|
|
|
|
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/4/2008 5:06:45 PM | I don't worry about it..but it is part of who I come from..I am a true southerner & I want to know the things I don't know about the war between the states..not the emotional lies & myths..not what I was taught in school and what millions believe to be the final truth....I want to know what is not spoken about..
So what will the next war be about.. | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/4/2008 5:33:12 PM |
I don't worry about it..but it is part of who I come from..I am a true southerner & I want to know the things I don't know about the war between the states..not the emotional lies & myths..not what I was taught in school and what millions believe to be the final truth....I want to know what is not spoken about..
So what will the next war be about..
From all indications, the next war will be about taxation and illegal immigration. And it will be a North/South war once again. Only this time it will be fought here in the West. | |
|
Nona37
|
Joined: 12/4/2007
Msg: 53 | |
| the civil war
Posted: 1/4/2008 6:13:08 PM | Slavery actually began in the United States in the North, Massachusetts to be exact. The plantations in the North were matching the slave plantations in the south at one point, and alot of the supposed abolitionist's were also slave owners, therefore, making them hypocrites, during this time within America, both sides were owners of slaves.
Speaking of "indentured servants", Benjamin Franklin was once one of those, and he too was a slave owner, for the record | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/4/2008 7:16:04 PM | Talk about little known facts! Wow! Great post Nona. I'd heard a lot of things about the civil war, and differing theories as to what brought it about.
But, I had never heard that Benjamin Franklin had been an indendured servant, or that slavery had actually been started in the North. Most interesting. This thread has been very enlightening. | |
|
Nona37
|
Joined: 12/4/2007
Msg: 55 | |
| the civil war
Posted: 1/5/2008 2:34:29 AM | | I agree, I've enjoyed reading the responses, hence why I wanted to add what I know as well, I do believe everyone on this thread has added enough material for a book, don't you think? lol | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/5/2008 3:17:41 AM | Slavery actually began in the United States in the North, Massachusetts to be exact. The plantations in the North were matching the slave plantations in the south at one point, and alot of the supposed abolitionist's were also slave owners, therefore, making them hypocrites, during this time within America, both sides were owners of slaves.
At which point were they matching? Certainly not by the period of the civil war. Slavery may have started in the north, but ended LONG before the period under discussion.
Also, those tarrifs?
1857
Congress passes the Tariff of 1857 lowering rates to the lowest level since 1812 to 20%, this is very unpopular in the North and praised in the South.
| |
|
Nona37
|
Joined: 12/4/2007
Msg: 57 | |
| the civil war
Posted: 1/5/2008 3:39:01 AM | Charles:
I will be more exact here. In 1641 Massachusetts became the first
colony to recognize slavery by statute.
Four years later, a ship was sailed out of Boston embarking on a slave
voyage to Africa with stopping in England. By the late 1700s, there
were tens of thousands of Africans who were living in the North
as slaves.
At one time, the Narragansett Plantation matched the Plantations
of Virginia by acreage as well as number of slaves.
I wrote an article on this once, therefore, I will share a good
book in reference to this if you are interested.
"Complicity" How the North Promoted And Prolonged and Profited
from Slavery, it's written by Anne Farrow, Joel Lang and Jennifer
Frank Ballantine.
I do want to state for the record, that where I am acknowledging facts of the Civil War as a whole, I by no means was stating that the South was not guilty of this as well, in fact, I chastise both sides for enslaving human beings, but while accepting the fact it is the history of the United States.
I just viewed the latter part of your statement, seems I am bringing up facts that happened before the date of discussion, my apologies. | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/5/2008 4:21:18 AM | Slavery Comes to America
The first slaves were introduced into the English-American colonies by a Dutch trader, who, in 1619, sold twenty of them to the settlers at Jamestown, Va. After that the trade between North America and Africa was carried on quite vigorously; but some of the colonies remonstrated, and in the Continental Congress, and also in the public mind, there was a strong desire evinced to abolish the slave-trade. Lawrence and Cassandra Southwick were banished from the colony of Massachusetts, in 1658, under penalty of death if they should return.
http://www.sonofthesouth.net/slavery/history-slavery.htm
This site also contains The Slave Trade: Early Roots in Britain
The first Black Regiment of the civil war was the 54th Massachusetts. | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/5/2008 4:41:36 AM | Why does the OP sound like its a response to another post?
