Causes of the Civil War

by Kenneth M. Stampp

In The Causes of the Civil War, Kenneth Stampp presents the full range of the continuing debate on the issues and events leading up to America's bloodiest conflict, skillfully integrating the conclusions of historians with the writings of the men who were part of the struggle.

This third revised edition contains eighty-seven selections drawn from original sources of the period, including newspaper editorials and speeches by public figures - plus essays by historians from the post Civil War era up to the present. Key contemporary documents - such as excerpts from the Lincoln - Douglas debates, Jefferson Davis's history of the Confederacy, and the speeches of Senator John C. Calhoun - give the reader a vivid, authoritative overview of the political, cultural, and economic currents that swept the nation toward a bloody civil war.

The Causes of the Civil War has been a perennial sourcebook for historians and lay readers alike since 1959. This edition is the most complete ever, with prominent historians such as Michael F. Holt, James M. McPherson, and Bertram Wyatt-Brown bringing fresh insights to bear.

Genres: History, Civil War, Nonfiction, American History, American Civil War, War, United States

Hardcover

First published January 1, 1965

About the author

Kenneth Milton Stampp, Alexander F. and May T. Morrison Professor of History Emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley, was a celebrated historian of slavery, the American Civil War, and Reconstruction.

Reviews

[Alex · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a compilation of essays, speeches, and other extraneous excerpts. I have read several books in this format, across a wide array of subjects, and this is the best of the bunch. Three reasons why:

It is supremely well-organized. Most books-of-essays lack cohesion. They feel like a jambalaya, with things grabbed from here and there, haphazardly thrown into a pot. Stampp has not only curated a fascinating selection of excerpts but has collated them in a such a way that the book feels like an integrated whole.

It does not tell you what to think. The title may be misleading in this regard. The Causes of the Civil War might imply that some conclusion is on offer; that an explanation will be put forth; that Stampp will lead you down one road toward a certain end. It is the opposite. One essay will present an idea. It's compelling. Then, immediately following, another viewpoint is presented that is directly opposed to the one preceding—it is equally compelling. As such, you are constantly turning corners. To be continually presented with different perspectives makes for an engaging (and highly educational) read.

It prepares you for further Civil War reading. There is a theory of learning that says if you don't first have basic knowledge of a subject, then any new and higher order information will not be retained. This book provides that essential foundation, covering all the major issues in a sweeping survey of the landscape. There is enough substance that this book can stand on its own, but none of the topics are explored in depth. Depth is not the purpose. The book is laying velcro strips in your brain, giving you a framework which can be later filled in.

[The Angry Lawn Gnome · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a collection of abridgements of source documents and later periodical and magazine articles, all concerning the, duh, causes of the Civil War. Stampp seemed to be focused primarily on the most provocative writings from both "sides," antebellum and postbellum. Thus there's scarcely a mention of, say, Stephen Douglas, but we are blessed (ahem) with a screamingly funny discussion of the Southerner as an emerging being, the "Tropic Nordic," alas whose full flowering was never reached, cut down by the War.

There is virtually nothing in this text to suggest that any sort of compromise was possible, and that as time went on more and more people on both sides of the divide lost any interest they might have otherwise had in reaching such a compromise anyway. To read this book and no others is to take the War coming as inevitable as the sun rising or the tide changing. And perhaps it was

To keep strictly to the text, I would say that on balance the "pro-" [Southern, Confederate, etc.] contingent comes off the worst, both in their attempts at reasoning through positions and reconciling them to something approaching rational thought, but that that was a race "won" by the South by the narrowest of margins. In fact, the invective employed by both sides against the other rather startled me...and I cannot escape thinking that though these sources are interesting, they do not represent the full spectrum of political thought, either North or South.

Though of particular interest is how the text catches Alexander H. Stephens with his hand firmly in the cookie jar. Naughty Alex made his "cornerstone" speech shortly after secession, but then turned around and wrote a book defending secession almost completely from a "State's Rights" perspective. Another round of chuckles, and another notch in the belt of Southern hypocrisy. If any Northerners are guilty of a similar set of sins they are not mentioned here.

As noted, we get "provocative" sources, but said sources do echo a curious diversity of opinion by themselves. There is writing from doctrinaire Marxists, pro-Confederate historians who are actually willing to discuss -- in serious terms -- a "plantation ideal," whereby a peaceful localism ruled the day, and all was, well, at least pretty good if not precisely a Utopia.

Certainly an interesting reading, and to take the term doubtless to the point of cliche, for the umpty-umpth time in a short review again resort to the term "provocative."

