Why is the Southern cause so compelling even now?

In my attempt to organize, condense and purge my many Civil War file boxes, I now have them lined up in a row out in the garage. From the local office supply store I found handsome blue plastic 'hang and store' containers with lids; they're out there lined up, too. I'm getting closer to being organized. Now the hard job begins - sorting and purging.

So, I continue now with another question posed by Benjamin J. Stein in his 2003 “The American Spectator” article: “Preserving the Civil War”.



7. Why is the Southern cause so compelling even now?

Knowing - as we do - that the Southern economy was largely based on a horrifying notion of racial supremacy, why do we find the South still so haunting and sympathetic? Is it Gone With the Wind? Is it moonlight and magnolias and nonsense? Is it the romance of a lost cause? Why do we find Lee so much more compelling than Grant? Why do we find Lee so much more compelling than a general that even Lee said was the finest on either side in the Civil War, Nathaniel Bedford Forrest? Why do I cry when I visit one of my favorite battlefields, the one at Upperville, Virginia? And why do I have nightmares every time I visit Gettysburg, when most of my ancestors did not even come to America until thirty years after the Civil War ended?

Americans, Northerners at least, had little or no sympathy and compassion for the South in 1865. So when did this romanticism with that cause begin? Did it develop shortly after the last of the Civil War veterans died off in the early 20th Century? What part did Gone With the Wind play, or not play, in this? Has anyone written specifically about this?

When I next comb the History shelves at Barnes & Noble I'll be searching for an answer.

Preserving the Civil War, cont.

Now, here we go with question #6 of Benjamin J. Stein back in October 2003 in “The American Spectator”.

So, here goes:

What would the South have been like if slavery had ended peacefully, as a result of moral awakening in the South, instead of through a bloody war?


Might the situation of blacks in America be better today? Might there have been no segregation, no Klan, no lynchings?

I just finished reading the book Killing Lincoln: the Shocking Assassination that Changed America Forever on my Kindle. The film "The Conspirators" follows this book closely; I now understand the movie much better. In fact, I plan to get the movie thru Netflix and watch it again.  I couldn't put the book down though. It's a must read for anyone interested in the Civil War.

US Civil War "What Ifs" cont.

Now, here we go with question #5 posed by Benjamin J. Stein back in October 2003 in “The American Spectator”. “Preserving the Civil War” was the title of his three page essay that asked ten questions about the beginning of the conflict, ramifications of this and that decision, and the 'what might have beens' of it all. I want to continue sharing it here:



5


How would America have been different if the South had won?
Does anyone really think slavery would still be a stain on humanity in 2003? What would have happened if Lincoln had just said, “Erring sisters, go in peace”? Would the North and South not have reconciled and been one nation again? There were mystic chords of memory, after all, to coin a phrase. Would they not have pulled the Union together eventually without bloodshed?

To me, Ben's questions beg others. How 'bout, as two separate nations how would the USA and the CSA have handled the war with Spain over Pacific islands? Or, what about WWI &II ?

You can go on and on...

Was it illegal for the South to break-away? Q #3

I'm reaching out here to the Civil War Researchers. I'm doing research for an ebook. I'd appreciate any info on Sunday battles. If used in publication, I'll of course cite you as a source. Email me at chris@greensblueandgray.com. Thanks in advance.

Now, here we go with question #3 posed by Benjamin J. Stein back in October 2003 in “The American Spectator”. “Preserving the Civil War” was the title of his three page essay that asked ten, most often, provocative, questions about the beginning of the conflict, ramifications of this and that decision, and the 'what might have beens' of it all. I plan to keep the article, and I want to continue sharing it here:

#3


"Why was it legal for the colonies to rebel against Britain but not for the South to rebel against the North?

Again, I assume slavery was and is horrible and disgusting and a crime against humanity. But it was legal under the U.S. Constitution, so why was it allowable to wage a moral crusade killing six hundred thousand men to end it and to compel the slave states back into the Union? If popular sovereignty and right to self-determination mean anything, why did they not mean something in North America? Clearly the South (most but not all of it) wanted to be separate. Why was war the response to popular sovereignty? Or did the Southern firebrands force it on the North? If so, could the North have walked away from the fight? And, again, I am convinced that slavery was thoroughly horrible. But so is war."

Preserving the Civil War

So, to continue here with the provocative questions posed by Ben Stein back in 2003 in the "American Spectator" regarding the Civil War. here's his second question:

#2.
"To slightly restate this [Question #1, previous blog] – assuming, as I do, that slavery was a moral evil of horrendous proportions – could it not have been allowed to wither away?

Slavery was horrific, but so are the deaths of 600,000 plus men and the maiming of millions. Does the ultimate responsibility lie with the abolitionists, the secessionists or with both? And how could any of them live with themselves ever after, when they saw the rivers, oceans of blood?"

Did the Civil War have to be fought?

