Religion and the Civil War: A Guide for Pre-Service Teachers nsleeter Fri, 08/19/2022 - 08:53
Image
Article Body

What is it?

As historian James McPherson has written “Religion was central to the meaning of the Civil War, as the generation that experienced the war tried to understand it.” However, many of the resources available for students learning about the war do not deal with the religious themes of the war and therefore miss important context to one of the most consequential topics in U.S. history.

Key points:

  • This activity will take one 90-minute period or two 45-minute periods. It is appropriate for a high school U.S. history classroom, but can be modified for a variety of learners.
  • Students will analyze, interpret, and evaluate primary sources. 
  • Students will learn more about the causes of the Civil War as well as the course and character of the war and its effects on the American people. 

 

Approach the Topic

This guide will use a variety of Library of Congress sources including sheet music from marching songs that soldiers sang as they marched to battle. These songs often contained religious themes that connect to what soldiers viewed as the meaning of the war. Students will also read excerpts from sermons by various religious leaders in the North and the South as they looked to religious texts in an effort to explain the war. The guide will also contain tips for teaching about religion generally to help teachers engage students with what can be a challenging topic to teach. 

In introducing this topic to students, emphasize that the United States at the time of the Civil War was a very religious nation. Church attendance was frequent in all regions of the U.S. and significantly Americans on both sides of the war often invoked God and the Bible when justifying the war. According to historian Mark Noll, this took a variety of forms. For example, the Bible was frequently used to both condemn slavery and justify it. Similarly, American Protestants in both the North and South identified strongly with the notion of divine providence, that is, the idea that God was actively working to shape events and this work could be perceived by people as the events happened. However, which events to cite and how to interpret them differed greatly depending on which side of the conflict a person supported. In this activity students will examine primary sources to note how Americans invoked religion during the Civil War and how understanding the role of religion changes our understanding of the war. 

 

Description

This activity facilitates students as they engage with primary sources and understand better how religion shaped the beliefs of Americans during the Civil War. Students will examine sources carefully, note details, and then interpret what the details might mean based on what they know and their interpretations of the other sources. Working in groups, students will use these interpretations to create a museum exhibit (either physical or digital) to communicate the role of religion in the Civil War.  

 

Teacher Preparation

Make the primary sources below available to students either through links, if using electronic devices, or by printing them out. According to your students’ needs, you may need to guide students to the relevant excerpts or share the excerpts separately. These excerpts are included below. 

Prepare the necessary materials for students to create their exhibit. If it’s a physical exhibit this could be as simple as scissors to cut out excerpts from primary sources and materials to create captions or annotations for those sources. Poster board can also be used if the exhibits are to be more permanent or for display in another part of the school. 

For digital exhibits, a variety of formats might be used including PowerPoint, Google Slides, Google Sites, Canva, or Omeka There are all free to use or have free versions for teachers and students.  

Differentiation note: Depending on students reading abilities, teachers may want to consider accommodations for engaging with the primary sources below. Excerpts from text sources have been included along with annotations to highlight the most relevant passages. Teachers may also elect to read excerpts out loud to students or to assign smaller chunks of texts for students to examine in small groups. 

 

Primary sources

J.H. “A prophecy of the Southern Confederacy” Jefferson County, Virginia [1862?].

Excerpt(s):

That God should love thee, has been demonstrated in favour of the South, with the abundant crop, supplies and comforts to support the Armies with the material of war, is strongly shewing I have loved thee, and the men for thee. Isaiah 43d chapter 14th verse is England, with Europe, now acting in behalf of the South, by the receiving of our Commissioners or Ministers. The result of that act alone will stay the Northern power from continued aggression—thereby “giving a people for thy life.” After this promise, hear the 5th verse: “Fear not: for I am with thee: I will bring thy seed from the east, and gather thee from the west.”

Annotation: White American Protestants, both in the North and South, strongly believed in divine providence — that God was actively working to shape events and that God’s efforts could be perceived as these events were happening. This source from Jefferson County (part of West Virginia today) in 1862 is an example of this thinking. Presenting itself as a “prophecy,” it predicts that the Confederacy will achieve victory over the Union because God’s love “has been demonstrated in favour of the South.” Further signs that the Confederacy will win, according to this author, are seen in the “abundant crop, supplies and comforts to support the Armies with the material of war”. The “prophecy” goes on to predict that England will side with the Confederacy against the Union and bring about an end to the war. Given the estimated year, 1862, which was early in the war, the source is likely a reaction to the success Confederate armies were having against Union forces at that point in the war. 

A sermon on the war, by the Rev. Elias Nason, preached to the soldiers at Exeter. N. H. May 19, 1861. 

https://www.loc.gov/item/rbpe.09400400/

Excerpt(s):

My hope of ultimate success does not so much repose in our superiority to our enemies in point of military skill, or power, as in our going forth to the field of contest in confederation with Almighty God. . . 