*****
Testing, testing, 1-2-3 - Extraneous hoo-haas added 2:55 PM 12/31/2012

Just trying to see if I can get a review to post to my blog. Yes, it is a WordPress.com blog, but, no, it is not my "main" blog. Which may or may not be the reason my last 3,479 attempts have all failed. Or perhaps I'm doing something so painfully and obviously wrong that only a knucklehead such as myself could have missed [fill in the blank] as the reason for my failures. Ah, well. Helps pass the time and all that.

[Emerson Stokes · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a collection of essays, letters, editorials and excerpts from texts attempting to highlight the multiple views presented for the cause of the American Civil War. The texts range from contemporary writings from the period to the views of northern and southern historians on the issue.

Although the editor of the book presents these different views in an unbiased manner, I cannot help but feel like they show that slavery was for the most part at the root of the cause. Other ideas for what caused the civil war either lead back to slavery or are heavily linked to the debate surrounding it.

Regardless of your views on the matter, one thing is certain: the men writing from the period under examination did not always have intellectual reasons for doing so. Even if you are firmly with the North in the civil war debate, a lot of writers from the time had very… interesting reasons for siding with the north.

Overall though, the book helps bring attention to perspectives on the Civil War from the time period and after, while also providing the basis for further research into key texts one may wish to consult to understand the Civil War era.

[Nathan Albright · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the most fascinating aspects of this book is the agnostic approach of the author to the question of the causes of the Civil War and a distinct unwillingness to intrude his own opinion into the book that is combined with a willingness to quote at considerable length the viewpoints of others about the causes of the Civil War that demonstrates the complex way in which slavery was at the basis of the Civil War but not always in a straightforward fashion.  Moreover, the book does a good job in showing out how it was that the lack of honesty on the part of postwar Southerners as well as the desire of later revisionist historians to slander the generation of the Civil War that tended to muddy the waters, given that the only "state's rights" that the South were fighting over were in protection of their system of plantation slavery and that the bungling of politicians was done in an atmosphere where there was little if any room to thread the needle between pro-slavery and anti-slavery views within the various sections of the country. 

This book is less than 200 pages and contains 92 different accounts of the causes of the Civil War that are divided into seven categories that are at least somewhat in connection with others.  In the introduction the author points out the large number of books that continue to be written about the Civil War and how it started--which was true in 1965 when this book was written and certainly even more true now.  The first part of the book then contains twelve accounts (including ones by Jefferson Davis and John C. Calhoun) that blame the start of the civil war on the slave power or on antislavery Republicans and other abolitionists (I).  After that there is a discussion of the role of states rights and nationalism in thirteen excerpts, including accounts by Lincoln as well as Alexander Stephens on the matter (II).  After that there are another thirteen excerpts that discuss economic sectionalism, including the speculations of various Marxist historians on classes and plenty of newspaper accounts about tariffs and internal colonization (III).  Seven selections blame blundering politicians as well as irresponsible agitators, going back to James Buchanan and John Crittenden (IV) before twenty-six selections discuss the right and wrong of slavery itself (V), including thoughts by Lincoln, Davis, Stephens, Seward, Douglass, and a great many others.  Ten selections (including one by Lincoln and another one by John C. Calhoun) discuss the matter of majority rule and minority rights (VI) before the last eleven sections discuss the supposed clash of cultures that existed between North and South at the time.

This book has a lot of relevance when it comes to not only understanding the Civil War itself but the problems of our times as well.  Those who mock the Southerners for being thin-skinned about dealing with criticisms of slavery should pay attention to the thin-skinned nature of contemporary Americans concerning the defense of biblical morality or the defense of the right to life for the unborn and check their hypocrisy at the door and ponder the crises of our own time.  The author deserves considerable credit for his willingness to let the writers and speakers in this book speak for themselves, even if he does abbreviate what they say to keep the book within a very short level.  It is indeed quite possible that this book could have been less heavily edited for length given that it is very short and could easily have been as good a bit longer.  But all the same, this is a very worthwhile book when it comes to presenting what a large number of diverse people both at the time and later on have said about the causes of the Civil War, leaving the reader to decide which arguments are more plausible and how the various causes tend to coalesce together into a few related reasons.  It is a subject that historians will probably not stop arguing over, considering that they are still writing about why Rome fell, after all.

