kappa, the Organization of American Historians, the American Historical Association, and the Southern Historical Association.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
June 19, 2022
The Militant South is an examination of the social and cultural traits of the antebellum South. It is a study on why these traits made The Civil War possible, if not inevitable. A unique book, it’s a thoughtful and probing examination of a bellicose and militant culture nearly as peculiar as the South's peculiar institution of slavery.
Franklin examines the roots of this militant culture, from the needs arising from existing along a wild frontier and clashes with natives, to the fact that civil government was rarely very developed there. Individuals had to learn to be sufficient to defend themselves in government’s absence. He examines in some depth how the presence of slavery encouraged this militancy, providing a source of constant fear (slave revolts), and conditioning the habit of being absolute master of others into the slave-holding class from their cradles onward. He also explores thoroughly the code of personal honor that was unique to the South, and the dueling and deadly fights that grew from that code.
One of the most rewarding sections of Franklin's work is his chapter on filibusters. These adventurers provided an outlet for the martial feelings of the South while attempting to create a Southern empire where the values and institutions of the South could expand into a greater sphere. The small, private wars launched by filibusters against Mexico, Cuba, and Nicaragua, financed by those hoping to expand the South's interests are a fascinating and often neglected part of our history.
Franklin is a skillfull writer, and his book is readable as well as informative. In a few chapters, such as the one in which he examines the military schools of the South, his writing becomes repetitive simply from the large number of examples that he gives that are all so similar. But aside from that, his writing is captivating. His book ends as abruptly as the War began.
Franklin’s book is an excellent precursor to Civil War histories, examining the culture that that spawned this greatest of national tragedies. It presents important pieces of the large, complicated, and lethal puzzle that launched the deadliest war in the nation's history.
Franklin examines the roots of this militant culture, from the needs arising from existing along a wild frontier and clashes with natives, to the fact that civil government was rarely very developed there. Individuals had to learn to be sufficient to defend themselves in government’s absence. He examines in some depth how the presence of slavery encouraged this militancy, providing a source of constant fear (slave revolts), and conditioning the habit of being absolute master of others into the slave-holding class from their cradles onward. He also explores thoroughly the code of personal honor that was unique to the South, and the dueling and deadly fights that grew from that code.
One of the most rewarding sections of Franklin's work is his chapter on filibusters. These adventurers provided an outlet for the martial feelings of the South while attempting to create a Southern empire where the values and institutions of the South could expand into a greater sphere. The small, private wars launched by filibusters against Mexico, Cuba, and Nicaragua, financed by those hoping to expand the South's interests are a fascinating and often neglected part of our history.
Franklin is a skillfull writer, and his book is readable as well as informative. In a few chapters, such as the one in which he examines the military schools of the South, his writing becomes repetitive simply from the large number of examples that he gives that are all so similar. But aside from that, his writing is captivating. His book ends as abruptly as the War began.
Franklin’s book is an excellent precursor to Civil War histories, examining the culture that that spawned this greatest of national tragedies. It presents important pieces of the large, complicated, and lethal puzzle that launched the deadliest war in the nation's history.
October 5, 2019
Having been impressed by the autobiography of John Hope Franklin, I thought I'd read some of his professional work. This book is one that he had in mind to write for a long time, finally completing it late in life.
It is fair to generalize about groups of people based on behavior, in the present day or historically. The Puritans of New England, for example, were notably rigid and intolerant. Americans from the Northeast today are thought to be abrupt, rather humorless and reticent, New York City's residents have a reputation for rudeness. From my own experience I've found that people who live in the southwestern U.S. are remarkably relaxed and free of the tension that I feel radiating from Midwesterners. When I moved from Arizona to Chicago, I was struck by the depressed looks on the faces of people seen on the street.
Characterization can be positive or negative. The danger is in attributing these to specific individuals without giving those individuals a chance to show who they are personally before condemning or elevating them on generalizations even if those generalizations are accurate for a group.
