APUSH Period 5 (1844-1877) Study Guide
This period encompasses significant events like Manifest Destiny, the Mexican-American War, escalating slavery debates, the Civil War, and Reconstruction’s complex aftermath.
Overview of Period 5
Period 5 in APUSH, spanning 1844-1877, represents a transformative era defined by expansion, division, and ultimately, civil war. The core theme revolves around the nation’s relentless westward expansion fueled by Manifest Destiny – the belief in America’s divinely ordained right to stretch across the continent. This expansion, however, ignited fierce debates over the extension of slavery into newly acquired territories.
The period witnessed escalating sectionalism as the North and South clashed over economic systems, political power, and moral principles. Attempts at compromise, like popular sovereignty, proved insufficient to quell the growing tensions. The election of 1860 served as the catalyst for secession, leading to the devastating Civil War.
Following the war, Reconstruction aimed to rebuild the South and integrate formerly enslaved people into society, but faced significant challenges and ultimately fell short of its goals. This period fundamentally reshaped American society, politics, and the very definition of freedom and equality, leaving a lasting legacy still felt today.
Key Concept 5.1: Expansion & Manifest Destiny
Key Concept 5.1 centers on the dramatic territorial expansion of the United States in the mid-19th century, driven by the ideology of Manifest Destiny. This belief asserted that Americans were destined to expand their dominion and spread democracy and capitalism across the entire North American continent. Economic motivations, including access to resources and new markets, played a crucial role, alongside the desire for land ownership – exemplified by the Homestead Act offering 160 acres.
Religious refuge also spurred westward movement, as groups sought new opportunities and freedom. However, this expansion came at a cost, particularly for Native Americans, who were displaced and subjected to conflict. The acquisition of new territories, like Texas, inevitably reignited the debate over slavery’s expansion, creating deep sectional divisions and setting the stage for future conflict.
Understanding the motivations behind westward expansion and the consequences for all involved is central to grasping this key concept.
Westward Expansion: Motivations
The surge of westward expansion during this period stemmed from a complex interplay of economic, social, and political motivations. The allure of economic opportunity was paramount, with settlers seeking fertile farmland, valuable mineral resources – like gold – and new avenues for trade. The promise of readily available land, further incentivized by legislation like the Homestead Act (granting 160 acres), drew countless individuals westward.
Beyond economics, many sought religious refuge, escaping persecution or desiring to establish communities based on their beliefs. Overpopulation in eastern states and the appeal of a fresh start also contributed. The pervasive belief in Manifest Destiny, the idea that Americans were divinely ordained to expand across the continent, provided a powerful ideological justification.
However, it’s crucial to acknowledge the darker side: displacement and conflict with Native American populations, and the exacerbation of the slavery debate as new territories raised questions about their future status.
The Mexican-American War (1846-1848)
The Mexican-American War, ignited by territorial disputes – particularly over Texas’s border – and American expansionist ambitions, dramatically reshaped the map of North America. President James K. Polk, a staunch believer in Manifest Destiny, actively pursued the acquisition of California and New Mexico, leading to escalating tensions with Mexico.
The war itself was relatively short but decisive for the United States. Key battles, including those led by Zachary Taylor and Winfield Scott, resulted in American victories and the capture of major Mexican cities, including Mexico City. Despite internal opposition from abolitionists who feared the expansion of slavery into newly acquired territories, the war enjoyed widespread popular support.
The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848) formally ended the conflict, ceding vast territories – including California, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and Wyoming – to the United States. This acquisition fueled further debate over slavery and ultimately contributed to the growing sectionalism that would tear the nation apart.
Territorial Acquisitions & Their Impact
The mid-19th century witnessed a dramatic expansion of the United States’ territory, profoundly impacting its economic, political, and social landscape. Acquisitions like Texas (1845), following its independence from Mexico, and the vast lands gained from the Mexican-American War (1846-1848) – including California, New Mexico, and Arizona – significantly increased the nation’s size and resources.
However, these acquisitions intensified the ongoing debate over slavery’s expansion. The question of whether these new territories would be admitted as free or slave states became a central point of contention, fueling sectional tensions between the North and the South. Attempts to resolve this issue, such as the Compromise of 1850, proved temporary and ultimately unsuccessful.
