The Confederate Nation: 1861 to 1865 (55 page)

The subject of white racist response to emancipation has a growing literature which lies outside the scope of this study. Two titles, however, are suggestive: Forrest G. Wood,
Black Scare: The Racist Response to Emancipation and Reconstruction
(Berkeley, Calif., 1968); and John S. Haller, “Civil War Anthropometry: The Making of a Racial Ideology,”
Civil War History,
XVI (1970), 309–324.

An addition to the bibliographical guides cited above is Samuel Flagg Bemis and Grace G. Griffin,
Guide to the Diplomatic History of the United States, 1775–1921
(Washington, D.C., 1935). The best summary and interpretation of the diplomacy of the war era is D. P. Crook,
The North, the South, and the Powers, 1861–1865
(New York, 1974). On Confederate foreign relations the “classic” is Frank L. Owsley,
King Cotton Diplomacy: Foreign Relations of the Confederate States of America,
revised edition, (Chicago, 1959). Other general works on Confederate diplomacy include an older study, James M. Callahan,
Diplomatic History of the Southern Confederacy
(Baltimore, 1901); and a thoughtful article by Henry Blumenthal, “Confederate Diplomacy: Popular Notions and International Realities,”
Journal of Southern History,
XXXII (1966), 151–171. Also of general interest are the essays in Harold Hyman (ed.),
Heard Round the World: The Impact Abroad of the Civil War
(New York, 1969).

The dated, but still useful, work on Great Britain is E. D. Adams,
Great Britain and the American Civil War,
2 vols. (New York, 1925). More recent interpretations are in Max Beloff, “Great Britain and the American Civil War”
History,
XXXVII (1952), 40–48; Robert H.Jones, “Anglo-American Relations, 1861–1865, Reconsidered,”
Mid-America,
XLV (1963) 36–49; and Kinley J. Brauer, “British Mediation and the American Civil War: A Reconsideration,
“ Journal of Southern History,
XXXVIII (1972), 49–64. Confederate efforts in England are the subject of Frank J. Merli,
Great Britain and the Confederate Navy, 1861–1865
(Bloomington, Ind., 1970), which provides an excellent overview of British policy as well as an appreciation of the work of James D. Bulloch. The latter spoke for himself in his
Secret Service of the Confederate States in Europe,
2 vols. (New York, 1884). A companion work to Merli’s is Richard I. Lester,
Confederate Finance and Purchasing in Great Britain
(Charlottesville, Va., 1975). A fine case study of Anglo-American diplomacy in action is Stuart L. Bernath,
Squall Across the Atlantic: American Civil War Prize Cases and Diplomacy (Berkeley, Calif., 1970).

On the economics of British neutrality, see: Louis B. Schmidt, “The Influence of Wheat and Cotton on Anglo-American Relations during the Civil War,”
Iowa Journal of History and Politics,
XVI (1918), 400–439; Eli Ginzberg, “The Economics of British Neutrality during the American Civil War,”
Agricultural History,
X (1936), 147–156; Robert H.Jones, “Long Live the King?”
Agricultural History,
XXXVII (1963), 166–169; Amos Khasigian, “Economic Factors and British Neutrality, 1861–1865,”
Historian,
XXV (1963), 451–465; and especially Eugene A. Brady, “A Reconsideration of the Lancashire ‘Cotton Famine,’ ”
Agricultural History,
XXXVII (1963), 156–162.

There has been a continuing controversy in the literature concerning British public opinion regarding the American war. The issue is now perhaps at rest because of several fine studies: Mary Ellison,
Support for Secession: Lancashire and the American Civil War
(Chicago, 1972); Joseph M. Hernon,
Celts, Catholics and Copperheads: Ireland Views the American Civil War
(Columbus, Ohio, 1968); and Joseph M. Hernon, “British Sympathies in the American Civil War: A Reconsideration,”
Journal of Southern History,
XXXIII (1967), 356–367.

About the
Trent
Affair, the older standard is Thomas L. Harris,
The Trent Affair
(Indianapolis, Ind., 1896), now supplanted by Norman B. Ferris,
The Trent Affair
(Knoxville, Tenn., 1975). Lynn Case in his part of Lynn M. Case and Warren F. Spencer,
The United States and France: Civil War Diplomacy
(Philadelphia, 1970), contends that the Confederates all but arranged their capture and argues the significance of the French influence on Washington. Articles of interest and/or importance to the incident include: F. C. Drake, “The Cuban Background of the
Trent
Affair,”
Civil War History,
XIX (1973), 29–49; Charles Francis Adams, “The
Trent
Affair,”
American Historical Review,
XVII (1912), 540–562; V. H. Cohen, “Charles Sumner and the
Trent
Affair,”
Journal of Southern History,
XXII (1956), 205–219; Norman B. Ferris, “The Prince Consort, ‘The Times,’ and the ‘Trent’ Affair,”
Civil War History,
VI (1960), 152–156; and Norman B. Ferris, “Abraham Lincoln and the
Trent
Affair,”
Lincoln Herald,
LXIX (1967), 131–135.