Franklin seeks to establish that the antebellum South contained a militancy setting it apart from the rest of the country and he does so through careful examination of historical documentation from many sources. Few pages lack a footnote. He quotes directly from leading Southerners, from Southern newspaper stories, from foreign visitors remarking on their experience in the South, and gives statistics kept in state records, to name just a few sources.
Using chapters to go into detail, he covers the popularity of dueling (though illegal), the common practice of carrying a knife, a tendency of individuals to show prickly independence, the popularity of firearms and mastery of same in target shooting contests, a love of volunteer military groups (each creatively uniformed), a desire for military ranks given by popular acclaim rather than official advancement and routine fighting between individuals to settle the most insignificant issues. I thought of the kindly Colonel Sanders of Kentucky Fried Chicken fame as I read of how honorary titles were so sought after that it seemed almost anyone who made anything of himself was known as a colonel, a major or a captain and expected to be so addressed.
Emotion and a keenly held sense of honor were always ready for combustion. Plantation owners were an elite, the law on their lands that did not accept correction by anyone. Slights among average citizens resulted in fights with knives or fists that frequently featured part of an ear or nose bitten off or an eye gouged out. Not new to me, in other histories I have read of this being called by the people of the time as the "rough and tumble." Dueling was so common in New Orleans that there was a specified location just outside the city known as The Oaks where duels were regularly staged. Supporting this atmosphere, the works of Sir Walter Scott, filled with chivalry and the apotheosis of honor were wildly popular with Southern readers.
The South trailed the rest of the country badly in education, book learning being ridiculed in favor of practical knowledge of self defense and tool use including arms. 20% of the population of the southern states was illiterate when the the figure for the northeast was .5% and for the mid Atlantic, 3%. Politicians played to this. See if the following excerpt doesn't put you in mind of current day speeches directed to "the base" of Donald Trump solidly represented in the modern South. White nationalism is after all what the Confederacy was all about.
The height of oratory was reached during the political canvas. The strongest appeal to the emotions were regarded as the most effective; and the real issues were subordinated to those matters that could arouse the greatest popular enthusiasm. Few veterans could resist the basest emotions of their ignorant listeners. Even enlightened men like (John C.) Calhoun encouraged a kind of intolerance that could easily lead to violence in connection with well known delicate questions involving the rights and honor of the South.
As Franklin points out, there was reason for white Southerners to be fearful, originally of Native-Americans and then of the large slave population that from time to time rose up in rebellions that were quickly put down with force. John Brown's 1859 raid at Harper's Ferry resulted in a move by the Southern states to increase their stock of arms. Remarkably, as the threat of civil war increased, Southern representatives in Washington were successful in getting federal arms (mostly rifles) sent to the South.
The formal military was respected, in particular the United States Military Academy at West Point. Several of the Southern states started their own academies modeled on West Point; South Carolina had three of them.
As the civil war drew closer, the militancy of the South became more blatant. It was widely assumed that superiority in shooting skill and martial spirit would make quick work of any attack from the North. Boasting and taunting became common just as today we hear individuals telling the government, "if you want my gun, come and get it!"
It wasn't just the way of life in the South that became non-negotiable, it was the expansion of slavery, an institution said to be a positive good for master and slave alike, an advance of civilization. The populace was eager for a fight but in the event the inability to accept orders from anyone led to disarray between the Southern states as war raged. Individualism taken to the extreme makes society impossible. We face that today.
This is a book that should be more widely read, instead it is, I'm afraid, a forgotten item of the University of Illinois Press. As with any good history, John Hope Franklin has provided us an education on a topic that remains pertinent today.
It is fair to generalize about groups of people based on behavior, in the present day or historically. The Puritans of New England, for example, were notably rigid and intolerant. Americans from the Northeast today are thought to be abrupt, rather humorless and reticent, New York City's residents have a reputation for rudeness. From my own experience I've found that people who live in the southwestern U.S. are remarkably relaxed and free of the tension that I feel radiating from Midwesterners. When I moved from Arizona to Chicago, I was struck by the depressed looks on the faces of people seen on the street.
