Lincoln Through A Southern Lens (Article 12)
Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain) told of a dialogue with a Southern lady one evening twenty years after the Civil War. Hoping to start a casual conversation, Clemens said, “Madam, what a splendid moon.” To which the lady responded in a most pleasing southern drawl, “Bless you dear, but you should have seen the moon before the War.”
As I researched material for my books about Abraham Lincoln, I became curious about the perceptions toward Lincoln and the Civil War held by those individuals with a long and deep Southern heritage. I began to seek people who grew up in the South and whose families had lived in the Southern states since at least the mid-19th century. I inquired as to their own thoughts about the War and Lincoln’s legacy and asked if they could articulate the perceptions of their friends, teachers, and relatives; going back as far as they could remember. Some could recall commentary by great grandparents and others were, fortunately, able to refer to written records their ancestors had left for posterity.
While I expected to seek answers in private conversations, I received one “view through a Southern lens” at a meeting of a civic club in early 2012. The discussion at our table turned to the recently announced movie “Lincoln” which was expected in theaters in a few months; and one visiting couple joined in the conversation. The woman, with her face tightened in resolve and in a very measured voice said, “Abraham Lincoln was a despicable man” and waited for one of us to respond. Her husband hesitated for a moment before saying, “My wife is from Georgia and her family has not yet conceded the Civil War.” She was not amused.
In other, more private exchanges, I interviewed Southerners whose families had lived in the region since before the Civil War, with some pre-dating the Revolutionary War. Their personal thoughts, as well as their speculation about the views of their contemporaries, ranged from a barely controlled hatred of Lincoln, the War, and the aftermath, to an appreciation that the United States was preserved and slavery ended. However, most said that their relatives who lived through the War, and the next few generations, deeply resented Lincoln, the “War of Northern Aggression,” and the subsequent “Yankee” re-construction policies.
I was very fortunate to interview two men who were also from Georgia, as was the lady at the civic club. Both went to grade school and high school in smaller communities in the 1940s and 1950s and then became acquainted at a Georgia university; and have since remained life-long friends. These men epitomize the term “Distinguished Southern Gentlemen” by the honorable way they have conducted their lives. Both said that their great grandparents, and even grandparents, might have agreed with the lady’s assessment and one commented that, “Even in the 50s, nothing could start an inflamed conversation at family gatherings like the North’s invasion of the South, Abraham Lincoln, and re-construction; even after a hundred years!”
Both of these men said, however, that most of their contemporaries had a nuanced view of Lincoln and the Civil War, agreeing that the preservation of the Union and the end of slavery were positive outcomes. But, they both were critical of the intentional mass destruction of Southern infrastructure during the War and the unnecessarily harsh penalties of re-construction after the War ended. In their elementary and secondary classrooms, the history of that period tended to focus on the noble effort of the Confederate cause, admiration for its civilian and military leaders, and the unfair policies toward the South in the aftermath; but neither recalled descriptions of Lincoln as “despicable” or other similar derogatory terms. Neither thought Lincoln was to blame for the debilitating re-construction policies and, to the contrary, both thought Lincoln, had he lived through his second term, would have been a moderating force. One said that, “In all wars the victor sets the terms for reconciliation, but the Union’s policies were more retaliatory and focused on retribution, rather than the best path to reconciliation.” Both acknowledged that, for a few generations after the war, there were still those who defended slavery as a historical right, a practical labor source, and the relationship of owner to slave as benevolent. However, they said that those they personally knew, including grandparents, parents, friends, and teachers, while proud of their Southern heritage, never attempted to defend the institution of slavery.
By contrast, I also had an exchange with a “serious student of the Civil War,” a term he applied to himself, who was a direct descendent of men who fought for the Confederacy. He said, “I take great pride in their service and their sacrifices and the Southern officers conducted themselves more honorably than their Union Counterparts.” He further stated that, “Secession was a legal and appropriate response to abuses by the Federal government, and the Union conducted an undeclared war on a new country.”
As an aside, while we disagreed on most points, I appreciated that his tone was always reasoned and calm, unlike some of the “new Confederates” and “Southern Avengers” who seem to shout out their arguments in sound-bite slogans with a string of epithets. My experience with these groups began when they coordinated a mass of spiteful comments about Lincoln and the Civil War on the Amazon.com sales pages for my books and on my web-site; causing us to temporarily shut down comments. To add insult to injury, I don’t think any of them ever paid for one my books!
However, while the “serious Civil War student” was more measured and polite, he was absolute in his belief that the United States (what remained of it) and the Confederate States of America could have co-existed as separate countries for years. If so, the Civil War could have been avoided and, perhaps, the two countries might have re-formed a new Union later. He said that he had “bought into the mythology of Lincoln” until he began his independent research at the age of thirty, when he determined that “Lincoln was no Great Emancipator but only a tyrant who was predetermined to destroy the South.” When he added that, “Slavery would have died out anyway over the next fifty years,” I asked if he had any concern for the four million slaves in 1865 and the thousands more who would have been born into slavery under his scenario. He replied, “The slaves were totally unprepared for freedom, and over that fifty years slaves could have been gradually assimilated as the South modernized; which would have been preferable to the War waged by Abraham Lincoln’s armies.” After reviewing his commentary, I thought that he demonstrated an old proverb that someone can study a lot but still not learn anything at all!
Fortunately, based on my interviews, these “new Confederates” are a small, but noisy, minority of those with a Southern heritage. One person told me that, “We refer to these so-called new Confederates as the ‘crazies’ and they are an embarrassment to the South.” Another said, “We can be proud of many aspects of our Southern heritage without overlooking the terrible injustice of slavery, which is a stain that cannot be erased and must not be forgotten.”
After all of these interviews and other interactions, my limited research revealed to me that there may be as many opinions about Lincoln and the Civil War as seen “through a Southern lens” as there are fireflies on a southern night; and that would be too many to count.
Contact the author at gadorris2@gmail.com