Civil War + 150 years

[roywhite]

Anniversary of Ft. Sumter shelling coming up April 12, and should see extra Civil War coverage over the next 4+ years.

I am re-watching Ken Burns' outstanding series, which is running on PBS this week. There have been 2 segments already (even last night, I watched way more of this show than the Butler--UConn game...glad of it) with 3 more to come over next 3 nights (April 5-7).

Burns' series is very impactful. I'd heard the stat before, but was reminded that 600,000 total killed over the course of the war represented 2% of US population at the time, or today's equivalent of 6 million+ killed.

Any battlefield folks or serious Civil War hobbyists out there?

[Lord Ash]

Yep, I am a pretty big "fan" of the ACW. I actually have a whole room of my house dedicated to military prints and artifacts from various wars, including the War of Northern Aggression (heh.) I also collect small toy soldiers to represent the era, and have a pretty good library of books. You can come on by and take a peek at my blog, which is currently focused on the video game I'm working on, but also has a lot of ACW stuff if you look through it!

My blog

The Burns documentary is FANTASTIC... the music is maybe the most hauntingly memorable piece from any show ever.

A fascinating time of our history, and amazing because it didn't happen as long ago as it might seem, and it still has a huge impact on our nation today.

[roywhite]

Thanks very much for the link to your blog, Lord Ash.

Amazing collection and great photos.

[Lord Ash]

No prob, glad you enjoyed!

Here is a link to the room itself, which would be of more interest to a general population... it does feature a few ACW pieces, including an original pack.

Link

And here is my best friends equivalent, which is like a darn museum

Link

[Indoor66]

Anniversary of Ft. Sumter shelling coming up April 12, and should see extra Civil War coverage over the next 4+ years.

I am re-watching Ken Burns' outstanding series, which is running on PBS this week. There have been 2 segments already (even last night, I watched way more of this show than the Butler--UConn game...glad of it) with 3 more to come over next 3 nights (April 5-7).

Burns' series is very impactful. I'd heard the stat before, but was reminded that 600,000 total killed over the course of the war represented 2% of US population at the time, or today's equivalent of 6 million+ killed.

Any battlefield folks or serious Civil War hobbyists out there?

Is that the recent unpleasantness that was a war of Northern Aggression to which you refer?

[Lord Ash]

I do enjoy all the names people use for the Civil War... I teach them to my kids when we discuss perspective and point of view, and they always get a kick out of them

[roywhite]

Last night in the Ken Burns series covered 1863.

The fighting was just brutal; the weapons had become more accurate and more deadly, but military tactics had not evolved very much, and men would sometimes just walk into deadly volley after deadly volley. Just horrific human costs.

The coverage of the Battle of Gettysburg was terrific, as was the part on the Gettysburg Address delivered by Lincoln. The Address was only 277 words, but may be the best, most important speech in American history.

I have been to the Gettysburg battlefield for a tour, but it has been quite some time; I'll try to get back there sometime in the next year.

[Lord Ash]

Oh, definitely go back! They have done a LOT of work on the field, including chopping down the woods that weren't there, and replanting the orchards and stuff that were. You can really see now how thoroughly Little Round Top dominated the field.

And yeah, the tactics were really not caught up... everyone was still fighting as if it were the Napoleonic wars, with smoothbore muskets all around. It wasn't until the end of the war that Lee and Longstreet started getting their men behind ditches regularly, but by then, it was too late. I often teach in class that TECHNOLOGY often improves first, and TACTICS take time to catch up... we are doing WWI right now, and the kids are blown away by the idea of mass charges and cavalry trying to attack machine guns and barbed wire... it takes a few years of slaughter before the tactics finally catch up.

[wavedukefan70s]

I dont keep up or collect on the revolutionary or civil war.but we use to have some harpers weekly newspapers from that era.if i can come across a few.{i have no idea where they went}ill pm you your welcome to them.i did escort the hunley in with several hundred boaters.it was a moving moment to say the least.just something interesting i had to share.before hurricane hugo in 1989.there were tunnels that lead into the forts and batteries around charleston.they were known by locals.secret passage ways to batteries around sullivans island and james island.we use to go in them at night as teens.at the time i didnt realize that i was walking through history.with the knowledge of swamp gas now.i probably wouldnt go in them if they werent covered up.you had to get out of them when the tide came in.also along the ashley river there are still pathways made of crushed oyster shells from the revolutionary war times.we have one a few hundred yards behind my house.if your ever down in charleston.just outside of charleston is a town called summerville.they have a library named the timrod library.its off of main st.they have the oldest maps of the area i have ever seen.its a treat to go look at.

[wavedukefan70s]

Here is a link to a list of events happening around charleston.
http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2...-at-the-forts/

[OldPhiKap]

It's amazing that we got this country off the ground, let alone kept it together for this long.

We are a truly blessed nation.

[JBDuke]

The Washington Post has a special section today devoted to The Civil War. Here's a link to the online version: http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/civil-war

[Jarhead]

As a person who grow up in Alexandria, Virginia, the same town as Robert E. Lee, I still cannot understand celebrating the start of the Civil War, the darkest period in our history as a nation. We mourn and memorialize the start of all our other wars, including the American Revolution, but we do rightly celebrate the end of each of them, including the Civil War. The Union won, and thank God for that.

[roywhite]

As a person who grow up in Alexandria, Virginia, the same town as Robert E. Lee, I still cannot understand celebrating the start of the Civil War, the darkest period in our history as a nation. We mourn and memorialize the start of all our other wars, including the American Revolution, but we do rightly celebrate the end of each of them, including the Civil War. The Union won, and thank God for that.

Celebrate? I guess that's in the eyes of the beholder, or on an individual basis.

