Union Jayhawkers And Woe To Live On: A Comparison

In “Apostles of Disunion: Southern Secession Commissioners and the Causes of the Civil War,” Charles B. Dew analyzes the public letters and speeches of white, southern commissioners in order to prove that the Civil War was fought over slavery. By analyzing the public letters and speeches of the commissioners, Dew offers a compelling argument proving that slavery along with the ideology of white supremacy were primary causes of the Civil War. Dew is not only the Ephraim Williams Professor of American History at Williams College, but he is also a successful author who has received various awards including the Elloit Rudwick Prize and the Fletcher Pratt Award. In fact, two of Dew’s books, Tredegar Iron Works and Apostles of Disunion and Ironmaker to the Confederacy: Joseph R. Anderson, received the Fletcher Pratt Award for the best nonfiction book regarding the American Civil War. In his analysis, Dew argues that the fear of eliminating slavery along with the fear of racial equality were both crucial factors regarding the outbreak of the Civil War. By tracing the speeches and public letters of state-appointed commissioners, Dew effectively argues that the white, southern commissioners led the southern states into a Civil War in order to preserve the institution of slavery as well as the ideology of white supremacy.

The American Civil War has become a point of controversy and argument when discussing key events in shaping America. The arguments that arise when discussing the war tend to focus on whether the Confederate was constitutionally justified in seceding, or whether the North had the right to prevent the secession. However, when discussing the America Civil War and the idea of separation, it is important to be mindful that separation did not simply end at the state level. Letters written by Jesse Rolston, Jr. and Jedediah Hotchkiss portray two significantly different attitudes toward the war, despite the fact that the writers both fought for the Confederate States and give accounts of the same battle, one of which ended in the Confederate’s favor. When examining the documents, both writers express different viewpoints on life on and off the battlefield. This significant difference represents a division amongst the Confederate army.

Americans had been engaged in a Civil War which had been begun in April of 1861 with shots fired on a fort in South Carolina. In the summer of 1863 in a small town called Gettysburg, there would be a fierce battle fought between the Union Army of the Potomac led by General George G. Meade and the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia led by General Robert E. Lee. The events of the battle would overcome the losses suffered by the Union and put the Confederacy on the run. “Over 165,000 men would converge, and before the fighting ended, the ground would run red with blood. The battle was fierce, and the casualties proved it. But the casualties that resulted would not be in vain, at least for the Union; the formidable power

Rawley, James A. Race & Politics; "bleeding Kansas" and the Coming of the Civil War '

The American Civil War occurred between 1861 and 1865 and is largely considered the most destructive conflict in U.S. history, resulting in approximately one million military casualties and an inestimable number of civil victims. Much controversy still surrounds the nature of this conflict, as its determining causes are complex. Contemporary international perception may have placed a progressive, anti-slavery label on the whole affair, yet the basic fact remains that nineteenth century America was an increasingly inhomogeneous country and prone to blatant discrepancy.

James M. McPherson sets out to discover what motivated the Confederate and Union soldiers to continue fighting in the Civil War in his book What They Fought For. McPherson analyses nearly a thousand letters, journals, and diary of Union and Confederate soldiers to determine what urged them to fight is this defining American Conflict. McPherson reads and groups together the common thoughts of the everyday soldier, from their letters and journals that none of which had been subjected to any sort of censorship, in that time period. He then generalizes the motivations that they used to fight for their country. Whether it be for slavery or for the Union, the author views both sides of the fighting to analysis their ideological issues, how deep their belief coursed through their veins to continue fighting, and how the soldiers held their convictions close to heart in the time of war.

The theme of race and reunion had become a competition for memories with vastly different aspirations between the north and the south. Striving for a reunion, a majority of American white communities close obscure the civil war racial narrative would only fade. In race and reunion: The Civil War in American memory, by David Blight, represents how Americans chose to remember the Civil War conflict, from the beginning of the turning point of the war. The two major themes race and reunion, demonstrate how white Americans adjusted and altered the causes and outcomes of the Civil War to reflect their particular ideas regarding this catastrophic conflict between Northerners and Southerners era. Blight, addresses how these differences in cultures collided in the visions that they saw America becoming when reunited as a union after the Civil War, reconciliationists, White supremacy and emancipationist. Blight does an excellent job of showing the arguments between all three versions of the Civil War. As the emancipationist image kept a firm hold amongst ex-slaves, it lost much of its white support and political power. Reconciliation became more about healing, allowing racial injustice of the supremacist movement to seep into the landscape of national healing. why do Union veterans allow the real cause of the war, slavery, to disappear from the memory of the war – Blight strives to answer. Through a culture of remembrance, veterans looked back at their experience with a sort of

