The University of Delhi

Bharati College

History of USA-II

Rimpa Karmakar
22/488
BA History hons
Submitted to: Mr. Anas Zaman

1|Page
Question 1.

Examine the rise of populist Movement and its contributions towards agrarian reform. Did they

succeed?

Populist Movement, in U.S. history, politically oriented coalition of agrarian reformers in the

Midwest and South that advocated a wide range of economic and political legislation in the late

19th century. A populist is a person who subscribes to the political philosophy of populism,

which is in favor of supporting the rights of the masses and giving power to the people in the

struggle against the privileged upper class. The general philosophies of populism theoretically

fall somewhere in the center of the political spectrum, as opposed to left or right, but one will

rarely have the same beliefs as another. Typically, this person is liberal on economic and national

security issues, but conservative on social issues. Examining the populist movement in America

from its inception to the present day will give a general understanding of the belief system.

Although some scholars argue that populism has been a worldwide common political

phenomenon dating back to the time of Spartacus, the beginning of the movement in America

usually refers to the organization of farmers and laborers who disapproved of the inequalities in

America during the “Guilded Age” of the late 19th century. From 1865 to 1901, the United States

saw unprecedented economic and industrial growth and an eruption of an elite class of incredibly

wealthy leaders of finance and industry. With the belief that the country’s farmers and working-

class citizens created the nation’s wealth, they collectively joined together to create the People’s

Party of the U.S.A., also known as the Populist Party.

2|Page
POPULIST MOVEMENT

The failure of the Granger movement made the supporters of pastoral life realize that in order to

preserve the rights of the small farmers and tillers what was needed was a political third front.

"Ever since the Civil War the farmers, laborers and moral reformers had been involved in third

party politics, but with scant success. Their main efforts-the Greenback Labor Party and the

Prohibition Party-had never won more than 3.5% of the vote in national election.". However,

none of these attempts could leave a permanent impression on American politics. This naturally

made the Democrats and Republicans complacent and they started believing that they had finally

been able to achieve political stability for the nation. But they were proved wrong when the

agrarian revolts in the countryside began to make their presence felt, as a viable third front. This

prepared the way in the 1890s for the Populist Movement to appear on the American political

scene. They provided a completely new interpretation of American life. Defining the Populist

movement. Populist movement was the political version of the Granger movement. It was more

or less the same in composition and content. But there was a difference in that they had to face

two important events, landmarks in American history, which had taken place during this period,

of which one was the loss of the American frontier. Americans now realized that there was no

further land in the west to go to. The feeling of being caged in now worried them. His opponent

Dover Cleveland, a conservative Republican, had scant chances of winning, with the rising

popularity of Brymes. But the election took an unlikely turn when Cleveland was elected the

President. The decision of the people may have been unexpected but not un-pragmatic. American

life and identity sustained by the frontier felt threatened with the sudden loss of the frontier and

believed that agriculture alone could not sustain them and that they needed industries in order to

survive. This belief that the days of prosperous agriculture were numbered (with the close of the

3|Page
frontier), may have been the reason behind the victory of Dover Cleveland in the presidential

elections.

Main Cause of the Populist Movement?

The main cause of the Populist movement was the ignorance that the Democratic and Republican

parties had over the difficulties and interests of farmers in the South and Midwest. Farmers took

advantage of their numbers to try to demand positive change. They demanded an increased

income tax for people who earned high salaries. During the 1890s, millions of farmers joined the

Populist movement in an attempt to reverse their declining economic prospects and to rescue the

government from what they saw as control by powerful corporate interests. The 1890s witnessed

the imposition of a new racial system in the South that locked African- Americans into the status

of second-class citizenship, denying them many of the freedoms white Americans took for

granted. During the time of the movement, senators were not elected by the people. Instead, they

were chosen by the state legislatures. The Populists demanded political reform to allow the

senators to be elected by the people. They also wanted citizens to be given the privilege of

introducing topics for debate in the legislatures. This would allow citizens to be involved in

voting for a bill instead of their representatives. Populists also wanted a recall, whereby citizens

could end the term of an elected official before it ended. The movement demanded a secret ballot

and wanted presidents to have a one-term limit. In 1892, the movement ran for the presidential

seat through James Weaver. He managed to obtain more than 1 million votes and 22 electoral

votes. Even though the movement did not manage to win the presidential seat, their grievances

were able to be discussed at a national level.

