General Lee's College: The Rise and Growth of Washington and Lee University (review)

book reviews355 wonder, however, just whom Thomas A. Belser had in mind when, in the 1969 volume, he characterized Samuel Proctor's Florida Commemorates the Civil War Centennial, 1961-1965; A Manual for the Observance of the Civil War in the Counties and Cities of the State of Florida as a "helpful guide for those interested in commemorating the Centennial ." (II, 295) Equally curious, or else a vitriolic commentary on the reading accomplishments of American secondary school students, is E. B. Long's description of James I. Robertson's The Civil War as "of good use to secondary school students and beginning readers." (II, 26) Surely it was in questionable taste for Long to describe one of Allan Nevin's volumes as "brilliant" and to proclaim that another "wül stand for years at the peak of Civil War history." (II, 23) The directory of compilers identifies Long as a research associate to Allan Nevins. Though it is amusing to seek out the risible among the annotations, Civil War Books neither stands nor falls on the basis of its annotations. Its central weakness is its incompleteness, and it is that which severely limits its usefulness. John V. Mering University of Arizona General Lee's College: The Rise and Grotvth of Washington and Lee University. By Ollinger Crenshaw. (New York: Random House, 1969. Pp. xvi, 366. $10.00.) Histories of academic institutions frequently arise from a desire to eulogize the trustees, placate the controlling denomination, or plug for that elusive salary increase. The result, unfortunately, is consistent with the motives which inspired it. OUinger Crenshaw's chronicle of Washington and Lee University is a cut above most institutional studies . He is neither fulsome in his praise nor reluctant in his criticism. The strength of this study is his treatment of the nineteenth century. The origins of the college in die late colonial period disclose famüiar themes: the educational enthusiasm of the Scotch-Irish Presbyterian settlers; religious antagonisms; the absence of academic structure and standards; constant financial crises; stability after the acquisition of a prominent donor in the person of George Washington; a curriculum dominated by the classics and religion. Presbyterians did not exercise explicit authority over the college in the nineteenth century, yet it drew its trustees, faculty and students primarily from that denomination. De facto Presbyterian control brought clashes with the local Episcopalian community in Lexington. Severe discipline and compulsory chapel became characteristic of the college. The Shenandoah Valley, with its traditional sectional antagonisms, colored the politics of the coUege. Most professors and trustees voted die Whig ballot, were mildly pro-slavery and vigorously pro-Union in the decades of the 1840's and '50's. Town and gown relations were rela- 356civil war history tively tranquil, perhaps because college sentiment so nearly mirrored the surrounding Rockbridge County attitudes. Internal divisions surfaced on the eve of secession. Academic freedom disappeared with the rise of abolitionism and the southern reaction. Secessionist students launched a bloody confrontation in 1861, fought armed clashes with Unionist townsfolk, hauled down the American flag, disobeyed administrative demands for law and order, intimidated Unionist President George Junkin into resigning, pressured faculty, and generally conducted themselves like an antebellum states rights version of Students for a Democratic Society. Washington College sent its sons to war in 1861 and virtually ceased to exist except as an academy for young boys. Occupied by Union troops during the war, it lost equipment, endowment, and some facilities . Although its war experience was typical of other southern colleges, its recovery was not. In a trustee coup of unparalleled brilliance, General Robert E. Lee was persuaded to assume the presidency of the college . The general expanded the curriculum to include practical subjects, emphasized modem languages while deemphasizing Latin and Greek, added English and history to the curriculum, and cherished a plan to create a college of agriculture. Prosperity, growth, and change characterized Lee's brief tenure as president (1865-1870) and attracted national attention to the college. Crenshaw concludes that President Lee's practical innovations were oftentimes not suitable to a liberal arts college but did indicate Lee's perception of the duty of a college to correct regional problems. Curiously, the Lee...