1,99 €
Niedrigster Preis in 30 Tagen: 1,99 €
Niedrigster Preis in 30 Tagen: 1,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: Booksell-Verlag
- Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
- Sprache: Englisch
In "A Defence of Virginia," Robert Lewis Dabney engages in a rigorous examination of the historical, cultural, and ethical dimensions of the Southern perspective during the tumultuous period of the American Civil War. Written in a passionate and articulate prose style, this work seeks to justify Virginia's actions and beliefs while emphasizing the state's unique historical context. Dabney employs a blend of legal argumentation, theological insight, and socio-political analysis, providing a comprehensive defense of Southern society and its values amidst growing national discord. As a Southern apologist, his work is situated within the broader literary context of 19th-century American literature, where debates around state rights and morality were fervently contested. Robert Lewis Dabney (1820-1898) was an influential theologian and Southern nationalist, whose experiences during the Civil War deeply informed his perspectives. His esteemed career included roles as a professor and a chaplain, allowing him a vantage point of both scholarship and practical engagement with the issues at hand. His commitment to the Southern cause and the preservation of its heritage illuminated his arguments in "A Defence of Virginia," reflecting the complexities of loyalty amidst a fractious national identity. This book is highly recommended for readers interested in American history, particularly the Southern perspective on the Civil War and its lasting implications. Dabney's work not only serves as a historical document but also offers penetrating insights into the ideological battles of his time. Whether approached for its scholarly content or its rhetorical strength, "A Defence of Virginia" is an essential read for anyone seeking to understand the intricacies of Southern identity and history. In this enriched edition, we have carefully created added value for your reading experience: - A succinct Introduction situates the work's timeless appeal and themes. - The Synopsis outlines the central plot, highlighting key developments without spoiling critical twists. - A detailed Historical Context immerses you in the era's events and influences that shaped the writing. - A thorough Analysis dissects symbols, motifs, and character arcs to unearth underlying meanings. - Reflection questions prompt you to engage personally with the work's messages, connecting them to modern life. - Hand‐picked Memorable Quotes shine a spotlight on moments of literary brilliance. - Interactive footnotes clarify unusual references, historical allusions, and archaic phrases for an effortless, more informed read.
Das E-Book können Sie in Legimi-Apps oder einer beliebigen App lesen, die das folgende Format unterstützen:
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2019
Ähnliche
A Defence of Virginia
Table of Contents
Introduction
In A Defence of Virginia, and Through Her, of the South, Robert Lewis Dabney advances a sweeping polemic that seeks to vindicate the social order of the slaveholding South against abolitionist criticism by appealing to scripture, history, and constitutional reasoning, framing the postwar struggle over memory and morality as a contest between what he presents as ordered tradition and revolutionary reform, and positioning Virginia as emblem and battleground for larger arguments about authority, rights, and the legitimacy of slavery, with the ultimate aim of persuading readers that the South’s cause, institutions, and leadership warrant moral and intellectual respect despite the Confederacy’s defeat.
This book is a work of nonfiction, a polemical treatise produced in the Reconstruction era after the American Civil War, when public debate over slavery, citizenship, and national identity remained urgent and unsettled. Dabney, a Southern Presbyterian theologian, writes from within that moment’s turmoil to defend Virginia and, by extension, the broader Southern polity. The publication belongs to the late 1860s context in which former Confederates and their allies elaborated arguments to justify their past and shape the postwar order. The result is not a narrative history but an advocacy text that marshals authorities to contest prevailing Northern and abolitionist critiques.
Readers encounter an assertive voice that argues systematically, drawing on biblical exegesis, legal reasoning, and historical anecdote to craft a comprehensive case. The prose is formal, rhetorical, and combative, with a tone that alternates between scholarly confidence and denunciation of opposing views. Rather than inviting a neutral survey, Dabney presses a brief, anticipating counterarguments and seeking to dismantle them point by point. The experience is that of engaging a sustained, tightly constructed defense, whose structure and cadence are designed to persuade through accumulation of citations and the assurance of doctrinal and historical certainty.
