FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2022043704> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2022043704 endingPage "335" @default.
• W2022043704 startingPage "317" @default.
• W2022043704 abstract "Conciliation and Its Failure, i 861-1862 Mark Grimsley In November 1862 a military commission convened in Cincinnati to review the actions of Maj. Gen. Don Carlos Buell, recently removed from command of the Army of the Ohio. Although primarily concerned with Buell's apparent failure to come effectively to grips with Confederate forces, the commission also probed the beleaguered general's conduct toward Southern civilians. It summoned a variety of witnesses, most of whom firmly believed that Buell had treated Southern civilians too leniently. He should not have extended protection to everyone, regardless of their sympathies. He should not have restrained his troops when they needed to forage supplies from the countryside. Instead, he should have dealt sternly with open secessionists, arrested them and confiscated their property. But other witnesses staunchly defended Buell; and although clearly hostile to the general, the commission conceded that his actions toward the enemy population were unassailable. He had simply adhered to what was familiarly known as the conciliatory policy. Whether wise or foolish in its effects, the commission concluded, General Buell deserves neither blame nor applause for it, because it was at that time understood to be the policy of the Government. At least he could violate no orders on the subject, because there were none.' On the face of it, it seems odd that the commission could characterize the government's policy toward Southern civilians as conciliatory while maintaining that no specific orders on the subject existed. But the Lincoln administration had indeed given no formal instructions on the issue—in fact, would 1 Opinion of the [Buell] Commission, undated, in The War ofthe Rebellion: Official Records ofthe Union and Confederate Armies, 128 vols. (Washington, D.C.: GPO, 1 880-1901), ser. I, vol. 16, 1:8-9 (hereafter cited as OR). Except where noted, all citations are to series 1. For background on the so-called Buell Commission, see James Robert Chumney, Don Carlos Buell: Gentleman General (Ph.D. diss., Rice University, 1964), 1-32. See Testimony of William G. Brownlow before the Buell Commission, Apr. 7, 1863, OR, vol. 16, 1:673-75. Civil War History, Vol. XXXIX, No. 4, © 1993 by The Kent State University Press 3l8CIVIL WAR HISTORY offer none until April 1863, two full years after the war had begun2—and yet an informal policy did exist, which Buell had earnestly tried to follow. The eventual demise of that policy signaled a major shift in the war's nature and level of severity. The standard current interpretation of the American Civil War depicts it as the first of the modern total wars. Although begun as a limited conflict to quell rebellion, it eventually became the remorseless, revolutionary struggle of Lincoln's fears. A number of gifted historians have described and explained this development in a variety of ways, many ofthem quite insightful.3 This essay builds on their work by examining the roots of the conciliatory policy and its early success. It then analyzes the various strains that beset the policy's implementation and critiques the competing explanations for its eventual failure. Finally, it suggests that the present conception of a one-step transition from conciliation to hard war may be too simplistic. An identifiable intermediate step, here called the pragmatic policy, was conciliation's initial successor . Like conciliation, the pragmatic policy was essentially a conservative program that emphasized the need to win victory by battlefield success, not by subjecting Southern civilians to the burdens of war. Although it permitted greater severity toward those who engaged in or abetted guerrilla warfare and offered larger scope for Union foraging operations, it did not yet view the Southern population and economic infrastructure as major targets. The pragmatic policy differed from conciliation primarily in that it lacked a coherent strategic purpose. The mild policy, by contrast, sought to coax Southern civilians back to their former allegiance to the United States in order to erode support for the Confederate government and hasten its demise. In many ways the idea made excellent sense, given the widespread belief that secession had been the product of a small, slave-holding aristocracy. According to this view, the 350,000 slaveholders in the South—a mere..." @default.
• W2022043704 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2022043704 creator A5004195214 @default.
• W2022043704 date "1993-01-01" @default.
• W2022043704 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W2022043704 title "Conciliation and Its Failure, 1861-1862" @default.
• W2022043704 cites W1492426350 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W1500369452 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W1522512523 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W1567746610 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W1580997998 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W1993743543 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2020179393 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2021744620 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2029735789 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2042658712 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2044725342 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2050321878 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2053602401 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2054009477 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2056674436 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2058193805 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2058821112 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2059283328 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2071288334 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2081013945 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2087161492 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2101905703 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2105083768 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2131581003 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2149203269 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2151252992 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2290124149 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2331368124 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2491416459 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2495972148 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2619024470 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2796670941 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2796799116 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2798657843 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W2802083326 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W3086307878 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W586489226 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W614204291 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W629987182 @default.
• W2022043704 cites W650506452 @default.
• W2022043704 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/cwh.1993.0012" @default.
• W2022043704 hasPublicationYear "1993" @default.
• W2022043704 type Work @default.
• W2022043704 sameAs 2022043704 @default.
• W2022043704 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2022043704 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2022043704 hasAuthorship W2022043704A5004195214 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C105795698 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C118552586 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C149923435 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C160151201 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C161191863 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C175762713 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C2776034101 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C2777855551 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C2778137410 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C2781466463 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C2908647359 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C41065033 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConcept C56617239 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C105795698 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C118552586 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C138885662 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C144024400 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C149923435 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C15744967 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C160151201 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C161191863 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C175762713 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C17744445 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C199539241 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C2776034101 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C2777855551 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C2778137410 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C2781466463 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C2908647359 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C33923547 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C41008148 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C41065033 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C41895202 @default.
• W2022043704 hasConceptScore W2022043704C56617239 @default.
• W2022043704 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W2022043704 hasLocation W20220437041 @default.
• W2022043704 hasOpenAccess W2022043704 @default.

• next