Featured Which State Would You Fight For During The Civil War?

The Confederacy was such an oxymoron. The governors were nearly all too independent to cooperate and act in unison. Lee having to write letters to state officials and beg them for men and material was a travesty.
In order to preserve the state's rights, they needed to suspend them until the war's conclusion. Can you imagine a governor denying the president use of the National Guard today? That sounds like Huey P. Long.
 
Vote Here:
The Confederacy was such an oxymoron. The governors were nearly all too independent to cooperate and act in unison. Lee having to write letters to state officials and beg them for men and material was a travesty.
In order to preserve the state's rights, they needed to suspend them until the war's conclusion. Can you imagine a governor denying the president use of the National Guard today? That sounds like Huey P. Long.

That is why states right at the level of CSA would not work over time.
 
Vote Here:
Wrong [the "Not many of them" part]. This is a basic historical fact. They were recruited by states, but they didn't fight for states. They fought for the national entities. Union soldiers were mustered into United States national service and confederate soldiers were mustered into confederate national service.
Technically, you're right -- but there's no denying that there was a lot of state pride in those regiments!
 
Vote Here:
My ancestors come from New England and fought for the New England states particularly VT. I have lived all over the place both North and South as well as Canada and England, so I have no strong state or regional loyalty. However, given that I am strongly into social justice issues and a compassionate person, I feel that I would either be a nurse for the Union or working with the US Santitary Commission.
 
Vote Here:
Well, I call myself a Kansas free-stater, but had I lived back then, my horror at John Brown's Pottawatomie massacre might have soured me on his cause. On the other hand, the actions of the border ruffians from Missouri -- not to mention the odiousness of their cause -- should have guaranteed I would be no Confederate sympathizer. I like to think I would have been proud that the first black regiment in all the Union came from Kansas, the 1st Kansas Colored Infantry -- which was not only the first recruited, but the first to see action, and the first to lose men in battle.

Most of my ancestors weren't even in the U.S. yet at the time of the war, but I recently found out that my paternal grandmother claimed a Confederate soldier as an ancestor -- if so, I know the choice he made. (It's always amazed me that Texans joined the Confederate army in the numbers they did, and fought as hard as they did -- having only joined the Union a decade-and-a-half earlier!)
 
Vote Here:
Right, one company of 39th NY for the Union, but one battalion and lots of company for Confederacy.:smile:
Thank you for the correction. The Italian influence, however, surpassed their mere numbers, in my opinion. The "Garibaldi Guards" was a whole regiment -- which included companies of several ethnicities, but all of whom professed to share Garibaldi's ideals. Indeed, Lincoln himself had offered Garibaldi a generalship in the Union Army.

Although there was, as you pointed out, only that one company that was organized as a specifically Italian unit, I'm guessing that there must have been some more Italian immigrants diffused throughout the Union Army, since there were many Italian immigrants in the North at that time. (Nothing to compare with the numbers of German and Irish, of course, but still....) I haven't researched it; you probably know more specifics than I do.
 
Vote Here:
Only years after the war, a large number of Italian arrive in America. In 1861 their number was reduced.
In addition to the various units, it is true that many individuals were diffused throughout Armies, North and South. I both Navies there were some Italian sailors, one was with Semmes in CSS Alabama.
 
Last edited:
Vote Here:
The Confederacy was such an oxymoron. The governors were nearly all too independent to cooperate and act in unison. Lee having to write letters to state officials and beg them for men and material was a travesty.
In order to preserve the state's rights, they needed to suspend them until the war's conclusion. Can you imagine a governor denying the president use of the National Guard today? That sounds like Huey P. Long.

Hey, careful there with the Kingfish! :dance: He never did any such thing. :skip:

Now Orval Faubus is another story but that's a different state....
 
Vote Here:
Technically, you're right -- but there's no denying that there was a lot of state pride in those regiments!

There may have been state pride, but they were fighting for their nation.

"I have no misgivings about, or lack of confidence in the cause in which I am engaged, and my courage does not halt or falter. I know how strongly American Civilization now leans on the triumph of the Government and how great a debt we owe to those who went before us through the blood and sufferings of the Revolution. And I am willing—perfectly willing—to lay down all my joys in this life, to help maintain this Government, and to pay that debt . " Sullivan Ballou
 
Vote Here:
There may have been state pride, but they were fighting for their nation.

"I have no misgivings about, or lack of confidence in the cause in which I am engaged, and my courage does not halt or falter. I know how strongly American Civilization now leans on the triumph of the Government and how great a debt we owe to those who went before us through the blood and sufferings of the Revolution. And I am willing—perfectly willing—to lay down all my joys in this life, to help maintain this Government, and to pay that debt . " Sullivan Ballou
He certainly paid that debt.
 
Vote Here:
I'm a Texan, but I am also a Lincoln Loyalist, so I would have to hide in the woods with other Northern sympathizers and figure out a way to get out of Dixie. Perhaps I could escape via the Underground Railroad with runaway slaves (which is something a lot of Union loyalists did) and volunteer to serve in President Lincoln's army in the first region that is above the Mason-Dixon Line, or I could travel to East Tennessee which was an area famous for having southern Unionists. I wouldn't go to Kansas, even though it's closer to me because there was an equal number of secesh and men loyal to the Stars and Stripes, and the risk of running into the wrong fellas would be too great.


I could wait in the swamps and pray that the Federal authorities would come through to my area or somewhere near me, and I could join Uncle Sam then, but I think action would need to be taken or I could risk death, imprisonment, or be pressed into the rebel army.


Ideally, I would prefer to work for a United States Texas military branch. So I am thinking I would like to join the 1st Texas Regiment Cavalry. (U.S.) They were organized in New Orleans, Louisiana on November 6, 1862. So perhaps I could hole up in the mountains of the Lone Star State until hearing of General Butler's occupation of the Crescent City, travel there, make some connections and fight treason with my fellow loyal Texans.
 
Last edited:
Vote Here:
at the time of the Civil War, most of my family were packing things up in Rockville Illinois and starting to head west to Kansas and New Mexico territory. Some settled in Northeastern Colorado, and Lawrence Kansas. Then they moved to New Mexico in the late 1870's. I guess I would sign up with an Illinois regiment or join IcarusPhoenix and join a New Mexico outfit.....
 
Vote Here:
Back
Top