Armies of Deliverance: A New History of the Civil War

by Elizabeth R. Varon

Loyal Americans marched off to war in 1861 not to conquer the South but to liberate it. So argues Elizabeth R. Varon in Armies of Deliverance, a sweeping narrative of the Civil War and a bold new interpretation of Union and Confederate war aims. Northerners imagined the war as a crusade to deliver the Southern masses from slaveholder domination and to bring democracy, prosperity, and education to the region. As the war escalated, Lincoln and his allies built the case that emancipation would secure military victory and benefit the North and South alike. The theme of deliverance was essential in mobilizing a Unionist coalition of Northerners and anti-Confederate Southerners.
Confederates, fighting to establish an independent slaveholding republic, were determined to preempt, discredit, and silence Yankee appeals to the Southern masses. In their quest for political unity Confederates relentlessly played up two themes: Northern barbarity and Southern victimization. Casting the Union army as ruthless conquerors, Confederates argued that the emancipation of blacks was synonymous with the subjugation of the white South.

Interweaving military and social history, Varon shows that everyday acts on the ground-from the flight of slaves, to protests against the draft, the plundering of civilian homes, and civilian defiance of military occupation-reverberated at the highest levels of government. Varon also offers new perspectives on major battles, illuminating how soldiers and civilians alike coped with the physical and emotional toll of the war as it grew into a massive humanitarian crisis.

The Union's politics of deliverance helped it to win the war. But such appeals failed to convince Confederates to accept peace on the victor's terms, ultimately sowing the seeds of postwar discord. Armies of Deliverance offers innovative insights on the conflict for those steeped in Civil War history and novices alike.

Genres: History, Civil War, Nonfiction, American History, American Civil War, Politics, Military Fiction

528 pages, Hardcover

First published March 13, 2019

About the author

Elizabeth Varon (PhD, Yale University) is a professor of history at Temple University. Her research and teaching interests include the Civil War and Reconstruction, History of Women and Gender, Southern History.

FROM WEBSITE:
"Personal Statement I have sought in my work to integrate social history and women’s history with political and military history. My first book was on white women’s participation and complicity in Southern politics during the antebellum era. My recent book is a bio of Elizabeth Van Lew, a Civil War spy for the Union and pioneering advocate of women’s rights and of civil rights for African Americans. My current project is a study of the origins of the Civil War (part of a multi-author thirteen part series on the war), and seeks to integrate the rich new social history of sectionalism (particularly works on African American and women’s history) with the more traditional political narrative."

Reviews

[robin friedman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Deliverance And The Civil War

Learning about the United States and its history is a never-ending rewarding experience. In particular, the study of the many facets of the Civil War can bring insights over a lifetime to amateurs, Civil War "buffs", and scholars alike. In times of turmoil it is good to think closely about America.

The joy and the rewards of learning about the Civil War are amply fulfilled in Elizabeth Varon's new (2019) one-volume history of the conflict, "Armies of Deliverance: A New History of the Civil War". The Langbourne M. Williams Professor of History at the University of Virginia, Varon has written extensively on the Civil War, including a book I have read and reviewed, "Appomattox: Victory, Defeat and Freedom at the End of the Civil War" (2013). Varon's new study of the entire conflict is elegantly and seriously written, displays great knowledge of the source material and the work of other scholars, and displays thoughtful judgment. The book also develops a fresh perspective on the war and on the reasons why it was fought.

The book brings together the military, social and political history of the war, with the discussion of battles and campaigns receiving somewhat less attention than in other studies. Varon's focus is on the reasons which led the Union to conduct and persevere in the long, bloody difficult four-year conflict with the Confederacy. Typically scholars have offered and given different emphases to two different answers to this question: 1. the desire to preserve and restore the Union and 2. the desire to end slavery. Varon tries to find a third answer to the question that combines the strengths of the two most common answers: she finds the Civil War constituted a War of Deliverance. She argues that both North and South saw the war in this fashion but in mirror-image ways. Most of her book is given over to explaining what a "War of Deliverance" meant to the participants and how it was waged. Her understanding of the conflict is set out in the book's lengthy Introduction, titled "We are Fighting for Them" which sets the stage for the treatment in the body of the study.

