******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
Best regards, Andrew Stewart - - - Subscribe to the Washington Babylon newsletter via https://washingtonbabylon.com/newsletter/ Begin forwarded message: > From: H-Net Staff via H-REVIEW <h-rev...@lists.h-net.org> > Date: September 5, 2019 at 8:34:35 AM EDT > To: h-rev...@lists.h-net.org > Cc: H-Net Staff <revh...@mail.h-net.org> > Subject: H-Net Review [H-War]: Eichhorn on O'Connor, 'American Sectionalism > in the British Mind, 1832-1863' > Reply-To: h-rev...@lists.h-net.org > > Peter O'Connor. American Sectionalism in the British Mind, > 1832-1863. Baton Rouge Louisiana State University Press, 2017. 280 > pp. $47.95 (cloth), ISBN 978-0-8071-6815-8. > > Reviewed by Niels Eichhorn (Middle Georgia State University) > Published on H-War (September, 2019) > Commissioned by Margaret Sankey > > "We may be for the North or the South; but we have no doubt of > this--that Jefferson Davis and the other Confederate leaders have > made an army; they are making, it appears, a navy; and they have made > what is more than either--they have made a nation."[1] These famous > words by Chancellor of the Exchequer William Ewart Gladstone in > Newcastle upon Tyne are the linchpin upon which Peter O'Connor > constructs his argument. > > Engaging the growing literature of US in the world and transnational > Civil War scholarship, O'Connor faults scholars for focusing too > narrowly on the Civil War years, which skews their understanding of > British public opinion.[2] By looking at leading British > intellectuals and their writings about the United States, especially > travelogues, O'Connor argues that the prewar discourse regarding > politics, slavery, and sectionalism influenced British attitudes > concerning the secession crisis and Civil War, leading to a > reluctance to support either section. He closes the book in 1863 when > the implementation of the Emancipation Proclamation permanently > changed British opinion in favor of the United States. Divided into > two sections, the book starts with the Nullification Crisis of 1832, > tackling "issues of race, slavery, and labor" in chapter 1, > perceptions of "US ethno-cultural regional identity" in chapter 2, > and "political policy, political culture, and states' rights" in > chapter 3 (pp. 8, 9). > > British observers frequently reported the paternal attitude southern > planters had toward their chattel, thus downplaying the human carnage > of slavery. Furthermore, to these Britons, guilt for slavery did not > rest solely at the door of the plantation mansion but with the entire > country that tolerated and profited from slavery's products. In a > long-overdue nuanced fashion, O'Connor explains that British > perceptions that the southern identity centered on slavery did not > translate automatically to a pro-northern attitude. This part of > O'Connor's argument is reminiscent of what Duncan A. Campbell > illustrates in his works on British public opinion (_English Public > Opinion and the American Civil War_ [2003] and _Unlikely Allies: > Britain, America and the Victorian Origins of the Special > Relationship_ [2007]): anti-southern views did not automatically mean > an embrace of the other section. > > Next, O'Connor engages ethnicity and geography as Britons looked for > an image of themselves in the United States. Observers frequently > invoked a Puritan New England and Cavalier South to illustrate the > distinctive characters of the two sections. Complicating matters was > that the northern parts of the country included a diverse immigrant > population, diluting its British heritage. Therefore, pure > Britishness was located in the Cavalier, ethnically cohesive southern > parts. Confounding things was the Irish population in cities like New > York, O'Connor argues. British anti-Irish and anti-Catholic attitudes > translated into concerns about the northern section. Finally, > O'Connor's subjects indicated a detailed understanding of politics in > the United States that escalated sectional divisions. In the course > of this discussion, O'Connor notes how Britons continued to perceive > of the democratic system in the United States as mob rule and even > more how some, but certainly not all, viewed democracy as a northern > phenomenon and saw an aristocratic society in the southern states. > However, the detailed engagement Britons had with the states' rights > issues in the United States caused many to view the growing crisis > from a constitutional point of view, rather than a moral > slavery-based argument. Thus, O'Connor provides an important overview > of antebellum British opinions about the United States. > > In the second part of the book, O'Connor chronicles the changing > British attitude in 1861 and 1862. Based on thirty years of matured > understanding, Britons located many pitfalls with the northern > government, such as the anti-free trade Morrill Tariff, as well as > the absence of abolition as a war goal, which allowed Confederate > sympathies to spread. As long as slavery was not a war goal, > Confederate and Confederate-sympathetic propagandists could liberally > build on British prewar attitudes of the United States and planter > paternalism. The reports on the use of Irish soldiers and the > significant number of foreign-born soldiers permitted the return to > arguments about the Britishness of the southern part of the country. > However, again embracing a nuanced approach and reminding