Reviews

User reviews

User Review - Flag as inappropriate

But but but the all serve make some interesting points but there are some areas where he is so radical and subjective his work is a tour propaganda. But if his chapter on confederate general Nathan Bedford Forrest is a case in point. But calling him one of the most vicious to racists in history is really over the top. No one can question the fact that but Nathan Bedford Forrest was an accomplished killer it was said of him that he had 39 forces shot from under him and killed 4080 soldiers, he said he was one of course ahead.
Unlike the author the was born in in the 19th century and desperate poverty in the backwoods of Tennessee with all the violence is and racial and cultural atmosphere of that existed at that time. When he was only a young man his uncle and father were attacked and he defended them in a deadly shootout. He also was shot by one of his own officers but when he upbraided the officer and then and self defense killed him with a knife.
Let's take a couple cases in point first of all Nathan Bedford Forrest had 45 slaves in his personal retinue working teamsters. When it was obvious the war was going to be lost he gave them all papers but of manumission, when asked by a reporter about them he also said of them better confederates never lived."
As for his defeats he had almost none, General Sherman, General Robert E Lee, general PT Beauregard among many others called him the greatest military mind of the war. This is quite a compliment given that Sherman actually have a bounty of $100,000 on his head during the war.
I might add the author is not a historian is a sociologist with little knowledge of the cultural conditions of the 19th century.
As for his vicious racism Nathan Bedford Forreste gave a speech in 1875 convention and BBQ was held by the Independent Order of Pole-Bearers Association at the fairgrounds of Memphis, five miles east of the city. An invitation to speak was conveyed to General Nathan Bedford Forrest, one of the city's most prominent citizens, and one of the foremost cavalry commanders in the late War Between the States. This was the first invitation granted to a white man to speak at this gathering. The invitation's purpose, one of the leaders said, was to extend peace, joy, and union, and following a brief welcoming address a Miss Lou Lewis, daughter of an officer of the Pole-Bearers, brought forward flowers and assurances that she conveyed them as a token of good will. After Miss Lewis handed him the flowers, General Forrest responded with a short speech that, in the contemporary pages of the Memphis Appeal, evinces Forrest's racial open-mindedness that seemed to have been growing in him.
“Ladies and Gentlemen I accept the flowers as a memento of reconciliation between the white and colored races of the southern states. I accept it more particularly as it comes from a colored lady, for if there is any one on God's earth who loves the ladies I believe it is myself. ( Immense applause and laughter.) I came here with the jeers of some white people, who think that I am doing wrong. I believe I can exert some influence, and do much to assist the people in strengthening fraternal relations, and shall do all in my power to elevate every man to depress none. (Applause.) I want to elevate you to take positions in law offices, in stores, on farms, and wherever you are capable of going. I have not said anything about politics today. I don't propose to say anything about politics. You have a right to elect whom you please; vote for the man you think best, and I think, when that is done, you and I are freemen. Do as you consider right and honest in electing men for office. I did not come here to make you a long speech, although invited to do so by you. I am not much of a speaker, and my business prevented me from preparing myself. I came to meet you as friends, and welcome you to the white people. I want you to come nearer to us. When I can serve you I will do so. We have but one flag, one country; let us stand together. We may differ in color
 

User Review - Flag as inappropriate

Waste of time. Little in the way of research. Weak!

User Review - Flag as inappropriate

James Loewen needs to do some additional research when exposing "Lies". For example, I read his account of Stephenson's connection to Madge Oberholtzer and he is w-a-y off the mark on what truly happened and gets her age incorrect, etc. Since he is so inept in his handling of the Stephenson facts, I have doubts about the rest of his book. 

Review: Lies Across America: What Our Historic Sites Get Wrong

User Review  - Nathaniel - Goodreads

I'm a librarian with archival training who has known several people who worked in public history, including the head of the Indiana Historical Bureau (which produces every historic marker in that ... Read full review

Review: Lies Across America: What Our Historic Sites Get Wrong

User Review  - Joe Glynn - Goodreads

An eye-opening, hilarious, magical history tour of some of America's most hallowed sites and museums. Proves that what you see is not always what really happened. Read full review

User ratings

5 stars
6
4 stars
11
3 stars
3
2 stars
4
1 star
3

All reviews - 29
4 stars - 11
1 star - 3

All reviews - 29
Editorial reviews - 0

All reviews - 29