Replies

I've read several books on this subject, and here is the important fact: Lincoln was willing to give up Fort Sumter, but he wanted something of value in return, and that was a pledge by Virginia not to secede -- a fort for a state was a good trade in Lincoln's mind.

A Fort would indeed be a very good trade for a state, especially a state as large and important as Virginia. But see, this once more illustrates a point. As the old joke goes, "We've already determined what kind of girl you are, now we are just negotiating over price."

If Lincoln was going to give up Ft. Sumter and let the rest of the South secede in exchange for Virginia remaining, then how does that square with the assertion that it was of absolute unquestionable principle and importance that states didn't have a right to leave the Union?

How can you fight such a bloody war on a principle which you were willing to negotiate away?

DiogenesLamp: "If Lincoln was going to give up Ft. Sumter and let the rest of the South secede in exchange for Virginia remaining, then how does that square with the assertion that it was of absolute unquestionable principle and importance that states didn't have a right to leave the Union?
How can you fight such a bloody war on a principle which you were willing to negotiate away?"

First of all, we're not talking about "the rest of the South" here, only the Deep South, from South Carolina through Texas, seven states, about 2.5 million whites and almost as many slaves.
Militarily, economically & socially this rump-Confederacy was not viable against the economic & political might of the United States.
To become viable, the rump-Confederacy needed the rest of the slave-states to join them -- the Upper South and Border States.
And since the Upper South was committed to following Virginia's lead, Lincoln's negotiations with Virginians were in effect, negotiations over whether the Confederacy would double in size & population, making it a serious threat to the Union, or whether instead Virginia would remain in the Union, rendering the rump-Confederacy unviable and temporary?

But Fire Eaters in Virginia had no interest -- none -- in preserving the Union, their only concern was to meet the obligations of their US Constitution ratification statement, which required some act of "oppression" for them to declare secession.
And for those Fire Eaters, a battle over Fort Sumter -- regardless of who started it -- was the perfect excuse.

So Lincoln continued to negotiate as long as he could, but in the end his hand was forced by Major Anderson's situation in Fort Sumter -- he must either be resupplied or surrender.
Lincoln chose resupply, and the rest of the story, you may know...

Second, all Unionists (then and now) acknowledged a "right of secession", with the approval of Congress, or some material breech of compact, but none recognized unilateral declarations of secession, especially for no material cause.
That was the opinion of both out-going Democrat President Buchanan and incoming Republican Lincoln.
But both presidents did not consider that secession, by itself, was cause for war, and both did what they could to preserve the Union, while avoiding war.
As Lincoln announced in his Inaugural (March 4, 1861), secessionists could not have a war, unless they themselves started it.

Of course, the Confederacy was full of hot-heads, eager to prove their manliness, and so any small excuse was enough, such as Fort Sumter.
For Jefferson Davis, Sumter was a "no brainer" -- in one stroke he captured the fort and doubled the size of the Confederacy, adding Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee and Arkansas.
Really, it was the most brilliant move Davis ever made, certainly in his own mind.
That he also doomed his Confederacy to war and eventual defeat was not so important in 1861, because without the Upper South, the Deep South rump-Confederacy was doomed anyway.
At least with the Upper South, the Confederacy now had a fighting chance for victory, especially if they could also win over the Border States -- Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky & Missouri.
Those would add another 50% to his population and make the Confederacy virtually unbeatable.

Lincoln's estimates were the same, and so he redoubled his efforts to keep Border States in the Union.

So, once again, here are the bottom lines:

Slavery did not directly cause Civil War.
Deep South declarations of secession did not directly start Civil War.
Forming the Confederacy did not begin Civil War.
What initiated Civil War was the Confederacy's military assault on, and the surrender of, US troops in Fort Sumter, followed by military aid to Confederates in Union states and the Confederacy's formal declaration of war, May 6, 1861.
All this before a single Confederate soldier was killed in battle with any US force, or any US Army invaded a single Confederate state.
By May 6, 1861 the Confederacy represented an existential military threat to the United States, a threat which Lincoln recognized had to be defeated militarily.