Civil War History - The South & Western TheatersCheck this forum for all South and Western Theater Questions. Included are the Western, Pacific, Trans-Mississippi, & Lower Seaboard and Gulf Approach Theaters.
Lots more stuff on the western theatre showing up in libraries these days. Some of it very well written. I grew up in North Carolina and was told that General Lee fought the war for the Confederacy. That wasn't exactly the whole story, as is evidenced by this board.
Visiting the park at Sabine Pass put me on the path to learning more about The War for Southern Independance. A handful of men holding off 5000 (shows ya don't mess with Texas) is a great story. How bout those cottonclads in Galveston taking on Union ships? Battles that kept Texas out of the hands of the North and keeping mills empty of cotton in New York. These are events that are absent in our school History books even here in Texas ...
Ya know, Bill. Nobody really cared about Texas then. Or now, for that matter.
__________________ 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 the textile mills there in the northeast would have had a different opinion. Not everybody in the North was worried about slaves but there businesses and jobs. If wasn't for these mills Banks would not have taken away valuable men and supplies from Grant to capture Shreveport and invade Texas all in the name of cotton. This venture could have caused the war to go on longer causing many more men to parish. It may not interest some but it is History and did affect a small portion of the war...
One would be hard pressed to make a case for the great importance of Missouri if one listed the five most important battles in that state.
Missouri was important, but never rose in status to gain much interest from historians.
Missouri logistically was too far north and too far west to sustain any large Confederate army. The Confederacy never captured St. Louis nor did they ever conduct a siege of that city. The Confederacy had no large fresh water navy that could supply an army in Missouri.
If one lists all the logistical reasons the Confederacy could not sustain itself in Missouri, one can only add to a long list of logistical reasons why the Confederates should never have seceded, as they could not defend many areas of interest, even in the early stages of the war.
One would be hard pressed to make a case for the great importance of Missouri if one listed the five most important battles in that state.
Missouri was important, but never rose in status to gain much interest from historians.
Missouri logistically was too far north and too far west to sustain any large Confederate army. The Confederacy never captured St. Louis nor did they ever conduct a siege of that city. The Confederacy had no large fresh water navy that could supply an army in Missouri.
If one lists all the logistical reasons the Confederacy could not sustain itself in Missouri, one can only add to a long list of logistical reasons why the Confederates should never have seceded, as they could not defend many areas of interest, even in the early stages of the war.
That Missouri fell so rapidly into Union hands is, for the large part, why there it doesn't generate interest as does Virginia or even Tennesee and Georgia. No big waging battles on the scale of those fought there may be found in Missouri.
Fans of the Trans-Missippippi, Pukes and Razorbacks might sharply disagree. Missouri had its own significant part in the overall picture with a rich, colorful story.
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. 
...
Linear Mode
