North against South: The American Iliad, 1848-1877 (ISBN 0962384208)

Succinct, fair, balanced account of the War Between the States:
~North Against South: The American Iliad 1848-1877~ is provocative account of the road to disunion, the late War Between the States, and the short-lived Confederacy which was militarily extirpated in 1865. Ludwell Johnson presents basic objective historical facts from the beginning of the sectional crisis that afflicted antebellum America. The problem is that what passes for objectivity these days is biased scholarship. While it is admitted that a pro-Unionist could feasibly write an objective account, many spend their time obfuscating historical fact, rationalizing atrocities and downplaying abuses committed by the Lincoln regime. Johnson levels the playing field and presents information that other historians deny or gloss over. He offers an insightful social and political history from the sectionalism crisis that emerged in antebellum America to the post-Reconstruction era. Moreover, Johnson gives clarity to the various issues at stake, such as: the spread of slavery to the territories; federal funding for internal improvements; and exorbitant protectionist tariffs lobbied for by northern industrialists. This is not a military history per se, but a handy succinct companion volume covering a pivotal juncture in American history-the sectional crisis, the War Between the States, and Reconstruction. Yes, this is a perspective that would appeal to Southern partisans-because it doesn't obfuscate historical fact and as Clyde Wilson says, it "redeemed the honor of the Confederacy." John Mering, former Professor Emeritus of History at University of Arizona has called this "...the southern version..." Historians Clyde N. Wilson and James I. Robertson have also lavished praise on Johnson's book as well. Ludwell Johnson is Professor Emeritus of History at the College of William and Mary and a specialist on the War Between the States and Reconstruction era. "A question settled by violence, or in disregard of law, must remain unsettled forever." -Jefferson Davis

Interesting reading:
This a thought-provoking book. It does require a careful reading and critical mind. I have checked references and found those that I could locate in libraries to be accurate. I also checked the background of the references since so much was difficult to accept and found them credible. The source materials are good to excellent. If you have a closed mind, this book is not recommended. I have little faith in references on the net and perhaps this is an irrational prejudice but I see no sense in accepting any work as fact unless it is verifiable through multiple sources. Despite some original objections to the tenor of the work, I was persuaded to some degree by documented facts. Some is hard to "swallow" as it contradicts so much of what I was taught. The fact checking exercise made it easier to "swallow" though it is still not a pleasant thing to accept.

A pleasant surprise . . . with reservations:
I opened this volume expecting little in the way of honest history. The publisher is the biased Foundation for American (i.e., Southern) Education, and Ludwell Johnson's 1995 preface promised nothing alluring. Neo-Confederates, generally given to historical ignorance (e.g., Thomas DiLorenzo) or bigotry (e.g., Clyde Wilson) cite Johnson's overview of the Civil War era. Johnson is a Southerner born and bred, as his preface to the 1995 edition indicates, but he rises above both of the two above-mentioned men (admittedly, not a steep climb). He has his Southern moments--no black Union soldier emerged from the South except as a shanghaied victim, the North seemingly was 100% corrupt, and Republicans uniquely did not do anything except for selfish reasons--but the book is relatively well balanced and about as crammed with facts as possible given the necessity of discussing 29 years of tumultuous history in less than 300 pages. I have a major problem with the lack of sources and a bibliography, but I'll bet that was the publisher's decision, not the author's. The last chapter is a brief but useful overview of the literature through the mid-1970s that I wish he had extended to 1995 in the later edition. Unlike the DiLorenzo/Wilson crowd, Johnson takes a realistic view of Abraham Lincoln and mainstream historians, and he is unwilling to lay total innocence at the South's doorstep. He has no love for Radical Republicans and takes great pains to defend Andrew Johnson. (I would argue that stripping away all moral sentiments and replacing them, as he does, with purely political-economic ones is very debatable.) All in all, North Against South is worth the time to read and an easy read to boot. I disagree with many of Johnson's points and the tenor of some of his approches but on an entirely different and loftier plain than the DiLorenzo- and Wilson-ites, whose philosophy is founded on hate and, in DiLorenzo's case, also historical ignorance. I want to scream at Wilson and DiLorenzo. I could politely debate Ludwell Johnson.