Review---Lincoln's 100 Days Between September 22 1862 and January 1 1863

Jim Cullen's Review of Louis P. Masur's Lincoln's 100 Days: The Emancipation Proclamation and the War For the Union, [Oxford 1862]

Louis P. Masur's latest book stands at the intersection of two important long term trends in Civil War historiography (and, by extension, U.S. historiography generally). The first a post-1960s emphasis on foregrounding the racial dimension of the conflict, asserting slavery was the precipitating cause and abolition as the primary significance of its outcome. This would almost be so obvious among scholars to not bear mentioning if such emphasis was not primary before the late twentieth century, and if there didn't remain vocal segments in the culture at large that explicitly reject it. The other, more recent trend is a new emphasis on political history, in effect closing a circle that began with a move toward social history in the 1970s and '80s and cultural history in the 1990s and 2000s. In recent decades historians have tried to affirm their commitment to a democratic discourse by affirming the agency of individual actors at the ground level rather than the Words and Deeds of Great Men. Like all well-intentioned (or perhaps just intellectual marketplace-driven) trends, however, such tendencies have perhaps reached the point where they conceal more than they reveal. Who's running the government at any given time really may matter after all.

Given this context, there may well have been a spate of Emancipation Proclamation books even if its 150th anniversary was not at hand (President Lincoln issued the preliminary Proclamation on September 22, 1862, and the final one putting it into effect on January 1, 1863). In recent years, a string of heavyweight scholars -- among them Allen Guelzo, Harold Holzer, and, going back a bit further, John Hope Franklin -- have made it the subject of volume-length studies. This is interesting when one considers the traditional perception of the E.P., captured most vividly by Edmund Wilson, who in Patriotic Gore famously described it as having "all the moral grandeur of a bill of lading." But just as the center of gravity in the military history of the war has shifted from Gettysburg to Antietam, so too is the E.P. getting a second look as a document as carefully crafted, and eloquent in its own way, as the Gettysburg Address.


Full Text Continues at  History News Network, October 15, 2012

News---President Signs Proclamation, Establishes Fort Monroe National Monument

President Barack Obama Tuesday signed an executive order making Fort Monroe in Hampton, Va., which closed as a military base in September, a National Monument. Fort Monroe "was the site of the first slave ships to land in the New World," Obama said during the Oval Office signing. "But then in the Civil War, almost 250 years later, Fort Monroe also became a refuge for slaves that were escaping from the South, and helped to create the environment in which Abraham Lincoln was able to sign that document up there -- the Emancipation Proclamation."

Obama said the National Monument designation would bring millions of dollars to the region and create 3,000 jobs. "There's a strong economic component to this. We think we're going to see additional jobs in Virginia as a consequence of this. But for those members of Congress who are here, I still need some action from Congress on the American Jobs Act and other steps," the president said.

Remarks by the President at Signing of a Presidential Proclamation Establishing the Fort Monroe National Monument, President Barack Hussein Obama, Oval Office, White House, Washington, DC, November 2, 2011.

"Well, one of the great pleasures of this job, but also one of my responsibilities, is making sure that we are preserving our nation’s treasures so that they can be enjoyed by our children, our grandchildren, our great-grandchildren. And over the years, over 100 sites have been set aside as national monuments -- everything from the Statue of Liberty to the Grand Canyon.

"So today, I am continuing that proud tradition by adding another monument to the list: Fort Monroe in Hampton, Virginia, has played a remarkable role in the history of our nation. It was the site of the first slave ships to land in the New World. But then in the Civil War, almost 250 years later, Fort Monroe also became a refuge for slaves that were escaping from the South, and helped to create the environment in which Abraham Lincoln was able to sign that document up there -- the Emancipation Proclamation.

"In September, Fort Monroe closed its doors as a military base. But thanks to advocacy of some outstanding citizens and historians and elected officials who are represented here, as well as the great work of our Department of the Interior and Ken Salazar and the -- all the people who have been involved in making this day possible, we are going to continue this legacy, making Fort Monroe a national monument.