4|Page
Demand of Populist Movement:

There were a few things hat the populist party wanted. The items that the party wanted were, a

secret ballot, an election for senators, an income tax, to oppose legislature votes, free coinage of

silver, farmers to get the money back that they paid on loans, and the railroad system, telephone

system, and telegraph system to be owned by the public. It was the election of 1896 which put to

test the popularity of the Populist movement. The elections provided a third front for bringing

their demands to public notice. Their demands as being for easier circulation of silver currency

among the farmers and for de-centralization and de-federalization. They wanted regional banks

in addition to federal banks, which were in the clutches of industrialists. They wanted a sub-

treasury system backed by the federal government in their own states. William Jennings Brymes,

a popular figure became the face of the populist movement, and their presidential candidate. In a

famous speech delivered at Omaha he said, "you sacrifice the nation at the cross of gold",

bringing home to the people the evils of capitalism and what lay at stake with the capitalists at

the helm of power. They demanded an increase in the circulating currency (to be achieved by the

unlimited coinage of silver), a graduated income tax, government ownership of the railroads, a

tariff for revenue only, the direct election of U.S. senators, and other measures designed to

strengthen political democracy and give farmers economic parity with business and industry.

Achievements of Populist Movement:

The United States populist movement of the 1890s was successful in bringing previously

unconsidered economic grievances to the nation's attention, and it helped to eventually bring

about significant reform legislation. Although the Populist Party, or People's Party as it was also

known, failed to achieve an electoral victory at the national level, party members won both

congressional and state government elections. This led to the passage of laws regulating banks,

5|Page
stockyards, and railroads, and also helped to improve working conditions. The Populists' often

impassioned rhetoric served to develop support for an activist government that would involve

itself to a greater degree in reigning in what was viewed as the abusive practices of the large

commercial and industrial trusts. The local and state-level successes of the Populist Party, and

the related focus on the plight of workers and farmers, is believed to have laid the groundwork

for many of the interventionist policies later enacted as part of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's

New Deal program. By running a third-party Populist Party candidate in the 1892 presidential

election, the Republican and Democratic Parties became aware of the significance of the growing

populist movement. The third-party candidate was able to win 8.5 percent of the popular vote

and 22 electoral votes. This led to the Democratic Party building coalitions, or fusions, with the

Populist Party. The Democratic Party eventually absorbed the Populist Party into its own ranks.

The start of the Spanish-American War in 1898 deflected most of the attention from the issues

raised by the populist movement and the Populist Party as an individual political entity soon

disappeared.

6|Page
Agricultural Distress

The economic transformation taking place during the Gilded Age created prosperity and new

lifestyles for some, but these changes also had a widespread negative impact in areas dominated

by farming. Although crop diversification and the greater focus on cotton as a cash crop offered

some potential for farmers to get ahead, other forces worked against that success. For instance,

while technology greatly increased the amount a farmer could harvest, it also created large

surpluses that could not be sold. Farmers struggled due to debt and falling prices. The crop failures

of the 1880s greatly exacerbated the situation.

During the late 1880s, a series of droughts devastated the West. To make matters worse, the

McKinley Tariff of 1890 was one of the highest the country had ever seen. This was detrimental

to American farmers, as it drove up the prices of farm equipment. By 1890, the level of agrarian

distress was at an all-time high.

Agrarian Movements

This high level of agricultural distress led to the birth of several farmer movements, including the

Grange movement and Farmers’ Alliances. The Grange was a secret order founded in 1867 to

advance the social and economic needs of farmers. In addition to farming practices, the Grange

provided insurance and aid to its members. The association grew swiftly during early years, and at

its peak, had approximately 1.5 million members. The original objectives of the Grange were

primarily educational, but these were soon de-emphasized in favor of an anti-middleman,

cooperative movement. Collectively, Grange agents bought everything from farm machinery to

women’s dresses, and purchased hundreds of grain elevators, cotton and tobacco warehouses, and

7|Page
even steamboat lines. They also purchased patents to enable the Grange to manufacture its own

farm machinery. In some states, these practices led to ruin, and the name, Grange, became a

reproach.

The Farmers’ Alliances were political organizations with elaborate economic programs. According

to one early platform, the alliance’s purpose was to, “unite the farmers of America for their

protection against class legislation and the encroachments of concentrated capital.” Their program

also called for the regulation—if not the outright nationalization—of the railroads; currency

inflation to provide debt relief; the lowering of the tariff; and the establishment of government-

owned storehouses and low-interest lending facilities. These requests were known as the “Ocala

Demands.” From these elements, a new political party, known as the “Populist Party,” emerged.

