Customer Reviews

The Confederate Battle Flag: America's Most Embattled Emblem

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

When you think of the national flag of the Confederate States of America, you may well think of the "Stars and Bars" which is now a familiar sight on t-shirts, truck grills, and license plates, and at Klan rallies. You would be wrong twice. That flag never was the national flag of the Confederacy and never flew over the governmental buildings of Confederacy. It also never was the Stars and Bars, which was a very different looking flag that was indeed the initial (and only the initial) national flag of the Confederacy, but which came to be detested by many southerners who thought it too much like the Stars and Stripes. The familiar star-studded diagonal blue cross on a red background is properly named in the title of John M. Coski's book, _The Confederate Battle Flag: America's Most Embattled Emblem_ (Belknap Press), a full account of the flag's history and current status. The problem with symbols, as any English major will tell you, is that they can mean too many things, so that anyone deploying a symbol may intend a different meaning from everyone who sees it, while the viewers will differ among themselves. The ambiguity of this particular symbol has led to anguish and bitterness, but Coski, the Historian at the Museum of the Confederacy in Richmond, Virginia, has written a beautifully even-handed account that examines the foundations of the bitterness (many of them far more recent than the Civil War) and even extends hope that the symbol "... might generate genuine insights into the complex issues of race and states' rights in the American past, present, and future."

The actual Stars and Bars, the real national flag of the Confederacy, was approved by its Provisional Congress in 1861, but was too similar to the Stars and Stripes. General P. G. T. Beauregard himself at the first major battle of the Civil War, Manassas, could not figure out whether the flag of an approaching force was friend or foe. He resolved to adopt a battle flag, so that there would be a war flag and a peace flag. Individual battle units in the Confederate forces had idiosyncratic flags, but the battle flag quickly caught on, and has been the symbol of the Confederacy ever since, although it usually is spread from the actual square into the rectangular version in popular reproductions. The Confederate Constitution guaranteed that the institution of slavery would continue. It is clear that slavery is one of the things the South was fighting to preserve, but not the one thing. Their battle flag is rightly associated with the fight to preserve slavery, but as Coski points out, the flag also stood for Southerners' defense of their own view of constitutional liberties and southern customs. What may be surprising to modern readers is that the battle flag was not a popular icon until the 1940s. It really made a political debut with the 1948 Dixiecrat Party and the run for the presidency by Strom Thurmond. It is thus legitimately associated with political resistance to segregation. The Ku Klux Klan also started featuring it in the 1940s, and the Klan's advocacy of the flag has been an embarrassment to sensible southerners ever since.

The flag has become a universal symbol of protest; the Sons of Confederate Veterans got requests for it from citizens of former Eastern bloc countries, and it was present at student protests in Yugoslavia. Since it is so easily taken up as a symbol for causes in the spectrum from states' rights to racism to race hatred, the NAACP turned to the flag issue in the 1980s, and was successful in some campaigns to have its use restricted from governmental endorsement. Coski has given specific chapters on its use in state flags, public schools, and colleges. It is only proper to understand that the flag does have a checkered past, it has been used by those with vile agendas, and that it is also viewed with affection by those Southerners who say "you can't erase history." Detractors and defenders will resolve this conflict only by intelligent compromise, and fortunately, some of the history Coski has given includes shared mutual understanding both that the flag has an important place in American history and political thought and that it has stood for causes that now even most Southerners understand are reprehensible. This useful and balanced history ought to help both sides of the controversy see the issues more clearly and generously.

Let me begin by saying that the author is a colleague of mine and someone I admire as an historian and as a person. He has a tremendous ability to collect facts and reach objective conclusions based entirely on those facts. That being said I grew up in the south and I grew up seeing the Confederate Battle Flag pretty much everywhere. It meant, to me as a child, exactly . . . nothing. It was a "cool" symbol of the south that meant you were a mischievous hell raiser at worst. My brother and I had Confederate Flags on beach towels, baseball caps, glasses and all sorts of things. Now, this was in the 1960's and the battle flag was a pretty popular piece to put on such things. Over the years the Confederate Battle Flag has not meant much more until recently.

