Is the Abbeville Institute a Reliable Source for Information Related to the Civil War?

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Rhea Cole

Corporal
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
350
Location
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
I'm doubled over in laughter at you presumptions of what others at others have read, as I have read letters of USCT, Missouri slave narratives, and multiple books of slavery in Missouri which also include USCT accounts. Your presumptions of people you don't even know simply leave me with little opinion of your credibility.
My honest reaction is puzzlement. If, as you have stated, you have all these resources, why didn't you use quotes from them to support your statements? That would be illuminating. What sources led you to the ideas you presented? I would like to read them myself. USCT letters & journals are very thin on the ground. My friends in the 13 th are always looking to add to their library.
 

archieclement

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
4,990
Location
mo
My honest reaction is puzzlement. If, as you have stated, you have all these resources, why didn't you use quotes from them to support your statements? That would be illuminating. What sources led you to the ideas you presented? I would like to read them myself. USCT letters & journals are very thin on the ground. My friends in the 13 th are always looking to add to their library.
Because I tend to look at most campaigns where Union troops passed through an area, and it seems usually roughly half the slaves in the area would run away with the Union troops, and half would choose to remain where they were. And the USCT would represent mainly those from the half running away, it hardly reflects the views of those who choose not too, again thats why one shouldnt put an over reliance on a group that represents less then 5%, and would be comprised of runaways and not represent those who elected to not run away at all. A group of less then 5% of anything in the CW I wouldnt be over reliant of representing the majority of anything as its only less then 5%

I'm honestly a little puzzled by why anyone trying to be impartial would hold up something representing 4 % as somehow gospel.........it would seem reaching to support an agenda to me, to ignore it doesnt include the other 95.5 %.........

But if you think a group of less then 5% reflects the whole, I'll agree to disagree, as its simply too limited a sample for me to make that jump.
 
Last edited:
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
30,064
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
It is precisely for those interested in actual history that the Abbeville Institute exists.
No, the Abbeville Institute is for those interested in having a cheer-leading institution for their personal beliefs.

Actual history that interferes with such a calling is tweaked and twisted until it conforms.

Such is the legacy of said Institute.
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
20,004
Location
Laurinburg NC
No, the Abbeville Institute is for those interested in having a cheer-leading institution for their personal beliefs.

Actual history that interferes with such a calling is tweaked and twisted until it conforms.

Such is the legacy of said Institute.
UB, There comes a time to realize there are still Southerners left unwilling to submit to Yankee "fake history" and propaganda. As long as we exist so will the Abbeville Institute.
 

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
30,064
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
UB, There comes a time to realize there are still Southerners left unwilling to submit to Yankee "fake history" and propaganda. As long as we exist so will the Abbeville Institute.
Therein lies the heart of out disagreement, @CSA Today.

Because you don't like it, it's "Yankee fake history and propaganda," an easy label used to dismiss and discard without too much thought or effort.

And it's not that there are "still Southerners" who are unwilling to read and acknowledge actual, factual, history, as not all Southerners sign up for the censored and twisted history of the Abbeville Institute. In fact, many don't.

it's just there are a few diehard souls who, for whatever reason, feel the need to excuse or cover up what Confederates did for four short years during a part of the history of the South, and confuse the reasons they gave for doing such.

History should not be a "team sport" with certain players put in the game and others put on the bench because the coach doesn't like what they bring to that "game."

And the Abbeville Institute is playing a game and not reporting actual history.

Unionblue
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Horrido67

Private
Joined
Sep 29, 2019
Messages
107
I suppose you could liken the Southern 1860-1861 Declaration of Causes to the one of 1776 that led to unilateral secession and the First War of Rebellion for its ommissions. What I like about North Carolina Governor John Ellis's reason for secession was that it was short, sweet, no mincing of words, or omission of reasons why.

"I can be no party to this wicked violation of the laws of the country and to this war upon the liberties of a free people. You can get no troops from North Carolina.
Governor John Ellis
What 'liberties' of 'a free people' were threatened? Again, it fails to answer the question - liberties to do what? state's rights to what?

Luckily, again, Governor of North Carolina John Ellis wasn't shy about stating what 'liberties' were under attack by 'Black Republican'.

