Posted on 07/07/2012 11:51:43 AM PDT by nickcarraway
At the height of the holiday shopping season of 1860, a bookseller in Richmond, Va., placed a telling advertisement in The Daily Dispatch promoting a selection of "Elegant Books for Christmas and New Year's Presents." Notably, the list of two dozen "choice books, suitable for Holiday Gifts" included five works by the late Scottish novelist and poet Sir Walter Scott in "various beautiful bindings."
Sir Walter Scott not only dominated gift book lists on the eve of the Civil War but also dominated Southern literary taste throughout the conflict. His highly idealized depiction of the age of chivalry allowed Southern readers and writers to find positive meaning in war's horrors, hardships and innumerable deaths. And his works inspired countless wartime imitators, who drew upon his romantic conception of combat.
In 1814 Scott had begun his ascension to the heights of literary stardom with the publication of the historical romance "Waverley," which was soon followed by other novels in the so-called Waverley series. The works were an immediate and immense success in Great Britain and America. Over the course of many volumes, Scott glamorized the Middle Ages, at once shaping and popularizing what we now consider the classic tale of chivalry. As one enamored 19th-century reader explained, each of Scott's romances focused upon the "manners and habits of the most interesting and chivalrous periods of Scottish [and] British history."
Among Scott's most famous works was "Ivanhoe," published in 1820. The romance, set in the 12th century, presents a tale of intrigue, love and valor. The plot traces the fortunes of young Wilfred of Ivanhoe as he strives, despite his father's opposition, to gain the hand of the beautiful Lady Rowena. In the course of Ivanhoe's adventures, Richard the Lionheart and Robin Hood appear, and Ivanhoe performs many a remarkable feat.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com ...
See...this thread for about 300 posts before I found it. And I am able to keep out of it. But when I saw the title, I knew you were expecting a missive from me.
No comment...just wanted to say I drove through VA on my way to Mississippi. Nice country down there in the valley.
Have a wonderful weekend, Reb.
You defied it. Good you were just passing thru. Go back to "beans and barney frank" town a different way next time.
I must say, that I did stop and take a dump on some hillbillies lawn. Was that you?
What is the matter with you? I try to say something nice and you react like a dope.
Go f yourself and all of your slave loving rebel friends.
My daughter and I were in awe of the fact that if we spoke to anyone for ten minutes, the civil war came up. Its over. Its done. You cannot have your boys mowing your lawns any more. You may have thought it was about states rights, you can think that all you want.
Your ancestors were traitors to your country. And we whooped you back in line, just like you advocating whooping slaves back in line.
Don’t use the crap about not owning slaves. Your people did nothing to stop it. And you want it back.
It was a pleasure to see the remnants of the old south. Burned to ground and ruined. Gave me a good feeling in my heart to know that MY family spilled blood to get ya’ll back in line.
I'm glad you dropped the phony nice Yankee act. I appreciated the statist honesty you displayed here. Say hello to Barney for me.
Your little screed proves the reason why the term “damn yankees” was invented.
If you push these Yanks hard enough their true self righteous venom will finally ooze out. It is fun game to play.
I gave you two per capita figures. One from two sources, both of which I quoted for you, and the other from Fogel and Engerman’s ‘Time on the Cross’ and the 1860 census.
Misunderstanding my post due to your erratic comprehension, you did not realize that the three figure per capita data was for unskilled laborers, while the four figure comparison was for the wealthy planter/industrialist class.
Naturally you did not understand, and instead of doing a tiny bit of critical thinking, you want to jump on the source and cry foul.
You really are light on the comprehension.
But of course the fact remains that for both classes of workers, in the 1860 time period, the average per capita income for free labor was higher in the South than the North.
If you could refute the data, I am sure you would post sources.
“Even the most elementary can explain the relation between luxury items, transportation costs and trade.”
Alright, go ahead and do some explaining.
Changing the subject is not a viable substitute for providing reference sources for the wild assertions you made.
So, let’s go back to where we were.
“Imported hats and shoes probably were rather luxurious.”
Source?
“International trade, as a whole, concentrated on luxurious stuff.”
Source?
“Those were the things which could justify the high cost of transportation.”
And your source for that wild ass statement is what?
Only after transport costs had been reduced to low levels could one profitably trade in bulk goods.
Source?
Nails could be traded because their high weight to volume allowed profits.
Source?
“But the South’s trade woes were not the result of importing nails but an obsolete economic system.”
Source?
No good deed goes unpunished with the Lost Cause Losers.
Did you read post 403? I would say the LT. became unhinged...
Considering the response I gave to post #403 then I would say yes, I read post #403.
BTW: Did you read post #401 where he paid you a compliment (casting pearls after swine) and wished you well? (ditto) I don’t know Vermont Lt but my best guess was that he was attempting to get himself down to a level where he could communicate with you. Consider it one gratuitous nasty shot in reply to a gratuitous nasty shot.
Y’all have a nice evening, y’hear?
No one is concerned with partial and disaggregated statistics. I have been speaking all along of totals for all classes of people. This you mysteriously try to ignore.
Trade begins with wandering peddlars who trade what they can carry while walking. This is the prototype. Now, of course the intelligent among them make sure they carry small, high value items, LUXURIES.
You, on the other hand, probably would carry a bushel of wheat.
This concept of value equaling or exceeding transportation costs is probably too difficult for one still struggling to comprehend Treason but so be it.
Let’s see 100 hats (with rare bird feathers and beads) at $10 each occupying 64 cubic feet and weighing 25 lbs total vs 100 bales of cotton at 25 cents/lb occupying say 3000 cubic feet and weighing 20 tons.
Is this still too difficult for you to figure out?
Any International Trade textbook or history should allow you to figure this out.
“Your people did nothing to stop it. And you want it back.”
What you say may be true of the ancestors of central_va but not so of the Southern people as a whole.
Gen. George Thomas, a Virginian, did not turn Traitor and fought valiantly for the United States. Over 100,000 southerners from Tenn, Arkansas, N. Ala, N. Georgia, W. Carolinas fought in the United STates Army against the traitors. Louisiana Free Blacks raised troops.
Many southern men had no choice but be drafted into the Cornfederate army since their families would be punished should they flee. Many in the mountainous areas fled anyway.
Like the Nazi regime it was difficult to openly oppose without endangering your family.
I am sure you aren't since they all say the same thing.....that you are wrong.
Here again is the raw data:
The paid labor per capita rates were $150 in the South to $144 in the North, so per capita income was higher in the South,
Again, you are making no sense at all. Try concentrating.
“Any International Trade textbook or history should allow you to figure this out.”
Name one that will explain your comment.
“paid labor rates” does not equal “per capita income”. Did you fail basic economics?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.