[Oolalaa · Rating 4 out of 5]

13/20

[Bob Croft · Rating 4 out of 5]

Both original source material and historian commentary. Had not realized the pernicious effect of party, the Southern code of honor, and the effects of other Northern economic policies, not just the tariff and internal improvements (paid for by all but tending to benefit manufactures and shippers), but a variety of subsidies to particular industries (starting with New England fisheries in the very early national period).

One caveat: not noted at all was the heavily Celtic ancestry of the South, as brought out by David Hacket Fisher, Forrest MacDonald, and others (not just the Scotch-Irish but huge numbers from the Celtic fringe of the British Isles). The feudal south of England genesis of plantation society is noted, and given as the foundation of southern "honor"; a better foundation (for the larger society) would be the Celtic propensity for violence, even over petty slights, suggested by MacDonald (See "Cracker Culture") as a outgrowth of a pastoral, rather than agricultural, lifestyle.

Another issue: the only explanation offered for the centrality of salve culture, given the relatively few slave owners among the general population, is, again, "honor"; to be considered honorable, one needs someone less honorable than oneself. Hence the handiness of a whole class of lesser beings. One might better look at all those who benefited from slavery without owning slaves. The poorer farmer might, at harvest time, borrow a slave from a wealthier relative or neighbor, of rent same; slaves were often leased long term (a widow's retirement, when her plantation-owner husband passed and the plantation was sold for its debts, was a couple of slaves that she would lease (an early sort of IRA).

But these are quibbles. Overall, very good material. and much food for thought.

[The Bear · Rating 5 out of 5]

A top flight survey of the highest order regarding the causes of the American Civil War, and of the era in which that terrible conflict occurred. Both based upon historical sources, and modern research.

[Lisa Konet · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a very brief synopsis with periodicals and clipping about several causes of the Civil war. This was better than I thought it was going to be even though it was primarily one sided, though both sides of the war were discussed in detail.

Well written and I loved the historical periodicals.

[James S. · Rating 2 out of 5]

I hoped this book would be an opinionated and definitive essay on the major reasons for the Civil War; instead, it's an anthology of Civil-War era excerpts from magazines and speeches. This is the raw material for a book, but not the book itself.

[Daniel Stepke · Rating 4 out of 5]

excellent selection, just like oof what he has to select--lots of racism, lots of silly theories

[Paula Weisberger · Rating 3 out of 5]

Worth reading in our current political environment! Who knew!

[David Carniglia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very useful anthology of essays on the causes of the civil war--from all periods--before, during, and for each succeeding generation, at least through the 1950s. Stampp's organization of the book into seven chapters works well. From these myriad writings we cover the more significant aspects of the sectional crisis.

The writing, naturally, is variable, according to each author's ability. Lincoln's direct, clear style stands out; Alexander Stephens is also an adept writer. My issue with the book as a whole, given the generally high quality, or, at least, relevance of the authors' and editor Stampp's contributions, is that maybe there's not enough. The total of 91 excerpts sounds great; all but the shortest, however, are abridged (for 181 pages total). Many times I wanted to see a more complete argument or picture of an individual author's view. Nearly all of the entries are from journals or articles that were relatively short anyway. The longest entry is five pages, most are two to three pages. What's there is definitely well-presented. I like how the editor sets up each chapter, and then gives a quick but solid introduction to each entry.

The content, abbreviated though it is, includes writings from every principle politician and many significant historians of the era. Whether by design, or more likely, just by exposition of these opinions, one can see the intractable nature of the north/south conflict. Although there were plenty of attempts to minimize the differences--particularly by cloaking slavery in purely economic or philosophical terms--the problem of slavery drew in so many points of contention as to make it an unavoidable issue.

When Lincoln, for example, responded to Alexander H. Stephen's letter in late 1860, as the secession crisis was in play, but before the war began, one can't help but think that he understated his case by a vast distance. "You (Stephens, the South) think slavery is right and ought to be extended, while we (in the North) think it is wrong and ought to be restricted. That I suppose is the rub. It certainly is the only substantial difference between us" (p.151). Stampp comments that Lincoln is narrowly focused on an abstract point; that is, the pro-slavery and anti-slavery views were only superficially different. Obviously, that was absurd. Stampp is correct in pointing out that discrepancy.

It's still possible, however, that Lincoln was well aware of the unrealistic tone the controversy had taken on. Stephen's response shows that he is depending entirely on legalistic argument (p.152) for his rebuttal. The fundamental nature of the disagreement, which, in less decorous communications, manifested outright hatred, grown out of religious, moral, rational, historical, cultural, and traditional sources.