The Populist Party and the Currency Question

The pragmatic portion of the Populist platform focused on issues of land, railroads, and money,

including the unlimited coinage of silver. During the Civil War, the United States switched from

bimetallism to a fiat money currency to finance the war. After the war, the government passed the

Fourth Coinage Act in 1873 and soon resumed payments without the free and unlimited coinage

of silver. This put the United States on a monometallic gold standard. This angered proponents of

the free coinage of silver known as the “Silverite.”

To understand exactly what is meant by “free coinage of silver,” it is necessary to understand the

way mints operated in the days of the gold standard. Essentially, anyone who possessed uncoined

gold, such as successful prospectors, could bring it to one of the U.S. Mints and trade it for it

equivalent in gold coins. Free silver advocates wanted the mints to accept silver on the same

8|Page
principle, so that anyone would be able to deposit silver bullion at a Mint and in return receive

nearly its weight in silver dollars and other currency.

The Populists showed impressive strength in the West and South in the 1892 elections. It was the

currency question, however, pitting advocates of silver against those who favored gold, that soon

overshadowed all other issues. Agrarian spokesmen in the West and South demanded a return to

the unlimited coinage of silver. Convinced that their troubles stemmed from a shortage of money

in circulation, they argued that increasing the volume of money would indirectly raise prices for

farm products and drive-up industrial wages, thus allowing debts to be paid with inflated dollars.

Conservative groups and the financial classes, on the other hand, believed that such a policy would

be disastrous. They insisted that inflation, once begun, could not be stopped. Railroad bonds, the

most important financial instrument of the time, were payable in gold. If fares and freight rates

were set in half-price silver dollars, railroads would go bankrupt in weeks, putting hundreds of

thousands of men out of work and destroying the industrial economy. They claimed that the gold

standard was the only currency that offered stability.

The financial panic of 1893 heightened the tension of this debate. Bank failures abounded in the

South and Midwest. Unemployment soared and crop prices fell sharply. The crisis, and President

Cleveland’s inability to solve it, nearly broke the Democratic Party.

The Democratic Party, which supported silver and free trade, absorbed the remnants of the Populist

movement as the presidential elections of 1896 neared. The Democratic convention that year was

witness to one of the most famous speeches in U.S. political history. Pleading with the convention

not to, “crucify mankind on a cross of gold,” William Jennings Bryan, the young Nebraskan

champion of silver, won the Democrats’ presidential nomination. The remaining Populists also

9|Page
endorsed Bryan, hoping to retain some influence by having a voice inside the Bryan movement.

Despite carrying most of the South and West, Bryan lost the more populated, industrial North and

East—and the election—to the Republican William McKinley whose campaign slogan was “A

Full Dinner Pail.”

The following year, the country’s finances began to improve, mostly from restored business

confidence. Silverite, who did not realize that most transactions were handled by bank checks, not

sacks of gold, believed the new prosperity was spurred by the discovery of gold in the Yukon. In

1898, the Spanish-American War drew the nation’s attention further away from Populist issues. If

the movement was dead, however, its ideas were not. Once the Populists supported an idea, it

became so tainted that the vast majority of American politicians rejected it; only years later, after

the taint had been forgotten, was it possible to achieve Populist reforms, such as the direct popular

election of senators.

Achievements of the Agrarian reform:

Agrarian reform in America has played a pivotal role in shaping the nation's agricultural

landscape, improving the lives of farmers, and fostering sustainable agricultural practices. Over

the course of history, various initiatives and policies have been implemented to address the

challenges faced by farmers and promote the development of a robust and equitable agricultural

sector.

1. Land Distribution and Access: One of the significant achievements of agrarian reform in

America was the distribution of land to aspiring farmers. The Homestead Act of 1862

stands as a landmark reform that granted individuals the opportunity to claim and

10 | P a g e
 cultivate parcels of land, thus encouraging westward expansion and fostering agricultural

development. This reform facilitated the establishment of numerous farms, supporting the

growth of rural communities and contributing to the nation's overall economic progress.

2. Farmer Support and Economic Stability: Agrarian reform efforts have aimed to provide

support and stability to farmers during periods of economic hardship. The New Deal era,

under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, witnessed the implementation of several

agricultural programs, including the Agricultural Adjustment Act. This act aimed to

stabilize farm prices by regulating production and providing financial assistance to

farmers. By offering relief during the Great Depression and subsequent crises, agrarian

reform measures contributed to the economic stability of farming communities and

prevented widespread agricultural bankruptcies.

