Anybody watching the Civil War on PBS this week?

[country lady]

EweSheep, a story that has passed down through our family (BTW Southerners are great story tellers) and told many times by my dad is that his grandfather was 14 when there was a Union camp in what is now Union City, TN. The young Union soldiers grabbed grandpa's hat and every time he made a dive for it, the hat was tossed to another soldier. As the story went, finally the commanding officer said, "give that boy back his hat!" Grandpa lived to be in his 80s and lived with my dad's family in his last years.

Another thing that I was surprised to read is that there were slaves in the north, as some of you mentioned. NY was mentioned in one book. It was written that the north thought that slavery would die out in the south on its own but then the cotton gin was invented. Another story is that quilts were hung to signal a safe house during the underground railroad, but that may not be true because some of the quilt patterns mentioned didn't exist during that period; they came later. Anyway, it is a fascinating period. Critics praised Grant's writing skills in his bio. He knew he was dying and needed money for his wife to live on.

I read that only 7% of southerners had slaves. Some books I read said it was about states' rights. No doubt it was several issues. Back then, though, it was the United States of America ARE (plural).

 

[EweSheep]

As for the quilts, there were several patterns out there and yes we did have underground slave trains going thru Illinois.

I believe the cotton gin was made around the time of the War but after the war, it became more efficent and much faster. Slavery being gone, now we had share croppers, almost just as bad as slavery. I remember being in several plantations, particuarly the Arcadian Village somewhere in LA, they did show us how they were done and several of their parents and grandparents were sharecroppers. They would be at the mercy of their landowners when their crops died.

Chickamunga reenactment was great but a big yellow dust bowl, took about four to five washings out of my dresses to get them clean again. Never saw so many men in one place even I was a bit miffed about not being with my friend's husband as part of our unit but they didn't allow women in the camp so I ended up going with several friends who kindly snuck me in at the KOA camp LOL. It was HOT but the Southern boys were more kinder and more gentler and more polite to the women than I did receive from our Northern guys. Such differences!

I hated Sherman with a passion...just hated him for what he had done. But like my dad said, war is HELL. No denying that either.

As our Southern reenactors, majority said state's rights and keep their way of living alone.

 

[WyandotteTX]

I am not trying to say that racism did not exist whole heartedly on both sides of the war. It was part of our society and had been for several centuries with the enslavement of others. I was not trying to veil an accusation of racism, it was only a statement of what exists. You may say, how does this guy know what he is talking about calling others racist? I grew up in a very small town in west central Texas that had not had an African-American live in the country for well over 125 years and the last one that did was falsely accused of rape and burned alive. I have witnessed personally people donning the white hoods and chanting "White Power" and burning a 40 foot cross..... I grew up in the atmosphere of hate and heard all of the rhetoric that anyone might choose to emit. I have had to battle that past of growing up in such an atmosphere within myself by trying to become as knowledgeable of what the truth might be.
Are there Villains on each side of the war? OF course there is, ITS WAR. It always has a way of bringing out the best and worst in humanity. Mistreatment of others and wasting men in battle was two sided throughout the war. Picketts charge was a futile assault that annihilated an entire division. Andersonville prison camp in the South would rival any Nazi concentration camp from World War II in the scope of its atrocities.......the list on both sides would be long in terms of mistreatment of humans.
I know all of our pasts as Americans is checkered with heroes and villains, the Civil War is no different. I only choose to attempt to look at it objectively and not place blame on either region.
I am not trying to offend anyone by talking about this, only trying to share my passion of history.

 

[Q9]

Quote:
You thinly veiled an accusation of racism on the part of mamaKate. Don't try to tell me you didn't accuse her of it, albeit indirectly.

As far as Andersonville goes, they literally could not help the conditions there. Sherman and his goon squads had cut almost all of the railways that would otherwise have delivered suppplies - not to mention burning quite a few of the farms. Then, on the other hand, is the Union's Camp Douglas. Their railways and farms were 100% intact, but as "retribution" for Andersonville "crimes" they intentionally made it a living hell for their prisoners.

And I still say you don't know what you're talking about when you accuse others of racism - if you haven't met them, and if they've never said nor done anything racist, then you cannot possibly accuse them of such.

You wanna know what the real issues were behind the war? POWER. The North had such a majority in the House of Representatives that they could pass a law without a single Southern vote. Hence, the South's determination to get slave states in the West. It wasn't about slavery itself - the Southwest is totally unsuitable for agriculture anyway - it was about balancing out Northern power. In addition to that, the North had imposed a massive tarriff that really hurt the South's economy, and almost all the revenue from said tarriff went to the North. Lincoln had promised to support an amendment making slavery permanent, so he was obviously no threat to slavery as an institution. The mention of slavery in SC's Secession Proclamation was almost entirely a unifying issue - something that a majority could agree on.

Interestingly, only a tiny percentage of Southerners actually owned slaves. Now try and tell me they were fighting to preserve slavery.

 

[Robo]

Quote:
You thinly veiled an accusation of racism on the part of mamaKate. Don't try to tell me you didn't accuse her of it, albeit indirectly.

As far as Andersonville goes, they literally could not help the conditions there. Sherman and his goon squads had cut almost all of the railways that would otherwise have delivered suppplies - not to mention burning quite a few of the farms. Then, on the other hand, is the Union's Camp Douglas. Their railways and farms were 100% intact, but as "retribution" for Andersonville "crimes" they intentionally made it a living hell for their prisoners.

And I still say you don't know what you're talking about when you accuse others of racism - if you haven't met them, and if they've never said nor done anything racist, then you cannot possibly accuse them of such.

