FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1478633253> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1478633253 endingPage "325" @default.
• W1478633253 startingPage "323" @default.
• W1478633253 abstract "Reviewed by: Claiming the Union: Citizenship in the Post–Civil War South by Susanna Michele Lee Daniel Ritchie Claiming the Union: Citizenship in the Post–Civil War South. Susanna Michele Lee. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014. ISBN 978-1-107-01532-6, 256pp., cloth, $95.00. Susanna Michele Lee’s book focuses on the work of the Southern Claims Commission (1871–80), which awarded compensation for property losses during the Civil War to southerners who could prove they had been loyal citizens. It helpfully elucidates how loyal citizenship was conceptualized and disputed in the aftermath of the conflict. The author has provided us with an engaging, clearly written, and well-researched account of the commissioners’ work. Lee argues that the commissioners initially defined loyal citizens as white men who had opposed secession at the ballot box and on the battlefield. Southern claimants were expected to prove they not only possessed Union sympathies (ideological citizenship) but had also vigorously contributed to the Union cause (active citizenship). The supposition that loyal citizens were to be defined as white men was undermined by both the complex relationship of former slaves, free blacks, and women to the state and the efforts of these groups to prove that they had been loyal citizens during the war to the commissioners. During its ten-year lifespan, the Southern Claims Commission acted as a bulwark against the Democrats’ idea that postwar loyalty should be the basis for access to the rights and privileges of citizenship in the United States. Lee’s first chapter situates the work of the Southern Claims Commission within a wider context of congressional debates over citizenship and loyalty, while the second examines the efforts of white men to demonstrate their loyalty. What is perhaps most striking about the chapters on white men is how strict the Southern Claims Commission was in its definition of loyalty. The three commissioners (Asa Owen Aldis, Orange Ferris, and James B. Howell), all Republicans appointed by President Grant, believed that residence in a seceded state was prima facie evidence of disloyalty. They assumed that a real unionist could not have remained in these localities without being subjected to severe harassment. Unsurprisingly, many white southern claimants did not meet the commissioners’ standards of loyalty. The author suggests that [End Page 323] the Southern Claims Commission’s elevation of wartime actions over ideology, moreover, promoted an understanding of citizenship that ensured that the passive unionists in the South could be marginalized as cowards who had shirked their obligations to the nation. It is significant that the Southern Claims Commission did not ask claimants about their position on slavery unless they mentioned it. The commissioners did not view slaveholding as evidence of treachery, but they did see criticizing emancipation as incongruous with loyalty to the Union. This position posed a significant problem for those unionist slaveholders who claimed allegiance to the Union on the basis that it was a proslavery compact. In the case of southern women who were pro-emancipation and who had opposed the Confederate war effort, the Southern Claims Commission was forced to recognize that white men did not possess a monopoly on loyal citizenship. The common law tradition of coverture, the notion that women possessed no relationship to the state unmediated by a father or husband, had made it difficult for women to claim to be loyal citizens. Coverture, however, allowed some white southern women to claim the political sympathies of their husbands while preserving their essential feminine domesticity. In harmony with these principles, white women sometimes presented their opposition to male enlistment on behalf of the Confederacy as an action appropriate to their sphere of influence. There were some obvious cases of inequity in the commissioners’ treatment of women, which the author usefully highlights. For instance, on the one hand, cooking for or nursing Union soldiers was dismissed as merely circumstantial evidence of loyalty. On the other hand, the Southern Claims Commission regarded even cooking and sewing as indicative of assistance for the Confederacy. The chapters on non-white southerners are useful, if only for reminding us of the need to avoid the tendency of conflating southerners with whites. The Southern Claims Commission had initially not..." @default.
• W1478633253 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1478633253 creator A5059267221 @default.
• W1478633253 date "2015-01-01" @default.
• W1478633253 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W1478633253 title "Claiming the Union: Citizenship in the Post–Civil War South by Susanna Michele Lee" @default.
• W1478633253 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/cwh.2015.0059" @default.
• W1478633253 hasPublicationYear "2015" @default.
• W1478633253 type Work @default.
• W1478633253 sameAs 1478633253 @default.
• W1478633253 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W1478633253 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1478633253 hasAuthorship W1478633253A5059267221 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConcept C104317684 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConcept C11413529 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConcept C2776034101 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConcept C2777094542 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConcept C2780781376 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConcept C2780857596 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConcept C48103436 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConcept C520049643 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConcept C55493867 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConcept C56273599 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConcept C81631423 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConceptScore W1478633253C104317684 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConceptScore W1478633253C11413529 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConceptScore W1478633253C17744445 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConceptScore W1478633253C185592680 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConceptScore W1478633253C199539241 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConceptScore W1478633253C2776034101 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConceptScore W1478633253C2777094542 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConceptScore W1478633253C2780781376 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConceptScore W1478633253C2780857596 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConceptScore W1478633253C41008148 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConceptScore W1478633253C48103436 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConceptScore W1478633253C520049643 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConceptScore W1478633253C55493867 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConceptScore W1478633253C56273599 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConceptScore W1478633253C81631423 @default.
• W1478633253 hasConceptScore W1478633253C94625758 @default.
• W1478633253 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W1478633253 hasLocation W14786332531 @default.
• W1478633253 hasOpenAccess W1478633253 @default.
• W1478633253 hasPrimaryLocation W14786332531 @default.
• W1478633253 hasRelatedWork W1478633253 @default.
• W1478633253 hasRelatedWork W2083537726 @default.
• W1478633253 hasRelatedWork W2288494885 @default.
• W1478633253 hasRelatedWork W2328569034 @default.
• W1478633253 hasRelatedWork W2598994232 @default.
• W1478633253 hasRelatedWork W3004418751 @default.
• W1478633253 hasRelatedWork W3121304467 @default.
• W1478633253 hasRelatedWork W3124793408 @default.
• W1478633253 hasRelatedWork W4213250777 @default.
• W1478633253 hasRelatedWork W4220712266 @default.
• W1478633253 hasVolume "61" @default.
• W1478633253 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1478633253 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1478633253 magId "1478633253" @default.
• W1478633253 workType "article" @default.