Carl Creason - Profile on Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Papers by Carl Creason

Past Imperfect, 2013

and author of numerous scholarly works, the American Civil War "was the first major war in which ... more and author of numerous scholarly works, the American Civil War "was the first major war in which both sides were fully armed with rifle muskets" (p. 35). 1 For Civil War military historians, Hess's claim necessitates an accurate understanding of the rifle musket's role in Civil War

Catholic Confederates: Faith and Duty in the Civil War South by Gracjan Kraszewski

Shedding Light on Kentucky’s Jackson Purchase Region during the Civil War

The whole world seems to be getting out of joint": The Catholic Response to the Start of the Civil War in the Border South

U.S. Catholic Historian, 2017

Abstract:Catholic clergy from Missouri, Kentucky, and Maryland offered a unique interpretation of... more Abstract:Catholic clergy from Missouri, Kentucky, and Maryland offered a unique interpretation of events that transpired from the presidential election of 1860 through the Confederate invasion of Kentucky in the fall of 1862. Due to their location within the border region, where sympathies remained divided throughout the Civil War, the clergy sought to remain apolitical while advocating a peaceful resolution to the national crisis. Despite their endorsements of neutrality and compromise, Catholic prelates and priests from the region remained openly critical of the perceived negative influence of radical religion in American society. Border State clergy viewed the triumph of the Republican Party, the secession movement, and the start of the war as products of Protestant fanaticism in the United States. Catholic clergy argued that if more Americans embraced Catholic principles, especially respect for the law and the maintenance of social order, then secession and civil war could have been avoided.

Slavery and War in the Americas: Race, Citizenship, and State Building in the United States and Brazil, 1861–1870

History: Reviews of New Books, 2016

for political success. So, too, did Johnson. Like the president, Johnson navigated an intraparty ... more for political success. So, too, did Johnson. Like the president, Johnson navigated an intraparty landscape fraught with division between Northern and Southern Democrats that forced him to field his own share of assaults from the liberal fringe. The result, as Donaldson adroitly details, was an important period of bipartisan compromise and moderation. Johnson lined up the needed support of moderate Democrats for Eisenhower’s foreign policy initiatives, and the Republican president signed much of Johnson’s moderate, half-a-loaf domestic legislation with little to no contest. This political quid pro quo underpinned much of American policy during the Eisenhower years, from Social Security expansion and the Federal Highway project to the creation of NASA and the Eisenhower Doctrine, to the tepid enforcement of desegregation and Civil Rights. By decade’s end, however, Donaldson argues that this fragile coalition began to crumble, as the fringe of both parties increasingly exerted greater political weight. In short, the “middle way” gave way to the polarizing tumult of the 1960s. The author’s intended audience is an important factor in weighing the contributions of this book. As in his previous works, Donaldson targets general readers, especially undergraduate students. The book is a valuable contribution and supplement to American history courses, providing students with a well-written and succinct account of politics and policy making during the Eisenhower years. Here, students get a clear look at the vying factions within the Republican and Democratic parties and how these factions helped shift both the parties and their respective coalitions during the early post–World War II era. Moreover, by highlighting the strategic underpinnings of policymaking that gave rise to bipartisan moderation under Eisenhower, Donaldson offers students the opportunity to delineate between politics and governance, or, to paraphrase Carl Becker, “things said and things done.” For scholars in the field, Donaldson’s contributions may be less compelling. The book is largely a work of synthesis, supplemented with an array of primary source material. As a result, political historians will likely not deem the book’s thrust and insights profoundly new. Some may take issue with the fact that the “secret coalition” was actually well known, and the policy examples of this bipartisan coalition are covered too succinctly by the author and require deeper analysis. Historians may also argue that the true breakdown of this moderate coalition occurred during the Nixon Administration, rather than in the early 1960s. These critiques aside, Donaldson does contribute to the scholarly discourse by refocusing attention on the center. In many respects, the book itself carves out a middle ground amid the pillars of scholarship on the era, from the historical works on American conservatism and civil rights to Robert Cairo’s celebrated biographies of Lyndon Johnson. Much of this literature spotlights the political forces pulling at the center. The Secret Coalition reminds us that, amidst such tensions, there was a period when “moderation prevailed, the center held, and the people’s work was done” (x).