Why then am I hopeful in this dreadful conflict? I answer fairly: not so much because of our numbers, gold, or fleets, or generalship at the north; not so much because of our union at the north; not so much because of our “materiel;” our “sinews of war” at the North—No, no, no! not these alone.—but I am confident of final victory because of the plans and the action of that wise Spirit whom we come into this temple to worship today; because we have set up our banners, not in our own, but in his Almighty name; and because I believe we go forth under his benediction to the battlefield—and one with God upon his side is an invincible legion. The South has set up its banner in the name of secession, in the name of rebellion; in the name of oppression! The poisonous rattlesnake is its fitting emblem. Such a banner ought to fall; it is opposed to human progress; learning, liberty; it is opposed to the great leading ideas of the nineteenth century; such a banner ought to fall; and I feel assured that God through your right arm intends to make it fall; and the illustrious “Star spangled banner” rise, heaven-lighted with the swelling songs of Freedom, over it.

Annotation: The notion of divine providence, that God would actively shape events in favor of the American people, was just as strongly held in the North as in the South. Here a sermon by Reverend Elias Nason, delivered to Union troops in New Hampshire, expresses faith that the Union will defeat the Confederacy because God will be on their side. “I am confident of final victory because of the plans and the action of that wise Spirit whom we come into this temple to worship today.” Nason also declares the Union on the side of “freedom” as well as “human progress; learning, liberty” likely references to fighting against slavery. To Eason this was further evidence that God was on the Union side. Note too the month and date of the sermon, May of 1861, was a month after the Confederate attack on Fort Sumter and still a few months before the first major battle of the war. At this point many on both sides would have predicted a short victorious war. 

“The Nutshell: the system of American slavery "tested by Scripture," being "a short method" with pro-slavery D.D.'s, whether doctors of divinity, or of democracy, embracing axioms of social, civil, and political economy, as divinely impressed upon the human conscience and set forth in divine revelation; in two lectures,” 1862

https://www.loc.gov/item/12005595/

Excerpt(s):

[From page 22-23]

And yet will ye plead the Scriptures in justification of American Slavery? We can imagine but one mode of evading the common sense application of the “Golden Rule.” It is substantially this: “With my present experience and knowledge,” says the apologist, “of the conditions of mankind, were I a black man,I would prefer for myself and posterity forever the condition of Slavery to that of Freedom. So do I unto others as I would they should do unto me.” Dare ye answer thus at the bar of God in the day of final account! at His bar who commands: “Break every yoke and let the oppressed go free”!

Annotation: Slavery was the central issue dividing the Union and Confederacy and on this issue too both sides believed that the Bible supported their position. While pro-slavery Christians pointed to the existence of slavery in the Old Testament of the Bible, anti-slavery Christians tended to argue that the teaching of the New Testament were opposed slavery as it was practiced in the United States. In this 1862 pamphlet, the author identified only as “Layman of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Connecticut” argues that the Golden Rule, found in the book of Matthew and Luke as part of the Sermon on the Mount, necessarily means that slavery is not justified. The author then quotes from the book of Isaiah, ““Break every yoke and let the oppressed go free” a passage often invoked by abolitionists. 

Battle hymn of the Republic / by Mrs. Julia Ward Howe. [Philadelphia] : Published by the Supervisory Committee for Recruiting Colored Regiments, [1863?]

https://www.loc.gov/item/98101743/

Battle hymn of the republic - background information 

https://www.loc.gov/item/ihas.200000003/

Battle hymn of the republic audio

https://www.loc.gov/item/ihas.100010455/

Song of the first of Arkansas ... written by Captain Lindley Miller, of the First Arkansas Colored Regiment
https://www.loc.gov/item/amss.cw105500/

Excerpt(s):

Oh, we're the bully soldiers of the “First of Arkansas,”

We are fighting for the Union, we are fighting for the law,

We can hit a Rebel further than a white man ever saw,

As we go marching on.

Chorus: Glory, glory hallelujah.

Glory, glory hallelujah.

Glory, glory hallelujah.

As we go marching on.

2. See, there above the center, where the flag is waving bright,

We are going out of slavery; we're bound for freedom's light;

We mean to show Jeff Davis how the Africans can fight,

As we go marching on!

(Chorus)

3. We have done with hoeing cotton, we have done with hoeing corn,

We are colored Yankee soldiers, now, as sure as you are born;

When the masters hear us yelling,

they'll think it's Gabriel's horn,

As we go marching on.

(Chorus)

4. They will have to pay us wages, the wages of their sin,

They will have to bow their foreheads to their colored kith and kin,

They will have to give us house-room, or the roof shall tumble in!

As we go marching on.

(Chorus)

5. We heard the Proclamation, master hush it as he will,

The bird he sing it to us, hoppin' on the cotton hill,

And the possum up the gum tree, he couldn't keep it still,

As he went climbing on.

