What do you think?
Rate this book
What Caused the Civil War?: Reflections on the South and Southern History
“An extremely good writer, [Ayers] is well worth reading . . . on the South and Southern history.”―Stephen Sears, Boston Globe The Southern past has proven to be fertile ground for great works of history. Peculiarities of tragic proportions―a system of slavery flourishing in a land of freedom, secession and Civil War tearing at a federal Union, deep poverty persisting in a nation of fast-paced development―have fed the imaginations of some of our most accomplished historians.
Foremost in their ranks today is Edward L. Ayers, author of the award-winning and ongoing study of the Civil War in the heart of America, the Valley of the Shadow Project. In wide-ranging essays on the Civil War, the New South, and the twentieth-century South, Ayers turns over the rich soil of Southern life to explore the sources of the nation's and his own history. The title essay, original here, distills his vast research and offers a fresh perspective on the nation's central historical event.
Foremost in their ranks today is Edward L. Ayers, author of the award-winning and ongoing study of the Civil War in the heart of America, the Valley of the Shadow Project. In wide-ranging essays on the Civil War, the New South, and the twentieth-century South, Ayers turns over the rich soil of Southern life to explore the sources of the nation's and his own history. The title essay, original here, distills his vast research and offers a fresh perspective on the nation's central historical event.
224 pages, Paperback
First published June 20, 2005
10 people are currently reading
139 people want to read
About the author
Edward L. Ayers
107 books46 followersEdward Ayers is President Emeritus of the University of Richmond, where he now serves as Tucker-Boatwright Professor of the Humanities. Previously Dean of Arts and Sciences at the University of Virginia, where he began teaching in 1980, Ayers was named the National Professor of the Year by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching in 2003.
A historian of the American South, Ayers has written and edited 10 books. The Promise of the New South: Life After Reconstruction was a finalist for both the National Book Award and the Pulitzer Prize. In the Presence of Mine Enemies: Civil War in the Heart of America won the Bancroft Prize for distinguished writing in American history and the Beveridge Prize for the best book in English on the history of the Americas since 1492. He was awarded the National Humanities Medal in 2013.
A pioneer in digital history, Ayers created "The Valley of the Shadow: Two Communities in the American Civil War," a website that has attracted millions of users and won major prizes in the teaching of history. He serves as co-editor of the Atlas of the Historical Geography of the United States at the University of Richmond's Digital Scholarship Lab and is a co-host of BackStory with the American History Guys, a nationally syndicated radio show and podcast.
Ayers has received a presidential appointment to the National Council on the Humanities, served as a Fulbright professor in the Netherlands, and been elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences
A historian of the American South, Ayers has written and edited 10 books. The Promise of the New South: Life After Reconstruction was a finalist for both the National Book Award and the Pulitzer Prize. In the Presence of Mine Enemies: Civil War in the Heart of America won the Bancroft Prize for distinguished writing in American history and the Beveridge Prize for the best book in English on the history of the Americas since 1492. He was awarded the National Humanities Medal in 2013.
A pioneer in digital history, Ayers created "The Valley of the Shadow: Two Communities in the American Civil War," a website that has attracted millions of users and won major prizes in the teaching of history. He serves as co-editor of the Atlas of the Historical Geography of the United States at the University of Richmond's Digital Scholarship Lab and is a co-host of BackStory with the American History Guys, a nationally syndicated radio show and podcast.
Ayers has received a presidential appointment to the National Council on the Humanities, served as a Fulbright professor in the Netherlands, and been elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews
September 17, 2011
Coincidently, this is the second consecutive book I have read where the subtitle is more accurate about the book's contents than the title. Despite the Confederate soldier on the cover, this book actually has very little to do with the Civil War itself. The essays are the author's thoughts and experiences with Southern history. It argues the South is much more complex than widely believed and typically portrayed, and the Civil War's causes are likewise complicated. But the book is too light to feel like it gets anywhere or strongly argues it's point. That's a problem I've noticed with short books (about 200 pages or less) - they simply aren't long enough to go into any real depth.
