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 fault in your logic that you assume this was the rule, rather than the exception. This is a fault of your prejudice towards the Southerner and the institution in that he was more successful with slavery as an institution than the yankees were up North.
It was very likely an exception. But it did happen. And it's disgusting. The entire idea that, oh well, it was just on this guy makes my skin crawl. A runner can be hamstrung and, oh well, that was just that guy!
I'll give you that slavery was. It was not a nice time and we ought to all hang our heads in shame. But to say that guy was not the norm goads my goat some. So we get to play with owning another human. Best back off now.
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 was just playing on Battalion's tongue-in-cheek. (Humor is not one of the puritanical yankee's strong suits. It is as annoying to them as 'hospitality'!)
Battalion is Battalion, you are not. As for "yankees" having a sense of humor, it's there. It's just that we have to have something funny to laugh at.
But I do know of some accounts of freed negroes selling themselves back into slavery to get money for various causes. Robert of Avenel, and later, Doc, who returned to the plantation after the 13th amendment...
Do you "know" or are you just remembering such? A source would be nice.
Lucinda, a negress, remained with Letitia her entire life, and was the first black woman buried beside her mistress in Longwood Cemetery. I have visited her grave, and Letitia Burwell's grave, personally, when I visited there once some years ago.
So this means what to you and to others at this board?
So go ahead and tell us your horror stories about isolated incidents and try to pass them off as commonplace; that's an old yankee horror-story pattern which predates the most horrible yankee-storyteller of all, Stephen King, by some hundred odd years!
It never fails to amaze me at how some who support a Southern view of the war want to do everything in their power to ignore slavery or paint it as some kindly institution that 'wasn't that bad' as if individual acts of kindness somehow excuse the entire concept of keeping human beings in eternal bondage as property or work animals. Isolated incidents? I could begin a thread and fill it with those 'isolated incidents' and give a fiction writer a run for his money.
And don't ever own up to bringing the poor wretches over here, your own selves! Just get self-righteous about it in the 1860's and drone on ceaselessly about it from now on... to hide the fact that the yankees destroyed a country
in the process.
And the biggest attempt at misdirection is stated right here. Somehow, someway, the Civil War is responsible for our present-day state of affairs in the United States. Lincoln is the man who created all our ills and woes in the 21st century. The ignorance that advances this present-day agenda is appalling in its depth as it is in inability to understand history.
The belief that if somehow, the South had been successful in its attempt at secession and had been able to keep the institution of slavery would somehow be better for history and better for this nation is just plain stupid.
Talk about diversion and mis-direction! Sheeeesh!
The only one who is attempting diversion and mis-direction is yourself when you attempt to belittle what the causes of the war were and hide them from those who come here.
Beowulf
But I have noted this is your approach when trying to forward your own agenda, dressed up in the guise of what you consider the "real" history of the war.
And you make it plainly obvious that you would rather advance this agenda at the expense of historical fact and sources, relying instead on modern myth produced by those who are unhappy in the present.
Too bad.
Unionblue
__________________ "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
Sorry, timewalker, for a moment there I thought you misunderstood. The uncle and the ma'am would go on the block in a New York minute when the need came up. Don't know what you'd get for an aging slave. But when you're going broke, I'd guess the uncle or the ma'am would be worth something. And it would have all the pathos of selling the most favored horse.
Dolly, we hardly knew ya.
ole
I hope people don't take this wrong, but equate slaves to dogs. Many people are very kind to their dogs - even "love" their dogs. But then there are also the Michael Vicks of the world who use their dogs for dogfighting and brutalize them.
But for those who "love" their dogs, a dog is still a dog. Their offspring will be sold because they don't need that many dogs. Yes, a few will treat them almost like part of the family. However, for the vast majority, like you say if it becomes an ecomomic burden to own the dog, out it goes.
As long as a person is considered property, they will, in the end, be treated like property. My car is valuable and I care for it because it is valuable. But it is still property. Slaves were taken care of because they had value. Roughly equivalent to a car today, if I recall correctly.