(Chorus)

6. They said, “Now colored brethren, you shall be forever free,

From the first of January, Eighteen hundred sixty-three.”

We heard it in the river going rushing to the sea,

As it went sounding on.

(Chorus)

7. Father Abraham has spoken and the message has been sent,

The prison doors he opened, and out the pris'ners went,

To join the sable army of “African descent,”

As we go marching on.

(Chorus)

8. Then fall in, colored brethren, you'd better do it soon,

Don't you hear the drum a-beating the Yankee Doodle tune?

We are with you now this morning, we'll be far away at noon,

As we go marching on. (Chorus)

Annotation: The United States at the time of the Civil War was a very religious nation and soldiers in the Civil War often expressed their understanding of the war in religious terms. This can be seen in the marching songs that were used to recruit soldiers to the war and that were later sung by the soldiers themselves to keep time during marches and engage soldiers’ interest. A famous example of a marching song, “The Battle Hymn of the Republic”, incorporates religious themes implying that God is on the side of the Union in their effort to defeat the Confederacy and end slavery. Many versions of this song with different lyrics were sung by Union troops including “Song of the first of Arkansas”, the first of Arkansas being a regiment of Black soldiers. In addition to the “Glory, glory hallelujah” chorus, the song references Gabriel’s Horn which in many Christian traditions signals that Judgment Day has arrived. In the song, when the “masters” hear the first Arkansas coming they will think it’s Gabriel’s Horn. 



In the Classroom

Warm up (5 minutes)

When teaching the history of religion it is important to communicate to students that they are learning about religion to better understand people who lived in the past. Thus the goal is not to judge the validity of those beliefs or to accept or reject them. To set the stage, begin by posting the quote above by historian James McPherson and then asking students how historians might come to this conclusion that religion was important to Americans during the Civil War. “What kinds of evidence do you think historians might use to come to this conclusion?” Answers can be written on the board. The purpose of the warm up is to remind students that their goal is to try to understand these beliefs, not assess the accuracy or legitimacy of these beliefs. Inform students that the goal of the activity is to better understand what role religion played in the Civil War. 

Step One: (20 minutes)

Place students in groups. Each group member receives the same primary source and each group receives a different primary source. This is a jig-saw group activity so students will join new groups to create their exhibits. In their primary source groups, direct students to examine the source carefully noting all the words that might relate to religion. Students should also note the date of the source, who created the source, and who they think the audience might be. They can either jot these down as notes or if more scaffolding is needed, students may complete a primary source analysis sheet for their source. 

Step Two (40 minutes)

Place students in new groups such that each group has a member with a different primary source. Instruct students that each group will be responsible for creating a museum exhibit on the topic of religion and the Civil War. Each exhibit will feature 

  • The primary sources the students analyzed 
  • Captions for each source of about 50 words explaining what the source is and what it tells us about religion in the Civil War. 
  • A paragraph introducing the exhibit.
     
  • A title for the exhibit (Note: Exhibit titles are often phrases from one of the sources used in the exhibit).

Again this exhibit could be designed as a physical exhibit or a digital exhibit using the tools mentioned above.

Step 3 (25 minutes)

Students group share exhibits with class. This can either be done with each group presenting to the class or using a “gallery walk” where half the students’ exhibits are on display with their creators there to explain and answer questions while the other half of the class walk around to view the exhibits. Halfway through this period the groups switch places. 

 

General Tips for Teaching Controversial Subjects

Teaching history inevitably means teaching about topics that generate strong reactions from a wide range of people. While not every reaction can be anticipated, the following tips can provide a strong basis for a rationale for your learning activities:

  • Center activities on primary sources. Primary sources are tangible evidence that allow students to engage directly with history. These primary sources in particular were preserved and digitized by the Library of Congress because they were deemed important to the history of the United States. 
  • Discussion and analysis of these sources can be wide ranging, but within each class those discussions can always be turned back to the source itself. 
  • The sources are also, by definition, only pieces of a puzzle. They bring us closer to understanding the past but there is always room for doubt and uncertainty.  
  • Questions, Observations, and Reflections should come from students. These are primarily student-directed learning activities. It is the instructor's role to create a space for inquiry and empower students to drive the inquiry.
  • Linking to state or national standards can provide support and justification for classroom activities such as these. The Civil War is explicitly mentioned in many state standards for example. The activities in this guide also link to NCSS Themes including Theme 1: Culture ("How do various aspects of culture such as belief systems, religious faith, or political ideals, influence other parts of a culture such as its institutions or literature, music, and art?")  and Theme 2: Time, Continuity, and Change ("How do we learn about the past? How can we evaluate the usefulness and degree of reliability of different historical sources?") 
     
Abraham Lincoln and the Jews nsleeter Wed, 01/27/2021 - 09:15
Teaser

Students learn about the sixteenth president's relationship with Jewish Americans and his policy of religious tolerance.

lesson_image
Description

Students analyze letters, speeches, and other manuscripts to better understand how Abraham Lincoln interacted with Jewish Americans in a time of heightened anti-Semitism. 

