how to make a website for free
The Rivers Ran Backward: The Civil War and the Remaking of the American Middle Border

PDF The Rivers Ran Backward: The Civil War and the Remaking of the American Middle Border by Christopher Phillips in History

Description

The pilgrimage to Mecca; or Hajj; has been a yearly phenomenon of great importance in Muslim lands for well over one thousand years. Each year; millions of pilgrims from throughout the Dar al-Islam; or Islamic world; stretching from Morocco east to Indonesia; make the trip to Mecca as one of the five pillars of their faith. By the end of the nineteenth century; and the beginning of the twentieth; fully half of all pilgrims making the journey in any given year could come from Southeast Asia. The Longest Journey; spanning eleven modern nation-states and seven centuries; is the first book to offer a history of the Hajj from one of Islam's largest and most important regions.


#690819 in Books Phillips Christopher 2016-05-20Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 6.40 x 1.80 x 9.40l; .0 #File Name: 0195187237528 pagesThe Rivers Ran Backward The Civil War and the Remaking of the American Middle Border


Review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Old history; new premiseBy Alan F. SewellWhen I started this book I was thinking that THE RIVERS RAN BACKWARD was a nod to the well-known geographical alignment of the Cumberland and Tennessee rivers; taking their great northern jog into the Ohio River; thereby allowing the Union’s riverine navy to break the Confederacy’s back in the West.However; it turns out that Cristopher Phillips created the title metaphorically to refer to what he believes was the Civil War’s reversal of the CULTURAL RIVER whose current was guiding the development of the Western Border States:=====The national confluence once represented as the West was remade as South and North; the great divide symbolized by the former region’s now-wide rivers.====I’ll have to think on that premise for a while before I decide if I can agree on it. (It seems to me that perhaps the extremists in the North and South had radicalized the West BEFORE the Civil War started. After all; the first armed conflict between North and South was in “Bleeding Kansas” in 1856; so in a sense the Civil War started on the Western Border and then inflamed the rest of the country).Premise aside; this is a solid book that encapsulates most of the previous scholarship and popular writing about the Civil War on the Western Border; in the states of Kentucky; Missouri; Kansas; and neighboring parts of southern Illinois Indiana; and Ohio. It brings to life the war that divided families and set neighbors at each other’s throats. It describes the four-year terror of house-burnings; forcible relocation of “disloyal” people; and summary executions of Confederate sympathizers by Unionists; and of Unionists by Confederate guerillas. Those who were indifferent to the war and sought neutrality risked being murdered by cutthroats pretending to be soldiers of either side.Phillips draws from earlier classic works like THE CIVIL WAR ON THE WESTERN BORDER (which I read decades ago in researching this topic) as well as hundreds of lesser-known sources. He makes the point that this was the frontier of the East / West divide of the USA in the mid-19th Century; as well as the North / South divide.The book carries its analysis of the post-war effects on these states forward into the 20th Century. It explains the curious phenomenon of why Kentucky; Missouri; and even ferociously Unionist Kansas retrograded into the Southern sphere of influence after the South lost the war.I’ve published articles on this subject going back to the early 1980s; so I was familiar with the general run of events. Nevertheless; I was educated to a few points:1. That the slavery culture in Kentucky and Missouri was much different from the plantation slavery further south. Slaveowners in the border states owned slaves in two’s and three’s; not in the hundreds as in the Deep South. The people were torn between patriotism for the Union; and their ill-feeling toward Yankee Abolitionists. Thus; there was every shade of opinion in these states. The center of opinion shifted back and forth; ironically becoming more pro-southern as the certainty of Union victory increased.2. The sheer oppressive enormity that the war inflicted on these people. They were never at ease. A single word that seemed to favor the Confederacy or the Union could get a man killed by those on the other side. Petty quarrels over private matters would cause neighbors to denounce each other to the military authorities; resulting in incarceration of the denounced party; just like in totalitarian societies. The Constitution was defunct.The book; being encyclopedic of most of the prior work on the subject has the strengths and weaknesses typical of these works. Its strength is its completeness in encapsulating prior scholarship. It is written in a readable style without opinionating by the author. For example; he documents the Copperhead Movement in Indiana and Illinois but leaves it for the reader to judge whether it posed a material threat to the Union or was a “will-o-the-wisp”. Likewise; the reader can render his/her own judgment of whether the Federal military government imposed on the Border States was needlessly heavy-handed.Of course; the weakness is the inverse of its strength. Because it is a scholarly book it is lengthy and matter-of-fact. It’s not a happy; popular story with clichés about “Moonlight and Magnolias in the South” or “Battle Cry of Freedom in the North.” It’s about the brutal tragedies of families at war with each other and good men and women wondering every day which side might come to their house and drive them off their property or kill them.I’ve yet to form any definite conclusions about the author’s primary premise. Did the Civil War alter the “cultural rivers” of the Western Border or merely confirm the trend of its pre-war development; which had already started to fission into a North / South divide? As a Civil War buff; I’ll be giving that some thought.0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. The Civil War in the Country's MiddleBy Eric MayforthStudents of the Civil War know that the state of Kentucky was distinct from both North and South during the conflict. Less well known is how the whole region of the West near the Ohio and Mississippi rivers was as well. In "The Rivers Ran Backward;" Christopher Phillips shows the extent to which the West was a distinct section of the country before the war and that it was divided into Northern and Southern sections only in the war's aftermath.While there were wide-ranging opinions concerning slavery in the region; most in the West were relative moderates on the question; with few abolitionists or fire-eaters. Phillips describes the politics of the late antebellum period. There was heavy Southern influence in the southern parts of Illinois; Indiana; and Ohio; with slaveholding not unknown even in those nominally free states—the author recalls cases of an Indiana man and an Ohio man eventually fighting for the Confederacy when the war came.The war itself was traumatic in Missouri; Kentucky; and elsewhere in the border region. Phillips looks at the secession debate in the slave states that remained in the Union. Life was unsettled to say the least in the region during the war; with localized skirmishes and community strife; guerrilla warfare; and strained friendships between unionists; secessionists; and neutrals. Both armies attempted to occupy parts of the region during the conflict; with conscription evaders and deserters adding to the chaos. Phillips describes the politics of the slaveholding but Union states of Missouri and Kentucky during the war and notes the effect of the Emancipation Proclamation in those places. The election of 1864 is also discussed.Phillips describes how the region known as the West during the antebellum period later came to think of itself as divided at the Ohio River between North and South in the decades following the conflict. While the war was traumatic for the entire nation; it was especially so for those borderlands that saw more than their share of the fighting and that contained people in close proximity with differing (or no) loyalties. "The Rivers Ran Backward" is a well-researched volume examining the war in an important part of the country and would be enjoyed by those with a keen interest in the Civil War.2 of 2 people found the following review helpful. Impressive work!By Richard R. MccormickAn excellent study of the politics of racial attitudes in Middle America in both pre and post Civil War times. Truly impressive research! Unfortunately a reader will realize that our country is still adversely affected by race relations; and in some ways not totally different from the attitudes present in the 19th century. Interesting presentation of a point that "Conservative Politics" then incorporated a strong belief that the protection of property from interference by the government was an absolute right of the people and that; without regard for the human element; slaves were as much property as land; house; or horse.It is not possible to read this work and not acquire a new perspective about our society then and even now.

© Copyright 2025 Books History Library. All Rights Reserved.