Varon argues that the Union fought the war for the benefit of the white southern population as much as for the slaves. The North saw the white population as in part a "deluded mass" under the control of the small aristocracy of the Slave Power which fought the war for its own benefit and used and cared little for the southern people. White southerners were victimized by lack of economic opportunity, lack of education, poor living conditions, and restrictions on their thought and expression by the small aristocracy of large slaveholders. The Union sought to deliver southerners into the benefits of free society. Hence, it fought the Civil War as a War of Deliverance. Varon argues in detail how this understanding of the aims of the war helped united the disparate Union coalition which included Abolitionists, moderate Republicans, War Democrats, and more. Her view of the war focuses even more attention on the importance of the Border States than they receive in most studies. And it shows, in Varon's account, how the Union could combine elements of "hard" war as waged by Grant, Sherman, and Sheridan with many conciliatory gestures towards southerners, former Confederates, and border state residents who came over to the Union cause. Varon also discusses who the Confederates cast their own efforts as a "war of deliverance" to free themselves from the Yankees and their alleged barbarism, brutality, and materialism.

The North over-estimated the strength of Southern Unionism and the degree to which southern whites felt themselves in the thrall of the aristocracy. Varon recognizes this fact which is critical to understanding her study. She writes "In hindsight, Lincoln and other Northern political figures and writers were clearly wrong about a Southern populace deceived and coerced into supporting the secession movement." She finds that "far greater evidence exists of the robust support of white Southerners for secession on the eve of war." In the short concluding chapter of the book, Varon stresses the faulty assumptions on which the deliverance theory of the war was based by examining the fate of Reconstruction. Still, understanding the Civil War as motivated by an aim of delivering and redeeming the "deluded masses" of the South has a great deal to commend it in explaining the conduct of the war.

Varon's study itself consists of three large parts, well-titled, "Loyalism" which covers the period up to the issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863, "Emancipation" , which takes the war through Gettysburg, Vicksburg, the New York City Draft Riots, and Fort Wagner, and "Amnesty" which covers the last year and one-half of the war. Throughout the book, Varon weaves together the military aspects of the war with the political history, a rare and important accomplishment. While she discusses the Emancipation Proclamation at length, she focuses even more on Lincoln's Ten Percent Plan late in the war as evidence of Lincoln's attempts to offer a conciliatory approach to southern whites. She also treats extensively and well the 1864 presidential election and Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address, often considered his greatest speech and maturest statement of his war aims. The study throughout shows Lincoln's evolving attitude towards the slaves and his necessary efforts throughout the war to maintain the allegiance of the border states, included repeated attempts at compensated emancipation.

The word "deliverance", Varon concludes, remains of critical importance in understanding how the Union viewed the "deluded" southern whites and, ultimately, how it viewed the slaves. She writes: "the story of Civil War-era deliverance politics is both bounded by a specific time and place and boundless, with modern echoes. In the Civil War era, more than today, the term and the Union War aims were resonant with Biblical overtones derived from the Book of Exodus. "Over the course of the long civil rights crusade" Varon writes, "generations of African American activists together with their white allies have again and again drawn on the symbolic power of the Exodus story and of deliverance narratives."

Varon's book offers a moving account of the Civil War and of deliverance. The book is a joy to read and ponder for those who want to learn about the United States and the seminal event of its history.

Robin Friedman

[Jill Meyer · Rating 5 out of 5]

Is there a reason we need a new history of the American Civil War? Haven't many complete war histories, as well as books specialising on individual campaigns, battles, and war participants already been published? Yes, of course, but history has been constantly updated with discoveries of new records, reports, and interviews. Elizabeth Varon, using new sources, has written an excellent new "biography" of the Civil War in her book, "Armies of Deliverance: A New History of the Civil War".

Much of the new research concerns WHY the South chose to secede from the Union and WHY the North chose to go after them to keep them in. Varon goes into the politics of the time and explains how the United States - having come together as a nation merely 80-some years before - had bollixed up the slavery issue into the major impediment in keeping the Union together. Varon explains difficult concepts easily and her writing is excellent.

