/u/Anastik isn't around today, so asked me to post this question by proxy (although I'm kind of writing it how I would ask it I guess...). So please do ensure this one is sent at the top of the list, as getting it answered was the genesis of this entire AMA!

Dr. McPherson, I was hoping you could talk a little bit about your views towards Shelby Foote. Having recently read his 'Narrative', it is easy to see why he is so lauded for his writing style. But at the same time, while reading it I couldn't help but feel like I should be cautious with anything he wrote, as he also has reputation for being less than scholarly. I've heard it said more than a few times that he was a writer who didn't let facts get in the way of a good story.

In your own work though, you cite Foote frequently, over three dozen times in Battle Cry of Freedom, so I think it fair to say you have some respect for him, despite the well known shortcomings. Given this, where exactly do you feel Foote fits in the larger field of Civil War scholarship? And to possibly follow up, if you do take something of a dim view to his value as an historian, what led you to nevertheless rely on him with such frequency in your own work?

Dr. McPherson,

Historians often discuss (or lament) the gulf between prevailing historical interpretations and widespread public knowledge/belief about a given topic. Yet even college courses, in my view, often fall back on the same tired narratives that historians both bemoan (while themselves leading these courses) and seek to complicate and destabilize through their research.

So, how can historians better engage with the non-academic public, both in and out of the classroom? I feel that the public discourse surrounding the Civil War makes this topic especially relevant, but by no means is this trend limited to American history.

As a sidenote: Both your works and (very limited!) past correspondence with you factored heavily in my decision to enter graduate school, where I am now pursuing a PhD in 19th century American history. Your encouragement was, given the quality of my work at the time, very generous but also very appreciated. Thank you.

This question is asked on behalf of /u/gingerkid1234 who is travelling:

Dr. McPherson, I'm really appreciative and honored you could answer questions for us.

As someone whose main interest is Jewish history, I'm curious about the experience of the Jewish community in the Civil War. In my reading, all I can find are references to a community divided along with the rest of the country, with both pro-Union and pro-Confederacy Jews, in addition to Grant's infamous order expelling Jews from Kentucky and the rank of Judah Benjamin in the Confederate Government.

But I'm curious about the experience of Jews during the Civil War more generally. Was there a "Jewish Civil War experience" that was meaningfully different from the experience for the rest of the country, outside of specific incidents (i.e. Grant's General Order #11)? Were there political trends in the Jewish community? I know it's a rather specific question, but it's one I've long been curious about.

Being a Southerner who grew up with many of the "Lost Cause" myths, the most intriguing and baffling one I have heard of is of "Negro Confederates", or black Confederate soldiers. I have never seen any real satisfactory evidence of this, but it leads me to a larger question.

What was the role of slaves/free blacks in the Confederacy and its war effort?

Dr. McPherson at this point the Civil War is as much American Mythology as American History. As an expert in this era what specific points of divergence between history and myth do you find particularly frustrating?

What are your thoughts on the growing number of transnational works which deal with the Civil War and Reconstruction eras? Specifically I'm thinking of Sven Beckert's work on global cotton production networks, Thomas Bender's A Nation Among Nations which looks at the war as part of larger international trends toward consolidation of "nation-state empires", and Matthew Guterl's American Mediterranean: Southern Slaveholders in the Age of Emancipation which looks at international networks of slaveholders in the Americas.

What do you think such studies contribute to Civil War scholarship and where do you think (or hope) these types of studies will lead in the future?

Dr. McPherson, can you comment on why the Lost Cause narrative seems so prevalent in recent years? Is it due to any actions taken after the Civil War?

Dr. McPherson, do you think that Jefferson Davis's pursuance of the strategic defensive in late 1861-1862 was wise, given the circumstances under which it was implemented? He seems to have felt that the political consequences of leaving some states to the wolves outweighed the value of military concentration, though the reverses brought on by this policy brought him a great deal of criticism.

Dr. McPherson, what do you think about the historiographical shift that has taken place away from examinations about why the South lost the Civil War to those about why the North won the Civil War?

