History 202 Term Paper
A Review of Eric Foner’s “Reconstruction Revisited”
Jonathan Fetterley
History 202: American History 1840-1900
August 4, 2014
In 1982 Eric Foner, a historian and writer, penned an article called “Reconstruction Revisited”. In this article he expressed his views on the Reconstruction period of American history, and how this period of time had become the subject of much debate. To begin this discussion Foner writes, "historians have failed to produce a coherent modern portrait of Reconstruction.”1 To back this statement, Foner uses specific examples stemming from the different schools of thought to come of studying Reconstruction and how much they have varied, both from each other and sometimes the truth.
One school of thought presented in the article was the classical view on Reconstruction, which was prevalent from the end of the 1800s all the way through the 1960s. The historians who created and defended this viewpoint believed that Reconstruction was an abject failure for America. It was rife with corruption in all levels of the government and pushed an agenda of black supremacy that threatened white culture. The ‘Redeemers’ (southern Democrats) who eventually overthrew the abolitionists’ corrupt movement, were heroes who saved the southern way of life and white culture. Foner articulated this viewpoint as such, “vindictive Radical Republicans fastened black supremacy upon the defeated South, unleashing an orgy of corruption presided over by unscrupulous carpetbaggers, traitorous scalawags, and ignorant freedmen.”2
The next school of thought presented came into being during the 1960s during the civil rights movements at a time when the US was experiencing a fundament shift in race relations. As a white dominated society began to shift towards equality and seek and end to segregated and racist policy this ‘revisionist’ view of Reconstruction emerged as what seems to be a polar opposite to the traditional view. Foner, quantifying this
Jonathan Fetterley
History 202: American History 1840-1900
August 4, 2014
In 1982 Eric Foner, a historian and writer, penned an article called “Reconstruction Revisited”. In this article he expressed his views on the Reconstruction period of American history, and how this period of time had become the subject of much debate. To begin this discussion Foner writes, "historians have failed to produce a coherent modern portrait of Reconstruction.”1 To back this statement, Foner uses specific examples stemming from the different schools of thought to come of studying Reconstruction and how much they have varied, both from each other and sometimes the truth.
One school of thought presented in the article was the classical view on Reconstruction, which was prevalent from the end of the 1800s all the way through the 1960s. The historians who created and defended this viewpoint believed that Reconstruction was an abject failure for America. It was rife with corruption in all levels of the government and pushed an agenda of black supremacy that threatened white culture. The ‘Redeemers’ (southern Democrats) who eventually overthrew the abolitionists’ corrupt movement, were heroes who saved the southern way of life and white culture. Foner articulated this viewpoint as such, “vindictive Radical Republicans fastened black supremacy upon the defeated South, unleashing an orgy of corruption presided over by unscrupulous carpetbaggers, traitorous scalawags, and ignorant freedmen.”2
The next school of thought presented came into being during the 1960s during the civil rights movements at a time when the US was experiencing a fundament shift in race relations. As a white dominated society began to shift towards equality and seek and end to segregated and racist policy this ‘revisionist’ view of Reconstruction emerged as what seems to be a polar opposite to the traditional view. Foner, quantifying this