The American Civil War discussion

New guy trying to rekindle some Civil War discussion within this group. Very surprised to not find several lively discussions underway; especially with all the parallels between conditions today & then. Tend to read more about 'off the battlefield' issues and as I dig deeper I find the information about polarized Congresses & cabinet members battling with Presidents, impeachment, economics, foreign policies, race relations, voter inequities, states rights etc. fascinating and very pertinent to today!

I'll hold off on diving into any specific issue in hopes that I'll inspire someone to get a ball rolling - look forward to sharing some thoughts :)

One of my favorite off the battlefield books is Rehearsal for Reconstruction: the Port Royal Experiment (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...). The Union captured several islands off the coast of South Carolina early in the war. The whites skedaddled to the mainland, leaving their slaves behind. These slaves were given education, given land, and often worked together to run plantations, proving to the North their capacity to take care of themselves if given the chance. Sadly, Andrew Johnson rescinded Sherman's promise of 40 acres and a mule, so after Reconstruction they got to descend into Jim Crow hell with the rest of the African Americans in the South.

Another must read off the battlefield book is Andersonville A Story of Rebel Military Prisons (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...).

This is probably the most difficult book I ever read. But also one of the best, though of course biased because it was written by someone who was imprisoned there, one of the first to arrive there. It's full of interesting stories, amazing facts one has never heard of (e.g., Georgia troops guarding them were often quite humane, but when Alabamans took over at some point, they shot prisoners more or less for sport.) The Confederate prison in Florence, South Carolina was even worse. While we often hear that the guard got little more than the prisoners to eat, at the trial of Captain Wirtz, the scapegoat who was the only Confederate executed after the war (who richly deserved it), dozens of nearby neighbors testified that there was plenty of food available in that part of Georgia at that time. Sherman also found plenty in the rest of the state.

We often hear that a relatively low percentage of the 35,000 men imprisoned there died, but that's because many were there only a short time. Of the 63 members of the author's brigade who entered Andersonville as it was opened, only 13 survived. Major causes of death were scurvy (easily avoided with inexpensive food sources of vitamin C, which both armies were aware of) and exposure. Most men had to sleep on the ground, even in winter in freezing weather, while the camp was in a literal wilderness area surrounded by forest which they were not allowed to use to build huts or build reasonable fires for cooking their daily ration of less than one pint of poorly ground corn meal.

The general in charge, John H. Winder, bragged, "I am killing off more Yankees than twenty regiments in Lee's army." On July 27, 1864, in his order No. 13, he ordered that if Federal troops came within 7 miles of Andersonville, the guards were to "open upon the Stockade with grapeshot [using the numerous cannons that were trained on the prisoners] without reference to the situation beyond these lines of defense." The leaders in the South knew very well what was going on.

My new Civil War Era novel, "I Jonathan, A Charleston Tale of the Rebellion." It's this Southern boy's exploration of how a Christian society that considered itself virtuous could fight and kill to keep people in bondage.

A stranger from Boston is marooned in Charleston just as the Civil War begins. His relationships with working men and women, slaves, merchants, planters, spies, inventors, soldiers, sweethearts and musicians tell the story of a dynamic culture undergoing its greatest challenge.

Jonathan's adventures include witnessing the bombardment of Fort Sumter, the last great Charleston horse race, the Great Charleston Fire of 1861, the Battle of Secessionville and visits to the North Carolina mountain homes of wealthy Low Country planters. He even has an encounter with a Voo-Doo conjure man. He makes a run through the Federal Blockade and visits the raucous boomtowns of Nassau and Wilmington. The author describes battles of ironclads and monitors, and the Battle of Battery Wagner (made famous in the movie "Glory"). Jonathan’s story documents the hopes and struggles of a young man making a new life in a strange land in times of war and change.

The book has no graphic sex scenes and contains some middling graphic battlefield scenes, nothing extreme.

I hope you give it a try, and like it. -GWB Scott

Ted wrote: "One of my favorite off the battlefield books is Rehearsal for Reconstruction: the Port Royal Experiment (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...). The Union captured..."

Sounds like a good one Ted and right up my current alley which is immersing myself in reading about Further Destruction (aka Reconstruction) .. and where it all went so terribly wrong :(

INCREDIBLY poor planning, NO separation of church & state & a festering divisiveness that perpetuated the war sentiments aside; '40 acres & a mule' was a pipedream that had no practical means of being implemented and/or administered (tho may have been a much better solution than the varied [forced] efforts from numerous factions that had at best limited success). I'd also add that it appears Andrew Johnson made Herculean efforts to try and bring some semblance of order and justice to the mess [and I would like to read more about him].

That being said, your book seems like an excellent study in perhaps what could've been many times over. My reading continues to be intertwined with 'education' - the countless resources thrown at it, and the checkerboard (at best) success it resulted in. And while there were numerous black colleges established that are still flourishing today; it seems in general that the traditional 'subjects' of secondary education (military, religious & classical) had little practical application resulting in waning interest .. not unlike today (why we're not taught civics & govt, personal finance & algebra EVERY year from the 7th grade on is beyond me). As such, I would be very interested in how the community/ies in your book handled education ('curriculums') and the administration of recurring tasks.

