The Road to Poverty: the Making of Wealth and Hardship in Appalachia.

By Dwight B. Billings and Kathleen M. Blee. (New York and other cities: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Pp. xiv, 434. Paper, $24.95, ISBN 0-521-65546-3; cloth, $59.95, ISBN 0-521-65229-4.)

Perhaps the central paradox of the Appalachian region is the persistence of widespread economic poverty amid great natural wealth that has enriched only a handful of native and nonresident individuals and corporations. Scholars have attempted to explain this contradiction by searching for its origins in incipient industrialization, but surprisingly few have traced agricultural and extractive industrial development and its effects over extended time. With an acute awareness of previous historiographical and sociological work, thorough archival research, and extensive statistical presentations (sometimes overwhelming in detail), this comprehensive and original study of Clay County, Kentucky, by two historical sociologists addresses the paradox of chronic rural poverty in Appalachia from first European settlement to modern times. It seeks to explain how capitalism, state coercion, and cultural strategies shaped local society, and to guide future policymakers who fashion programs to alleviate poverty.

Several factors caused the selection of Clay County, Kentucky, to serve as a window to the remainder of Appalachia. The authors build upon the work on Clay County by James S. Brown, a Harvard University student of Talcott Parsons, and his associates. The last Kentucky county reached by a railroad (in the 1920s) and not a significant coal producer until then, Clay is located within a cluster of similar jurisdictions in a state with 10 percent of the country's poorest counties. In 1990, having a median per capita income of $8,693, it was the twenty-third poorest county in the United States and the seventh poorest in Kentucky.

Frontier Clay County was on the economic periphery of the richer Bluegrass region, but later it became distinct. The county developed a prosperous antebellum salt industry and extensive supporting agricultural enterprises. It attracted settlement and labor for its economic activities, including slaves, who in 1840 constituted 11 percent of its population. From the beginning, unequal distribution of wealth and resources characterized the area, and two families persistently dominated the county for many decades.

As early as 1806 violent conflict over livestock pasturage erupted, stimulating future reoccurring lethal episodes that reflected inter-elite rivalries. Into the twentieth century, economic crises, political competition for local control and state preferment, a sensational and salacious murder trial, and Civil War differences between the two dominant families, their kin, and their economic and political clientele contributed to open lawlessness and civil corruption. Periodic civic anarchy stimulated political irresponsibility and disaffection.

Between 1860 and 1880 Clay County underwent a crisis of agricultural decline caused by wartime destruction, declining soil fertility, and a high reproductive rate, all of which occasioned an arable land shortage. Out-migration of the poor, including most African Americans, and even greater magnification of elite power resulted. The same leaders, failing at manufacturing and commercial schemes, then fostered economic contacts with potential investors in timber and mineral resources.

The ensuing corporate dominance did not create the county's poverty or political pathologies but rather fed on the situation with the connivance of the resident elite, even including some acquisitive women. Not innocent victims, these local owners were well aware of their land's potential for exploitation. More recently, however, depressed conditions stimulated the migration of the elite's offspring and other educated residents.

A restricted thematic overview of this engaging work's interpretive contours camouflages its complex, subtle, and rich tapestry. This microscopic and sophisticated analysis of one county's historical plight rings true, has general Appalachian applicability, and carries regional research well beyond its usual norm. The mild intrusion of present-mindedness and jargon should not deter historians of the South and Appalachia.

JOHN E. STEALEY III
Shepherd College