3. Agricultural Research and Innovation: Agrarian reform has also fostered advancements in

agricultural research and innovation, leading to increased productivity and improved

farming practices. The establishment of research institutions, such as the U.S.

Department of Agriculture (USDA) and agricultural experiment stations, has facilitated

scientific research and the dissemination of knowledge to farmers. These efforts have

played a vital role in developing new technologies, improving crop varieties, and

enhancing agricultural techniques, thereby boosting yields and contributing to overall

food security.

4. Rural Development and Infrastructure: Agrarian reform initiatives have recognized the

importance of rural development and the need for a robust infrastructure to support

agricultural communities. Projects like rural electrification, introduced under the New

Deal, brought electricity to rural areas, transforming farming practices and enhancing the

11 | P a g e
 quality of life for farmers. Access to electricity enabled the use of modern equipment and

technologies, leading to increased efficiency and productivity on farms. Additionally,

initiatives such as cooperative extension services have provided farmers with valuable

educational resources, technical assistance, and training, empowering them to adopt best

practices and improve their farming methods.

5. Environmental Conservation and Sustainability: In recent decades, agrarian reform has

increasingly focused on promoting sustainable agricultural practices and environmental

conservation. Efforts to protect soil health, conserve water resources, and reduce

chemical inputs have gained prominence. Programs such as the Conservation Reserve

Program (CRP) have incentivized farmers to implement conservation practices, such as

planting cover crops, establishing buffer zones, and adopting precision agriculture

techniques. These measures have contributed to improved soil quality, reduced erosion,

enhanced biodiversity, and minimized the environmental impact of agriculture.

The enactment of the Homestead Act and the Morrill Act promoted land distribution and

agricultural education, fostering the growth of farming communities and improving farming

practices. The Granger Movement and cooperative movements aimed to address the economic

challenges faced by farmers, regulate railroad rates, and provide collective strength. Additionally,

advocacy for currency and debt relief shed light on the economic struggles of farmers and

sparking important discussions on monetary policy. These achievements laid the groundwork for

future agrarian reform efforts, contributing to the resilience and development of the nation's

agricultural sector.

12 | P a g e
Question 2.

Examine critically the different views on Reconstructions. Can it be justified as ‘a splendid

failure’ and ‘a national disgrace?

The mainstream narrative which gradually emerged in the late nineteenth and early twentieth

equality centuries held that Reconstruction had been a time of chaos and corruption, when

ignorant newly-freed men, supported by the bayonets of the federal government, had been

allowed to rule over the South. Redemption restored society to its presumed natural order and put

an end to the unholy alliance of freed slaves, adventurers from the North (“carpetbaggers”) and

Southern white traitors ("scalawag”). The elaboration and continuation of the overarching

narrative of Reconstruction served to justify, among a host of other acts, the removal of the

recently-won rights of African Americans. This totalizing discourse —and the treatment of

blacks in the South —did not go unchallenged. Dissenting voices remained largely unheard,

however, before the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. This article aims to retrace

and contextualize “ The Dark and Bloody Ground of Reconstruction Historiography ”

(Weisberger) until the beginning of what C. Vann Woodward called the “ Second

Reconstruction”.

The reconstruction era was the period that followed the American Civil War during which

attempts were made to redress the inequities of slavery, its political, social, and economic legacy

and to solve the problems arising from the readmission to the Union of the eleven states that had

seceded. At the national level, new laws and constitutional amendments permanently altered the

federal system and the definition of American citizenship. In the South, a politically mobilized

black community joined with the white allies to bring the Republican Party to power thus

13 | P a g e
redefining politics and race relations. These legislations were passed with the aim of empowering

the blacks and rebuilding the southern states.

The reconstruction, as historians put it, was The Tragic Era. “The Dreadful Decade," The Age of

Hate." and "The Blackout of Honest Government." It was the epoch that most Americans wanted

to forget. The traditional interpretation of Reconstruction held that it was the darkest era in

American history, where American political and social life was being eroded. This traditional

interpretation originated in the 1870s as part of the anti-Reconstruction propaganda by Southern

Democrats. It was believed that President Lincoln had planned a quick and painless readmission

of the southern states as equal members of the nation. His untimely death meant his plan could

not be executed. His successor, Andrew Johnson tried to carry out Lincoln’s plan but was unable

to because of the Radical Republicans and the northern capitalists who plundered the south and

fastened black supremacy upon the defeated Confederacy. This traditional interpretation believed

that the freed slaves were ignorant and childlike and therefore were incapable of properly

exercising the political power they had been entrusted.