Other studies of significance to Anglo-Confederate relations include: Martin P. Claussen, “Peace Factors in Anglo-American Relations, 1861— 1865,”
Mississippi Valley Historical Review,
XXVI (1940), 511–522; Milledge L. Bonham,
The British Consuls in the Confederacy
(New York, 1971); J. Franklin Jameson, “The London Expenditures of the Confederate Secret Service,”
American Historical Review,
XXXV (1930), 811–824; FrankJ. Merli and Theodore A. Wilson, “The British Cabinet and the Confederacy: Autumn, 1862,”
Maryland Historical Magazine,
LXV (1970), 239–262; Robert L. Reid (ed.), “William E. Gladstone’s ‘Insincere Neutrality’ during the Civil War,”
Civil War History
XV (1969), 293–307; Frank Merli, “Crown versus Cruiser: The Curious Case of the
Alexandra” Civil War History,
IX (1963), 167–177; Wilbur D.Jones, “The British Conservatives and the American Civil War,”
American Historical Review,
LVIII (1953), 527–543; David F. Krein, “Russell’s Decision to Retain the Laird Rams,”
Civil War History,
XXII (1976), 158–163; and Wilbur D. Jones,
The Confederate Rams at Birkenhead
(Tuscaloosa, Ala., 1961).

Relating directly to questions of neutral rights and the blockade are: James P. Baxter, “Some British Opinions as to Neutral Rights, 1861 to 1865,”
American Journal of International Law,
XXIII (1929), 517–537; James P. Baxter III, “The British Government and Neutral Rights, 1861–1865,”
American Historical Review,
XXXIV (1928), 9–29; Frank L. Owsley, “America and the Freedom of the Seas, 1861–1865,” in Avery O. Craven (ed.),
Essays in Honor of William E. Dodd
(Chicago, 1935), pp. 194–256; and William M. Leary, Jr.,
“Alabama
versus
Kearsarge:
A Diplomatic View,”
American Neptune,
XXIX (1969), 167–173.

On Confederate relations with France the standard work is Case and Spencer, cited above. This study, however, is seriously marred by the omission of treatment of the French venture in Mexico. Fortunately there are a number of fine recent works which deal with that topic: Arnold Blumberg,
The Diplomacy of the Mexican Empire, 1863–1867
(Philadelphia, 1971); Alfred J. Hanna and Kathryn A. Hanna,
Napoleon III and Mexico: American Triumph over Monarchy
(Chapel Hill, N.C., 1971); and Nancy Nichols Barker, “France, Austria, and the Mexican Venture, 1861–1864,”
French Historical Studies,
III (1963), 224–245. The Erlanger loan is well covered in Judith Fenner Gentry, “A Confederate Success in Europe: The Erlanger Loan,”
Journal of Southern History,
XXXVI (1970), 157–188. Other material touching France and the American conflict includes: Henry Blumenthal,
A Reappraisal of Franco-American Relations, 1830–1871
(Chapel Hill, N.C., 1959); Daniel B. Carroll,
Henri Mercier and the American Civil War
(Princeton, N.J., 1971); and Serge Gavronsky,
The French Liberal Opposition and the American Civil War
(New York, 1968).

About Confederate diplomats and foreign agents the following studies are useful: C. S. Davis,
Colin J. McRae: Confederate Financial Agent
(Tuscaloosa, Ala., 1961); Charles P. Cullop,
Confederate Propaganda in Europe, 1861–1865
(Coral Gables, Fla., 1969); Charles P. Cullop, “Edwin de Leon, Jefferson Davis’s Propagandist,”
Civil War History,
VIII (1962), 386–400; Stephen B. Oates, “Henry Hotze: Confederate Agent Abroad,”
Historian,
XXVII (1965), 131–154; W. Stanley Hoole (ed.),
Confederate Foreign Agent: The European Diary of Major Edward C. Anderson
(University, Ala., 1976); Virginia Mason,
The Public Life… of James M. Mason
(Roanoke, Va., 1903); Louis M. Sears,
John Slidell
(Durham, N.C., 1925); Beckles Willson,
John Slidell and the Confederates in Paris (1862–65)
(New York, 1932).