Elizabeth Varon's book is large, running over 500 pages. I'd really advise, if you have the chance, to buy the Kindle version for two reasons. One is just the sheer weight of the book if you hold it, and the other is the ability to switch between Kindle app and Wikipedia. Varon's book is extremely readable but you may well have questions as you read along that flipping to Wiki for facts is the best way to read a history book.

[Porter Broyles · Rating 3 out of 5]

Elizabeth Varon is one of my favorite authors. Her books Disunion!: The Coming of the American Civil War, 1789-1859 and Appomattox: Victory, Defeat, and Freedom at the End of the Civil War, are two the best books on the causes of the Civil War and its end.

I enjoyed those books so much that this was one of the few books that I pre-ordered.

Unfortunately, this book left me disappointed. I had high expectations and the book did not come close to living up to them. The title of the book, "Armies of Deliverance: A New History of the Civil War" implies that the book is going to provide a novel if not radical interpretation to the Civil War and why people fought---particularly the North.

But it didn't.

Perhaps if you are compaing the interpretation to the educational model used 20 or 30 years ago, then her ideas a new. But if you are looking at modern scholarship, there wasn't anything unexpected or novel. She didn't cover new territority or provide radical insights into the already covered ground.

The coverage of the historical battles/actions was lacking.

Don't get me wrong. This was a good book. It probably deserves more than 3 stars---I purchased it convinced that I would be giving it 5 stars---but it didn't deliver like I hoped.

[Mike · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a difficult book to rate for me. I think academically (scholarly) it is probably a 4/5. As my ratings on Goodreads are simply my enjoyment of a book - I give it a 3. I struggled getting through this book. The theme of the book is basically that Northerners felt that most Southerners were "duped" into buying into the narrative of the Confederacy and that when the Union armies and government were able to convince them of their naiveté, the Union could easily be restored. Essentially the idea that the leaders, slave owners, aristocracy of the South was deluding everyone else. The book was written as a start to finish history of the Civil War and covered all of the major battles. I think that is why I had such a hard time with it - the battles were summarized, but other than the results they really didn't need to be discussed at all to fit with the theme of the author. In addition, the battle narratives were given short-thrift, so as a reader I simply struggled working my way through it.

[lukas · Rating 5 out of 5]

výborná kniha o americkej občianskej vojne, must read!

[Steve Smits · Rating 3 out of 5]

In every war there develops a predominant shared public perception of "who are the enemy?". Such views are most usually stereotypical and morally grounded, leading inevitably to dehumanizing the enemy. Our conception of the enemy informs our willingness to accept the sacrifice and loss that war brings about. In the Civil War, the author suggests, the public conception of "the enemy" was different. There was a distinction in the public mind between the elites of the southern polity and the masses, those who were disdained as the "Slave Power" for whom there was great antipathy and the lower castes by and large not slaveholders. As the title suggests, many in the North held the belief that a great number of rebels were at arms only due to the coercion and manipulation of the political leadership and social aristocracy of the planter elite. Thus, the subjugated masses, the North believed, would recognize and respond, if only given the opportunity to do so, to the "deliverance" from their oppressors as the Union armies gained territory throughout the South. The fervency to restore the national union was bolstered by the understanding that the lower castes of the Southern states would come to accept the North not as invaders, but as redeemers.

The reaction to emancipation demonstrates how this deliverance would be manifested among the general populace. Many in the North were indifferent to slavery as a social ill and opposed to abolitionism. The sense that eliminating slavery would be necessary to achieve national reunion took hold, even in light of rampant racism among Northerners. The average Southerner had no stake in the perpetuation of slavery as slave holding was in the main the province of the elite. Thus, once the strangle hold of the ruling class was broken the masses would show their support for emancipation.

