Venues. David particularly in his book race in the union, has examined the postwar culture in america and eric has literally written the book reconstruction. Has this wonderful new book that takes a look at lincolns evolution on this issue, where it took the country. Let me start by observing something that you all know, which is we are living in or maybe living through is a better era in which raw emotions are being continually laid bare about the status of americans, race relations, refugee status. We all know recent examples. Let me tell you about one that occurred some months ago, but may have slipped through the cracks as we focus on current events. , Hillary Clinton was appearing in iowa, defending her choice, interestingly, as Abraham Lincoln as her favorite president. They asked secretary clinton, who is your favorite president . She said, im sorry, bill. Its a ram lincoln. Why, she was asked. Its Abraham Lincoln. Why, she was asked. She said because he was willing to forgive. I dont know what reconstruction would have been like if he were alive, i think it would have been more tolerant. If shed have been good stops there. But she said instead we had reconstruction. We had racism and jim crow. We had people in the south feeling defiant. I really do believe he could have put us on a different path. One blogger said, clinton, whether she knows it or vision telling a racist of American History which held sway until recently that reconstruction was a mistake brought on by vengeful northern radicals, resulting in a savage and corrupt government which, in turn, left former confederates, as clinton put it, discouraged and defiant. A new York Magazine blog said, did Hillary Clinton channel a dixie view of . Econstruction as they say in the news business, she walked it back, but it does linger. Lets start with edna, if we can. What is the evolution of historiography on reconstruction, and why is it still misunderstood at this point . Is a very generic question, but lets start there. Think we medford i are very much influenced by the dunning school, the school that came out of columbia university. Its really great that eric has corrected all of that. Dunning and his students argued that reconstruction was a tragic because black people ignorant, uneducated black dominated reconstruction politics in the south with the assistance of the carpetbaggers, men and women who had come from the north, and local republican scalawags, as they called it. And as a consequence, there were policies that were put in place that were detrimental to southern whites. And so, that is why it was a tragic era. It did take eric and other historians coming later to correct that, to indicate if it was a tragic era, it was tragic because of what had happened to africanamericans, or what was not realized, a promise that was unfulfilled. Of ways wea lot still operate under that misconception of what reconstruction is, so as well educated as Hillary Clinton is, she even was caught up in that alternative fact. [laughter] so, weor medford and try those of us who are teaching in universities try to correct that, but i think students get so much of their history all of us get so much of our history from film, and we remember gone with the wind and birth of a nation, and we still believe that there is some truth to that. Eric, what was the reconstruction what was the state of reconstruction study when you were a student . Thank you forr saying that. I am not the only one who tried to correct the old mythologies. You have to go back to w. E. B. Dubois. And even earlier than that, there were others challenging what we call the dunning school. The problem today is there is a vast gap, maybe bigger than any other period of American History about what scholars think about reconstruction. The old view was no longer live in universities, in textbooks, butcholarship in this era, there is a gap between that and kind of a sentiment Hillary Clinton, i do not expect politicians to be experts on every aspect of historical interpretation, but she was just channeling what was, is still a sentiment that is out there. Although my feeling is, lecturing a lot about reconstruction, the problem is not the survival of the dunning school, as we call it, but ignorance altogether. People do not know anything about reconstruction. It is overshadowed by the civil war. And also, as david blight pointed out in his great book some years ago, i think quoting howells, americans like a tragedy with a happy ending. Reconstruction was a tragedy, although as edna said, not that it was attempted, but that it did not succeed. It does not have a happy ending. It is hard to assimilate reconstruction into the picture a lot of us want to have of American History of onward and upward, you know, right six ing, free to mix and in, rights expanding, freedom expanding, Getting Better and better. After reconstruction, things got worse for a long time. The main problem right now is lack of knowledge of reconstruction. Our job as scholars is to spread as much information as we can. You haveholzer david, to take some responsibility because hillary, after all, went to Yale Law School director blight before my time. [laughter] director holzer but you have written powerfully that reunion and reconciliation were more important to those shaping opinion in the 1960s and 1970s then equality and citizenship then equality and citizenship. Equality and citizenship. Expand on that. The stakes oft reconstruction is this master narrative of American History. We do all wish we lived in a narrative of progress. The 19th century especially was supposed to be a century of progress, but it had this hideous, horrible civil war in the middle and the whichtruction period became chaotic in many ways an incredibly violent in other ways. What is and that Hillary Clinton