"This is going to give an opportunity for people from all across the country to travel to Fort Monroe and trace the history that has been so important to making America what it is. It’s also going to be an incredibly important economic boost to the region. Local officials estimate that this may end up creating as many as 3,000 jobs in the region. It will add millions of dollars to the local economy in and around Hampton. And so this is a win-win. Not only is it good for the people of that region now, but it also allows us to set aside this incredibly important site for the enjoyment and appreciation of generations to come.

"So I want to thank everybody who’s here for the great work that they’ve done. I am looking forward to not only visiting myself but also taking Malia and Sasha down there so they can get a little bit of sense of their history. And I thank the Commonwealth of Virginia for giving us this opportunity to appreciate the remarkable history of their state but also of this country.

So with that, I’m going to sign this bill -- or executive order.(The executive order is signed.) There you go. (Applause.) Just one last point I want to make. As I said, there’s a strong economic component to this. We think we’re going to see additional jobs in Virginia as a consequence of this. But for those members of Congress who are here, I still need some action from Congress -- (laughter) -- on the American Jobs Act and othttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifher steps. But in the meantime, this is going to make a big difference. And again, I want to thank everybody here, particularly the private citizens who put their time and money and effort into making this day possible.

Top Text Source: United Press International

Bottom Text Source: White House

Top Image Source: Hampton Roads
Middle Image Source: Missouri Law
Bottom Image Source: White House

CWL --- White Union Soldiers, Race and Slavery

"A Vexed Question": White Union Soldiers on Slavery and Race, Chandra Manning in The View From the Ground: Experiences of Civil War Soldiers, edited by Aaron Sheehan-Dean, University Kentucky Press, 2007, pp. 31-66, notes.

At what point did white Union soldiers accept African-Americans as being more than contrabands? Chandra Manning would say that they accepted blacks as early as 1861 if the white Union soldiers were west of the Appalachian Mountains.

The connection between emanicipation and the war was made by African-Americans. The first group of whites to make the connection were those of Union soldiers serving in Dixie during the fall of 1861. Citing camp newspapers that were writen and edited by soldiers of the line, Manning believes that these soldiers became both advocates and agents of emancipation. The assumption that racism made Union soldiers oppose emancipation is found in Bell Irvin Wiley's The Life of Billy Yank and the essay Billy Yank and the Black Folk.

Reviewing about 100 camp newspapers written and edited by soldiers in the field, Manning has found evidence that Union soldiers were linking emancipation with war aims by the end of 1861. ". . . the fact that slavery is the sole undeniable cause of this infamous rebellion, that it is a war of, by and for slavery, is as plain was the noon-day sun" are words that were written in October 1861 by an Illinois soldier stationed in Missouri; this statement is typical of what Manning has found. Between the late summer and early winter 'a striking pattern took shape, as soldier after soldier began to insist that because slavery had caused the war, only the destruction of slavery could end the war," states Manning.

Remarkably the author has also found that soldiers understood that the South's lacked a middle social class. They viewed the middle class as holding the reservoir of social virtue, which was essential for a democratic nation with a republican government. The sanctity of the family, and the slave holder's violation of it, was an issue for Union soldiers. First hand they observered that one in three first marriages of slaves were broken by sale and that one in two slave children were seperated from one parent by sale.

The progress of the war influenced the racial attitudes of Union soldiers. As black soldiers engaged the enemy and these engagements were alongside white Union soldiers, then white attitudes about blacks changed. Battlefield stamina and courage among black soldiers became an agent of change within the preceptions of white Union soldiers. Importantly, Manning states that many Union soldiers understood that Northern society was complicit in slavery and that the war was a judgment from on high upon the entire nation.

Help Note: This chapter can be obtained by using your local library's inter-library loan services or by contacting me.