Civil War History - Secession and PoliticsWas it Slavery, or was it States Rights? Perhaps it was the election of Lincoln? What were the real reasons for Southern Secession and what were the political issues in this time of war? Find your answers here in the Secession and Politics Disussion.
"the question may be isolated by the incontrovertible statement that if the Negro had never been brought to America, our Civil War could not have occurred."
- James Ford Rhodes, "Slavery as a Single Cause," from Lectures on the American Civil War. (New York: Macmillan, 1913)
__________________ -
"It was a very peculiar time." - Franklin D. Cossitt
Ancestors in USA Army: 6th IA Inf, 11th IL Cav, 1st AL Cav; 122nd NY Inf; 6th MI Cav; 35th MA Inf; 100th IL Inf; 1st CO Inf/Cav; 22nd IN Inf
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
Bruce Catton (in his AOP trilogy, I believe) made the point that although many (if not most) northerners 'thought' they were fighting the war to reestablish a pristine past, when in fact (especially after the Emancipation Proclamation) they were fighting to move into the future.
Lincoln was the most conscious of this movement 'forward' rather than 'back' and although unsure of the ultimate results of this movement, he was satisfied that it was the correct direction. As a corollary, Catton felt that the armies of the north (especially the AoP) were the agents of that movement, that not only were they pushing the south, but were also dragging the north, both, into the future.
Although promissing at first glance, I found it disappointing. It's not a bad college essay, and it touches on several interesting issues and events, but it meanders around from isssue to issue and contains several dubious if not entirely inacurate assertions ("When the South hanged John Brown...", etc.).
__________________ -
"It was a very peculiar time." - Franklin D. Cossitt
Ancestors in USA Army: 6th IA Inf, 11th IL Cav, 1st AL Cav; 122nd NY Inf; 6th MI Cav; 35th MA Inf; 100th IL Inf; 1st CO Inf/Cav; 22nd IN Inf
The South didn't hang John Brown? Brown attempted to sieze federal property but was given to Virginia for trial. Virginia convicted him and hung him (not that a Federal court would have reached a different conclusion). The South wanted him hung and would not have been satisfied had the Feds hung him. It was a case of "give John Brown to the dogs and maybe they'll quit barking."
As far as Federal law was concerned, John Brown trespassed and killed some people in his attempted siezure. It was U.S. Marines who thwarted his effort and captured him. The South considered his crime from a different angle: John Brown intended to foment a slave insurrection. Far more than a Federal threat was the threat to the Southern institution. He wasn't hung for his raid but for his intention.
The South hung John Brown and was glad to do it.
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
While we might differ in what was considered "the South" pre or post secession, the fact is that no individual state, particularly before secession, should be considered the same thing as "the South"; perhaps "of the South", but the concept of "the South" must be inclusive of more than any one state.
I'll agree "the South" was glad of it, but it wasn't "the South" that did it, it was the state of Virginia.
__________________ -
"It was a very peculiar time." - Franklin D. Cossitt
Ancestors in USA Army: 6th IA Inf, 11th IL Cav, 1st AL Cav; 122nd NY Inf; 6th MI Cav; 35th MA Inf; 100th IL Inf; 1st CO Inf/Cav; 22nd IN Inf
The attitude that hung him was very much that of the entire slaveholding south. In for a penny, in for a pound. The south hung him.
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
The attitude that hung him was very much that of the entire slaveholding south. In for a penny, in for a pound. The south hung him.
Ole
Whoa! Seems to me it was a police action (led by Col. Robert E. Lee, USA under orders) to stop a maniac, however well intended one might consider his motives. There is always speculation that fear of the abolitionists and actual guerilla warfare in Virginia and North Carolina had much to do with the decisions of those states to secede and enter the war.
__________________ Ancestors in US Army: 13th TN Cav; 10th TN Cav; 3rd NC Inf
Ancestors in CSA Army: 48th VA; 63rd VA, 5th NC Cav; 37th NC
Wife and Grandson's CSA: 15th AL, 51st GA, 41st TN; 36th TN; GA Mil 1197 Dist
Nevermind John Brown's motives, they were, at best, criminal. It remains that he struck out at the practice of slavery -- a southern institution at the time -- and the practitioners of slavery exacted retribution. A good case can be made that "the south hanged John Brown."
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
All public executions as symbolic acts, signifying much more than the simple act of killing someone.
As pointed out on this thread, Va. wanted the job as Brown's exectioner (would have demanded, if the US Gov't had demurred) and the leaders of Va. considered that they were doing this for all slave holding states.
To me, it is significant, that the great majority in All the slave states rejoiced at John Brown's execution, while the the Great majority in All the free states mourned. There seemed little crossover in these sentiments between North and South.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