readers of > Campbell's work, O'Connor cautions that "antipathy toward the Union" > did not mean "sympathy for the Confederacy" (p. 176). Finally, > O'Connor notes that "disillusion with immediate emancipation in > Britain ... stemm[ed] from the nation's experience in the West > Indies" (p. 146). Nevertheless, O'Connor concludes that Abraham > Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation forced Britons to reevaluate > their view on the sectionally torn United States and permanently > aligned them with the US. > > O'Connor's work fits into an emerging pattern of scholarship that has > moved away from looking at the Civil War era's diplomatic relations > confined by the four years of fighting. Instead, like Philip E. Myers > (_Caution and Cooperation: The American Civil War in British-American > Relations_ [2008]) and Jay Sexton (_Debtor Diplomacy Finance and > American Foreign Relations in the Civil War Era, 1837-1873_ [2005]), > O'Connor believes the key to understanding British wartime attitudes > lies in the antebellum years. However, O'Connor does not explain why > he starts in 1830, considering that sectional issues and geographic > differences existed well before then. Similarly, how much does the > focus on a select group of intellectuals and their travelogues skew > the understanding? Did they have an influence outside of their > specific intellectual strata? How much did they influence the middle > strata of society and even the working class? While these are > important intellectual components, there is very little politics. > Prime Minister Lord John Palmerston is only mentioned about a dozen > times and Foreign Secretary Lord John Russell even less, yet these > were the leading politicians in the country during the Civil War. Did > they accept and read these works? > > _American Sectionalism in the British Mind_ is an appreciated and > critical addition to the transnational literature of the Civil War > era. The book forces scholars interested in the transnational and > diplomatic aspects of the era to consider the long durée of > political, diplomatic, and intellectual narratives and no longer > engage solely on the four years of war. Finally, this book hopefully > will encourage other studies. Besides the pantheon of travelogues > used by O'Connor, there are other famous ones by Alexis de > Tocqueville and his travel companion Gustave de Beaumont that > critically assessed the political and racial landscape in the United > States. How did these two and others affect French perceptions? How > did antebellum literature influence people in other countries in > regard to the United States? Importantly, O'Connor alters the > narrative from the US-centric transnational account available so far > and looks at the people who mattered in making British opinions, > British opinion-makers and policymakers. This book will have a > lasting impact on the international aspects of the Civil War. > > Notes > > [1]. William Ewart Gladstone, "Speech on the American Civil War," > Town Hall, Newcastle upon Tyne, printed in _The Times_ (London), > October 9, 1862. > > [2]. Enrico Dal Lago, _William Lloyd Garrison and Giuseppe Mazzini: > Abolition, Democracy, and Radical Reform_ (Baton Rouge: Louisiana > State University Press, 2013); Don H. Doyle, ed., _American Civil > Wars: The United States, Latin America, Europe, and the Crisis of the > 1860s_ (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2016); Don > H. Doyle, _The Cause of All Nations: An International History of the > American Civil War _(New York: Basic Books, 2014); Niels Eichhorn, > _Liberty and Slavery: European Separatists, Southern Secession, and > the American Civil War_ (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University > Press, forthcoming 2019); Andre M. Fleche, _The Revolution of 1861: > The American Civil War in the Age of Nationalist Conflict_ (Chapel > Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2012); David T. Gleeson and > Simon Lewis, _The Civil War as Global Conflict: Transnational > Meanings of the American Civil War_ (Columbia: University of South > Carolina Press, 2014); Jörg Nagler, Don H. Doyle, and Marcus > Gräser, eds., _The Transnational Significance of the American Civil > War_ (Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2016); Paul Quigley, > _Shifting Grounds: Nationalism and the American South, 1848-1865_ > (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011); Paul Quigley, ed., _The > Civil War and the Transformation of American Citizenship_ (Baton > Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2018); Brian Schoen, _The > Fragile Fabric of Union Cotton, Federal Politics, and the Global > Origins of the Civil War _(Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University > Press, 2009); and Ann L. Tucker, _"Newest Born of Nations": European > Nationalist Movements and the Making of Southern Nationhood, > 1820-1865_ (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, > forthcoming).________ > > Citation: Niels Eichhorn. Review of O'Connor, Peter, _American > Sectionalism in the British Mind, 1832-1863_. H-War, H-Net Reviews. > September, 2019. > URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=53955 > > This work is licensed under a Creative Commons > Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States > License. > > _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: https://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
