geeeburns's review
5.0
Manning's scholarly work is a reasoned, well-balanced examination of what ordinary soldiers thought about the relationship between slavery and the American Civil War. Using Union and Conferate primary sources, she demonstrates slavery--not abstract arguments such as state's rights or republican government--was the focus of soldiers' view of the war. The book enhances our understanding of why slavery mattered to the Confederate rank and file, the majority of whom owned no slaves, as well as illustrates how enlisted Union troops became a "critical link" betwwen government policy makers and slaves.
bovineuniversity's review against another edition
5.0
Slavery. It was over slavery. This is a vital book, revealing with force and clarity how U. S. soldiers and rebels alike understood, as far back as 1861, what was at stake in the War of the Rebellion.
moreteamorecats's review against another edition
4.0
As a record of profound social change, this book is terrific. Manning's commendable research has brought to light the changing thoughts of Civil War soldiers, Black and White, Union and Confederate, about the causes of the war. Her sources are engrossing, lively, often hilarious. I assume she's picked out the best quotes from a lot of rather humdrum letters, camp newspapers, and so on, but I still had a sense of the great wealth of nineteenth-century American rhetoric underlying what she's raised up.
This is definitely a supplemental text. Have some other Civil War knowledge from the standard sources under your belt before you pick this one up. From them, you'll learn how generals talked. From this one, you'll hear from the privates. It's an eye-opener and a real pleasure. Manning's exposition didn't bowl me over, but it didn't need to: Her sources, quite rightly, do most of the talking.
My favorite point: Lincoln's formulations in his major public writings and speeches were very much in line with what his army was saying. Manning says the army mourned him as the only leader who truly understood them. There's something geistlich going on there that deserves further attention.
This is definitely a supplemental text. Have some other Civil War knowledge from the standard sources under your belt before you pick this one up. From them, you'll learn how generals talked. From this one, you'll hear from the privates. It's an eye-opener and a real pleasure. Manning's exposition didn't bowl me over, but it didn't need to: Her sources, quite rightly, do most of the talking.
My favorite point: Lincoln's formulations in his major public writings and speeches were very much in line with what his army was saying. Manning says the army mourned him as the only leader who truly understood them. There's something geistlich going on there that deserves further attention.
shanehawk's review against another edition
3.0
Decent.
Would've liked more content from primary documents and less editorializing the minimal quotes included. Academic writing plagued by black-or-white fallacious thinking when it came to intentions of Union whites, Confederate whites, and blacks in the war. She covered herself, as many historians do, by continuously copping out with phrases like "this was not unanimous" or "not all Union troops thought this way" while presenting primary sources only supporting one overarching viewpoint. Of course people aren't unanimous in anything.
I still recommend those curious about the Civil War to read this, but with caution. It's worth a lot more to read the actual letters exchanged between soldiers and their families for full context.
Would've liked more content from primary documents and less editorializing the minimal quotes included. Academic writing plagued by black-or-white fallacious thinking when it came to intentions of Union whites, Confederate whites, and blacks in the war. She covered herself, as many historians do, by continuously copping out with phrases like "this was not unanimous" or "not all Union troops thought this way" while presenting primary sources only supporting one overarching viewpoint. Of course people aren't unanimous in anything.
I still recommend those curious about the Civil War to read this, but with caution. It's worth a lot more to read the actual letters exchanged between soldiers and their families for full context.
jone_d's review against another edition
5.0
As a white Southern man, who identifies as an anti-racist this was a tough read. While as a child I think I was taught that the war was about Black enslavement or more likely "a war to free the slaves," that the North was good and the South was bad, by the time I was a teen-ager, I became curious about, then came to embrace, and continued to cling to view that most white Southerners who fought on the side of the Confederacy believed they were just defending a "home" that they loved. I sought out stories of white Southerners who resisted Black enslavement or who fought guerrilla style against the Confederacy. However, Manning makes a convincing and sobering argument that for white people in the South, particularly white men, Black enslavement was so central to their identity that they fought for the Confederacy not simply to "defend a home they loved," but to defend the institution of Black enslavement and their identity as white men.
I also found Manning's explanation of how the Great (religious) Awakening played out in the North and South differently very interesting. Not only was it interesting to think about how that effected white and Black American's view of the Civil War but also how it effect politics in the US today.
I really like this book. I think it is an important read for all white folks in the US whether or not you have an interest in the Civil War.
I also found Manning's explanation of how the Great (religious) Awakening played out in the North and South differently very interesting. Not only was it interesting to think about how that effected white and Black American's view of the Civil War but also how it effect politics in the US today.
I really like this book. I think it is an important read for all white folks in the US whether or not you have an interest in the Civil War.
More...