United, Yet Divided: An Analysis of Bishops Martin John Spalding and John Baptist Purcell during the Civil War Era

American Catholic Studies, 2013

The paper explores the views of American Catholic bishops during the Civil War period. As a whole... more The paper explores the views of American Catholic bishops during the Civil War period. As a whole, the Catholic Church proclaimed peace and public neutrality during the war. Yet despite urging of the Vatican for clergy to remain uninvolved in American politics, many bishops and other clergymen developed specific Union or Confederate sympathies, thereby creating divisions within the American Catholic Church. Such an example of divergent sympathies can be found through a comparison of Bishop Martin John Spalding of Louisville, Kentucky, and Archbishop John Baptist Purcell of Cincinnati, Ohio. The bishops' letters, journals, and diocesan publications illustrate the rift within the American Catholic Church of the time period. The case studies of Spalding and Purcell serve as clear examples of opposing sympathies. Spalding's conservative, Southern roots evolved into a pro-slavery, anti-Lincoln view, while Purcell's immigrant, urban background inspired him to promote an abolitionist, pro-Union agenda.

The Chattanooga Campaign by Ed. Steven E. Woodworth, Charles D. Grear

Civil War History, 2014

Dr. Mackey never hesitated to answer questions, read drafts of my work, write recommendation lett... more Dr. Mackey never hesitated to answer questions, read drafts of my work, write recommendation letters for scholarships, or to chat about history, historiography, the academy, politics, or life after graduate school. I owe Dr. Mackey my sincerest gratitude for guiding me through the process of writing this thesis and for improving its arguments and prose along the way. In addition to Dr. Mackey, I thank Dr. A. Glenn Crothers for encouraging me to pursue the topic and for agreeing to serve as the second reader on my thesis committee. Dr. Jasmine Farrier also deserves recognition for serving as the third reader and for agreeing to join the committee late during the semester. I also want to thank other members of the University of Louisville Department of History, especially those who served on the Graduate Committee and awarded me a Graduate Teaching Assistantship during the 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 academic years. v The GTA position afforded me the opportunity to gain post-secondary teaching experience as well as provided a generous stipend that allowed me to focus on research and writing. Furthermore, I want to recognize Drs. Malissa Taylor and John McLeod, both of whom accepted me as a teaching assistant and served as valuable mentors. As I have learned during the final weeks of my graduate career, the reading, research, and writing components of the M.A. degree often constitute the "easy parts" of the process. Completing paperwork, organizing committees and defense dates, and formatting the thesis to the required style have produced several "hiccups and headaches." Fortunately for me and my classmates, Dr. Daniel Krebs, Director of Graduate Studies, and Lee Keeling, Senior Program Assistant, offered timely and invaluable assistance throughout the process. In fact, I doubt any department has a more efficient and accommodating administrative duo than the Department of History. Robin Carroll and Lee Keeling have been remarkable in helping me allocate funding for research trips and ensuring that I adhered to all required deadlines during the last two years. I also thank Lee for her "motherly" attributes and regular treats. In addition to the faculty and staff in the department, members of my cohort-especially Hannah O'Daniel[s], Benjamin Gies, and Eric Brumfield-helped make my experience worthwhile and enjoyable. Together we learned much about history and historiography, engaged in thought-provoking political discussions, and shared an inordinate number of laughs but not enough beers. I would not have succeeded at the University of Louisville without the guidance and tutelage I received while earning my B.A. in History at Murray State University. Drs. Duane Bolin and James Humphreys, and Mr. Ted F. Belue have and continue to be great friends, teachers, and mentors. In particular, Dr. Humphreys encouraged me to vi pursue graduate studies in History, seek publication opportunities, and present papers at academic conferences. I thank him for his guidance and for helping me "build a C.V." before beginning graduate work. In writing this thesis, I have relied on several professionals outside of the academy, particularly staff members at The Filson Historical Society, the Kentucky Historical Society,