Article Body

In this engaging teaching module from the Shapell Manuscript Foundation in collaboration with the Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media teachers are provided resources to help students better understand how Lincoln governed as president and the role of religion during the Civil War. Students will engage with primary sources including rare letters by Lincoln that are part of the Shapell collection. Other primary sources include letters by Civil War generals including Benjamin Butler, George McClellan, and William Tecumseh Sherman which demonstrate the anti-semitic attitudes held by many at the time. 

Students work in groups to analyze sources with the goal of creating an exhibit that addresses the compelling question "What were Abraham Lincoln’s attitudes toward religious minorities such as Jews and Catholics and how did it differ from others at the time?" Teachers have the option of assigning students to create physical exhibits or digital exhibits on their topic. Students will also be asked to consider the context of nativist attitudes as expressed by group's such as the Know Nothing Party. An optional extension for the lesson is to have students read the Gettysburg Address to find connections between Lincoln's ideas in that text and in the manuscript sources they have analyzed. The modules also contain guidance on differentiation for diverse learners and connections to standards

 

Topic
President Lincoln and Jewish Americans during the Civil War
Time Estimate
90 minutes
flexibility_scale
2
Rubric_Content_Accurate_Scholarship

Yes

Rubric_Content_Historical_Background

Yes

Rubric_Content_Read_Write

Yes. 

Sources are handwritten but transcriptions are available on the Shapell.org site.

Rubric_Analytical_Construct_Interpretations

Yes

Rubric_Analytical_Close_Reading_Sourcing

Yes
Requires close reading and attention to source information.

Rubric_Scaffolding_Appropriate

Yes

Rubric_Scaffolding_Supports_Historical_Thinking

Yes

Rubric_Structure_Assessment

Yes

Rubric_Structure_Realistic

Yes

Rubric_Structure_Learning_Goals

Yes

Death and the Civil War

Description

From the Library of Congress:

"In conjunction with the landmark exhibit The Civil War in America, the Library presented Harvard University President Drew Gilpin Faust in conversation with filmmaker Ric Burns for this commemoration of the Civil War Sesquicentennial. Sen. Elizabeth Warren introduced the event, which explored how death in the Civil War permanently transformed the character of American society. The program featured a clip from the PBS documentary "Death and the Civil War," produced by Burns and based upon Faust's book "This Republic of Suffering: Death and the American Civil War.""

What Happened to the Fenians After 1866?

field_image
Fenian Prisoner, 1857, New York Public Library
Question

What happened to the Fenians after 1866?

Answer

The Irish Republican Brotherhood (IRB) was established in 1858 in Ireland and the United States as a secular, revolutionary movement committed to armed struggle against Great Britain in order "to make Ireland an independent democratic republic" as members pledged when taking the society's oath. In 1859, the American wing—"equal, if not senior, partners in the trans-Atlantic organization," according to historian Hereward Senior—became known as the Fenian Brotherhood, a name derived from the Fianna, the militia of the warrior Fionn MacCumhail of Gaelic legend.

Modeled on earlier Irish revolutionary organizations by revolutionaries who had fled Ireland following the failed rising of 1848, the Fenian Brotherhood and the IRB emerged following a decade during which the population in Ireland had declined from 8.5 million to six million due to famine, disease, and mass migration, especially to the U.S. In a resolution agreed upon at the first Fenian Congress in the U.S., held in Chicago in November 1863, Fenians expressed "intense and undying hatred towards the monarchy and oligarchy of Great Britain" that, they charged, had "ground their country to the dust, hanging her patriots, starving out her people, and sweeping myriads of Irishmen, women, and children off their paternal fields, to find refuge in foreign lands."

...Fenians expressed "intense and undying hatred towards the monarchy and oligarchy of Great Britain."...

Although the Fenian Brotherhood remained in existence until 1886, its most notable North American exploits, a series of failed military raids into Canada, occurred in 1866. After 1866, the IRB center of gravity moved to Ireland, although in 1870 Fenians undertook another series of raids into Canada. Following 1870, as the Fenian Brotherhood declined in importance, the group Clan na Gael developed into the most prominent Irish-American revolutionary organization, and during the second half of the 1870s, the latter group became allied with the IRB. Throughout this period, the words "Fenian" and "Fenianism" were applied to the IRB as a whole and to revolutionaries not connected with the original Fenian Brotherhood. Historians have noted significant unintended consequences in Canada of the Fenian raids and have contended that Fenianism influenced later Irish nationalist movements of the early 20th century.

Canadian Incursions

In 1866, the Fenian Brotherhood conducted three military incursions into Canada after plans for an insurrection in Ireland had fallen apart due to British raids against the IRB in Dublin in September 1865 that had resulted in arrests and dispersal of the leadership. With many Irish-American veterans of the American Civil War in their ranks, the Fenians decided to seize territory in British North America and proclaim an Irish Republic. They hoped their raids would encourage the United States to follow with troops in order to establish the St. Lawrence River as its northern border or even to annex the whole of Canada.

