The Myth of the Lost Cause: Why the South Fought the Civil War and Why the North Won
- Downloads：3629
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-09-16 09:54:21
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：Edward H. Bonekemper III
- ISBN：1621574547
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
The former Confederate states have continually mythologized the South’s defeat to the North， depicting the Civil War as unnecessary， or as a fight over states’ Constitutional rights， or as a David v。 Goliath struggle in which the North waged “total war” over an underdog South。 In The Myth of the Lost Cause， historian Edward Bonekemper deconstructs this multi-faceted myth， revealing the truth about the war that nearly tore the nation apart 150 years ago。
Reviews
Hunter
，
Not particularly deep， so nothing new from it， but it is at least a nice， concise primer to recommend to people。
Steve
，
A couple of years ago， in the context of a conversation on race， a southern friend said to me "You know， Steve， the civil war was not fought over the issue of slavery。"I was familiar with this argument， but was surprised to hear a friend of mine advance it to me。 I took the bait。 "Really？ What was it fought about？""State's rights。" he said confidently， in a tone that implied that this definitively ended the conversation。 "Huh。 The right to do what， exactly？" I asked him。The question， which seeme A couple of years ago， in the context of a conversation on race， a southern friend said to me "You know， Steve， the civil war was not fought over the issue of slavery。"I was familiar with this argument， but was surprised to hear a friend of mine advance it to me。 I took the bait。 "Really？ What was it fought about？""State's rights。" he said confidently， in a tone that implied that this definitively ended the conversation。 "Huh。 The right to do what， exactly？" I asked him。The question， which seemed to me to be an obvious follow up to his statement， appeared to catch him unprepared。 This notion of "states rights" is an old one， of course， beginning almost immediately after the south lost the war， as a way of dignifying their cause， and making that cause appear noble and principled。 In truth， it was neither。 Evidence from historical documents from the time leading up to the civil war makes it obvious that the south was interested primarily in defending slavery， which was， of course， the foundation of the southern economy， and an institution that many southerners believed was sanctioned by the almighty， himself。 One has only to look at the various states' declarations of secession for evidence of this fact。 The confederate states saw the very real threat to their way of life in the growing abolitionist movement in the north， and they were especially angry at the northern states' resistance to returning runaway slaves to their proper masters。 Southern legislators had successfully written into the constitution the obligation for returning slaves to their owners， and they were outraged that northern states exercised their state's rights by resisting this obligation。 It's a whole， complicated issue， a fascinating one， one well worth exploring in detail。 This book does just that。 。。。more
Erik
，
An eye-opening book， well documented and easy to read。 Much of what you think you know about the Civil War is probably wrong。 Lee wasn't a better general than Grant。 Ulysses S。 Grant wasn't a butcher who won by sheer brute force。 The South wasn't doomed to lose the war to the superior numbers and equipment of the North。 There were no "Black Confederates。" And no， the South didn't start the Civil War because of states rights。 They started the war to defend and expand slavery。 That's the main reas An eye-opening book， well documented and easy to read。 Much of what you think you know about the Civil War is probably wrong。 Lee wasn't a better general than Grant。 Ulysses S。 Grant wasn't a butcher who won by sheer brute force。 The South wasn't doomed to lose the war to the superior numbers and equipment of the North。 There were no "Black Confederates。" And no， the South didn't start the Civil War because of states rights。 They started the war to defend and expand slavery。 That's the main reason they deserved to lose。 But there were plenty of others。Edward Bonekemper has no sympathy for the Lost Cause propagandists like rebel General Jubal Early or "Lost Cause" author Edward Pollard who spread these myths starting soon after Appomattox and continuing right up to the present day。 So he busts each one of their myths remorselessly， while replacing the myths with a more accurate version of the Civil War and its meaning for American history。Grant was a great general， perhaps the best in American history， and the North deserved to win not merely because it fought a better battlefield war but because its cause was better。These days， as Confederate statues come down across the country， we might cheer to see the end of the Lost Cause。 But we shouldn't stop by tearing down the traitors and enslavers who fought for what Grant termed one of the worst causes in history。 Instead， we should put up new statues of Grant and real Civil War heroes whose memory deserves to be honored， and the truth of whose stories deserves to be better known by all Americans。 Bonekemper's book is an excellent start。 。。。more
Adam Klein
，
Enjoyed reading。 And learning Lee despite the propaganda was an overaggressive general。 And you learn about Grant。 And just for that it is worth the read。 As always the overly romantic and perfect tends to be propaganda and false as good people are imperfect that the truth is not something to be afraid of to overcompensate。
