Posted on 04/02/2021 9:04:55 AM PDT by gattaca
On April 12, 1861, Confederate troops fired the opening shots of the Civil War at Fort Sumter in South Carolina. This month marks the 160th anniversary of the beginning of the war, the deadliest conflict ever fought on American soil. The Civil War lasted four years and resulted in an estimated 620,000 deaths and 1.5 million casualties. Approximately one in four soldiers that went to war never came back home. This impacted families, communities, and the entire country for generations to come.
Historical photograph of Fort Sumter The years leading up to the beginning of the Civil War were filled with increasing tensions between northern and southern states. In 1860, Abraham Lincoln was elected president by a strictly northern vote. The election was the impetus for southern states, who were already wrangling with the North on issues like slavery, states’ rights, and westward expansion, to begin the process of secession. Four days after the election, South Carolina Senator James Chesnut resigned his Senate seat and began drafting secession documents. Before long, six more states joined South Carolina to form the Confederate States of America on February 8, 1861. That number increased to 11 states after the fall of Fort Sumter. Four border states (Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, and Missouri) held enslaved persons but remained loyal to the Union.
Exterior view of Fort Sumter Fort Sumter, originally built as a coastal garrison, was located at the entrance to Charleston Harbor. Confederate General P. G. T. Beauregard, from the newly formed Confederate States Army, demanded federal officials turn over the fort. He claimed the fort was located in Confederate territory and thus belonged to the South. President Lincoln refused and made attempts to send a ship to resupply the fort. The ship was turned away by Confederate guns.
Tensions grew, and Beauregard finally sent US officials an ultimatum – abandon the fort or face destruction. At 4:30 a.m. on April 12th, some 500 soldiers from the South Carolina Militia opened fire on 80 Federal soldiers inside the fort. The bombardment continued for 34 hours until the afternoon of April 13th, when the garrison commander, Major Robert Anderson, surrendered the fort. Though there were no fatalities on either side during the Battle of Fort Sumter, the conflict marked the beginning of more than 10,000 military engagements that occurred between 1861-1865.
Interior View of Fort Sumter Fold3® has an extensive collection of Civil War records including:
Brady Civil War Photos: The Civil War is considered the first major conflict to be photographed extensively. Mathew Brady led a photography team that captured images of the war using a mobile studio and darkroom. Civil War Maps: This collection of 2,000 detailed battle maps provides insight into Civil War engagements. Some maps show the placement of regiments and the movement of troops. Civil War “Widows Pensions” Files: Only 20% of Civil War pension files are digitized, but if you are lucky enough to find the pension file for your ancestor, you’ll uncover a treasure trove of information. Civil War Service Records: We have service records for both Union and Confederate troops. These records are organized by state. Service Records for US Colored Troops: Approximately 179,000 Black men served in the US Army and another 19,000 in the US Navy. Despite facing racism and discrimination, the US Colored Troops served with valor and honor. These records are organized by regiment. Southern Claims Approved: After the war, the US government established the Southern Claims Commission. This office accepted petitions for compensation for items taken by Union troops during the war. In addition to these collections, Fold3 has more than 150 additional collections that contain 43 million Civil War records. Start searching our Civil War collection today on Fold3®.
Oh stop the s**t. The South was fighting to preserve an economic system based on the use of slave labor and you know it.
I was able to see the site of the cannons at Ft. Johnson in 1974. The site was open to the public but getting to it wasn’t by land. It is now.
Oh barf.
Nice to see your accuracy is a poor as usual.
These would be the same fundamental rights you claimed Lincoln refused to negotiate on in your reply 102?
The negotiations were about the disposition of the property and debt.
There were no offers to negotiate. The South just walked out.
You are speculating about what would have happened if the South had won - that did not happen. And even with your Argus-eyed omniscience I wonder if your reveal of the unknown and unknowable is somehow influenced by your preferences.
Your “what if” distraction does avoid discussing what has actually happened after the disaster at Appomattox: the effective elimination of the 9th and 10th amendments as safeguards against federal usurpation.
