Podcast Summary:

Podcast: New Books Network
Host: Dr. Miranda Melcher
Guest: Dr. Aaron Sheehan-Dean
Book Discussed: Fighting with the Past: How Seventeenth-Century History Shaped the American Civil War (UNC Press, 2025)
Release Date: October 12, 2025

Episode Overview

This episode explores Dr. Aaron Sheehan-Dean’s new book, which investigates how Americans of the mid-19th century looked back to the English Civil War and the 17th-century British past to make sense of their own colossal national crisis—the American Civil War. The discussion reveals how both Northern and Southern Americans, including key policy-makers and influential public intellectuals, drew historical analogies and lessons from the English Civil Wars, shaping identities, justifying strategies, and wrestling with moral questions of legitimacy, rebellion, violence, and postwar peace.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Origins and Motivation of the Project

• Aaron Sheehan-Dean’s Background: Teaches U.S. 19th-century history at LSU. His prior book explored Civil War-era conflicts globally and sparked his interest in how Americans referenced Cromwell and the 17th century.
• Triggering Curiosity: Noted frequent references to Cromwell, particularly from Confederates criticizing Lincoln as a “military despot,” leading to the realization that both sides in the U.S. Civil War were drawing deeply from English Civil War analogies.
  • “What I discovered as I pulled on that thread was that... memories of and analogies to the English Civil Wars of the 17th century were threaded all throughout the American conflict.” — Sheehan-Dean [03:04]

2. How 19th-Century Americans Learned About the English Civil War

• Popular Historical Reading: Largely through widely-read works such as Macaulay’s History of England and Carlyle’s edition of Cromwell’s speeches.
• Cultural Saturation: The English Civil Wars were discussed in newspapers, reviews, and popular circles—not through formal education, but through adult reading.
  • “I was really surprised by the saturation that this conversation had among everyday Americans... They did actually come to know this history.” — Sheehan-Dean [04:56]

3. Americans’ Interpretations and Uses of English Civil War History

• Basic Dichotomy: Americans viewed the conflict as a struggle between royalist “Cavaliers” and anti-monarchist “Puritans” under Cromwell, but misread or simplified 17th-century allegiances to fit their own polarizations.
• Revisionism and Myth-Making: The parliamentary or Puritan side was recast as proto-democratic for Northern, progressive Americans and as a dangerous source of instability for Southern conservatives.
  • “19th-century Americans, I would say... sort of misinterpret...this history in ways to read the parliamentary forces as lowercase D democrats, which they are generally not.” — Sheehan-Dean [07:36]

4. Who Embraced Which Historical Identity?

• Mapping onto Sectional Identities:
  • Confederates (Southern slaveholders): Embraced the cavalier/royalist identity, valorizing hierarchy, tradition, and order, and began to openly reject Puritan/abolitionist “ultra-liberty men.”
    • “White southerners... attach themselves to the vision of the cavalier and to the hierarchy that royalism represents...” — Sheehan-Dean [10:52]
  • Northern Abolitionists: Embraced the Puritan/Cromwellian radical tradition, with figures like John Brown invoking Cromwell.
• Political Function: These identities justified both the Confederacy’s claim to distinct nationhood and the North’s claim to a righteous, reforming cause.

5. The Analogy’s Role in Escalation and Legitimacy Debates

• Past as a Guide—and a Goad: Comparison to the English Civil Wars fueled the logic of confrontation, with both sides seeing themselves as heirs to historic, irreconcilable conflict.
  • “Reading the past can lead us towards violence, not away from it.” — Sheehan-Dean [13:30]
• Debates Over Legitimacy:
  • Northerners compared the Confederacy’s rebellion to the illegitimate Irish Rebellion of 1641 (cast as barbaric and doomed), distinguishing it from the “virtuous” American Revolution.
  • Southern claims of legitimate resistance drew selectively from the same era.