Thanks for the suggestion - please feel free to comment on my comment :)

George wrote: "My new Civil War Era novel, "I Jonathan, A Charleston Tale of the Rebellion." It's this Southern boy's exploration of how a Christian society that considered itself virtuous could fight and kill to..."

Congrats George! As a fledging writer I know what a monumental task it is to write a novel .. and what a labor of love it is to be immersed in the telling of a story :)

In general, I like the idea of taking a whole lot of 'factual' occurrences (i.e. history) and adding several dashes of [what if] imagination to give that history a vitality that can better be related to ...

I further like your choice of Charleston as the setting as this was certainly one of the most 'involved' locations from pre-war to post-war and being a coastal city should provide ample opportunities to explore the many areas mentioned in your book's description ...

And bully for you throwing in some romance - always find it a fun challenge to take the female perspective (and supply reason & dialogue :)

Will probably be a bit til I get to reading and might want to try a roadtrip to Charleston b4 and/or after I do (long day trip :)

I'd also be curious if you were working on another book? I'd be glad to read a chapter if you'd need (I have some editing experience)

Congrats again - hope the book does well!

Haven't read a lot about Johnson. It would be interesting if anyone knows why he changed so much from being strongly oriented toward punishing the south to wanting to pretty much ignore what they did. There is some interesting detail in the book about the volunteers who came from the North to educate the former slaves in the SC Islands. A lot more about how well they did when given a chance to take care of themselves. It's a major theme in American history: the right blaming African Americans and complaining about their common need of "welfare" while refusing to give them what they need (and the upper and middle classes get from birth) to avoid having to go on welfare. The 40 acres and a mule was given to them from land abandoned and taken by the Union during the war as contraband.

The government easily could have compensated these and other landowners at a low cost compared to what they were spending on the war. But Johnson chose instead to rip it away from the former slaves. Most were forced into unfair, slave-like shareholder arrangements so horrific that the book "A Plague of Corn" documents that huge numbers of them suffered from the nutritional deficiency disease pellagra.

I am glad to see some recent discussion. Hope to see books etc.

Ted wrote: "Another must read off the battlefield book is Andersonville A Story of Rebel Military Prisons (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...).

This ..."

Thank you for this recommendation. I purchased it tonight and hope to get started on it soon.

I thought your comment about it being bias was interesting. They usually call that first hand account :-)

You'll find it pretty shattering. We'll never know exactly how much of the abuse was intentional but after reading it, I'm sure that much of it was avoidable.

Just finished Catton’s trilogy for Army of the Potomac - the last book was just downright depressing.

Richard wrote: "Just finished Catton’s trilogy for Army of the Potomac - the last book was just downright depressing."

Depressing in what respect?

Book #63 - finished the Trilogy. This book made me sad, the effects of total war, the futility of massed rifle attacks. So many lessons to learn that were not and led to the terrible death toll of World War 1 - THIS is where trench warfare began, not WW1. And again, the terrible, terrible cost of total civil war. Still a fantastic read - I wrote a paper about this trilogy/book this weekend, and I stated that if all academic histories were this approachable I think a lot more people would read history books!

(That’s what I wrote up on Facebook)

Richard wrote: "Book #63 - finished the Trilogy. This book made me sad, the effects of total war, the futility of massed rifle attacks. So many lessons to learn that were not and led to the terrible death toll of ..."

Congrats Richard - noble effort! (that trilogy still sets on my bookshelf untouched :) As the 'off the battlefield guy' (and a place to go for less bloodshed and deeper depression btw); I'd say you captured two extremely important points - the "futility" [of war] and 'lessons NOT learned' - sad indeed for the needless loss of so much youth :( War must be buried deep in our dna as it seems to be one of the few constants that has been with man since his inception.

I like your thought about making history more accessible academically - especially at an early age. History was probably my least favorite subject in school because it was presented so lifeless and boring. With technologies available today there s/b no excuse for not being able to make history interesting and relevant for students ...

And imo, wouldn't be the worse idea to teach the ACW every year through high school - it's social, political & economic tentacles (i.e. lessons) ring as true today as they did back then!

I've recently finished The Angry Scar (subtitled The Story of Reconstruction) by Hodding Carter (C)1959 .. and would be curious to know if anyone else has read?

I thought it was an excellent read that covered every aspect of reconstruction in great detail with good objectivity (most issues presented from multiple perspectives!) including a pre-war/wartime setup and post-reconstruction conditions and forward thoughts. If guilty of anything, it is TMI as the variety of scenarios/locations and cast of characters can be overwhelming.

Obviously impossible to summarize reconstruction in 25 words or less, but I'll try - A group of 'Radical Republicans' gained control of congress from 1864-1876 and were so vindictive, corrupt and self-motivated [with little or no authority to check them] that they almost completely overrode the countless good intentions of many so as to leave the nation in many ways worse off and more divided than they were at any point pre or during war :(

I'll hold off on further commentary to see if anyone wants to join in, but would like to discuss some of the many issues here in detail. Also, this book is well referenced and has a 10 page bibliography listing hundreds of sources (other reading temptations :)

I too have the Bruce Catton & Battle Cry of Freedom sitting on my TBR.

