Regional identity

[atlantis]

Terms like The South or The North get thrown around a lot when the subject is the CW. Yet what produced those regional identities and just how old and solid were they by late 1861 early 1862.
Did regional identity produce the war or did the war produce[cement] regional identity?

 

[E_just_E]

1780. When slavery was abolished in Pennsylvania, all the slave states were South of the Mason Dixon line.

Regional identity is a different story, since each region both in the North and South (and West) had different identities. Legality of slavery is just a singular data point. New Orleans was probably culturally more similar to New York than to Birmingham in the 19th century, save that singular data point.

Matter of fact, parts of the South, including the US Capital, were with the Union in the Civil War.

 

[CCMDCSA]

migh

1780. When slavery was abolished in Pennsylvania, all the slave states were South of the Mason Dixon line.

Regional identity is a different story, since each region both in the North and South (and West) had different identities. Legality of slavery is just a singular data point. New Orleans was probably culturally more similar to New York than to Birmingham in the 19th century, save that singular data point.

Matter of fact, parts of the South, including the US Capital, were with the Union in the Civil War.

might i add some of those parts because of government occupation

 

[Taylin]

Two things can be true at once

 

[Canadian]

I read an article last year about the patterns of settlement in the colonies, and how they were settled by groups from different parts of the British Isles (as well as other parts of Europe.). If I recall correctly, much of the North was settled by people branching out from New England over several generations, while much of the South was populated by people who came from Tidewater Virginia. They kept many of their customs and kinship ties, so would have had somewhat different cultures. There was more of a mix in the border states, as well as the Northern part of some southern states, so people there had attitudes from both cultures. The same in the Midwest, as well, and the Eastern part of Texas, more mixed than the more southern leaning western part.

 

[E_just_E]

I read an article last year about the patterns of settlement in the colonies, and how they were settled by groups from different parts of the British Isles (as well as other parts of Europe.). If I recall correctly, much of the North was settled by people branching out from New England over several generations, while much of the South was populated by people who came from Tidewater Virginia. .

Not really. Much more complex, esp. if you count French and Dutch settlements, some of which became part of what was the US in the 19th century, as well as direct settlement of several areas by religious-based groups, OH and PA mainly, and the push westward from the East Coast to MS. Plenty of the decedents of the Plymouth, MA colonies, settled in Alabama when you fast-forward 200 years