- Shopping Bag ( 0 items )
Prologue: The South's Strangest Soldier 1
1 Corinth 13
2 Home 62
3 The Swamp and the Citadel 123
4 The Hounds 165
5 The Third Front 226
6 Banners Raised and Lowered 270
7 Reconstruction and Redemption 326
8 The Family Tree 396
Acknowledgments 447
Notes 451
Bibliography 553
Index 567
The recovery of the life of a Mississippi farmer who fought for his country is an important story. The fact that southern Unionists existed, and in very large numbers, is largely unknown to many Americans, who grew up with textbooks that perpetuated the myth of the Confederacy as a heroic Lost Cause, with its romanticized vision of the antebellum South. Some historians have even palpably sympathized with Confederate cavaliers while minimizing - and robbing of credit -- the actions of southerners -- who remained loyal to the Union at desperate cost.
One would never know that the majority of white Southerners had opposed secession, and that many Southern whites fought for the Union. In Tennessee, for example, somewhere around 31,000 white men joined the Union army. In Arkansas more than 8,000 men eventually served in Union regiments. And in Mississippi, Newton Knight and his band of guerillas launched a virtual insurrection against the Confederacy in Jefferson Davis' own home state.
"There's lots of ways I'd rather die than being scared to death," Knight said, and it was a defining statement. At almost every stage of his life this yeoman from the hill country of Jones County, Miss., took courageous stands. The grandson of a slave owner who never owned slaves, he voted against secession, deserted from the Confederate Army into which he was unwillingly impressed, and formed a band called the Jones County Scouts devoted to undermining the Rebel cause locally. Working with runaway slaves and fellow Unionists and Federal soldiers caught behind enemy lines, Knight conducted such an effective running gun battle that at the height of the war he and his allies controlled the entire lower third of the state. This southern Yankee" as one Rebel general termed him, remained unconquered until the end of the war. His resistance hampered the Confederate Army's ability to operate, forced it to conduct a third-front war at home, and eroded its morale and will to fight.
Knight also burst free of racial barriers and forged bonds of alliance with blacks that were unmatched even by Northern abolitionists. He fought as ardently as any man for racial equality during the War, and after, during the terrifying days of Reconstruction, when his life was if anything even more in danger. He lived with an ex-slave named Rachel, fathering several children with her (but he never divorced his Caucasian wife, Serena), and worked on behalf of U.S. Grant's Republican administration and against the nascent Ku Klux Klan, and envisioned a world that would only begin to be implemented a century later. Moreover, he operated in an inverted moral landscape in which fealty to country was labeled traitorous, and kinship with blacks was considered morally repugnant. He survived only because he could reload a shotgun before the smoke cleared.
As an Alabama Unionist told a Congressional committee in 1866 in testifying about the little appreciated service of southern loyalists, "You have no idea of the strength of principle and devotion these people exhibited towards the national government."
-- Sally Jenkins and John Stauffer, June 2009
DavidH42
Posted July 23, 2010
The authors missed so many basic facts, that I found myself wondering how much I could believe. For example: they described the muskets as weighing 18 lbs! (maybe two muskets might weigh that) On another page, they described the sound of musket hammers falling on gunpowder. On the standard muskets used by both sides, the hammers fell on percussion caps producing a sharp snap, not the pfft they claimed.
I finally gave up when Knight (maybe) kills McLemore, and the authors claimed the others in the room had eyes filled with cordite smoke. Cordite was a smokeless propellant invented in England a quarter of a century after the end of the Civil War.
For me, they lost all credibility at about page 134.
If they cannot get basic information correct, their interpretation becomes suspect. Granted the deatils I found annoyingly wrong MIGHT be construed as "artistic license" for dramatic effect, but this is proported to be history, not a novel.
Anonymous
Posted November 11, 2009
Its been said that more books have been written about the Civil War than any other topic in the US. With numbers like that, you'd think its been milked.
Well, it hasn't.
Its difficult being from the South to justify the Southern Cause. Especially in light of history. Well, not all in the South backed the South. What it was like and how they survived and rebelled is written in this book.
Their difficult aftermath is also written up, how they weren't appreciated by the North. Or even written in the history books.
As with a lot of histories where the primary actors are long gone, there are questions that just beg to be answered. This is built in large part on historical testimony but also on a reporter who decided to talk to the participants before they died. Without those notes a lot of this story would be lost to history.
At times its as much an oral history as a standard sifting through the papers in archives. That brings a richness to it.
We all know who won the Civil War. If you ever wondered how or if anybody opposed the South deep in Dixie, this book is for you.
0 out of 1 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted November 4, 2009
I Also Recommend:
Very insightful reading if you are interested in what was happening in the South during the Civil War. A good companion work to others dealing with the subject. Obviously well researched however,I wish there were more details concerning some of Newton Knight's altercations with the Confederate forces as well as the number of altercations documented. This is however most likey due not to any editing decisions but on the fact that Mr Knight was just so reclusive and secretive about his actions. I can only speculate that there is surely a volume of stories that Mr Knight kept to himself for fear of social retribution.
0 out of 1 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.Anonymous
Posted March 29, 2010
No text was provided for this review.
Anonymous
Posted January 17, 2010
No text was provided for this review.
Anonymous
Posted November 29, 2010
No text was provided for this review.
Anonymous
Posted September 1, 2010
No text was provided for this review.
Anonymous
Posted March 2, 2010
No text was provided for this review.
Anonymous
Posted September 15, 2009
No text was provided for this review.
Anonymous
Posted January 26, 2010
No text was provided for this review.
Anonymous
Posted September 21, 2009
No text was provided for this review.
Anonymous
Posted September 29, 2009
No text was provided for this review.
Anonymous
Posted December 7, 2009
No text was provided for this review.
Anonymous
Posted July 23, 2011
No text was provided for this review.
Anonymous
Posted January 6, 2010
No text was provided for this review.
Anonymous
Posted January 27, 2010
No text was provided for this review.
Anonymous
Posted February 26, 2010
No text was provided for this review.
Overview
New York Times bestselling author Sally Jenkins and distinguished Harvard professor John Stauffer mine a nearly forgotten piece of Civil War history and strike gold in this surprising account of the only Southern county to secede from the Confederacy.The State of Jones is a true story about the South during the Civil War—the real South. Not the South that has been mythologized in novels and movies, but an authentic, hardscrabble place where poor men were forced to fight a rich man’s war for slavery and cotton. In Jones County, Mississippi, a farmer named Newton Knight led his neighbors, white and black alike, in an insurrection against the Confederacy ...