The abstract for the piece describes it this way:
“In this article the author argues that applying the methodologies of gender and cultural studies to the prewar life of Thomas J. 'Stonewall'
Lawton follows the predictable path of many moderns in trying to psycho-analyze Jackson in the faddish terms and perspectives of 21st century social historians.
Mr. Lawton’s use of terms like “acting-out” and “psycho-social” (when discussing Stonewall Jackson and "masculinity") would seem more suited, in my opinion, coming from Dr. Phil than from a journal like the Virginia Magazine of History and Biography. But that is not what I’m going to address here. Rather, I wanted to address Mr. Lawton’s error regarding the genesis of
Mr. Lawton repeats a myth about
Mr. Lawton writes:
Actually, quite the opposite is true. Jackson was, in fact, very much influenced by religion in his youth. One of
“No student of the life of
Interestingly, it is likely that
“. . . the lad’s search for knowledge, plus a natural curiosity, produced inquisitive probes into religion. He began reading the Bible with genuine interest. Joe Lightburn added exegesis for passages that
There are numerous other historical sources and accounts which make it clear
Though the piece is not my cup of tea, it is interesting in some respects. Not being one who embraces faddish trends in the study of history (or anything else for that matter), the article is nonetheless instructive as to how some modern social historians look at 19th century Christians.
*Though Cook was an "amateur" historian, his research and book on Stonewall Jackson's early life and family is still highly regarded.