Furthermore, the acquisition of new lands spurred economic growth, particularly in agriculture and resource extraction. The Homestead Act of 1862 encouraged westward migration by offering settlers free land, contributing to the development of the American West and its unique culture. These territorial gains fundamentally reshaped the nation’s identity and trajectory.
Key Concept 5.2: Sectionalism & Slavery
The period between 1844 and 1877 was defined by escalating sectionalism, primarily fueled by the contentious issue of slavery. Economic disparities between the industrializing North and the agrarian South, reliant on enslaved labor, exacerbated these divisions. Moral arguments against slavery gained momentum in the North, while the South vehemently defended it as essential to their way of life.
Political compromises, like the Compromise of 1850, attempted to maintain a balance between free and slave states, but ultimately failed to address the underlying moral and economic conflicts. The concept of “popular sovereignty,” allowing residents of territories to decide on slavery, proved highly problematic, leading to violence and instability;
The rise of abolitionist movements, coupled with events like the publication of Uncle Tom’s Cabin, further inflamed passions. These factors collectively contributed to a growing sense of division and animosity, setting the stage for the nation’s eventual descent into civil war. The future of slavery became inextricably linked to the very survival of the Union.
Popular Sovereignty & Compromises
Attempts to resolve the escalating conflict over slavery’s expansion centered around the principle of popular sovereignty – letting residents of territories decide for themselves whether to permit slavery. This idea, championed by figures like Stephen Douglas, aimed to bypass the contentious debate in Congress, but proved disastrous in practice.
The Compromise of 1850 temporarily eased tensions by admitting California as a free state, enacting a stricter Fugitive Slave Act, and allowing popular sovereignty in Utah and New Mexico territories. However, the Fugitive Slave Act intensified Northern opposition to slavery, while popular sovereignty in Kansas and Nebraska led to violence.
The Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854) explicitly authorized popular sovereignty in these territories, effectively repealing the Missouri Compromise. This sparked “Bleeding Kansas,” a period of intense conflict between pro-slavery and anti-slavery settlers, demonstrating the inherent instability of relying on local decision-making in such a charged environment. These compromises ultimately failed to provide lasting solutions.
The Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854)
Introduced by Senator Stephen Douglas, the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 dramatically altered the landscape of the slavery debate. It proposed organizing the Kansas and Nebraska territories, allowing residents to decide the slavery question through popular sovereignty – a direct challenge to the Missouri Compromise of 1820.
This act effectively repealed the Missouri Compromise’s restriction on slavery north of the 36°30′ parallel, igniting fierce opposition from abolitionists and those who believed in containing slavery. Proponents argued it allowed for local self-determination, while opponents saw it as a pro-slavery maneuver designed to expand slavery’s reach;
The immediate consequence was “Bleeding Kansas,” a period of violent clashes between pro-slavery “border ruffians” from Missouri and anti-slavery settlers. Both sides rushed to establish dominance, resulting in fraudulent elections and escalating bloodshed. The act fundamentally destabilized the nation, fracturing existing political alignments and paving the way for further sectional conflict. It demonstrated the failure of compromise and fueled the march towards civil war.
Dred Scott Decision (1857)
The Dred Scott v. Sandford Supreme Court decision stands as a pivotal and deeply controversial ruling in American history. Dred Scott, an enslaved man, sued for his freedom after residing in free states and territories with his owner. The Court, led by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, delivered a sweeping decision against Scott, denying his claim to citizenship and freedom.
The ruling asserted that enslaved people were not and could never be citizens of the United States, thus lacking the standing to sue in federal court. Furthermore, it declared the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional, arguing Congress lacked the power to prohibit slavery in the territories. This effectively opened all territories to slavery, intensifying sectional tensions.
The Dred Scott decision was a victory for the South and a devastating blow to abolitionists. It inflamed anti-slavery sentiment in the North, further polarizing the nation and pushing it closer to the brink of civil war. The decision fueled the Republican Party’s rise and solidified the belief that the slavery issue could only be resolved through drastic measures.
John Brown & Escalating Tensions
John Brown, a fervent abolitionist, became a central figure in the escalating tensions leading to the Civil War through his radical actions. Believing violence was necessary to end slavery, Brown led a small group in the Pottawatomie Massacre (1856), killing five pro-slavery settlers in Kansas – a direct response to the violence of “Bleeding Kansas.”