Published in 1896, Twain’s piece follows a band of youthful Civil War rebels through the eyes of their 24-year-old ‘leader’. Instantly one can distinguish the inadequacies of the “Marion Rangers” as Twain depicts both their cowardice and inexperienced war tactics. Through a closer examination of textual evidence, along with

Thomas DiLorenzo spends the rest of the book discussing secession, Lincoln’s assumption of “war powers,” his resort to total warfare, the story of Reconstruction, the cruel Indian

William W. Freehling's book The South vs. The South: How Anti-Confederate Southerners Shaped the Course of the Civil War tells a unique story about the Civil War and one that is not typically discussed in history books. The book is about divisions within the southern culture, which might have led to the outcome of the war in favor of the Union. Perhaps all black southerners had a vested interest in the North's victory, but many white southerners felt the same way for many reasons. In The South vs. The South, Freehling discusses the way the Union used divisions in the south as a war strategy, such as by recruiting potentially neutral Americans living in border states. Recruiting soldiers from border states and western states with less entrenched plantation cultures versus their Dixie counterparts was one of Lincoln's key strategies and also helped General Grant secure some key military victories.

The American Civil war is considered to be one of the most defining moments in American history. It is the war that shaped the social, political and economic structure with a broader prospect of unifying the states and hence leading to this ideal nation of unified states as it is today. In the book “Confederates in the Attic”, the author Tony Horwitz gives an account of his year long exploration through the places where the U.S. Civil War was fought. He took his childhood interest in the Civil War to a new level by traveling around the South in search of Civil War relics, battle fields, and most importantly stories. The title “Confederates in the Attic”: Dispatches from the Unfinished Civil War carries two meanings in Tony Horwitz’s

The South vs. The South by William Freehling is a narrative that focuses on the civil war that affected a vast number of Southerners who opposed the Confederacy regardless of whether they were white or black. These “anti-Confederates,” as termed by Freehling comprised Slaves and Boarder state whites who together formed half the southern population and were significant to the Union victory. By weakening the Confederacy military, contributing manpower and resources to the Union and dividing the southern home front, the anti-Confederates made a critical contribution to the Union war efforts that hastened the end of the war leading to the Union’s victory. The U.S was not the only house that was divided; Divisions between pro-and anti-Confederates, white and black, and the loyalty of both upper and lower states to slavery contributed a lot to the downfall of the confederates. “Divisions within the South helped pave the path toward war. The same divisions behind army lines helped turn the war against the slaveholders.”(p.10). William Freehling argues that more than 450,000 Union troops from the South, especially southern blacks and border state whites, helped in the defeat of the confederates. Further, when the southern Border States rejected the Confederacy, more than a half of the South’s capacity swelled the North’s advantage.

This book was a good analysis of Civil War soldiers' diaries, and letters to their loved ones. Which explains what they were going through in their lives and what they fought for and risked their lives for in this conflict. In the book the author James M. McPherson uses information from l00's of diaries and letters from the soldiers to learn why they fought in this war. The Union soldiers fought to preserve the Nation that was created in 1776, to save it from destruction. The Confederate soldiers fought for their independence, liberty, self government, and for revenge.

The South vs. The South by William Freehling is a narrative that focuses on the civil war that affected a vast number of Southerners who opposed the Confederacy regardless of whether they were white or black. These ?anti-Confederates,? as termed by Freehling comprised Slaves and Boarder state whites who together formed half the southern population and were significant to the Union victory. By weakening the Confederacy military, contributing manpower and resources to the Union and dividing the southern home front, the anti-Confederates made a critical contribution to the Union war efforts that hastened the end of the war leading to the Union?s victory. The U.S was not the only house that was divided; Divisions between pro-and anti-Confederates, white and black, and the loyalty of both upper and lower states to slavery contributed a lot to the downfall of the confederates. ?Divisions within the South helped pave the path toward war. The same divisions behind army lines helped turn the war against the slaveholders.?(p.10). William Freehling argues that more than 450,000 Union troops from the South, especially southern blacks and border state whites, helped in the defeat of the confederates. Further, when the southern Border States rejected the Confederacy, more than a half of the South?s capacity swelled the North?s advantage.

“Battle Cry of Freedom; The Civil War Era id a work of such vast scope necessarily emphasizes synthesis at the expense of theme. If there is a unifying idea in the book, it is McPherson 's acknowledged emphasis on “the multiple meanings of