The Road Was Full of Thorns: Civil War Runaways and the Destruction of American Slavery

by Tom Zoellner

A radical retelling of the drama of emancipation, from New York Times bestselling author and winner of the National Book Critic Circle Award



In the opening days of the Civil War, three enslaved men approached the gates of Fort Monroe, a U.S. military installation in Virginia. In a snap decision, the fort’s commander “confiscated” them as contraband of war—and declared them free men.



From then on, wherever the U.S. Army traveled, torrents of runaways rushed to secure their own freedom, a mass movement of 800,000 people—a fifth of the enslaved population of the South—that set the institution of slavery on a path to destruction.



In an engrossing work of narrative history, critically acclaimed historian Tom Zoellner introduces an unforgettable cast of characters whose stories will transform our popular understanding of how slavery ended. The Road Was Full of Thorns shows what emancipation looked and felt like for the people who made the desperate flight across dangerous the taste of mud in the mouth, the terror of the slave patrols, and the fateful crossing into Union lines. Zoeller also reveals how the least powerful Americans changed the politics of war—forcing President Lincoln to issue the Emancipation Proclamation and opening the door to universal Black citizenship.



For readers of The 1619 Project—and anyone interested in the Civil War—The Road Was Full of Thorns is destined to reshape how we think about the story of American freedom.

Genres: History, Civil War, Nonfiction, American History

320 pages, Hardcover

First published September 30, 2025

About the author

Tom Zoellner is the author of several nonfiction books, including Island on Fire: The Revolt that Ended Slavery in the British Empire, and works as a professor at Chapman University and Dartmouth College. His writing has appeared in The Atlantic, Harper’s, The American Scholar, The Oxford American, Time, Foreign Policy, Men’s Health, Slate, Scientific American, Audubon, Sierra, The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, The Texas Observer, Departures, The American Scholar, The Wall Street Journal and many other publications. Tom is a fifth-generation Arizonan and a former staff writer for The Arizona Republic and the San Francisco Chronicle. He is the recipient of fellowships and residencies from The Lannan Foundation, the Corporation of Yaddo, the Economic Hardship Reporting Project and the Mid-Atlantic Arts Foundation.

Reviews

[Bill · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a short, fascinating, somewhat flawed but thought-provoking read that looks at the destruction of slavery from a different perspective - those who self-emancipated and helped push the process along rather than passively waiting to be freed.

Zoellner’s story begins with the three escaped enslaved men who turned up at Virginia’s Fort Monroe weeks into the Civil War, whom Union Gen. Benjamin Butler decided to treat as contrabands of war rather than return them to slavery. That opened the floodgates for more enslaved people to make their way toward Union lines, and their settlement in hastily-assembled contraband camps.

“The United States had never had a refugee crisis of this scale,” Zoellner writes. “As many as eight hundred thousand people - a fifth of the enslaved population of the entire South - left a plantation and lived in a contraband camp at some point during the Civil War.”

Zoellner’s argument is that President Lincoln was pushed and prodded into emancipating the slaves, bowing to the practical reality that so many had already emancipated themselves. He couldn’t leave them in limbo, with an indeterminate status, so “a permanent solution had to be found.”

The strength of the book is in giving names and recognition to those who bravely took the risk to free themselves. It upends the traditional thinking that slaves remained in bondage until Lincoln decided to free them. While I don’t disagree with this argument, and appreciate the acknowledgment of the active role these individuals played in securing their own freedom, I thought the balance was a bit off - if you envision a three-trayed balance scale with the roles of Lincoln, Congress and the enslaved people themselves evenly weighted, acting in tandem to dismantle the system of slavery, Zoellner’s telling tends to give much greater weight to the enslaved people and too little credit to the others, who come across as a bit more passive and reactive than they might actually have been.

To be fair, he does provide a thorough recap of the Confiscation Acts and preliminary and final Emancipation Proclamations that formalized the contrabands’ freedom, so Lincoln and Congress do get some credit for acting. He’s not necessarily wrong that, without the contraband camps, “emancipation would never have happened on an accelerated timetable.” And he astutely disputes the old canard that the Emancipation Proclamation “freed nobody,” pointing out that it immediately freed many of the contrabands, representing “a permanent removal of the ambiguity that had hung over the contraband camps for nineteen months,” and formally establishing that future contrabands would also be considered free.

