Help support TMP


"Review of Mark M. Smith's "The Smell of Battle,..." Topic


1 Post

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Remember that you can Stifle members so that you don't have to read their posts.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the ACW Media Message Board


Areas of Interest

American Civil War

Featured Hobby News Article


Top-Rated Ruleset

Horse, Foot and Guns


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Showcase Article

1:72nd IMEX Union Cavalry

Fernando Enterprises paints Union cavalry and Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian bases them up.


Featured Workbench Article


Featured Book Review


750 hits since 9 Dec 2014
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?


TMP logo

Membership

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Tango0109 Dec 2014 12:41 p.m. PST

… The Taste of Siege: A Sensory History of the Civil War".

""How Did People Experience the American Civil War?"


So begins Mark Smith's original if shocking history of the Civil War's smells, tastes, sounds. So many books have been written about the war from almost every angle but virtually none from Smith's approach save the eloquent histories by Bruce Catton and Shelby Foote, for example. Yes, every year, thousands try to re-enact the famous battles but it is impossible to recreate what happened in the war. Whatever re-enactors playing soldier say or think, Mark Smith, Carolina Distinguished Professor of History at the University of South Carolina, says "cannot be understood with the same or even similar meaning today…What sounded loud or smelled rancid or tasted foul is different or even irretrievable." Or, put it this way: If a contemporary writer mentioned that the battlefield at Gettysburg smelled of death, what could that have actually meant to both the warriors and civilians in 1863?

Smith opens with the Holy City—Charleston, South Carolina,--so-called because of its many churches. A quiet and prosperous southern city, obsessed with keeping order and preserving the rights and privileges of a parasitic slave owning upper white class who were always fixated on fears that their slaves might rise up and destroy everything they held dear. The eerie silence of nighttime was especially worrisome. Nat Turner, Denmark Vesey and many lesser known rebels did not go unnoticed and it is hardly surprising that many secessionist firebrands came from Charleston. Charleston was then a city of 70,000, with 2,800 owning 37,000 slaves plus about 3,000 free blacks. Its slave trade was the largest in the country. "Slavery built this city," Smith writes, " and the culture that built slavery defined how people behaved"…It all came down to one word: order." (In Tsarist Russia the rural nobility lived among the peasantry, the cherni cheloveki or black peasants, as some called them, and they too dreaded a peasant uprising, certainly one reason why serfdom was abolished in 1861),.."
Full review here
link

link

Amicalement
Armand

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.