Remembering the Columbia Burning

February 17th marks the 150th anniversary of the burning of Columbia, South Carolina, and the town is memorializing the event with a series of lectures. If you live in or can get to Columbia in the next month, there are some interesting topics being covered.  Click the link below for the full list of speakers.

More than 450 buildings in Columbia were destroyed and many residents were left homeless and destitute in February 1865 after Union Gen. William T. Sherman’s troops marched with vengeance into the city.

The fire that nearly wiped out the city is the focus of two months of lectures, exhibits and tours designed to help current residents determine look back on the nation’s most devastating conflict and gauge its impact even today.

via Diverse experts, events to mark Columbia’s most devastating period | Living | The State.

Wisconsin: The Civil War years

Wisconsin is one of those forgotten states for me – I can only spot it on the map by counting away from Illinois, and it’s never made it onto my must-see list. During the Civil War, though, it was a keystone for the Union. This short article details Wisconsin’s contributions to the Federal cause.

By the time the Civil War broke out in 1861, the Wisconsin State Journal had been publishing for more than 20 years. But nothing could prepare Wisconsin and its nascent capital city for the horrors to follow. The country’s struggle with slavery, and the resulting war, would be the dominant issue of the time.

Families in Wisconsin and elsewhere were torn apart, as one soldier in three suffered some sort of casualty and one in every seven “gave the last full measure of devotion,” as Abraham Lincoln memorably said in his Getttysburg Address.

via The Wisconsin State Journal at 175: The Civil War years : Wsj.

Alexandria, Virginia

This is an interesting chronicle of life in Alexandria, Virginia – just a short walk from downtown Washington, DC.  During the war it was Confederate territory, occupied by the Union.  Citizens and returning soldiers write about their lives on the front line of the Confederate homefront.

Voices from the Past, Alexandria, Virginia 1861-1865 | Fort Ward Museum & Historic Site | City of Alexandria, VA.

Visiting Historic Richmond

My return visit to Washington was sadly lacking in triumph – Protip: Check that your GPS maps are correct before setting out – and I was too strapped for time to get over to Richmond.  If anyone is considering a visit, though, this piece sums up all the great Civil War sites to visit in town.

And look! It suggests a visit to a cemetery where the remains of some of those Jewish soldiers I mentioned are buried.

An offbeat cemetery is the Hebrew Cemetery, dating to 1816 and operated by Congregation Beth Ahabah. Within this cemetery is a plot called the Soldier’s Section. It holds the graves of 30 Jewish Confederate soldiers killed in the Civil War.

Visiting historic Richmond – Philly.com.

A Rebel’s Recollections

The Atlantic published an excerpt from A Rebel’s Recollections that provides an interesting, rambling take on the Upper South’s (specifically Virginia’s, in this case) reasons for entering the war.  In summary, the writer suggests they were bullied into it by the planter states, with some propaganda and misinformation thrown in for emphasis.

Why, then, the reader doubtless asks, if this was the temper of the Virginians, did Virginia secede after all? I answer, because circumstances ultimately so placed the Virginians that they could not, without cowardice and dishonor, do otherwise; and the Virginians are brave men and honorable ones. They believed, as I have said, in the abstract right of any State to secede at will. Indeed, this right was to them as wholly unquestioned and unquestionable as is the right of the States to establish free schools, or to do any other thing pertaining to local self-government. The question of the correctness or incorrectness of the doctrine is not now to the purpose. The Virginians, almost without an exception, believed and had always believed it absolutely, and believing it, they held of necessity that the general government had no right, legal or moral, to coerce a seceding State; and so, when the President called upon Virginia for her quota of troops with which to compel the return of the seceding States, she could not possibly obey without doing that which her people believed to be an outrage upon the rights of sister commonwealths, for which, as they held, there was no warrant in law or equity.

She heartily condemned the secession of South Carolina and the rest as unnecessary, ill-advised, and dangerous; but their secession did not concern her except as a looker-on, and she had not only refused to be a partaker in it, but had also felt a good deal of indignation against the men who were thus endangering the peace of the land. When she was called upon to assist in reducing these States to submission, however, she could no longer remain a spectator. She must furnish the troops, and so assist in doing that which she believed to be utterly wrong, or she must herself withdraw from the Union. The question was thus narrowed down to this: Should Virginia seek safety in dishonor, or should she meet destruction in doing that which she believed to be right? Such a question was not long to be debated. Two days after the proclamation was published Virginia seceded, not because she wanted to secede, – not because she believed it wise, – but because, as she understood the matter, the only other course open to her would have been cowardly and dishonorable.

I have always taken issue with the Southern Cause (capital C) – it’s difficult, as a modern-day moderate, to understand why anyone could offer themselves up to “die of a theory” (stealing a quote from Jefferson Davis).  This bitter paragraph, and that brutal last line, is an excellent summation of my own thoughts:

With all its horrors and in spite of the wretchedness it has wrought, this war of ours, in some of its aspects at least, begins to look like a very ridiculous affair, now that we are getting too far away from it to hear the rattle of the musketry; and I have a mind, in this chapter, to review one of its most ridiculous phases, to wit, its beginning. We all remember Mr. Webster’s pithy putting of the case with regard to our forefathers of a hundred years ago: “They went to war against a preamble. They fought seven years against a declaration. They poured out their treasures and their blood like water, in a contest in opposition to an assertion.” Now it seems to me that something very much like this might be said of the Southerners, and particularly of the Virginians, without whose pluck and pith there could have been no war at all worth writing or talking about. They made war upon a catch-word, and fought until they were hopelessly ruined for the sake of an abstraction. 
via A Rebel’s Recollections (Part 1) – George Cary Eggleston – The Atlantic.