During the Civil War, tensions had heightened between the U.S. and Great Britain when the latter, after declaring its neutrality in the conflict, allowed Confederate diplomats passage on British ships and sanctioned the building in England of Confederate cruisers that later destroyed Union merchant ships. American hostility to Great Britain increased in October 1864 when a Confederate band, after crossing the Canadian border, robbed banks in St. Albans, Vermont, stole horses, set fire to houses, and shot a citizen before returning to Canada. After a local Canadian court released the raiders on a technicality, voices in the American press called for an invasion.

In 1865, an ephemeral movement to annex Canada called for outright attacks and coercive economic pressure

The movement in 1865 in the U.S. for the annexation of Canada, characterized as ephemeral by historian Donald F. Warner, included calls in the press for Union and Confederate armies to unite to attack Canada and schemes of politicians to coerce annexation through economic pressure. Although expressions of U.S. interest in annexing Canada died down following the end of Civil War hostilities, the Fenians nevertheless hoped that their planned invasion would revive the annexation movement and draw British troops to North America leaving Ireland vulnerable.

Plan of Attack

The plan of attack, devised by the Fenian secretary of war who had been a U.S. Army major during the Civil War, called for multiple invasions: across the Vermont-Canadian border; from Malone and Potsdam in New York to the Canadian towns of Cornwall and Prescott, then north to Ottawa and Montreal; across Lake Michigan and Lake Huron to Stratford and London in order to gain control of an important railway terminal; and incursions to capture Toronto and major waterway and railway centers. The Fenians had some reason to believe that the U.S. government would recognize an Irish republic on captured British soil, as President Andrew Johnson and his Secretary of State, William Seward, anxious not to antagonize Irish-American voters, reportedly stated that the U.S. would "acknowledge accomplished facts," in the words of historian William D'Arcy, when they were informed by a Fenian delegation about the group's vague intentions to seize territory in Canada. No official U.S. commitment, however, ever was committed to writing.

Fenians misjudged both U.S. and Canadian politics and history.

Canadian historians have concluded that in addition to misreading the response of U.S. politicians, the Fenians also misjudged the Canadians. Their invasion plan was formulated, Hereward Senior has written, "without much regard for Canadian history or the contemporary political scene." W. S. Neidhardt has pointed out that Fenian plans to win over key elements of the Canadian populace "were based on completely false assumptions." Contrary to their beliefs, most Canadians of Irish descent were Protestants from Northern Ireland, not Catholics like the Fenians. Furthermore, for many Irish Catholics, "Canada offered a reasonably good government, a fair legal and adequate educational system, and an opportunity to maintain a decent standard of living." Most Canadians who had experienced the Famine in Ireland during the 1840s were unlikely to risk their present situation to support the Fenians' scheme.

Across the Border

The first Fenian operation of 1866 occurred in April when a small force raided Indian Island in New Brunswick as part of a plan to invade the nearby island of Campobello in order to establish a base for a later landing in Ireland, for launching cruisers to attack British commercial vessels, and as a diversionary tactic designed to keep British troops in North America preoccupied while revolutionaries in Ireland attempted a rising. By declaring themselves a republic at war with Great Britain, the Fenians hoped to attain the status of belligerents, rather than pirates, and thus not risk violating U.S. neutrality laws. A concerted effort by Canadian militias, well-armed British naval vessels, and the American military, however, confounded Fenian plans with only a few shots fired during confrontations and no reported casualties.

Some nine combatants from each side were killed in battle, however, during the second Fenian invasion of 1866, which began in the early morning of June 1 as a Fenian force of nearly 1,000 men traveling on canal boats that were towed by tugs crossed the Niagara River near Buffalo and landed at a dock just north of the Canadian village of Fort Erie, which they proceeded to occupy. Two days later, following a victory at Ridgeway over ill-prepared Canadian volunteer forces—the ease of disrupting the Campobello plot apparently had led to complacency among Canadian troops—the Fenians, aware that a large Canadian force was approaching, retreated back across the Niagara River, where U.S. naval forces belatedly called into action arrested them. Three days later, President Johnson issued a proclamation characterizing the Fenians as "evil-disposed persons" and their actions as "proceedings which constitute a high misdemeanor, forbidden by the laws of the United States as well as by the law of nations."

The final Fenian raid in 1866 took place one day after Johnson's proclamation, on June 7, when a band of less than 1,000 raiders starting out from St. Albans crossed the Vermont border and planted an Irish flag near the Canadian village of Pigeon Hill. Fenians subsequently occupied Pigeon Hill and three additional Canadian villages before fleeing from a Canadian cavalry corps that chased them back to the border. Under political pressure during a congressional election year, Johnson issued executive orders to release Fenians arrested in the raids and return arms that were seized, and intervened with British authorities to try to get Fenian prisoners in Canada and Ireland released. Although 25 of the invaders were tried and convicted, all but one—a man who died in prison—were pardoned by 1872.

