The New York Historical Society recently opened “Lincoln and New York,” a new exhibit that aims to “fully trace the evolution of Lincoln’s relationship” with the state. The exhibit includes not only Lincoln’s visits to New York, such as for his Cooper Union address in February 1860, but also explores the impact of his administration’s policies during the Civil War. In addition, the material on display highlights the extent of serious political opposition that Lincoln could face even in northern states. “We see New York’s version of the Civil War being fought using words, ideas, images and, at least during the 1863 Draft Riots, a fair amount of blood, with Lincoln as the battles’ nexus,” as the New York Times’ Edward Rothstein explains in his review. If you can’t make it to the exhibit (which runs through March 25, 2010), be sure to check out their interactive exhibit online.

The American Antiquarian Society, an independent research library, has provided a digital collection of the Grant-Burr family papers on their website.  The letters in this collection were written between the years 1827-1892, and a majority of the correspondence is between Daniel Grant and his wife Caroline Burr Grant.  There are over 500 letters, covering a great range of 19th century topics from courtship and childrearing to westward expansion and the Civil War.  The collection can be searched by keyword or, perhaps more usefully, can be browsed according to subject.  Additionally, the website offers genealogical information and images of the family.  All of the transcribed letters are available as a scanned pdf file which is useful for those seeking to use these letters in the classroom.  For more information on how to use primary sources in the classroom, teachers may want to refer to this page from the Library of Congress.

After his victory in the 1860 election, President-Elect Abraham Lincoln quickly started to work on filling the positions in the federal government that were political appointments. While selecting cabinet members was an important task, historian Harold Holzer explains that “Lincoln understood” how critical it was “to purge [the] Democrats” and “guarantee the loyalty of the federal bureaucracy.” Even as Lincoln considered the appropriate response to the secession crisis, he held countless meetings with office seekers who showed up at his temporary office in the Illinois Statehouse (see image to the right – it is #1 on this map). Those unable to travel to Springfield sent numerous letters to recommend either themselves or their friends. Other letters offered Lincoln advice on the appointment process. “Do not be led astray by corrupt Politicians,” as one anonymous author warned. The significant amount of incoming mail even caught the eye of at least one reporter. After a meeting in December, the reporter’s only comment about Lincoln’s office was to note that “[the secretary’s] desk [was] heaped up with letters and documents.” The political activity in Springfield did not escape the notice of Democratic papers like the New York Herald, which used the opportunity to portray their rivals as corrupt. The Herald predicted a “great republican feast” on all “the fat things” and identified the two “cooks” who would direct “the distribution of federal offices” in Pennsylvania.

Marist College’s Kathryn Silberger has put together an impressive collection of thirty-one letters by  Union soldier Daniel Francis Kemp from his tenure as a landsman in the US Navy between 1862 and 1863. Your Affectionate Son offers a wide range of pictures detailing the specific events and locations described in Kemp’s letters. It offers a unique first-hand perspective and is invaluable for anyone wishing to know more about US Navy actions during battles in the Civil War.

A great general resource on the web is PBS Teachers. Easily searchable, resources are broken down by grade, subject, and topics. It seems that PBS strives to make their resources interdisciplinary and tie in with different media sources. One example uses the Ken Burns’ film, The Civil War, to explore the music of the period. Michael Hutchinson wrote Civil War Music (.pdf available here) to be taught in conjunction with the film, but does not necessarily require the film itself.

Civil War Music is a straight forward look into the songs and “battle hymns” popular at the time of the Civil War. Aimed at students from grades 7-12, the lesson explores two Confederate and two Union songs. In addition, Hutchinson offers a handful of follow up and extension activities, a possible way to round out the lesson if necessary. The subject is potentially interesting for a wide range of students as music, and the feelings associated with music, could be seen as universal.