Central themes include the claimed moral permissibility of slavery, the authority of scripture in public life, the bounds of constitutional federalism, and the meaning of regional honor and duty. The book also advances critiques of abolitionist activism and Northern political leadership, casting Reconstruction policies as illegitimate or destructive. These arguments rest on interpretive moves in theology and law that modern scholarship largely rejects. For contemporary readers, the text is a primary source on proslavery thought and Southern apologetics, illuminating how appeals to tradition and selective history were deployed to defend an entrenched hierarchy and resist egalitarian reform.
The enduring relevance of A Defence of Virginia lies not in the soundness of its conclusions, but in the window it opens onto the intellectual strategies that underwrote slavery and later shaped Lost Cause narratives. It shows how religious language, legal formalism, and regional identity can be woven into a persuasive rhetoric that normalizes injustice. Engaging the book critically raises questions about authority, interpretation, and the ethics of public argument. It invites readers to consider how moral certainty is constructed, how selective evidence can legitimize power, and how historical memory is contested in the aftermath of profound social upheaval.
Approached as a historical document rather than a guide to truth, the work rewards close, critical reading. Noting what is emphasized and what is omitted helps reveal the scaffolding of its claims and the stakes of its polemics. Readers may find it useful to situate Dabney alongside contemporaneous abolitionist writing, postwar legal debates, and later historical research on slavery and Reconstruction. Such context clarifies the gulf between advocacy and evidence, and underscores the ways religious and constitutional language were conscripted into partisan ends. The book thus functions as a case study in how ideas can authorize systems of control.
Ultimately, A Defence of Virginia offers a challenging encounter with Reconstruction era apologetics and the mindset of a defeated but unrepentant elite. Its pages supply a record of arguments that influenced public discourse long after the war, shaping narratives about responsibility, virtue, and national purpose. For readers interested in intellectual history, theology, or the legal and moral debates surrounding the American South, the text provides a stark, focused example of polemical writing. Engaging it critically can sharpen ethical judgment and historical literacy, while making plain how forcefully words can contend for the meaning of a nation’s past and future.
Synopsis
A Defence of Virginia, and Through Her, of the South by Robert Lewis Dabney, published 1867, sought to vindicate Virginia and the former Confederacy against postwar criticisms, especially those linking the region’s character to slavery. A Presbyterian theologian and former Confederate chaplain, Dabney frames the volume as a response to Northern accusations of moral delinquency and political rebellion. He proposes to examine the controversy through scriptural interpretation, historical precedent, constitutional analysis, and practical observation. The introduction defines his audience as readers persuaded by religious authority and reasoned argument, and it announces a plan to show that Southern institutions, chiefly slavery, were misrepresented and not inherently criminal.
He next defines the central question: whether slavery, as practiced in the American South, is sinful in itself or only when accompanied by abuses. Dabney insists that critics conflate the institution with the transatlantic slave trade and with unlawful kidnapping, which he treats as distinct. He proposes to examine slavery as a form of domestic servitude regulated by law and religion. Establishing terms, he distinguishes scriptural "servants" from modern wage laborers and argues that moral evaluation must consider ends, means, and circumstances. This preparatory discussion sets boundaries for his later appeals to Scripture, moral philosophy, and policy, framing abolitionism as an overbroad moral claim.
A substantial section surveys the Old Testament to claim divine sanction for regulated servitude. Dabney cites the patriarchs, Mosaic statutes, and Israel’s household laws to argue that Scripture authorized masters to hold bondservants while imposing duties of protection and justice. He interprets provisions on Hebrew and foreign servants, debt servitude, war captives, and manumission, emphasizing that the Decalogue recognizes a master’s household authority. The Year of Jubilee and related ordinances are presented as reforms of treatment, not abolitions of the relation itself. From these texts he concludes that the Bible does not present slavery as intrinsically immoral within a lawful and humane framework.
Turning to the New Testament, the book contends that Christ and the apostles address masters and servants without requiring emancipation. Dabney analyzes Pauline household codes, admonitions in Ephesians and Colossians, and the epistle to Philemon, where Onesimus’s return is read as recognition of lawful servitude tempered by charity. He argues that apostolic condemnation of "men-stealers" targets kidnapping rather than slaveholding under civil law. The equality of believers before God is presented as spiritual, not a mandate to dissolve social hierarchies. This exegetical portion thus aims to show that Christianity reforms conduct within slavery rather than declaring the relation a sin per se.