But he tends to portray Lincoln as scrambling to respond to events, forced to act in ways he might otherwise have preferred not to. “Lincoln did not lead the process of emancipation so much as he trailed behind the fast-moving events like a streetsweeper behind a parade,” he writes, conjuring up an unappealing and unfair mental image of Lincoln reluctantly trying to clean up a situation of someone else’s making.

He goes further in observing of Lincoln that “what he was doing represented a reversal of everything he had said about slavery through his thirty years of public life” - specifically, his prewar promises not to interfere with slavery where it already existed. But this was not so much a change of heart as it was seizing an opportunity, to do during war what he couldn’t do during peace. Lincoln was always staunchly antislavery, suggesting even before he became president that slavery was likely headed toward “ultimate extinction.” And upon his inauguration, he specifically warned the seceding Southern states that they were giving up constitutional protections such as the Fugitive Slave Law by doing so, foreshadowing the later decision to treat fugitives as contrabands and refusing to return them to slavery.

So while the escapees certainly deserve credit for securing their own freedom, Lincoln also deserves credit for seizing the moment, to actively put slavery on the path toward “ultimate extinction” as he had long hoped - he didn't simply react to circumstances or change his convictions to match the reality on the ground. Zoellner makes much of the abolitionists who pushed Lincoln to act more boldly, but doesn’t give Lincoln as much credit for moving ahead of public opinion in certain respects, going further than some Northerners and the border states would have preferred. It was a delicate balancing act, but Zoellner tends to err on the side of Lincoln’s passivity.

The book’s tendency to jump around in time doesn’t help in this regard - in discussing the genesis of the Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, Zoellner gives the impression that Lincoln’s famous exchange with Horace Greeley, in which he said his primary goal was to save the Union even if he could do so “without freeing any slave,” came much earlier than it did - suggesting that Greeley pressured Lincoln to act when in reality he had already decided on the Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation at that point.

The most notable example, however, of jumping around in time comes near the middle of the book, when we get an entire history of American slavery going back to 1619, and even a history of the establishment of Fort Monroe itself. It’s well-written and provides some context that is cited later, but it’s a lengthy diversion that takes you out of the main story for quite a long time. The book is already quite short, so it’s unclear whether this is necessary background or simply some elongated padding.

So while Lincoln is portrayed as something of a more reluctant actor than he really was, the book does succeed in giving the enslaved escapees well-deserved credit for taking matters into their own hands. It doesn’t do them a disservice to consider Lincoln the Great Emancipator - but it doesn’t do him a disservice to acknowledge that he didn’t do it alone.

[Kat · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book completely reshaped how I think about the Civil War and emancipation. It focuses on the often-overlooked reality that freedom was not something handed down from above but something seized by those who were enslaved. The sheer number of people who fled bondage at the start of the war is staggering, and the book gives voice to their courage, their strategy and the pivotal role they played in turning the tide for the Union.

What I found especially striking was how the author breaks down the legal and military shifts that allowed escapees to find protection behind Union lines. The “contraband” policy in particular stood out as a moment of both legal ingenuity and moral clarity. It made space for people who had risked everything to start claiming a future for themselves even while the war still raged on.

The writing is clear, engaging and full of urgency. The stories are detailed without ever feeling dry, and the emotional weight of what is being described is never lost. I learned a lot, but more than that, I felt a real shift in how I understand who drove the movement for freedom.

This is not just an important addition to Civil War history. It is a necessary one. I highly recommend it to anyone interested in American history, social justice or untold stories of resistance and self-determination.

[Andy Hamilton · Rating 5 out of 5]

Outstanding history of slaves freed during the Civil War by the Union Army, and the crucial role they played to bring about the Emancipation Proclamation and the 13th Amendment. I had no idea about this aspect of the war. Why is it never taught?!? Perhaps this book will change that. The research and writing were solid. This is an important book every American should read.