In the 1980's and 1990's the flag has become the subject of controversy. Should it be flown over the state houses of some southern states? Should it be the emblem of political organizations? Should any government sponsored display feature it in any way, even if the context is historical? Where did the flag come from, what was it's place in the Confederacy and what should it's place be in our modern society? These are some of the questions addressed in Dr. Coski's book.

It may surprise many readers that the flag we think of as the Confederate Flag was never a political flag of the Confederacy. But over time the battle flag has come to be accepted somehow as "the" flag of the Confederacy. How this happened is a significant part of the book. The flag's inevitable association with the opposition to desegration is also discussed. I even learned exactly why the flag was on that beach towel my brother and I had when we were kids and what do you know, the flag really was cool!

I think the main thing this book will cause you to do is think about ideally vs. really. Ideally the battle flag should simply be an historic symbol. A symbol of the most traumatic period in American history, a period when we tried to tear ourselves apart, a tragic period whatever you may think the causes were. Ideally the flag should be something used by Confederate Veteran organizations to honor the sacrifice of their ancestors. Ideally this is what the flag should be, but REALLY is something else. In reality, the flag has also become a symbol of racism and segregationist causes. In reality the flag continues to be used as a symbol of anti-american feelings. In reality the flag has unfortunately become many things it should not be and this is where the book challenges us the most.

What is the Confederate Battle Flag to you? This is the question each person must answer. If it is a symbol of history and honored ancestors let us work hard to keep it in that perspective. If it is a symbol of racism please understand that it is NOT that to everyone. And to many it will never be anything more than it was to me when I was a child and knew little about the flag's history and uses. To those folks, it will continue to go on bumper stickers and t-shirts. Perhaps the book's greatest asset (and knowing what I know about my friend and colleague I think this is a good bet) is its challenge to all of us to THINK; think about who we are as Americans and what place this "Embattled Emblem" has in our nations, in our history and in our hearts.

The author wrote this book in order to provide a factual and objective basis for a constructive dialogue about the Confederate flag. All of the many reviews in newspapers and history magazines praise the book for transcending the often unproductive debates over the meaning of the Confederate flag - debates that pit emotional reactions against each other and confuse an individual's feelings about the flag for its overall meaning. According to the book's preface, its "guiding question" is "What does the [reader] need to know in order to understand the modern debate over the battle flag?"

It is, therefore, disheartening to see that so many people are incapable of engaging this subject with anything but their emotions and their preconceived notions. Three of the so-called "reviews" posted here merely state the reviewers' own opinions and feelings about the flag and give the book gratuitously low ratings (I give it a slightly inflated full 5 stars to balance those unfair ratings.) It is obvious that the reviewers have not bothered to read the book: they make statements about the flag that the book irrefutably contradicts and make judgments about the book that are inaccurate. In an easily overlooked passage on page 291 (especially easily overlooked if one does not actually read the book), the author observes how some people tend to confuse "history" with "heritage": "The discipline of history strives to present the past objectively, but acknowledges that historical interpretation is inevitably subjective and must evolve as new evidence and new perspectives emerge. Heritage is more akin to religion than history. It is a presentation of the past based not on critical evaluation of evidence but on faith and the acceptance of dogma. Heritage seeks to define and propagate _Truth_ and often does so with the selective use of evidence. Heritage affirms the historical myths essential for national, cultural, or subcultural identity."

The Confederate heritage critics who have sought to disparage this book seem to substantiate just what the author says. Is it because they can muster no rational responses to the evidence that he presents and the objective arguments he makes? That is the conclusion that any fair-minded reader must make. It's sad, but it also underscores how truly insightful this book is.

John Coski's significant achievement: he has managed to bring a historian's neutral perspective to an otherwise highly-charged controversy. He begins with the flag's initial design (it was an alternative design for the first Confederate national flag, actually proposed by the design committee's chair, William Porcher Miles) and with its use in battle (adopted in late 1861 at the urging of General Beauregard who observed that the national flag resembled the Union's flag too closely, causing confusion on the battlefield). Coski then lays the groundwork for the flag's initial post-war significance as a memorial marker and a historical honor among Confederate heritage groups. With superbly-documented detail, he traces the flag's use by the (second) Ku Klux Klan in the 1920s, by southerners in the US Armed forces during the Second World War, by "Dixiecrats" in the 1948 presidential campaign, by southern college students starting in the late 1940s, by those caught up in the "flag craze" of 1951, by pro-segregationist/anti-civil rights activists in the 1950s, and through the frictions of the past 50 years.

