Mastering Wartime: A Social History of Philadelphia during the Civil War (review)

BOOK REVIEWS Mastering Wartime: A Social History of Philadelphia during the Civil War. By J. Matthew Gallman. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Pp. xiv, 354. $49.50.) The Civil War was certainly a traumatic event in this nation's history. Grand armies fought and died, four million slaves were freed, and a great nation was held together. The story stirs us, and the temptation is strong to claim it for one thing that is probably true: it was a watershed experience. Historians of national perspective testify to that fact in many ways; textbook divisions of part one and part two, divided at the Civil War era, are only the most obvious sign. Certainly people of the age itself thought that they had lived in transforming times. And yet, when historians focus on the meaning of the war at the level of daily life they find that people responded in channels well carved by years and customs. The war may have been a major event, a turning point, even "the Second American Revolution" for the historians of the national experience, but people living then had to live from day to day. Few could pause to watch the revolution. And living from day to day meant that the people at home who did not fight preserved, rather than transformed, the home for the soldiers on the battlefields. Describing Philadelphia during the conflict, Matthew Gallman, in this deeply researched and wonderfully informative book, enlists himself among those historians who challenge the Second American Revolution vision of the American Civil War. Using Arthur Marwick's standard for the impact of war—destructive aspects, test aspects, participation aspects, and psychological impacts—Gallman finds limited impact on Philadelphia . The destructive impact was limited to the loss of soldiers' lives that citizens of the city experienced. No armies destroyed the city. The institutions of the city were tested but replied in terms that resembled prewar patterns, if expanded. Voluntary contributions supplemented a slightly expanded city authority, which paid bounties and helped families of soldiers. Local institutions thrived and centralization was never a specific goal even though centralizing forces of conscription, war contracting , suppression of dissent, and "national benevolence" swirled around the city. Armies were raised and supplied by predominantly local efforts, and antebellum Philadelphia proved well prepared to carry on BOOK REVIEWS261 the war. When government institutions, such as hospitals, were needed to supplement existing facilities, volunteer associations were there to supply workers. The war also saw more continuity than change in the participation of citizens in the economy and polity. Women seldom moved into new occupations. They suffered from inflation and an unfair subcontracting system that kept them in their places. "[T]he role of women in the city's most complex benevolent mosaic changed less between 1860 and 1870 than it did between 1870 and 1885" (332). Male workers participated widely in "all aspects of the war experience" but made few substantive gains because of this participation. Even blacks who eagerly joined Union regiments received only late and slight benefits at the local level. Racism abided through Reconstruction and beyond. Indeed Gallman finds that "the city 'changed' at least as [sic] much in [the] dozen postwar years as it had in the previous decade [which included the war]" (340). The book contains valuable and clear details on how recruiting took place, and the role of private and public agencies in wartime. It shows how profoundly the war involved citizens in raising money, volunteering time, and committing their ingenuity to the cause—a people's contest indeed. Such unknown institutions as the "Union Volunteer Refreshment Saloon," Brazilini Brown, Proprietor, come to life here as they offer their services to passing soldiers. There is a very informative and entertaining chapter on the Great Sanitary Fair of 1864 and the activities of such subsections as the "Department of Singing Birds and Pet Animals," the "Women's Committee of the Children's Department of Toys and Small Wares," and the "Relics, Curiosities, and Autograph's Committee of Women." Excellent photographs expand understanding. Illustrating the contrast between conclusions based on national focus with those informed by local perspective, Gallman corrects George Frederickson's view of the Sanitary Commission as rigid...