|
- |
ON APRIL 9, 1865, after five long years of
As a battered and broken nation began the long march toward reconstruction and reconciliation, countless families in the North and South grieved for more than 620,000 men who had sacrificed their lives in the name of their country.
Although these events took place more than 140 years ago, the debate over the cause of such a tragedy still rages to this day. Historians, preservationists, civil rights organizations and re-enactors from both sides of the Mason-Dixon line have argued vehemently for decades over topics such as slavery, secession, states' rights and forced government. It is, at times, as if the war had never ended; many of these issues have become "hot button" topics in today's litigious society.
One can hardly open a newspaper without reading about the political incorrectness of displaying the Confederate battle flag or the enduring disagreement over heritage versus hate. Across the country, information-technology departments scramble to increase the hard-drive capacities of their servers as they strain under the volume of letters to the editor that arrive every day in support, or protest, of the "right to remember."
From small high school classrooms to mammoth college lecture halls, teachers preach a lesson plan that could have any number of titles, depending upon their location. Some simply teach an impartial history of the Civil War, while others choose to present a more biased version, referring to the time period as "The War Between the States" or "The War of Northern Aggression."
Regardless of the medium or approach, the one question that remains consistent is, "What caused the Civil War?" It is a universal question for which, perhaps, there is no answer; a query that can never truly be defined and one that is responsible for a "culture war" in which no end appears in sight. Few people outside of the Civil War community are comfortable with this topic and even fewer would be willing to present their arguments in bold, black print for everyone to read.
In order to define, at minimum, a portion of the cause and more importantly to do so effectively, one would have to possess a thorough and unbiased understanding of 19th-century America, firsthand experience with both Northern and Southern cultures and the ability to discriminate historical fact from fiction. The project would require that equal time be given to both the liberal and conservative sides of the country in the 1860s, while taking into account the social, spiritual, psychological and economic facets that separated them. As with a baseball purist, the subject's conclusion would have to be built on a foundation of statistics and not legends and folklore. It is a risky and daunting task that could be presented only by an academic study with no political agenda. Sounds impossible, right? Not quite.
Edward L. Ayers, the Hugh P. Kelly professor of history at the University of Virginia, and one of the country's leading historians, has made a career out of tackling these very tough topics. In addition to publishing several critically acclaimed books on Southern society, he is also one of the first historians to embrace the concept of digital history and its educational uses for the World Wide Web.
A founding father of U.Va.'s famous "Valley of the Shadow" project, Ayers helped to establish an ever-expanding online archive that focuses on the American Civil War as experienced in two communities in the Great Valley of Pennsylvania and Virginia. He is also the author of the groundbreaking book "The Promise of the New South" (1992), which won several prizes and was a finalist for both the National Book Award and the Pulitzer Prize.
Ayers' latest offering, titled "What Caused the Civil War? Reflections on the South and Southern History," takes this study of the conflict to a whole new level. The book is composed of a collection of essays, covering the lifelong experiences and academic findings of the author, that present a fresh perspective on American culture and a call to revive the "tradition of skepticism" in Civil War history.
The book is clearly written by an academic and it flows nicely from one conclusion to the next, resulting in a smooth and uniform read that should please scholars and laymen alike.
From the opening chapter, in which Ayers reflects on reluctantly coming to terms with himself as a Southerner, to the retrospective period, when he discovers a passion for history, the reader is presented with a firm foundation of credibility that sets the stage for the forthcoming arguments and conclusions.
Throughout the story, we walk alongside Ayers as he grows from a disenchanted youth to a leading historian and professor. That alone is worth the read, as his very personal reflections cover growing up in the South, and then eagerly abandoning his roots for the hustle and bustle of the Northeast, only to return home with a newfound respect and appreciation for his people and culture. It is a journey that comes full circle and is one to which many can relate.
Ayers discusses the early origins of the Internet and how a group of his colleagues immediately recognized its potential for the study of history. Through trial and error, this group of computer-literate scholars ultimately developed a new form of reference material that continues to evolve to this day. A thoughtful essay on the late historian C. Vann Woodward balances the book, as the author pays tribute to his intellectual mentor.
Ayers also defines the recurring difficulties in studying a period of American history that has been constantly under a reformation of sorts. History, he maintains, is messy and undetermined. And more often than not, the truth is buried beneath decades of propaganda and editorializing. The events of the Civil War are so much more than just a series of battles to set people free. The roots of the conflict go much deeper than a fight for independence.
Over the last 140 years, most of the general public has become lazy regarding the study of history; most people accept whatever "facts" are spoon-fed to them without question. In the North, public opinion dictates that the Union simply fought to free the slaves. And in the South, the Confederacy is depicted as simply defending its land against an invader. Clearly, Ayers understands this dilemma. His efforts to provide the reader with a glimpse of the very fabric of Southern culture challenge any preconceived notion that a war that turned brother against brother could be so easily defined.
By introducing other aspects, including regionalism, idealism and a completely opposite optimism, the author shows how neither region was on the same page when it came to America's future. The rapid progression of commerce and industry in the North clashed with the romantic visions of an agricultural and self-sufficient South and forged a social division that went far beyond mere politics.
Moving fluently between the past and the present, Ayers also comments on the sensitive subject of race relations, both prewar and postwar. He insists that the culture of both white and black Southerners has become a trend-setting novelty of sorts that is routinely hijacked by the rest of the country for entertainment purposes. Television, radio, film and the advertising industry are all guilty of using redneck cliches and black stereotypes that perpetuate ignorance on some levels.
One of the more controversial issues presented by Ayers is his opinion about the "revisionist" interpretation of the causes of the Civil War made famous in the '30s and '40s by James Randall and Avery Craven. According to them, the Civil War was not simply the result of a conflict over fundamental issues like slavery, but more a reaction to extreme party politics and an irresponsible press.
He also spends several pages commenting on other works, including James McPherson's "Battle Cry of Freedom" (1988) and Ken Burns' nine-part PBS documentary film on the war (1990). Both concluded that the Civil War was the inevitable consequence of slavery, fought nobly on both sides. Ayers argues, by contrast, that Confederates told themselves they were fighting for a new nation built on slavery, telling themselves in the process that they were idealistic patriots rather than defenders of an indefensible institution. In my opinion, the author is to be applauded for including these counter-points, as he obviously intended to offer the arguments of his peers.
Although not everyone will be of the same mind about it, all who read this book will probably find themselves looking at the division of the country at that time with a new insight and a different perspective.
In an e-mail interview with me, Ayers stated: "I wrote this book because I love the American South. I love it not with blind devotion, but with a love that acknowledges all that the South has been and is. The essays in this book look at the South from different angles--past and present, autobiographical and global, political and cultural, defensive and critical. My hope is that readers, whatever they think about the South, will find something in these essays that may surprise them about a place we all seem to know so well."
I truly enjoyed reading this book, and I feel that Ayers has accomplished his goal. In the end, we may not be any closer to agreeing on exactly what caused the Civil War, but studies like this certainly help both sides to gain some new perspectives. For more information on the author, visit virginia.edu/history/faculty/ayers.html. For access to "The Valley of the Shadow," go to valley.vcdh.virginia.edu.
MICHAEL AUBRECHT of Spotsylvania County is the author of "Onward Christian Soldier: The Spiritual Journey of Stonewall" and "Christian Cavalier: The Spiritual Legacy of J.E.B. Stuart." Visit his Web site at angelfire.com/ny5/pinstripepress.