[Lauren · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was a fascinating read that details the mass exodus of enslaved folks from their forced servitude at the beginning of the American Civil War. It focuses less on white Americans having “freed” anyone, and more on how Black Americans freed themselves, and as a result, played a major hand in the Union winning the Civil War. It also talks about General Benjamin Butler, who orchestrated a legal loophole by referring to enslaved folks running away from the Confederacy as “contraband,” allowing them to stay at Union forts all throughout the war. Taught me SO MUCH!!! Excellent read.

[Brad Eastman · Rating 4 out of 5]

We like to deify our heroes and we have certainly deified Abraham Lincoln - The Great Emancipator. Growing up in the 70s and 80s, I learned how Lincoln freed the slaves and preserved the union. I learned history, as I am sure many other children in America did, as a directional drama - America advancing towards its ideas in an unstoppable march to the "more perfect union". Mr. Zoellner turns this narrative on its head. Lincoln did not come to the presidency to free the slaves, enslaved people created facts on the ground and forced Lincoln and others' hand.

The story starts in the early days of the war and the Lincoln administration. Southern states have seceded over the issue of slavery. Northern states want to put down the rebellion, but there is no early consensus in the North that ending slavery is a war aim. Indeed, several slave states, the border states, are part of the Union coalition and President Lincoln does not want to take any measures that might alienate those states. In Virginia, two rival forts in very close proximity try to dominate the river access to the sea. For the rebels, slave labor is being used to enhance their fortifications. One night three enslaved people escape from bondage and turn up at the Union fort. The Union general in command must decide what to do. He can return the enslaved people to the Confederacy, as required by the Fugitive Slave Act, but then he would be helping the insurrection. He could not return the enslaved people, but then he would be violating the laws of the very Union he was fighting to preserve.

The commander of the Confederate fort comes and requests return on the enslaved people. The two generals actually know each other (an idiosyncrasy of a civil war is that many of the leading figures had friends and family on the other side). In a spur of the moment inspiration, General Butler of the Union, argues that the people are "contraband of war" and cannot be returned. Enslaved people forced his hand. General Butler reports back to Washington about his decision and asks what should be done. The White House endorses his contraband theory, not as a pre-planned war strategy, but as a reaction to an in-fact situation.

Word of the decision about the three escapees circulates through the slave camps rapidly and a flood of "contraband" begins to arrive at Union forts. The Union quickly realizes that the flood of now freed people weakens the South by depriving it of labor, export commodities (cotton) and potential new recruits for the fight against the South. Mr. Zoellner tells this story with remarkable clarity and respect for the enslaved people, not as a single mass, but as agents of history. Mr. Zoellner also documents how the arrival of millions of formerly enslave people shifted President Lincoln's views on war aims and what was possible as well. In addition to Mr. Lincoln, the contraband camps and the bravery of Black soldiers, helped convince an apathetic-at-best North to make the war about ending slavery.

Two interesting byproducts of this remarkable history. First, while Abraham Lincoln did not enter the war with the purpose of ending slavery, he was a remarkably savvy politician who understood what was possible while also understanding that what is possible changes as facts change. In the hagiographic view of history, this flexibility would appear to be a negative. However, in our hyper-partisan age, it is the ultimate strength. Abraham Lincoln led public opinion, but he never got so in front of it as to create real gridlock. Second, two things can be true at once. Abraham Lincoln, the vast majority of Northern citizens, even the vast majority of abolitionists, could be against the institution of slavery and still have deeply ingrained racial prejudices. This does not make their anti-slavery fight any less important, but it does mean that we are human, products of our environment and subject to contradictions. Should we think less of Lincoln because he was not an angel perfectly in-tune with 21st Century attitudes towards race? I don't think so. We need to look at his long journey across a lifetime. Perhaps we should also remember that Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, etc. were all people, not deities. We honor their amazing achievements. We do not lessen those achievements by noting the true nature of the beliefs and their conduct. Indeed, we make those achievements all the more remarkable when we understand that these heroes were flawed individuals.

