Did the south really fight over slavery? Hear it from the horse’s mouth in his own words.

Viper21

Brigadier General
Moderator
Silver Patron
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Location
Rockbridge County, Virginia
On the contrary, anyone can say "go Google it". That's not really offering a source.
100%

Kind of an odd request. Go find a source (yourself) which contradicts your own claim..?! :O o: A request like that, comes across as lazy, & pretty arrogant in my opinion. As long as we've participated in this forum, the standard has been, to back up your claims, or rebuttals, with actual sources. "Go to google", is hardly backing up a position, or rebutting anything.
 

GwilymT

Sergeant Major
Joined
Aug 20, 2018
Location
Pittsburgh
Didn’t Pollard portray slavery as good though? Like it was a war of slavery yes but slavery was the noble side as it created the chivalrous south?

"Slavery established in the South a peculiar and noble type of civilization. It was not without attendant vices; but the virtues which followed in its train were numerous and peculiar, and asserted the general good effect of the institution on the ideas and manners of the South. If habits of command sometimes degenerated into cruelty and insolence; yet, in the greater number of instances, they inculcated notions of chivalry, polished the manners and produced many noble and generous virtues. If the relief of a large class of whites from the demands of physical labour gave occasion in some instances for idle and dissolute lives, yet at the same time it afforded opportunity for extraordinary culture, elevated the standards of scholarship in the South, enlarged and emancipated social intercourse, and established schools of individual refinement. The South had an element in its society - a landed gentry - which the North envied, and for which its substitute was a coarse ostentatious aristocracy that smelt of the trade, and that, however it cleansed itself and aped the elegance of the South, and packed its houses with fine furniture, could never entirely subdue a sneaking sense of its inferiority. There is a singularly bitter hate which is inseparable from a sense of inferiority; and every close observer of Northern society has discovered how there lurked in every form of hostility to the South the conviction that the Northern man, however disguised with ostentation, was coarse and inferior in comparison with the aristocracy and chivalry of the South." Edward Pollard, The Lost Cause, Pages 50-51

From the American Battlefield Trust link defining The Lost Cause that @Andersonh1 provided:
"Second, slavery was portrayed as a positive good; submissive, happy, and faithful slaves were better off in the system of chattel slavery which offered them protection. Confederate Vice President Alexander H. Stephens declared in 1861 'Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition.' After the war, these formerly enslaved people were now said to be unprepared for freedom, which was an argument against Reconstruction and the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments of the Constitution."

If what Pollard wrote is not the Lost Cause then I don't know what is.
Pollard did portray slavery as good and the confederate cause as just. Now folks have turned to downplaying slavery as an issue while maintaining that the confederate cause was just. When Pollard was writing one could still get away with arguing that slavery was a positive good. Up until the 1950s/60s you could get away with “slavery wasn’t really that bad”, now we are just left with folks who refuse to acknowledge it as an issue at all... unless to highlight a “black confederate”.
 

Rhea Cole

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Location
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
100%

Kind of an odd request. Go find a source (yourself) which contradicts your own claim..?! :O o: A request like that, comes across as lazy, & pretty arrogant in my opinion. As long as we've participated in this forum, the standard has been, to back up your claims, or rebuttals, with actual sources. "Go to google", is hardly backing up a position, or rebutting anything.
Is there room on the site to list several thousand citations? If so, I have access to one that is a research resource. Of course, it would involve reading that “..,which contradicts your own claim…” The creation of the Lost Cause false narrative & the harm it did is settled history. The Encyclopedia of Virginia citation is a particularly good one.
 

Rhea Cole

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Location
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
You assume incorrectly. The condemnation of books or authors that appear even remotely sympathetic to some small aspect of the CS, or who don't attack the South viciously enough, as "Lost Cause" is very real. I saw it fairly quickly once I began reading Civil War history, which is why I'm now skeptical of many claims about the "Lost Cause".

It's like your claims that Pollard's book was the origin of the "Lost Cause" mythology. My own impression of it was very different, as I've noted several times now. I could give other examples from various claims that I've read or which have come up in discussion. When I see a lost cause claim and then investigate and see something quite different, it makes me take all the other claims with a grain of salt. I look at them with a skeptical eye.