After elections of 1866, Fenian influence on American politicians waned, but more attacks on Canada would follow.

After the congressional elections of 1866, the Fenians no longer were able to exert a significant influence over American politicians. Plagued by factional fighting, financial troubles, police informers, and opposition from the Catholic Church, they did not attempt another Canadian raid until May 24, 1870, a date chosen to coincide with Queen Victoria's birthday. On that day, President Ulysses S. Grant issued a proclamation warning U.S. citizens "against aiding, countenancing, abetting, or taking part" in reported "sundry illegal military enterprises and expeditions" aimed "against the people and district of the Dominion of Canada."

A Fenian force of less than 200 men crossed the border the next day despite warnings from a U.S. marshal that Canadian riflemen in well-chosen positions on an overlooking hill awaited their arrival. Although four or five Fenians died in the subsequent battle, as the Fenians fled, their commander, John O'Neill, berated them for cowardice. O'Neill himself then was arrested by the marshal. On the following day, a group of more than 450 Fenians gathered in Malone, New York and advanced over the border. In a skirmish with Canadian forces the next day, one Fenian was killed before most retreated to Malone. Despite entreaties by their general for further action, most of the Fenians remained convinced that they had no chance to win and the general was arrested. The Canadians suffered no serious casualties during the 1870 raids. In October 1871, O'Neill, having resigned from the Fenian Council, led a group of three dozen men across the Canadian border into Manitoba in an unsuccessful raid that an advocate for the independence of the Red River Colony had proposed, but which the Fenian Council had rejected. Historians have credited the Fenian raids with encouraging a nationalistic spirit in Canada and spurring the movement to confederacy.

Aftermath

Despite failure in North America, the Fenians, after shifting their focus of attention to Great Britain at the end of 1866, "helped to work a change in the traditional English attitude toward Ireland," according to historian Brian Jenkins. Locating themselves in London, Fenian leaders, supported financially by Irish-American contributions, adopted a strategy of guerrilla warfare. In a proclamation published in the Times of London in March 1867, they announced the formation of an Irish Republic and Provisional Government. During that month, Fenians fought police and soldiers in clashes throughout Ireland in an attempted rising. In November, three Fenians, executed on the basis of doubtful evidence for the murder of a police officer who had been escorting captured Fenian leaders to prison, were heralded in the press as the "Manchester Martyrs." In December, 12 Londoners were killed in an explosion designed to facilitate the escape from prison of a Fenian armaments organizer.

In response to fears of the British populace stimulated by the return of Irish revolutionary activity, the new Liberal Party Prime Minister, William Ewart Gladstone, in 1869 and 1870, successfully enacted laws to disestablish the Church of Ireland and address longstanding Irish land tenure issues. Gladstone acknowledged that Fenianism had "produced that attitude of attention and preparedness on the whole population of this country which qualified them to embrace, in a manner foreign to their habits in other times, the vast importance of the Irish controversy." Gladstone's actions, historian Oliver P. Rafferty has written, were intended "to alienate Fenian opinion, and enable the mass of the Irish people to differentiate their aspirations from those of the revolutionaries." Subsequently, the Irish Protestant barrister Isaac Butt advocated home rule for Ireland as an alternative to an Irish republic, stating that Fenianism "taught me the depth, the breadth, the sincerity of that love of fatherland that misgovernment had tortured into disaffection and . . . exaggerated into revolt." While a number of leading Fenians supported the home rule movement and entered into mainstream politics, under an agreement characterized as the "New Departure," Fenians also maintained their revolutionary commitment to create through insurrection an independent Irish republic.

Rafferty has contended that "the Fenian idea of the necessity, or inevitability, of armed insurrection passed into Irish historical lore and conditioned the thinking of, perhaps, the majority of those who staged the 1916 insurrection." In a recently published history of the rise of Irish nationalism during the period between the 1880s and the Easter rising of 1916, M. J. Kelly has asserted, "Historians have largely neglected the activities of the Irish Republican Brotherhood in the 1880s, tending to focus on the two great flash-points of 1867 and 1916." In his revisionist history, Kelly has looked anew at a "second generation of Fenians, qualitatively distinct from their fathers and uncles," who developed "a fresh separatist dynamic based on the nurture of a distinctly Irish culture" and significantly influenced subsequent Irish nationalist political activity and ideals.

Bibliography

W. S. Neidhardt, Fenianism in North America (University Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1975), 4, 13, 41–42.

Hereward Senior, The Fenians and Canada (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1978), 24; Donald F. Warner, The Idea of Continental Union: Agitation for the Annexation of Canada to the United States, 1849–1893 (Lexington, Ky.: University of Kentucky Press, 1960), 48.