Dr. McPherson, in my recent reading, I've been especially interested in the system of parole and exchange used in war, and I was hoping you could expand on my own readings, especially in regards to its failings. What has been especially eluding me is sound information on how the system was enforced.

Lacking any sort of searchable database, was it at all possible to prove that a captured soldier had broken his parole, unless he openly admitted it, or as in a few cases I have found, carried his parole papers on his person when recaptured? If it was discovered that the soldier had broken his parole, what would now happen? And finally, how common was it for a soldier to break parole? Was this widespread, or limited to small numbers here and there?

Dr. McPherson,

Thanks for taking the time to stop by today. In recent decades, military history, while still popular with public, has fallen deeply out of favor within academia. This has created a generation or two of otherwise good historians that lack a fundamental understanding of warfare, a phenomena that brings together so many different facets of history.

How can military history remain relevant in modern academia, and why should it do so? Should military historians be concerned with the various negative connotations associated with the field (i.e. that it's the province of old white men that are uninterested in the advances made in other fields of history in recent years)?

Not as interesting a post as most of the others, but this one's for my dad, who's a huge fan of your work, and he'd absolutely love your answer to this question. Dr. McPherson, what to you is the most interesting engagement of the American Civil War, whether that interest is in terms of strategic and tactical brilliance, overall importance, or even just the horror of the battle or its drama? My dad has been wondering this for quite some time and I figured that this is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to get him the answer he's looking for. Thank you!

Dr. McPherson, in part this is a question of historiography: perhaps no other period in American history has had its history go through so much revision and re-thinking and discrediting. Is there a history of the history of the Civil War that you would recommend? As in, a work that traces the political and historical trends in how academic historians have written about the Civil War, and how Americans have popularly constructed the Civil War in the public consciousness?

Dr. McPherson: Works such as Gary Gallagher's The Confederate War and Susan-Mary Grant's North over South: Northern Nationalism and Identity in the Antebellum Era have stressed the importance of Southern or Northern nationalism in shaping the causes and operation of the Civil War.

• What do you think is the role of nationalism in Civil War scholarship?

• Connected with this, to what extent do you believe antebellum sectionalism comprised advancing regional interests (or opposing another region's interests) versus advancing a national vision which was rooted in regionalized identities and interpretations of the United States as a whole?

Dr McPherson, part of the popular perception of the Civil War is the appointment of "political generals": men who received positions of military command due to political connection or favor. Most of the time, they are criticized for their incompetence and lack of military experience. Were there any politically appointed military commanders who were actually quite adept at leading armies? As well, did the United States Navy have any "political captains" in charge of ships or squadrons?

Doctor McPherson, it has been argued that the potential of the rifled musket was lost on most soldiers, as most combat happened within smoothbore range, and soldiers were not taught how to properly engage at greater distances. How much truth is there behind that claim?

Thank you for taking the time to participate here today, I have always enjoyed your books and cut my civil war teeth on Battle Cry of Freedom.

Dr. McPherson, I am currently writing a thesis about total war tactics in relation to nineteenth century military law and my analysis keeps on circling back to whether we should be calling the Civil War a "total" war, "the first modern war," etc. You have said in the past (I think 1996 I could be wrong) that historians have a point when they say that "total war" does not have a good nineteenth century context, but that the argument is only one of semantics. But in the past decade, work by historians like Mark E. Neely Jr. suggests, to me at least, that a proper reassessment might be in order. Has your thinking on this issue changed in light of this scholarship?

Dr. McPherson, this is perhaps not as technical as many other questions will be, but what is your most poignant story of the Civil War?

Dr McPherson Having recently read "Killer Angels" by Michael Shaara for a history class, I was wondering what your opinion is on the relationship between Longstreet and Lee. It seemed..rocky during the war and especially afterwards with Longstreet's criticism of Lee's tactics particularly at Gettysburg. My questions are 1. In your opinion is this relationship relative to the outcome of the battle (maybe the war?) 2. How much of their relationship-healthy or not, was accurate and how much is fabricated?

Thanks for your time, "Struggle for a Vast Future" is our textbook and my family makes fun of me because I read it for leisure sometimes.