June 25, 2017
Ayers is one of the most fair-minded modern historians specializing in the South. This slender collection contains several mediocre essays, a couple of trivial ones, and two that should be mandatory reading for everybody coming in contact with this period of history.
The essential articles are "Worrying About the Civil War" and the title piece. Ayers divides historians in this field into two basic camps: the "fundamentalists", who argue for an inevitable conflict resulting from the irreconcilability of slavery and freedom, and the "revisionists", who see the war as contingent upon a myriad of political, ideological, and economic factors, and finally set in motion by personalities and events. Both schools are right, and wrong. He sums it up this way:
"The war came through misunderstanding, confusion, miscalculation. Both sides underestimated the location of fundamental loyalty in the other. Both received incorrect images of the other in the partisan press. Political belief distorted each side's view of the other's economy and class relations. Both sides believed the other was bluffing. . . By the time people made up their minds to fight, slavery itself had become obscured. Southern white men did not fight for slavery; they fought for a new nation based on slavery. White northerners did not fight to end slavery; they fought to defend the integrity of their nation. Yet slavery, as Abraham Lincoln later put it, 'somehow' drove everything."
This is essentially the same position staked out years ago by David Potter, and one would think such a nuanced, readily-supported argument would end discussion. But, as Ayers demonstrates, American historiography is often not about what actually happened in the past, but about how we want to manipulate the present.
Ayers unpacks the mind-set of the dominant school of today's Civil War historians, which dissidents have dubbed the "neo-Radical" or "neo-abolitionist" school. Preeminent in this school is James McPherson, whose perspective reached a mass audience through Ken Burns's TV series. McPherson is up front about regarding the Civil War as an exemplary tale: "Lincoln led the country through the worst of times to a triumph that left America stronger, more free, and more democratic. And that offers a lesson not only for Americans but also for the whole family of man." Historians who argue that the South might have fought for something other than slavery, or that the North fought out of self-interest, have to be beaten off as threats to this beautiful, inspiring vision of the past, and the preceding century of historiography, which insisted on exploring complexities rather than championing the Fight for Freedom, has to be derided and expunged.
Why does any of this really matter? Because, as Ayers suggests, the function of the neo-abolitionist story is to serve present needs. It feeds the need of Americans and their rulers to avoid self-criticism:
"The current interpretation reassures Americans by reconciling the great anomaly of slavery with an overarching story of a people devoted to liberty. These stories reassure Americans by reconciling the horrors of fratricidal war with a vision of a peace-loving republic devoted to democracy and prosperity. They tell the story of a devastating war so that it seems not merely unavoidable but transformative and ultimately healing. . . . Such faith in the transformative effects of warfare can make it easier for Americans to find other wars natural and inevitable."
In other words, an interpretation of the Civil War in which 'the real America whips the bad guys and creates freedom' is very obviously useful for export.
These two essays hit the ball out of the park. Others are merely worthwhile: "What We Talk About When We Talk About the South" is an interesting look at the South's image, how it defines itself, and how it is defined by others, but is too casual and brief to do justice to its subject; "Telling the Story of the New South" is a critical look at W.J. Cash and C. Vann Woodward, and a suitable introduction to Ayers's The Promise of the New South; "Exporting Reconstruction" doesn't live up to the promise of its title, although it has good moments. There is also a fairly interesting autobiographical piece explaining the circuitous route by which Ayers came to be a Southern historian. The only skippable article is a truly dull item on Ayers's struggle to use early computer technology as a research tool.
Just this past week I read that Ayers has been chosen to be part of the team which is to recommend how Richmond, Virginia should provide corrective "context" to its array of Confederate monuments. If anyone can do the job without swapping old propaganda for new, he's the man.