The North's political leaders and many editors of the newspapers significantly over estimated the degree of overt and latent unionism throughout the Southern states. There was a mistaken sense that once unburdened of the oppressive yoke of the power elite many Southerners would openly rally to restoration of the Union. This misapprehension supported the belief that all but the top political and military leaders of the rebel states were deserving of leniency at the conclusion of armed conflict. This certainly informed Lincoln's reconstruction plan and Johnson's even more liberal approach. This degree of open welcome back to the fold was not shared by the Radical Republicans who disputed Johnson's executive actions and put into effect their own harsher legislation.

While not primarily a military history, the author does a good job of succinctly recounting the military campaigns and weaving the public's reaction toward these military events into the theme of hoped for deliverance from the tyranny of the ruling elite.

[Jean Bonilla · Rating 1 out of 5]

Whew! Finally finished this book. I found Varon’s arguments hard to follow and her thesis somewhat questionable. Yes, her extensive quotations from contemporary news reports and literature backed her contention that the North and the South fought the war as an evangelical crusade. But I saw them as as much propaganda as truth. Even she acknowledges at the end of the book that many things didn’t change. On her final page, she cites another historian, John Coffey, saying “The collapse of Reconstruction in the South ensured that the biblical story [of Exodus] retained its resonance. Living under Jim Crow and segregation, black Protestants found they had neither reached the promised land nor got clear of Egypt.” It’s not that I completely disagreed with her thesis; it’s that it wasn’t articulated clearly.

I gave the book one star for a couple of reasons. One is that the argument, while not specious, was hard to follow (as described above). Another is that she frequently skipped around from one year to another. One minute she described things in 1863, the next sentence 1865, and then back to 1863 two sentences later. Later in the book, she switches back and forth between the presidencies of Johnson and Grant without using that as a technique to contrast the two administrations. A third reason is that I found the maps quite confusing. It was difficult to tell who advanced where, when. Fourth, if I hadn’t known who the Copperheads were, I would remain unenlightened by Varon. She seemed to blend Confederates and Copperheads into one and, in my view, quoted Copperheads when she should have been drawing on southern sources.

A fifth reason is that her discursive writing style would have benefited if she had used summaries at the start of each chapter, but it wasn’t ever really clear she did! I have no idea whether she intended to write them or not; it was difficult to tell partly because of her style of jumping from date to date. Where it seemed like she had done one, she then drifted into the meat of the chapter without a clear transition!

Although the book jacket lauds Varon’s ability to interweave military and social history, I found that she actually did a poor job of digging down into the social impact of the events of the Civil War. She quoted many African-American sources and did a very good job of highlighting their concerns, but she didn’t describe the real social impact of the war and of the divisions created by the war.

Finally, some important events got short shrift. Surely Sherman’s March into Atlanta deserved more than a sentence (literally!) With all the detail she gave about other things, could she not spare a word for Sherman instructing his troops to burn the railroad ties and heat the rails over the flames in order to twist them into unusable shapes? I kept waiting for that!! Instead, she almost immediately turned to describing Copperhead commentary. Lincoln’s assassination got several pages, but she again chiefly focused on Copperhead reactions. And didn’t we really want also to hear what the Confederates thought?

One very good element of this book was her ability to describe the ‘Lost Cause’ philosophy shared by many in the South after the war and even today. This vision idealized the slave system and the old South; depicted Confederates as united, blameless, and righteous martyrs who were overwhelmed by the ruthless Yankee war machine; and sought to justify vigilante violence as a legitimate means to “redeem” the suffering South from radical Republican misrule. “There were no dupes or dissenters in Lost Cause histories, only diehard Confederates and faithful white women and slaves.” Against this fantastical view, stood the deliverance narrative of deceived non-slaveholders and the ideal of freedom for the oppressed slaves themselves. And the truth of the War itself was the brutal reality of lives lost, homes destroyed, and economies wrecked.