His most audacious act was the raid on Harpers Ferry (1859), an attempt to seize a federal armory and incite a slave rebellion. Though the raid failed, and Brown was quickly captured and executed, it had a profound impact. Southerners viewed Brown as a terrorist, confirming their fears of Northern aggression and slave uprisings.
Conversely, many Northerners hailed Brown as a martyr for the cause of freedom, further solidifying the moral divide. His trial and execution were widely publicized, becoming rallying points for both sides. Brown’s actions, though controversial, dramatically heightened sectional animosity and accelerated the nation’s descent into civil war, showcasing the irreconcilable differences over slavery.
Key Concept 5.3: Causes of the Civil War
The Civil War stemmed from a complex interplay of long-standing sectional differences, primarily centered on slavery. Economic disparities fueled tensions; the North’s industrial economy contrasted sharply with the South’s agrarian, slave-labor system. Political failures to compromise, like the breakdown of popular sovereignty in Kansas, exacerbated the divide.
States’ rights arguments, particularly regarding the expansion of slavery into new territories, became increasingly prominent. The election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860, despite not being on the ballot in many Southern states, proved the final catalyst. Southern states feared Lincoln’s administration would ultimately abolish slavery, threatening their way of life and economic foundation.
South Carolina’s secession in December 1860 triggered a chain reaction, with other Southern states following suit, forming the Confederate States of America. The attack on Fort Sumter in April 1861 officially initiated the war, born from decades of unresolved conflict and irreconcilable differences over slavery and its future.
The Election of 1860 & Secession
The 1860 presidential election was a pivotal moment, fracturing the nation along sectional lines. Abraham Lincoln, representing the anti-slavery Republican Party, secured victory despite not appearing on many Southern ballots. His platform opposed the expansion of slavery, alarming Southern states who feared its eventual abolition;
The Democratic Party was deeply divided, fielding multiple candidates – Stephen Douglas, John Breckinridge, and John Bell – further weakening their chances against Lincoln. This split allowed Lincoln to win with a plurality of the popular vote and a majority in the Electoral College.
Following Lincoln’s election, South Carolina formally seceded from the Union in December 1860, initiating a wave of secession across the Deep South. Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas soon followed, establishing the Confederate States of America. These states believed their rights were threatened and that secession was their only recourse, ultimately leading to the outbreak of the Civil War.
The Civil War: Major Events & Strategies
The Civil War commenced with the Confederate attack on Fort Sumter in April 1861. The Union initially aimed to preserve the Union, but the conflict evolved to include the abolition of slavery as a central goal with the Emancipation Proclamation.
Key battles included the First Battle of Bull Run (Manassas), demonstrating the war’s potential length; Antietam, the bloodiest single-day battle, prompting the Emancipation Proclamation; Gettysburg, a turning point favoring the Union; and Vicksburg, granting Union control of the Mississippi River.
Union strategy, known as the Anaconda Plan, involved blockading Southern ports and controlling the Mississippi River to strangle the Confederacy. Confederate strategy focused on defensive warfare and seeking European recognition, particularly from Britain and France, which never fully materialized.
Generals like Ulysses S. Grant and William Tecumseh Sherman led the Union to victory through attrition and total war tactics, while Robert E. Lee commanded the Confederate forces with remarkable skill.
Emancipation Proclamation (1863)
Issued by President Abraham Lincoln on January 1, 1863, the Emancipation Proclamation declared slaves free in Confederate-held territory. It did not free slaves in border states loyal to the Union, or in areas of the Confederacy already under Union control – a strategic decision.
While limited in its immediate practical effect, the Proclamation fundamentally transformed the war’s purpose. It shifted the focus from preserving the Union to also ending slavery, making it a moral crusade. This discouraged European powers, particularly Britain and France, from officially recognizing or aiding the Confederacy, as they were largely opposed to slavery.
The Proclamation authorized the enlistment of African American soldiers into the Union Army and Navy. Nearly 200,000 African Americans served, significantly bolstering Union forces and contributing to ultimate victory.
It represented a crucial step towards the complete abolition of slavery, culminating in the 13th Amendment, and redefined the nation’s understanding of freedom and equality.
Key Concept 5.4: Reconstruction
Reconstruction (1865-1877) aimed to rebuild the South and reintegrate Confederate states into the Union after the Civil War. It involved complex political, social, and economic challenges, marked by differing visions for the nation’s future.