The essential articles are "Worrying About the Civil War" and the title piece. Ayers divides historians in this field into two basic camps: the "fundamentalists", who argue for an inevitable conflict resulting from the irreconcilability of slavery and freedom, and the "revisionists", who see the war as contingent upon a myriad of political, ideological, and economic factors, and finally set in motion by personalities and events. Both schools are right, and wrong. He sums it up this way:
"The war came through misunderstanding, confusion, miscalculation. Both sides underestimated the location of fundamental loyalty in the other. Both received incorrect images of the other in the partisan press. Political belief distorted each side's view of the other's economy and class relations. Both sides believed the other was bluffing. . . By the time people made up their minds to fight, slavery itself had become obscured. Southern white men did not fight for slavery; they fought for a new nation based on slavery. White northerners did not fight to end slavery; they fought to defend the integrity of their nation. Yet slavery, as Abraham Lincoln later put it, 'somehow' drove everything."
This is essentially the same position staked out years ago by David Potter, and one would think such a nuanced, readily-supported argument would end discussion. But, as Ayers demonstrates, American historiography is often not about what actually happened in the past, but about how we want to manipulate the present.
Ayers unpacks the mind-set of the dominant school of today's Civil War historians, which dissidents have dubbed the "neo-Radical" or "neo-abolitionist" school. Preeminent in this school is James McPherson, whose perspective reached a mass audience through Ken Burns's TV series. McPherson is up front about regarding the Civil War as an exemplary tale: "Lincoln led the country through the worst of times to a triumph that left America stronger, more free, and more democratic. And that offers a lesson not only for Americans but also for the whole family of man." Historians who argue that the South might have fought for something other than slavery, or that the North fought out of self-interest, have to be beaten off as threats to this beautiful, inspiring vision of the past, and the preceding century of historiography, which insisted on exploring complexities rather than championing the Fight for Freedom, has to be derided and expunged.
Why does any of this really matter? Because, as Ayers suggests, the function of the neo-abolitionist story is to serve present needs. It feeds the need of Americans and their rulers to avoid self-criticism:
"The current interpretation reassures Americans by reconciling the great anomaly of slavery with an overarching story of a people devoted to liberty. These stories reassure Americans by reconciling the horrors of fratricidal war with a vision of a peace-loving republic devoted to democracy and prosperity. They tell the story of a devastating war so that it seems not merely unavoidable but transformative and ultimately healing. . . . Such faith in the transformative effects of warfare can make it easier for Americans to find other wars natural and inevitable."
In other words, an interpretation of the Civil War in which 'the real America whips the bad guys and creates freedom' is very obviously useful for export.
These two essays hit the ball out of the park. Others are merely worthwhile: "What We Talk About When We Talk About the South" is an interesting look at the South's image, how it defines itself, and how it is defined by others, but is too casual and brief to do justice to its subject; "Telling the Story of the New South" is a critical look at W.J. Cash and C. Vann Woodward, and a suitable introduction to Ayers's The Promise of the New South; "Exporting Reconstruction" doesn't live up to the promise of its title, although it has good moments. There is also a fairly interesting autobiographical piece explaining the circuitous route by which Ayers came to be a Southern historian. The only skippable article is a truly dull item on Ayers's struggle to use early computer technology as a research tool.
Just this past week I read that Ayers has been chosen to be part of the team which is to recommend how Richmond, Virginia should provide corrective "context" to its array of Confederate monuments. If anyone can do the job without swapping old propaganda for new, he's the man.
February 23, 2015
This wonderful set of nine essays is just about as complete of a discussion of the South, the Civil War, Reconstruction, family, home, historical research and some practical applications of the lessons of the Civil War for us today as I have read.
It seems to me that most of these essays have been published somewhere else first. That being said, Ayers has arranged them in a rough chronological order based not on the historical topic of the essay but on Ayers's own life. He starts with his own childhood in Eastern Tennessee and Western North Carolina and his own growing understand of what it means to be a Southerner. As the essays go along, Ayers goes to college, travels the world a bit and eventually returns to the South to do research and eventually teach at the University of Virginia.
As Ayers moves through his education and his career he develops a perspective on the Civil War and that perspective changes as he grows in his research.
The best essay was the title essay. Ayers has a surprisingly...
Read more at: http://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/2015/...
Read all of my Civil War-related reviews at: http://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/searc...