The Angry Scar sounds interesting. I, too, like to read of reconstruction and off battlefield subjects. However, I am getting into Gettysburg a lot (love to read about Joshua Chamberlain.)

Magooz, as an aside, I am also an aspiring writer.

Ted wrote: "Haven't read a lot about Johnson. It would be interesting if anyone knows why he changed so much from being strongly oriented toward punishing the south to wanting to pretty much ignore what they d..."

Hi Ted! .. Sorry, missed this interesting post from you :( You're going to have me walking a few tightropes here, but I hope that's what lively discussions entail ...

My knowledge of AJ is still somewhat limited, but I will say he was from TN (which was effectively 1/2 union & 1/2 confederacy during and arguably after the war), was the only southern senator to remain in the union, was anti-slavery and pro-Lincoln (did make him VP :) .. and had many Lincolnesque plans for reconstruction that got shot to pieces by Radical Republicans culminating in a ridiculous attempt to impeach him ...

Ok, now the fun issues .. which I will tend to fall back on my observations of incredibly poor planning. I really don't understand what miracle somebody thought was going to occur by waving a magic wand and declaring 3 million + unprepared people free ...

As such, a few of the unfortunate circumstances you mention were the inevitable results. A 'welfare state' of some degree had to exist when dealing with people with no support or property; tho the misdirection & corruption of funds turned things from a 'hand up' to a 'hand out' situation that still causes issues today :( Sharecropping actually seems a fairly logical interim step [to moving former slaves to eventual property owners], but had the misfortune of being somewhat a forced implementation in a not overly receptive environment that probably was done in a 1000 ways from good to bad ...

Despite the injustices, I am generally hesitant to give something to somebody they haven't earned AND are not prepared to deal with! I'll buy the argument that slaves had toiled for generations with almost no rewards; but somehow I feel invaluable lessons of appreciation and being able to connect specific efforts with specific results got very lost during this time :(

Again, I can't emphasize enough how much I feel good planning by a united government could've gone a long way towards remedying situations that were only made worse ...

A good example of such is your point I totally agree with regarding compensation. Principles aside, you weren't going to confiscate property and take $2 billion dollars of property (slaves) from people with no compensation and not expect a hornet's nest as a result. And yes, it seems the government could've handled this aspect much more [cost] effectively and potentially avoided many problems :(

Look forward to further discussions!

A lot of things to respond to and it is late:

1. "I can't emphasize how much I feel good planning by a united government"... if there has been a united government we might have delayed a Civil War.

2. "I am generally hesitant to give something to somebody they haven't earned...." meanwhile those slave owners got rich by watching their slaves from the comfort of their plantation. Meanwhile, slaves had no meaningful rights. They could be beat, raped, lynched, or forceably separated from their family at the whim of their owner.

3) There were proposals for compensating slave owners. Lincoln made at least two proposals to do just that---but the South of went to war before Lincoln had a chance. Remember, at the end of the 1860 election, Confederate agents were in NY pushing for the state to vote for lincoln over Douglas. They wanted secession---and Buchanan let them leave.

3) Sharecropping might be an idea... but it was really slavery but worse. The sharecropper couldn't move, they were bound to the plantation. They were paid by their former master who controlled the books. you had to borrow from your master land repay at the end. if you were black, you couldn't own a gun to protect yourself and if you got to vote it was the exception.

4) A little concerned that you are citing a book written during the height of the Civil Rights era that appears to blame the Radical Republicans. They weren't blameless, but they weren't the only problem....

as for AJ.... Johnson was the only senator from a southern states who didn't leave the Senate during the war. He was rewarded with being made interim governor of TN.

He was a Democrat and a Southerner Lincoln thought it would be good to have him on the ballot. he had nevrr mrt Lincoln...

there is so much to say about him but I can't stay awake...

I agree with Porter. I'll bet virtually all American schools teach something from the Lost Cause version of Reconstruction. They learn how the southern whites were exploited by carpetbaggers. They may learn about the indignities they suffered under military occupation.

But do they learn about the volunteers who went south to teach literacy to an entire race forbidden to learn to read? About the fact that for about a decade blacks in America actually felt safe to vote (at levels never possible for them to this day) and elected the best educated and wisest freemen among them in most cases? While southern whites appealed to their northern "brethren" (few of whom had even met a black person) to save them from this rule by monkeys (or a worse term)?

As we saw on January 6, a sizable proportion of the US population can still be manipulated into supporting racist authoritarianism--just like happened in 1860-1. Honestly facing up to realities of what went on then and now is surely one step in finding a way out for a country whose way of life is threatened now a second time.

I read Catton's Army of the Potomac trilogy years ago and recently purchased them (I think my mother must have donated my father's set after his death) but haven't read them again yet. I also have the Centennial trilogy, which I started some time ago. I may have read them years ago, too. My father was a big fan of Catton.

Don't recall if I mentioned this before but received Heather Cox Richardson's West from Appomattox: The Reconstruction of America after the Civil War but haven't started it yet. She is fascinating to read on Facebook, both her historical lectures and commentary on today.

I looked up Hodding Carter's "Angry Scar."

Carter was a progressive journalist in the 30s/40s. He won a Pulitzer Prize for his coverage of he japanese Internment in the 40s and was widely respected for his coverage of Civil Rights in the 30s and 40s.

