The
new topic of interest across American Civil War blogs is the number
of dead which resulted from the American Civil War. The estimated
number of 618, 222 has been revised to an estimated 750,000 and may
well have been as high as 850,000 dead Union and Confederate
soldiers. An article by historian J. David Hacker, an associate
professor of history at Binghamton University, SUNY, which appeared
in the New York Times “Opinionator” on line column seems to have
sparked this renewed interest. I must admit that it is a topic that
needs closer scrutiny, but I must disagree with the findings set
forth in the article. I must admit also that this is strictly my
opinion as I am not familiar with the method of “back projection”,
so I can not discount or confirm the veracity of this information.
Given this, I will state why I do not agree with the new figure as
presented in the article.
I question whether using census data, coupled with (or for that
matter, set against) the back projection can lead to a solid,
verifiable result. The article shows that census under counts were
estimated by using back projection over several different census
years. The years 1850 through 1880, and all of these had a
shortfall in numbers. They
ranged from 6.5 percent in 1870, the year that carries the the most
doubt, and 3.6 percent in 1880. The average under count
over these 40 years would be 5.4
percent. If we add the shortages back into the total of each census,
would that not increase the population figure and thereby decrease
the number of estimated civil war deaths? By not counting people that
should have been, it seems that would skew the numbers in favor of
more deaths. Can we even use these figures as a basis for a more
accurate death toll? Can “back projection” be reasonably used
when a catastrophic event is involved?
The
article goes further in looking at the differences in mortality
between the sexes in the 1850's, 1860's and 1870's. The figure
presented states that the war was responsible for the deaths of
750,000 men. Based on what? The census, which has already been shown
to be flawed. And does the census count the dead? Furthermore, does
the census take into account the number of ex-Confederates that fled
the country fearing reprisals from the Federal government, who never
returned? Does it take account of the former soldiers of both armies
that drifted west after the war and may not have been counted due to
living in sparsely populated regions of the growing country? The
census can give a reasonable figure for the population, but it can't
give a figure for the death toll of the Civil War. There are to many
variables to contend with and the basis for the new figure is just to
weak for me to hang my hat on. What would make me believe the new
figure is if the census data used was thoroughly confirmed, not
simply speculation. I will concede however that the death toll is
probably higher than the accepted 618,222 but until something more
definitive and substantial comes along, I will stay with this figure.
The
author asks if the difference in figures really matter's and answers
yes as it will cause us to look at the war differently. I can't say
honestly that it would change the way we look at it. It was a tragic
event, yes, and the added 130,000 dead would make it even more
tragic, but seeing the war differently I say no. The new figure may
influence the way the socio-economic landscape is viewed but I feel
that to view it or the war itself differently would lead us into the
realm of “what if...”, which will produce nothing but more
assumption and bear little in the way of actual fruit that will
enhance our understanding of the war or the era. What happened post
war occurred in spite of, not because of, the butchers bill.
The
true number will never be known. All the documentation available and
used in compiling
both
estimates is flawed and based on assumption and incomplete
information but the fact still remains that the years 1861 to 1865
were the darkest time the United States has ever known.
It
has never been my intention to turn this blog into an “Op Ed”
column, filled only with my opinions and thoughts about the American
Civil War but this article and subsequent posts by other bloggers
lent itself well to me for expressing my opinion. This post is in no
way meant to disparage their views. I am not refuting the new death
toll, nor am I discounting it, yet I am not embracing it either. I
merely question it. I never take things at face value and although my
thoughts may at times go contrary to the thoughts of others, they do
show another viewpoint some may not have considered while searching
for a solid answer. That is my hope and intent anyway. If indeed the
750,000 figure holds up, it does need to be recorded. Just give me
something a little more substantial than assumptions.
The
article this post refers to can be found at:
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/recounting-the-dead/?scp=19&sq=Disunion&st=blog
The
Picket
No comments:
Post a Comment