"Then, the subjects of controversy between the two parties were merely questions of domestic policy, important it is true, but not vital; now, questions affecting our liberties as a people, and, it may be, our existence as a nation, are under discussion." (Emphasis mine)

"Upon these questions the parties are arrayed, and the contest approaches. Upon the one side the Democratic party, buoyant with the recollection of many victories gained in the cause of the country; on the other Freesoilers, black Republicans and Abolitionists, consolidated and combined. These, sir, are the two great contending political forces that divide the country. All others are mere political atoms, that cannot and will not be felt, except so far as they may affect the contest between the two main organizations." (Emphasis mine)

"Such, gentlemen, are the parties to the contest. The issue between them should be clearly understood, especially here at the South. I assert, and shall maintain it with the proofs, that this issue is, whether African slavery shall be abolished here in the States, where it now exists? Let us not be deceived upon this point. Men may talk about our rights in the territories, but depend upon it they are not the questions now in issue. The abolition of slavery here at home is the design of our opponents. This is the bond that cements all the anti-slavery elements in one solid column against us." (Emphasis mine)

March 9, 1860
John W. Ellis

Yes, Governor John Ellis and North Carolina might have been less enthusiastic about unilateral secession than many Fire-Eaters ("
"we are not prepared for the acknowledgement that we cannot enjoy all our constitutional rights in the Union."). Even then, they wouldn't tolerate any perceived threat to their "constitutional rights" (of owning slaves) and any political party that promoted anti-slavery causes.

When Fort Sumter which was a Federal property was attacked, the question whether joining other slave states to perpetuate slavery though Southern Independence or remaining in the US which was controlled by 'Black Republicans' about to enter the war to preserve the Union was forced upon Governor John Ellis.

Governor John Ellis responded to this crisis by refusing to aid the 'Black Republican' President and ordering state troops to illegally seize Federal properties including the federal arsenal in Fayetteville which didn't belong to State of North Carolina.

UB, There comes a time to realize there are still Southerners left unwilling to submit to Yankee "fake history" and propaganda. As long as we exist so will the Abbeville Institute.
I don't know about this Yankee "fake history" and propaganda you are talking about, but I know some individuals and organisations such as the Abbeville Institution continue to deny the centrality of the issue of slavery in the War of the Rebellion and dishonestly leave out crucial facts that secessionists openly said, without guilt or embarrassment, that they thought their 'liberties' of holding persons as properties were threatened by 'Black Republicans'.

I feel for the Confederates who sacrificed so much and fought so hard, yet ultimately failed to achieve their Independence. However, I think there is no honor in submitting yourself to the Lost Cause narratives.
 
Last edited:

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
20,004
Location
Laurinburg NC
What 'liberties' of 'a free people' were threatened? Again, it fails to answer the question - liberties to do what? state's rights to what?

Luckily, again, Governor of North Carolina John Ellis wasn't shy about stating what 'liberties' were under attack by 'Black Republican'.

"Then, the subjects of controversy between the two parties were merely questions of domestic policy, important it is true, but not vital; now, questions affecting our liberties as a people, and, it may be, our existence as a nation, are under discussion." (Emphasis mine)

"Upon these questions the parties are arrayed, and the contest approaches. Upon the one side the Democratic party, buoyant with the recollection of many victories gained in the cause of the country; on the other Freesoilers, black Republicans and Abolitionists, consolidated and combined. These, sir, are the two great contending political forces that divide the country. All others are mere political atoms, that cannot and will not be felt, except so far as they may affect the contest between the two main organizations." (Emphasis mine)

"Such, gentlemen, are the parties to the contest. The issue between them should be clearly understood, especially here at the South. I assert, and shall maintain it with the proofs, that this issue is, whether African slavery shall be abolished here in the States, where it now exists? Let us not be deceived upon this point. Men may talk about our rights in the territories, but depend upon it they are not the questions now in issue. The abolition of slavery here at home is the design of our opponents. This is the bond that cements all the anti-slavery elements in one solid column against us." (Emphasis mine)

March 9, 1860
John W. Ellis

Yes, Governor John Ellis and North Carolina might have been less enthusiastic about unilateral secession than many Fire-Eaters ("
"we are not prepared for the acknowledgement that we cannot enjoy all our constitutional rights in the Union."). Even then, they wouldn't tolerate any perceived threat to their "constitutional rights" (of owning slaves) and any political party that promoted anti-slavery causes.

