The State of Jones: The Small Southern County that Seceded from the Confederacy

"The State of Jones", is authored by Sally Jenkins and John Stauffer. The writer is Sally Jenkins, an experienced journalist. The historian is John Stauffer. He is the Chair and Professor of Harvard University's American History.We all have heard the old axiom that "history is written by the victors". Whether there is truth to that is arguable. However, there are examples that demonstrate that history can be written by the losers. The history of the American Civil War is one example of these exceptions. Southern - Americans wrote the first histories of the Civil War These are the stories of the war that captured the publics imagination. It can truly be said that the South lost the war but wrote the history.As is to be expected from the adage, a history of a war written from the perspective of only one side will be distorted and likely be inaccurate. Such a history will present the victor's admirable qualities and sweep the less desirable ones under the carpet. For the losing side, the process will be reversed.The South's version of the history of the Civil War was meant to be more propaganda than fact. It was meant to leave a legacy of the "Noble Cause" as the raison d'être for the war. The "Noble Cause" was the fiction of State's Rights. Most of the Southern States Secession Acts stated that the reason for secession was the threat to the base of their economy, slavery.Unfortunately, the mythology created by Southern-American historians of the 19th and early 20th centuries is the story that still reverberates the most in the popular mind. Think of the debates about state's rights during the Civil Rights Movement or among todays reactionary conservatives.As recently as the 1960's the World Book Encyclopedia referred to the Civil War as the "War Between the States". This name for the Civil War was meant to imply that the war was over the fantasy of "States Rights" rather than economic issues.During the Civil Rights era, the "Nobel Cause" was used to justify racist cants such as "the South shall rise again" and the use of the Confederate battle flag as a symbol of racial hatred. The post Civil War history provided by Southern-American historians has proven to be an albatross around the collective neck of America.History, as most know, is not among the most popular subjects in American education. If we are to correct the perceptions of the Civil War the best way is to make it as accessible as possible.There are many scholarly histories of the American Civil War that have debunked the flights of fancy provided by early Southern - American historians. But, unfortunately, the Southern - American propaganda has persisted as a parasite in the American popular understanding of the Civil War.The clear purpose of "The State of Jones" is to contribute to the correction of the historical distortion created by the Southern mythology. To do so, the authors use a writing technique that makes the history of the War accessible and easily understood.Their history does not discuss "Grand Military Strategy", "Great Battles" or "Great Men". Instead, it concentrates on telling history from the viewpoint of the average citizen of the South. The experience of an individual is much more compelling for a reader than a dry academic dissertation can provide.The individuals involved in this history are treated as three dimensional characters as they would be in a story. This method maintains reader interest by allowing the reader to identify with the historical persons, as in novels. The language is descriptive with all the necessary adverbs and adjectives to create a natural canvas against which the reader can paint, in her or his mind, the historical events as they unfold.The history revolves around the (factual) life of Newton Knight. He is the "hero" of the book, so to speak. As the book evolves, more "characters" are introduced. The "characters" are seen through the lens of Mr. Knight's eyes. Some are seen as sympathetic to his views and actions, some are are seen as the opponents to his deeds and thoughts. Some are seen as enemies. All are seen as caught up by the historical whirlwind in which they lived.Through the introduction of "new characters"' the story expands from a biography of Newton Knight into a revelatory history of the class structures of the antebellum South. It describes the great suffering endured by both the troops of the Confederacy as well as average Southern - American citizens. The history makes it clear that Southern - American citizens were exploited by an aristocratic upper class.The book explains that secession was often not supported by many of the citizens of the South. These people were often aware that secession was promoted by the aristocrats to preserve their wealth and not for the benefit of all. The book reveals that many Southern - Americans continued to support the Union.This history brings life to a particular Southern- American group that used guerrilla warfare to fight the Confederacy. This particular group was headed by Newton Knight. His compatriots were Southern - Americans of a similar mind, deserters from the confederate army, escaped slaves and Union troops trapped behind Confederate lines.The narrative also goes on to tell how the Southern - American aristocracy reconstructed the antebellum South after the War. A reconstruction that returned them to political power and rebuilt the "New South" - in a somewhat different form - from the remains of the "Old South."This history reveals that the Union's unwillingness to continue to police the South to enforce the changes for which the war had been fought allowed the South to "rise again". This turning of a blind eye by the Union resulted in the North's misperception that they "….thought they had won. They were wrong. They had lost."There are some things in the work I do find objectionable. The first is the name of the book itself: "The State of Jones: The Small Southern County that Seceded from the Confederacy". In the first few pages the writers admit that "…exaggerated reports circulated that he [Newton Knight] and his compatriots seceded from the Confederacy and formed a separate government." As the book goes along it makes it is clear that no such event occurred. I find the name misleading.My other objection is use of the mythical accent that was supposedly spoken by African - Americans of that time, when quoting African - American sources.The accent is what you might call the "Stephan Foster Idiom". Such a dialect never existed. It was a racist lie created to signify the low intellectual capabilities of African - Americans.In fact, African - Americans used the same speech patterns that the white Southern - Americans used. An African - American slave in Georgia would have used the same dialect as a white Southern - American from Georgia. An African -American slave in Tennessee would have spoken with the same accent that a white Tennessean would have spoken with. That would been the only speech pattern to which the slave was exposed. There was no idiom reserved only for slaves alone, as the "Stephan Foster Idiom" assumes.Despite the misleading name of the book and the use of the "Stephan Foster Idiom" as the speech patterns of African - Americans, I give a high rating to this book.All things considered, I think that the authors have succeeded in contributing to the corrections needed for an accurate understanding of the American Civil War. This book brings into the open the reality of the Confederacy as it actually was and not as the romantic fiction that persists even to this day.In addition, the authors have also brilliantly succeeded in making this history an easily understood and enjoyable read.Books such as this may begin to cleanse the nation of the fabrication of post - war Southern - American historians. It is a legend that is used to denigrate African- Americans, undermine democracy's meaning and support white supremacy to this day.