Dr. McPherson:

I recently finished reading Doris Kearns Goodwin's Team of Rivals and was wondering if you could address her argument that Lincoln was a rustic but incredibly savvy political operator in his approach to handling the presidency.

For that matter, I was also wondering if you could touch on the notion that Edward Bates, Salmon P. Chase, and William H. Seward were absolutely critical to both the political arena and the war effort writ large. She seems to argue that they are more important than figures such as Edwin Stanton, Gideon Welles, or Francis P. Blair, Sr. Do you agree?

Thank you for doing this AMA. Battle Cry of Freedom was the book that ignited my interest in Civil War history!

Dr McPherson, I've studied the Civil Wr from the UK for some time and it's a great honour to be able to interact with such an expert, so thank you for that.

My question is, perhaps, an all too simple one, unfortunately! To me, the Civil war is the most important conflict in modern times, if not all time. It created the foundations of a superpower, it revolutionised warfare and navies and it created Schisms in American society that last to this day in race and geography. To you, what about the civil war inspires such debate and romantic myth and do you believe it to be the most important conflict of all time?

1. Is there any evidence that the North traded opium for Southern cotton during the war?

2. How did both the Union and Confederacy dye their fatigues?

Dr. McPherson, I am interested in your opinion of Civil War reenactments. My girlfriend's father, who's every waking thought seems to center around this period of history, participates in these reenactments. This is my first real exposure to this sort of thing and I'm not really sure what to make of it all. I'm curious what a scholar such as yourself has to say on the topic.

Dr. Mcpherson, first I'd like to thank you for your work as a historian. You are one of the primary reasons why I want to become a historian. My question is what is the best advice you can give someone who aspires to become an historian? Currently I'm in the MAT program at USC to become a high school history teacher, but I have considered the PhD route once I have completed my current academic program.

Dr. McPherson, with the increasing prevalence of social history, what is your perspective on the role and importance of military history?

Dr. Mcpherson –

When I read your description of Joshua Chamberlain’s charge from Little Round Top in Battle Cry of Freedom I literally jumped out of my chair and ran around my living room like a fan at a basketball game after an amazing play. The boldness of that maneuver, the importance of the battle as a whole and the impact it seemed to have in the outcome made the magnitude of the success of the charge seem immense the way that you told the story. In your footnotes to the book you noted with seeming annoyance that people have seized on this story and I inferred that you felt it may have been over-sensationalized. I unfortunately own a different version of the book than the one I originally read so I can't find the quote. I recently visited Gettysburg and sought out the Little Round Top site to assess for myself what type of strategic impact holding that ground would have had because I was curious how much credit really ought to be ascribed to the 20th Maine. It was quite clear what the impact of yielding the ground would have been as I looked out over the bluff with the monuments representing all the Union positions the Confederates would have been able to shell, and I was fairly surprised by the relatively small elevation gain which the Confederates would have been attempting to push up, actually making the charge seem more impressive as it wasn’t as downhill as I had imagined based on the way you described it in Battle Cry of Freedom. I was very intrigued by the dichotomy between your words on the seeming over-emphasis of the charge in Civil War literature and the geography which seemed to make what he’d done a remarkable feat of bravery for very significant ground. I would be very interested to know what level of significance you feel should be ascribed to this maneuver in the Union success of the battle because it simultaneously seems hugely important and completely overemphasized.

Dr. Mcpherson, thank you for your time. One of the most interesting aspects of the Civil War and Reconstruction for me is that even in the face of incredible violence from whites, the many blacks were determined to depend on the federal government to protect them when state and local governments would not.

Were there ever widespread attempts by black communities to arm and defend themselves against white violence? What were some of the factors that would have led black communities to meet violence with violence, and what are some of the factors that would have led them not to?

One unfortunate aspect of American Civil War scholarship is its extreme insularity, of not being aware of what happened around the world at that time. How can (US) historians be enticed to integrate their work into a wider international picture?

Dr. McPherson! I recently read War on the Waters and in it you discuss the event in which the US captured Confederate diplomats that were on a British ship. In your opinion, did the use of the Navy by the Confederates and this event in particular lend credence to the claim that the Confederacy was in fact a separate country during the Civil War? As I recall it nearly brought Britain into the conflict.