Peter Hale
，
A very interesting book， to say in the least。 The point of this book was to put down "the Myth of the Lost Cause"， which is the belief that the South never could have won， while also analyzing such things as overglorified depictions of Robert E。 Lee， "Pete" Longstreet was why Gettysburg was such a colossal failure， yatta yatta yatta。 It is done in a very short and readable way。But I must refute a few things Bonekeeper Bonekemper says in the book。 First off， I'm glad he put down some of the glori A very interesting book， to say in the least。 The point of this book was to put down "the Myth of the Lost Cause"， which is the belief that the South never could have won， while also analyzing such things as overglorified depictions of Robert E。 Lee， "Pete" Longstreet was why Gettysburg was such a colossal failure， yatta yatta yatta。 It is done in a very short and readable way。But I must refute a few things Bonekeeper Bonekemper says in the book。 First off， I'm glad he put down some of the glorification of Lee， but he does so in a very bitter and distasteful way， calling him "overrated" at the end of the chapter。 Bonekemper should have brought up why he was loved so much。 As Emory M。 Thomas did in his biography of ol' Marse Robert， Lee was a great man not because of what he did， but how he did them。 He was dignified and kind， humble and careful。 He lost a war， but inadvertently created admiration from even his foes。 Why didn't Bonekemper bring up how Grant and his men saluted Lee at Appomattox？ He also quotes Lee out of context when discussion Emancipataion， to paint him as a racist on a par with David Duke。 Is there an anti-Lee agenda out there？Speaking of Grant， Bonekemper apparently does not believe Grant was exempt from glorification。 There's an entire chapter about what a great dude Yulee was compared to Robert。 Grant was more racist that Lee was。 Here's a quote from Grant taken from Battle Cry of Freedom:"Grant informed his family that his only desire was 'to put down the rebellion。 I have no hobby of my own in regard to the Negro， either to effect his freedom or to continue his bondage。。。'"And does this make Grant any less admirable？ No。 He was wrong to think in such a pretentious way， but these were men of the time， who just followed what everybody else though。 It was a past wrong that should be ignored。 Anyway， a good read with some unusual hypocrisy。 Still did a good job clearing up some myths。 。。。more
Kathleen Lamothe
，
This book was *super* illuminating and informative about all the nuanced/complex elements that make up "The Myth of the Lost Cause，" beyond the most well-known "slavery had very little to do with The War; it was more about The South fighting for 'States Rights' and against 'Northern Aggression"However， as informative and enlightening as it was， the reason it's only getting a 4-star review （rather than a full 5-star） is that I found it to be quite dry。 Perhaps actual historians would give it high This book was *super* illuminating and informative about all the nuanced/complex elements that make up "The Myth of the Lost Cause，" beyond the most well-known "slavery had very little to do with The War; it was more about The South fighting for 'States Rights' and against 'Northern Aggression"However， as informative and enlightening as it was， the reason it's only getting a 4-star review （rather than a full 5-star） is that I found it to be quite dry。 Perhaps actual historians would give it higher ratings but as a layperson， my preference is for history books that are more narrative in nature。 In other words， I prefer all the dryer stats， graphs， & figures to reside in extensive Appendices & Notes sections at the back of a book， rather than being interspersed throughout the text。 ¯\_（ツ）_/¯ 。。。more
Andy
，
Bonekemper's book is well written， well researched， and well documented。 I doubt any Confederate flag-waving moron is going to read this book。 If someone is under the delusion that the Confederacy's design was anything but a war waged for the sole reason of owning slaves， this book could help them understand the foundational reasons。 With that said， no conversion will be made by this book and probably no others。 The fact that you would bear that miserable rag about is all one needs to know that Bonekemper's book is well written， well researched， and well documented。 I doubt any Confederate flag-waving moron is going to read this book。 If someone is under the delusion that the Confederacy's design was anything but a war waged for the sole reason of owning slaves， this book could help them understand the foundational reasons。 With that said， no conversion will be made by this book and probably no others。 The fact that you would bear that miserable rag about is all one needs to know that you've been raised with ignorance as your teacher and violence as your champion。Bonekemper provides insights into the failed leadership of Robert E。 Lee， Jefferson Davis， Alexander Stephens， and some of the lesser generals， including Jubal Early and James Longstreet。 Because the war was lost to the Union， the need to have heroes fighting for a worthy cause needed to be created。 Bonekemper does a good job of illuminating the efforts of Jubal Early's creation of the myth。 It is evident today that many people still cling to the myth。 Yesterday I came across a posting showing a proud confederate doofus showing a depiction of the two flags， two soldiers， and a quote saying， "This time we ride together！" In this poor moron's mind， he holds the confederate flag in esteem and imagines that he's the victim of the union flag he still lives under， yet thinks he should have both as equals。 This is the culture of the idiot that wants to believe he is better than the man he wants to oppress。 Bonekemper does a good job of revealing why the myth is a falsehood but does not provide insight into overcoming the culture's tragic results。This book is worth reading to gather information。 If you are a believer in the Confederacy and want to begin living an altruistic life， this could be a book for you。 。。。more