He shows how the flag "became an aggressively racist symbol only after World War II and the Civil Rights movement", and explores with great sensitivity how the flag has two conflicting but potentially overlapping meanings for its users: one, as a symbol of the Confederacy-a historical icon, and second, as a symbol for a major (alleged) principle underlying the Confederacy, the racism that justified slavery. Whether advanced simply as "a symbol of our heritage" by proud Southerners, or as an assertion of a "redneck" political/cultural position, the confusion over these meanings fans the flames of the "flag wars" that still rage in our American public discourse.

The text reflects intensive research and provides superb footnotes. It was delightful to see an article from NAVA's scholarly journal Raven (which I edit) cited in the text, quoting author Rosalind Urbach Ross describing the Confederate Battle Flag as "the second American flag", and to read the excellent treatment of the Georgia state flag adopted in 2003 (for which NAVA member Ed Jackson won the Vexillonnaire Award for his role in its design, and during which the Georgia General Assembly members referred to NAVA's flag-design guidebook Good Flag, Bad Flag).

In a fascinating irony, the Southern hereditary organizations, Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) and United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC), have long fought to restrict the use of Confederate flags to events and sites directly tied to Civil War heritage (such as cemeteries and monuments), decrying its misuse by "slack-jawed teenagers": this has put them in the difficult position of defending the flag itself against attacks (for example, supporting the right to wear the flag on a T-shirt), yet advocating for its more-limited use (for example, opposing the wearing of the flag on a T-shirt).

The author serves as historian and library director at the Museum of the Confederacy in Richmond, Virginia. His evenhanded approach demonstrates a triumph of professionalism over regionalism, and results in a solid and informative treatment of an important contemporary issue in flag usage.

Edward B. Kaye
Editor, Raven, A Journal of Vexillology
North American Vexillological Association

This gives a detailed history of the confederate flag(s) and its use for a variety of purposes in its long history. It truly means many things to many people--history and heritage and in equal measure oppression and ostracism. Both are right. The author does not take sides but allows each side to understand how others' perceeptions are shaped. Superb

An excellent attempt at surveying the whole complex and vexed history of a flag that could potentially be a legitimate symbol of regional identity for the 21st century South, but which carries so much historic baggage that the likelihood of its successful transformation into a symbol of both black and white Southerners is slight. It is also highly unlikely that any of Coski's excellent research will change anyone's mind. He has some good recommendations for commonsensical approaches to the flag, though, and it would be nice if the book succeeded in encouraging flag enthusiasts to consider all the levels of meaning the flag has, instead of tuning out the more negative meanings, and encouraging flag opponents to ASK people why they display the flag, instead of just assuming the worst. It's all about communication, folks.

One of the things I particularly like about the book is that Coski gives due attention to the use of the flag as rowdy-boy kitsch, a use that is not racially charged (or not much) and which often gets lost in the noise when the pro- and anti-flag groups are having at it.

Coski's strong research goes beyond "Heritage Not Hate" to support the notion that we should consider the motives behind those who display the Confederate Battle Flag rather than reduce its meaning to our own prejudice. The history of the flag is emersed in the blood of some 200,000 Confederate soldiers who died in its service. While some certainly fought to preserve the institution of salvery most rallied to defense of their home, their state, their commrads. In the 1960s, the Southern heritage of the flag was lost as it became a symbol of segregation and hatred. More recently, the battle flag has become associated with the "bubba" stereotype of country, stock car racing, gun racks and the Dukes of Hazard County. Others expand upon the latter to adopt the flag as a metaphore for "thumbing one's nose" at authority, a synonym for independence, a modern version of "Don't Tread On Me." The point of Coski's excellent book is this: Perhaps it is time for more dispassionate consideration of the flag. That we look at it as a tool in education rather than a pariah of political correctness. Whereas the use of the Swaskita evokes universal convulsion, the Stars & Bars suggest reasonable purpose on both sides of the question.

