No Quarter - Black Flag Warfare 1863-1865

[bob 125th nysvi]

We have had a number of discussions on this board about what was or was not the cause of the civil war.

In North & South Magazine Vol 10, #1, George Burkhardt has an article related to the official southern policy verses African American soldiers (and their white officers) with extensive quotations by both southern combatants and northern combatants who saw (and participated in) southern military forces mistreating African American soldiers.

I'm not going into specifics here as it is a long article with 100 references at the end. Only read it if you have an open mind.

And before you accuse Mr. Burkhardt of being biased wait for his book to be published (soon) that I'm pretty sure outlines atrocities by both sides in the CW.

[vamick]

Has Mr Burkhardt's book been named yet?...sounds interesting!
I'm reading one by TJ Stiles now about Jesse James, "Frankly" a lot of it is in my opinion 'Yankee revisionist history' with numerous efforts to link Jesse et al with the Klan, slavery yadda yadda yadda with a li'l "head shrinking" thrown in by this amateur Jung...there are enough other facets to the book however to keep me going...my mind is 'open' but I know BS when I read it too ..to me history written by 'historians' ought to be kept in that middle ground to be considered professional, if not 'history' merely becomes 'histrionics'!

[bob 125th nysvi]

Confederate Rage, Yankee Wrath: No Quarter in the Civil War. To be published by Southern Illinois University Press.

Is supposed to be released this spring. May already be out.

[Gary]

I look forward to reading it to see if it substantiates what I've written. I was disappointed by Speer's War of Vengance on the treatment of PoWs by both sides. Speer's research wasn't bad, it just wasn't what I was looking for.

[hiplainsyank]

Of course, it was the middle of the road, not too shocking research of historians like C. Van Woodward and others whom Margaret Mitchell based her portrayal of slavery on in Gone with the Wind.

Then came along those rabble-rousing Yankee revisionists--without whom we'd still think of slavery and the slave master relationship largely along GWTW lines.

There is a place--and properly researched, a noble place--for revisionist historians.

[vamick]

Then came along those rabble-rousing Yankee revisionists--without whom we'd still think of slavery and the slave master relationship largely along GWTW lines.

I think most folks with any sense know that GWTW is a bit skewed

There is a place--and properly researched, a noble place--for revisionist historians.

AHHH YES..all things "Yankees" do are noble and semi divine aren't they!

History, good history is free from all axe-grinding by any view, you'd have to read it for yourself I suppose, but Mr Stiles goes to great lengths and varies from his subject matter soapbox style to cast his modern day aspersions on 19th century characters ( without evidence I might add)...'revision' without new discoveries is merely one person's opinion! thats not 'history'..thats just HIS story, a coat of whitewash is no better than a coat of tar, they both obscure, and are both self serving nothing 'noble' comes from this

[hiplainsyank]

AHHH YES..all things "Yankees" do are noble and semi divine aren't they!

History, good history is free from all axe-grinding by any view, you'd have to read it for yourself I suppose, but Mr Stiles goes to great lengths and varies from his subject matter soapbox style to cast his modern day aspersions on 19th century characters ( without evidence I might add)...'revision' without new discoveries is merely one person's opinion! thats not 'history'..thats just HIS story, a coat of whitewash is no better than a coat of tar, they both obscure, and are both self serving nothing 'noble' comes from this

First, I never said that a/ all revisionists are yankees, and b/ that all yankees are divine. I simply was using the example of C. Vann Woodward - MArgaret Mitchell because it is very obvious. But it did seem that I got the wrong name in there--it's been a long time since History 411 in college. But whichever historian she utilized, he was well known and widely recognized throughout the US, north and south, as the expert on slavery in the old south.

Second, there is no such thing as an unbiased historian. No human being can totally separate his/her core beliefs from the topic she/he is researching and writing on.