Bloody Shirt, The: Terror after Appomattox
buy bestselling books in print, audio books
|
 |
List Price: $34.95
Our Price:
$25.51
You Save: $9.44
Features
• Audiobook
• CD
• Unabridged |
| [ + Zoom ] [ Buy Now ] |
Book : Usually ships in 24 hours |
|
Bloody Shirt, The: Terror after Appomattox Customer Reviews
|
|
|
|
♥♥♥♥♥ |
Popular History of Reconstruction
|
Stephen Budiansky has written a popular history of the Reconstruction era. His is no easy task, as Reconstruction falls far behind the Civil War as a subject of popular interest, despite their closeness on the historical timeline, and despite the fact that many of the Civil War's main players (such as James Longstreet, who's featured here) were very active in both. "The Bloody Shirt" is a well-researched and well-written account that focuses on several individuals and events rather than try to examine the period as a whole. The author explores Reconstruction in Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina--the Deep South states that were the heart of the large plantation economy.
The main problem I had with the book was its emphasis on description rather than analysis. It reads like dispatches from the Reconstruction "front." That's fine, to a point, but at times it is more a string of primary sources than a monograph. Very often, letters and newspaper editorials, frequently printed whole, are left to speak for themselves. Much of this information could've been boiled down--and more importantly, should've been commented upon. For example, at one point, one Southern newspaper makes reference to "Colfax." Those familiar with the Reconstruction period will know this means the "Colfax Massacre" of 1873, which happened in Louisiana (if one wants to read about that, he/she can read the recent book "Redemption" by Nicholas Lemann).
Most importantly, the book lacks sufficient political context. The last portions of the book deal with the infamous Hamburg massacre (or, as Democrats fashioned it, the Hamburg "riot") in South Carolina. Budiansky unfortunately, doesn't give us much context about Reconstruction politics in that state. Despite the violence there, it was one of the last Reconstruction governments to fall and was the only one to have a mostly black legislature. The Republicans survived in South Carolina largely because of the state's majority black population. Budiansky doesn't lay this out, and makes it seem as if African Americans were merely victims of some last-minute white terror. By that point, however, Reconstruction had failed, and it was not because of events in South Carolina alone.
The extent to which Democrats resorted to violence and fraud was inexcusable, but Budiansky doesn't examine some of the faults of the Reconstruction governments. Republican mismanagement and corruption were some one of the subjects upon which Democrats built their case for overthrowing Republican rule (on this subject, check out Thomas Holt's "Black Over White" about the Reconstruction government in South Carolina). As overstated or even outright false as many of these claims were, there was mismangement and corruption among Republicans. This is not to justify the Democratic backlash, but even the Republican governments' legitimate expenses--for things as seemingly basic as public education and infrastructure projects--were hotly debated by Southerners.
Nevertheless, Budiansky is correct in saying that the real cause for overthrowing Reconstruction was not fiscal conservatism--which he addresses in the case of the Republican Governor Ames of Mississippi--but white anger with "Negro rule." And he is also correct in showing that African Americans were eventually abandoned by Northerners who had grown tired with events in the South. Once the Federal government decided blacks weren't worth defending, the radical Republican governments could not succeed.
If Budiansky's sympathies are with the right people, another problem I had with the book was its fragmented nature. As soon as we are introduced to some figures and events in Reconstruction, we are whisked away to somewhere else. The passages about James Longstreet are well written, but Longstreet feels dropped in from nowhere. No sooner does he appear then he is gone.
In sum, Budiansky's description of the violence of the period is well done, and he certainly is passionate in his defense of the white-black Republican Reconstruction governments. This is a good place to start for someone who is not well versed in the Reconstruction period. If I were to suggest an academic book about terror after Lee's surrender, I would suggest Richard Zuczek's "State of Rebellion," about Reconstruction in South Carolina. As a work of popular history, Budiansky's book illustrates some of the features of Reconstruction, but it doesn't break any new ground in the field of study. And those looking for a more comprehensive study might want to check out Eric Foner's "Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution." |
|
Bloody Shirt, The: Terror after Appomattox Books In Print, Audio Books.