History
My buddy David from Baghdad and I used to talk a lot about great historical figures and, in particular, the incredible gifts (such as the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution) they gave us. At one point I mentioned that I really needed to refresh myself on US history and David urged me to read the three-volume Oxford History of the American People by Samuel Eliot Morison.
It’s out of print, but a week before I left for Liberia I wandered into Smith Family Bookstore (the used bookstore in Eugene) and found all three volumes. The fact that all three volumes cost me about $8.00 made up for the fact that it was paperback and the print is really, really small. I added it to my household items that arrived over a month ago.
I’ve been reading it and I’m nearing the end of Book 2 - yesterday Sherman rampaged the South, Lee surrendered at Appomattox, and Lincoln was shot. Anyway, I’ve periodically mentioned to Ann how I have been enjoying not just reading a history, but reading this historian. Ann keeps asking why and I couldn’t really form an articulate reason why until yesterday, when I hit three passages that highlight why Morison is such a joy to read.
1] He frequently has a very witty yet insightful turn of phrase that, coming from an academic is even more enjoyable. On the attacks on blacks in the south following the Civil War, and the overall decline in society that resulted he writes, “And the sad thing is that they need never have been, had the old planter aristocracy not forfeited its leadership to ‘poor white trash.’” And another, “There is nothing equal to the kindness of the American heart when touched, except the bad judgment of Americans when irritated[.]”
2] He has a helpful way of relating events spaced well apart in history to provide an understanding of the significance of actions, positions or accomplishments in a particular moment in history. For example:
“Lincoln had grasped a great truth which other Western statesmen never realized until 1945; that reconstruction of a shattered empire must be approached with wisdom rather than strict justice; the defeated foe must be helped to his feet and treated more like the prodigal son than a convicted felon. Lincoln and Johnson had tried this Christian policy on the South; the South (so it seemed) had contemptuously declined the friendly hand and defied the victors. Woe, then, to the South!”
I should note that the above paragraph and the sentence just before 2] were on the same page. He doesn’t just tell history, he mixes in just the right amount of spices to keep it interesting.
I’ve mentioned to Ann that he expresses his opinion, but not in an in-your-face manner. Note the sentence in the end that essentially said that the South bears plenty of responsibility for the tragedy that was the period of reconstruction following the war. As another example, Morison at several points notes how that the “current” civil rights protests (he wrote in the early 1960’s) were evidence that we have yet to live up to the aspirations we’ve set out for ourselves.
3] He can pack a lot of information in a descriptive paragraph that frequently leaves me in awe. Now, this paragraph may not be as enriching for you as it was for me, but I had just read about the personalities, which made the following paragraph all the more powerful:
“Lincoln had attained new stature. Resolute in purpose and sure of vision he had always been; yet often vacillating and uncertain in performance. From those anxious vigils at the White House during the terrible summer of 1862 the perplexed, over-advised, and humble Lincoln emerged humble before God, but the master of men. He seemed to have captured all the greater qualities of the great Americans who preceded him, without their defects: the poise of Washington without his aloofness, the mental audacity of Hamilton without his insolence, the astuteness of Jefferson without his indirection, the conscience of John Quincy Adams without his harshness, the courage of Jackson without his irascibility, the magnetism of Clay without his vanity, the lucidity of Webster without his ponderousness; and fused them with a sincerity and magnanimity that were peculiarly his.”
It’s been a pleasure to read. By tomorrow I’ll probably be starting Book 3 with the knowledge that it will close with the assassination of President Kennedy. Thanks David!
UPDATE: I finished the book this morning and came across a few more examples worth noting.
On trying to secure minority rights in the reconstruction south - “Of several attempts to hold ground already one, the most notable was Amendment XV to the Constitution, ratified in 1870, forbidding the states to deny anyone the vote ‘on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.’ To the time of writing, this has proved a mere paper guarantee.”
Here, the subject is obvious - “Although apologists for the South decry the crimes of the K.K.K. (163 blacks murdered in one Florida county in 1871, 300 murdered in a few parishes outside New Orleans), they were led by ‘the flower of Southern manhood,’ who cannot escape responsibility for acts in the same class as with those of Hitler’s storm troopers.”
And the last paragraph of Book 2 - “Looking back over the whole episode of reconstruction, one must regret that the magnanimous policy of Lincoln was not long followed. Yet, all in all, considering what it cost the Union to preserve itself, the victors treated the vanquished pretty well. A recent European historian of our Civil War remarked wryly that the Poles who were overrun in World War II, the central Europeans subjected to one totalitarian regime after another, the defeated Hungarian rebels of 1956, and the expropriated landowners and middle class in every communist state, including Cuba, would have considered the sufferings of the Southern white people as a heavenly dispensation in comparison with theirs.”