Customer Reviews

Reconstruction after the Civil War

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

 

 

I completely disagree with those reviewers who found this book to be poorly written or confusing. In my opinion it is neither. I found this book to be very clear and well written. This is a short book that provides many interesting insights into a period of American history that is very often neglected in most history books. If one reviewer found the book confusing it is possibly because this is a very controversial and highly confusing period of American history. This book is a good antidote for those whose knowledge of reconstruction was obtained by the distortions and bigotry of films like Birth of a Nation or from the books written by revisionist southern historians. Dr. Franklin outlines the several stages of reconstruction: the initial confederate dominated governments that passed "black" laws that introduced de facto slavery, the reaction of congress and the passage of laws which helped install state governments that contained former slaves and northern "carpetbaggers", the southern reaction to this that was dominated by groups such as the Ku Klux Klan and finally the readmission and rehabilitation of the Southern states that led to the political marginalization of the former slaves. Along the way he discusses the almost impeachment of President Andrew Johnson and the disputed election of Rutherford B. Hays. I found this extremely interesting as he shows that the oft cited reason for the Southern Democratic support for the Republican Hays was not primarily because of a deal to remove Federal troops from the three states that had not yet been rehabilitated. The Democrat Tilden had promised to remove these troops. Dr. Franklin cites studies that show that the deal by which the Southern Democrats switched their votes to Hays was motivated primarily by a deal concerning federal support for southern railways.

It's appalling that previous reviewers have denigrated this classic work by one of our counry's most distinguished historians. Born in 1915, Franklin was subject to the ugly aftermath of Reconstruction and wrote many definitive works on African-American history and the history of race relations. He has won innumerable honors, including the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and has chaired the American Historical Society, Phi Beta Kappa, the American Studies Association, the Southern Historical Association, and the President's Commission on Race (1997). Reviews that accuse him of being a poor writer or offering nothing beyond a high school history text (which would not have been written without his pioneering scholarship) only display the ignorance of the reviewers. Read this book, and Franklin's others!

Reconstruction After the Civil War reads like a tome, a boring one at that. The writing is dry at times, and my mind kept wandering also at times. No question the subject of Reconstruction after the end of Civil War is a fascinating one. There is an array of rich information in the book, and John Hope Franklin does a nice job of pointing out the progress whether it be politics, Negro suffrage, reconciliation between Northern and Southern states, public education, policies and laws, amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America, and economy. I remember some weird pieces of information that I learned in a history textbook during high school that seemed to me a bias or perhaps just really off the mark, and the author actually addressed these points, the myths and stereotypes, in Reconstruction After the Civil War. It makes more sense from his explanations. Moreover, what I liked about the book is the careful analysis of many elements that were going on at once, and the author breaks them down in respective chapters. I wished that he could be more entertaining with his words. Make no mistake about it: Reconstruction After the Civil War represents a vital and important piece of African American history because it exactly lays out the roots of the problems that would lay ahead of the Negroes in the South throughout the 20th century, most especially the Civil Rights movement of 1960s. It's fascinating when I think about it: the creation of Jim Crow laws stemming from the hatred of the Whites, the hate groups (the Ku Klux Klan was actually not the only one), the ignorance by the Northern states of the real problems going on in the South, and the lack of sincere effort to educate the Freedmen (since they were going to stay in United States for good, what could they do?) from the outset which actually led future decaying morals and values among African Americans along with high rates of imprisonment and penury. Henceforth, the problems have brought out long term ramifications in terms of cost that would throw United States in debt. All in all, Reconstruction After the Civil War is an excellent book in spots yet the writing needs to be less dry.

I was very disappointed in Franklin's book. Having read numerous books on Reconstruction prior to his, I was hopeful that he, as an African-American, would bring a unique and challenging perspective to the subject. In my estimation he failed and I'm very sorry for that, because I expecting more based on Franklin's reputation as a pre-eminent historian. In comparison to other books on Reconstruction, read before and after his, I'm sorry to agree with others and state this is not a well written examination of a very important period in American history. I had sincerely hoped for better from him and didn't get it.

February is Black History Month


The Reconstruction period directly after the American Civil War ended in 1865 was cast as the time of the `scalawags', `carpetbaggers', Black Codes and ultimately after a determined and ugly political and military fight by the `right' people, the so-called natural rulers in the South, `redemption'. In short, a least for any radical, a time of shame in the American experience and, at least implicitly, a racist slap at blacks and their supporters for attempting to upset the traditional social order.