From Scripture the argument moves to moral philosophy and political theory. Dabney challenges what he calls the abstractions of "higher-law" abolitionism and critiques readings of the Declaration of Independence that infer absolute, universal equality. He maintains that moral rights are relative to social order, that liberty is conditioned by duty, and that various forms of subordination can be legitimate. The book disputes immediate emancipation as a categorical imperative and argues that civil legislation should regard public welfare. It also rejects social and political equality between whites and Blacks, proposing racial separation and restricted citizenship as prudent policy within the constitutional framework he defends.
A long practical section portrays Southern slavery as a regulated system with paternal obligations. Dabney compiles statutes, testimonies, and traveler accounts to claim that enslaved people received material support, religious instruction, and legal protections, while discipline was circumscribed. He contrasts this picture with what he represents as harsher conditions for industrial laborers in the North and in Europe. Family life, medical care, and conversion to Christianity are emphasized as alleged benefits of the system. Abuses are acknowledged but treated as punishable deviations from norms. Through this survey, he concludes that Southern society could integrate servitude humanely under Christian and civil oversight.
Extending the practical analysis, the book surveys emancipation experiments abroad and wartime changes at home. Jamaica and Haiti are discussed as cautionary examples, interpreted as evidencing economic decline and social disorder after liberation. Dabney applies these readings to predict harmful consequences of rapid abolition in the United States. He criticizes federal wartime measures and the postwar Freedmen’s Bureau, alleging dependency, labor dislocation, and political manipulation. On suffrage and civil rights, he argues against immediate incorporation of freedpeople as equals, advocating gradualism or separation. These claims, he asserts, reflect prudence drawn from experience rather than hostility, and they inform his policy recommendations.
The narrative then addresses constitutional questions and the conflict itself. Dabney presents the Union as a compact of sovereign states, from which secession was a reserved remedy, and he interprets Virginia’s course as legally and morally justified. He contends that the North transformed a constitutional dispute into coercive war, and he catalogues military and civil measures—confiscation, devastation, and suppression—he deems unlawful. Confederate resistance is described as defensive, honorable, and bound by just-war restraints. Through this lens, the book links the moral status of slavery with the legitimacy of secession, arguing that misjudgment of the former distorted the nation’s response to the latter.
In conclusion, Dabney asserts that Virginia and the South merit historical vindication on religious, moral, and constitutional grounds. He reiterates that slavery, as he defines it, is not inherently sinful; that the Confederacy’s political stance followed lawful principles; and that hasty emancipation and centralization produced lasting harm. The book ends by appealing to Providence and posterity to reassess motives and outcomes without what he calls Northern fanaticism. While urging reconciliation under constitutional limits, it preserves a defense of Southern society’s honor and institutions. The overarching message is a systematic case for the South’s moral legitimacy amid defeat and reconstruction.
Historical Context
A Defence of Virginia was written in the immediate aftermath of the American Civil War, when Virginia lay economically shattered and politically supervised by federal authority. Composed and published in 1867, the book addresses audiences in a United States struggling over emancipation, citizenship, and the constitutional meaning of the war. Its place is the Old Dominion and the wider South, where plantations, county courts, seminaries, and churches had long anchored social order. The author, Robert Lewis Dabney, a Presbyterian theologian based at Union Theological Seminary in Virginia, wrote amid the upheavals of Reconstruction, when military districts, loyalty oaths, and constitutional conventions recast state institutions and when public debates fused scripture, law, and political economy.
The book’s central subject is slavery as it developed in Virginia from the colonial era to 1865. Enslaved Africans first arrived in Virginia in 1619, and the Virginia Slave Codes of 1705 codified hereditary, racial bondage. Tobacco cultivation and later diversified agriculture shaped a slave society that, after Congress banned the transatlantic importation in 1808, relied on a domestic trade sending hundreds of thousands from the Upper South to the Deep South between 1790 and 1860. Events such as Nat Turner’s insurrection in Southampton County in 1831, followed by tightened legal restrictions and a failed legislative emancipation debate in 1831–32, defined the politics of fear and control. Dabney’s treatise defends this Virginia system as lawful, paternal, and biblically sanctioned.
