The Gentlemen and the Roughs: Violence, Honor, and Manhood in the Union Army

by Lorien Foote

Finalist for the 2011 GilderLehrman Lincoln Prize"A seminal work. . . . One ofthe best examples of new, sophisticated scholarship on the social history ofCivil War soldiers."—The Journal of Southern History“Will undoubtedly, and properly, beread as the latest word on the role of manhood in the internal dynamics of theUnion army."—Journal of the Civil War EraDuring the Civil War, the Unionarmy appeared cohesive enough to withstand four years of grueling war againstthe Confederates and to claim victory in 1865. But fractiousness bubbled belowthe surface of the North’s presumably united front. Internal fissures were rifewithin the Union class divisions, regional antagonisms, ideologicaldifferences, and conflicting personalities all distracted the army fromquelling the Southern rebellion. In this highly originalcontribution to Civil War and gender history, Lorien Foote reveals that these internalbattles were fought against the backdrop of manhood. Clashing ideals ofmanliness produced myriad conflicts, as when educated, refined, and wealthyofficers (“gentlemen”) found themselves commanding a hard-drinking group offighters (“roughs”)—a dynamic that often resulted in violence and even death. Basedon extensive research into heretofore ignored primary sources, The Gentlemen and the Roughs uncoversholes in our understanding of the men who fought the Civil War and the societythat produced them.

Genres: History, Civil War, American History, War

250 pages, Kindle Edition

First published June 1, 2010

About the author

Lorien Foote is the Patricia & Bookman Peters Professor in History and author of four books, including Rites of Retaliation, winner of the 2022 OAH Civil War and Reconstruction Book Award. She co-edited The Oxford Handbook of the American Civil War and leads the Digital Humanities Project “Fugitive Federals,” mapping escaped Union POWs’ movements.

Reviews

[Shrike58 · Rating 4 out of 5]

Having started out writing a study on military justice and discipline in the Union Army in the American Civil War, the author eventually found it necessary to write a work about social conflict in that army, as period expectations of equality between men ran into the barriers of the demands for military efficiency & discipline on one hand, and "unequal designations of manhood" on the other. These matters being exacerbated as the war went on, particularly once the volunteers who started the war were replaced more and more by men who came to the service as draftees and as paid substitutes for men who had been drafted; the "roughs" of the title who basically only recognized the authority of someone who could physically best them one on one, and who had little use for "civilized" virtues or social order. Foote's bottom line is that these conflicts have tended to be glossed over in the years since the war, and a close attention to the records of regimental court-martials are a bracing check to more romantic notions about why Union soldiers fought and what was necessary to keep them literally in line. The one thing that gives me pause is that the author appears to be a protege of Tom Lowry, a scholar who has since been discredited for writing a book using falsified documents.

Originally written: March 5, 2018.

[Lance · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely loved this book. I was astonished at the violence involved in the struggle for manhood in the Union army. Also the complexities of deciding who was and wasn’t a gentleman was fascinating, and how your image in society could very well impact your court martial. I loved how this book explores how complex views on manhood were, and doesn’t act like it was a monolithic institution. Manhood has and always will be a complex concept, and this book gives us a look at how it was complex for Union soldiers in the civil war.

[Kelly · Rating 3 out of 5]

Did not employ enough gender theory, but interesting use of new historical records

[Tyler · Rating 5 out of 5]

Having enjoyed The Yankee Plague last year, this year I decided to read another book by my amazing friend Dr. Lorien Foote. Her earlier book draws upon courts martial records and regimental order books to make a fresh argument about the competing conceptions of manhood among Union Civil War soldiers. Whereas many soldiers valued the idea of self-control and felt that the ideal man should avoid profanity, intoxication, gambling, or fighting, another group of soldiers found this attitude effeminate and believed that the ideal man should display physical prowess and domination. The beauty of the book is that although several generations of scholars had already analyzed sources and made arguments about these soldiers, Dr. Foote understood that these scholars were often working with incomplete evidence. Thus she composed a database of hundreds of courts martial records and regimental order books by which to make her arguments in this book, to go along with the oft-used letters and diaries that soldiers wrote.

[Daniel · Rating 5 out of 5]

“The Gentlemen and the Roughs” goes deep inside life in Union regiments, right down to the bitter battles between the men. This book is thoroughly informative and interesting. Prof Lorien Foote stumbled onto this story – of disputes of manhood and class among Northern soldiers in the Civil War almost by accident. She started examining Union court-martial records and saw an untold slice of history in disputes of honor between men. The outcomes of cases could hinge on inflammatory words, such as calling someone an SOB or a “puppy.” Disputes between officers and officers and privates unfold in vivid detail. The author’s discussion of class differences will bring forth new information to even veteran Civil War readers. Prof Foote’s work is academic research but retains mass appeal. She’s excellent in podcast interviews as well, including the Art of Manliness! The Gentlemen and the Roughs is a great follow-on to “The Vacant Chair” by Reid Mitchell. This book is worth your time.

[Mike Wisbrock · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great insight to an often uncovered social strata!

[Roger Burk · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is a little out of my line, being a kind of sociological study of attitudes toward honor, violence, and manhood in the Union army during the Civil War. I read it because the author is the daughter of a friend of mine and I played a role in selecting the source documents on which it was based, for which I received handsome acknowledgement. The study is based on selected regimental order books and court-martial records, as well as the usual letters and memoirs.

It did not surprise me that there were lower-class toughs who dedicated themselves to drinking and brawling and would readily fight to maintain their honor, if that's what you want to call it--nowadays it's called respect, and being denied is called being dissed. These toughs are still with us; they join gangs and deal drugs. Then there was an elite class that valued self-control and acceptance of responsibility as the markers of manhood; these too are still with us. Less familiar to us are the elite gentlemen who felt that formalized deadly violence was necessary in response to a grave insult, or to maintain respect from military inferiors. Duelling was strictly forbidden by Army regulations, but occasionally it happened, or a challenge was issued, and some acts were excused by the Army that nowadays we would regard as simple murder.

A bit surprising was the report that discipline and violence in the "Colored" regiments does not appear to have been any different from that in the others, judging from court-martial and other records. Perhaps part of the reason is the white officers in these regiments were carefully screened and only best allowed to serve; it was felt, rightly or wrongly, that only the best could make efficient soldiers from ex-slaves.

[Kevin Gannon · Rating 5 out of 5]

An original, insightful, and well-written study of the union army and the ways in which conceptions of masculinity shaped the soldiers' experiences. A key insight is in the description of how the post-1863 conscripts changed the character o the enlisted ranks. Unlike many studies of the soldiers' experience, this one is sensitive to change over time and presents a dynamic, not static, portrait of its subject. Highly recommended.

[Tim Williams · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fantastic. 4.5 stars. Teaching now in a history methods course--very teachable.