State of Scott

Here’s a short history of the State of Scott, one of many pro-Union counties that rebelled against the rebellion. There’s a little more to read on the link – worth a few minutes of your time.

The State of Scott was the result of a secessionist movement by Scott County in the Eastern Division of Tennessee, which officially passed a proclamation during the American Civil War to secede from Tennessee and form the Free and Independent State of Scott in protest of the states separation from the United States. Scott became an enclave community of the Union within Tennessee. Although its edict had never been officially recognized by any government, the county didnt officially rescind its act of secession until 1986.

via State of Scott – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

War on the Potomac

Being the seat of the US government, it’s easy to forget how divided a city Washington was during the war. The Georgetown Hoya describes the schism on campus as a microcosm of the country in the spring of 1861.

At the time of the war’s outbreak, Georgetown College was a small, all-male institution composed of not only a postsecondary liberal arts college but also a comprehensive preparatory school. Little separated the students of the two establishments, meaning that in 1860 one could bump into a student who was anywhere between 12 and 21 years old.

It was among the older, postsecondary students that the war caused the greatest divide. Many came from the South, some from slave-owning families. According to Curran’s book, some of these students even kept a personal slave with them on campus. Thomas J. Caulfield, a music professor and organist at the school, wrote “Grand Secession March” which became a rallying song for the South Carolinians ,while many of the Jesuits at the college had been writing letters and articles against slavery in the years leading up to the war.

The strains were evident at campus events. On Dec. 18, 1859, the Philodemic Society debated the topic of whether the South should secede. J. Fairfax McLaughlin, a student from New York who studied at Georgetown between 1851 and 1862, wrote about the commotion the debate caused.  

“It was getting on war time and everyone was in a belligerent mood. Our debate that night was particularly stormy,” McLaughlin recorded in his book, College Days at Georgetown and Other Papers. “The climax was finally reached, and a scene followed not unlike some of those then frequently occurring in Congress — free fight.

via War on the Potomac – The Guide – The Hoya.

Lesser Knowns

Much of the local newspaper content that filters through my inbox involves small stories of long-dead and long-forgotten local residents.  This Columbus Dispatch article touches upon some of the middling players from the era’s national stage, also long-forgotten, but with some nifty personal anecdotes.

Formerly a Whig, he joined the new Republican Party and was named a delegate to the 1860 Republican Convention in Chicago.

Vocal demonstrations of support were important tools for candidates seeking to demonstrate strength at political conventions back then.

Lincoln, an underdog at the convention, didn’t secure enough delegates for the nomination on the first two ballots. When the roll was called for the third, Delano rose and delivered a one-sentence statement that electrified the crowd: “I desire to second the nomination of a man who can split rails and maul Democrats — Abraham Lincoln.”

via Ohioans loom large in lore of Lincoln | The Columbus Dispatch.

Battle of Nueces

This article mentions a “battle” in Texas which is new to me – one guesses that anything under 50 casualties generally gets skipped in the narratives. Interesting to learn there was a pro-Union, German contingent in Texas during the war, though. We tend to think of the German immigration as being exclusively Northern. I wonder how much their influence was felt on that “every Southern state except SC had Union regiments” statistic.

All five major Civil War battles in Texas were fought along the coast – two at Galveston, two at Sabine Pass and one near Brownsville. But little is remembered about the discord the war caused. While people in and around Boerne and Fredericksburg opposed secession, those in the New Braunfels area, where Germans had lived in Texas longer and were sympathetic to states’ rights, supported it.

via Battle of Nueces event to recall conflicted Texas during Civil War – Houston Chronicle.

Homesteady

The Homestead Act is one of those Civil War consequences whose real intention has been lost in its legacy. We remember it for opening up the West to settlement, and for its effects on the Native Americans on the plains, whose displacement it began. What we tend to forget is that it was issued when the fire of secession was still burning, and the question of free versus slave statehood was still theoretically open to debate. It helps to remember Shelby Foote’s words on Lincoln, “Almost everything he did was calculated for effect.” I need to be more cynical in my historical readings!

The Homestead Act effectively opened up thousands of acres of land in the Midwest where slavery had been discussed but not approved, as well as the upper South where blacks would be more welcome as well as further West, which was open to all.

By the time it was over, some four million settlers had filed claims to be allowed to receive the land, which covered 270 million acres in 30 states. This accounted for roughly ten percent of the landmass of the country. 

Since the varying peoples of the United States, even then, could not unanimously agree on much of anything, the land deals were equally as divisive. The land proposition had initially been talked of in the 1850s, but Southern congressmen had blocked the proposed legislation each time it was brought up. It was their fear that this expansion might produce more free states, which would not be in favor of the expansion of slavery.

via The Civil War: Lincoln's Homestead Act of 1862, bane or blessing? | Washington Times Communities.