Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMoore, Robert Josephen_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-11-20T20:39:16Z
dc.date.available2017-11-20T20:39:16Z
dc.date.issued1961
dc.date.submitted1961
dc.identifier.otherb1468861x
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2144/25695
dc.descriptionThesis (Ph.D.)--Boston University.en_US
dc.description.abstractSince 1900 there have been three distinct interpretations of Reconstruction--the traditional or "Dunning" interpretation and two major revisions, each demonstrating that changing climates of opinion in American society have vitally affected historians of Reconstruction. Near the beginning of the century historians were expected to answer questions on politics and the Constitution. The doctrine of white supremacy, as manifested by disfranchisement of Negroes and crystallization of the segregation system in Southern states and by the United States involvement in imperialism , was reaching its peak. Furthermore, emphasis was on conciliation between North and South rather than equality of races. These influences produced the "Dunning" interpretation. Historians of the "Dunning" school emphasized politics and the actions of individuals; believed in the inferiority of the Negro; sympathized with Southerners oppressed by unwise, harsh , and destructive Radical policies; and sharply criticized the motives and methods of Radical leaders [TRUNCATED]en_US
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherBoston Universityen_US
dc.rightsBased on investigation of the BU Libraries' staff, this work is free of known copyright restrictions.en_US
dc.subjectReconstruction (U.S. history, 1865-1877)en_US
dc.titleHistorians' interpretations of the reconstruction period in American historyen_US
dc.typeThesis/Dissertationen_US
etd.degree.nameDoctor of Philosophyen_US
etd.degree.leveldoctoralen_US
etd.degree.disciplineHistoryen_US
etd.degree.grantorBoston Universityen_US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record