6. Historical Analogy in Violence and Military Policy

• Abolitionist Radicalization:
  • Rhetoric referencing Cromwell and “hard war” tactics—invoking even Cromwell’s brutal campaigns in Ireland—as justifications for total war and emancipation.
  • “Abolitionists, the country’s only genuine pacifists before the Civil War, become leading proponents of hard war.” — Sheehan-Dean [22:21]
• Northern Moderates vs. Radicals: Lincoln and moderates navigated between radical precedent and conservative cautions about excessive executive power, often using the English past to frame policy.

7. Influence on Postwar Peace and Reconstruction

• Land Confiscation Controversy:
  • Radicals wanted to emulate Cromwell’s punitive land redistribution in defeated Ireland; moderates and conservatives cited the counterproof of perpetual Irish unrest to argue against vindictive settlement.
  • “Moderates like Lincoln are swayed... by these Macaulay-like arguments for a generous peace at the... end of the war.” — Sheehan-Dean [37:04]

8. Lessons for Historical Thinking Today

• Cautions on Analogy: Analogies shape not just our understanding of the past but also present-day decisions—and are always selective, distorted, and slippery.
  • “I want us to use analogies... carefully and... as clear-eyed about them as we can.” — Sheehan-Dean [42:38]
• Contemporary Relevance: The time span between the U.S. Civil War and the English Civil Wars is roughly the same as between today and the U.S. Civil War, highlighting ongoing challenges in using history to inform present politics.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

On the Use—and Abuse—of Analogies:

“The ways that 19th-century Americans use the 17th century... analogies lead us, you know, almost invisibly into positions that we might not adopt... in the cold light of day.”
—Sheehan-Dean [42:38]

On Abolitionists’ Turn to Hard War:

“Abolitionists had been the country’s only genuine pacifists before the Civil War... becoming advocates of hard war... because they see that this war, if long and kind of vigorous enough, will require the emancipation of slavery.”
—Sheehan-Dean [22:21]

Lincoln as a Student of History & Cautious Moderate:

“Lincoln is working hard to navigate a kind of middle path between... a royalist [and] a Puritan inspired parliamentary radical.”
—Sheehan-Dean [28:36]

On the Relevance of Historical Process:

“Even if we like what the outcomes are now, figuring out a better understanding of how we got there is really key.”
—Host, Dr. Miranda Melcher [36:33]

Important Segment Timestamps

• Introduction and Why the Book — [02:53]
• How Americans Learned About the 17th Century — [04:35]
• Who Claimed “Cavalier” and “Puritan” Identities — [10:41]
• The Analogies and their Political Consequences — [13:13]
• Legitimacy, the Irish Rebellion, and Northern Justifications — [16:58]
• Impact on War, Violence, and Radicalization — [22:21]
• Postwar Debates and the Example of Ireland — [37:04]
• Historical Lessons and Analogies Today — [42:38]
• Preview of Next Project — [48:47]

Tone and Style

• Sheehan-Dean is thoughtful, deeply knowledgeable, and candid when discussing misreadings and “dangerous” uses of analogy.
• The host, Dr. Melcher, steers with curiosity and a desire for nuance, emphasizing the value—and complexity—of using the past to understand both itself and the present.

Takeaways

• Both Confederates and Northerners invoked 17th-century English history for self-justification, identity, and strategy.
• Historical analogies, especially as wielded by politicians and public intellectuals, can reinforce divisions and help escalate conflicts.
• Recognizing the limits and transformations involved in analogical thinking is not just an academic concern, but an ongoing public necessity.
• Nuanced use of history—embracing complexity and specificity—remains vital for understanding both the past and our current choices.

Looking Forward

Sheehan-Dean’s next project will extend the story, exploring how the legacies of war—on military power, civil liberties, the state, and the expansion west—shaped American society through Reconstruction and into the 20th century, possibly via the lens of the Sherman brothers’ divergent careers.

Recommended: For listeners interested in history, politics, and the ethics of analogy, this episode is both a fascinating story of the past and a meditation on its ongoing power.