The Pennsylvania Antiwar Movement, 1861-1865 (review)

BOOK REVIEWS189 freedmen's education and each must be read for its own considerable merit. In the last analysis, both historians view northern teachers as models ofvalor and identify their response to freedmen's education as a moral equivalent of war. The performance of northern teachers under fire during Reconstruction, however, does not recommend their inclusion in the all too indiscriminate ranks of American heroes. Thomas Cox Middlebury College The Pennsylvania Antiwar Movement, 1861-1865. By Arnold M. Shankman . (Rutherford: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1980. Pp. 236. $19.50.) Dissent within a democratic society is an intriguing and important topic for the historian. The study of the minority frequently offers a new perspective on the majoritorian view. Consequently, an analysis of the antiwar sentiment during the American Civil War is an especially alluring question. Shankman's small volume examines the antiwar dissenters in Pennsylvania . They have long merited a comprehensive study for they were an outspoken and troublesome minority in a state Lincoln considered vital to his administration. Shankman's premise is that the dissenters, or "copperheads ," were not traitorous to the Union, but were simply antiwar Democrats. They included a small band of several types of dissidents. A small element advocated that Pennsylvania join the Confederacy; a second group urged "peace at any price"; and a more moderate component simply sought a compromise to end the war. Shankman's impressionistic estimate is that at least 25 percent of Pennsylvanians were copperheads. These Pennsylvanians were located in most sections of the state and included a variety of social and economic groups. Lacking any distinctive socioeconomic characteristic that set them apart from other Pennsylvanians, all the historian can say is that they were simply bound together by their hatred for abolitionists and blacks, their hostility to the draft laws, and their alarm over the threat to civil liberties. Shankman's interpretation of these dissenters closely follows the recent historical interpretation of copperheads as being constitutional conservatives. Shankman has shown a dogged persistence by delving deeply into Pennsylvania newspapers and manuscript collections. But superb history is based on imaginative conceptual analysis and interpretation as well as thorough research. Unfortunately, this is where this volume misses the mark. The book is descriptive history rather than analytical. It follows a chronological pattern, citing newspaper editors that condemned the Lincoln administration or antiwar rallies that protested some new Union policy. Yet, the author fails to clearly or explicitly probe into the ranks or minds of the copperheads. Why were they antiwar? What was their vi- 190CIVIL WAR HISTORY sion of what American society should be? Were they politically or ideologically motivated? By examining them what insights can we gain about a democratic society fighting for its survival? These questions remain unanswered. In fact, the book reveals no conceptual basis for studying the antiwar dissension in Pennsylvania. The author argues that the antiwar dissenters were Democrats, but he touches only slightly on the Pennsylvania Democratic organization. One is not certain of the copperheads' relationship to the regular Democratic organization. For example, he includes the 1863 election returns, county by county, but fails to discern the regular Democrats from the copperheads . The Democratic candidate polled 48.5 percent (my calculation) of the total vote, but we do not know if this represented the true copperhead strength. One is unable to discern any flux in the pro or antiwar sentiment in Pennsylvania from Shankman's book. When he cites election data he fails to use it imaginatively to note upswings, troughs or stability in public opinion. He does not consider the impact that statewide or national events had on antiwar sentiment in Pennsylvania. In 1862, for example, there was a crucial congressional election, but the book ignores how the battle of Antietam or the first Emancipation Proclamation may have affected the antiwar candidates' campaigns. Similarity, Pennsylvanians voted in major state elections in 1863, but the author pays no attention to what impact Lee's invasion of Pennsylvania that year may have had on the electorate. In addition, this volume is too narrowly focused in that it makes no relationship between antiwar sentiment in Pennsylvania and elsewhere. The book is a useful addition to Pennsylvania history. Unfortunately, it sheds...