Category Archives: Blog

‘Dixie’s loss is Montana’s gain’

Posted on by
1

I’ve always been fascinated by the westward expansion after the war, though my focus was always on the Missouri guerrillas and how they laid the shaky foundations of the Wild West. The more sedate yet lasting effects regular immigrants caused hadn’t much occurred to me.

Among those profiled were James, William and Charles Conrad from the Shenandoah Valley in Virginia. James and wife, Maria, raised 13 children on Wapping Plantation, home to 11 slaves. James Conrad and sons William, 16, and Charles, 14, served the militia, in the boys’ case, with guerrillas.

They returned from the war to find their slaves freed and their plantation in ruins, unable to support the large family. William and Charles eventually moved to Fort Benton with a single silver dollar, according to family lore. They built a business empire on the frontier.

“Confederate veterans were in on discovery of most of the largest strikes,” Robison wrote. “Songs ‘Dixie’ and ‘Bonnie Blue Flag’ were on the ‘hit parade’ in the hurdy-gurdy dance halls of Virginia City, and the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln was cheered and celebrated on the streets. When ex-Confederate soldiers formed Gallatin Masonic Lodge No. 6 in October 1866, they refused admission to African-Americans, which was not surprising, but they also refused to admit whites who had fought for or supported the Union.”

via ‘Dixie’s loss is Montana’s gain’.

“Godfor, a Gettysburg battlefield vulture”

Posted on by
Reply

Somebody posted this image to Reddit last week, and as usual the userbase filled in some of the questions it inspired about Civil War deaths and mores. There are some well-read historians lurking on there amongst the jokers and the wags – this is a thread word reading.

Godfor, a Gettysburg battlefield vulture

durutticolumn comments on Godfor, a Gettysburg battlefield vulture. [1396×702].

Who was the greatest Confederate general?

Posted on by
1

This abortive little article doesn’t give us much food for thought on its stated question, but includes this intriguing tidbit:

Culberson was 10 years old when the great conflict ended, and he had always wondered who was the greatest. He sent a survey to 43 surviving Confederate generals asking for their input. Forty completed and returned the senator’s survey. Of the seven major generals five named Gen. Robert E. Lee, one chose Gen. Jonathan “Stonewall” Jackson, and one was non-committal. Of the 30 brigadier generals, they all named Lee.

Anyone else curious to see all these responses, and especially to find out who remained “non-committal”?

via Who was the greatest Confederate general?.

Civil War subs: Lost no more?

Posted on by
Reply

A museum director appears to have unearthed the remains of a Confederate “sub base” in Louisiana. I’ve read about the David and the Hunley, but had no idea there were others in the “fleet”. Fascinating discovery!

There’s evidence the Shreveport subs existed. Reports of Union spies in Shreveport, as well as Confederate reports, detail the appearance and dimensions of the submarines as well as operations to put mines in Red River for a Union invasion that never came. Five submarines were built, with one sent to the Houston/Galveston area in Texas, and lost in transit. The late historians and authors Eric Brock and Katherine Brash Jeter did considerable research on the subs and the Confederate Navy Yard and found documentation a number of machinists and engineers who had built the Hunley and other submarines for the South were in Shreveport the last year of the conflict.

via Civil War subs: Lost no more?.

Lincolniana Auction

Posted on by
Reply

There was an important auction this week of Lincoln and assassination memorabilia. I was surprised by this discrepancy:

The lock of hair, taken by Surgeon General Joseph K. Barnes shortly after Lincoln was shot by John Wilkes Booth, sold for $25,000.

An 1861 letter written by Booth to a friend boasting about his career and value as an actor sold for $30,000.

You’d have thought anything of Lincoln’s, much less his actual hair clipped by the doctor on site for his autopsy would be worth more than a simple letter by JWB. Thankfully, the article followed up with a handy explanation:

"The public was so disgusted by Booth’s atrocity that most all letters, signatures and documents mentioning him were destroyed after Lincoln’s death, making any that survive 150 years later exceedingly rare and valuable," said Don Ackerman, Consignment Director for Historical Americana at Heritage Auctions.

via Lock of Lincoln’s hair among items auctioned in Dallas – Yahoo News.

Newspaper partisanship

Posted on by
Reply

I wrote earlier of the slaveocrats’ role in bringing about the war; it’s fascinating yet horrific to watch how they lured moderates into their scheme, but after this article it’s slightly easier to see how they did it. Newspapers at the time were not held to much in the way of journalistic standards, and the boom in printing meant any idiot who could afford a press could disseminate his views. Sadly, the general public then was probably as unquestioning as the average consumer today.