quote and im not blaming her for this. This is what other people do. The speed from 1865 into the jim crow era, and look what we had in the aftermath. We had jim crow. Yeah, but we had this amazing experiment of reconstruction where the constitution was truly rewritten. Under the 13th and 14th and 15th amendments. We live under the constitution created in washington more than the one created in philadelphia. Thats a huge achievement. That is what everyone has said now for half a century. But also reconstruction involves constitutional flux and chaos. It involves it is the worst the mystic violence, mob violence of American History. We have a hard time broaderating that into narratives of what we would like American History to be, and it involves race. For years and years and years have donere you two this and graduate oral exams with graduate students, youve got to give them the questions and i always say, so, why is reconstruction such a difficult for historians . Why is it so topsyturvy and how we interpret it . Generally the students take a few seconds, they take a gulp and they say, race. I say, well, yeah. They say, it is americas first great racial reckoning. The war and emancipation forced the United States to define who black people were going to be as free, as citizens, were they. Oing to have rights it was not a white nation anymore. It was the first major racial reckoning, and we did some of it very well for the time. And it failed as well because of the political culture and the political will to sustain it. To fitdifficult period into the broader narrative of progress and ascension. We always want our history to be ascending. God, no matter what happens to us, we recycle that. Even this recent election sorry. [laughter] director blight i mean director holzer well, lets start. Director blight i didnt mean to do that. [laughter] director holzer lets talk about a different president we can discuss at the Historical Society more more easily. Director blight sorry. Director holzer its all right. Its inevitable. So, lincolns absence from reconstruction is one of the great what ifs. We can go there if you would like. But lets start with lincolns reconstruction plans as early as 1864 when he vetoes atop congressional reconstruction and vetoes a top greek a top plan congressional reconstruction plan. Andrew johnson, it ultimately leads to his impeachment. But judging what he said to wade davis and his own plans, where is lincoln taking the country as 64 . Ar winds down in professor medford its really debatable. The 10 plan,t and it looks like he is willing to do, in fact, what Hillary Clinton suggested, that he is willing to forgive and forget and bring people back into the nation as quickly as he can. That is part of what the whole 13th amendment, was where he had to get this done before the next Congress Comes in. Have waited. But if you look at what he was doing three days before he dies, and he is talking about Voting Rights for certain segments of the africanamerican population, it suggests that he is willing to move much more quickly. But if we look at lincoln longterm, if we look at what he had done throughout the war, and what he did before he became president , we would have to assume that he was going to follow a very cautious plan. And so, he might not have been willing to have black codes implemented, for instance, but he certainly wouldve been much more conciliatory to the south. I think that is the direction he was going in. That might not have voted boded well for africanamericans. Because we know the 14th and 15th commitments are passed because you have a president and 15tho weak 14th amendments are passed because you have a president that is so weak and congress is able to take over. I do not know that lincoln would have insisted on the 14th and 15th amendments so quickly. Point,r holzer just one the speech that edna was referring to, from a window in the white house, lincoln talks about limited black Voting Rights. It sounds like means testing in a way. The very intelligent and those who served in the army, but it is the first time any american president has talked about extending Voting Rights to people of color. And it is true several sources, including testimony at the johnson impeachment trial suggested that John Wilkes Booth was in the audience and did say that is the last speech he will ever make. Im not sure he said the other thing that is attributed to him about negro equality without using a more unpleasant word then negro, but he did say that was the last speech he will ever make. Eric, you have traced this is sor foner my view this is all counterfactual history. Director holzer right. Professor foner no, in terms of what would have happened if lincoln had lived. I resist the idea he had a plan of reconstruction, if by that you mean he figured out what he wanted to happen once the war was over. s view,he war, lincoln plan for reconstruction was predicated on getting these two major objectives to read one was defeating the confederacy and the other is ending slavery. Especially after the emancipation proclamation. Once the war ends, those are not the issues anymore. Its impossible to know what lincoln would have done on the as david said what does slavery actually what does the end of slavery actually mean in terms of the status of africanamericans in society . Lincoln was a mainstream republican. Andrew johnson, he represented the heart of the Republican Party. He had his finger on the pulse of northern Public Opinion and Something Like the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which was passed with virtual unanimous support of republicans in congress, i cannot imagine lincoln vetoing that. He vetoed wade davis, but that was the end of the session. That was a strange thing. I think the Civil Rights Act, lincoln would