Steve Barney
，
Excellent book that thoroughly debunks the myth of “The Lost Cause” on all of its points。 The false narrative that the war was about states rights and not slavery。 The elevation of Lee to that of a deity， when in fact he was mostly likely the reason the south didn’t succeed in the war。 That Grant was a butcher and a drunk， when in fact， his losses were significantly less than Lee’s， his strategy and leadership better， and of course that he led the north to victory。 To the points of the north wag Excellent book that thoroughly debunks the myth of “The Lost Cause” on all of its points。 The false narrative that the war was about states rights and not slavery。 The elevation of Lee to that of a deity， when in fact he was mostly likely the reason the south didn’t succeed in the war。 That Grant was a butcher and a drunk， when in fact， his losses were significantly less than Lee’s， his strategy and leadership better， and of course that he led the north to victory。 To the points of the north waging total war， and could not lose。 It’s a very detailed and researched breakdown of what happened。 Both from exposing the southern originators/pundits that created the lies of the lost cause， and thus perpetuating an incorrect history of the war， and furthering white supremacy and racism。 To a detailed review of the actual events that disproves all of their lies。 Even finer aspects of the lost cause history are shown as false; like Longstreet was the cause of the loss at Gettysburg and hence the war。 The truth/proof is really overwhelming。 Statistics of losses on both sides， the actual language used in each state’s secession statements， the objective review of Lee’s and Grant’s battle strategies in the face of their sides overall strategic imperatives， it’s all reviewed。 Recommended highly。 I hope this information is finally finding its way into the history curriculums being taught。 。。。more
Philip
，
This book was very informative。 There were times when it was a little dry。
C。
，
This book provides irrefutable evidence that the South has been brainwashed by a propaganda campaign since the late 19th century。 The facts in this book are as important as ever for understanding the truth about American history。
Bill Christman
，
Myths are stronger and more lasting than the truth can ever be。 Myths are tidy stories， heroes with a great cause。 The American Civil War is steeped in many myths derived from southerners who had to justify the destruction of the south; they had to justify the reason for the war they started; they also had to spin the war into a noble cause and hide away the real reason they fought。 To these people Edward H。 Bonekemper III must be satan。 Bonekemper has made it his life's work to rewrite the stor Myths are stronger and more lasting than the truth can ever be。 Myths are tidy stories， heroes with a great cause。 The American Civil War is steeped in many myths derived from southerners who had to justify the destruction of the south; they had to justify the reason for the war they started; they also had to spin the war into a noble cause and hide away the real reason they fought。 To these people Edward H。 Bonekemper III must be satan。 Bonekemper has made it his life's work to rewrite the story of the Civil War into something that resembles the truth and to kill the myths。 This is his most encompassing book attacking the Lost Cause school of Civil War history， yet it is short and highly readable。 Robert E。 Lee being the winningest general in the south would become clouded in marble as Lost Causers would try to ennoble the war。 I don't think Lee was that good of a general。 Bonekemper agrees。 Lee has been given a reputation far outsizing his accomplishments。 The great generals in US history understood how to achieve the final objectives of what they and the country wanted。 Washington， Eisenhower， and U。S。 Grant understood what they needed to do and therefore set about with a strategy to achieve it。 At times for all of them there was failure but it never interfered with their persistence heading towards their goals。 Lee on the other hand did not seemed concerned for his 'country'， only his state。 He would suck up the resources of the confederacy， waste his soldiers lives on frontal assaults （where Grant's few frontal assaults were followed by maneuver， yet he gained the reputation as a butcher）， and in the end Lee would not come down off his figurative high horse and give the Union generals credit for how they handled their forces。 His brief comments created the entire Lost Cause movement that continues to shadow the United States to this day。 As a point of this Grant's conquest of the south resulted in gaining more acreage under control than Dwight D。 Eisenhower did in Europe in World War II yet his reputation would be of a drunk butcher who used overwhelming force and got lucky。 