That been said,I'm conflicted with the American Civil War.....I mean, it was a war that violated liberty......in order to gain liberty....
I mean, those states had a right to govern themselves.....but those slaves had just as much rights as any human......and I am a strong opponent of the belief that the end justifies the means......
So here we are then....I'm conflicted......both instances suck and yet both instances both defended and defied freedom...
>>> slavery has existed for thousands of years...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't man enslave man before he did any animal? | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/5/2008 4:59:17 AM | | At the outset of the civil war, what was the comparitive population of slaves in the north vs the south? | |
|
Nona37
|
Joined: 12/4/2007
Msg: 61 | |
| the civil war
Posted: 1/5/2008 5:23:31 AM | I tried to find some credible sources for your question, try this one,
it speaks of the French Settlements around the great lakes as well as
the Spanish Established settlements in Florida, etc..it also speaks
of indentured servants making up 60-70 percent of European immigrants
during this era.
Hope this helps.
http://ca.encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_1741500824_2/united_states_(people).html
Here is another source in reference to percentage of slaves in both North and
South.
http://ca.encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761580652_2/Slavery_in_the_United_States.html | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/5/2008 5:31:03 AM | | I dunno.....Indentured servants aren't exactly slaves.....its something you agree to(or your parents sell you into), but you eventually regain freedom.....whereas slavery means you,your children, and your childrens childrens will never experience freedom..... | |
|
Nona37
|
Joined: 12/4/2007
Msg: 63 | |
| the civil war
Posted: 1/5/2008 5:34:39 AM | | To me it's the same as slavery, largely due to the fact, someone owns you, until the outrageous debt was paid, but I must say, where being an indentured servant was NOT a good thing by any means, at least they had the option of eventually winning their freedom as you so state, the African Slaves did not have that option, and only winning their freedom by their own persistence, in my eyes, the abolitionist's were not responsible for the African's freedom, it was the African's with their own persistence to be free, with rebelling as well as fighting for their own equality as well as freedom which truly freed them. | |
|
| |
| the civil war
Posted: 1/5/2008 6:14:27 AM | the civil war
Posted: 1/5/2008 8:09:31 AM
I found the orginal question ~while interesting, some what disjointed and question what truth is attempting to be discovered.
Why the Civil war?
What was the backdrop and the forces that permited this to happen?
Not unlike today ~ market forces ~ The need , the greed and the power.
At that point in time for the south, Cotton was King! The demand was world wide.
To market this demand took large amounts of land holdings and manpower.
Big landowner with all the trapping of wealth lead sway to the very fabric of socity in the south. ~ It's was the south. It was a lifestyle ~ everyone knew their place. It was agricultural, the need for formal education was not that high for one to find a livlyhood to support and raise a family.
By contrast, the north was more industrized the need for cheap labor was much less.
Education was more in demand, The north was the home of advanced learning institutes and suppied more forward thinking.
This attempt of bright minds to seek the high road came to logger heads with the very backbone , the very underpinning of the south. ~ Cotton, and how it got to market.
Linclon seen this all coming to ahead ~ all the bickering and in -fighting ~ He had his views as well ~ but he also knew ` that it wasn't an easy fix and would require time to correct the inequities but time was not on his side.
Linclon was sure of "one" thing ~ It was not in the best interest for the union to be divided ~ if it was to be a fight! ~ There will be a fight!
That decision was taken away from him when the South fired on Fort Sumter on April 12th and 13 th 1861
This would indeed be a war of wars ~ There was much going on in the world at this point and time in world history. ~ The civilized world was in transistion from agricultural to industrial ~ yet great need for both were still in demand.
Like today ~ war requires huge amounts of money to be spent ~ opportunities for huge amounts of money to be made. ~ This fueled the north and killed the south every so slowly.
Like all wars ~ good things do come of it ~ but at great cost in lives and human suffering. ~ The french invented the first ice machine ~ but people were slow to accept the product ~ feeling it unnatural ~ at that time , ice was still being harvested in the artic and shipped in.