There certainly was plenty that went wrong during Radical Reconstruction (there were, as Professor Franklin points out several phases of Reconstruction, not all of them radical) in the South but the conventional high school history textbooks never got into the whole story. Nor did they want to. The whole story is that until fairly recently this Radical Reconstruction period was the most democratic period in the South in American history, for white and black alike. The book under review that reflects the earlier efforts of the likes of Professor Kenneth Stamp (whose book of essays on Reconstruction I have previously reviewed in this space) goes a long way toward a better understanding of the period than those old high school textbooks.

Professor Franklin, as he must, starts off his narrative history by describing the political problems associated with most of the earlier studies of Reconstruction done by those influenced by Professor Dunning and his school in the early 20th century (he provides a very useful "Suggested Reading" section at the end the book which details his sources for those who want to look at the state of scholarship on the subject in the late 1950's/early 1960's). That picture presented, as I described above, the familiar corrupt and scandalous activities associated with this period. Needless to say this position dovetailed very nicely with the rationale for Jim Crow in the pre-1960's South. Moreover, in the hands of its northern liberal devotees it nicely covered up the burgeoning corruption of the northern- based `robber barons'. There is an old adage that history is written by the victors. Whatever the truth to that assertion early Reconstruction history was written by the losers, or rather their apologists once removed.

The Reconstruction era was dominated by three basic plans that Professor Franklin describes in some detail; the aborted Lincoln `soft' union indivisible efforts; the Johnson `soft' redemption plans; and, the radical Republican `scorched earth' policy. In the end none of these plans was pursued strongly enough to insure that enhanced black rights gained through legislation would lead to enlightened citizenship. Franklin, following Stampp, presents detailed critiques of all these plans and some insights about the social and cultural mores of the country at the time that do not make for pretty reading.

The professor then goes on to try to demystify what the radical reconstruction governments did and did not do. That there were scandalous activities and more than enough corrupt politicians to go around goes without saying. However like most myths there is a snowball effect about how bad things really were that obliterates the very real advances for black (and some poor whites) like public education, improved roads and increased state facilities that were anathema to the planting class that formerly ruled the South.

The last part of the book deals with the conservative counter-revolution to overthrow the radical governments culminating in the well-known Compromise of 1877. The actions of that rabble, rich and poor whites alike formed in militias and other para-military operations like the Klan, is certainly not pretty reading. Moreover it took about a century and a `cold' civil war during the 1960's (a battle that continues today) to even minimally right that situation. For those that need an in depth, definitive study of this subject you must turn to the master, Eric Foner, and his monumental "Reconstruction, 1863-1877". However, if you want an earlier, shorter but nevertheless informative overview of Reconstruction this is one of your first stops.

This short book focuses on what is an oft ignored segment of American History--the Reconstruction effort after the Civil War. Usually, Reconstruction is treated as a final chapter or sort of epilogue to many works on the war, but here Franklin attempts to devote an entire book to the various challenges presented to the North in the matter of reconstructing the shattered Union.

I'm not quite sure Franklin achieves his purpose here. The greater part of this book is confusing and difficult to follow, and in fact seems to state the same facts and cite the same incidents three or four different times. The picture Franklin paints of the post-war South is one of violence and depredations committed by such organizations as the Ku Klux Klan against a poor and defenseless African American class. He also portrays the Radical Republicans as trying to restore order and reconstruct the states, but also as just giving up ten years after the war and the election of Hayes. In between, there is a jumble of facts and incidents which show the inability of both parties (which I agree with) to successfully reconstruct the South. If this was an attempt to expose the injustices done to the Negroes by the ex-Confederate ruling class, I think the book achieved its purpose. If, however, it truly was meant to be a book on Reconstruction as a whole, it falls short. In fact, there is little of historical value that one could not gain by the final chapters in a good Civil War text.

If you are interested in black studies, this book will prove to be very useful. But, if you are seeking a thorough and well-written account of the post Civil War era, I recommend you keep looking.

The fact that Dr. Franklin is a very accomplished African American does not automatically ordain him a great writer who is above criticism. The sources in this text are substantial; however, it is still poorly written. I still plan on attending a conference next Thursday at U of South Carolina in order to hear him speak.

This book is very confusing, perhaps Franklin should stop writing books and attend a few writting classes. Franklin repeats facts 2 or 3 times in different chapters and often sets off on wild tangents the can leave the reader utterly befuddled. The only reason I gave this book 1 star is due to Franklins fair treatment of the reconstruction period. Franklin places the blame for the mistakes and horrors of the post civil war era on both Northern and Southern forces; however, due to the utterly incompetent writing of franklin, I can not recomend this book.