If Grant got 'lucky'， why is it that the army commanders before him did not completely harness the full power of the north until Grant？ Usage of all the resources at your disposal is a sign of at least very good generalship。 Bonekemper is good at using statistics to prove Grant was the better general。 He also focuses on the cause which he says， surprise here， was slavery。 By sticking to what the southerners said at the beginning of the confederacy he establishes that slavery and white supremacy was the cause of the war。 States rights' was actually a problem for the south as they complained the federal government was not enforcing its own fugitive slave laws and forcing the northern states to return the runaways。 From the compromise constitutional amendments protecting slavery （which are still eligible to become amendments unlike the Equal Rights Amendment）， to the constitution of the confederacy， to the desertion and chances of being a casualty within the confederate army Bonekemper shows over and over again that slavery was the reason and the motivation for the treason。 This book here is a nice brief look at the lost causers beliefs and each of their arguments。 Each gets attacked by Edward Bonekemper， with the deadliest aim。 This book will not be the last word because as long as people believe myth over fact， the struggle for the truth will go on。 。。。more
Ethan Prueitt
，
An easy to read and fascinating dismantling of the southern narrative of the war。 It decisively cuts through the arguments that the war was alabout anything but slavery。
Mrrequiem
，
Excellent book， except n my opinion the author devotes a bit too much time to the military strategies of Lee vs。 Longstreet: a lot of battlefield minutiae which I didn't think was essential to the thrust of the entire book， However， not being previously familiar to the the extent to which Robert E。 Lee has been deified， perhaps these chapters were essential for more informed readers。 Excellent book， except n my opinion the author devotes a bit too much time to the military strategies of Lee vs。 Longstreet: a lot of battlefield minutiae which I didn't think was essential to the thrust of the entire book， However， not being previously familiar to the the extent to which Robert E。 Lee has been deified， perhaps these chapters were essential for more informed readers。 。。。more
Christine
，
This should be required reading for Americans， even if just the first few chapters and the conclusion。 This masterfully breaks down the myths we’ve all been taught about The Civil War in clear language with lots of citation。 Especially now， when Confederate flags seem to be everywhere and people claim they’re just about “heritage” and not racism， its important to be armed with the facts to shoot down that theory。 （In case you need them: the Confederacy was only formed in order to protect slavery This should be required reading for Americans， even if just the first few chapters and the conclusion。 This masterfully breaks down the myths we’ve all been taught about The Civil War in clear language with lots of citation。 Especially now， when Confederate flags seem to be everywhere and people claim they’re just about “heritage” and not racism， its important to be armed with the facts to shoot down that theory。 （In case you need them: the Confederacy was only formed in order to protect slavery and white supremacy。 Therefore， Confederate flags only exist as symbols of white supremacy。 Citation: the Confederate Constitution and every Confederate states’ statement on secession。） Highly recommend。 。。。more
Mary
，
Must read and so relevant in the current climate。
Marcus Latham
，
Excellent work that dispels the “states rights” argument used by the Confederacy。 Also takes the halo off Confederate “heroes” Timely with the controversy over the removal of monuments of these “heroes”
Dana Wilson
，
Terrible book， couldn’t finish and returned it。
Alex Miller
，
Edward Bonekemper's The Myth of the Lost Cause is a compact and persuasive little book that demolishes the various myths underpinning neo-Confederate Lost Cause mythology， chief among them that the South seceded from the Union to preserve "states' rights"， not slavery， and that Robert E。 Lee was the greatest general of the war， only succumbing to Ulysses S。 Grant through the brute force of Northern men and arms; if Lee failed， as he did at Gettysburg， the blame lies with his subordinates， not wi Edward Bonekemper's The Myth of the Lost Cause is a compact and persuasive little book that demolishes the various myths underpinning neo-Confederate Lost Cause mythology， chief among them that the South seceded from the Union to preserve "states' rights"， not slavery， and that Robert E。 Lee was the greatest general of the war， only succumbing to Ulysses S。 Grant through the brute force of Northern men and arms; if Lee failed， as he did at Gettysburg， the blame lies with his subordinates， not with Lee personally。 There are other facets of Lost Causeism - did the Union wage punitive "total war" on the South as legend has it？ No， says Bonekemper - but the dual myths of "states' rights" as the motivating factor for secession and the legend of Robert E。 Lee， the personification of Southern honor and martial valor， are at the heart of Lost Cause mythology and Bonekemper spends a majority of the book successfully debunking these two fables。