The book was part of a series of books, which included Bruce Canton, so was fairly well received.

That being said, Carter has been criticized a change in his views and vehement defense of the South after the Brown decision. He was proud to be a Southerner.

I have no doubt that this book is a good book and worth reading---but it needs to be read in historical context.

In the 1950s/60s the country was in the midst of the Civil Rights movement. Much of the scholarship from this era is tainted..

I am not going to pretend that scholarship today is without its faults, but you have to recognize when it was written and under what circumstances.

Over the past 60 years, we have learned a lot. We have a better understanding of what happened. We also have had minority academics chime in on the subject.

To claim write "A group of 'Radical Republicans' gained control of congress from 1864-1876 and were so vindictive, corrupt and self-motivated [with little or no authority to check them] that they almost completely overrode the countless good intentions " is literally so backwards thinking that it cannot go unchallenged.

Sorry, it cannot.

My father, originally from Baltimore, told of reading/there being a number of "Southern" histories when he was growing up - '20s-30s. They disappeared somewhere along the way. He wanted to see what they said vs. what he now knew to be the true history.

Burke Davis is another historian with a grain of salt and remember that he's a Southerner and of a certain generation.

Carter was a reporter writing about something that interested him and may have had an axe to grind. Maybe his family was wiped out financially by the combination of the Civil War and Reconstruction. Who knows what his story was.

James I. Robertson Jr. is also a Southerner but thus far I haven't felt the need to take that into account when reading his books.

Porter wrote: "I looked up Hodding Carter's "Angry Scar."

Carter was a progressive journalist in the 30s/40s. He won a Pulitzer Prize for his coverage of he japanese Internment in the 40s and was widely respecte..."

Porter, first off let me say how glad I am you're willing to back up your points with some homework & substance - I will try and do likewise! I'm even gladder that you categorize our discussion as a 'challenge' :) Keep in mind I titled the thread 155 Years Later - my [reading] quest, if you will, is an ongoing journey to discover 'What Happened' .. and why we may be on the verge of repeating horrible mistakes. An admitted newbie in my [reconstruction] readings, I find your, and others, comments invaluable in helping formulate understandings!

Thx for the info on H.C. - I had no idea who he was (presumed a southerner) & the book has no dust jacket or mini-bio. I'm a little troubled in your implication that what sounds like a well-respected journalist [with a good civil rights track record] could NOT have written an objective narrative on reconstruction (tho you have me curious as to reasons for & results of "a change in his attitudes" . hmmm) ...

Let me digress for a min & fess up to being a 65 yr old white guy. I've lived half my life in the north & half in the south . half in the city, half in the country . half financially well off, half at the poverty level. I'd say I had well above average knowledge of both american & world history. And last, but not least, I pride myself on my objectivity - I most certainly can tell when I'm being presented a biased viewpoint . and would likely discontinue reading (as I do with almost every news article today :(

Sorry for long winded, blustery defense of my ability to appreciate 'the context' from which a book was written (or a movie made for that matter) - and I will strongly agree it is very important in understanding what you're reading/viewing!

One last thing for this post. Please be careful to criticize a book you haven't read. Again, this book discusses countless issues in a thorough, multi-sided presentation that includes 100s of first hand, eyewitness accounts with exact quotes from people from all walks of life (including many black slaves, politicians & community leaders). You might be surprised to find just how objective it was :)

Ok, will save the defense/challenge of my reconstruction quote (which I don't want to change a single word of on reread btb) when replying to your 1, 2, 3, 4 post .. after I catch my breath :)

Hope to keep the good discussion going - exactly what I'd hoped for when starting the thread!

Porter wrote: "I looked up Hodding Carter's "Angry Scar."

Carter was a progressive journalist in the 30s/40s. He won a Pulitzer Prize for his coverage of he japanese Internment in the 40s and was widely respecte..."

One more thing re the book/author. I NEVER felt like he was trying to have me take any side - not regional, not racial, not political or otherwise. I felt the author's well-documented, well-presented intent was [always] to point out what a mess this period disintegrated into . and that there was plenty of blame to go around! The very apropos title states emphatically that this was a tremendous blemish on our country. This was a result of horrible leadership that begat fractions that begat fractions that begat strange bedfellows that resulted in more regression than progress [imo] - conditions that have an eerie resonance to today :(

Porter wrote: "A lot of things to respond to and it is late:

1. "I can't emphasize how much I feel good planning by a united government"... if there has been a united government we might have delayed a Civil War..."

Ok, back from a long dog walk & ready to proceed .. let's play tennis with these 4 guys for awhile :)

1) Apples & oranges .. the pre-war & war govts were their own UNCOMPROMISING, tangled webs that are their own vast topics for discussion (and your point is taken :) .. I am strictly talking about the post-war govts that imo/reading appear to be much worse & incompetent than any pre/war govts ?

