Making Sense of Slavery is a historiography of slavery studies. Tracing the way in which enslavement is written about from before the Civil War to the present, it provides a narrative about how our academic understanding of the institution has changed, and how that work reflects the context in which it was written. Many of the key thinkers make an appearance, and Spillman does a great job summarizing their views. The first section includes an analysis of key writers of the 1800s, nationalist historians like Bancroft and Ramsay, but also the impact that Benezet and Stowe had. Spillman's section on the Reconstruction years is particularly strong, explaining U.B. Phillips, Pollard's Lost Cause, Turner, and Dunning. However, it was the section on consensus and New Left historians that I think was the standout one. Stampp and Hofstadter make appearances, as does Myrdal (although, I wish Spillman would have unpacked An American Dilemma more than what he did). Genovese's Roll, Jordan, Roll gets adequate coverage, and he does a nice job exploring Fogel and Engerman's cliometrics approach. Moynihan gets attention, in which Spillman ties the past to the present, showing how the report is grounded in ideas that have been developed throughout our history.
Spillman rounds out the work with significant, more recent works. Annette Gordon-Reed's book on Jefferson shows how historians have peeled back the curtains on some of the issues that have been kept quiet. Edward Baptist's work on the intersection of enslavement and capitalism shows how historiographical developments have been changing in our present day. Of course, Spillman ends with the 1619 project, adequately explaining the thesis and the controversy around it.
This book would best serve those who have some background in American history and the history of slavery. Spillman's work should serve as a model for other historians who might be willing to write a similar exploration of the historiography of other topics.