In “The Guerrilla Shirt,” by Joeseph Beilein, the
importance of masculinity in guerrilla warfare was examined. This article
helped to explain why gender was important in guerilla warfare and how it
affected the war.
Beilein introduced the concept
that the warfare was Freudian in a way. He claimed that the “sons resisted the
authority of their symbolic fathers in the form of the Union government, only
to be forced to submit to their fathers once again when captured or killed.” This
is interesting, because many other historians have called the war a rebellion,
but not may compared it to a son challenging his father. It was also
interesting to see that the author believed that the Union and Confederate
soldiers were “virtually the same” and “were all ‘brother killers.’” When
reading different history books the Union and Confederacy are made out to be
two different entities, but in this article the two sides are made out to be
the same. This could be because the article focuses on guerrilla warfare,
rather than the war as a whole. Besides the importance of rebellion, women also
played a prominent part in guerrilla warfare.
Beilein claims that “the
relationships between men and women were utterly destroyed by the war,” but
that there was also “order in the chaos.” The
relationship between men and women wasn’t destroyed, but rather changed
due to wartime. When the men needed supplies sometimes their women would
provide them, and help them survive. This relationship “became the logistical
backbone for guerrilla warfare,” and helped prove why women played such a vital
role in guerrilla warfare. It is intriguing to read about the importance of
women during guerrilla warfare, because one usually only reads about men.
Gender one of the main driving factors in guerrilla warfare. Men used it as a
chance to rebel against authority, and women used it as a way to support their
men.
Beilein Jr., Joseph M. 2012.
"The Guerrilla Shirt." Civil War History 58, no. 2: 151-179. Academic
Search Premier, EBSCOhost (accessed April 13, 2013).
Shaleeah,
ReplyDeleteYour blog entry was an interesting read. It is interesting to see how, throughout history, gender plays a roll in the vast majority of things. The American Civil War (or The War of Northern Aggression, depending on your point of view). You make mention of "brother killers", and this was often (quite literally) the case. Many families, especially in border states like Kentucky and Missouri, were divided right down the middle with one son in the Union Army and the other in the Confederate Army. Also, as mentioned in class, we know that women played a big role in the war, much as they would some 80 years later. During the Civil War, women were left at home to attend to the children, take care of the home, and provide food for the family. In slave holding families, many slave owners wives were left in charge which was controversial to both the white race and among the slaves. The eventual dire straits that women found themselves in, led to Southern Bread Riots. You're definitely right when you say that gender played a big role in the Civil War. Nice post.
I found it interesting that the author of the article referred to all soldiers as "brother killers." As Robert nicely notes, many families were literally divided down the middle. Even on a more metaphorical scale, many men from the same area were hotly divided on the secession issue. I think Shaleeah makes a good point, though, by noting that the "brother killer" label was probably applied more in regards to guerilla warfare. It seems that the official armies of both sides were seen more as separate entities, although of course they did engage in "brotherly fights" between family members. However, guerilla warfare seemed to be on a more personal, familial level because it occurred in the guerillas' home areas, very often between brothers or lifelong friends.
ReplyDelete