It's not hard to see why the legalistic arguments defending the existence of slavery gained traction for many Southerners. The Founding Fathers, wanting above all to cement a union of states in order to prosecute the war against England during the Revolution, and later, to consolidate the victory by establishing the United States of America, had to compromise on the slavery issue. The disagreement on which powers were reserved for the states is indeed a legalistic issue, and did bear directly on slavery. On the Federal or Northern side, the validity and legality of secession was key. As Lincoln stated in 1861 "the Union of these states is perpetual...It is safe to assert that no government proper ever ha a provision in its organic law for its own termination" (p.39).

In 1789, as in 1820, 1832, and 1850, there were means to overcome these washed-out bridges in logic between North and South. But by 1860-1861, every bit of compromise had been tried and found lacking by one or both sides. It proved impossible to appeal to reason when the borders of reasoning had shifted as far apart as the sections. The Causes of the Civil War does give the lasting impression that the war was inevitable.

[Christian · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was not a history of the Civil War, but a collection of essays, articles, letters and other documents that range from personal communications written by Jefferson Davis and Abe Lincoln, to excerpts from historical works written as late as the 1970s. While the book is fairly balanced, I did have to read it in pieces, as one can only stomach so many 1860s speeches justifying slavery and negro subversion in one sitting. Mostly though, this collection just serves to reinforce the idea that the war was fought over slavery as a moral issue, not an economic one, and that the Civil War was somehow something other than a rich man's war and a poor man's fight, just like every war since. It is fair to suggest that you get any more authoritative than to document the leading political voices of that time, but in that regard, the book just makes clear that politicians of any era will say anything to get reelected, and secure personal power. This is better than the last book I read on the Confederacy, which had no citation, no bibliography, and a little too much pro-Confederate bias, but you can't beat David Williams' A Peoples' History of the Civil War (yes, edited by Howard Zinn).

[Nathaniel · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting collection of excerpts from primary and secondary sources related to the titular topic, organized by "category" of cause (slavery, economic sectionalism, etc.) - a sort of historical sampler, if you will. This is very much a scholarly resource, but can be difficult to read from start to finish even for educational purposes thanks to the somewhat repetitive nature of the excerpts in each "category". Additionally, the paperback edition is printed on very cheap acidic paper, which guarantees that this is one book with a very short "shelf life". However, for those who seriously want to examine the root trends at this point in American history, there's a lot of good information here. All excerpts are fully credited, so anything particularly interesting to the reader can then be cross-referenced and acquired separately. Quoted sources also include selected editorials from newspapers and the like, as well, which can be hard to track down otherwise, so it's not just books. In all, this is a useful resource for scholars of the period. Just watch out for the crappy paper it's printed on, especially if you have a dust allergy.

[John Petersen · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you're looking for an answer to what caused the American Civil War, you won't find it here. And that's what makes this book so powerful and important. Instead, it gives a plethora of diverse interpretations and viewpoints on the subject, some of them contemporary, some of them current, some of them primary sources/speeches by politicians of the day, some of them historians' insights. The point: the American Civil War is such a complex issue that so many factors contributed to its buildup and outbreak and none are the single/only cause. Slavery, states' rights, morality, sectionalism, difference of cultures, Constitutional interpretation, economics, "irresponsible agitators": Stampp has them all represented in this volume and given equal voice. This is the hallmark of top-notch historical analysis, and it's the hallmark of this excellent book, first published in 1959 and since having gone through subsequent re-publishings with new material added each time. Highly recommended.

[Robert · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an interesting look at the causes of the American Civil War. It is a collection of of essays, articles, speeches and so on from historians, political and historical figures. They offer a variety of viewpoints on the causes of our most costly war with ourselves. It goes a little deeper than just the obvious cause , slavery, but probably not as radical as some "lost cause' fanatics scream in denial. The book even attempts to explain the denial held by many. It is a thought provoking book and a handy reference book on the war itself. The only detraction is that by nature some of the reading can be tough due to different writing styles which isn't the authors fault. Otherwise it was an excellent book.

[Jason · Rating 4 out of 5]

I love all the primary source material in this book. I also appreciated that opposing positions were treated fairly. The book definitively broadened my understanding of the underlying causes of the Civil War.

[Tom Darrow · Rating 3 out of 5]

A decent collection of primary and seconday sources about the causes of the war. I would view this book more as a reference book than a sit down and read cover to cover book because 87 collected essays, many of them repeat the arguments of other authors in this same book.

[Doug Reith · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting. Trying to learn as much as I can about the Civil War.

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good series of readings.