In pre-Civil War America, the dominant newspapers were based in New York: James Gordon Bennett’s Herald, Horace Greeley’s Tribune and Henry J. Raymond’s Times. However, as Brayton Harris points out in “Newspapers in the Civil War,” the invention and expanded use of the telegraph and a soaring literacy rate in the U.S. led to a quadrupling of active newspapers across the country between 1825 and 1860.

In Delaware, as the Civil War loomed, erupted and progressed, those seeking control of the political process allied with likeminded newspaper editors to expand and encourage their constituencies. These journals heralded partisan viewpoints on behalf of their political patrons.

via Civil War Profiles: Newspaper partisanship in Civil War Delaware | Coastal Point.

Weekly Recap: Jan 27

Posted on by
Reply

Weekly Recap: Jan 27

Here’s a recap of last week’s Civil War Podcast blog topics, and suggested readings for further study.

 

Post: Southern Unionist Strongholds
The State of Jones
The State of Jones is a true story about the South during the Civil War—the real South. Not the South that has been mythologized in novels and movies, but an authentic, hardscrabble place where poor men were forced to fight a rich man’s war for slavery and cotton. In Jones County, Mississippi, a farmer named Newton Knight led his neighbors, white and black alike, in an insurrection against the Confederacy at the height of the Civil War. Knight’s life story mirrors the little-known story of class struggle in the South—and it shatters the image of the Confederacy as a unified front against the Union.

Post: Generals Who Fought Against Home & Country
For Cause and Comrades: Why Men Fought in the Civil War
It is to this question–why did they fight–that James McPherson, America’s preeminent Civil War historian, now turns his attention. He shows that, contrary to what many scholars believe, the soldiers of the Civil War remained powerfully convinced of the ideals for which they fought throughout the conflict. Motivated by duty and honor, and often by religious faith, these men wrote frequently of their firm belief in the cause for which they fought: the principles of liberty, freedom, justice, and patriotism.

When the South Wasn’t a Fan of States’ Rights

Posted on by
1

The more I read about the war’s origins, the more I dislike the slaveocrats. The Lost Cause tradition has swathed the discussion in the States’ Rights argument, but even a scratch on its surface reveals the ugly truth beneath. Eric Foner agrees in this article for Politico.

Whenever I lecture to non-academic audiences about the Civil War era, someone is bound to insist that the South fought for states’ rights rather than the long-term survival of slavery. In an extreme version of this view, Abraham Lincoln was not the Great Emancipator but a tyrant, the creator of the leviathan national state that essentially enslaved white Americans. This reading of the conflict is why a remarkable number of libertarians, self-proclaimed defenders of individual freedom, sympathize with the Old South, and why some even make excuses for slavery.

But this history omits one important part of antebellum history: When it came to enforcing and maintaining the peculiar institution against an increasingly anti-slavery North, the Old South was all too happy to forget its fear of federal power—a little-remembered fact in our modern retellings of the conflict.

When the South Wasn’t a Fan of States’ Rights – Eric Foner – POLITICO Magazine.

PBS planning Civil War drama

Posted on by
Reply

I guess the sesquicentennial took a few years to register in the minds of TV and movie producers, but they’re throwing their lot in now.  In addition to the less-than-promising shows mentioned last week, this is a PBS production backed by some Hollywood clout.  I’ll post more news as I see it; this has some serious promise!

After being wedded for so long to British-centric scripted series, including the mega-hit “Downton Abbey,” America’s public-television giant has plans to do a Civil War drama shot in Virginia.

The news was announced last week during the Television Critics Association Press Tour.

Based on true stories, the six-part series, which is yet to be titled, will follow two volunteer nurses on opposite sides of the conflict — one a staunch New England abolitionist and the other a young Confederate belle.

The series is being produced by Ridley Scott and David Zucker, and is scheduled to air this winter.

via Brit-centric PBS planning Civil War drama – Lowell Sun Online.

Fighting Against Home & Country

Posted on by
Reply

Another History Channel article, this time discussing a few of the generals who turned their back on their state to fight the war.  Not many surprises here, though I did learn that David Farragut was a total babe in his younger years.  Timbers shivered!

For many Americans, choosing a side in the Civil War was no easy task. While most people simply sided with their home state, others struggled with family pressures, personal political beliefs and their devotion to the federal government. Unwilling to break their military oaths, many Southern-born officers remained with the Union, but a surprising number of sympathetic Northerners also cast their lot with the Confederacy. These conflicted soldiers were often disowned by their families or regarded as traitors in their native states, but they also faced suspicion and distrust from their newfound brothers in arms. Below, get the facts on six generals who switched sides in the run-up to the Civil War.

via 6 Generals Who Fought Against their Home State in the Civil War — HISTORY Lists.