When Fort Sumter which was a Federal property was attacked, the question whether joining other slave states to perpetuate slavery though Southern Independence or remaining in the US which was controlled by 'Black Republicans' about to enter the war to preserve the Union was forced upon Governor John Ellis.

Governor John Ellis responded to this crisis by refusing to aid the 'Black Republican' President and ordering state troops to illegally seize Federal properties including the federal arsenal in Fayetteville which didn't belong to State of North Carolina.



I don't know about this Yankee "fake history" and propaganda you are talking about, but I know some individuals and organisations such as the Abbeville Institution continue to deny the centrality of the issue of slavery in the War of the Rebellion and dishonestly leave out crucial facts that secessionists openly said, without guilt or embarrassment, that they thought their 'liberties' of holding persons as properties were threatened by 'Black Republicans'.

I feel for the Confederates who sacrificed so much and fought so hard, yet ultimately failed to achieve their Independence. However, I think there is no honor in submitting yourself to the Lost Cause narratives.
I suggest you go back to the original unilateral secessionists who refused to let others tell them what the liberties of a free people were. The Confederate Founding Fathers were so impressed by their actions they put George Washington on the Great Seal of the Confederacy.
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
20,004
Location
Laurinburg NC
Therein lies the heart of out disagreement, @CSA Today.

Because you don't like it, it's "Yankee fake history and propaganda," an easy label used to dismiss and discard without too much thought or effort.

And it's not that there are "still Southerners" who are unwilling to read and acknowledge actual, factual, history, as not all Southerners sign up for the censored and twisted history of the Abbeville Institute. In fact, many don't.

it's just there are a few diehard souls who, for whatever reason, feel the need to excuse or cover up what Confederates did for four short years during a part of the history of the South, and confuse the reasons they gave for doing such.

History should not be a "team sport" with certain players put in the game and others put on the bench because the coach doesn't like what they bring to that "game."

And the Abbeville Institute is playing a game and not reporting actual history.

Unionblue
Perhaps you would so kind to suggest alternative sources for we misguided Southerners?
I await your recommendations.

"If we lose this war, these people will be telling us how to live for the next 500 years."
Maj. General Patrick Ronayne Cleburne



 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
30,064
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
Perhaps you would so kind to suggest alternative sources for we misguided Southerners?
I await your recommendations.

"If we lose this war, these people will be telling us how to live for the next 500 years."
Maj. General Patrick Ronayne Cleburne
@CSA Today ,

I'm sure you can recall asking me this question once or twice over the years we have been members here.

The original source documents are the best, when read honestly and without edit.

Enjoy your Thanksgiving.

Unionblue
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
20,004
Location
Laurinburg NC
@CSA Today ,

I'm sure you can recall asking me this question once or twice over the years we have been members here.

The original source documents are the best, when read honestly and without edit.

Enjoy your Thanksgiving.

Unionblue
-
So it's what determines 'accurate history' just your opinion.

I hope you and your family had a Happy Thanksgiving.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

GwilymT

Brigadier General
Moderator
Joined
Aug 20, 2018
Messages
920
Location
Pittsburgh
I'll tell you one thing I've learned for certain in my four and a half years of studying the Civil War: history is as political as any other topic. Very few if any historians on either side seem truly objective and free from bias, and many are clearly ideologues. Howard Zinn and Eric Foner come to mind as good examples.
Zinn and Foner are very up front about their political views and open state the lense they are using for their interpretations. Issues arise when a historian or political organization disguised as a historical society proport to have “truth” without without modern political motives or viewpoints when the opposite is clearly apparent, as is the case with Abbeville.
 

Andersonh1

Major
Joined
Jan 12, 2016
Messages
8,166
Location
South Carolina
Zinn and Foner are very up front about their political views and open state the lense they are using for their interpretations. Issues arise when a historian or political organization disguised as a historical society proport to have “truth” without without modern political motives or viewpoints when the opposite is clearly apparent, as is the case with Abbeville.
I think Abbeville is pretty open about where their biases fall. They don't pretend to be neutral, they're discussing various Southern points of view.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
30,064
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
@CSA Today,

I did give you a source, but you refuse to acknowledge that I did. Check my post again and see if you can see my answer.

@CSA Today ,

I'm sure you can recall asking me this question once or twice over the years we have been members here.

The original source documents are the best, when read honestly and without edit.

Enjoy your Thanksgiving.

Unionblue
Hope that's clear enough.

Unionblue
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top