It seems to me that most of these essays have been published somewhere else first. That being said, Ayers has arranged them in a rough chronological order based not on the historical topic of the essay but on Ayers's own life. He starts with his own childhood in Eastern Tennessee and Western North Carolina and his own growing understand of what it means to be a Southerner. As the essays go along, Ayers goes to college, travels the world a bit and eventually returns to the South to do research and eventually teach at the University of Virginia.
As Ayers moves through his education and his career he develops a perspective on the Civil War and that perspective changes as he grows in his research.
The best essay was the title essay. Ayers has a surprisingly...
Read more at: http://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/2015/...
Read all of my Civil War-related reviews at: http://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/searc...
Currently reading
February 2, 2009I got this book at Gettysburg...i dont even think i spelled it rit...oh well...you learn alot in this book. I bet some of my friends dont even belive i am reading this...i bet they think i dont even listen in Class..
December 6, 2021
Much ink has been spilled on the title question of Ayers' book of essays and the title essay of that book gives a fresh perspective: yes, it was slavery, but not so directly as we might think. Instead, it was through ripples across society that were economic, cultural, and social.
Other interesting essays include an account of how Ayers's own upbringing in eastern Tennessee shaped his view of Southerners and the South in a national and international context, and an essay that injects nuance into Southern studies by questioning fixed definitions of regions like the South in general. It's a much more diverse place in every way than images of either its detractors or boosters portray and given the region's importance to national politics, it will help all Americans to understand that the South is not just a backward or traditional area isolated in its own uniqueness but also an area of innovation wired into the national and global economy, as it always has been.
Other interesting essays include an account of how Ayers's own upbringing in eastern Tennessee shaped his view of Southerners and the South in a national and international context, and an essay that injects nuance into Southern studies by questioning fixed definitions of regions like the South in general. It's a much more diverse place in every way than images of either its detractors or boosters portray and given the region's importance to national politics, it will help all Americans to understand that the South is not just a backward or traditional area isolated in its own uniqueness but also an area of innovation wired into the national and global economy, as it always has been.
August 21, 2022
A well-written, insightful collection of essays about the US South and the Civil War.
Highlights include “Worrying About the Civil War,” which proposes and critiques two schools of historical thought and scholarship regarding the Civil War (the “standard” interpretation and the reactionary “revisionist” interpretation); “What Caused the Civil War,” where Ayers introduced his idea of “deep contingency”; and “Exporting Reconstruction,” where Ayers examines the relationship between the US’s failed attempt at reconstruction and its history of interventionist foreign policy.
“A Digital Civil War” is also an interesting reflection on how Ayer’s earlier scholarship coincided with the advent of digital humanities.
There are some additional essays, a tribute to C. Vann Woodward, and a short autobiographical essay that doesn’t quite fit with the collection.
Highlights include “Worrying About the Civil War,” which proposes and critiques two schools of historical thought and scholarship regarding the Civil War (the “standard” interpretation and the reactionary “revisionist” interpretation); “What Caused the Civil War,” where Ayers introduced his idea of “deep contingency”; and “Exporting Reconstruction,” where Ayers examines the relationship between the US’s failed attempt at reconstruction and its history of interventionist foreign policy.
“A Digital Civil War” is also an interesting reflection on how Ayer’s earlier scholarship coincided with the advent of digital humanities.
There are some additional essays, a tribute to C. Vann Woodward, and a short autobiographical essay that doesn’t quite fit with the collection.
September 28, 2021
I found a lot to like in the collection of essays about Southern US history, and a lot of it was eminently readable. I did not enjoy the last two essays so much. 'Telling the Story of the New South' was full of concepts and jargon which were totally unfamiliar to me, so I missed the point. The essay on Reconstruction was very enjoyable.
February 14, 2018
A collection of essays reflecting on themes related to the American Civil War and Southern History. Overall, a good read, but important to understand going in that it is a collection of essays, not a single unified historical treatment of the causes of the American Civil War.
February 20, 2015
What Caused the Civil War? by Edward L Ayers is about his personal experiences of growing up in the American South and being influenced by its culture, traditions, and values. It also has much to do with the history of the south and events that would be causes of the Civil war. The book, however, does not specifically address the question, "What caused the Civil war?", directly. The introduction of the book is mainly about his accounts of growing up in the south and the latter portion is more historical and fact based. He does say that some of the most critical causes of the Civil war were slavery, economics, and the rights of states.
