Read on Twitter
#Grant seems to be getting negative reviews from many who #TeachReconstruction.
Brevity was part of the problem.
Grant spent more time as general in chief after Appomattox than before. His presidency lasted 2x as long as the war.
But Reconstruction gets 30 mins out of 6 hrs.
Brevity was part of the problem.
Grant spent more time as general in chief after Appomattox than before. His presidency lasted 2x as long as the war.
But Reconstruction gets 30 mins out of 6 hrs.
This was the choice of the producers, not the contributing historians. It meant a lot was going to be left out and glossed over.
Still, I was surprised by the jumbling of chronology and causation and by some of the bigger mistakes. For
example: https://twitter.com/Stephen_A_West/status/1265833371718033410?s=20
Still, I was surprised by the jumbling of chronology and causation and by some of the bigger mistakes. For
example: https://twitter.com/Stephen_A_West/status/1265833371718033410?s=20
Black men were already voting in large numbers before the #15thAmendment—mostly, in ex-Confederate states where they'd been enfranchised under Military Reconstruction.
So while Grant helped make the #15thAmendment part of the Constitution, black men helped make Grant president.
So while Grant helped make the #15thAmendment part of the Constitution, black men helped make Grant president.
#Grant—like Chernow’s biography—doesn’t so much break new ground as it distills for the public a generation of scholarly reassessments of Grant.
Its biopic focus and brevity in treating post-1865 events means it has trouble even doing that for scholarship on Reconstruction.
Its biopic focus and brevity in treating post-1865 events means it has trouble even doing that for scholarship on Reconstruction.
One thing that I wish had been included—and that would work with the focus on Grant—would be to reassess how we think about “reconciliation” after the Civil War.
It was an impulse that drew white Americans together, often at the expense of African Americans.
Grant felt it too.
It was an impulse that drew white Americans together, often at the expense of African Americans.
Grant felt it too.
But Grant didn’t want “reconciliation” to come at the cost of losing what had been won in the Civil War.
"I do not see what the North can do that has not been done, unless we surrender the results of the war," he said in 1879.
https://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc2.ark:/13960/t4th8t34r?urlappend=%3Bseq=406
"I do not see what the North can do that has not been done, unless we surrender the results of the war," he said in 1879.
https://hdl.handle.net/2027/uc2.ark:/13960/t4th8t34r?urlappend=%3Bseq=406
Grant identified Reconstruction as of a piece with the Civil War itself.
His commitment to secure "the results of the war" on a stable and just basis didn't end with his presidency.
In 1879 as in 1865, he saw ex-Confederates and their political allies as the biggest obstacle.
His commitment to secure "the results of the war" on a stable and just basis didn't end with his presidency.
In 1879 as in 1865, he saw ex-Confederates and their political allies as the biggest obstacle.
Want to learn about more of what was left out and glossed over in #Grant?
Check out this great thread from @BrooksDSimpson https://twitter.com/BrooksDSimpson/status/1266095145197289472?s=20
Check out this great thread from @BrooksDSimpson https://twitter.com/BrooksDSimpson/status/1266095145197289472?s=20
