Posted on 08/25/2008 9:11:18 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
LS, He considers Marylanders, West Virginians, Delawareans, Kentuckians and Missourians as Southerners even though none of these states ever were really part of the Confederacy - because these states were culturally part of the South.
And part of his larger argument, which tends to be obscured, is that following myth:
"The people of the North were united as one against the slave power/The people of the South were united as one against the Yankees"
is a myth that serves the worst elements on both sides.
It serves the anti-Southerners who want to tar the entire Southern people with Confederate ideology, and it serves the anti-Northerners who want to portray the North as cultural imperialists.
The reality is that in both Union and Confederacy there were sizable elements of the population who were not on board with their government's goals.
Good point on W VA. Hadn’t thought of that, since it technically was the “Union.”
Civil War historian Henry Steele Commager’s words from more than fifty years ago still ring true today:
“No other war started so many controversies and for no other do they flourish so vigorously.Every step in the conflict, every major political decision, every campaign, almost every battle, has its own proud set of controversies, and of all the military figures only Lee stands above argument and debate.”
That I thought was always understood.
No way the US could win another war using the "more men, more resources" strategy.
You got that right. There were “Copperheads” and all sorts of northern Dems who opposed the war, including George McClellan by 1864. Victor Hanson makes a nice point in a speech about how it depends on which year it was how “great” or “brilliant” Lincoln was. Right after Fredericksburg, a much higher % of northerners were “anti-war,” and after Gettysburg, a much higher were “pro-war.”
“Yep, son. We have met the enemy and he is us.”
—Pogo
Doesn't appear to be ground breaking research here.
“I’m wondering if he’s including West Virginians in that 300,000 figure.”
The Union enlisted 175,000 black soldiers during the American Civil War, 75% of which came from Confederate statest. That is 132,000 right there. 167,000 more seems believeable, especially when you consider the large numbers of Union supporters in states like Tennessee, North Carolina, Arkansas and Virginia.
There were white Union regiments raised in every Confederate state. I’d have to check at home to get ther exact number.
Outside of the Quakers and the German American population, Philadelphia was a stronghold of pro-southern sentiment, both among the upper class (many of whom had family connections in the south, or were in the cotton trade) and poor Irish immigrants. Such folks were hostile to the idea of war with the confederacy.
It wasn’t only the schools but the media as well which until the 60s made the rebels out to be heroes. I hated the damn Yankees until I started reading some real history as did almost all southern kids. But for some odd reason I could not hate Lincoln.
It serves the anti-Southerners who want to tar the entire Southern people with Confederate ideology, and it serves the anti-Northerners who want to portray the North as cultural imperialists.
That's why learning the true facts can be so important. Then the Civil War becomes a poor vehicle for regional chauvinism. Get that out of the way, we can argue over more relevant differences such as grits and auto racing.
The truth always sounds that way to those who do not accept it.
With all due respect to Commager, may I also volunteer the French Revolution? The legacy and meaning of the revolution has been debated and contested in France, sometimes violently, to this day. Francois Furet may have angrily declared that "the French Revolution is OVER" back in the 1970s, but it is still being debated, everything from the level of popular support, Louis XVI's miscalculations, they loyalty of the national guard, whether Napoleon continued the revolution or was a reactionary at heart, etc. There are even many female historians who claim that the revolution took power AWAY from women, as women had more power at Versailles than in the Directory.
Our Civil War is far from the only conflict that causes continuous controversy and debate over its legacy.
“The historical fact is that “the American South” and “The Confederacy” are not synonyms.”
I agree. In fact ‘the American South” isn’t exactly correct.
There were many different views in different parts of the South.
I’m not against the South. But in the war years it was often the Confederates who were the south bashers. In much of the South, the Confederates brought extortion, political oppression and lawlessness, while the Union army restored a degree of law and order and peace. In many areas of the South, Reconstruction was a delightful picnic in the park compared to the rebel reign of terror.
By the way, good luck with the Neo Confederates. Hope they don't burn your keyboard.
In “Lincoln’s Loyalists” Richard Nelson Current comes up with your figure. The Provost Marshall General gives official figures of 86,009 for enlistments but this figure is considered too low by those who looked into the question.
Another author, Charles Anderson in “Fighting by Southern Federals” claims 296,579 whites but includes those from the Border states (he also claims 200,000 southern born Northerners enlisted for a total 634,255 southerners fighting to preserve the greatest nation in history). This is close to the 300,000 this author claims. I think it is safe to claim at least 250,000 black and white troops served.
In “Lincoln’s Loyalists” Richard Nelson Current comes up with your figure. The Provost Marshall General gives official figures of 86,009 for enlistments but this figure is considered too low by those who looked into the question.
Another author, Charles Anderson in “Fighting by Southern Federals” claims 296,579 whites but includes those from the Border states (he also claims 200,000 southern born Northerners enlisted for a total 634,255 southerners fighting to preserve the greatest nation in history). This is close to the 300,000 this author claims. I think it is safe to claim at least 250,000 black and white troops served.
That's a discredited thesis.
Grant's strategy was not to sacrifice men, but to turn the tables on Lee by giving him battle consistently: his predecessors (McClellan, Hooker, Meade) were famous for taking as much time as possible between campaigns - dillydallying that allowed Lee time to regroup and take the strategic initiative.
Grant's plan was to hammer at Lee again and again and rob Lee of the extra time that his predecessors had continually given Lee.
In the Overland Campaign - the one in which Grant undeservedly got the "butcher" title - he lost 7,600 killed in 12 major battles or engagements.
In the same period Lee lost 4200 killed - more than half Grant's number, despite the fact that much of these battles were fought with Lee on the defensive.
If one terrible command decision had not been made at Cold Harbor, that number would have been more like 6400 killed for Grant and 4500 killed for Lee.
Lee lost 1700 men killed at Chancellorsville.
In other words, Lee according to a deliberate plan that was masterfully executed lost almost as many men at Chancellorsville as Grant lost at Cold Harbor - which is famous as Grant's worst bloodbath and worst-executed plan.
Another comparison: Gettysburg was Lee's worst disaster. He lost 4700 killed at Gettysburg. That is more than twice as many men as Grant lost at Cold Harbor.
If Grant is to be called a butcher, then he is an apprentice butcher to Lee the master butcher.
You make reference to Sherman's abortive attack at Cheatham Hill in the Battle of Kennesaw Mountain. Sherman launched that assault believing that he had found a thin and breachable point in Johnston's line - the scope of the losses his command sustained in that engagement was completely unanticipated.
A just comparison might be the actions of John Bell Hood, the Confederate commander who made a similar assault at Franklin that cost him almost the identical amount of men killed as the Union endured at Kennesaw Mountain.
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.