How involved was the Hispanic population of Texas in the Confederate Cause?

What do you think of the legality of the South seceding from the Union? Were they within their right to do it?

Hello Dr. McPherson,

In a history course I took last year, my professor said that Henry Clay "postponed" the Civil War for many years. I was very interested in Clay and his policies throughout the course, and I was wondering what your views are on him. Do you think that the Civil War would have occurred earlier if Clay had not been present? Or rather, would there have been a higher chance of the events which caused the war, for example the secession of the South, occurring earlier? I would love to hear any of your thoughts on Clay and his policies, thank you very much and have a great day!

Dr. McPherson, I have no questions for you, but I would just like to tell you that your book "Battle Cry of Freedom" was a thoroughly enjoyable read, helped to give me a greater understanding of the American Civil War; and thus how it relates to a world history perspective to my historical niche, the First World War. Thank you for publishing such fine work.

Questions about McClellan and his actions after the Battle of Antietam...

http://memory.loc.gov/mss/mal/mal1/373/3731900/001.jpg

This is a letter from the field claiming that McClellan sent a warning for Lee to run. I question how truthful it is, but why would he want Lee to escape? Was he a Southern sympathizer?

Stumbled across this while I was doing a paper and did not really know what to make of it.

Dr. McPherson, What was the extent of the Sharpshooters regiments involvement in battles? Was it mainly as skirmishers or as regular line troops? As were they equipped differently from a regular unit other than their weapons?

Thank you for doing this. I have always wondered something. Did the experience of Southern Jews change during the time of the Confederacy?

Dr. McPherson, first, thank you for taking your time to share your knowledge and experience with us.

Could you tell us what repercussions from the Civil War are still effecting the US political system today and how? It seems that our nation is still devastatingly divided in direct relationship to the divide between the North and South.

Thank you!

Dr. Mcpherson,

The vast majority of Union soldiers were volunteers. Can you speak to why so many Northern Whites were willing to risk their lives for a cause that was, at least in large part, underpinned by the plight of Southern Black slaves? Was it more about saving the Union or were they genuinely inspired by the cause of slavery?

Thank you so much for your thoughts!

Thank you, Dr. McPherson, for doing this.

My question: What were the various sentiments among the southern states before ratification of the Constitution about the possibility of leaving the Union if they wanted to at any time in the future? Was there a feeling that the southerners would have never joined the Union of they knew they couldn't get out? How widespread was it?

Dr. McPherson, thank you for taking the time to answer some questions! Who do you believe is an underrated and overlooked military general of the war and why?

Hi Dr McPherson, I have a few questions, some already answered by memebers of this community but I was wondering if you had any further input:

• Were there any examples of logistics going catastrophically wrong?

• Was there ever a significant refugee problem from people fleeing the violence?

• What were the attitudes towards conscientious objectors/draft dodgers?

• Before the Civil War were there any concrete plans to end slavery in America?

• Considering the nature of the American Civil War were their special units/tactics created to deal with espionage and guerilla warfare?

• Similar to Lafayette and Von Steuben were there any foreign nationals who rose to prominence on the continent during the war?

• As with Thomas Paine during the revolution were there any philosophers whose ideas were particularly associated with any faction?

• During the war did any Native American populations serious plan or carry out any actions to exploit the weakness and recover any lost ground?

• Considering how the Civil War could be seen as a transition from the line infantry based combat of the past to the trench warfare based future was there a similar level of innovation by troops at the front in terms of adapting equipment to the new environments they faced?

EDIT: Quick question about the downvotes, have I messed up formatting wise or something? If someone could let me know I'll edit it out.

Dr. McPherson,

Thanks for joining in today. Less of a question that a comment. You and your wife wrote a biography back in 1990s of Roswell Lampson, a U.S. Navy officer aboard the USS Gettysburg and a slew of other ships that formed the Union naval blockade. He's an ancestor of mine - Lampson's ship clock and a engraved silver speaking horn his crew gave him are prized family heirlooms. I just wanted to say that your book really helped inspire me to seek out a career as a historian. I'm now a history professor teaching and writing American history at a small liberal arts college. Many thanks!

Dr. McPherson:

I read that there were actually black slaves fighting for the South during the civil war. What were their motives? Wouldn't it be easier to seize the weapons and use them against the Confederates? If I were a slave at that time I would never give my life to protect to people who oppressed me every day.

Hi Dr. McPherson, first off thank you for taking questions. I just read your book "What they fought for", and just had one question regarding the south granting freedom to slaves if they fought for the south. In your research, although black slaves were mostly illiterate, for the book did you come across letters written by black confederate troops?

Lots of very good questions here already, mine is much more light hearted but I'm curious...

The civil war era has been a popular setting and point of divergence for alternate history writers. Are you a fan of any works of alternate history, and what sort of alternate history scenarios fromt he period do you find most interesting or have particularly interesting views on?

Fellow Gustie Dr. McPherson- Thanks for doing this AMA! I loved my history courses at Gustavus- and one important thing they taught me is that there is a considerable amount of inaccurate historical writing today. What qualities do you look for in historical narratives that ensure quality research? Who are some of your favorite historical scholars?

Hello Dr McPherson! Have you ever met Bruce Catton and if so what was he like as a person? What is your impression of his writing on the civil war?

A less scholarly question: do you enjoy board games or computer games that let you play out the Civil War (or other wars) in "what if" kind of scenarios? Or games at all?

I'd like to ask a question that relates to something others have said about your work; that you are more interested in the intersection of military history, social history, and cultural history than many others. With that in mind, could you comment on how the way the war was fought especially early on relates to broader trends in Antebellum culture and in particular prevailing ideas about and images of military conflict? For example, did reporting of the Crimean war and the photographs of Roger Fenton affect or notably fail to affect the way the leadership of either the North or the South thought about war and warfare in the early stages of the conflict and how did that play out on the battlefield? Likewise, did the ongoing conflicts with Native Americans affect either military theory or popular discourse on the Civil War? Apologies if either or both of these questions are iffy or misformed, and thanks in advance for looking at them!

Is there any new theories/narratives/viewpoints/controversies recently out due to new evidence (archaeological/archive/etc)?

Thank you Dr. McPherson for your previous answer to my question regarding Hispanics and the Civil War. My next question involves tactics and doctrine. My focus is in the Napoleonic Wars and I have heard the Civil War using Napoleonic tactics, but I hear that Clausewitz had more of an influence on tactical theory than Jomini.

Whom would you credit as being a philosophical father of the tactics used by the North and the South, Jomini or Clausewitz?

How do you feel about Civil War Reenacting?

Dr. McPherson how would you respond to William Freehling's contentions that European Intervention was never a serious possibility and that the election of 1864 was not nearly as important as most histories portray?

Not a question, just a huge thanks. As a foreigner to the country (Kenyan) your book (recommended by Ta-Nehisi Coates) was a great introduction to The Civil War and American history and a good antidote to some of the bad history taught about the Civil War in the U.S (strangely, when we covered the Civil War in High School in Kenya it was much better and placed Slavery firmly as the cause of the War)

Also, glad I got to hear you speak at Boston Public Library when you were on you 'Lincoln: Tried by War' book tour.

Dr. McPherson, would you compare the conditions at Andersonville and other prisons equal in comparison to that of the Nazi concentration camps of WWII?

Thank you for your time sir.

Do you agree with William Gillette's assertion in Jersey Blue that New Jersey was not a Copperhead state?

Dr. McPherson, How does modern political polarization compare with pre-civil war polarization?

And after reading your book I have trouble thinking about the modern political parties without seeing their roles in the civil war. Is this common?

Dr' McPherson is it possible you could answer a question I posted on another thread about slave auctions

Probably to late but! Dr.McPherson why wasn't Cleburne given higher command? He seems to be one of the most talented commanders in the west for the CSA.

I'm a foreigner with a great interest in the American Civil War. My knowledge has been, so far, limited by Wikipedia articles, films and the occasional reddit post. What book should I get into? Cheers