William D'Arcy, The Fenian Movement in the United States: 1858–1886 (Washington: Catholic University of America Press, 1947; reissue, New York: Russell & Russell, 1971), 84.

James D. Richardson, comp., A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 1789-1897 (Washington, 1899), 6:433, 7:85.

Brian Jenkins, Fenians and Anglo-American Relations during Reconstruction (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1969), 216.

Oliver P. Rafferty, The Church, the State and the Fenian Threat, 1861–75 (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1999), 110, 154, 155, 158.

M. J. Kelly, The Fenian Ideal and Irish Nationalism, 1882–19 (Woodbridge, UK: Boydell Press, 2006), 15, 16.

Robert Kee, The Green Flag: The Turbulent History of the Irish National Movement (New York: Delacorte Press, 1972).

Hereward Senior,The Last Invasion of Canada: The Fenian Raids, 1866–1870 (Toronto: Dundurn Press, in collaboration with the Canadian War Museum and the Canadian Museum of Civilization, 1991).

American Catholic History Research Center and University Archives, "Fenian Brotherhood Collection," (accessed September 14, 2008).

Florida State Archives Photographic Collection

Image
Image, Conch Town, WPA, C. Foster, 1939, Florida State Archives Photo Collection
Annotation

More than 137,000 photographs of Florida, many focusing on specific localities from the mid-19th century to the present, are available on this website. The collection, including 15 online exhibits, is searchable by subject, photographer, keyword, and date.

Materials include 35 collections on agriculture, the Seminole Indians, state political leaders, Jewish life, family life, postcards, and tourism among other things. Educational units address 17 topics, including the Seminoles, the Civil War in Florida, educator Mary McLeod Bethune, folklorist and writer Zora Neale Hurston, pioneer feminist Roxcy Bolton, the civil rights movement in Florida, and school busing during the 1970s.

"Writing Around Florida" includes ideas to foster appreciation of Florida's heritage. "Highlights of Florida History" presents 46 documents, images, and photographs from Florida's first Spanish period to the present. An interactive timeline presents materials—including audio and video files—on Florida at war, economics and agriculture, geography and the environment, government and politics, and state culture and history.

Accessible Archives

Image
Image, Godey's Lady's Book, Accessible Archives
Annotation

These eight databases present more than 176,000 articles from 18th- and 19th-century newspapers, magazines, books, and genealogical records. Much of the material comes from Pennsylvania and other mid-Atlantic states.

Godey’s Lady’s Book (1830–1880), one of the most popular 19th-century publications, furnished middle- and upper-class American women with fiction, fashion illustrations, and editorials. The Pennsylvania Gazette (1728–1800), a Philadelphia newspaper, is described as the New York Times of the 18th century. The Civil War: A Newspaper Perspective includes major articles from the Charleston Mercury, the New York Herald, and the Richmond Enquirer. African-American Newspapers: The 19th Century includes runs from six newspapers published in New York, Washington, DC, and Toronto between 1827 and 1876. American County Histories to 1900 provides 60 volumes covering the local history of New Jersey, Delaware, and Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Genealogical Catalogue: Chester County 1809–1870 has been partially digitized, with 25,000 records available. The Pennsylvania Newspaper Record: Delaware County 1819–1870 addresses industrialization in a rural area settled by Quaker farmers.

The Reason Behind the "Stars and Bars"

field_image
sheet music cover, origin of the stars and bars
Question

Why does the Confederate battle flag have 13 stars on it, instead of 11 stars, one for each of the seceding states?

Answer

A Confederate battle flag distinct from the flag of the Confederacy, the "Stars and Bars," was created following the first major battle of the Civil War, at Bull Run near Manassas, Virginia, in July 1861, because in the heat of battle soldiers and commanders confused the Stars and Bars with the Union army's "Stars and Stripes."

After General Pierre Gustav Toutant Beauregard, commander of the Confederate forces at Manassas, demanded a change, the Virginia army's high command, meeting in the Fairfax Court House in September, agreed to a design that earlier had been proposed for the flag of the Confederacy, but rejected in favor of the Stars and Bars. The new battle flag, a perfect square of red with a diagonal St. Andrew's cross of blue punctuated with white or gold stars, was produced by women in Richmond and first issued to soldiers by the end of October. The number of stars, representing the number of seceding states, increased to 13 after Missouri was admitted into the Confederacy on November 28, 1861 and a Kentucky secessionist provisional government that had formed on November 18 was voted into the Confederacy on December 10.

Despite the fact that a pro-Union government replaced the secessionists in Missouri and the Kentucky government voted to end their status of neutrality and stay in the Union, the 13 stars remained on most Confederate battle flags throughout the war, although flags with 12 stars also were produced. Beauregard attempted to standardize the battle flag throughout the Confederacy, but individual units resisted, insisting on retaining their own distinct designs.

Bibliography

John M. Coski, The Confederate Battle Flag: America's Most Embattled Emblem. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2005.