[Book Club of One · Rating 4 out of 5]

Abraham Lincoln is often remember by the descriptor: 'the Great Emancipator" for his issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863. But as Tom Zoellner demonstrates in The Road Was Full of Thorns: Running Toward Freedom in the American Civil War it would be far more accurate to describe Lincoln as the great improvisor, holding no true policy until forced to by crisis or popular sentiment. This is not intended as criticism, instead showing a true talent and skill for balancing various needs and factions in a tumultuous portion of American history.  In this account of emancipation, Zoellner argues that both the establishment and, much more convincingly, the  ending of slavery were gradual processes, often made spur of the moment or at a crisis point, without consideration for precedent or the harsh criticism of historical analysis. 

The narrative is framed around the establishment of Civil War "contraband camps," or places where Black refugees established themselves under Union control, having fled servitude. These camps developed from Union General Benjamin Butler's canny use of legal argument that surmised that if people could be property, they could be seized or removed from their owner. Butler's position was that any enslaved person removed from Southern control further weakened the Confederate war effort. As it happened, this contraband could self-emancipate as thousands did. While Butler's argument would come to be supported by Lincoln and the Union army, initial results were more mixed, especially with Lincoln's concerns over the slave states who had not left the Union. 

Zoellner starts with an in-depth history of what became known as Slabtown, near Fort Monroe on the Virginia Peninsula.  This location serves as an especially key focal point as it is near (Point Comfort, Virginia) the same location where enslaved people first arrived in England's mainland colonies. From the arrival of European settlers through the development of the United States and 19th century growth in armies and states, Zoellner describes the importance and expansion of coastal defense. Unlike Fort Sumter, Fort Monroe did not fall to the Confederates and remained an important  check on Confederate access to the ocean.  From there chapters range in discussing the Civil War campaigns, changing political foci and Lincoln's policy of no policy. Where there is the documentation to draw on Zoellner also delves into various perspectives supported by primary sources.

Contraband camp life is explored, showing not all camps were equal, some being highly successful in creating pathways to integration, where others were concentrations of misery, sickness and disease. Zoellner follows a roughly chronological outline, but there are sections that stretch a wide breadth of time to make points about political or historic developments. 

Recommended for readers in American History, Emancipation or the American Civil War. 

I received a free digital version of this book via NetGalley thanks to the publisher.

[Steven Conger · Rating 4 out of 5]

I consider myself a student of the American Civil War. I have read hundreds of volumes, participated in round tables and even own a couple of civil war diaries, but I have never read anything that presented the destruction of American Slavery the way Tom Zoellner does.

This is a fascinating look at the problem that was created by General Benjamin Butler when he declared runaway slaves "contraband." To the surprise of everyone, that simple decision my have changed American society and the war. My hunch is, we would have gotten there eventually.

The book outlines the development of the former slave encampments around the Union army and how those realities ultimately shaped Lincoln's policy. The book is well written and engaging.

My biggest complaint would be having the chapter on 1619 in the middle of the book. It disrupted the flow and it almost felt like the book restated after it.

If you want to learn more about a little known part of the Civil War that may have had a larger impact than many other things, take the time and read this book.

Thanks to Tom Zoellner, The New Press and NetGalley for an ARC in exchange for my unbiased opinion.

[Sean Keating · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book adds to the multitude of civil war era historical books. Gen, Benjamin Butler in charge of Fort Monroe on the Virginia peninsula claims 3 escaped slaves as contraband of war. This leads to the town of Hamilton becoming “slab town”. A refugee camp of enslaved people. Across the south as union forces advance contraband camps spring up filled with enslaved citizens. Thousands follow the union armies. In 1861 congress passes the confiscation act confirming what Butler started.
At the end of the war sadly the government never had a good plan to assist the enslaved to citizenship
Many stories of how enslaved people migrated through reconstruction, movement to north and searched for a place to call home and provide a path to equality.

[Calvin Schermerhorn · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a fresh, fast-paced history of freedom in the Civil War that looks at what it was like to be a "Contraband" or person who fled slavery to the Union Army but was not quite free. It tells the story of the places where those freedom seekers “created a powerful thorn in the conscience of the Northern public.” In spite of persistent hardships, contraband camps became freedom villages: hubs of education, enterprise, and independence, which helped turn a war begun over Union into a revolution for Black Americans.