Most regard the Civil War as a uniquely American experience, a conflict that tested the resilience of the nation and then determined the form that nation would take. In this book, Amanda Foreman views the Civil War through a different lens, which focuses on global issues and in particular the Anglo-American relationship. At the time of the Civil War, this relationship was affected by prior affinities and prior animosities. It would be the working through of these issues that would help to determine the outcome of the war, and the nature of the Anglo-American relationship for years to come. The notion that Great Britain assumed a crucial role in determining the war’s outcome and that the war was part of a worldwide conflagration seems a bit overstated. Yet the meaning of these alludes is addressed in this epic tale of national and multinational involvement in this seemingly quintessential American event.
Amanda Foreman is relatively new to the task of historical writing. Yet she seems to have been born to the task of writing this book. She is bi-national, with British and American citizenship and was educated both in this country and in the United Kingdom. Her father was Carl Foreman, a legendary screenwriter who fled to England in 1951 after being blacklisted by the United States for being a former Communist and refusing to name names. He was reinstated in 1997, only to return to his country of birth in 1984 to die and to receive the accolades of his fellow citizens. Who better to write a story of the Civil War as a global event, than a global citizen such as Amanda Foreman?
Amanda Foreman has fashioned a book, which is impressively researched and overwhelming in its completeness. Its length of over 900 pages, is somewhat intimidating and occasionally too much for the reader, but overall, the reader is rewarded for his patience and diligence. The author tells the story by employing a myriad of vignettes and a cast of well over 200 characters. The author has combined two narrative tasks, one a description of the diplomatic efforts on both sides of the Atlantic and the second a description of individual participation by immigrants from many countries, with special attention to British involvement. The diplomatic story is the central narrative of the book, yet the tales of individual involvement are more engrossing, and in the end more meaningful for both countries.
The central diplomatic event of the war was the Trent affair. It was a diplomatic dance, with many twists and turns that would set the pattern for subsequent diplomatic efforts of the two nations. It is a complicated story centered on the American seizure of Confederate diplomats from a British mail ship, The Trent. Unfortunately the author mixes this event with others and spreads it over two chapters. The author commits the heuristic sin of further complicating an already complicated issue, a strategy that she would pursue throughout the book. Nonetheless, this event introduces the reader to the diplomatic heavyweights on both sides: Richard Lyons, the Minister of the British Legation in Washington, Richard Russell, the British Foreign Secretary and most of all William Seward, the American Secretary of State who figured prominently thought-out the war. In a description of the Trent Affair Seward is presented as a bombastic individual who threatens war to obtain peace. Foreman concludes that Seward was a supremely talented diplomat who the English came to know and trust. We recall the judgment of Walter Stahr that Seward was Lincoln’s indispensible man.
Overall, the diplomatic efforts of the North and Great Britain were mostly successful, with success being defined as furthering the foreign policy of both nations. The policy of the United States was to keep Britain out of the war and the policy of Great Britain was to remain neutral. Although there was some tension between Britain and the United states, the relationship never sank to belligerence and was at least officially friendly. Although the British regarded the south as a belligerent, they never recognized the Confederacy as a nation. The diplomatic goal of the South was to secure British recognition, and to break the Northern blockade. In these respects they failed.
Which brings us to the title of the book, “A World on Fire, Britain’s crucial role in the American civil War.” The title is cryptic, since the author uses words in an unconventional way. The title of the book, “A World on Fire” were the words used by Seward to threaten diplomats of Great Britain to back off and to thus avoid off igniting a worldwide conflagration. After all was said and done it was a figure of speech, but like many figures of speech, it was pregnant with meaning. In the book title the fire referred to was not a worldwide conflagration but a fire in men’s hearts. It was a fire ignited by the disappointment of the European revolutions of 1848. The failure of these efforts spelled the doom of democracy in Europe with monarchy the clear winner. Those drawn to freedom were attracted like moths to the flame burning in America, both in the North and in the South. The North was fighting for the equality of all men while the South fought for the freedom to live the sort of life they cherished. In this country a large number of immigrants were poor, without good family support and without the support of their homelands. Amongst other reasons, but mainly to recapture the meaning in their lives, they chose to join the fight for their new country. Most fought for the North. The northern army was multicultural and multinational. One third of the soldiers who fought for the north were immigrants: 10% were German, 7.5% Irish as well as French, Italian, Polish and Scottish. There were no British Units; the Neutrality Act had forbidden British nationals from active participation in the war. Nevertheless, numerous individuals served as observers and as both officers and fighting men. It was this shared experience that shaped the nature of relationship between the United States and Great Britain. The old memories were extinguished, and a new role based on shared values was created.
In a manner similar to the way she used the word fire, Foreman used the word crucial in an unexpected way. To most, the word crucial implies some sort of action. Foreman used the word, to mean an absence of action. The crucial role of Great Britain in the Civil War was, in fact, no official role. The Southern quest for independence was quixotic and doomed to failure. The Confederacy was simply outclassed by the North in every way. The British played a crucial role by simply not interfering and thus allowed fate to take its course.
There are times when diplomacy takes unexpected paths. Ironically, Britain’s major contribution to the Civil War was to take no military action. The most important interaction were the personal ones, the shared experiences that would establish that special relationship between the countries that would have a major impact in two world wars and several minor ones. For the foreseeable future, the fate of both nations appears to be intertwined.
Loading your book clubs
There was a problem loading your book clubs. Please try again.
Not in a club? Learn more
Join or create book clubs
Choose books together
Track your books
Bring your club to Amazon Book Clubs, start a new book club and invite your friends to join, or find a club that’s right for you for free.
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Flip to back Flip to front
Follow the Author
Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.
| Price | New from | Used from |
|
Audible Audiobook, Unabridged
"Please retry" |
$0.00
| Free with your Audible trial | |
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
About the author
Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.
Top reviews from other countries
Wayne Pickering
An excellent account of Britain and the American Civil War
Reviewed in Canada on January 22, 2017
Geoffrey Woollard
Every page is a gem. Get it now!
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on December 12, 2010
Darren O'Connell
A momentous achievement, all the same?!
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on March 29, 2012
Mr. Pj Williams
interesting
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on March 17, 2011
Steven Harker
not just a war between brothers but also between cousins
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on August 29, 2015
Steven Harker
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on August 29, 2015
On the face of it the American civil war had very little to do with us Brits and as such we only tend to come across it via American sources such as TV and the movies where understandably the view point in focused inwardly. As this book explains the truth is that we were almost as much involved as America and the civil war had a much wider international dimension. In fact had we played it differently the South would have been able to go its own way. Be warned this is not a light read, it needs, and repays, your full attention. It also outlines the troubled relationship between the USA and Britain during most of the 19th century. Basically we were the bogie man and every ill that befell the USA leading up to the start of the civil war was laid at the feet of Britain by US politicians. In fact, the book points out that the Republican party's great plan to avoid the south from seeking independence was to invade Canada and provoke a war with Britain. The book also highlights how slavery and cotton bound our two nations. Victorian Britain was dedicated to wiping out the slave trade yet approximately 5 million people (Lancashire's dark satanic mills) depended on the south's slave economy cotton. British industry wasn't above selling arms to the south either. The confederate navy's best warships were all built in British shipyards and their soldiers often carried British weapons, as did many in the Northern army. In fact many officers and men on both sides were also British but it was on the political front where Britain had the most influence. Packed with detail, the book shines a light onto a part of British history very few of us probably know much about. Well worth it if you have any interest in this period.
Images in this review
