The Civil War Historiography of my High School Textbook

October 2, 2019 7:21 PM

There's a name for the way my 1980's edition of The American Pageant approached slavery and secession. What is it?

I took AP history in 1985. We used The American Pageant by Bailey and Kennedy. (No idea the numerical edition but it was fairly recent at the time, not some left over copies from the '50s.)

The approach to slavery, the Civil War and Reconstruction was generally "moderate," if you'll excuse the term. The authorial voice tended to speak well of Henry Clay style compromises, criticized the actual abolitionist fringe (like the Liberty Party) as counterproductive for throwing elections to the Democrats, emphasized the racism and "end the war without freeing a single slave" part of Lincoln's legacy, and was thoroughly anti-Radical Republican in the description of the Johnson years and Reconstruction period.

A year or two ago I found there was a specific name for this perspective on American politics but can't remember what it was. I'm looking for the actual academic term, not an epithet like "lost causers" or some such.

If you can toss in other well known historians who adhered to this or even better a resource summarizing the influence of this school I'd be doubly grateful.

posted by mark k to Education (6 answers total)

Shelby Foote was famous for a kind of masked Lost Cause ism (masked enough that he was prominently featured in Ken Burns’ Civil War series), not sure if that’s too far away from the style you’re looking for. A good example of his attitude: “You have to understand that the raggedy Confederate soldier who owned no slaves and probably couldn't even read the Constitution, let alone understand it, when he was captured by Union soldiers and asked, 'what are you fighting for?' replied, 'I'm fighting because you're down here.'”
posted by sallybrown at 7:36 PM on October 2, 2019

Best answer: Are you thinking of the Dunning School? David Blight confronts this/the legacy of that approach in his excellent Race and Reunion: The Civil War in American Memory.
posted by HonoriaGlossop at 7:40 PM on October 2, 2019 [4 favorites]

Eric Foner also delves deeply into these issues in his also excellent scholarship. Can’t recommend his work enough, starting with his seminal Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution.
posted by HonoriaGlossop at 7:44 PM on October 2, 2019

I mean, "lies" kinda covers it, but I'm also commenting to read what others say.

I took history in the 80s, too, and my (south Mississippi) public school took great pains to avoid admitting that the war was over slavery. I could cite many aspects of this, but the definitional one is this: at no point was the existence of the various Articles of Secession mentioned, chiefly because mentioning them or -- horrors! -- actually reading them in class would leave little doubt that Lost-Cost bullshit is, well, bullshit.

Because those who wrote those Articles were very, very clear that the reason for their secession was slavery.
posted by uberchet at 8:03 PM on October 2, 2019

Response by poster: It was indeed the Dunning School, a couple academic generations removed. Knowing the name let me turn up more to read up on regarding the school, as well as this entry in the 1619 Project by someone who used my exact textbook. Nineteen minutes to an answer, thanks Metafilter!
posted by mark k at 8:16 PM on October 2, 2019 [4 favorites]

Chandra Manning's What This Cruel War Was Over

...uses letters, diaries, and regimental newspapers to take the reader inside the minds of Civil War soldiers--black and white, Northern and Southern--as they fought and marched across a divided country. With stunning poise and narrative verve, Manning explores how the Union and Confederate soldiers came to identify slavery as the central issue of the war and what that meant for a tumultuous nation.

posted by kirkaracha at 9:14 PM on October 2, 2019 [1 favorite]