It is almost humorous (but actually rather sad) that Beowulf can tout the moral superiority of the slaveowner in attacking the Northerners of the time. Oh, slavery was forced on the South, the Northerner is the morally wrong one, etc., etc., etc. Funny how he constantly berates us for our alleged moral superiority, yet the only moral superiority I get is from him. Neither you nor I, not Unionblue, nor Cash, nor any of the others on the forum deny that the North had a role in slavery, that many in the North were complicit in slavery, that many in the North benefitted, directly or indirectly from slavery. Yet we are accused of being holier than thou and attacking the poor morally superior slaveholders to cover up the North's own moral failings, which I believe we all freely admit. I have said it before, "when the law is against you, argue the facts. When the facts are against you, argue the law. When the law and the facts are against you, attack the other side."
In another thread we are talking about how to judge historians. This is a prime example. When you can admit no wrong on one side, and attribute all that is evil to the other side - when the entire world is black and white and there are no shades of grey - when you claim that Davis was all angel and Lincoln all devil (or for that matter, vice versa) - then you have left the realm of history and entered the world of apologia - "defending the faith."
We must accept that since we are not of the True Church of the South, we are to be burned at the stake as heretics.
I'll bring the marshmallows.
__________________ "There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were generals figthing in it... Of the two groups, the historians are the more belligerent." David Donald, Lincoln Reconsidered (1961)
And I'll bring the graham crackers and chocolate bars. Smores all around!
Sincerely,
Unionblue
__________________ "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
But I have noted this is your approach when trying to forward your own agenda, dressed up in the guise of what you consider the "real" history of the war.
And you make it plainly obvious that you would rather advance this agenda at the expense of historical fact and sources, relying instead on modern myth produced by those who are unhappy in the present.
Too bad.
Unionblue
June Goode - OUR WAR (contain's Letitia Burwell's diaries. I know June's not blowing smoke because I have been to the Alderman Library at UVA and held her actual diaries in my hands... And read them. They are two composition books, one black and white flecked, just like the paper ones they sell in Walmart, (exactly) only these are CLOTH... the other Green and white flecked CLOTH). I have also met June Goode.
Also by Letitia Burwell A Journal of a Girl's life in Virginia before the war (published 1895) available $7.00 at confederatereprint.com
I know this woman does not fit your's nor Cash's idea of credible sources, just as Jefferson Davises doesn't... but that is YOUR PROBLEM!
If my agenda is to leave a record of plantation life as it was, then that will surely fall foul of you and your agenda, which is to justify an unnecessary war to those who come after you.
What gives me hope is when McPherson starts in on his
'war crimes are sometimes necessary' rhetoric.
I don't want to interrupt my opponent when he is making a mistake, er... expressing himself!
June Goode - OUR WAR (contain's Letitia Burwell's diaries. I know June's not blowing smoke because I have been to the Alderman Library at UVA and held her actual diaries in my hands... And read them. They are two composition books, one black and white flecked, just like the paper ones they sell in Walmart, (exactly) only these are CLOTH... the other Green and white flecked CLOTH). I have also met June Goode.
Also by Letitia Burwell A Journal of a Girl's life in Virginia before the war (published 1895) available $7.00 at confederatereprint.com
Thank you for taking the time to list your sources.
I know this woman does not fit your's nor Cash's idea of credible sources, just as Jefferson Davises doesn't... but that is YOUR PROBLEM!
What you think you know is your biggest problem when posting at this board. I have not read nor seen the book/diaries you have given. I cannot comment on them until I have read them or read about the authors.
If my agenda is to leave a record of plantation life as it was, then that will surely fall foul of you and your agenda, which is to justify an unnecessary war to those who come after you.
If your agenda is to leave a record of plantation life as it was, then you're right, because it is plain to see by your posts and comments you consider slavery unimportant as a cause of the Civil War. In this, you are always going to "fall foul" whenever you make the claim that it was an "unnecessary war" and try to twist history completely out of shape to those who come after us.
What gives me hope is when McPherson starts in on his
'war crimes are sometimes necessary' rhetoric.
And what gives me faith that history will stand the test of time and assualts of neoconfederate rants is that most people can read.
I don't want to interrupt my opponent when he is making a mistake, er... expressing himself!
Don't worry, you are more than upsetting any balanced view of history and your "opponent" even with mistakes, is still coming out far ahead.
