Historiography

Dunning School
To the modern reader the Dunning School's interpretation of reconstruction strains credulity. It depicts it as a tragic era in which radical republicans vindictively imposed black suffrage on the south, much to its detriment and leading to the so-called "blackout of honest government". It depicts African-Americans as inferior, childlike and ignorant, ultimately unable to adapt to their newfound freedom. It condemns northern "carpetbaggers" as exploiters of the south, while depicting southern Republicans - "scalawags" - as perfidious. For Dunning School historians such as John. W. Burgess and Robert Stiles, the heroes of reconstruction are the former confederates, victims of the unwarranted intervention of northern republicans and the bestial instincts of free blacks. Famous works of this vein include Dunnings //Reconstruction: Political and Economic, 1865-1877// (1907), Burgess's //Reconstruction and the Constitution// (1902) and Robert Stiles's //Reconstruction in Virginia// (1890). Tragically, this intrinsically racist version of reconstruction survived well into the 20th century, arguably because of a need for sectional reconciliation. It was not until the modern civil rights movements of the fifties andf sixties that the Dunning School's garbage was consigned to the bin of history.

The Dunning School is sometimes referred to as the 'Columbia School'.

Other historians writing in the vein described above include Claude Bowers (whose //Tragic Era// is perhaps the nadir of Dunning School historiography), Walter Lynwood Fleming (author of an important state study of Alabama), and E. Merton Coulter (who was battling revisionist interpretations well into the 1950s).

Some historians argue Dunning himself may be worth of rehabilitation. Though few would question the racist underpinnings of his scholarship he did make important contributions to the study of the Reconstruction Constitution, and he also (as Foner points out) treated Reconstruction as a national phenomenon.

Revisionism
Appeared with the advent of the 1960s Civil Rights Movement (1960s Revisionism). Strove to break down deepseated racial mentality within American society, and revise the predominantly racist viewpoint of the Dunning School. It acquitted the Radicals of vindictave motives during Reconstruction, and revised them as genuinely committed to black equality and political rights. Reconstruction during their time seen not just as Radical ideology but something supported driven by Congress and the North. The establishment of public schools and access to education and efforts to revitalise the Southern economy as commendable achievements, rather than the Dunning interpretation of Reconstruction under the Radicals as a 'tragic era' of misgovernment. Faced considerable opposition in trying to break down the 'negro rule' mentality at the forefront of Reconstruction historiography up to this time.

Revisionism in a nutshell: Radicals and Southern freedmen the heroes; Southern Redeemers the villains.

Post-revisionists
1970s-80s. The Dunning School and Revisionism, although 'Radical'-ly different perspectives, both agreed Reconstruction was an era of profound and significant change. Post-revisionists believe that change during Reconstruction was more superficial. Persistent racism, North and South negated efforts to truly extend lasting justice and equality to the freedmen. The failure to distribute land prevented freedmen from truly obtaining autonomy / economic means for equality and made civil / political rights meaningless. As a result, post-revisionists stress the 'conservatism' of Republican policymakers. Equally, the Army and Freedmen's Bureau worked together with ex-slaveholders to thwart freedmen's aspirations and thwart their economic independence, and force them back onto the plantations. In this way, post-revisionisets differ from previous historiography in that it questions whether anything truly lasting or significant came from Rconstruction.

'New Western History'
Richard White's work is very much in this vein.

Diplomatic History
Walter LaFeber - argues for economic interpretation of American foreign policy post-Civil War. Shift away from land empire towards looking for new markets for American goods.

Eric Love - see //Race Over Empire//. Argues anxieties about drawing non-whites into nation constrained imperial expansion. Example of Grant's failed attempt to annex Santo Domingo in 1870-71.