Claude Bowers has been the chief disseminator of the traditional picture of reconstruction. The

years of reconstruction, he wrote, “were years of revolutionary turmoil ..The prevailing note was

one of tragedy. . .. Never have American public men in responsible positions. directing the

destiny of the nation, been so brutal, hypocritical, and corrupt. The constitution was treated as a

doormat on which politicians and army officers wiped their feet after wading in the muck.

Southern people literally were put to the torture. . . ." The popularity of Bowers’ book stems in

part from the simplicity of his characters. None are etched in shades of gray. The Republican

leaders of the reconstruction era were evil through and through, and the helpless, innocent white

men of the South were noble and pure. James ford Rhodes in the 1890s branded the republican

14 | P a g e
scheme of the reconstruction as “repressive and uncivilized." At about the same time Professor

John W. Burgess, of Columbia University. called reconstruction the "most soul-sickening

spectacle that Americans had ever been called upon to behold”.

A synopsis of the Dunning School's version of reconstruction would run something like this:

“Abraham Lincoln. while the Civil War was still in progress, turned his thoughts to the great

problem of reconciliation;” and,"with malice toward none and charity for all, “this gentle and

compassionate man devised a plan that would restore the south to the Union with minimum

humiliation and maximum speed”. But there had already emerged in Congress a faction of

radical Republicans, sometimes called Jacobins or Vindictives, who sought to defeat Lincoln’s

generosity. Motivated by the hatred of the South, by selfish-political ambitions and by crass

economic interests the radicals tried to make the process of reconstruction as humiliating, as

difficult, and as prolonged as they possibly could.

The second chapter of the Dunning version begins with Andrew Johnson's succession to the

presidency. Johnson, the old Jacksonian unionist from Tennessee, took advantage of the

adjournment of Congress to put Lincoln's mild plan of reconstruction into operation, and it was a

striking success. In the summer and fall of 1865, Southerners organized loyal state governments,

showed a willingness to deal fairly with their former slaves, and in general accepted the outcome

of the civil war in good faith. In December. when Congress assembled, President Johnson

reported that the process of reconstruction was nearly completed and that the old Union had been

restored. But the radicals, unfortunately, had their own sinister purposes: they repudiated the

governments Johnson had established in the South, refused to seat southern Senators and

Representatives, and then directed their fury against the new President. After a year of bitter

15 | P a g e
controversy and political stalemate, the radicals, resorting to shamefully demagogic tactics won

an overwhelming victory in the congressional elections of I866.

Now, the third chapter and the final tragedy. Riding roughshod over presidential vetoes and

federal courts, the radicals put the South under military occupation, gave the ballot to Negroes,

and formed new southern state governments dominated by the base and corrupt men, black and

white. Not satisfied with reducing the South to political slavery and financial bankruptcy, the

radicals even laid their obscene hands on the pure fabric of the federal Constitution. They

impeached President Johnson and came within one vote of removing him from office, though

they had no legal grounds for such action. Next, they elected Ulysses S. Grant President, and

during his two administrations they indulged in such an orgy of corruption and so prostituted the

civil service as to make Grantisman enduring symbol of political immorality.

The last chapter is the story of ultimate redemption. Decent southern white Democrats, their

patience exhausted, organized to drive the Negroes, carpet baggers, and scalawags from power,

peacefully, if possible, forcefully if necessary. One by one the southern states were redeemed,

honesty and virtue triumphed, and the South's natural leaders returned to power. In the spring of

1877, the Tragic era finally came to an end when President Hayes withdrew the federal troops

from the South andrestored home rule. But the legacy of radical reconstruction remained in the

form of a solidly Democratic South and embittered relations between the races.

This point of view was rarely challenged until the 1930s when a small group of revisionist

historians began giving life and a new direction to the study of reconstruction. Few revisionists

would claim that the Dunning interpretation of reconstruction is a pure fabrication. They

understand thatthe radical Republicans were not all selfless patriots, and that southern white men

were not all Negro-hating rebels. In short, they have not turned history on its head, they

16 | P a g e
recognize that much of what Dunning's disciples have said about reconstruction is true.

Revisionists, however, have discovered that the Dunningites overlooked a great deal, and they

doubt that nobility and idealism suddenly died in 1865. They are not satisfied with the two-

dimensional characters that Dunning's disciples have painted.

