Edmund Ruffin: A Biography (review)

84CIVIL WAR HISTORY Edmund Ruffin: A Biography. By Betty L. Mitchell. (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1981. Pp. ?, 306. $22.50.) One would not expect a prote'gé of Stephen Oates, the biographer of such figures as John Brown, Nat Turner, and Abraham Lincoln, to display much sympathy for a southern fire-eater. And that is decidedlythe case with Betty Mitchell's new biography of Edmund Ruffin. At great pains to deny that her study is an"apologia or justification" ofRuffin lest she be tarnished by the unfashionable views of her central figure, the author announces at the outset that she will eschew psychoanalysis of this "essentially tragic figure" and simply let her readers form their own conclusions about him. Yet, in the narrative that follows, Mitchell manifests an attitude toward Ruffin which can best be characterized as uniformly and unremittingly unsympathetic, sarcastic, condescending, and sneering. In view of her ill-concealed dishke for thenoted agricultural reformer and dedicated southern nationalist, it is surprising that Mitchell would undertake a new life of Ruffin, especially since a superb study of the fiery Virginian already exists. Unfortunately, the present work is less satisfactory than the previous biography of Ruffin, written fifty years ago by Avery Craven, and adds Uttle to our understanding of either Ruffin or the society of which he was a part. Mitchell employs no new methodology, provides little analysis, offers no direct challenge to the interpretations of Craven (whom she does not mentionin either preface or text), and utilizes no significant new primary sources. Like Craven, she rehes very heavily on Ruffin's 4100-page manuscript diary, basing eight of her last nine chapters almost exclusively on that source. It is not clear to what extent her work was facilitated by the printed version of that diary, the first volume of which appeared more than two years before she commenced her study, since virtually all citations are to the manuscript diary. Incredibly, she seems unaware (judging by her bibliography ) that the second volume of the edited diary was published in 1977. To her credit, Mitchell is an imaginative and, attunes, brilliantwriter; indeed, her study of Ruffin reads almost like a novel. And therein lies another problem. Not only does she employ the styleofthe novelist, but also many of the techniques—devices which may be proper in abook of fiction but which have no place in a scholarly work. Thus, she extrapolates material from separate conversations and letters and passes them off as one in the text (pp. 99, 216-17); she attributes to Ruffin statements apparently made at one point in time which actually were written at other times (pp. 234, 248); she misrepresents evidence for narrative effect (p. 172, withrespectto theallegedinterruption ofRuffin's journey to Montgomery). More than this, the book is marred by imprecise wording, careless citation of sources (there are more than fifty such errors in references to the diary alone), and factual errors—it was William Boulware, not Baulwane (p. 79); Johnson J. Hooper, not Johnson A. (p. 159); Colonel Terry, not Ferry (p. 190); John Shdell, not BOOK REVIEWS85 Sliddell (p. 201); John Quincy Adams, not John Adams, was a presidential candidate in 1824 (p. 23); Ruffin was not in Washington on New Year's Eve, 1859 (p. 151); seceding southern delegatesnominated Breckinridge in Baltimore, not Richmond (p. 157); and the Confederate Congress did not pass a new conscription law in the summer of 1863 (p. 236). More serious is the consistent misreading of evidence to make Ruffin appear ludicrous, inept, self-serving, vain, and senile. Armed with a plethora of deprecatory words—he "clucked," he "whined," he "frothed," he was subject to "burping spells," he was a "martinet," he looked like "some queer apparition of the Ancient Mariner"—Mitchell labors assiduously to ridicule her subject. The same end is achieved through subtle manipulation of source materials. Thus, Ruffin's statement , "I spoke . . . for about three-quarters of an hour—& then stopped, having forgotten to bring in some of my main points," becomes, in the hands of Mitchell: ". . . he rambled on for threequarters of an hour, then ended abruptly, having forgotten to mention most of his main points" (p. 167, my itaUcs). Considered individually, such examples...