Henry Woodhead, ed. Echoes of Glory: Arms and Equipment of the Confederacy. Alexandria, Va.: Time-Life Books, 1991.

Who Earned a Medal for Cutting Costs by Starving Confederate Prisoners?

field_image
William Hoffman, Commissary General of Prisoners
Question

A well-read friend recently told me about a prison camp in Southern Maryland during the Revolutionary or Civil War. If it was the Civil War, it must be Point Lookout. My question is this: Who was the military leader (officer) who was supposedly awarded a medal or award for the amount of money he saved by keeping the prison in its deplorable condition (i.e. starving the prisoners)?

Answer

Your friend may have been thinking of William Hoffman (1807–1884), who was Colonel of the 3rd U.S. Regular Infantry, and, as Commissary General of Prisoners, reported directly to Secretary of War Edwin Stanton during the Civil War.

On October 13, 1863, Brigadier General Gilman Marston (1811–1890), the Commander of the military district where the war prison at Point Lookout, Maryland, was located, wrote to Hoffman, asking for money to build barracks for the thousands of Confederate prisoners there, who had to sleep in a large stockade compound crowded into flimsy tents, summer and winter. Hoffman denied General Marston's request. Marston also asked to be supplied with better rations for the prisoners, but Hoffman also refused that request, saying that the prisoners were already "bountifully supplied with provisions" sent to them from their families and friends, which was clearly not true.

The Union officer then acting as the Provost-Marshall in charge of the camp, Captain Joab Nelson Patterson (1835–1923), was relatively well-regarded by the prisoners, despite the terrible conditions there. One of the prisoners wrote of Patterson that he was "as kind as he was allowed to be."

Brady proceeded to increase prisoner suffering and to appropriate for himself vast amounts of provisions meant for them.

General Marston was reassigned, as was Captain Patterson. Replacing Marston was Brigadier General James Barnes (1801–1869), who had performed extremely poorly at the Battle of Gettysburg. He was a kindly man, thought the prisoners, but he had almost no contact at all with them. His Provost-General at Point Lookout became Major Allen G. Brady, 20th Regiment, Veteran Reserve Corps (1822–1905), a cruel, brutal, and arrogant man who assumed his post at the prison in June 1864 and proceeded immediately to increase enormously the sufferings of the prisoners and to appropriate for himself vast amounts of provisions meant for them. He remained in command of Point Lookout until the end of the war. His tenure there was the worst time for the prisoners.

Brigadier General Barnes received a brevet promotion to Major General just before the end of the war. Major Brady was never promoted anywhere near as rapidly as he believed he merited, but months after the war ended, he was promoted to Brevet Colonel before he was discharged.

Hoffman allowed terrible conditions of privation and abuse to grow unchecked.

Colonel Hoffman appears to have handled the management of Point Lookout no differently than he did the other Union prisons, which is to say badly, allowing terrible conditions of privation and abuse to grow unchecked. Secretary Stanton certainly did nothing to intervene and may even have encouraged this as one way to punish the South for its rebellion. Stanton did not wish to exchange prisoners with the South because he believed the North could better afford to prosecute the war without the return of its men than the South could, and because he believed that negotiating with the South on this issue might provide some precedent that could be construed as a Union recognition of the Confederacy as a sovereign power.

Many prison camps on both sides during the war were miserable places where many tens of thousands of prisoners from either side died. Prisoners returning from Point Lookout, however, pointed out that whereas some of the privations of Union prisoners in Confederate camps might be attributed to the general deterioration of conditions in the South as the war progressed, the privations of Southern prisoners in Union camps had no such contributing cause, and, in fact, were fostered by a commonly-practiced policy of retribution.

At the end of the war, Colonel Hoffman, having stifled some camp commanders and aid groups who had wished to help Confederate prisoners during the war, was actually able to return to the U.S. Treasury almost $2 million that had been originally allocated to feed Confederate prisoners. He was brevetted Brigadier General on October 7, 1864, for "faithful services," and then brevetted Major General on March 13, 1865, for "faithful, meritorious and distinguished services as Commissary General of Prisoners during war."

Bibliography

Robert E. Denney, Civil War Prisons & Escapes: a day-by-day chronicle (New York: Sterling Publishing Company, 1993).

Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, Washington, D.C. Gen. William Hoffman, Commissary General of Prisoners (at right) and staff on steps of office, F. St. at 20th NW, http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/cwpb.03953.

James Barnes and staff at Point Lookout Prison, 1863.

Lincoln Forgery

Description

Wes Cowan of PBS's History Detectives talks to Mary Lincoln's biographer, Jean Baker, at the Abraham Lincoln Museum in Springfield, IL, about Mary Lincoln's interpretation of the role of First Lady.

Re-enactors

Description

Gwen Wright of PBS's History Detectives looks at the popularity of historical reenactment and the particular appeal of Civil War reenactment.