2) Interesting where you sawed my quote off at - hopefully you didn't miss my point. And btw, I in NO WAY condone slavery under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES at any time - just the idea sickens me! Amongst many things, I would've been all for compensating former slaves (a stimulus check maybe :) to get them on a financial footing. My point is that it's an unfortunate [human nature] side effect to not fully appreciate something being 'givin' to you (it would be the rare person indeed that would bother to understand the machinations behind govt 'handouts'). In the broader context, I feel that terrible/corrupt administration [at EVERY govt level] coupled with unrealistic expectations (40 acres & a mule) set a tone that negated any practical solutions to a much needed smooth transition ??

3) 2 different points :) I'd have to refresh on Lincoln's pre-war compensation proposals, but I'd propose by that point we were effectively 2 different countries and that war was inevitable .. and didn't seem like too many southerners would listen to Abe about much of anything :( Lincoln had some fairly radical ideas on dealing with the freed slaves imo .. NY[city], the national melting pot then as it remains today is it's own interesting entity. The great diversity of people allowed for many varying groups to get well established there that had national influence . and some regrettable consequences .. to say nothing of it's 2 poor hopeless post-war presidential candidates ??

4) I proffered that sharecropping would've been implemented in thousands of ways. It seems large plantation owners were a big minority . and certainly not my 1st choice for share-cropping :) It seems as you worked your way from small plantations to individual farms that the slave relationships were much less harsh and needfully more co-dependent . and potentially conducive to the intent of share-cropping .. I do believe slaves were fairly free to move - tho options were limited thru lack of life experience and/or guidance from govt. Blacks couldn't/didn't vote - what? The 15th amendment (and much of the intent of the 14th)? My reading would say that the wooing of the uninformed black vote was a major issue that begat a continual disenfranchising & redistricting nightmare :(

Hey, neither of us can count to 4 :) .. Good news for you is I'm gettin tired again. (5) I've discussed book/author in another post, but I stand by my 'literally backwards thinking' :) The Radical Republicans were RUNNING THE SHOW from 1865-1876 - as such, they were responsible for the results. I can find almost nothing - from passing legislation to making presidents ineffective, to implementing military govts to installing carpetbaggers to consorting with railroad barons to fixing elections at every level to thwarting education attempts to on & on & on .. that does not point fairly directly back to them! They talked a good game about helping freed slaves [and others], but in reality they used them when convenient for selfish purposes. Revenge & rape were their primary motivations, not reconstruction :(

Ok, talked out for now .. hopefully given you a bit to chew on. Please advise where I'm going astray :)

Jan C wrote: "My father, originally from Baltimore, told of reading/there being a number of "Southern" histories when he was growing up - '20s-30s. They disappeared somewhere along the way. He wanted to see what..."

Hi Jan - welcome to our lively group .. ashame your father couldn't join in [and MIGHTILY contribute!]. I appreciate your input and knowledge of Catton & Carter; especially adding some more on Carter's timeframe/s (gonna have to find out more on him now :)

The book by Heather Cox Richardson, by title alone, sounded especially interesting & apropos to our topic. I don't FB, but hopefully she'll meet me in YT land :) I'll look for the book - maybe we could coax MaryAnn to make it her/our group reading choice :)

Look forward to hearing more thoughts from you!

Ted wrote: "I agree with Porter. I'll bet virtually all American schools teach something from the Lost Cause version of Reconstruction. They learn how the southern whites were exploited by carpetbaggers. They ..."

Hi Ted - didn't forget you :) Hopefully you saw some of my replies to Porter shedding some more light on my thoughts & perspectives. Again, I very much want to be a neutral observer with lots of questions (I was an auditor for many years :)

We keep recircling the SUPER important issue of education . and you bring up a good question apparently neither of us know the answer to; tho I would very much like to. I helped an ex-GF's kids through middle & high school and don't recall there being ANYTHING ever taught to them about the civil war. Have a friend now whose grandson is a hs soph and he's never learned anything about the war. I'm not sure what, if anything is being taught . let alone an in-depth, multi-faceted approach I think we'd like to see. This is a good question!

As an aside, I would teach critical thinking early & often in school. Real learning is being open to all sources & being discriminating enough to determine the likely truisms amongst them :)

Oh boy ... let's hope that not beyond the wildest stretch of any imagination would that group of nutburgers at the capitol be considered "a sizable proportion of the US population" - yowzer. These were lunatic fringe anarchists that don't need any 'maneuvering', only opportunity :( As someone who has been involved with several protest movements over the years I find these anarchists are part of the territory. They only want to do what anarchists do - flaunt rules & authority of ANY kind; including those of the movement they're supposedly in. You warn them, you discourage them, you distance yourself from them - you pray they don't do the wrong thing at the wrong time to undo your peaceful progress!

I'm going to make an extra effort to get the book you recommended about the Port Royal Experiment .. conversations with you & others have made this book seem much more topical .. especially since my first inclination from your description was to wonder why this community didn't become a post-war 'model' to build from/upon?

Also, you mentioned the blacks "elected the best educated and wisest freemen". This again sounds like a good foundation for future progress - a few have been touched upon in my reading, but would like to know more about them and would appreciate any reading suggestions.

Look forward to hearing from you!

Hi Magooz,

I appreciate the response.

My concern isn't the book, it appears to be a fine source albeit dated. Carter appears to be an author who tried his best---but he wrote dring an era where parity in views was not the norm nor expected.