In disproving the notion that the South was driven to secession by a philosophical commitment to states' rights and not slavery， Bonekemper goes straight to the horse's mouth and compiles a lengthy list of contemporary statements and documents from leading Confederates who made it clear beyond all reasonable doubt that the preservation of slavery was the overwhelming reason， arguably the sole reason， why they felt compelled to dissolve the Union。 The secession proclamations from the first five seceding states （which were also the five states with the most slaves per capita， as Bonekemper notes） gave slavery pride of price in declaring to the world why they were seceding from the United States; Mississippi's secession ordinance bluntly stated that， "Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery—the greatest material interest of the world。" Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens declared two months before Fort Sumter that the Confederacy's foundation， "rests upon the great truth， that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition。 This， our new government， is the first， in the history of the world， based upon this great physical， philosophical and moral truth。” And this entire outburst of slavery-induced secessionitis came in the wake of the election of an explicitly anti-slavery candidate to the presidency， Abraham Lincoln， after a campaign almost exclusively dominated by the single issue of slavery。 The evidence， in sum， is clear that the mantra of "states' rights" was merely a means to an end; the end being the protection of slavery， as openly admitted by the leaders of the would-be breakaway state。 After laying bear Southern motives， Bonekemper follows up with two chapters that successfully cut the sainted Robert E。 Lee down to size。 The Robert E。 Lee in this book was an overrated general with a flimsy grasp of strategy who squandered the South's natural advantages of defense with aggressive， costly campaigns that depleted Southern manpower and paved the road to Southern defeat。 Wedded to antiquated Napoleonic notions of decisive victory， Lee launched two failed invasions of the North， and in the second of those campaigns， at Gettysburg in 1863， fatefully ordered a frontal assault on the Union center that ended in catastrophe。 Strategically and tactically aggressive， Lee's style of warfare was fundamentally ill-suited for the manpower-starved South， which only needed to wear down the North in attrition warfare to achieve its ultimate objective of independence。 In Bonekemper's inimitable phrasing， Lee only needed a tie， gambled for a win， and recorded a loss。 Bonekemper makes a convincing case that Grant， and not Lee， was the war's outstanding general （Grant won decisive victories in the two main theaters of war and suffered fewer casualties than Lee despite commanding far greater forces）， although the criticism of Lee's military nous seems overdone， all things considered。 Indeed， he is so keen on destroying the notion of Lee the military genius that he misses an opportunity here of debunking the notion of Lee the reluctant warrior who tisked-tisked at slavery and secession （part-and-parcel of the Lee legend）; Lee was actually more of a Southern ideologue than conventional wisdom has it， as even sympathetic biographers like Michael Korda have documented。 I'd still have no problems recommending this book to anyone who wants a quick and easy-to-read demolition of the distorted history that even today colors our understanding of the war。 If you've read this book， you'll at least realize that the next time you come across a Robert E。 Lee statue， you'll view him not as a saintly， honorable figure but a flawed general who betrayed his country in the name of slavery。 。。。more
Thomas
，
This book is a valuable resource for refuting the pack of lies that is the Lost Cause Myth， a thing that has been passed off to generations of vulnerable school children as history。There’s a lot to unpack in this one so I’ll be brief。Slavery was an evil institution that destroyed the lives of generations of slaves and their descendants。 The American Civil War was absolutely about slavery and very little else。The soldiers that fought for the Confederacy in that war might have had heroic intention This book is a valuable resource for refuting the pack of lies that is the Lost Cause Myth， a thing that has been passed off to generations of vulnerable school children as history。There’s a lot to unpack in this one so I’ll be brief。Slavery was an evil institution that destroyed the lives of generations of slaves and their descendants。 The American Civil War was absolutely about slavery and very little else。The soldiers that fought for the Confederacy in that war might have had heroic intentions but that does not change the fact that they were pawns of evil。 Robert E Lee was not the greatest general in the history of the world。 He wasn’t even the greatest general in the Civil War。 That honour belongs to Ulysses S Grant。The Myth of the Lost Cause is one of the most successful and pernicious propaganda campaigns in the history of the United States。 It continues to do massive harm to all who believe in it as well as the entire world。 It， along with racism and white supremacy， is near the top of the list of ideas that need to die。 。。。more
C。T。 Phipps
，