have gone along with that. When you get to the 15th, maybe not, but that is four years later. The thing about reconstruction, it was a totally dynamic situation. The situation was changing radically as time went on. Who were people totally opposed to black suffrage in 1865 endorsed it two years later. At thet freeze lincoln moment he is killed and say that doneat lincoln would have for the next four years of his presidency. Everything was changing rapidly and one thing we know about lincoln is he was an openminded guy and he had changed and he was willing to change, unlike Andrew Johnson who was totally inflexible and stuck in a mold and would never move away from it here it i dont find it andicult to imagine Lincoln Congress working out a plan of reconstruction that would have looked very much like the Civil Rights Act and 14th amendment. What would have been the reaction of the white south to that . Who knows . You can speculate all you want, but youre moving further and further from actual his tree. Actual history. Lincoln alsoht would have been reacting to the murders, the riots in norlin that did radicalize some republicans. Riots in new orleans. It was not just a Andrew Johnsons instruction. Tocoln would have had record those as well. And they were being flooded by letters from the south, the Freedmens Bureau saying, you have to act. You have to do something. Is thatavorite answer lincoln would have written a memoir. [laughter] and everything we say about him would begin there. Director holzer there would be about 25,000 fewer books. He would have written it. And you would have been out of business. [laughter] professor foner you believe peoples memoirs . Director holzer some. Parts of some. Instead we have the reality of Andrew Johnson. Not record is filled bulging with, but it includes comments from progressive republicans that say lincoln was a wonderful man, but maybe gods hand is in this because he would have been weak. He would have been to conceal a jury, too forgiving. Conciliatory, to too forgiving. Lets talk reality here. Was his where was the Tipping Point between his position and his racism and why were lincoln they so wrong about him in the beginning s great mistake lincolns great mistake, his Vice President. Professor medford i guess we he chose himat why as Vice President. He was in a situation with tennessee he has done a great deal to keep that part of tennessee loyal to the union, even though there is the other half that is not. In a sense, he is giving a gift to that group of tennesseans for what they have done for the nation. That pointw that at he was wrong. Instance ofis is an a man who becomes president who is not prepared to be president. Imagine that. [laughter] pregnant pause for a reaction. Ok. Professor medford im sure lincoln never expected he was going to even though he knew they all had dreams and all the rest. Im sure when he chose that person as his Vice President , he did not expect he would actually get the opportunity to be president. Right. R holzer its even questionable whether he there is no smoking gun in hetory that suggests affirmatively chose johnson the way that president s today choose the candidates. But two of his secretaries took credit for carrying that message to the convention, and lincoln did not need a northerner on his ticket to balance him anymore. He need a southerner to balance the quintessential northerner. They should have vetted him more. Director holzer you know, they could. By the way, the vetting was available. The onlyat johnson, prominent southern senator who stays loyal to the union, but if you read his speeches, there are filled with racial invective. Oh, yeah. Foner he also said i will be the moses of the colored people of tennessee and i will leave them ofo the Promised Land freedom. You can find some racist as well. In lincolns i think johnson at the moment is the worst president in American History. He could be superseded. As edna said, he was not cut out for the job, which is sort of the basic problem to begin with. Some of the radicals did think that johnsons reputation, when he said overilled, and over again, treason must be made odious. Traders must be punished. Tors must beaio punished. He had risen in tennessee as a spokesman of the poorer whites, many of whom resented these nters who were deeply resented these planters, and who were deeply racist. And theres the question harold raised, why did he change his mind very quickly . He is offering pardons to these rich guys and allowing them to get elected to office even though they have not been pardoned. Nobody knows. Johnson did not leave a memoir either. Did not write letters, did not keep a diary, did not confide in people. What was going on in his mind, we do not know. My supposition based on the evidence i have seen is johnson was very alarmed by what we would call an upsurge of black activism in the south in 1865. I mean, it was chaotic, as david said. There were places, including tennessee, where former slaves were seizing land for themselves. There were places they were demonstrating and marching for the right to vote. There were places they were challenging discrimination on streetcars. And this kind of that was not what johnson had in mind. Johnson that, yeah, they are free, absolutely. Now they should go back to work on the plantations and not bother anybody and they will get paid wages or something, but they are not really part of the body politic. I think johnson came to realize or feel that only the planter class could keep blacks under control, so to speak, from his point of view. The poor whites could not do that, from eastern tennessee. What you said, you guys have to exert, put a racial order in place in the south again. You cant very well say, you cant hold office, you can vote. I feel it was black activism that p