Contains the list of accessions to the library, formerly (1894-1909) issued quarterly in its series of "Bulletins."

In this comprehensive history, R. Douglas Hurt traces the decline and fall of agriculture in the Confederate States of America. The backbone of the southern economy, agriculture was a source of power that southerners believed would ensure their independence. But, season by season and year by year, Hurt convincingly shows how the disintegration of southern agriculture led to the decline of the Confederacy's military, economic, and political power. He examines regional variations in the Eastern and Western Confederacy, linking the fates of individual crops and different modes of farming and planting to the wider story. After a dismal harvest in late 1864, southerners--faced with hunger and privation throughout the region--ransacked farms in the Shenandoah Valley and pillaged plantations in the Carolinas and the Mississippi Delta, they finally realized that their agricultural power, and their government itself, had failed. Hurt shows how this ultimate lost harvest had repercussions that lasted well beyond the end of the Civil War. Assessing agriculture in its economic, political, social, and environmental contexts, Hurt sheds new light on the fate of the Confederacy from the optimism of secession to the reality of collapse.

This edition of the economic history classic One Kind of Freedom reprints the entire text of the first edition together with an introduction by the authors and an extensive bibliography of works in Southern history published since the appearance of the first edition. The book examines the economic institutions that replaced slavery and the conditions under which ex-slaves were allowed to enter the economic life of the United States following the Civil War. The authors contend that although the kind of freedom permitted to black Americans allowed substantial increases in their economic welfare, it effectively curtailed further black advancement and retarded Southern economic development. Quantitative data are used to describe the historical setting but also shape the authors' economic analysis and test the appropriateness of their interpretations. Ransom and Sutch's revised findings enrich the picture of the era and offer directions for future research.