The authors discuss how the aggressiveness of the South resulted in heavy casualties and thus their losing the war. They attribute the aggressiveness to the Celtic heritage of the South. In supporting their claim, they discuss how the Celts were aggressive in battle, relying on the charge, and little else for victory. They trace Celtic battles from the days when the Celts battled the Romans and show how the final struggle between Celts and the Anglos (who predominantly settled around New England & New York) was the American Civil War.
Fine & dandy, but it doesn't explain why Lee or Hood, both of whom are (by name) of English descent, were extremely aggressive. It doesn't explain how the Union Army was hardly any different (Fredericksburg, Cold Harbor II, Spotsylvania Court House) attacked and suffered high casualties.
Good reading book, but despite the scholarly cites, I remain skeptical. For me the redeeming quality of the book is it is the first time I've seen anything on the course of study of the antebellum West Point Cadet.
Thanks for the heads-up Gary. There seems to be some scholarly interest in finding some correlation between heritage and the inclination toward aggressiveness. The "Celtic" hypothesis usually shows up.
As you've mentioned, that doesn't ring any bells. Was the South more Celtic than the North? Does a Celtic heritage promote the faux aristocratic pretentions -- the gentleman farmer?
Sam recommended a book sometime back and I've just spent 5 minutes looking for it. It presents an extensive study of who came from where in the British Isles, their ethnicity, and where they settled. The Roundheads, for example, tended to the north; the Cavaliers, the South. Were the Cavaliers Celtic?
That being said, the pre-War courses at West Point may well make up for the book's other shortcomings.
Thanks. Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
Ole, I believe that the book you're referring to is called "Albion's Seed". I read the book and it is excellent. I think the celtic claim is a bunch of hogwash, there is no indication that the South was any more "celtic" than the north. If anything the South was and is more Anglo-Saxon in it's heritage than any other part of the country because the mass migrations of the late 19th and early 20th centuries by and large did not affect the South.
Thanks, Loyal. What is it about Celtic that makes people want to be one?
Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
I think it's because to Americans being Celtic means Mel Gibson Movies, Green Beer and shamrocks. To be English, right or wrong, brings to mind tea drinking, snobbery, and Masterpiece Theater.
I thought "Attack and Die" was very strong on CW tactics. The Celtic thing wasn't persuasive for me, but it was quite a big deal for McWhiney, who wrote other books claiming Southern culture was based on Celtic values.
Maybe the southern army were so aggressive because they really didn't want to lose. I'm may not be of Celtic decent, but I also don't like to lose either. Losing stinks (I'd use stronger wording, but I'd get censored).
Bart
__________________ "Thank You....Noooo."
Major Charles Emerson Winchester III M.A.S.H. 4077th
I think it's because to Americans being Celtic means Mel Gibson Movies, Green Beer and shamrocks. To be English, right or wrong, brings to mind tea drinking, snobbery, and Masterpiece Theater.
And Benny Hill! Don't forget Benny Hill!
Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Attack and Die 
Linear Mode