Frederick Douglass eloquently sums up the real consequences of those four years. “I do not affirm that friendly feeling cannot be established between the people of the North and South… But I do say that some steps by way of conciliation should come from the other side. The prodigal son should at least turn his back upon the field of swine, and his face toward home, before we make haste to fall upon his neck, and for him kill the fatted calf. He must not glory in his shame, and boast his non-repentance. He must not reenact at home the excesses he allowed himself to commit in the barren and desolate fields of rebellion...There was a right side and a wrong side in the late war, which no sentiment ought to cause us to forget, and while today we should have malice toward none, and charity toward all, it is no part of our duty to confound right with wrong, or loyalty with treason.” Douglass kept faith, Varon says, that the “heart of the nation” was “sound and strong,” and that “in the future, patriotic millions, with able captains to lead them, will stand as a wall of fire around the Republic, and in the end see Liberty, Equality, and Justice triumphant.”

God willing, one day it still may be so.

[Stuart · Rating 5 out of 5]

For over thirty years James McPherson’s Battle Cry of Freedom has stood as the gold standard single volume history of the American Civil War. Recently, a friend recommended Elizabeth Varon’s contribution to the genre, Armies of Deliverance, as a possible successor, or at the very least valuable supplement to McPherson’s venerable classic. Having now read Varon’s book I have to say that it is a very impressive piece of scholarship and a thoroughly enjoyable read. It certainly could act as an alternative to McPherson’s hefty tome, but with the caveat that it depends on what exactly you want out of your history of the American Civil War. It would be wrong to say that Varon is doing the same thing that McPherson did – these are two very different histories with different approaches, and both offer valuable insights into the war and the people who fought it.

Varon’s title, Armies of Deliverance, gives a very strong indication of what she focused on: the use of deliverance rhetoric in the American Civil War. While most people will probably be familiar on some level with the idea of deliverance rhetoric as it applied to emancipation, what Varon really focuses on is the use of deliverance rhetoric towards white southerners. In particular, the book explains how the belief that secession was the product of an elite minority in the south was used to hold together the fraught political coalitions of the northern states. The belief that the majority of the populations of Confederate states were loyal Unionists played a central role in the development of war policy and could define political fault lines. This perspective greatly expanded my understanding of why the war developed the way it did and why key political decisions were made when they were. It also does an excellent job at underlining tensions within the Union as well as juxtaposing the internal narratives of the Union and the Confederacy. It’s a radically different perspective than I was used to and an incredibly valuable one because of that.

That’s not to say that this is a niche academic book of little interest to anyone but specialists. While the first chapter, which lays down some essential theoretical foundations for understanding everything that follows, can be a bit dense most of the rest of the book is incredibly readable and an engaging account of the war. This is perfectly suited as a general history for anyone interested in learning about the American Civil War. That said, it may still not be for everyone. If what you want is plenty if minutiae, including in depth explanations of the build-up to the war, the mobilising of wartime economies, and the ins and outs of the main campaigns this isn’t really that book – you’d be better off with McPherson. Varon provides enough detail about the key chronology of the war so that after reading it you will be familiar with its major moments, but this is more of a hybrid political-military history. Varon’s book also does a lot more to explain the aftermath of the war, in particular the key fault lines that would define Reconstruction, than McPherson, who is much stronger on the build up to the war and how the American society changed between 1830 and 1865. Really, though, the best solution is to just read both. It’s what I did, and I can heartily recommend it.

This review originally appeared on my blog at: https://www.stuartellisgorman.com/blo...

[Cheryl Keller · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent and easy-to-read overview of the Civil War. Varon's key theme is that the citizens and soldiers of the Union were largely influenced by a narrative that the purpose of the war was to deliver the majority of the Southern population from the greedy and manipulative and dominant slave holders, and to bring democracy, economic prosperity and better education to the South. In this narrative, the non-slave owning people of the South were expected to greet the invading Union army with open arms, as liberators from the oppressive slaveholder-controlled society.

As Varon traces the chronology of the war, she shows how the many constituencies in the Union either exploited or rejected this narrative (including abolitionists, the various political parties and their leaders, religious leaders, and journalists). Varon also explores how similar constituencies in the South reacted to the war and to this narrative.

