Dr. David Coffey, professor and chair of the History and Philosophy department, spoke to a packed house on Nov. 8.
Coffey opened up his lecture by recapping the events on the day’s date during the Civil War.
“First I’d like to tell you, 150 years ago on this date, nothing much happened,” said Coffey.
Coffey then gave his thanks to all the veterans who had served in the nation’s armed forces before beginning the main meat of his lecture.
The main focus of the lecture was the “lost cause” narrative that southern writers have used when writing about the Civil War. Coffey explained the various flaws and inconsistencies in the “lost cause” theory.
The basic tenants of the “lost cause” narrative are an insistence that Northern forces had overwhelming numbers and superior supplies, the image of a united South, a willful de-emphasis of the role of slavery and the image of superior Confederate leaders. Coffey said that this narrative was harmful, because it allows Americans to see the Civil War through a veil.
By introducing Romanticism into the narrative of the Civil War, it served to hide the horror of the war and gave Americans an opportunity to look away from the underlying issues that caused the war in the first place. And thus Americans averted their eyes while the South continued to disenfranchise African-Americans.
Coffey also criticized what he called the “military vacuum.” He said that just a narrow view of the military campaigns of the war without a consideration of the larger elements at play would lead to an incomplete picture of the Civil War.
“We have to explore causes and effects… History is a living, breathing monster that evolves continuously,” said Coffey.
Coffey also discussed the contrasts between popular history and academic history and images versus reality. Although the “lost cause” narrative would downplay its role, Coffey pointed out that most historians acknowledge slavery as the main reason for the secession of Southern states. He also said that Northern troops weren’t always saintly and that Southern troops weren’t as bad off as is generally believed.
“It never lost a fight for want of arms or ammunition,” said Coffey.
As to the legendary and imposing figures of Civil War generals, Coffey had a more realistic view, allowing for the “complex humanity” of individuals. He also added that Robert E. Lee had his flaws and Ulysses S. Grant was a talented general.
“Each side had its share of competent and excellent … generals,” said Coffey.
In the end, Coffey had something to say to Southern apologists.
“The United States won the war fair and square. … As for the lost cause, I think it’s time to put it to rest,” said Coffey.
Coffey’s final appeal to the crowd was to research and read to obtain a more accurate and full view of the Civil War.
“Many Americans find comfort in their history and that’s fine, but I would suggest that people should be uncomfortable as well,” said Coffey.
The horror of the Civil War has been lost in Romanticized accounts. Re-enactors, while educational, have helped further desensitize Americans to the horrible and disgusting nature of war. Coffey had one final thought on the matter.
“We need the war to be terrible, or as Robert E. Lee himself admitted, we grow to love it,” said Coffey.