Bull Snipe, let me ask you a question: Have you heard anything about the 1st and 2nd amendments right now being endangered by the federal government and blue state culture?
In the South, Mr Lincoln’s War is often called The War of Northern Aggression.
It seems like months since I participated here on a discussion of Lincoln's War.
While away, I was worried sick that my idea opponents would develop powerful new arguments that would smash my world view and force me to say that the 10th amendment never existed.
So it is true: most of the things we worry about never happen.
Can't say.
While away, I was worried sick that my idea opponents would develop powerful new arguments that would smash my world view and force me to say that the 10th amendment never existed.
I have tended to shy away from these discussions myself because as someone once pointed out it's hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it's damned near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person. And your description of the 14th Amendment as 'pro-abortion' is about as dumb as they come.
I wouldn’t go that far. The so-called RevWar was 8 years. Much longer than the so-called CW.
George III and Parliament was not willing to give up a long time. But eventually they did acquiesce.
For further insight into what that rebellion meant, look at GB track record since. Never again would they lose their native English-speaking territories. Instead when colonies wanted “independence”, they got it. And not fully, so GB did not lose the benefit of having those colonies. Worked out pretty well for all involved.
They never made that mistake again.
Too bad within the US, we didn’t learn that lesson.
Then there's the strange conglomeration of modern day political correctness with secesssionist fervor: Lincoln wasn't perfect by today's standard, therefore he was a monster and the South was right.
What gets left out of the discussion are all the monstrous mistakes and missed opportunities of Southern leaders in the years leading up to the war.
They didn't want to get rid of slavery. They wanted to secure its continued existence.
Northerners tried to accommodate the slaveowners. They weren't perfect. Many of them just wanted to ignore slavery and hoped the problem would just go away.
But by the mid-19th century, it was the South's problem and Southern elites fumbled on slavery and secession in a disastrous way.
“. . . it’s hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it’s damned near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person.”
You seem totally unaware of how your own words . . . never mind.
bookmark
“The South was fighting to preserve an economic system based on the use of slave labor and you know it.”
That is an interesting comment.
If the South was fighting for slavery, who was fighting against it?
“I suppose in your way of thinking the preservation of slavery was worth the lives of the 300,000 men that died in supporting the Confederate cause.”
And just like that the war once again became a moral fight to “free the slaves.”
That didn’t take long.
The slaves were freed as one of the results of the war.
The North. The main intention of the Union’s war effort was to preserve the Union. Which it did.
The Unions efforts to end slavery were the result of this.
Now Reb, let me ask you something: If the South had won the war would it have ended slavery?
“The North (was fighting against slavery).”
That is an interesting comment.
But puzzling. Why did the Union slave state of Delaware send troops to fight against the Confederate slave state of North Carolina? Why didn’t Delaware troops fight to free the slaves in Delaware?
And why did the Union slave state of Kentucky send troops to fight against the Confederate slave state of Tennessee? Why didn’t Kentucky troops fight to free the slaves in Kentucky?
And why did the Union slave state of Missouri send troops to fight against the Confederate slave state of Arkansas? Why didn’t Missouri troops fight to free the slaves in Missouri?
And why didn’t the Union slave state of Maryland . . .
And so forth and so on.
As do you.
Like Pontius Pilate the North stands and washes its hands of problems of its own making: slavery was a “Southern problem”; race is a “Southern problem”; discrimination is a “Southern problem”.
And yet of the original 13 states, 13 of them were slave states. Call the roll: New York, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania; Connecticut; Rhode Island, Maryland, and Delaware.
North and South Carolina, Virginia, and Georgia were also slave states. Don't ever forget to cast 4/13ths responsibility in that direction.
Then fast forward through the history books and say “by the mid-19th century the Puritan north had mostly ended their trafficking in slaves and had begun to ponder the economic advantages of child labor and industrial-scale, fully stocked ghettos."
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.