Craig, my post keyed off of your statement,

"But, as I and some others here have explained, this is not what historians generally do in the field. Universities do not recruit or try to train new cheerleaders for "pro-Union" or "pro-Southern" advocacy."

I will ignore for the moment your use of "generally" and your characterization of university recruitment practices since I am fully aware of what university's tend to look for during recruitment.

The fact remains that with respect to the Civil War it is in my experience exceedingly rare to find a published article or text that, on the most controversial, hotly debated issues, does not lean one way or the other. That just seems to be the nature of historians who specialize in one or more facets of the CW.

So, I ask again,

Craig, I wish someone could identify for me an authentic, historian, respected by both northern and southern tilting historians alike, who does not tilt in one direction or the other, i.e., one who writes as close to the truth as truth may be defined - because he or she researches BOTH POINTS OF VIEW equally and includes both points of view in his or her citations before publication.

I would like to read one of his or her completely unbiased works.