A Comparison of Civil War Topics across Digitized Works
Even before the official start of the American Civil War in 1861, authors and commentators both in the country and abroad offered their own analyses of the deteriorating situation in the United States. The aftermath of the conflict saw a wave a publications and prints summarizing the causes, course, and outcomes of the ‘War between the States.’ Studies of this era continued to fascinate scholars into the modern era, with new growth in interest surrounding the centennial period in the 1960s. A similar trend occurred in the later 20th and early 21st centuries, particularly around the sesquicentennial commemoration in 2011, including new focuses on historical diversity and the application of the Civil War era to modern issues.
Below is a set of ngram graphs that follow the fluctuations in published and digitized source materials that include specific terms or subject materials relating to the area of the American Civil War. They follow the use of more general terms in written works digitized by Google books, namely ‘American Civil War,’ ‘Abraham Lincoln,’ ‘The Union,’ and ‘The Confederacy.’
As shown, writings including mention or discussion of Lincoln boomed during the era of the conflict itself, likely capped by the aftermath of the Lincoln assassination. The next generation of historical writings on the late President arose by the late 19th century and historians continued to write much on the man and his administration well into the next. Writing including ‘The Union’ experienced a similar boom during the crisis of secession and the ensuing Civil War, but it should be noted that the course charted by Google’s program is likely picking up additional uses and instances of the phrase not applicable to the Civil War era, particularly in periods that saw the rise of labor movements and the 20th century. Instances of the ‘The Confederacy’ appears largely flat throughout, though the same issue as before can arise with other instances of the phrase – it is not unique to writing on the Civil War faction.
The slow growth of writing on or considering the ‘American Civil War’ begins before the conflict even ends, reaching a plateau point with the generation of authors and historians in the early 20th century. The recurrence of such writing fluctuates throughout the ensuing century, reaching high points in three rough sections – 1940-41, 1965-66, and the 2000s. The first could be connected to the time frame that saw the last Civil War veterans dying, drawing public attention. The second is tied to the period of the War’s centennial, and the third could be explained by the rise in new interests in diversity in historical narratives, in contemporary political cultural tensions, or in interest surrounding the sesquicentennial celebration of the war.
Moving on, another comparison can be made concerning writings on the American Civil War and the commonality of terms and figures relating to the subject of this project: Diplomacy and Britain in the conflict. The following ngrams similarly follow four terms, one again being the ‘American Civil War.’ The others are three prominent individuals involved in the this dimension of the conflict being Secretary of State ‘William H. Seward,’ British ambassador ‘Lord Lyons,’ and British Foreign Minister the ‘Earl Russell’
A significant portion of the digitized writings shown are centered in the 1860s, and connects to the life and career of John Russell, the 1st ‘Earl Russell,’ even before digitized works on the ‘Civil War’ began to become more frequent. However, the recurrence of his incorporation in papers and narratives on Google declines swiftly in published works the 1870s, after his leaving political office and last years of life. On the other hand, his American counterpart, ‘William Seward,’ only begins to have digital works related to him after 1860-61, the start of his career with the Lincoln Administration, though into the subsequent Johnson years. For ‘Lord Lyons,’ mentions appear to be roughly aligned with that of Seward prior to the turn of the century, though he experiences a slight increase in frequency in Late Victorian writing amid the new generation of authors.
Other than this bump, all three figures in diplomacy have the same trend through the rest of the twentieth century, with Seward slightly higher than the other two – a characteristic that could be attributed to his importance as an figure in American history beyond the Civil War in other analyses. The usage of all three of these men in digitized writing on Google remained consistently below that of the ‘American Civil War’ following the end of the 19th century, declining to a plateau by the end of the twentieth.
The bulk of analyses or writings that make mention of these gentlemen – each integral to the course of diplomacy – and would be connected to their roles in the Civil War, appear to be concentrated in the first half of the twentieth centuries. This trend aligns with something I have noticed thus far in secondary research of the subject. While studies of the Civil War’s diplomatic side are not rare today, they appear with more frequency the farther back one goes. These early analyses of the subject area, while still a smaller subset of the overall field, was more popular among Victorian and early modern writing than in later generations