I’m not expert on the Civil War. I don’t even consider myself particularly knowledgeable about that sad affair. But I have been interested in it since I was introduced to it as, I think maybe, an eighth grader. Over the many years I’ve probably read close to 200 or volumes about the war and its many battles, leaders, and settings.
From my latest binge, I’ve had an epiphany, helped by some recent volumes. A thought emerged that if one were to review the most famous works on the subject of the first 100 years after the war, and those written during the last 57 or so, one would hardly recognize it as the same historical event. It represents a bold example of a refutation of the well-known saying that the history of wars is written by the victors.
Immediate histories of the Civil War came from the losers, or at least those who harbored a fascination with the losers. I’m not sure what this means or even if it is true. I do believe that if one were to look at the first period, it would be hard to find an account of how R.E. Lee’s army, during its two incursions into the north, captured free Americans and transported them to be sold as slaves to southern plantation owners.
I’m currently reading “The Myth of the Lost Cause and Civil War History,” edited by Gary W. Gallagher and Alan T. Nolan. Hope for some edification. Stay tuned.
No comments:
Post a Comment