You wanna know what the real issues were behind the war? POWER. The North had such a majority in the House of Representatives that they could pass a law without a single Southern vote. Hence, the South's determination to get slave states in the West. It wasn't about slavery itself - the Southwest is totally unsuitable for agriculture anyway - it was about balancing out Northern power. In addition to that, the North had imposed a massive tarriff that really hurt the South's economy, and almost all the revenue from said tarriff went to the North. Lincoln had promised to support an amendment making slavery permanent, so he was obviously no threat to slavery as an institution. The mention of slavery in SC's Secession Proclamation was almost entirely a unifying issue - something that a majority could agree on.

Interestingly, only a tiny percentage of Southerners actually owned slaves. Now try and tell me they were fighting to preserve slavery.

 

[country lady]

I have in my genealogy records a copy of the War Department, The Military Secretary's Office paper where my ancestor applied for a pension. It's not clear if he got it. but two brothers were interned at Rock Island Prison, Illinois, where one died as a POW. The letter states that he was captured at Missionary Ridge, Nov. 25, 1863 and was released on May 22, 1865, on taking the oath of allegiance. The brother who died was also captured at Missionary Ridge, TN, with his brother. He died on December 27, 1863 and is buried there in grave #80.c.c.

The book by Robert Remini, "At the Edge of the Precipice: Henry Clay and the Compromise that Saved the Union" said that there was almost a Civil
War in 1850, but had it happened then, it was likely the South would win. Those extra years gave the North time to build up its resources.

 

[WyandotteTX]

One thing that is known is that the great majority of deaths on both sides during the war was from disease, not combat.

I am not trying to fight the war over here either. I just stated it was and is a great program to watch.
There were 9 million people in the Confederacy at the start of the war and 3.5 million of them were slaves. They may have been owned by a small population of people but that does not diminish the magnitude of that issue.

 

[KristyHall]

Quote:
agreed. There are different camps of people including the camp of people who want to completely bury the fact that while states rights were a huge portion, and that slavery was dieing out on its own, like most wars, the wealthy, and their interests, including their desire to own slaves, drove the war just as much as the other issues.

And if there had not been an official measure and law in place (which war or no war eventually there would have been a law put in place) Slavery would remain, just in smaller and smaller numbers. Look at today.

We still have an illegal slave trade in this country that is far more common than people think. Many wealthy Americans have been busted for forcing undocumented immigrants, particularly children, to work for hours without pay, (among other things that are too horrible to mention on a family board) some forcibly brought into the US, some people forced to do these things are US citizens as well.

BTW I'm an Alabamian Born and raised.

 

[Q9]

Quote:
agreed. There are different camps of people including the camp of people who want to completely bury the fact that while states rights were a huge portion, and that slavery was dieing out on its own, like most wars, the wealthy, and their interests, including their desire to own slaves, drove the war just as much as the other issues.

And if there had not been an official measure and law in place (which war or no war eventually there would have been a law put in place) Slavery would remain, just in smaller and smaller numbers. Look at today.

We still have an illegal slave trade in this country that is far more common than people think. Many wealthy Americans have been busted for forcing undocumented immigrants, particularly children, to work for hours without pay, (among other things that are too horrible to mention on a family board) some forcibly brought into the US, some people forced to do these things are US citizens as well.

BTW I'm an Alabamian Born and raised.

Which totally ignores the fact that the Republican party of the era posed literally no threat to Southern slavery. The idea that Southerners were stupid enough to be convinced to fight a war for 7% of the population to own slaves is downright insulting, and the idea that they were actually concerned that Lincoln would abolish slavery is quite simply illogical, with nothing resembling a basis in reality. What drove the war was Lincoln's rabid desire to prevent Southern independence. If it weren't for him and his dishonest but very clever maneuvering, there would have been no war, and slavery would have ended peacefully, without 600,000 deaths.

 

[KristyHall]

Quote:
agreed. There are different camps of people including the camp of people who want to completely bury the fact that while states rights were a huge portion, and that slavery was dieing out on its own, like most wars, the wealthy, and their interests, including their desire to own slaves, drove the war just as much as the other issues.

And if there had not been an official measure and law in place (which war or no war eventually there would have been a law put in place) Slavery would remain, just in smaller and smaller numbers. Look at today.

We still have an illegal slave trade in this country that is far more common than people think. Many wealthy Americans have been busted for forcing undocumented immigrants, particularly children, to work for hours without pay, (among other things that are too horrible to mention on a family board) some forcibly brought into the US, some people forced to do these things are US citizens as well.

BTW I'm an Alabamian Born and raised.

Which totally ignores the fact that the Republican party of the era posed literally no threat to Southern slavery. The idea that Southerners were stupid enough to be convinced to fight a war for 7% of the population to own slaves is downright insulting, and the idea that they were actually concerned that Lincoln would abolish slavery is quite simply illogical, with nothing resembling a basis in reality. What drove the war was Lincoln's rabid desire to prevent Southern independence. If it weren't for him and his dishonest but very clever maneuvering, there would have been no war, and slavery would have ended peacefully, without 600,000 deaths.

do you honestly think any country is going to let any part of it leave just willy nilly? Seriously? No matter the reasoning, it was about power and control on ALL Sides not just the north. The rich southerners running the south wanted to do what they wanted to do, the rich northerners said no, so the south threw a tantrum and a war ensued. That's usually how wars result, someone wants power, resources, and mates,someone else wants the same, someone throws a tantrum, people die. (yes i know gross over simplification)