The theme of this book may be unknown to many people, including those Civil War Battlefield junkies. The taking ['looting'] of Southern Civilians crops & livestock, by the Confederacy happened to thousands. This single act alone, turned many loyal Confederates against the Confederacy. CSA President Jefferson Davis tried to get the planter class - as well as everyone - to grow more crops to feed the army. Instead, most of the planters grew more cotton. When Confederate soldiers (under Gen. Earl van Dorn) tried to impress crops & live stock from the Planter class, the planters were outraged & complained to CSA President Jefferson Davis. Davis felt he was forced to protect the elite, upper-class planter class. The majority of the common people of the South, had to endure four years of starvation. At the outbreak of the war, approximately 200,000 Southern people from the upper-South joined the Union army, along with 100,000 from the lower-South. Adding to this 500,000 Slaves fled to the North during the war - 180,000 joining the Union Army & 20,000 joining the Union Navy. Forcing the Southern civilians to bear the brunt of the war, while the planter class acquired profits, further alienated Southerners. Situations such as The Free State of Jones, existed across the Confederacy. (Jackson Country, N.E.Alabama seceded from the Confederacy in 1864, as well as the "wire-grass region of S.E. Georgia). Books such as 'The South vs The South' by William W. Freeling and 'Bitterly Divided, the South's Inner Civil War' by David Williams, are excellent book, which greatly elaborates this topic (and should be read by every student of the Civil War & history enthusiast). https://www.amazon.com/South-Vs-Anti-Confederate-Southerners-Shaped-ebook/dp/B004K6LHDE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1467040832&sr=8-1&keywords=The+Southern+vs+the+southhttps://www.amazon.com/Bitterly-Divided-Souths-Inner-Civil-ebook/dp/B0042RU4D0/ref=pd_sim_351_8?ie=UTF8&dpID=51xIdtBoAKL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_OU01_AC_UL160_SR107%2C160_&refRID=8TD81ARXWTRT29H1K4PM

"The State of Jones" is not only the story of Newton Knight, which on his own is very interesting, but it is also the story of the state of Mississippi during the Civil War years. You'll be introduced to a brand new cast of characters, the South's view of some important battles (Vicksburg just to name one), and the "evolution" from slavery to segregation.The last point is very important, because you'll realize that, even if the North won the War, the South still carried afterward an enormous, overwhelming political weight. In fact, it was business as usual with the complicit blessing of Andrew Johnson.An enlightning read that will open some eyes about the North apparent "victory".

All Good

A very important part of American History. An excellent read.Thank you

Not Avery interesting read.

Great