Question of the Week: What style of Civil War research and writing do you prefer?
Micro or Macro stories, Quantitative Statistical Analysis or Qualitative Storytelling? What style of Civil War research and writing do you prefer?
Micro or Macro stories, Quantitative Statistical Analysis or Qualitative Storytelling? What style of Civil War research and writing do you prefer?
I enjoy a mix of storytelling backed up by hard facts. Not a fan of history as a science. I think it should be accessible to the average person.
Without primary source evidence it is all fiction like one learns in school. Ezra Carman and everyone else besides me who has written about Fox’s and Turner’s Gaps in the Battle of South Mountain are the prime examples of fictional Civil War stories. Very sad that my research has refuted numerous PhD “experts” who did not know what they were writing about.
I wish to improve my writing linking the study of Civil War History to civic engagement and an appreciation of historic legacy. As we look toward the 300th Anniversary of the city of Fredericksburg VA, I seek to use the occasion to create content on how the war shaped antebellum and postbellum Fredericksburg.
Qualitative Storytelling – telling the story of the soldiers through regimental studies.
Storytelling for me.
Recently I’ve been reading dispatches from commanders engaged in the early months of the war. The details show real-time reactions and on the job training.
Also, the plight of former slaves, abandoned as their masters flee from invasion in the south, is extreme. Lack of food, their fear of any authorities, and their limited (by law) abilities to read and write, are a burden for the Northern soldiers.
But, their knowledge of the terrain, excellent skills in wood and metal crafts, cooking and even learning to fight, make them invaluable.
Those are the stories buried under decades of ‘lost cause’ and major battle narratives. The ‘Contrabands’ as the North referred to freed slaves, surely deserve their stories told.
I enjoy the very mix that ECW currently provides, which includes all of the types listed in the Question. ECW and its authors provide a nice balance of human interest stories and historical information. It helps keep the blog fresh.
What is important, to me at least, is that while ECW is committed to making Civil War-era history accessible to the general public, the statements made in the Blog posts are supported by cites to the historical record. While the reader may choose not to refer to the endnotes, the fact that they exist provides assurance that what is presented is accurate. ECW authors present quality work; it is part of ECW’s “brand.” Granted, not every good Civil War publication has notes worthy of a law review article (Shelby Foote’s work probably being the most famous example), but the bias should be towards explicit “quality control,” and citing record sources is a main way of doing such.
A good but unrelated example is Alvin Schwartz’s Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark. Very entertaining stories, obviously meant for children, but if you are interested, the book has a section at the back dedicated to sources, variations, and folkloric explanations for every story. So you know it’s grounded in academic research.
I agree. Storytelling is my favorite as well
I’m cotton to tales that include verbiage and vernacular of the participants. Like Virginian William Beckwith’s in 1861, “the North could whip the south with sticks, they are 4 to 1” or such as Ann Murtaugh’s (Centreville VA) words, “I was once told by a Confederate soldier that… my blood would have to answer for my Union sentiments. I told him it was none of his business.” Obviously you get alot more than you bargained for in terms of violating modern day political correctness but first hand verbulation keeps it real and helps transport me
Micro or macro, academic, or public it doesn’t matter as long as it is a well written story!
Use a lot of primary sources to support your telling of the story. If you use secondary sources say that in the text.
If someone said something to someone else, it’s OK to say “so-and-so turned to so-and-so and said. . . “ just don’t make up what was said! If someone crossed a river in December, it’s OK to add “the water was cold” in your story. Water is cold December!!
If you use statistics have the data available whether on the page, in the source notes, or an appendix. If something is new or different than has previously been said, tell me that in the source notes!
And while it’s ok to have differences opinion to politely point that out. Don’t tell me you have the True/real story or that previous authors didn’t know what they were talking about! Present the information and let me decide!!
All of those above