Myth, Manchester, and the Battle of British Public Opinion during the American Civil War

IF 0.1 Q3 HISTORY
David Brown
{"title":"Myth, Manchester, and the Battle of British Public Opinion during the American Civil War","authors":"David Brown","doi":"10.1017/s0018246x23000237","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Manchester ‘working men’ approved an address in support of Abraham Lincoln's emancipation policy and the American Union at the Free Trade Hall on 31 December 1862. The US president described their gesture as ‘sublime Christian heroism’ when hopes of restoring the cotton supply and reopening the mills were better served by Confederate recognition. This transatlantic exchange became an integral part of the scholarly traditional interpretation that the British working class frustrated the pro-Confederate designs of the upper classes during the American Civil War. It formed the historiographical orthodoxy until revisionists countered that Lancashire workers advocated Confederate recognition. The Manchester meeting, revisionists claimed, was contrived to give the impression of working-class support for Lincoln which was, in fact, a myth. These two incompatible interpretations simplify and flatten the complexity of an event with local, national, and international ramifications. This article presents the first detailed examination of who organized the Free Trade Hall meeting and why. It moves scholarly understanding of the British public response to the American Civil War beyond its current stasis of ‘traditional’ versus ‘revisionist’ by placing the field in conversation with the recent history of radicalism and ‘class’ in the Victorian era.","PeriodicalId":40620,"journal":{"name":"Ajalooline Ajakiri-The Estonian Historical Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ajalooline Ajakiri-The Estonian Historical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0018246x23000237","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Manchester ‘working men’ approved an address in support of Abraham Lincoln's emancipation policy and the American Union at the Free Trade Hall on 31 December 1862. The US president described their gesture as ‘sublime Christian heroism’ when hopes of restoring the cotton supply and reopening the mills were better served by Confederate recognition. This transatlantic exchange became an integral part of the scholarly traditional interpretation that the British working class frustrated the pro-Confederate designs of the upper classes during the American Civil War. It formed the historiographical orthodoxy until revisionists countered that Lancashire workers advocated Confederate recognition. The Manchester meeting, revisionists claimed, was contrived to give the impression of working-class support for Lincoln which was, in fact, a myth. These two incompatible interpretations simplify and flatten the complexity of an event with local, national, and international ramifications. This article presents the first detailed examination of who organized the Free Trade Hall meeting and why. It moves scholarly understanding of the British public response to the American Civil War beyond its current stasis of ‘traditional’ versus ‘revisionist’ by placing the field in conversation with the recent history of radicalism and ‘class’ in the Victorian era.
神话、曼彻斯特和美国内战期间的英国舆论之战
1862年12月31日,曼彻斯特“工人”在自由贸易大厅批准了一项支持亚伯拉罕·林肯的解放政策和美国联盟的演讲。美国总统称他们的举动是“崇高的基督教英雄主义”,因为邦联的承认更有利于恢复棉花供应和重新开放纺织厂。这种跨大西洋的交流成为学术传统解释的一个组成部分,即在美国内战期间,英国工人阶级挫败了上层阶级亲邦联的设计。它形成了史学上的正统观点,直到修正主义者反驳说,兰开夏郡的工人主张承认邦联。修正主义者声称,曼彻斯特会议是为了给人一种工人阶级支持林肯的印象,实际上,这是一个神话。这两种互不相容的解释简化和平面化了具有地方、国家和国际影响的事件的复杂性。本文首次详细介绍了是谁组织了自由贸易大厅会议,以及为什么要这样做。它将英国公众对美国内战的反应的学术理解超越了目前“传统”与“修正主义”的停滞状态,将该领域与维多利亚时代激进主义和“阶级”的近代史进行了对话。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
期刊介绍: “Ajalooline Ajakiri. The Estonian Historical Journal” is peer-reviewed academic journal of the Institute of History and Archaeology, University of Tartu. It accepts articles in Estonian, English or German. It is open to submissions from all parts of the world and on all fields of history, but articles, reviews and communications on the history of the Baltic region are preferred.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信