VA-HIST Archives

Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history

VA-HIST@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Constantine Gutzman <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 19 Feb 2003 22:02:05 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (38 lines)
Henry Wiencek asks an interesting question, the nub of which is, "During the
Revolution loyalist
Americans took up arms and joined the forces of the Crown in significant
numbers.  During the Civil War only a few distinct sections of the South,
notably north Alabama and East Tennessee, remained loyal in spirit and deed
to the United States.  I am wondering if there was any
significant public outcry across the South against secession."  It seems to
me that this question is flawed in its conception.  The only way that one
can say that there wasn't "any significant public outcry ... against," or
significant armed opposition to, secession is by defining "the South" in a
_post hoc_ way.  Before the 1860-61 secession crisis, "the South" would have
included Kentucky, Missouri, a large portion of Maryland, and the District
of Columbia.  These states/this district, which ultimately remained in the
Union even after Lincoln's inauguration, formed a far larger proportion of
the South than the portions of the United States dominated by Loyalists
formed of the entire area of the United States during the Revolution.

Although it is written for a lay audience, William W. Freehling's _The South
vs. The South_ develops this point in some detail.  His earlier volume, _The
Road to Disunion_, volume 1, deals extensively with sectionalists' and
secessionists' fear that if push came to shove, the upper South (MO, MD, DE,
and KY) would prove disloyal to the South.  If that happened, former
secretaries of war Calhoun and Davis believed, the South would have no
chance in an armed conflict.  (Of course, they had not read Gallagher's _The
Confederate War_, the central argument of which is that despite
disadvantages of every kind, the South very nearly won the war.  I don't
take a side in this debate.)  George Rable's _The Confederate Republic_
explores political opposition to the Davis Administration, and to the war
effort, particularly in NC and GA, but also in the context of the famous
Richmond bread riot.

Prof. K.R. Constantine Gutzman
Department of History
Western Connecticut State University

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2


LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US