His views, while they may have tended towards the progressive side for the era, were still a product of an era wherein black voices were not heard nor respected. A period wherein racial tensions were at the highest and while Carter has a general favorable reputation, he is still a product of the Jim Crowe South.

My concern is that you seem to accept his view as authoritative and final.

Let me tell you about my personal journey. I majored in history (Asian)
, but probably hadn't read but a few history books in 20 years prior to the Charleston Shooting. After that shooting, I wanted to learn more about the Battle Flag and its history/meaning. This lead me to a strong interest in the Civil War. But it also forced me to learn about American History prior to the Civil War and then trace the history post Civil War.

Prior to the shooting, I didn't know much too much about the subject or the period. Now I know enough to hold my own.

My concern isn't your use of the source, but your reliance upon a source that is 60 years old. I could offer up a large number of other sources---that are more recent---bu I'm actually going to reccomend and older book!

Pick up W.E.B. DuBois book Black Reconstruction in America 1860-1880. This book is 85 years old, but many the ideas he wrote about in the 1930's have come to be accepted by general academia. The book will challenge the ideas that you seem to accept.

There are a number of other, more recent books, that I could recommend---but the Du Bois is both historic and informative.

The book is a major contribution by an early black scholar that is probably better regarded today than it was in the 30s.

I picked up Eric Foner's book on Reconstruction from the library, Thursday. Haven't looked thru it yet. I enjoyed some of his "free" courses on Coursera, I think.

Cox's book is on Kindle Unlimited so I got it today. We can read whatever the group wants, I was just hoping to get some interest up. I have no place to discuss the Civil War IRL. Reconstruction is a rough place to start, though. ;-)

One of the big surprises I had with Du Bois is that even though he wrote his books 80-100 years ago, they are very readable.

His and Teddy Roosevelt's writing styles are still accessible to the 21st century reader (not all books from the period age as well).

MaryAnn (EmilyD1037) wrote: "I picked up Eric Foner's book on Reconstruction from the library, Thursday. Haven't looked thru it yet. I enjoyed some of his "free" courses on Coursera, I think.

Cox's book is on Kindle Unlimited..."

Foner is considered by many to be one of the absolute authorities on the period... that being said, I'm not a huge fan of his writing style.

His book is the principle source for the PBS Documentary on the Reconstruction Era---which is a great watch.

Porter, to what Charleston shooting are you referring to ?

The 2015 Charleston Shooting wherein a young man went into Emanuel AME Church. Participated in a Bible Study with the congregation, and then murdered 9 in cold blood.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles...

Porter wrote: "The 2015 Charleston Shooting wherein a young man went into Emanuel AME Church. Participated in a Bible Study with the congregation, and then murdered 9 in cold blood.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki..."

And they forgave him, like the Christians that they are.

Jan C wrote: "And they forgave him, like the Christians that they are.."

Maybe the church did, but he'll spend the rest of his life behind bars.

The people did. The law didn't.

MaryAnn (EmilyD1037) wrote: "I picked up Eric Foner's book on Reconstruction from the library, Thursday. Haven't looked thru it yet. I enjoyed some of his "free" courses on Coursera, I think.

Cox's book is on Kindle Unlimited..."

Hi MaryAnn .. I'm trying to lead 2 [or more] horses to some reading water :) And while I'll agree it's a rough entry point; it seems more everyday to me the war was kind of boring compared to reconstruction;)

Got me thinkin about that Kindle thing - does it have a large print option (ol eyes ain't what they used to be :) ? Tho I do so love holding a book as I read :)

Porter wrote: "Hi Magooz,

I appreciate the response.

My concern isn't the book, it appears to be a fine source albeit dated. Carter appears to be an author who tried his best---but he wrote dring an era where ..."

Hi Porter .. perhaps we can have a discussion on Asian history some time - would be curious to see if I could 'hold my own' :)

Good news - I think you have found a great next step [for me]. I have often come across the name W.E.B. DuBois in my reading . and he has impressed me as potentially a competent & capable black leader/spokesman . seemingly not given his historical due. Sorry I haven't pursued further knowledge of him earlier, but since he's written a book about our subject at hand, it seems like an EXCELLENT opportunity to do so .. I will be attempting to acquire this week & VERY MUCH look forward to reading/discussing :)

Ok, hate to keep defending ol H.C. but I must .. especially since we're hovering near some danger zones. If a man can be judged by where & when he was we're in some trouble. Fwiw, HC dedicates an entire chapter of his book to Jim Crow - thoroughly describing it's origins & growth - and his distaste for it! Wiki tells me he was a crusader against intolerances & injustices for many many years, and among other things, had dinner with Bobby Kennedy the night before he was shot. His biggest critic's main issue was that he thought integration should be gradual. I'm gonna continue to look, but seems you might be bein a little harsh on a guy you might be able to learn to appreciate a little?