An out -break of fever and the need for ice in the south~coupled with ricks involved with blockade running and it was just a matter of time ~ that people had this unnatural ice in there mouths. The french enjoyed a wind -fall. ~ there are many other stories to tell ` stories inside of stories.
But Linclon ~ the first ` republican ~ and he's vision of one nation, indivisable put us here ~ where we are today. ~ Regardless of our differences ~ we will be "one" ~dar | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/5/2008 6:27:23 AM |
I dunno.....Indentured servants aren't exactly slaves.....its something you agree to(or your parents sell you into), but you eventually regain freedom.....whereas slavery means you,your children, and your childrens childrens will never experience freedom.....
Indentured servitude became slavery in the US when planters in Virginia didn't want to honor their contracts w/ their African slaves when they ended.
Indentured servitude also became illegal in the US after the Civil War.
Just FYI | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/5/2008 7:28:44 AM |
So what will the next war be about.
Same as the last one. Who gets to be a human being, and thus protected under the Constitution.
Next time the criteria of human being will be along religious/ideological lines rather than racial/economic ones. | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/5/2008 11:26:14 PM | 1860
The results of the 1860 census show a total population of 31,183,582 including 3,950,528 slaves or 13% of the population. Slaves equal 2% of the population in what would be Northern Aligned States and 39% in Southern Aligned States. The total population for Northern Aligned States was 22,080,250 and for Southern Aligned States was 9,103,332. In the Northern Aligned States 8% of the families owned slaves and 31% in the Southern Aligned States. 57% of the population in South Carolina were slaves and 49% of the families in Mississippi owned slaves. Click for full 1860 Census detail.
Slavery was a southern thing.
Imagine a state where 57% of the population is slaves...
December - On December 20th South Carolina convention passes ordinance of secession thus seceding from the Union. The Declaration of Secession for South Carolina states, "We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection."
It's even in the freaking declaration of their independence. SLAVERY was the issue. The tariffs had been lowered.
War of Northern agression my ass. | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/6/2008 12:40:26 AM | Anyone that really wants to learn more about the Civil War should seriously consider renting, begging , or borrowing Ken Burn's epic documentary on the subject.
In the early 80's, I passed all the way down the Eastern coast of the USA to Florida. Although I was interested in military history, the Civil War had never captured my imagination for some reason.
I drove RIGHT THROUGH Gettysburg, without even considering stopping.
Along the way, I passed almost every major historical sight for Civil War battles - again without stopping.
When I was watching "The Civil War" , I was totally enthralled - and at the same time looking a bit like this ------->
I'd really like to go back someday, and see Gettysburg, and the area of the battlefield of the Second Manassas. Thanks to Burns, I can say that that period came alive for me. I also developed an appreciation for Lincoln, especially from that show.
I guess somewhere inside me I'd figured the Civil War was fought by people less intelligent than in our times. When Burns started showing some of the written letters and comments during that documentary, I suddenly realized their level of writing was perhaps far better than even ours today.
They came alive to me, in a very real way.
The thing that did me in totally was when they read Sullivan Ballou's letter to his wife :
July the 14th, 1861
Washington DC
My very dear Sarah:
The indications are very strong that we shall move in a few days - perhaps tomorrow. Lest I should not be able to write you again, I feel impelled to write lines that may fall under your eye when I shall be no more.
Our movement may be one of a few days duration and full of pleasure - and it may be one of severe conflict and death to me. Not my will, but thine 0 God, be done. If it is necessary that I should fall on the battlefield for my country, I am ready. I have no misgivings about, or lack of confidence in, the cause in which I am engaged, and my courage does not halt or falter. I know how strongly American Civilization now leans upon the triumph of the Government, and how great a debt we owe to those who went before us through the blood and suffering of the Revolution. And I am willing - perfectly willing - to lay down all my joys in this life, to help maintain this Government, and to pay that debt.
But, my dear wife, when I know that with my own joys I lay down nearly all of yours, and replace them in this life with cares and sorrows - when, after having eaten for long years the bitter fruit of orphanage myself, I must offer it as their only sustenance to my dear little children - is it weak or dishonorable, while the banner of my purpose floats calmly and proudly in the breeze, that my unbounded love for you, my darling wife and children, should struggle in fierce, though useless, contest with my love of country?