In these troubled times， I think the truth sets us free。 I grew up with the myth of "Northern barbarians" [Nope]， "General Lee donated Arlington to become a military cemetery as a gesture of healing" [flat out a lie]， "Slaves were too valuable to abuse" [nonsense]， and other stories designed to undermine the Union while propping up the Confederacy。 I was a child of the Eighties and even then people tried to sell me the idea that the Civil War was about state's rights and that the South was full In these troubled times， I think the truth sets us free。 I grew up with the myth of "Northern barbarians" [Nope]， "General Lee donated Arlington to become a military cemetery as a gesture of healing" [flat out a lie]， "Slaves were too valuable to abuse" [nonsense]， and other stories designed to undermine the Union while propping up the Confederacy。 I was a child of the Eighties and even then people tried to sell me the idea that the Civil War was about state's rights and that the South was full of larger-than-life heroes defending their homes rather than white supremacists depending their brutal exploitation of innocent people。 Indeed， one doesn't have to go far these days to find proof that the Lost Cause myth was always nothing more than a pack of lies。 My great aunt always insisted that General Lee loved Virginia too much to raise his hand against it， so that's why he led the Rebellion's [capital R] forces。 If you stop to note that this didn't prevent him from taking up arms against WEST VIRGINIA （the non-traitors）， a very different picture is painted of Robert E。 Lee。 Edward H。 Bonekemper III （and that is a name， sir） gives a lengthy but entertaining deconstruction of virtually every lie， darn lie， and darn dirty lie that the Confederate apologists told in order to paint themselves as something other than perpetrators of one of the worst evils of human history。The book is written in a conversational and entertaining style that makes history fun， even as it deals with dark and depressing subject matter。 The Lost Cause was a war on the truth and for over a century， I'd argue it was won by the Daughters of the Confederacy [who I never thought of as a sinister organization until this book]。 What's impressive is really how MANY lies the Confederacy's apologists told about everyone and everything。 "State's rights" doesn't hold up under the least scrutiny because the Declaration of Secession of almost every state cites slavery directly and sometimes the preservation of white supremacy。 Union generals were treated as morons and monsters when they were geniuses against an intractable enemy。 Truth， it turns out， has a Union bias。I highly recommend it。 。。。more
Haamid A Hakam
，
Should be required reading for everyone。 Answers the question of why the South fought the Civil War in the words of those who instigated secession。 Also answers the question of why non-slave owning whites fought in the war。 Lastly， it puts to rest forever what the Confederacy and its flag really represents。
Scott Martin
，
If the expression is true that sometimes "sacred cows make good hamburgers"， then Bonekemper has served up quite a cookbook。 Surveying the literature that inspired the "sacred cows" of the Lost Cause， Bonekemper discusses the origins of those beliefs， and then he proceeds to dismiss each of those assertions， using combination of additional writings and statistics。 Many of the arguments are detailed （although some assertions are shorter and seem a little more incomplete than others）。 In particula If the expression is true that sometimes "sacred cows make good hamburgers"， then Bonekemper has served up quite a cookbook。 Surveying the literature that inspired the "sacred cows" of the Lost Cause， Bonekemper discusses the origins of those beliefs， and then he proceeds to dismiss each of those assertions， using combination of additional writings and statistics。 Many of the arguments are detailed （although some assertions are shorter and seem a little more incomplete than others）。 In particular， Bonekemper looks to lay waste to the assertions that Lee was the brilliant commander whereas Grant was the drunk butcher。 Defenders of the cult of Lee will NOT like this work， but Bonekemper's case is strong enough to reconsider the pedestal that Lee currently sits on。 Much of the recent scholarship about Grant is growing more positive in recent years， and this work is part of that。 I would recommend reading this book to get an understanding of some of the key myths perpetrated by those who advocate for the Lost Cause。 Will it change minds？ Hard to say。 People who hold to the beliefs from the Lost Cause may not stomach this book， but it is worth the read， at least to know where these myths come from， and how to counter their arguments。 We have a lot of work to do about how we view the Civil War。 This work is part of that effort。 。。。more
Joe
，
As only a casual student of the Civil War， this book was a game-changer for me。 I'm sure that professional historians have explored this topic quite a bit， but for me， it's new territory。 I've never been sympathetic to the aims of the Confederacy — Colorado was a Union state after all — but I'm shocked by how many elements of The Lost Cause actually made their way into my assumptions about the War。 Luckily， it's never too late for a little intellectual spring cleaning。 I only wish that I could g As only a casual student of the Civil War， this book was a game-changer for me。 I'm sure that professional historians have explored this topic quite a bit， but for me， it's new territory。 I've never been sympathetic to the aims of the Confederacy — Colorado was a Union state after all — but I'm shocked by how many elements of The Lost Cause actually made their way into my assumptions about the War。 Luckily， it's never too late for a little intellectual spring cleaning。 I only wish that I could get back the 2，500 or so students who've already taken my class， and correct some of the things I taught them。 : / 。。。more