Although Britain and France were the most emphasized targets of Confederate diplomacy, other foreign nations received attention or affected the Southern international position. The consequences of the rising in Poland is the subject of John Kutolowski, “The Effect of the Polish Insurrection of 1863 on American Civil War Diplomacy,”
Historian,
XXVII (1965), 560–577. Concerning Canada see Robin Winks,
Canada and the United States: The Civil War Years
(Baltimore, 1960). About Southern activities in Northern Mexico, see Ronnie C. Tyler,
Santiago Vidaurri and the Southern Confederacy
(Austin, Tex., 1973). Three articles are important for the story of Confederate relations with the Indian nations: LeRoy H. Fischer, “The Civil War Era in Indian Territory,”
Journal of the West,
XII (1973), 345–355; Kenny A. Franks, “The Implementation of the Confederate Treaties with the Five Civilized Tribes,”
Chronicles of Oklahoma,
LI (1973), 21–33; and “The Confederate States and the Five Civilized Tribes: A Breakdown of Relations,”
Journal of the West,
XII (1973), 439–454.

Finally the abortive attempts to achieve a negotiated peace with the United States deserve mention. For these see Edward C. Kirkland,
The Peacemakers of 1864
(New York, 1927); Ludwell H. Johnson, “Lincoln’s Solution to the Problem of Peace Terms, 1864–1865,”
Journal of Southern History,
XXXIV (1968), 576–586; and PaulJ. Zingg, “John Archibald Campbell and the Hampton Roads Conference,”
Alabama Historical Quarterly,
XXXVI (1974), 21–34.

With the exception of the activities of the
Virginia
and the
Alabama,
the Confederate navy has assumed a distant second place to the army in the literature of the war. There is a bibliographical guide, Myron J. Smith, Jr.,
American Civil War Navies: A Bibliography
(Metuchen, N.J., 1972); however the work is essentially an uncritical, alphabetized list of materials. There is a bibliography of the
Virginia’s
conflict with the
Monitor,
David R. Smith,
The Monitor and the Merrimac: A Bibliography
(Los Angeles, 1968). Also under the heading of guide is the Naval History Division of the Navy Department’s
Civil War Naval Chronology 1861–1865
(Washington, D.C., 1971).

The best general history of the war on water is Virgil C.Jones,
The Civil War at Sea,
3 vols. (New York, 1960–1962). Other general histories include: Bern Anderson,
By Sea and By River: The Naval History of the Civil War
(New York, 1962); and Howard P. Nash, Jr.,
A Naval History of the Civil War
(New York, 1972). The fundamental collection of primary materials is
Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies in the War of the Rebellion
, 30 vols. (Washington, D.C., 1894–1922).

About the Confederate navy the best beginning is with J. T. Scharf,
History of the Confederate States Navy
(New York, 1887). Biographies of Mallory, Buchanan, Semmes, Maury, Bulloch, and Kell are important, as are works on purchasing activities in Great Britain (eg. Merli’s
Great Britain and the Confederate Navy 1861–1865).
The best recent works on the Southern navy are those of William N. Still, Jr. Still has written two good books—
Confederate Shipbuilding
(Athens, Ga., 1969) and
Iron Afloat: The Story of the Confederate Armorclads
(Nashville, Tenn., 1971)—and a number of fine articles: “Confederate Naval Strategy: The Ironclad,
“Journal of Southern History,
XXVII (1961), 330–343; “Facilities for the Construction of War Vessels in the Confederacy,”
Journal of Southern History,
XXXI (1965), 285–304; “Confederate Naval Policy and the Ironclad,
Civil War History,
IX (1963), 145–156; “Selma and the Confederate States Navy,”
Alabama Review,
XV (1962), 19–37; and “Confederate Shipbuilding in Mississippi,
“Journal of Mississippi History,
XXX (1968), 291–303. Other studies of a general nature about the Confederate navy include: Tom H. Wells,
The Confederate Navy: A Study in Organization
(University, Ala., 1971); Milton F. Perry,
Infernal Machines: The Story of Confederate Submarine and Mine Warfare
(Baton Rouge, La., 1965); G. Melvin Herndon, “The Confederate States Naval Academy,”
Virginia Magazine of History and Biography,
LXIX (1961), 300–323; and James M. Merrill, “Confederate Shipbuilding at New Orleans,”
Journal of Southern History,
XXVIII (1962), 87–93.

On the
Virginia
the best account of the fight with the
Monitor
is William C. Davis,
Duel Between the First Ironclads
(Garden City, N.Y., 1975). Related studies of significance include: R. W. Daly,
How the Merrimac Won: The Strategic Story of the CSS Virginia
(New York, 1957); Harrison A. Trexler,
The Confederate Ironclad ‘Virginia’ ('Merrimac')
(Chicago, 1938); and T. Catesby Jones, “The Iron-Clad Virginia,”
Virginia Magazine of History and Biography,
XLIX (1941), 297–303.