Characterization can be positive or negative. The danger is in attributing these to specific individuals without giving those individuals a chance to show who they are personally before condemning or elevating them on generalizations even if those generalizations are accurate for a group.
Franklin seeks to establish that the antebellum South contained a militancy setting it apart from the rest of the country and he does so through careful examination of historical documentation from many sources. Few pages lack a footnote. He quotes directly from leading Southerners, from Southern newspaper stories, from foreign visitors remarking on their experience in the South, and gives statistics kept in state records, to name just a few sources.
Using chapters to go into detail, he covers the popularity of dueling (though illegal), the common practice of carrying a knife, a tendency of individuals to show prickly independence, the popularity of firearms and mastery of same in target shooting contests, a love of volunteer military groups (each creatively uniformed), a desire for military ranks given by popular acclaim rather than official advancement and routine fighting between individuals to settle the most insignificant issues. I thought of the kindly Colonel Sanders of Kentucky Fried Chicken fame as I read of how honorary titles were so sought after that it seemed almost anyone who made anything of himself was known as a colonel, a major or a captain and expected to be so addressed.
Emotion and a keenly held sense of honor were always ready for combustion. Plantation owners were an elite, the law on their lands that did not accept correction by anyone. Slights among average citizens resulted in fights with knives or fists that frequently featured part of an ear or nose bitten off or an eye gouged out. Not new to me, in other histories I have read of this being called by the people of the time as the "rough and tumble." Dueling was so common in New Orleans that there was a specified location just outside the city known as The Oaks where duels were regularly staged. Supporting this atmosphere, the works of Sir Walter Scott, filled with chivalry and the apotheosis of honor were wildly popular with Southern readers.
The South trailed the rest of the country badly in education, book learning being ridiculed in favor of practical knowledge of self defense and tool use including arms. 20% of the population of the southern states was illiterate when the the figure for the northeast was .5% and for the mid Atlantic, 3%. Politicians played to this. See if the following excerpt doesn't put you in mind of current day speeches directed to "the base" of Donald Trump solidly represented in the modern South. White nationalism is after all what the Confederacy was all about.
The height of oratory was reached during the political canvas. The strongest appeal to the emotions were regarded as the most effective; and the real issues were subordinated to those matters that could arouse the greatest popular enthusiasm. Few veterans could resist the basest emotions of their ignorant listeners. Even enlightened men like (John C.) Calhoun encouraged a kind of intolerance that could easily lead to violence in connection with well known delicate questions involving the rights and honor of the South.
As Franklin points out, there was reason for white Southerners to be fearful, originally of Native-Americans and then of the large slave population that from time to time rose up in rebellions that were quickly put down with force. John Brown's 1859 raid at Harper's Ferry resulted in a move by the Southern states to increase their stock of arms. Remarkably, as the threat of civil war increased, Southern representatives in Washington were successful in getting federal arms (mostly rifles) sent to the South.
The formal military was respected, in particular the United States Military Academy at West Point. Several of the Southern states started their own academies modeled on West Point; South Carolina had three of them.
As the civil war drew closer, the militancy of the South became more blatant. It was widely assumed that superiority in shooting skill and martial spirit would make quick work of any attack from the North. Boasting and taunting became common just as today we hear individuals telling the government, "if you want my gun, come and get it!"
It wasn't just the way of life in the South that became non-negotiable, it was the expansion of slavery, an institution said to be a positive good for master and slave alike, an advance of civilization. The populace was eager for a fight but in the event the inability to accept orders from anyone led to disarray between the Southern states as war raged. Individualism taken to the extreme makes society impossible. We face that today.
This is a book that should be more widely read, instead it is, I'm afraid, a forgotten item of the University of Illinois Press. As with any good history, John Hope Franklin has provided us an education on a topic that remains pertinent today.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews