James Ford Rhodes: Difference between revisions

(No periods in captions unless they follow complete sentences.)
Rhodes's interpretation of the role of slavery strongly influenced intellectual opinion and historiography. Unlike the first generation of historians, who had been personally deeply committed on the slavery issue, Rhodes approached it dispassionately. He argued that slavery indeed was the main cause of the war. What he meant was an abstract political-economic system that law voters and politicians into position. He paid relatively little attention to slaves themselves, focusing on how the politicians and the foreigners used the issue to their advantage. He argued:
: The judgment of posterity is made up: it was an unrighteous cause which the South defended by arms; and the tribunal of modern civilization, Calhoun and Davis must be held accountable for the misery which resulted from this appeal to the sword.<ref>Pressly, ''Americans Interpret their Civil War'' p 173.</ref>
By misery he referred to the casualties, deaths, and hardships during the war, not to bethe miseries of the slaves before the war. He argued it was an irrepressible conflict, that is an inevitable war by December 1860 that perhaps could have been delayed, but would happen sooner or later.<ref>Pressly, ''Americans Interpret their Civil War'' p 173.</ref> For Rhodes, slavery was practically the only cause of the war, and he ridiculed "[[Lost Cause]]" Southerners who justified rebellion as an exercise of the right of revolution in the face of Yankee oppression. He rejected the Calhoun notion of state sovereignty. The issue, he argued, was atthat the South fought to extend slavery – an institution condemned by ethics, Christianity, and the modern world.<ref>Pressly, ''Americans Interpret their Civil War'' p 172.</ref> WroteRhodes treated slavery as a calamity for the South, but not a personalized time for white Southerners – he thought they deserved sympathy rather than censure. The South was associated with slavery because of a long chain of events going back centuries. Rhodes downplayed the importance of the abolitionist movement, instead focusing on mainstream leaders such as [[Daniel Webster]] for his promoting a deeper nationalism. Pressley says, "it was Webster's principle of 'Liberty and Union' which won in the Civil War, not Garrison's principle of 'no union with slaveholders.'<ref>Pressly, ''Americans Interpret their Civil War'' p 175.</ref>