I cannot describe to you my feelings on this calm summer night, when two thousand men are sleeping around me, many of them enjoying the last, perhaps, before that of death -- and I, suspicious that Death is creeping behind me with his fatal dart, am communing with God, my country, and thee.
I have sought most closely and diligently, and often in my breast, for a wrong motive in thus hazarding the happiness of those I loved and I could not find one. A pure love of my country and of the principles have often advocated before the people and "the name of honor that I love more than I fear death" have called upon me, and I have obeyed.
Sarah, my love for you is deathless, it seems to bind me to you with mighty cables that nothing but Omnipotence could break; and yet my love of Country comes over me like a strong wind and bears me irresistibly on with all these chains to the battlefield.
The memories of the blissful moments I have spent with you come creeping over me, and I feel most gratified to God and to you that I have enjoyed them so long. And hard it is for me to give them up and burn to ashes the hopes of future years, when God willing, we might still have lived and loved together and seen our sons grow up to honorable manhood around us. I have, I know, but few and small claims upon Divine Providence, but something whispers to me - perhaps it is the wafted prayer of my little Edgar -- that I shall return to my loved ones unharmed. If I do not, my dear Sarah, never forget how much I love you, and when my last breath escapes me on the battlefield, it will whisper your name.
Forgive my many faults, and the many pains I have caused you. How thoughtless and foolish I have oftentimes been! How gladly would I wash out with my tears every little spot upon your happiness, and struggle with all the misfortune of this world, to shield you and my children from harm. But I cannot. I must watch you from the spirit land and hover near you, while you buffet the storms with your precious little freight, and wait with sad patience till we meet to part no more.
But, O Sarah! If the dead can come back to this earth and flit unseen around those they loved, I shall always be near you; in the garish day and in the darkest night -- amidst your happiest scenes and gloomiest hours - always, always; and if there be a soft breeze upon your cheek, it shall be my breath; or the cool air fans your throbbing temple, it shall be my spirit passing by.
Sarah, do not mourn me dead; think I am gone and wait for thee, for we shall meet again.
As for my little boys, they will grow as I have done, and never know a father's love and care. Little Willie is too young to remember me long, and my blue eyed Edgar will keep my frolics with him among the dimmest memories of his childhood. Sarah, I have unlimited confidence in your maternal care and your development of their characters. Tell my two mothers his and hers I call God's blessing upon them. O Sarah, I wait for you there! Come to me, and lead thither my children.
Sullivan
He died two weeks later, after being wounded in the first battle of Bull Run. (aka First Manassas), one of the twenty three men killed during that battle in his regiment.
His corpse was exhumed, decapitated and desecrated by Confederate soldiers belonging to the 21st Georgia regiment.
That letter was never sent, but was given to his wife afterwards , by Governor William Sprague, who recovered it.
I actually have a replica copy of that letter, thanks to PBS.
How many people today could write such a wonderfully poetic and romantic letter, and do it so very well ?
Not too many... | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/6/2008 1:48:20 AM | I've been to a few of them. Used to go right through Chickamauga about once a month. I'd stop sometimes as it's a huge park with statues and plaques honoring those who fought and died. Very beautiful and peaceful. It wasn't like that back in '63 though.
Ken Burns did an awesome job on the series. I have them on degrading VHS tape that I copied faithfully when it was on A & E a decade and a bit ago but have been looking for them in stores. Guess I'll have to do it on Amazon.
There was something like 40,000 Canadians who fought in the Civil War with 29 of them receiving medals of honor. There was one General as well. Origionally they fought for the North but as the war went on and Canadian sympathy shifted to the south out of concern for an imperialistic North, more volunteers joining the south reflected that sentiment. | |
|
Nona37
|
Joined: 12/4/2007
Msg: 73 | |
| the civil war
Posted: 1/6/2008 3:14:28 AM | Montreal Guy:
That letter made me want to cry!!!! :( | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/6/2008 4:43:37 AM | RE: ...how much more superior the confederate army was to the north.
