The truth of John A. Logan’s position before the war may never be fully understood. Accounts on his end of have been destroyed, newspapers against him used political bias and have been caught distorting the facts, and close sources such as Hibert Cunningham have changed their stories. From a historical perspective today, the mutilated facts are not important. Instead, they provide insight into the antebellum mindset of Little Egypt as a whole. Clearly the acts of rebellion were not widespread; but rather bound to just a few counties (Jackson and Williamson) where they were lead by a handful of secessionists.
By examining the drama behind a key player like John Logan, one can gain a sense of how small the communities were. The region consisted of many tight knit counties, who’s residents were similar in ideology to John Logan. Little Egypt residents were not necessarily devout Unionists, but they were not all rebels either. Many were like John Logan, who wanted to preserve peace, and were unsure of the actions they would take if conflict started. The John Logan controversy simply shows how uncertain the region was before the war, and how closely they value their beliefs; as shown in the anger the press showed Logan when they felt he abandoned the Democratic Party. Looking at the John Logan conspiracy, the truth of his rebellious actions were most likely stretched, a characteristic similar to Little Egypt as a whole. Historically it is important to note that Logan’s actions during the war did not match the controversy that was present before it.
After deciding the join the Union, Logan became the army’s highest ranked civilian, and was one of the Union’s best generals. The same can be said for Little Egypt, who as a region, did not match the rebel exaggeration placed on it in the antebellum years. Instead the 10 southernmost counties had a volunteer excess of 50%, far too many to fit their quotes, and far outdoing their northern abolitionist counterparts. This was largely due to the recruiting efforts of John Logan; whom, like the region he long represented, was far from the traitor he was portrayed to be.