First a disclaimer, Dr. John Coski was my professor for the 2nd half of American history (1866 to present) and an assistant for America in Vietnam. His scholarship and ability to describe the tapestry of American history is on par with the finest of American historians and in this volume, he tackles a subject that most would avoid like the plague. If you can force yourself to read the lower # of stars reviews, the reviewers either have an axe to grind (would you expect the national NAACP not to use the battle flag as a recruiting device?) or wish to tell a story from local history (if done as chapters, Virginia would have 93 for it's counties and 38 for it's cities, North Carolina 100 counties, etc. That would not necessarily be history but folklore and open to interpretation) or as my compatriot from Maryland, an attack on Lincoln's unconstitutionality. None of which are the subject of the book. Granted, there are times in the text that I cheered for Coski to hit them harder but his comment regarding that was to bring up length - the book could easily be 1,000 pages and still some points of view would be left out. It would then not appeal to the majority of readers and be relegated to the ivory towers of acedemia. That would be a shame.
Coski has attempted to bring a tremendously emotional subject to the widest audience possible and I feel he succeeds. I have recommended the book to my own SCV camp as well as the executive director of my state's NAACP. That is the breadth of appeal of this work. Do I think everyone will agree with his conclusions? Of course not, but he gives a solid grounding in the post Late Unpleasantness history of the flag and reminds its supporters that their own organizations (the UDC) warned of allowing such widespread abuse of the flag would be a problem in the future.
So don't expect partisanship in this book. It is a history - just the facts. However, those facts are placed in context - both Southern and American - and if that makes you uncomfortable, then maybe a serious history is not for you. The Confederate Battle Flag is solidly researched, well-written and timely. John Coski deserves the highest praise for enduring the slings and arrows of those who would only wish to read something in support of their own position. I am not convinced that many historians would bear that in order to reveal the truth of American history. It is $20.00 very well spent if you want to understand a part of the modern South. Enjoy the prose.

Not a bad read if you want more truthful information to correct some things you have been taught wrong. Read it with an open mind and youll learn a thing or two you might not have already known.

The confederate battle flag is "an enigma wrapped in a riddle"
to historians. Was it:
a. A southern symbol of brave warriors fighting and dying to
protect their southland against the federal government; preserve
states right and slavery?
b. A pernicious symbol of racism and hatred of African-Americans?
c. A historical flag from American history that deserves a place in museums and sites but has no place flying over the
state house in such states as Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia and
South Carolina.
d. A divisive and ugly symbol of segregation which needs to be
furled since it assaults our African-American citizens.
e. A symbol of such far right groups as the KKK and Citizens
Councils which needs to be folded and put in history's attic
The fine historian John Coski from the Museum of the Confederacy in Richmond, Va. shows us in this scholarly, detailed and objective look at the confederate battleflag and the other flags of the Confederate States of America that this
flag is and has been all of the above. The Confederate Flag will:
a. Always be a part of the American scene-love it or hate it.
b. Ambiguous in its meaning to different people who remember
their ancestors who fought for Dixie or remember the bad old days of chattel slavery.
c. He looks at heritage groups such as the Daughters of the Confederacy and the Sons of Confederate Veterans as well as
black groups which oppose the flag.
As the ancestor of men who died for the Confederacy and were buried in confederate draped splendor I can clearly see both
sides of the issue. Unfortunately I conclude that the flag is a
symbol of racism and opppression and should be used only in a
historical context to remember the Confederate soldiers' brave
sacrifice. US Grant once said of the Confederacy, "Never did so
many good men die for so bad a cause (the perpetuation of slavery)."
Not everyone will agree with my personal view but this is a
book which should be read by all interested Americans black or
white or yellow or brown. We need to work together as Americans
free of prejudice and hatred to maximize our many freedoms.
Coski has done an excellent job of research; he understands
the flag flap controversies with expertise.