This really isn't an accurate statement. As an example, please read more about The Battle of Little Round Top and Col. Chamberlain & the 20th Maine Infantry
http://www.nps.gov/archive/gett/getttour/sidebar/chambln.htm
There is no doubt that extreme courage and skilled warriors were present on both sides, North and South. | |
|
Nona37
|
Joined: 12/4/2007
Msg: 75 | |
| the civil war
Posted: 1/6/2008 6:47:47 AM | | I'm loving all this information I'm gathering from this thread, I'm like a "kid in a candy store" here!!!!!! All the information referencing both sides has been so interesting, where I must say, the "Confederate Army" has always intrigued me, the "Union" side of this war always intrigued me as well, for there were hero's on both sides of the fence during this war, brother against brother, even women portraying themselves as male soldiers so they could fight as well, and by the way, if anyone has any information on women during this war, as in actual women who fought, please share it with us, I have heard there were women who portrayed themselves as men during this war, so they too could fight for their homeland and what they believed in, I have even heard a rumor, that there was a woman who was aiding the wounded and dying men who was left standing alone (I do not know what side she was on) and she actually dropped her medical supplies and started firing the cannon, in the hopes of saving the men she was tending to. Any info? Please share :)~~~Nona | |
|
Nona37
|
Joined: 12/4/2007
Msg: 76 | |
| the civil war
Posted: 1/6/2008 6:56:45 AM | http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/greenhow/#rose
This is about Rose O'Neal Greenhow, a spy for the Confederacy.
http://americancivilwar.com/women/mary_edwards_walker.html
Dr. Mary Edwards Walker, she is the only female to receive the
Congressional Medal of Honor.
http://americancivilwar.com/women/mary_todd_lincoln.html
Abraham Lincoln's wife
these are some I found. :) | |
|
| the civil war
Posted: 1/6/2008 7:37:12 AM | Okay you want an answer to the question from someone who knows then ask away?
I've read many of the post within this thread and some post have been quiet good with some of the facts, while others have been competely inaccurate and totally biased. Nevertheless, the truth or reality hasn't been brought to light because much of it has long ago been buried by propaganda teachings. However the truth is still out there but you have to look deep to find it...
The first problem you have is the term being used in naming the conflict. Which is understandable and perfectly acceptable you have to say something in order for people to ask such things. Nevertheless, the term Civil war is not appropiate because Congress has never adopted an official name for that war. However for arguement sake we have to call it something in order to discuss it and lets overlook that minor issue.
Secondly, we can't look at it from a 21st century view point to appreicate the real causes. The US prior to 1860 was no super power amoung nations of the world. It was the time of the Victorian age and that factors greatly into the economy and beliefs at that time.
Thirdly, The fight for American Independence had only taken place 80+ years prior and had not been truly earned until the close of the war of 1812, which had only been 40+ years earlier (The Hartford Convention adds insight into the conflict to come). One must also take into account the Mexican War that was fought 10+ years prior to the conflict in question.
Forthly, Slavery without question does play an important role in the conflict but in a very unusal way and not in the way it has been taught.
Fifthly, Civil disobedinace and the support and supression of it hinges the uderlying true cause of the conflict.
The Conflict in itself wasn't caused by the election of Lincoln, it wasn't about States Rights, and it wasn't about Slavery. The Nobelness of the cause isn't near so dramatic as has been previously discussed. It represents the abandonment of the United States as it was constructed and a substituteded new form conceled behind a vail of the old. That conflict you ask about didn't end when the guns fell silent at Appomattox, that conflict never truely ended and we as Americans still feel the blast wave from those cannons to this very day. The true issues where never solved and that's why the State of the Union is still in the mess it is. If a problem isn't resolved it will sooner or later resurface in the future and a conflict of the same magnatitude will arise again. The US is doomed to refight the unfinished business left on the table from 1865.
There are many reason why the South could not win that conflict, even if everything had went it's way on the battlefield the South really never had a chance to win.
If you really want to know what the casue for that conflict and you're really interested in knowing the truth and not the standard propaganda I'll be happy to explain it. I won't be biased and I won't mislead you in your search for the truth. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
