Announcement: It's September! Here are some things we can discuss, and two things we won't.

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

CivilWarTalk

Lieutenant General
Owner & Webmaster
Joined
Apr 1, 1999
Messages
142,338
Location
Martinsburg, WV
Am I the only one who marked these anniversaries and birthdays on her calendar? I'll be armed to annoy all my coworkers by telling them it's Hiram Berdan's bday, and explaining it giddily when they inevitably ask "who?' Probably equally annoying will be incessant explanation of the Battle of South Mountain or it's anniversary. :bounce:
Wait until the 2020 CWT calendar comes out, those dates will all be marked for you! You won’t know what to do with all your spare time!
 

Polloco

First Sergeant
Joined
Sep 15, 2018
Messages
1,646
Location
South Texas
Everything didn't happen in the Eastern Theater. The Battle of Iuka, Miss. and the fall of Little Rock, Ark. both happened in Sept. also didn't they? And speaking of the Eastern Theater one of the battles of Winchester, Virginia occured in Sept.( 3rd I think)
 

bdtex

Brigadier General
Moderator
Silver Patron
Civil War Photo Contest
Annual Winner
Regtl. Quartermaster Chickamauga 2018
Joined
Jul 21, 2015
Messages
8,537
Location
Houston,TX area
Everything didn't happen in the Eastern Theater. The Battle of Iuka, Miss. and the fall of Little Rock, Ark. both happened in Sept. also didn't they?
Absolutely. Post on 'em. The Battle Of Marianna,FLA was on 9/27/1864. It'll be posted on.
 

Dave D

Private
Joined
Feb 21, 2019
Messages
33
September was a hard month for my great grandfather, Mathew Henry Deatherage, and his family during the War - specifically September 13th :

On Sept 13, 1862 Mathew's younger brother, Sampson (Co K, 50th Va Inf) was killed in action during Gen. Wm. Loring's attack on Charleston, Virginia (now, West Virginia). See OR, Vol. XIX, Part 1 - Reports, page 1090, Report #13, [ Report of Col. John McCausland ] and pages 1079-1081, Report #8, [ Report of Surg. John A. Hunter ].

On Sept 13, 1864 Mathew's youngest brother, John (Co B, 8th Va Cav) was captured by elements of BG John McIntosh's brigade at the skirmish at Abrams Creek near Winchester, Va. See OR, Vol. XLIII, Part 1 - Reports, pages 529 & 530, Report #158, [ McIntosh's Report ]. John was sent to the Federal prison at Camp Chase, Columbus, Ohio where he died on January 23, 1865.

Pretty tough ...
 
Last edited:

CivilWarTalk

Lieutenant General
Owner & Webmaster
Joined
Apr 1, 1999
Messages
142,338
Location
Martinsburg, WV
Everything didn't happen in the Eastern Theater. The Battle of Iuka, Miss. and the fall of Little Rock, Ark. both happened in Sept. also didn't they? And speaking of the Eastern Theater one of the battles of Winchester, Virginia occured in Sept.( 3rd I think)
September was a hard month for my great grandfather, Mathew Henry Deatherage, and his family during the War - specifically September 13th :

On Sept 13, 1862 Mathew's younger brother, Sampson (Co K, 50th Va Inf) was killed in action during Gen. Wm. Loring's attack on Charleston, Virginia (now, West Virginia). See OR, Vol. XIX, Part 1 - Reports, page 1090, Report #13, [ Report of Col. John McCausland ] and pages 1079-1081, Report #8, [ Report of Surg. John A. Hunter ].

On Sept 13, 1864 Mathews youngest brother, John (Co B, 8th Va Cav) was captured by elements of BG John McIntosh's brigade at the skirmish at Abrams Creek near Winchester, Va. See OR, Vol. XLIII, Part 1 - Reports, pages 529 & 530, Report #158, [ McIntosh's Report ]. John was sent to the Federal prison at Camp Chase, Columbus, Ohio where he died on January 23, 1865.

Pretty tough ...
Yes, absolutely, share the history, and your stories!

I'd love to have you start threads about each of these for us to read, the more the merrier!
 

Mark F. Jenkins

Colonel
Member of the Year
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
13,001
Location
Central Ohio
How will the "S"-ban affect Reconstruction discussions, and discussions about foreign affairs in reaction to the Emancipation Proclamation (and is the EP banned along with the "S")?
 