Beowulf
I like that phrase "plantation live as it was." Sounds so hopeful, so pleasant.
For anyone who wasn't a slave.
Unionblue
__________________ "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
I like that phrase "plantation live as it was." Sounds so hopeful, so pleasant.
For anyone who wasn't a slave.
While Beowulf is eulogizing plantation life, he might want to consider the Barrow planation in Arkansas.
In the 1840 Census, Mr. Barrow had 129 slaves. A very detailed list of discipline on the planation has been found. Mr. Barrow had slaves whipped 160 times during the two-year period 1840-41. That implies he had a slave whipped every 4.56 days, on average, although often the whippings came in groups on the same day. One day he had his driver whipped because he had no idea who had committed a particular offense.
This does not count other punishments Mr. Barrow also used, such as "chaining" and "staking down". Mr. Barrow believed that uncertainty was a powerful principle in his disciple of slaves, and so devoted some effort to varying the type of punishment.
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
While Beowulf is eulogizing plantation life, he might want to consider the Barrow planation in Arkansas.
In the 1840 Census, Mr. Barrow had 129 slaves. A very detailed list of discipline on the planation has been found. Mr. Barrow had slaves whipped 160 times during the two-year period 1840-41. That implies he had a slave whipped every 4.56 days, on average, although often the whippings came in groups on the same day. One day he had his driver whipped because he had no idea who had committed a particular offense.
This does not count other punishments Mr. Barrow also used, such as "chaining" and "staking down". Mr. Barrow believed that uncertainty was a powerful principle in his disciple of slaves, and so devoted some effort to varying the type of punishment.
Tim
Tim
Is this the same Bennt Barrow in many book (because its teh most complete acount of punshment and reward we have)cites on whippings?, if so why is it his planation is in La, when you have it in Ark?. When you search on Bennt barlow, look up the isle of wight refernce, which im sure you will like. Im sure we are talking about teh same man and plaqnation, but wnat to be sure.
next is your maths, he had 200 slaves, 129 worked on the land, another way to put it is that per year, 0.7 whippings per year per hand, and the carrot was in both 1839and 1840 barrows slaves earnt in bonuses between 15 and 20 dollars, which ment they got about 20% of the national wage average as abounus, which was why Bennt claimed My negros have there name in the neighbour hod,for makeing more than anyone else, and they think whatever they do is better than everyone else". You dont get that attitude from beating it in, you get it from the rewards sytem.
__________________ "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Have fun. In addition to the quote from the Captain of the ship I have already given you, I have seen several accounts by other people present at the time who clearly describe her as flying one American flag when she approached, and hoisting a second one after the first shot.
Tim
Well yes ive seen those reports as well, but since they also say that they ran up the Union flag after being taken under fire, it kinda defeats your logic, since they set sail under the Union jack as per there orders, were taken under fire and run up the colours and sailed into Chralston with them flying, does not mean that when fired on she was flying them, was my point, which all the first hand acounts agree on.
__________________ "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Is this the same Bennt Barrow in many book (because its teh most complete acount of punshment and reward we have)cites on whippings?, if so why is it his planation is in La, when you have it in Ark?. When you search on Bennt barlow, look up the isle of wight refernce, which im sure you will like. Im sure we are talking about teh same man and plaqnation, but wnat to be sure.
The same. The Ark instead of LA appears to be a mental typo on my part.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanny
next is your maths, he had 200 slaves, 129 worked on the land, another way to put it is that per year, 0.7 whippings per year per hand, and the carrot was in both 1839and 1840 barrows slaves earnt in bonuses between 15 and 20 dollars, which ment they got about 20% of the national wage average as abounus, which was why Bennt claimed My negros have there name in the neighbour hod,for makeing more than anyone else, and they think whatever they do is better than everyone else". You dont get that attitude from beating it in, you get it from the rewards sytem.
No, he did not have 200 slaves in 1840 according to the source I was working from. The number in the passage in Time on the Cross is extrapolated from numbers in the 1850s, working backwards from the appendices in the Davis book, while the 129 is the number actually shown in the Census. The reference is to personal research by Professor William Scarborough of the University of Southern Mississippi into the 1840 Census manuscripts.
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