It doesn't matter how many Google citations there are. It's the quality of the research that matters, not the amount. It's the desire for truth that is important as well. A falsehood repeated a thousand times is still a falsehood.
The first lesson, literally, of my intro to philosophy class was that in order to have a discourse, you must first agree on what the words mean.

When I use the term, The Lost Cause, it is from the study of the counterfactual narrative that Jubal Early & The Southern Historical Society publications & the UDC put out. Have you read the “Your Friend the Klan” booklet that the UDC distributed to to schools? How about the other booklets extolling the cause & misrepresenting the reasons for secession that accompanied it?

Are you aware that historians at Vanderbilt & the University of the South were so hostile to black people that they deliberately left out the massive contributions of self liberated people from the histories they wrote? How about when the service records of Tennessee CW veterans on both sides were copied & brought to the TN Library & Archive the USCT was deliberately left out?

Anybody who visited the CW battlefield visitor centers built for the centennial could have been forgiven if they came away without knowing that blacks even lived in the South. The legacy of the historic amnesia about what slavery was really like & the contribution of slaves in their own liberation was clearly represented by the vacuum created by their absence. The ongoing replacement of the 1950’s era VC’s is a long needed restoration of the actual history.

It was the twaddle taught to my mother & passed on to me that I refer to when I refer to the false narrative of the Lost Cause. It is the near 100 year record of the publications of The Southern Historical Society & the UDC that I am referring to when I write the words Lost Cause.

Sadly, in this day & time when individuals use the Lost Cause as an excuse to not read things that contradict their preconceived beliefs, that is the lost cause I am referring to. It is the refusal of some individuals to investigate the genesis of their beliefs & follow the historic record to a logical conclusion thst is the present day lost cause.

Finally, I am offended personally that anybody would believe that my slaveholding family members were stupid enough to go to war for anything a intellectually flaccid as The Lost Cause.
 
Last edited:

Rhea Cole

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Location
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
Didn’t Pollard portray slavery as good though? Like it was a war of slavery yes but slavery was the noble side as it created the chivalrous south?

"Slavery established in the South a peculiar and noble type of civilization. It was not without attendant vices; but the virtues which followed in its train were numerous and peculiar, and asserted the general good effect of the institution on the ideas and manners of the South. If habits of command sometimes degenerated into cruelty and insolence; yet, in the greater number of instances, they inculcated notions of chivalry, polished the manners and produced many noble and generous virtues. If the relief of a large class of whites from the demands of physical labour gave occasion in some instances for idle and dissolute lives, yet at the same time it afforded opportunity for extraordinary culture, elevated the standards of scholarship in the South, enlarged and emancipated social intercourse, and established schools of individual refinement. The South had an element in its society - a landed gentry - which the North envied, and for which its substitute was a coarse ostentatious aristocracy that smelt of the trade, and that, however it cleansed itself and aped the elegance of the South, and packed its houses with fine furniture, could never entirely subdue a sneaking sense of its inferiority. There is a singularly bitter hate which is inseparable from a sense of inferiority; and every close observer of Northern society has discovered how there lurked in every form of hostility to the South the conviction that the Northern man, however disguised with ostentation, was coarse and inferior in comparison with the aristocracy and chivalry of the South." Edward Pollard, The Lost Cause, Pages 50-51

From the American Battlefield Trust link defining The Lost Cause that @Andersonh1 provided:
"Second, slavery was portrayed as a positive good; submissive, happy, and faithful slaves were better off in the system of chattel slavery which offered them protection. Confederate Vice President Alexander H. Stephens declared in 1861 'Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition.' After the war, these formerly enslaved people were now said to be unprepared for freedom, which was an argument against Reconstruction and the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments of the Constitution."

If what Pollard wrote is not the Lost Cause then I don't know what is.
This is what happens when actual citations enter the discussion.
 