CivilWarTalk

Lieutenant General
Owner & Webmaster
Joined
Apr 1, 1999
Messages
142,338
Location
Martinsburg, WV
How will the "S"-ban affect Reconstruction discussions, and discussions about foreign affairs in reaction to the Emancipation Proclamation (and is the EP banned along with the "S")?
The Emancipation Proclamation is going to be a special case that I've already considered, we will likely do a special thread that's an exception to the rule (because we always have exceptions to the rule!). If you have a discussion you'd like to start, you can either send me a message to discuss, or send the first post for a new thread to the submission forum for us to review, and if we approve it, you'll be good to go!

We haven't really been focusing on Reconstruction lately. That's more the aftermath of the Civil War, and although an important field of study that I'm sure other web sites are happy to specialize in, we are here to discuss the war, and that's what we are doing. I don't expect much of a change there.

At one time we expanded the scope of the forum to include reconstruction, but it became too much. I could see that we quickly lost our identity and along with it many of our longtime members had left us. When we limited Reconstruction discussion and returned to a more familiar format that went back to highlighting the discussions about the war, well I'm happy to say we've earned back a few of those long-time members! Week after week that trend improves! I'm hoping it's a trend that continues!

The subject of Reconstruction is not something I want to minimize and I don't want to insult those who enjoy discussing that time period or those people who lived through it, or even suffered during it, but it's just not the part of history we've focused our study on.

I would say if your interests lie in Reconstruction, then CivilWarTalk is probably not the ideal site best suited for that discussion. Perhaps there is a ReconstructionTalk.com? I don't know.....

So I would say during September, unapproved discussions about Slavery, or the Emancipation Proclamation, or discussions of a similar nature are discouraged... here on our forum.
 
Last edited:

MattL

Guest
Joined
Aug 20, 2015
Messages
3,128
Location
SF Bay Area
So to be completely clear since I think maybe I'm missing something, the entire topic of slavery as a "main topic" is banned for the entire month. On a "Civil War" forum where one entire side contained 40% of it's population as slaves, where that specific topic was both critical to the events that preceded the war, caused the war, involved during the war and existed as the forced life situation of the majority of an entire race of people residing within the United States is prohibited? Am I missing something?

A specific sub-topic such as "Black Confederates" or a specific slave topic I can understand, like saying we aren't talking about calvary battles this month. Though to prohibit slavery is like prohibiting the discussion of battles in general. Next month will there be a prohibition on a topic regarding the primary system of life for White American of the time period too, of also the key interest of the Union to enter the war then as well?

Am I missing something?

As to
"we don’t see what else you could possibly say that hasn’t already been said"

One could repeat that towards any of these topics from that era. I'm sure people from the outside can't imagine what any of us have to say about the Civil War that hasn't been said already as a whole. Say about battles, weapons, tactics, all the other non-slave politics etc.
 

archieclement

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
4,448
Location
mo
So to be completely clear since I think maybe I'm missing something, the entire topic of slavery as a "main topic" is banned for the entire month. On a "Civil War" forum where one entire side contained 40% of it's population as slaves, where that specific topic was both critical to the events that preceded the war, caused the war, involved during the war and existed as the forced life situation of the majority of an entire race of people residing within the United States is prohibited? Am I missing something?

A specific sub-topic such as "Black Confederates" or a specific slave topic I can understand, like saying we aren't talking about calvary battles this month. Though to prohibit slavery is like prohibiting the discussion of battles in general. Next month will there be a prohibition on a topic regarding the primary system of life for White American of the time period too, of also the key interest of the Union to enter the war then as well?

Am I missing something?

As to
"we don’t see what else you could possibly say that hasn’t already been said"

One could repeat that towards any of these topics from that era. I'm sure people from the outside can't imagine what any of us have to say about the Civil War that hasn't been said already as a whole. Say about battles, weapons, tactics, all the other non-slave politics etc.
There is a certain irony for 100 years or so there was an effort to separate S word from any main stream discussion of the CW, thought its referred to as "lost cause"

Removing it from the page about the CW......seems somewhat similar in a way, even if unintended
 

ami

Major General
Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 1, 1999
Messages
5,313
Location
the mountain state
and it has been quite pleseant the last few days without angry members posting and trying to beat each other over the head with the same argument for 100th time.

but do check out the footer at the bottom of the page, I think you will be happy to see what we have in the works, though not open yet and still in beta mode.
 