But certainly it's a hugely important part of American history, that has shaped the nation and continues to have an impact. And to re-visit the events on the occasion of the 150th anniversary and either refresh our memories or teach about these events to a new generation seems worthwhile.

To use some of Lincoln's words from the Gettysburg Address, I think "it is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this."

[Olympic Fan]

Celebrate? I guess that's in the eyes of the beholder, or on an individual basis.

But certainly it's a hugely important part of American history, that has shaped the nation and continues to have an impact. And to re-visit the events on the occasion of the 150th anniversary and either refresh our memories or teach about these events to a new generation seems worthwhile.

To use some of Lincoln's words from the Gettysburg Address, I think "it is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this."

Part of me agrees with Jarhead -- the Civil War was a tragedy and represents one of the darkest elements of our history. I'd like to forget it. But another part of me agrees with roywhite, we ought to remember history and try to learn from it.

I hate to bring up the old cliche about those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. But there is truth in it and what happened 1861-65 is nothing something I want to repeat.

It does disturb me that so much of what we hear about the war and its causes are warped. I grew up in North Carolina and I am the descendent of Confederate veterans. I was taught that the war was not about slavery, but about state's rights and all this other stuff. The "War of Northern Aggression" right?

It was only when I got older and actually read some history that I realized what a load of bull that was. The war was fought for one reason -- to protect the institution of human slavery.

Yes, most on the Northern side fought to preserve the Union, not to end slavery. But they had to do that because the firebrands on the Southern side were afraid that the election of a "black abolitionist" as president (yeah, I know Lincoln was white, but that was the rhetoric of the day) would threaten their slaves.

I also know that the great majority of the soliders who fought for the Confederacy did not own slaves. But what's rarely mentioned is that the wealthy Southerners that made up the bulk of the legislators who precipitated Seccession did own slaves and were acting in their own interest.

Don't believe me?: Read their own words. Every Southern state published Articles of Seccession (a sort of attempt to copy the Declaration of Independence). They made it quite clear why they were seceeding -- to protect slavery.

The very first line of the Georgia Artciles reads:

"For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery."

From the South Carolina Articles:

"A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction."

There's plenty more -- just check http://americancivilwar.com/documents/

Further proof of the cause of the war was the reaction of Southerners in those few regionals that didn't rely on slavery. In the mountains of western North Carolina and eastern Tennessee, free Southerners fought in civil war within a civil war to defend their status as American citizens. The mountaineers of West Virginia were so successful (with the help of Union Army troops under George McClellan) that they were able to throw off the yoke of the slaveholding bulk of the state and become an independent state. But there were pro-American undergrounds in every Southern state.

The Civil War was about slavery. I hate to be reminded that this nation was founded as a slave-owning nation. I'm proud that so many Americans had the insight and the courage to oppose that "peculiar institution." I'm sorry that so many Southerners -- including my forebears -- were deluded into defending such a wicked cause.

Their courage and their sacrifice -- even for the wrong cause -- deserves to be honored. But the cause they were fighting for should not be sugar-coated. It was as unworthy a cause as could be imagined.

[hughgs]

Part of me agrees with Jarhead -- the Civil War was a tragedy and represents one of the darkest elements of our history. I'd like to forget it. But another part of me agrees with roywhite, we ought to remember history and try to learn from it.

I hate to bring up the old cliche about those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. But there is truth in it and what happened 1861-65 is nothing something I want to repeat.

It does disturb me that so much of what we hear about the war and its causes are warped. I grew up in North Carolina and I am the descendent of Confederate veterans. I was taught that the war was not about slavery, but about state's rights and all this other stuff. The "War of Northern Aggression" right?

It was only when I got older and actually read some history that I realized what a load of bull that was. The war was fought for one reason -- to protect the institution of human slavery.

Yes, most on the Northern side fought to preserve the Union, not to end slavery. But they had to do that because the firebrands on the Southern side were afraid that the election of a "black abolitionist" as president (yeah, I know Lincoln was white, but that was the rhetoric of the day) would threaten their slaves.

I also know that the great majority of the soliders who fought for the Confederacy did not own slaves. But what's rarely mentioned is that the wealthy Southerners that made up the bulk of the legislators who precipitated Seccession did own slaves and were acting in their own interest.

Don't believe me?: Read their own words. Every Southern state published Articles of Seccession (a sort of attempt to copy the Declaration of Independence). They made it quite clear why they were seceeding -- to protect slavery.

The very first line of the Georgia Artciles reads:

"For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery."

From the South Carolina Articles:

"A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction."

There's plenty more -- just check http://americancivilwar.com/documents/

Further proof of the cause of the war was the reaction of Southerners in those few regionals that didn't rely on slavery. In the mountains of western North Carolina and eastern Tennessee, free Southerners fought in civil war within a civil war to defend their status as American citizens. The mountaineers of West Virginia were so successful (with the help of Union Army troops under George McClellan) that they were able to throw off the yoke of the slaveholding bulk of the state and become an independent state. But there were pro-American undergrounds in every Southern state.

The Civil War was about slavery. I hate to be reminded that this nation was founded as a slave-owning nation. I'm proud that so many Americans had the insight and the courage to oppose that "peculiar institution." I'm sorry that so many Southerners -- including my forebears -- were deluded into defending such a wicked cause.

Their courage and their sacrifice -- even for the wrong cause -- deserves to be honored. But the cause they were fighting for should not be sugar-coated. It was as unworthy a cause as could be imagined.

I was always told by well-meaning friends that the Civil War was completely about states' rights. They just always forget that it was about states' rights to keep slaves. I don't necessarily think that their thinking was bull, I just think that it's an excuse to not denigrate their ancestors. Nobody wants to think that their family didn't act in a noble fashion.