Why Confederates Fought: Family & Nation in Civil War Virginia.
Carmichael, Peter S.
Why Confederates Fought: Family & Nation in Civil War Virginia.
By Aaron Sheehan-Dean (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press,
2007. 291 pp.).
Virtually every scholarly treatment of Confederate motivation has
pivoted around the assumption that the innate desire to defend
one's home compelled Southerners to fight against long odds. Some
of the first scholars to tackle this issue insisted that Confederates
gave themselves to the cause out of an almost biological drive to
protect their loved-ones and their land. They fought, in other words,
because they had no other choice. The Yankees were in their midst. Since
the 1980s, historians have distanced themselves from a survivalist
explanation by stressing that Confederates were deeply ideological, even
down to the lowly private. Their letters frame the defense of home as
part of a broader defense of republicanism, slavery, manliness, and
honor. But in reclaiming Johnny Reb as a man of ideas, historians have
lost sight of the ways that soldiers were connected and informed by the
fundamental building blocks of political loyalty--the family and
community. In his impressive Why Confederates Fought: Family &
Nation in Civil War Virginia, Aaron Sheehan-Dean unites these two broad
scholarly approaches by knitting together the practical and the
ideological exchanges that gave Confederates just cause to continue
fighting, even when the war appeared utterly hopeless to outsiders.
Sheehan-Dean's argument does not resurrect the Lost Cause
interpretation of the Civil War that denies the centrality of slavery,
that extols the sacrifices of Confederates as a noble band of brothers,
or that portrays the Southern home front as perfectly united. He begins
his study by showing how whites of all classes were embedded
politically, economically, and socially in a slave society. With this as
his foundation, we follow his sample group of Virginia soldiers from
Fort Sumter to Appomattox. His treatment brilliantly brings together the
overlapping material, ideological, and emotional worlds of Virginia
soldiers. No other study of Civil War soldiers succeeds like Why
Confederate Fought in integrating all the dimensions of the soldier
experience. Too many studies, including the important works of James
McPherson and Reid Mitchell, tend to see the written word as an
unambiguous reflection of social reality. We lose, in the process, the
context in which these letters were constructed. In fact, much of the
recent soldier scholarship uses snapshot quotes to advance timeless
generalizations about motivation. Thankfully, Sheehan-Dean does not rely
on such a technique nor does he accept soldier letters at face value. He
digs beneath the words so that we can see how soldiers represented their
experiences to loved ones within the context of the army and within the
changing conditions on the home front, which the author masterfully
connects to the army.
As Sheehan-Dean shows, Confederates were always in the act of
remaking their identities as Virginians and Confederates. In this way,
the author complicates the simplistic and tired question about whether
Southern soldiers were sufficiently nationalistic or not. Sheehan-Dean
is more concerned with how soldiers constantly reworked issues of
loyalty as a process of negotiation and renegotiation with themselves,
their officers, their families, and other Confederate institutions. He
insists that Virginia soldiers came to see the political nation and
their domestic nation as inseparable. The merging of these interests led
Virginia soldiers to conclude that their families' survival, the
very existence of their material world, depended upon the survival of a
Southern nation. The discussion of domesticity and its impact on the
political culture of Virginia soldiers is especially important, for it
enables the author to move away from the ridiculous debate that race was
more important than class or vice-versa.
In Why Confederates Fought we have an immensely important book that
shows the interplay of motivations and emotions among soldiers adjusting
to the lived reality of the army, to the policies of the Confederate
government, to the hard war of Union armies, and to the expectations of
the loved ones on the home-front. Within the changing military
environment, the author never loses sight of these soldiers as men,
fathers, husbands, and sons. Their personal relationships, as
Sheehan-Dean explains, are crucial to understanding their sense of
national loyalty. No scholar has made such important connections before,
enabling Sheehan-Dean to give us a deeply humanistic view of Confederate
soldiers. We see them, not as simple-minded brutes, but as men who
struggled to preserve deep emotional ties with their loved ones while
coming to terms with the enormity of killing other human beings.
Peter S. Carmichael
West Virginia University