Mark F. Jenkins

Colonel
Member of the Year
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
13,001
Location
Central Ohio
We'll see how well this goes. 'Gag rules' are very difficult to administer fairly and equitably. I trust that the same treatment will be given to the statement, "The Civil War was caused by tariffs" as to the statement, "The Civil War was caused by slavery," since the former, despite not actually using the "S-word" directly, is using it by implication and cannot be countered without using the "S-word."

I do worry about a constituency that would then be under-represented (even more than they already are): African-Americans, both of the time and of today. It will be very difficult to discuss the USCT without at least alluding to the "S-word," for instance, and banning the USCT as a topic is clearly not acceptable.
 

uaskme

Sergeant Major
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
2,306
I had rather diminished Discussion of S than to leave it, like it is. Don’t think it is Fair and Equitable. People have trouble setting their emotions aside. Ends up being Weaponized in every Discussion, even the Battlefield ones. If all else fails, throw the S Card. I’m not afraid of it. Just the Way it is. There is little Debate.
 

CivilWarTalk

Lieutenant General
Owner & Webmaster
Joined
Apr 1, 1999
Messages
142,338
Location
Martinsburg, WV
So to be completely clear since I think maybe I'm missing something, the entire topic of slavery as a "main topic" is banned for the entire month....

….Am I missing something?....
Yes, sorry, I know it's annoying to have a topic missing.

I'm not sure how close you've been watching the forum....

Maybe you've seen our footer.

Here, I'll give you some freebie links:
There is a certain irony for 100 years or so there was an effort to separate S word from any main stream discussion of the CW, thought its referred to as "lost cause"

Removing it from the page about the CW......seems somewhat similar in a way, even if unintended
Don't think of it as "Removing These Topics"...

Think of it as … "The other side of the coin" ....
 

MattL

Guest
Joined
Aug 20, 2015
Messages
3,128
Location
SF Bay Area
We'll see how well this goes. 'Gag rules' are very difficult to administer fairly and equitably. I trust that the same treatment will be given to the statement, "The Civil War was caused by tariffs" as to the statement, "The Civil War was caused by slavery," since the former, despite not actually using the "S-word" directly, is using it by implication and cannot be countered without using the "S-word."

I do worry about a constituency that would then be under-represented (even more than they already are): African-Americans, both of the time and of today. It will be very difficult to discuss the USCT without at least alluding to the "S-word," for instance, and banning the USCT as a topic is clearly not acceptable.
Agreed. If we are at the point of a month long 'gag rule' on slavery, like we're replicating our slavery era congress then we probably need to take a deeper look at ourselves here IMHO.

I don't want to pre-judge the new setup too much without knowing the details, but if basically the alleged solution is segregation of the topic of slavery to it's own forum then I have to wonder if we're replicating a repressive history as a microcosm on this forum now. From gag rule to segregation.

I completely get a section dedicated to the deeper history of slavery, things outside the scope of the Civil War. Those topics can conflate things. Though I hope it isn't indeed segregation, where you can't have a main topic about slavery on the Civil War forum (as long as the context is in fact Civil War) since it was not only 40% of the Confederate population but the key divisive issue surrounding it and all the politics.
 

CivilWarTalk

Lieutenant General
Owner & Webmaster
Joined
Apr 1, 1999
Messages
142,338
Location
Martinsburg, WV
Agreed. If we are at the point of a month long 'gag rule' on slavery, like we're replicating our slavery era congress then we probably need to take a deeper look at ourselves here IMHO.

I don't want to pre-judge the new setup too much without knowing the details, but if basically the alleged solution is segregation of the topic of slavery to it's own forum then I have to wonder if we're replicating a repressive history as a microcosm on this forum now. From gag rule to segregation.

I completely get a section dedicated to the deeper history of slavery, things outside the scope of the Civil War. Those topics can conflate things. Though I hope it isn't indeed segregation, where you can't have a main topic about slavery on the Civil War forum (as long as the context is in fact Civil War) since it was not only 40% of the Confederate population but the key divisive issue surrounding it and all the politics.
Thanks for your comments!
 
Top