Civic Wars: Democracy and Public Life in the American City during the Nineteenth Century

by Mary P. Ryan

Mary P. Ryan traces the fate of public life and the emergence of ethnic, class, and gender conflict in the nineteenth-century city in this ambitious retelling of a key period of American political and social history. Basing her analysis on three quite different cities—New York, New Orleans, and San Francisco—Ryan illustrates how city spaces were used, understood, and fought over by a dazzling variety of social groups and political forces. She finds that the democratic exuberance America enjoyed in the 1820s and 1840s was irrevocably damaged by the Civil War. Civic life rebounded after the War but was, in Ryan's words, "less public, less democratic, and more visibly scarred by racial bigotry."

Ryan's analysis is played out on three different levels—the spatial, the ceremonial, and the political. As she follows the decline of informal democracy from the age of Jackson to the heyday of industrial capitalism, she finds the roots of America's resilient democratic culture in the vigorous, often belligerent urban conflicts that found expression in the social movements, riots, celebrations, and other events that punctuated daily life in these urban centers. With its insightful comparisons, meticulous research, and graceful narrative, this study illustrates the ways in which American cities of the nineteenth century were as full of cultural differences and as fractured by social and economic changes as any metropolis today.

Genres: History, American History, Cities

394 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1997

Reviews

[Vincent · Rating 3 out of 5]

Mary P. Ryan’s Civic Wars: Democracy and Public Life in the American City during the Nineteenth Century traces the path of democracy and what she terms the “public” within the urban setting, from the antebellum era, through the Civil War, and beyond Reconstruction. Ryan uses Tocqueville, who described early American democracy within a rural homogenized setting, as a point of contrast, looking instead for developments and definitions of democracy in environments that challenge that notion. She chooses three cities - New York, New Orleans, and San Francisco - partly for their geographic locations (one north, one south, and one to the far west). Ryan examines how people defined themselves and recognized others, while taking into account how urban space influenced such notions. Ryan finds that democratic zeal was prominent in the 1830s and 40s, and public spaces such as municipal buildings, monuments, or even sidewalks were largely seen as positive environments which fostered civic pride and pluralism. This was an advantageous byproduct of urban necessity, as antebellum residents “had very few places to socialize but public space,” and not until the 1840s did “distinctly residential districts” begin to emerge, and only in few parts. In relation, ethnic societies also multiplied in number, however, “despite the spatial definition given to ethnic occupational differences, it would be a mistake to label the antebellum city a segregated space.” Instead of seeking to politically divide residents spatially, pundits instead embraced a democratic spirit and even “audaciously called for the construction of halls capable of accommodating the whole citizenry.” Associations and civic ceremonies, too, played their part, allowing residents of varying backgrounds to unite under common causes, such as temperance, and further “served as vehicles for the democratization of urban culture.” Public meetings, too, allowed different classes and political parties to participate and helped to further democratize the notion of the public. Likewise, the creation of positions and organizations for the public good, organized by municipal authority, such as firemen or charitable arrangements, were agreed upon by Whig and Democrat alike.

However, already some groups were beginning to be excluded. Jacksonian Democrats increased democracy through direct elections and the extension of eligible voters, however, in doing so they caused debate over exactly who should be voting. In the parlance of the time, when women and black men were not seen as full citizens, the question really became who exactly should be considered white, making the democratic voting populace more fractured. Before the 1860s “the primary fissure of the public… was between foreign born… and nativists of Anglo-Saxon descent,” however, “by 1863 the boldest and more vicious divide was between black and white,” bringing the chasm from ethnic considerations to racial ones. The growing factionalism of the 1850s would turn increasingly violent, culminating nationally in the Civil War, a period which would see no significant support for public architecture or parks, and a growing sense of self interest. The post-war city would create a very different social landscape. Construction “converted large sectors of city space for concentrated domestic uses,” and privately owned amusements and businesses became more popular gathering places than civic or public buildings and landmarks. In fact, the wealthy grew to fear the streets as public space became associated, especially in popular literature, with crime and squalor. Violent confrontations still manifested and increasingly order was kept by a growing police force and sometimes a military presence which was only too ready to pull their triggers. Political reformers gradually pulled away from democratic faith as public policy, seeking to define and restrict who should be allowed to participate in the civic process. Hardly an inspiring end, however, Ryan gives fair warning early on, stating “one should not expect a simple story of triumphant public democracy in the pages ahead.”

Ryan organizes her argument in largely chronological terms, in three parts, the first looking at the years 1825-1849, the second 1850-1865, and lastly 1865-1880. Ryan also focuses on various aspects of urban life. She begins by looking at social interactions in public spaces like sidewalks, then at civic ceremonies. She then proceeds to political campaigns and then to their more aggressive forms: riots and violent demonstrations. Lastly, she looks at the role of military and government and how they helped to shape (or more accurately restrict) the idea of the public. Along the way, Ryan also follows the trail of how women, blacks, and Chinese were conceptualized by white males, especially as race became an ever important concept in a post master-slave world.

Civic Wars departs from earlier treatments of the era by incorporating crucial sociological history into a narrative, not around major political characters, as the traditional approach has done, but rather around an idea. Ryan writes that, “in the past the focal point had been politics on the national level. The central characters had been political leaders, and the plot ended in the uniformity of a common culture or at the apex of intellectual hegemony or political power.” Instead, Ryan’s central character is the public, and she uses this potentially ephemeral notion as a dowsing rod to steer her through the changing landscape of urban American democracy. Her characters are largely commoners, and where she ends her exploration is with a deeply fractured society, with little reassurance to the reader that things are going to improve.

Ryan successfully tracks the receding tide of democracy in the urban setting as the concept of the public became increasingly more restrictive, and public space ceased to be an environment for civic engagement or pride. In particular, she shows how people’s perceptions changed, affecting how they saw both each other and the spaces which they occupied. Ryan was inspired to write this examination of factionalism because of the parallels she saw in the Nineties. Unfortunately, those divisions seem quaint when compared to our current, politically and socially shattered landscape. Once again white supremacists march in force to symbols of the Lost Cause, violent political confrontations claim lives, flagrant political profiteering conjures the ghost of Boss Tweed, and our elected leaders demonstrate more faith in privatization than in an inclusive democracy. The “public” does not extend beyond their voting base. Our nation is deeply wounded and as yet there is only salt, not salve. We can only hope that when our story is written, unlike Ryan’s dour conclusion, historians will be able to pen a happy ending.

[Amy · Rating 3 out of 5]

An academic history book focusing on the history of public spaces in New Orleans, New York, and San Francisco. The book looks at how these cities were laid out, what civic celebrations were conducted in the streets, who got to participate therein, and who was excluded. Chapter 4 on coups against democratically elected local governments, vigilantism (extra-judicial killings and banishments), faked ballot counts, Nativism, violence, and pitched street battles is perhaps history most surprising to many people who have ideas about the smooth workings of democracy in the U.S. The author's examination of the post-war period helps show how U.S. cities largely moved away from public gatherings and parades and the populace retreated to private spaces and commercial venues. The epilogue is really interesting with a lot of food for thought about what it means to have a democratic form of government and how the people and public activities make or break democracy.

[Elizabeth · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting analysis of social interactions and positions of various classes of people in San Fran, N'Orleans, & NYC during 19th century.