Reviewed by:

• Household War: How Americans Lived and Fought the Civil War ed. by Lisa Tendrich Frank and LeeAnn Whites
• Lynn Kennedy

The household in nineteenth-century America was not only the site of familial relationships but also a central unit of economic and social organization; it thus provides an ideal lens through which to understand larger events and meanings. Household War: How Americans Lived and Fought the Civil War explores the diverse ways the Civil War household shaped the experiences of soldiers and civilians alike. Fundamentally, the edited collection suggests how the household and battlefield became intertwined, emphasizing "the reality [End Page 342] that households were both the sites of war as well as the basic social structures that underlay the Confederate and Union armies, polities, and economies" (p. 3). The inclusion of both northern and southern households further provides insight into the persistence of shared national values and into the complexity of relationships and loyalties created during this conflict. Organized into four sections, the essays survey the various functions of the household as a provider of emotional and material support, a basis for claims to social and political status, and a site of social challenge and control.

Part 1 takes a psychological focus, considering how the private household relations of three well-known historical figures—Mary Todd Lincoln, Robert E. Lee, and Ulysses S. Grant—shaped their public behavior. Joan E. Cashin focuses on how the material spaces of the various households in which Lincoln resided reflected her broader experiences. Joseph M. Beilein Jr. argues that extant historiography has bifurcated Lee into either a general or a man, but that in fact these two elements of his identity cannot be separated. Brooks D. Simpson's essay suggests how extended kinship networks complicated household relations for Grant.

The essays in Part 2 explore the connections that ordinary people, men and women, northerners and southerners, soldiers and civilians, drew between their households and the war. Jonathan W. White investigates the dreams of home recounted in the letters of soldiers, and how such dreams suggested the central role the household played in soldiers' lives, both consciously and unconsciously. These dreams provided both physical and emotional comfort to the soldiers and could also become a means for expressing anxiety around separation from their families. While White's work focuses on the psychological sustenance offered by the household, LeeAnn Whites's essay examines the essential material supplies that households contributed to the war. Both goods and money moved back and forth between the household and the battlefield. Whites also demonstrates how this supply chain maintained household inequalities in the war, as soldiers depended on what their families could send, and those whose households could not sacrifice such provisions undoubtedly suffered from the lack. Julie A. Mujic's work on Wisconsin households uses the letters written to state politicians to show how women responded to the war's disruptions "by shifting the place of the household, by flexing it and expanding it outward to encompass the battlefield" (p. 102). Even as women volunteered to send supplies and bring the caregiving function of the household to the soldiers, they expected the state to facilitate this interaction, thus using the exigencies of war to reframe the household's relationship to the state.

Part 3 goes beyond emotional or material connections to explore the literal merging of the household and the battlefield, resulting in significant displacements and disruptions. Lisa Tendrich Frank argues that the forced removal of southern households in the path of the Union army was a deliberate military strategy "to blur distinctions that typically separated civilians from enemy combatants" (p. 138). Margaret Storey explores the flipside of this strategy, with the wives of Union officers setting up households in occupied territory. Such disrupted and constructed households both became symbols of the Union's control over this territory that went beyond a battlefield victory. Andrew K. Frank provides another...

审核人：

• 家庭战争：美国人如何生活和打南北战争ed。丽莎·滕德里奇·弗兰克（Lisa Tendrich Frank）和李安·怀特斯（LeeAnn Whites）
• 琳恩·肯尼迪

十九世纪的美国家庭不仅是家庭关系的所在地，还是经济和社会组织的中心单位。因此，它提供了一个理想的镜头，通过它可以理解更大的事件和意义。家庭战争：内战的美国人如何生活和打仗，探索了内战家庭塑造士兵和平民经历的多种方式。从根本上讲，经过编辑的收藏集暗示了住户和战场如何交织在一起，强调了“现实[End Page 342]住户既是战争的发源地，又是构成邦联和盟军，政治和经济基础的基本社会结构”（第3页）。北方和南方家庭的融合进一步提供了人们对共享的持久性的深刻理解。本文分为四个部分，对家庭作为情感和物质支持提供者的各种功能，要求获得社会和政治地位的基础以及社会挑战和控制的场所。

第一部分从心理学的角度出发，考虑了三个著名历史人物-玛丽·托德·林肯（Mary Todd Lincoln），罗伯特·E·李（Robert E. Lee）和尤利西斯·S·格兰特（Ulysses S.Grant）的私人家庭关系如何影响他们的公共行为。琼·卡什（Joan E. Cashin）关注林肯所居住的各个家庭的物质空间如何反映她的更广泛的经验。小约瑟夫·贝琳（Joseph M. Beilein Jr.）辩称，现存的史学已将李分流为将军或普通人，但实际上，他身份的这两个要素无法分开。布鲁克斯·辛普森（Brooks D.

第2部分中的文章探讨了普通人，男人和女人，北方人和南方人，士兵和平民在家庭和战争之间的联系。乔纳森·怀特（Jonathan W. White）研究了士兵书信中叙述的家庭梦想，这些梦想如何表明家庭在有意识和无意识中对士兵的生活起着至关重要的作用。这些梦想为士兵提供了身心上的安慰，也可能成为表达对与家人分离的焦虑的一种手段。怀特的工作侧重于家庭提供的心理支持，而李安·怀特斯的文章则考察了家庭为战争做出的重要物资供应。货物和金钱都在家庭和战场之间来回移动。怀特还展示了这一供应链如何在战争中维持家庭不平等，因为士兵取决于其家庭可以派遣什么，而那些家庭却不能牺牲这些条件的士兵无疑会遭受这种短缺的困扰。朱莉·穆吉克（Julie A. Mujic）在威斯康星州家庭中所做的工作使用写给各州政客的信来表明，妇女如何通过改变家庭的位置，弯曲家庭并向外扩展以包围战场来应对战争的破坏（第102页） 。即使妇女自愿提供物资并将家庭的照料功能带给士兵，她们也希望国家促进这种互动，从而利用战争的紧急状况来重新构建家庭与国家的关系。

第三部分超越了情感上或物质上的联系，探索了家庭与战场的真正融合，从而造成了严重的流离失所和破坏。丽莎·滕德里希·弗兰克（Lisa Tendrich Frank）辩称，在联盟军的道路上强行驱逐南方家庭是一种蓄意的军事策略，“旨在模糊区分通常使平民与敌方战斗人员分开的区分”（第138页）。玛格丽特·斯托里（Margaret Storey）探索了这一策略的另一面，联盟官员的妻子在被占领土上建立了家庭。这种被破坏和建造的家庭都成为联盟对这块领土的控制的象征，这超出了战场上的胜利。Andrew K. Frank提供了另一个...