Rhea Cole

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Location
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
100%

Kind of an odd request. Go find a source (yourself) which contradicts your own claim..?! :O o: A request like that, comes across as lazy, & pretty arrogant in my opinion. As long as we've participated in this forum, the standard has been, to back up your claims, or rebuttals, with actual sources. "Go to google", is hardly backing up a position, or rebutting anything.
That is a very revealing statement. I am 72 & am blessed with very intelligent gran & great granddaughters. “Go Google it.” Is the equivalent of the go look it up that I grew up with. These days, rather than demanding that somebody else become your no fee research assistant, you can access a world of information at the stroke of a key. In the not so distant past, I would have had to go to California & check into a hotel in order to access the Huntington Library. Cross referencing my research there with letters from the Stones River NB collection on the same day would have been something out of Marvel Comics.

When you think back on the misery of getting stuck in traffic, mining the card catalogue, winnowing heaps of irrelevant texts & endless hours of wasted downtime waiting for texts to arrive in the mail, Google It! Has an almost magical ring to it.

I guess this geezer is just too up to date for some folks to keep up with. When I read something I don’t agree with or don’t understand or never heard of, I Google it. Especially if it contradicts what I already believe, I Google it. After reading academic papers or articles I can contribute to the ongoing discussion. What a wonderful world we live in today.
 

Andersonh1

Brigadier General
Moderator
Joined
Jan 12, 2016
Location
South Carolina
That is a very revealing statement. I am 72 & am blessed with very intelligent gran & great granddaughters. “Go Google it.” Is the equivalent of the go look it up that I grew up with. These days, rather than demanding that somebody else become your no fee research assistant, you can access a world of information at the stroke of a key.

Then if you want my sources, feel free to Google them. Far be it from me to be your no fee research assistant.
 
Last edited:

uaskme

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Location
SE Tennessee
Pollard did portray slavery as good and the confederate cause as just. Now folks have turned to downplaying slavery as an issue while maintaining that the confederate cause was just. When Pollard was writing one could still get away with arguing that slavery was a positive good. Up until the 1950s/60s you could get away with “slavery wasn’t really that bad”, now we are just left with folks who refuse to acknowledge it as an issue at all... unless to highlight a “black confederate”.
Bull. People didn’t get away with calling Slavery a Positive Good after the CW. Most didn’t before the War.

All Southerners who I have seen post here recognized Slavery as a major Issue and that to some Slavery was THE issue. However another major issue was control of the Federal Government and economic dominance. More than some can comprehend, So the whole causation is reduced to a Single cause. Which is a fallacy of describing a complex subject with a simple solution. The cornerstone of the Yankee Myth.

Yankee narrative preservation group don’t seem to have an answer why Lincoln called the war a fight for Union and a White Man’s Fight. Don’t have a answer why Lincoln protected Slavery until the North discovered they were losing. Don’t have a answer why Lincoln protected Slavery in all occupied Federal Territory until the End of the War. Don’t have an answer why the Egalitarian North, had. 1% Black population pre war. Tried to exterminate Native Americans and excluded the Chinese after exploiting their Labor.

Maybe it just wasn’t as simple as some would portrat?
 

Viper21

Brigadier General
Moderator
Silver Patron
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Location
Rockbridge County, Virginia
That is a very revealing statement. I am 72 & am blessed with very intelligent gran & great granddaughters. “Go Google it.” Is the equivalent of the go look it up that I grew up with. These days, rather than demanding that somebody else become your no fee research assistant, you can access a world of information at the stroke of a key. In the not so distant past, I would have had to go to California & check into a hotel in order to access the Huntington Library. Cross referencing my research there with letters from the Stones River NB collection on the same day would have been something out of Marvel Comics.

When you think back on the misery of getting stuck in traffic, mining the card catalogue, winnowing heaps of irrelevant texts & endless hours of wasted downtime waiting for texts to arrive in the mail, Google It! Has an almost magical ring to it.

I guess this geezer is just too up to date for some folks to keep up with. When I read something I don’t agree with or don’t understand or never heard of, I Google it. Especially if it contradicts what I already believe, I Google it. After reading academic papers or articles I can contribute to the ongoing discussion. What a wonderful world we live in today.
I also enjoy technology, & use google quite a bit myself. However, we are talking about two very different things here. The ability to use google is great. Even better that nearly everyone with a cpu, tablet, or smartphone can do the same. However, when involved in debates, or discussions, as we are routinely on this forum, proper etiquette has been to cite your claims, & or back up your position with actual sources. Not a directive to do your own google search.