Antebellum national compromises and court rulings framed the constitutional terrain Dabney invokes. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 balanced slave and free states and set the 36°30′ line; the Compromise of 1850 admitted California as free and strengthened the Fugitive Slave Act. The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 embraced popular sovereignty, triggering Bleeding Kansas. In 1857, Dred Scott v. Sandford held that Congress lacked power to bar slavery in territories and denied Black citizenship under the federal Constitution. A Defence of Virginia mirrors Southern constitutional arguments: that Northern personal liberty laws subverted federal compacts, that property in slaves was protected, and that Southern resistance flowed from perceived federal and state-level breaches.
Abolitionism and religious conflict supply another decisive backdrop. William Lloyd Garrison founded the American Anti-Slavery Society in 1833; his newspaper, the Liberator, and mass petitioning campaigns challenged Congress, prompting the gag rule in 1836. Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin in 1852 sold unprecedented numbers and shaped Northern moral imagination. Churches fractured: Methodists split in 1844; Baptists formed the Southern Baptist Convention in 1845; Presbyterians divided along Old School–New School lines and then by section in 1861, when Southern Presbyterians organized at Augusta, Georgia. Dabney, a leading Southern divine, entered these debates with biblical exegesis that read patriarchal slavery into scripture and rejected abolitionist hermeneutics, a logic he systematizes throughout his book.
John Brown’s raid on Harpers Ferry in October 1859 tested Virginia’s order and national nerves. With a small band, Brown seized the federal armory to incite slave insurrection and was captured by United States Marines under Robert E. Lee, with J. E. B. Stuart acting as aide. Tried at Charles Town for treason against Virginia, murder, and inciting servile war, Brown was executed on 2 December 1859. The episode accelerated militia mobilization across the South and deepened sectional alienation. Dabney’s work treats the raid as emblematic of Northern fanaticism and revolutionary violence, positioning Virginia’s legal response as justified self-defense and as a warning against radical reform from outside the state.
Secession and civil war are the crucible of the book’s argument. Following Abraham Lincoln’s election on 6 November 1860, Deep South states seceded; after Fort Sumter in April 1861 and Lincoln’s call for troops, Virginia’s convention voted to secede on 17 April 1861, and Richmond became the Confederate capital. Campaigns from First Manassas to the Seven Days and Antietam devastated Virginia’s landscape. Dabney served as Confederate chaplain and as a staff officer to Thomas J. Stonewall Jackson during the 1862 campaigns; Jackson’s death in May 1863 became central to Confederate memory. Policies like the Confiscation Acts and the Emancipation Proclamation of 1 January 1863 recast war aims. Dabney’s book defends secession as constitutional and denounces wartime emancipation as illegal and destructive.
Reconstruction shaped the book’s publication context and polemical edge. Confederate surrender came on 9 April 1865; the Thirteenth Amendment ended slavery in December 1865. The Freedmen’s Bureau, created 3 March 1865, oversaw labor contracts, schools, and relief. Southern Black Codes of 1865–66 prompted the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868. The Reconstruction Acts of March 1867 placed Virginia in Military District No. 1 under General John M. Schofield, leading to the Underwood Convention of 1867–68 and a new state constitution ratified in 1869; readmission followed on 26 January 1870, as the Fifteenth Amendment advanced Black male suffrage. Appearing in 1867, Dabney’s book protests Radical Reconstruction, castigates the Bureau, and reasserts states’ sovereignty and white supremacy.
The book functions as a social and political critique by marshaling history, law, and theology to challenge abolitionism, wartime emancipation, and centralized federal power. It exposes, from a proslavery perspective, the era’s conflicts over citizenship, labor, and sovereignty, revealing how Southern elites justified racial hierarchy as scriptural and constitutional order. By attacking antislavery activism, personal liberty laws, and Reconstruction statutes, it critiques the redistribution of power to freedpeople and the federal state. In doing so, it also illuminates the period’s deep fractures between biblical literalism and egalitarian ethics, regional economies and national policy, and clerical authority and democratic reform, even as it rationalizes the injustices at the heart of the antebellum system.