I do not take ANY historical source as authoritative . or the be all, end all source - I read EVERYTHING with what I hope to be an open, discerning, suspect more often than not mind! We are talking about a time period where nobody remains alive from - as such, everything remains open to interpretation & speculation .. two areas historians appear to excel at; only being outdone by archeologists who can build a whole civilization from a teapot. While one of the side impacts of the civil war was definitely a quantum leap in [everyday] recordkeeping & communications; just the fact that there are 1000s of civil war authors & 10s of 1000s of books/movies/docs etc. attest to just how varied these interpretations can be. I'll do what I do with all history/news reading/viewing - explore as many differing sources as I can and sift through the junk to find some value (the rarer than it should be seen corroboration helps a lot there :)

Kinda just like knowledge [of all kinds] for it's own sake tho you might call me a seeker because I'm a questioning fool. And history - especially the expansive landscape provided by the 'it happened right in your backyard' civil war - provides fascinating opportunities to dissect the human character and see what lessons were and were not learned.

Was interesting that the Charleston Shooting had such an impact on you. I vaguely remember it being a terrible tragedy, but will check your link to refresh myself on . and may comment in a future post.

Way late here - thx for your input & suggestions!

Magooz wrote: "MaryAnn (EmilyD1037) wrote: "I picked up Eric Foner's book on Reconstruction from the library, Thursday. Haven't looked thru it yet. I enjoyed some of his "free" courses on Coursera, I think.

Cox'..."

Magooz,
On my tablet and my Kindle White, you can make it as large as you want. If you are on a phone ... um that might be a problem. I too, love a regular book, but I am running out of room to keep them, so Kindle has been a good source.

I have little or no knowledge of particulars about the reconstruction era, so I can't say much in the discussion. I do recommend Dubois, very readable. The Richardson book looks like an easier read than Foner and I could use the knowledge, but unfortunately, I could use the knowledge from all 4 books on the table. ;-)

Porter, thanks for the link. I don't try to keep up on the news, but I have heard of it. We had another 10 lives lost in Colorado today, such a waste.

Magooz wrote: "And while I'll agree it's a rough entry point; it seems more everyday to me the war was kind of boring compared to reconstruction;)"

I'm that way, but with antebellum (before the war) period. The Battles and such are important as the affected how the country proceded (Without key battle England/France may have joined in on the side of the South, the Emancipation Proclamation may not have been issued, and Lincoln may not have been re-elected.) But the actual battles is of less interest to me as well.

But I am most interested in what lead to the war.

Here's an 'off the battlefield' comment. I've been a bit fascinated with the Confederate Secret Service and how their members were treated following the war. Jacob Thompson, who ran the show in Canada got off scot-free and with Confederate gold to set himself back up. Clement Clay on the other hand was arrested and imprisoned, his life was wrecked and he died impoverished. James Bullock who commissioned the commerce raiders such as the CSS Alabama was never allowed to return to the United States, forever banished (although his nephew Teddy Roosevelt later became president!). Bullock simply cost US insurance companies too much money! John Surratt, who by all accounts was no more than a messenger, was hounded, captured and returned to be tried for his involvement in the Lincoln conspiracy, although not convicted even though his mother was hanged for it-- difference between a military tribunal and a civilian court. Yet George Sanders, who by all accounts headed up the 'department of dirty tricks', was never tried even though they found a bank draft from him in John Wilkes Booth's pocket when Booth was shot. Even Albert Pike, head of the military wing of the KGC, got a statue. There were certainly a number of very autonomous characters, Thomas Hines, Caleb Huse, Bennett Young and many others. Judah Benjamin certainly sunk a lot of money into the various schemes, some hair-brained, yet some surprisingly successful. Certainly a lot of that gold was never spent and never accounted for.

Kurt wrote: "Here's an 'off the battlefield' comment. I've been a bit fascinated with the Confederate Secret Service and how their members were treated following the war. Jacob Thompson, who ran the show in Can..."

The subject of espionage is an area that I've had some interest... but What caught my attention was when you were talking about the Trial of Lincoln's killers.

One of my favorite books (but very niche) is Secession on Trial: The Treason Prosecution of Jefferson Davis.

This book is about the Trial of Jefferson Davis (or lack thereof.)

Jefferson Davis wanted to be tried for Treason. It was his fervent desire to have the issue of secession tried in the Courts. After he resigned from Congress in 1861, he stuck around in DC challenging the authorities to arrest him.

After the war ended, he believed that he acted in accordance with the Constitution. The North had achieved a military victory, but there was no court decision that supported the legality of secession. (There were a few court cases and legal opinions---often reaching contrary conclusions and wherein the Federal Government argued contradictory positions.)

If the case went to court, would an adverse ruling undo what had been achieved by the military? Would an adverse court ruling undermine the sacrafice of Union Soldiers? Would such court ruling re-animate the South and give it credence with other countries?

But surely the Federal Government could ensure a guilty conviction, right? Well, only if it is tried in a military tribunal. But the attorney general didn't believe that Davis' trial belonged in a military tribunal.

So, the trial might be done in a civilian court---just do it up north right? No, the law said that Treason has to be tried where the crime was committed. So does that mean that it can be tried in any state where battles occurred? Or is it limited to the Confederate States? Or is it limited to where Davis took pen to paper --- eg Virginia?

If Davis was tried for Treason in Virginia, would the Federal government be able to find a jury willing to convict?

Why did Chief Justice Salmon Chase want nothing to do with the case? (His jurisdiction included Virginia.) Why did Radical Republicans like Thadeus Stephens want to serve on Davis' defense? Why did Stephens want to win the case for Davis?