While revamping my site, greensblueandgray.com, I came upon an article yesterday as I dug through a couple of my many Civil War file boxes. I really need to organize, condense and purge, but that’s hard to do. But this three-pager, “Preserving the Civil War” I plan to keep, and I want to share it here. It was written by Benjamin J. Stein back in October 2003 in “The American Spectator”.




First, Ben suggests the reader check out Bruce Catton’s works, read John Brown’s Body and the sad (his word) Lee’s Lieutenant (I’ve started reading it), and then he poses ten thought-provoking (my words) questions about the war, the political climate back then, that era. He doesn’t come up with any answers, and that’s OK with me. I’ve read enough CW books to have an idea about how to answer these questions, and I’m sure you have as well.



I think it’s a good intellectual exercise to consider them, these questions. So, for the next few Blogs I plan to feature the questions that Ben writes about. I’m starting here with, Da-da!, question one:



1. Did the Civil War have to be fought?



The Northern states lost about 400,000 men. Two hundred thousand Southerners died – roughly one in nine Southern white males died. Each was a tragedy for his family and friends, and all died in agony. Did this have to happen? Did this have to happen? Was there not some way it could have been avoided? Was there a way of buying up the slaves? After all, abhorrent as it sounds and is, they were considered property. Could they have been emancipated by money rather than blood? What could have been done had the powers that be on both sides known how many would die? By Antietam or Shiloh, surely Lincoln knew it was going to be long and bloody. So did Jefferson Davis. Couldn’t something have been worked out to end the killing?



I know, this question has been asked many times and in lots of ways. It could be part of a History mid-term. Don’t worry, the other nine go different directions.

Stay tuned….

Second Journal Begins...

Three Groans – Journal Two Begins

1st [page]

February 8th, 1862

Huntsville, Randolph Co., Missouri

The year of ‘62 dawned upon me at Benton Barracks, St. Louis, Missouri. The first day of the new year was spent in a way peculiar only to a military life. A New Year’s dinner was served in the Captain’s room in military style. Nothing worthy of notice took place during the day.

We remained in Benton Barracks until the 11th of January at which time we were ordered to join our Regiment at Montgomery City on North Missouri Rail Road eighty-five miles north of St. Louis. At an early hour we bade adieu to Benton Barracks, but not without giving those remaining behind something to remember us by which we did by forming a line between Headquarters and the General’s house and gave three groans for Benton Barracks. I never was in all my life so much pleased to get away from a place as I was on this morning to leave Benton Barracks, Although, I left many good friends, from Page and Louisa counties.


We marched to the R.R. [railroad] Depot and in due time were on the cars for Montgomery City. We arrived at St. Charles on the Mississippi River at 11 o’clock A.M. and the river not being bridged we crossed on a large steam ferry. St. Charles is situated on the north side of the river, it contains perhaps 3000 inhabitants and I presume in ordinary times that a great deal of business is done here, it having the advantage of river and R.R. The crossing of baggage and such like occupied considerable time and consequently did not leave till 3 o’clock P. M. And, before we reached our destination, night overtook us and therefore did not get to see much of the country along the road.


At 11 o’clock P.M., arrived at Montgomery City, found our friends hail and hearty. The town of Montgomery City is a new place containing but few inhabitants, and is noted for nothing but the distilling and selling of whiskey and an unfinished well thirteen and fifty feet deep. Water is very scarce here the citizens using cistern water.


Huntsville


2nd


We remained at Montgomery City till the 1st of February 1862. During our stay here I, with four associates, boarded at a private house. The time passed off pleasantly while here.


However on the first of February we were ordered to Huntsville 60 miles north of Montgomery City. We took cars at 3 o’clock in the evening, arrived at Allen Station at twelve o’clock the same evening after a cold and disagreeable ride. We remained in the cars till morning and slept but little on account of the extreme cold. In the morning, after building fires on the ice and snow to get breakfast, we partook a meal gotten up in military style.


After all was over we took up a line of march in the direction of Huntsville six miles west of Allen Station, at which place we reached about noon, stepping to the time of Yankee Doodle. Quite a number of Negroes were upon the streets, with their white eyes turned up as large as a full moon. A few citizens could be seen standing around on the corners dressed in homespun of a blue and brownish color. There is but few, if any, avowed Union men in the town or vicinity. Those who have not declared openly their secession principles take a neutral position.


The town of Huntsville contains perhaps 2,000 inhabitants. There is nothing remarkable grand about the buildings except a magnificent courthouse and an educational institution, without which the town would present an insignificant appearance. The location is among the hills and resembles some of the county towns of eastern Ohio.


There is but five companies of the 3rd Iowa Infantry here and one company of cavalry under the command of Captain Ogg.


On the evening of the 8th of February at 11 o’clock P.M., a detachment of the Black Hawk Cavalry brought to headquarters at Huntsville, 90 kegs of Kentucky Rifle Powder captured some twelve miles from this place, also 7 prisoners. The powder was found part in a corncrib and part of it in a hallow log February 10th, 1862.