I am not a Civil War "buff," but lately I have been reading 1860s newspapers on Google's news archive and things like politicians' speeches and excerpts from the southern states' debates on secession. From reading this material, it's clear that, as much as people might try to deny it nowadays, slavery was the overwhelmingly prominent cause of the breakup of the Union.
It seems that the southern states' main evidence of the northern states' hostility to slavery was their attempts to shut slavery out of the territories and their non-enforcement of, or interference with, the Fugitive Slave Law.
But if they were to succeed in forming a separate country, they would cut themselves off completely from Kansas and Nebraska and eliminate any hope of ever getting escaped slaves back from the other side of the Mason-Dixon line. In fact, I saw an Alabama newspaper make just this point in 1860.
So why didn't the southern states see secession as counterproductive?
Also, how, in the era before Gallup, was it so clear that Lincoln would win the election before it took place? The newspapers of the time seemed to consider Lincoln's victory a fait accompli in fall 1860. By election day, South Carolina was already on the way to seceeding.
The other questions I had deal with the motivation of the volunteers on both sides of the conflict.
As mentioned above, the southern cause was clearly wrapped up with the cause of slavery. But most southern whites did not own any slaves, and the vast majority of slaves were owned by a small class of planters. So why were so many southerners so enthusiastic about fighting?
I'm also a little curious about the movivation of northern volunteers. If I were an abolitionist in 1861 and someone called a war to fight slavery, I'd be enthusiastic to fight. But most northerners weren't abolitionists, and anyway, the Lincoln administration said over and over again that the war was not being waged to fight slavery, only to restore the union. "Let's go force people who don't want to be in the country back into the country" doesn't sound like much of a rallying cry. So why were those northerners who were eager to fight so enthusiastic?
It seems that the southern states' main evidence of the northern states' hostility to slavery was their attempts to shut slavery out of the territories and their non-enforcement of, or interference with, the Fugitive Slave Law.
But if they were to succeed in forming a separate country, they would cut themselves off completely from Kansas and Nebraska and eliminate any hope of ever getting escaped slaves back from the other side of the Mason-Dixon line. In fact, I saw an Alabama newspaper make just this point in 1860.
So why didn't the southern states see secession as counterproductive?
Also, how, in the era before Gallup, was it so clear that Lincoln would win the election before it took place? The newspapers of the time seemed to consider Lincoln's victory a fait accompli in fall 1860. By election day, South Carolina was already on the way to seceeding.
The other questions I had deal with the motivation of the volunteers on both sides of the conflict.
I'm also a little curious about the movivation of northern volunteers. If I were an abolitionist in 1861 and someone called a war to fight slavery, I'd be enthusiastic to fight. But most northerners weren't abolitionists, and anyway, the Lincoln administration said over and over again that the war was not being waged to fight slavery, only to restore the union. "Let's go force people who don't want to be in the country back into the country" doesn't sound like much of a rallying cry. So why were those northerners who were eager to fight so enthusiastic?
Forum Host
Bringing the