Why was the clock ticking? (Statue of Limitations!)

This is one of the best books I've ever read---but it is very niche.

I like legal history and I like Civil War history... it can be a little heavy when talking about different legal precedents.

Porter wrote: "Kurt wrote: "Here's an 'off the battlefield' comment. I've been a bit fascinated with the Confederate Secret Service and how their members were treated following the war. Jacob Thompson, who ran th..."

Nice post! The Confederates were pretty desperate by the end of 1864 and I'm pretty convinced Jeff Davis was aware of much of what his government was up to. By April 1866 the Federal government was having to consider the Supreme court decision from ex parte v. Milligan which made it clear that civilians had to be tried in civil court-- no more of the Lincoln-era military tribunals. That's what saved John Surratt. In addition, the power structure in the federal government was fracturing by then. Congress was 70% Republican in the house and 75% in the Senate because they refused to seat any members from the ex-confederate states. They could override vetos from Johnson at will. But Stanton was the real power in the executive branch. He controlled the military which means he controlled reconstruction in the south through his choice of military commanders of the districts. In addition, by making Jim Blaine believe he would support him for a presidential run in 1868, Stanton exercised power over the House of Representatives. As it worked out, instead of trying Davis for treason, the War Dept. subjected him to pretty inhumane treatment for the first year of imprisonment, techniques to prevent him from sleeping or moving about. And he was not well. After a year of that they finally allowed him to move about for his second year of imprisonment, during daylight at least. Jeff Davis wanted to be tried to vindicate southern succession, no doubt the US government wanted him to just disappear, to die from his illness while in prison. Interesting that no writ was filed for his release until May 1, 1867.

Magooz wrote: "George wrote: "My new Civil War Era novel, "I Jonathan, A Charleston Tale of the Rebellion." It's this Southern boy's exploration of how a Christian society that considered itself virtuous could fi..."

Thanks, Magooz, I recommend Charleston for vacation. I prefer it to Savannah, though some might find Savannah more attractive. It was laid out better originally. My wife and I rent a house on Folly Beach when we go, and take day trips to the city.

My next novel is set in medieval Prague...

-George WB Scott

Have any of you decided to read with Richard, Jan, and I?

We have all the books that were discussed and it is not set in stone yet.

I've read those books... and right now I'm focusing on the TX revolution

Hi Everyone! Our thread continues to sprout new branches - tho we may need to do some trimming soon :) Kind of a blanket comment on my part that will talk to several issues & people ...

Kurt - Welcome! You've certainly thrown some new things in the mix .. and inspired that great reply from Porter :) Espionage would seem to take on a whole new light when you wouldn't have to try very hard to imitate the enemy :) And not gonna open legal floodgates on a general post; other than to say when a lot of the era dust settles, it comes down to a bunch of lawyers haggling to determine where we got to - and haggle they did .. making a mockery of our 'justice' system in the process :( And thx for indirectly supporting my assertion that the RRs controlled congress and ran roughshod over AJ. One last comment - I have a dvd documentary that makes very strong case that Stanton was behind the assassination of Lincoln (hmmm . Porter's book sounds interesting :)

Porter - again, nice reply to Kurt . love the way you threw all those questions out on the topic :) Didn't know DuBois was gonna bankrupt me - was hopin to pick up a copy for 5-10 & can't find one for under 25 . so acquisition on temporary hold :( Almost all of his titles look like they would be great reads btw! I did pick up 15 other books (all civil war, mostly reconstruction) at the used book store while I was hunting :) One of these is a statistical book (maps (at the county level)/charts/graphs) for many categories (population densities & makeups, political party breakdowns, land usage, etc) for the decades thru the 1800s that should provide some nice backdrop when viewing the different events.

MaryAnn - would like to join in the BIG read - will post my latest choice thoughts on your thread :)

Jan - The good news - I found Heather Cox Richardson on YT & watched 4 episodes (hrs) of something she called 'The American Paradox'. This was an 8 pt thing covering ALL of american history (yowzer) - pt 4 got me thru reconstruction. Her style was a nice casual with subtle undertones of passion and I appreciated her ability to go 'off the beaten path' to make her points. That being said, she is what gives modern liberal historians a bad name. As much as I prize objectivity, she wouldn't know it if it bit her on the nose! A terrible example of somebody cherry picking events and telling ONLY ONE SIDE OF THE STORY . and forcing a conclusion on you as a result :( Albeit, I never realized the foibles of reconstruction were the PRIMARY result of the ongoing struggle between the cowboy (representing the freedom loving american) and the everyday man (being influenced daily by the communism resulting from the franco-prussian war) - holy magollee

Ok, dog won't let me write anymore - keep the great discussions going!

Ok, Team of Rivals will be our first choice. I know it was my favorite of the list. See the other thread for the particulars.

Magooz, I don't know if you use Kindle books, but DuBois' book is $12.99. I much prefer "real" books to electronic esp. big books, but the Kindle fits my budget.

I also found DuBois' John Brown in Kindle.

Perhaps a new branch thread could be "new acquisitions" thread and you could regale us with your 15 :-)

I'm a big fan of libraries... at one point I wanted to buy the book, but that soon became impractical.