The Bloody Shirt: Terror After Appomattox
by Stephen Budiansky
(Viking, $28)

There was a time and place in American history when elections were decided through terror. Surveying the politics of the South 14 years after the close of the Civil War, one North Carolina state judge observed that opponents of racial justice had “reversed the verdict of Appomattox.” By then, every state government chosen in open, biracial elections had been toppled by a violent resistance movement, says historian Stephen Budiansky. Between 1868 and 1876 at least 3,000 freedmen and their white Republican allies were murdered by whites determined to chase blacks away from the polls and out of public office. Incredibly, Budiansky says, the terrorists saw themselves as the victims. “We had to shoot Negroes,” said one leading South Carolina politician, “to get relief from the galling tyranny to which we had been subjected.”

Budiansky’s barely disguised rage at such rationalizations does not immediately inspire confidence, said William Grimes in The New York Times. Though the myth that Reconstruction pillaged the South was retired a generation ago, Budiansky “blasts away with both barrels at this straw man” before finding a more rewarding vein. He wisely devotes the bulk of The Bloody Shirt to linked portraits of five men who risked their lives to create a just, biracial society in the South. “If Profiles in Courage had not already been taken, it would have made the perfect title” for this vivid, multipronged narrative about a valiant battle bitterly lost. In the book’s best passages, the author simply “lets the appalling facts, and the words of the participants, speak for themselves.”

The problem is that Budiansky doesn’t always seem in control of his material, said David W. Blight in The New York Sun. The author’s excerpts from the letters of one of the book’s heroes, onetime Mississippi Gov. Adelbert Ames, provide “some of the best insights into why Reconstruction failed.” Budiansky needs to better explain, though, why the violence we’re seeing in individual snapshots unfolded precisely the way it did. Even so, his “horrifying and shameful tale” serves as a reminder that the Southern rejection of Reconstruction was hardly just about states’ rights, said Eric Fettman in the New York Post. “It was about the murderous repression of an entire race of people—and it would continue for another century, long after even the events in this book were a distant memory.”