I thought that this book was alright, but I did not expect it to be so much about his personal accounts of growing up in the South. I thought that it would have more direct answers to the main question, as well as some (answers) that I did not already basically know.
I probably wouldn't recommend this book to anyone, unless they were looking for a sub-par American history novel. Even though some of the facts and reading about his own experiences growing up in the South were interesting, the book as a whole was pretty boring.
Three things that I learned from this book are that the American South is a whole different atmosphere than anywhere else in America, their traditions and values are not as stereotypical as media portrays them, and they are much more complex than we think (there is more to them than just country music and rednecks).
I thought that this book was alright, but I did not expect it to be so much about his personal accounts of growing up in the South. I thought that it would have more direct answers to the main question, as well as some (answers) that I did not already basically know.
I probably wouldn't recommend this book to anyone, unless they were looking for a sub-par American history novel. Even though some of the facts and reading about his own experiences growing up in the South were interesting, the book as a whole was pretty boring.
Three things that I learned from this book are that the American South is a whole different atmosphere than anywhere else in America, their traditions and values are not as stereotypical as media portrays them, and they are much more complex than we think (there is more to them than just country music and rednecks).
September 26, 2013
After dropping off the kid at college and listening to the university President, the author, speak, I was inspired to read one of his books. After perusing this one in the University of Richmond campus bookstore, I was immediately hooked. I wondered how my history teachers managed to make the Civil War so boring!
This book flows and reads easily, and I was equally engrossed in Ayer's personal story and journey as well as his modern and historical perspectives. He presents great insight on the great divide between the North and South, now and then, that cause so much bled shed.
I read some History, and I liked it!
This book flows and reads easily, and I was equally engrossed in Ayer's personal story and journey as well as his modern and historical perspectives. He presents great insight on the great divide between the North and South, now and then, that cause so much bled shed.
I read some History, and I liked it!
August 11, 2015
While there were certainly good essays/chapters in this book, there were at least two that failed to both capture my attention and answer the question, "What caused the Civil War?" One high note included the mention of counterfactual history questions, e.g. "What would the U.S. look like if the North had overwhelmed the South in 1862?" The point being: the North was not yet fighting to end slavery, and was merely attempting to preserve the Union.
Overall, I found the book to be too thin on deep analysis of the topic question, and too heavy handed on conclusive generalizations (which rarely speak to me) and extraneous discussion of the author's work and past projects.
Overall, I found the book to be too thin on deep analysis of the topic question, and too heavy handed on conclusive generalizations (which rarely speak to me) and extraneous discussion of the author's work and past projects.
May 24, 2015
First three lines:
"It took me a while to figure out that I was a Southerner. Other identities, not a few of them mistaken, dawned on me first. I had to see the South at a distance before I could see its shape and understand its power."
OK. This is not how a history book begins. This is how a personal memoir begins. I had checked this book out of the library to read about the causes of the Civil War. I'm returning the book next week.
"It took me a while to figure out that I was a Southerner. Other identities, not a few of them mistaken, dawned on me first. I had to see the South at a distance before I could see its shape and understand its power."
OK. This is not how a history book begins. This is how a personal memoir begins. I had checked this book out of the library to read about the causes of the Civil War. I'm returning the book next week.
September 15, 2014
Overall, very interesting! Not quite what I was looking for (I'm looking for books on the Reconstruction itself more than anything) but each essay was fascinating, and incredibly helpful in settling the South and the study of its history in the modern context.
January 29, 2012
Essays on various topics from a Southern Historian. It was more about the field of Southern history than the historical events themselves.
October 21, 2014
Good book that has points that make you consider your own knowledge of the Civil War. If you're looking for an answer to the title question, you may or may not find it.
January 25, 2017
I didn't really enjoy the author's writing style. He has a very condescending tone throughout the book and is very dismissive of other author's arguments. It takes him 133 pages for his thesis to make an appearance and it isn't convincing. I read this for a Civil War class and gathered very little from it.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews