History

Oct 2, 2014 -

Elizabeth Varon, Langbourne M. Williams Professor of American History at the University of Virginia and prize-winning author of several books on the American Civil War, was the speaker for the 19th Annual Carls-Schwerdfeger History Lectureship at Union University on October 2, 2014. Varon delivered two talks at Union, both of which were related to the Civil War.

Varon’s afternoon lecture was on “Reaping the Whirlwind: Disunion Rhetoric and the Coming of the Civil War.” She indicated that the specter of civil war in America was not something that suddenly emerged in 1861, but that it had haunted Americans since the founding of the republic. The key word in the rhetoric of those who imagined civil war in the antebellum years was “disunion.” It was a harsh political term that various groups used to attack and discredit their opponents. Proslavery Southerners, for example, labeled extreme abolitionists in the 1830s as disunionists, and later, Northern and Southern Democrats made the same accusation against the fledgling Republican Party. By the end of the 1850s, however, proslavery Southerners were defending disunion in the form of secession, which they saw as preferable to a Republican domination of the South, especially following Abraham Lincoln’s 1860 presidential election victory. Secessionists now believed that disunion was a blessing and that civil war would secure a Southern Confederacy that would become one of the most powerful nations in the world. Once the war was over, unreconstructed Southerners revived the use of disunion against the North by hurling the term at radical Republicans who favored African-American voting and civil rights. Varon noted that only in the late nineteenth century did the word fall out of use, when the North and South developed a cult of reconciliation between them. Some 75 people attended Varon’s afternoon presentation.

The topic of Varon’s evening presentation was “Legacies of Appomattox: Lee’s Surrender in History and Memory.” She argued that the signing of the surrender terms at Appomattox was an inherently political moment where Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant staked out diametrically opposed positions regarding the future of the republic. Lee sought the restoration of the South’s old social hierarchies minus the institution of slavery whose reincorporation he knew was impossible. For Southerners, Lee became a symbol of cautious defiance, someone who advocated restraint in the North’s plans for reunion. Grant, on the other hand, saw Lee’s surrender as a vindication of the justness of the North’s cause in the war. It was a victory for majority rule and a perpetual union. Yet Grant soon expressed disappointment at what he and his followers saw as President Andrew Johnson’s policy of excessive leniency in restoring power to unrepentant Southerners. He also criticized Lee for using the idea of restoration to justify Southern resistance to change. Varon likewise discussed the meaning of Appomattox for African-Americans. They viewed Lee’s surrender at Appomattox as a victory for racial justice and black freedom, and they saw the key role that black soldiers played in bringing about that surrender as a demonstration of patriotism, courage, and virtue. In the end, Varon pointed out, the hopes of African-Americans for social equality proved misplaced as the advocates of sectional reconciliation between North and South without racial equality ultimately prevailed. Varon spoke to an audience of more than 500 people.

In addition to lecturing, Varon visited Jackson’s Civil War Museum and Bemis Mill Village Museum, enjoyed a coffee time with history department faculty members, and attended a dinner in her honor in Union’s Chapman Dining Room. Following her evening address, Varon signed copies of her books Disunion! The Coming of the American Civil War, 1789-1859 and Appomattox: Victory, Defeat, and Freedom at the End of the Civil War.