Some Reactions of Union Soldiers Stationed in the South during the Civil War

1951 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
Louise P. Olsen
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Santiago Rodríguez Guerrero-Strachan

This article explores the concept of hospitality in Walt Whitman’s Specimen Days (1882). The article is informed by a Levinasian reading of the concept since the main argument is that Lévinas’ interpretation of hospitality sheds light on Whitman’s years in Washington during the Civil War and his much debated relation with wounded soldiers. Lévinas’ phenomenology is centered on care of the Other, which leads to the question of how far the self’s personal obligation to respond to the other in need actually extends. Whitman wanted to create a persona that was meaningful and useful in the Civil War and he chose to be a nurse, or, as he called it in a poem, “the wound-dresser”. By writing about the Civil War, he would both put himself in the center of the historical moment and support Lincoln’s decision to fight the South. In Specimen Days he  wanted to write a memorandum of the war that rejected the ‘sanitized’ versions already circulating. He focused on Union soldiers, who were representative of the best American qualities in Whitman’s view and who endured the hardships of the war, the injuries, pain and death included, but he also described the Southern soldiers, who were the ‘ghosts’ of the Union during the Civil War.


Author(s):  
Dana E. Byrd

This chapter examines the American Civil War history of the piano to shed light on the enormous socioeconomic changes that occurred on the plantation during this tumultuous period. The war sent people and objects in motion. Union soldiers were sent into battle as far away as New Orleans, Louisiana, and Tampa, Florida, and they occupied the South for more than fifteen years after the war began in 1861. Confederate soldiers also went on the move, fighting across the South and the Mid-Atlantic states, while plantation owners abandoned their human and material property and sought refuge away from the front lines. Former slaves wrested freedom from their absentee owners and then, having secured that freedom, joined the cash economy and sought to become citizens. The tensions in the interactions between these groups were manifested materially, and the resulting artifacts survive as extant objects or textual references within the archive. Bound together in an investigation of place, the piano presents a powerful narrative of American history through the making and unmaking of the plantation space.


2018 ◽  
pp. 1149-1162
Author(s):  
Konstantin N. Kurkov ◽  
◽  
Alexander V. Melnichuk ◽  

The article studies some of the more complicated and sensitive issues of the Civil War in the South of Russia – relations of the Armed Forces of South Russia with the Krai governments of the Don and the Kuban and separatist movements as an important factor in the Whites’ defeat in the South of Russia. Both issues are covered in ‘Defamation of the White Movement,’ one of the last works of General A. I. Denikin. Its manuscript has been introduced into scientific use by the authors. Commanders and military authorities of the Volunteer Army with A. I. Denikin at its head were not tied down by regional interests and could pursue national interests in their policy in order to restore an all-Russian unity destroyed by the revolution. Regional concerns of the Don, Kuban, Little Russian, Caucasian independentists were in direct conflict with the national tasks that the Volunteer Army and the Armed Forces of South Russia strove to solve. Unlike the Don Ataman P. N. Krasnov, who was forced to cooperate with the occupation authorities of Imperial Germany, whose troops had occupied the territory of the Great Don Army for the most of 1918, and unlike other regional administrators in the German-occupied territories, the Whites did not cooperate with the occupiers and at times counteracted their anti-Russian policy. Denikin's propaganda successfully used this fact to fall back on traditional patriotic sentiments and to eat away at the Kremlin regime’s support. Centrifugal tendencies in the South of Russia did not allow the Volunteers to consolidate anti-Bolshevik forces and made an armed resistance to the Bolsheviks impossible. Hence A. I. Denikin’s uncompromising stand on separatist aspirations of independentists. In his view, it was the separatists’ activities in different regions of the former Russian Empire that hindered the successful offensive of the armed forces of South Russia, for instance, on the Moscow direction. Internal dissent was exacerbated by intervention of foreign forces – German occupation forces, the Allied Intervention, and active Bolshevik influence on the outskirts of the former Empire. The article compares Denikin’s text with testimonies of contemporaries and writings of historians. Thus, the authors have been able to show that his slender work reliably and accurately recreates the complex and dramatic situation, which led to the defeat of the anti-Bolshevik forces in the Civil War.


2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 245-264
Author(s):  
Andrey Ganin

The document published is a letter from the commander of the Kiev Region General Abram M. Dragomirov to the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces in the South of Russia General Anton I. Denikin of December, 1919. The source covers the events of the Civil War in Ukraine and the views of the leadership of the White Movement in the South of Russia on a number of issues of policy and strategy in Ukraine. The letter was found in the Hoover Archives of Stanford University in the USA in the collection of Lieutenant General Pavel A. Kusonsky. The document refers to the period when the white armies of the South of Russia after the bright success of the summer-autumn “March on Moscow” in 1919 were stopped by the Red Army and were forced to retreat. On the pages of the letter, Dragomirov describes in detail the depressing picture of the collapse of the white camp in the South of Russia and talks about how to improve the situation. Dragomirov saw the reasons for the failure of the White Movement such as, first of all, the lack of regular troops, the weakness of the officers, the lack of discipline and, as a consequence, the looting and pogroms. In this regard, Dragomirov was particularly concerned about the issue of moral improvement of the army. Part of the letter is devoted to the issues of the civil administration in the territories occupied by the White Army. Dragomirov offers both rational and frankly utopian measures. However, the thoughts of one of the closest Denikin’s companions about the reasons what had happened are interesting for understanding the essence of the Civil War and the worldview of the leadership of the anti-Bolshevik Camp.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (10-4) ◽  
pp. 4-14
Author(s):  
Vladimir Kalinovsky ◽  
Alexander Puchenkov

This article is devoted to the development of science and culture in the short period of the Wrangel Crimea - 1920. At this time, the brightest figures of Russian culture of that time worked on the territory of the small Peninsula: O. E. Mandelstam, M. A. Voloshin, B.D. Grekov, G.V. Vernadsky, V.I. Vernadsky and others. The article provides an overview of the life and activities of the Russian intelligentsia in 1920 in the Crimea, based on materials of periodicals as the most important source for studying the history of the Civil war in the South of Russia whose value is to be fully evaluated.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document