While I can only speak for myself, I find the directive to search google, & or, the claim that the xxx millions of google hits, is some sort of actual citation, or qualifies as sourcing your claim...... to be lazy, condescending, & honestly, a little arrogant.

Opinions are different. One doesn't "need" to cite documents, or page numbers in books to source an opinion. Although when someone makes claims they wish to be taken as facts, routinely this forum's participants have required evidence, not opinion. Evidence being copies of documents, or page numbers in books, etc....

Again, just one man's opinion.
 

uaskme

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Location
SE Tennessee
This is what happens when actual citations enter the discussion.
Citations from one tainted source. Don’t think Pollard spoke for the South. His effectiveness as a historian has been discounted here.

Grant Got Grey Ghost a good job post war with the Pacific RR. He was an attorney for a extended period. Position he would of never gotten. Grant was pretty good wallowing in trough of getting gifts and returning favors.

Maybe Gray Ghost was just returning a favor to his benefactors of saying, it was all about Slavey?
 

19thGeorgia

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
How about when the service records of Tennessee CW veterans on both sides were copied & brought to the TN Library & Archive the USCT was deliberately left out?
IIRC it was the UDC (a private organization) that had Confederate records microfilmed for historical and genealogical purposes.
The UDC paid for the microfilming.

There would be no need for them to microfilm USCT records (or New York, Ohio or Wisconsin records for that matter).
 

Zack

First Sergeant
Joined
Aug 20, 2017
Location
Los Angeles, California
Citations from one tainted source. Don’t think Pollard spoke for the South. His effectiveness as a historian has been discounted here.

The question wasn’t whether or not Pollard was a good historian. The question was whether Pollard’s writing met the standard of being “Lost Cause.” I provided a quote from his book to argue that he does fall into that category.

Whether or not he specifically kickstarted the movement or it arose from other sources, he definitely lent the movement its name.
 
Last edited:

Rhea Cole

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Location
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
The question wasn’t whether or not Pollard was a good historian. The question was whether Pollard’s writing met the standard of being “Lost Cause.” I provided a quote from his book to argue that he does fall into that category.

Whether or not he specifically kickstarted the movement or it arose from other sources, he definitely lent the movement its name.
There is absolutely no mystery about the genesis of the Lost Cause false narrative. There is a paper trail a mile wide & long as can be. Read the Encyclopedia of Virginia entry on the Lost Cause for a start. This is not a mystery, scholarship about the Lost Cause counterfactual narrative goes back 75 years.
 

Zack

First Sergeant
Joined
Aug 20, 2017
Location
Los Angeles, California
There is absolutely no mystery about the genesis of the Lost Cause false narrative. There is a paper trail a mile wide & long as can be. Read the Encyclopedia of Virginia entry on the Lost Cause for a start. This is not a mystery, scholarship about the Lost Cause counterfactual narrative goes back 75 years.

I agree with you.

The Encyclopedia of Virginia cites a number of places where the Lost Cause mythology developed: Pollard’s book, the Ladies’ Memorial Association, the Southern Opinion paper, the Southern Historical Society, etc.

I don’t know how popular or widely read Pollard’s book was. The Encyclopedia writes, “In 1866 Pollard published The Lost Cause: A New Southern History of the War of the Confederates, a justification of the Confederate war effort, prompting the popular use of the term. Even though the phrase ‘Lost Cause’ would not emerge until one year after the war ended, the reverent mythologizing of the Confederate cause began immediately after the war.”

I simply meant that this book must have had some influence as the entire movement is named after it.
 
Last edited:

uaskme

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Location
SE Tennessee
There is absolutely no mystery about the genesis of the Lost Cause false narrative. There is a paper trail a mile wide & long as can be. Read the Encyclopedia of Virginia entry on the Lost Cause for a start. This is not a mystery, scholarship about the Lost Cause counterfactual narrative goes back 75 years.
Nationalism and altering a narrative for a political objective goes back further than 75 years. United States and the Yankees are just as guilty as anything you contribute as Lost Cause. You can throw in Grant worshippers in the mix.
 
Top