Presidential Reconstruction, under Lincoln and Johnson, favored a lenient approach, focusing on quickly restoring Southern governments with minimal federal intervention. This often led to the re-establishment of systems resembling the pre-war South, with limited protections for freedmen.
Radical Reconstruction, championed by Republicans in Congress, sought more substantial changes, including guaranteeing civil rights for African Americans and dismantling the old Southern power structure. They imposed military rule over the South and demanded ratification of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments.
Despite initial progress, Reconstruction faced fierce resistance from white Southerners, leading to the rise of groups like the Ku Klux Klan. Ultimately, political compromises and waning Northern support led to its abandonment, leaving many of its goals unfulfilled and setting the stage for decades of racial inequality.
Presidential Reconstruction vs. Radical Reconstruction
Following the Civil War, two distinct approaches to Reconstruction emerged: Presidential and Radical. Presidential Reconstruction, initiated by Lincoln and continued by Johnson, prioritized a swift restoration of the Union. It focused on pardoning former Confederates, allowing Southern states to quickly establish new governments, and minimizing federal intervention in their affairs. This plan largely ignored the rights and needs of newly freed slaves.
In contrast, Radical Reconstruction, spearheaded by Republicans in Congress, aimed for a more thorough transformation of the South. Radicals believed in protecting the civil rights of African Americans and dismantling the existing Southern power structure. They advocated for military occupation of the South, the enfranchisement of Black men, and the confiscation of Confederate land.
The clash between these two visions led to intense political battles, including Johnson’s impeachment. Ultimately, Radical Reconstruction gained momentum, resulting in the passage of landmark legislation and constitutional amendments, but faced significant resistance and ultimately proved unsustainable.
The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments
These three constitutional amendments, collectively known as the Reconstruction Amendments, fundamentally reshaped American society and aimed to secure the rights of formerly enslaved people. The 13th Amendment (1865) officially abolished slavery and involuntary servitude throughout the United States, marking a monumental step towards equality.
Following closely, the 14th Amendment (1868) granted citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the US, including former slaves, and guaranteed equal protection under the law. It also prohibited states from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property without due process. This amendment laid the groundwork for future civil rights legislation.
Finally, the 15th Amendment (1870) prohibited the denial of suffrage based on race, color, or previous condition of servitude. While intended to protect Black men’s right to vote, loopholes and discriminatory practices like poll taxes and literacy tests continued to suppress Black voter turnout for decades.
Challenges to Reconstruction & Its End
Reconstruction faced immense resistance from white Southerners determined to restore their pre-war social and political order. Black Codes, enacted by Southern states, severely restricted African Americans’ freedoms and economic opportunities, effectively recreating systems of oppression. White supremacist groups like the Ku Klux Klan used violence and intimidation to suppress Black voters and undermine Reconstruction efforts.
Northern resolve for Reconstruction gradually waned due to economic issues, political fatigue, and a growing focus on westward expansion. The Compromise of 1877 effectively ended Reconstruction by withdrawing federal troops from the South in exchange for Rutherford B. Hayes becoming president.
This withdrawal allowed Southern Democrats to regain control of state governments, leading to the disenfranchisement of Black voters through measures like poll taxes and literacy tests. While Reconstruction failed to achieve full racial equality, it did establish important constitutional principles and laid the foundation for the Civil Rights Movement of the 20th century.
Long-Term Effects of Reconstruction
Despite its ultimate failure to fully integrate African Americans into society, Reconstruction left a lasting legacy. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments fundamentally altered the constitutional landscape, abolishing slavery, granting citizenship to all persons born or naturalized in the US, and prohibiting denial of suffrage based on race. These amendments provided a legal basis for future civil rights struggles.
However, the South remained economically devastated and racially divided for decades. The sharecropping system, while offering some economic opportunity, often trapped Black farmers in cycles of debt and dependence. Jim Crow laws, enacted after Reconstruction’s end, institutionalized segregation and discrimination across the South.
Reconstruction’s failures highlighted the deep-seated racial prejudices within American society and the limitations of federal intervention in state affairs. It also fostered a sense of disillusionment among African Americans, yet simultaneously fueled a determination to continue fighting for equality in the years to come, shaping the trajectory of the Civil Rights Movement.