[Joe Keefhaver · Rating 5 out of 5]

When people talk about history being erased, they are often referring to Civil War history. Well, this 2019 book is one of the more than 60,000 volumes written about the American Civil War. The history of that conflict is in no danger of being erased. If fact, more and more facets of the war are brought to light each year. Varon's book examines both the day-to-day politics of the war, as well as the battlefield fortunes of the combatants. As many other historians have done, Varon chronicles the evolving attitude of Abraham Lincoln toward emancipation, colonization of former slaves in Africa, the use of African-Americans as soldiers, and their status following the war. The division of opinion among the people of both the North and the South are addressed. It isn't a thrilling page-turner, but the book is packed with information, and I would recommend it.

[Christopher · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoyed Varon’s sharp, holistic, and well-edited Civil War history that managed to draw upon the conflict’s political, social, and military themes. I agree with a reviewer who noted that Varon’s title, "Armies of Deliverance: A New History of the Civil War" implies that the book provides ‘a novel if not radical interpretation to the Civil War and why people fought,’ and falls short in this endeavor. While not groundbreaking in its coverage, “Armies of Deliverence” still packed an incredible amount of material into a one volume history, and did so in a highly readable manner.

[S. Taylor · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really liked this book. It combines a simplified military history of the Civil War and a more detailed discussion of the political activities related to the war that were simultaneously occurring. It was interesting to see the ebb and flow of social and political discourse change as the military fortunes changed over time. I recommend this book along with "Bitterly Divided: The South's Inner Civil War" by David Williams. The two give a really different perspective on the domestic aspects of the war, North and South.

[Hans Myers · Rating 4 out of 5]

Full Disclosure: I have corresponded with Dr. Varon previously on semi-related research.

Dr. Elizabeth Varon produces here a new takes on examining the American Civil War by utilizing the lense of 'deliverance' to understand what prompted hundreds of thousands of men to enlist and fight on both sides of the conflict. While Varon's central thesis on the ideals of deliverance is compelling and interesting, she overall develops the thesis too little - instead focusing on a synthesis survey of the war in general.

[Brad · Rating 5 out of 5]

A tremendously thorough book covering the entire timeline of the four years. Varon goes into great detail about virtually every major battle in the war, and skillfully connects the military actions to the political and social contexts in which they occurred. The unique conceit of "Armies of Deliverance" is that many if not most people in the North believed that most Southerners were in effect tricked by the rich elite slaveowners into rebellion, and that the North was fighting to set poor white Southerners free. A masterful, major undertaking.

[Thad Zajdowicz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent

Elizabeth Varon has written an excellent history of the Civil War with the point of view of deliverance from the evils of slavery and inequality of that era. It belongs alongside Eric Foner's body of work on Reconstruction as well as Blight's recent biography of Frederick Douglass as explication for the politics and culture that caused the Civil War and that live on today in the form of racism and political division in the United States.

[Chad Grissom · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a great, one-volume narrative of the War; the first I would put in someone's hands if they wanted such a book. Definitely puts the lie to the notion that the war was not about slavery. Most letters, editorials, and speeches from the South made it clear that a major goal of the War was the preservation of a way of life intimately linked to the institution of slavery.

[Kevin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book took a close look at motivations of a wide variety of people/groups during the US Civil War. It was a unique and interesting take. You need to be a ardent fan of history to enjoy this book, but I am one.

[Leonard Singer · Rating 4 out of 5]

Crisp history of the war. But the “deliverance “ theme is weak and inconsistent.

[Sean Rutter · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoyed this book very much. I felt the connection with the people involved made this such a good read

[William Peynsaert · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well written, but hardly anything new in it.

[Bill Ryan]

Great book, new way to look at the war.

[Thomas Mackie · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very good chronological look at this conflict from mostly a political perspective but with a brief military history too.

[David Love · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wonderfully written. Engaging.

[ainsley · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.00.

Read for HIST 460.

[Eric Burroughs · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another good option for single volume treatment of the Civil War. Only criticism is the deliverance theme seems a bit forced.

[James Early · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent!

[Sue · Rating 5 out of 5]

I used this as the main textbook for my Civil War Era class--it was perfect. Also come with a supplement of well chosen and engaging primary sources.