Terry
，
Certainly a mostly readable labor of love， in tying down the anti-bellium South with slavery and busting the myths of the Lost Cause。 Though not really a history book about that period。
NephriteON
，
The following review was originally published in the online newspaper The Orkney News in 2019。 Link here。 https://theorkneynews。scot/2019/12/29。。。The Myth Of The Lost Cause: Why The South Fought The Civil War And Why The North Won by Edward H。 Bonekemper IIIHello again to you all！ Now that we are slowly recovering from our overindulgences during Christmas and the holiday period it is time for me to review one final audiobook before the end of the year。 Originally I was planning on reviewing some The following review was originally published in the online newspaper The Orkney News in 2019。 Link here。 https://theorkneynews。scot/2019/12/29。。。The Myth Of The Lost Cause: Why The South Fought The Civil War And Why The North Won by Edward H。 Bonekemper IIIHello again to you all！ Now that we are slowly recovering from our overindulgences during Christmas and the holiday period it is time for me to review one final audiobook before the end of the year。 Originally I was planning on reviewing something somewhat more cheerful but I found myself drawn to the topic and gave this book a chance。 I’m glad I did！For those of you unaware， the idea of the ‘Lost Cause’ is the concept that no matter what the South did during The American Civil War they were guaranteed to lose and their rebellion was in fact doomed from the beginning。 Tied into this is the idea that The American Civil War was fought over states rights and that southern slavery had very little to do with the causes of the war。 The other main conjecture of the ‘Lost Cause’ idea is that General Robert E。 Lee was some form of military genius and he only lost the Battle of Gettysburg due to the incompetency of others （namely James Longstreet） and the butchery of Ulysses S。 Grant。 As you can guess by the title of the audiobook this book is written by Mr Bonekemper - a noted American historian - to counteract the mythmaking of southern revisionists。 The book is a very interesting read for those curious about the American Civil War as it dissects the multiple elements that create the myth using original sources from the period。 Another good thing about this book is the language is quite simple and easy to understand with very minimal jargon unlike some history books I’ve listened to over the years。 I assume this is because the book was written with intent to counter the arguments made by others and convey its message so therefore had to be understandable by the general public。 In my personal opinion he makes his arguments quite convincingly while still making the book enjoyable。 Notably the author also specifically name drops a few examples of those individuals who - even if they don’t explicitly support the ‘Lost Cause’ - indirectly continue its themes or messages - such as respected figures like Mary Beard and John Keegan。 I definitely recommend this book even if you aren’t particularly enamoured with history。 You never know what part of history from all over the world could spark your interest。 Be it the local history of Orkney during the world wars or specifically the Italian Chapel or more globally such as the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 or as in this case The American Civil War。 Now for the part I’m not looking forward to。 You may have noticed that up to this point I have made very minimal references to the audiobook version of this book？ That is for a very good reason。 Despite the book itself being rather engrossing and interesting in my personal opinion， the audiobook release is very much a disappointment。 The book is narrated by C。J。McAllister who unfortunately takes a well done book on an interesting subject and makes it dull as dishwater！ His voice is some form of American （I can’t tell the specific regional accent） and he does quite a decent job when reading the sections Mr Bonekemper quotes from period sources。 However the rest of the time it sounds like listening to a robot with an American accent。 I finished the audiobook because it is （relatively） short and I personally found the subject and actual book to be quite interesting。 I’m not sure however that others would say the same if their only exposure was through the audio version。 Another important criticism - specifically of the audiobook - is that on at least two or three different occasions the narrator can be heard pausing and taking a breath before repeating the last few words of his previous sentence and continuing on。 It is very rare in a professionally produced， edited and released audiobook for things like this to slip through the cracks and be left on the final release version to be heard by listeners。 This disappoints me greatly on a personal level as I really enjoyed the book otherwise but my recommendation to my readers is to buy and read either a physical version of the book， a digital ebook version or - if one exists - an audio version with a different narrator depending on your preferences。 In conclusion the book itself is a very worthwhile read for those of you who are so inclined （even if it’s not the most seasonally appropriate listening or reading。） However despite highly recommending the book I do think it’s more enjoyable in physical or digital format。 I hope my readers have a Happy Hogmanay and hopefully I can ring in the new year with a first review that’s somewhat more light listening。 Who knows。。。I might be joining a friend soon。Sayonara！ And Auld Lang Syne！Nephrite 。。。more