Written in 2002, the resources linked to lyrics and MIDI files no longer work, though YouTube has versions of all four songs and lyrics can be found easily through a Google search. For ease, examples are linked here. “Battle Cry of Freedom (Union)” (lyrics, music); “Battle Cry of Freedom (Confederate)” (lyrics, music); “Dixie’s Land” (lyrics, music); and “Union Dixie” (lyrics, music).

Duke University’s Sallie Bingham Center is an invaluable resource for studying the life and culture of American women. While the collection covers a broad range of topics on all aspects of women’s history, its strength is in Southern women and there are a great deal of resources pertaining specifically to the 19th century. This page features an extensive list of the primary sources that the collection has relating to domestic and social life in the 19th century.  Any one of these collections of family correspondence and diary entries could be useful in understanding the cultural and domestic context to the Civil War, but many have not yet been archived online. The resources that can be accessed online now are found here. Other collections relating explicitly to the Civil War period can be found on the subject guides page. Hopefully the Center will continue to provide more digital resources so that the documents in this collection can be accessed by a wider audience.

The Harpers Ferry story does not end when John Brown was captured early in the morning on October 18, 1859. While five members of his group managed to escape (including Barclay Coppoc, who later served in the Union army), others were not as fortunate. Albert Hazlett and John Edwin Cook, who were traveling separately, were both arrested in Pennsylvania. Hazlett was captured on October 22 and sent to Carlisle. (House Divided has a 3D model of the courthouse where his extradition hearing took place). Cook was captured four days later in Franklin County. Both men were sent back to Virginia, where after short trials, they were sentenced to death. The story attracted national attention and reports were published in papers around the country, including from Illinois, Ohio, and Kansas. These reports, however, were not always accurate. The Cleveland Herald explained that someone who “[gave] his name as Wm. Harrison” was “arrested…on the suspicion that he was Capt. Cook.” William Harrison was actually the name that Hazlett used after his arrest. One can also follow the story in papers published in central Pennsylvania. The Valley of the Shadow has two papers from Franklin County – the Franklin Repository and the Valley Spirit. Pennsylvania Civil War Newspapers also has a number of options, including the Gettysburg Compiler and the Lancaster Intelligencer.

Last week I discussed a southern newspaper that argued that only legal means should be used against abolitionists who threatened southern communities. Immediately after the Harpers Ferry Raid, however, this newspaper had a different perspective. The editor was not concerned about abolitionists invading the South, but rather argued in late October 1859 that Harpers Ferry would actually reduce sectional tensions. “We think that a great deal of good will result from the Harper’s Ferry affair – much more than could have been anticipated,” as the Fayetteville Observer explained. Only “fanatics” in the North supported Brown’s raid. The Observer also argued that Harpers Ferry would split the Republican party. An editorial in an Indiana newspaper was one of “many…signs of conservative Republicans [who were] cutting loose from the ultra fragments of their party.” While the Observer later admitted that Brown’s raid had not “heal[ed] the sectional breach,” it is still important to consider this newspaper’s initial reaction.

The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History has a new online exhibit on John Brown. The exhibit covers Brown’s life in the 1850s, the attack on Harpers Ferry, and Brown’s legacy. While only a few documents are available right now, they will add more material every month through March 2010.

The Gilder Lehrman Institute has a number of other online exhibits, including one on the Lincoln-Douglas Debates (co-produced by the House Divided Project).

These two reports from November 1860 use John Brown’s raid on Harpers Ferry to argue that a federal arsenal in Fayetteville, North Carolina had to protected, but not in the way that one might expect. Rather than have the local militia continue to provide protection, some Fayetteville residents asked the War Department to send soldiers. While some objected that “local authorities [had] to protect government property at their own expense,” the Fayetteville Observer explained that “the chief inducement…was to negative any idea of a John Brown raid here.” The presence of a US Army company from New York apparently did not cause any serious problems. “So far from irritating the public mind,” the Fayetteville Observer noted that “[their presence] has very materially quieted the public mind here.”