In 1907, Booker T. Washington noted that African Americans had been “less the instigators than

the victims of the mistakes of Reconstruction.” The southern take on Reconstruction, however

unambiguously ascribed victimhood to southern whites, and essentially blamed the federal

government and carpetbaggers for what was seen as the tragedy of Reconstruction. According to

the revisionists, the South’s traditional planters, merchants, and political leaders vehemently

opposed the new governments. The most basic reason was that most white Southerners couldn’t

accept the idea of former slaves voting, holding office, and enjoying equality before the law.

They believed that reconstruction must be overthrown and therefore, launched a campaign of

violence in an effort to end Republican rule. In a large number of areas, secret societies emerged

with the aim of preventing blacks from voting and destroying the organization of the Republican

Party by assassinating local leaders and public officials. The Ku Klux Klan (KKK) was one such

organization. An extreme right-wing organization, the KKK used terrorism against

groups/individuals they opposed, with the aim of “purifying” American society. Their other goals

included the political defeat of the Republican Party and the maintenance of absolute white

supremacy. Black institutions like churches and schools were burned down, teachers attacked,

and freed people who resisted were beaten and killed.

Reconstruction brought important social changes to former slaves. Families that had been

separated before and during the Civil War were reunited, and slave marriages were formalized

through legally recognized ceremonies. Families also took advantage of the schools established

17 | P a g e
by the Freedmen's Bureau. The Black scholar W. E. B. Du Bois, in his Black Reconstruction in

America, compared results across the states to show achievements by the Reconstruction

legislatures and to refute claims about wholesale African American control of governments. He

showed Black contributions, as in the establishment of universal public education, charitable and

social institutions and universal suffrage as important results. The number of African American

churches grew significantly and became social and ‐ political centres as well as houses of

worship. Black ministers assumed a leadership role in the community and were among the first

elected officials.

In the 1960s, neo-abolitionist historians emerged, led by John Hope Franklin, Kenneth Stampp,

and Eric Foner. Influenced by the civil rights movement, they rejected the Dunning School and

found a great deal to praise in Radical Reconstruction. Foner, the primary advocate of this view,

argued that it was never truly completed, and that a "Second Reconstruction" was needed in the

late 20th century to complete the goal of full equality for African Americans. In 1990, Eric Foner

concluded that from the Black point of view "Reconstruction must be judged a failure." Foner

stated Reconstruction was "a noble if flawed experiment, the first attempt to introduce a genuine

inter-racial democracy in the United States". According to him, the many factors contributing to

the failure included: lack of a permanent federal agency specifically designed for the

enforcement of civil rights; the Morrison R. Waite Supreme Court decisions that dismantled

previous congressional civil rights legislation; and the economic reestablishment of Whiggish

white planters in the South by 1877.

By the early 1870s sharecropping became the dominant way for the poor to earn a living.

Wealthy whites allowed poor whites and blacks to work the land in exchange for a share of the

harvest. Sharecroppers often found themselves in debt, for they had to borrow on bad terms and

18 | P a g e
had to pay excessively for basic supplies. If the debt exceeded harvest revenues, the sharecropper

remained bound to the owner. In many ways, this system resembled slavery. Pressure to return to

plantations increased. African-Americans were kept from voting through measures like poll

taxes, literacy tests, and violence at the ballot box, sidestepping the 15th Amendment. Many fled

to the North seeking employment and safe haven, while others fought in the war and tried to reap

the benefits of the chaos after its end

CONCLUSION

The historiographical interpretations of Reconstruction are products of their time. The Dunning

school interpretation reflects the racism of American society in the late nineteenth and early

twentieth centuries. Dunning school scholars relied on white southern accounts and uncritically

accepted their accounts of Reconstruction. The Dunning interpretation highlights the importance

of scrutinizing primary sources and the danger of accepting the perspectives presented in them as

true depictions of what really happened. The revisionist and post-revisionist interpretations

emerged from a different racial climate, the Civil Rights Movement, during which scholars took

seriously African Americans’ struggles for freedom. The revisionist and post-revisionist

scholarship, although not problem-free, nevertheless accounted for a larger body of evidence,

using both white- and black-authored sources, and provides a more reliable account of

Reconstruction. It is debatable whether the Reconstruction was a “Tragic Era” as suggested by

Bower. Reconstruction may have failed, but as Du Bois observed, it was a “splendid failure.” It

may not have achieved its goals yet it laid the foundation for future civil rights movements and

prompted for a democracy based on racial equality.

19 | P a g e
20 | P a g e