William Tussey
，
Enjoyed very much。 Thought provoking。
Lucas Lowry
，
This was a great takedown of exactly what it described: The specific and deliberate effort to distort history and build a myth following the Civil War。I'd call this more of a political history book than military history， and that's a good thing。 The author makes a point of how sanitized and tactics driven most Civil War history has become， mainly in an effort to spare readers having to consider why all those tactics were being used in the first place。 The middle of the book is spent on a lot of This was a great takedown of exactly what it described: The specific and deliberate effort to distort history and build a myth following the Civil War。I'd call this more of a political history book than military history， and that's a good thing。 The author makes a point of how sanitized and tactics driven most Civil War history has become， mainly in an effort to spare readers having to consider why all those tactics were being used in the first place。 The middle of the book is spent on a lot of this type of Civil War history， and that gets pretty dry。 It's all done in service of the two biggest points: That Lee was not the god-like figure he's since been made out to be， and that Grant wasn't simply a drunk and a butcher。The amount of these myths and echos I still see reported today， in new writing， far from traditional Civil War history and even by authors making no attempt to apologize for the South， is shocking。 This book makes them jump out even more， and makes for extremely relevant reading in 2020。 。。。more
Harry Whitlock
，
Very much a scholarly book and that made it difficult to get through at times， but it is well worth the plod。 Bonekemper provides some solid facts and observations about the continued delusion by many Americans of the righteousness of the southern cause。 Keeping people enslaved for economic reasons was in the constitutions of most of the states that seceded。 There's no denying the written word that was the reason， even when covered in an icing of "states rights" rhetoric。I think that the best ch Very much a scholarly book and that made it difficult to get through at times， but it is well worth the plod。 Bonekemper provides some solid facts and observations about the continued delusion by many Americans of the righteousness of the southern cause。 Keeping people enslaved for economic reasons was in the constitutions of most of the states that seceded。 There's no denying the written word that was the reason， even when covered in an icing of "states rights" rhetoric。I think that the best chapter of this book was demolishing the treasured story that Lee was the best general on either side of the US Civil War。 As a young soldier and military officer， Lee was the man to emulate。 Over the decades I became a supporter of US Grant and Sherman as more brilliant strategists and tacticians。 Bonekemper lays out solid evidence of Grant being the best Union general。This book， along with This Republic of Suffering: Death and the American Civil War by Drew Gilpin Faust， should be required reading for anyone wishing to understand why 150 years later the Confederacy's lies and mythology still influence our culture and way of life。 。。。more
Kathryn
，
As the 150th anniversary of the Civil War approached and I was preparing my "Songs of the Civil War" program， I noticed that the war was still being debated in certain forums， such as YouTube。 People from the south were still accusing Lincoln of tyranny and claiming that the south seceded over states rights issues， not slavery。 Anyone who still holds such views should take a look at this book。 The author dug up official articles of secession from multiple southern states revealing that--aha！ （or As the 150th anniversary of the Civil War approached and I was preparing my "Songs of the Civil War" program， I noticed that the war was still being debated in certain forums， such as YouTube。 People from the south were still accusing Lincoln of tyranny and claiming that the south seceded over states rights issues， not slavery。 Anyone who still holds such views should take a look at this book。 The author dug up official articles of secession from multiple southern states revealing that--aha！ （or more to the point， duh！）--the southern states seceded because they felt the new Republican president would not honor their Constitutional "rights" to retain and spread slavery。 Bonekemper points out， interestingly， that leaders of slave states had no interest in upholding the rights of northern states who didn't want slave catchers roaming their streets but were all about the power of the federal government when it came to upholding slavery throughout the country。 When that government posed a threat to their way of life they tried to exit。 He challenges other myths too， such as Lee's post-war canonization， but one that grabbed my attention was this: slavery was already dying out before the war began， hence the "northern invasion" was unnecessary。 When you stop laughing， consider this: Bonekemper points out that slavery was not only the foundation of the southern economy but also its society--white southerners， terrified of racial equality， were desperate to keep African-Americans in their place。 An excellent observation， especially to anyone to has studied the century-long Jim Crow nightmare。Excellently researched and a pleasure to read。 。。。more
Joe Sobek
，