Gettysburg

noharleyyet said:
Yea, sort of my point Brent.
Click to expand...
Nah - it was your point to use those terms. I only referred to those who took up arms against their nation and many against their own sworn oaths. I never used the labels - just pointed to individuals and their actions. North and South are merely points on a compass. The CSA is a long since dead failed revolution, not sure why folks feel the need to defend it.
 
You view their actions as treasonous because you view the country as most of us do now. Many people back then viewed their state as supreme within a group “These United States” vs. the current “The United States”. Foote recounted a story which told of a group of Yankee soldiers talking to a Reb asking why he was fighting, he replied because y’all are down here. Simplistic yes but a kernel of truth is there.

The war was horrific and was made inevitable by the actions of another group of “traitors” during the Constitutional Convention after the American Rebellion. We could go back and forth on this but to what end. I am not going to change your mind and vice versa.
 
VikingsGuy said:
Nah - it was your point to use those terms. I only referred to those who took up arms against their nation and many against their own sworn oaths. I never used the labels - just pointed to individuals and their actions. North and South are merely points on a compass. The CSA is a long since dead failed revolution, not sure why folks feel the need to defend it.
Click to expand...
So northerner/southerner offends you and Brent? Seriously?

I don't give a shit...
 
Handlebar said:
Back to the intent of original post, I am very jealous shrapnel that you were able to visit that hallowed ground, and one question is the table in Appomattox courthouse the one that Robert E. Lee signed the surrender on? If so, it must have been given back to the government by Elizabeth Custer? My recollection is the Gen. Custer purchased that desk.
Click to expand...



Actually, much happened at Appomattox that was because of Custer. He captured around 50 of Lee’s artillery and pressed him on ending the war. For several days, Lee and Grant were corresponding about the upcoming outcome.

A white flag of truce was offered to Custer as the Confederate army was submitting to Custer. Following the truce, Lee and Grant signed the terms of surrender as depicted here in this painting, Custer on the extreme right.

It was General Sheridan that bought the table and gave it to Libby Custer with a note:

“My dear Madam – I respectfully present to you the small writing table on which the conditions for the surrender of the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia were written by Lt. General Grant – and permit me to say, Madam, that there is scarecely an individual in our service who has contributed more to bring this about than your gallant husband.”


IMG_5161.jpegIMG_5166.jpegIMG_5169.jpeg
 
VikingsGuy said:
Simply embarrassing that the ridiculous narrative spun by the "Lost Cause" folks still holds in the minds of some Americans. A few excerpts from the Confederate states ordinances/articles of succession may serve as a good reminder from their own mouths:

Mississippi Ordinance of Secession adopted January 9, 1861

“Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery – the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product, which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition . . .”



Texas Ordinance of Secession February 23, 1861, popular vote 46,153 in favor, 14,747 against.

“In all the non-slave-holding States, in violation of that good faith and comity which should exist between entirely distinct nations, the people have formed themselves into a great sectional party, now strong enough in numbers to control the affairs of each of those States, based upon an unnatural feeling of hostility to these Southern States and their beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery, proclaiming the debasing doctrine of equality of all men, irrespective of race or color – a doctrine at war with nature, in opposition to the experience of mankind, and in violation of the plainest revelations of Divine Law. They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States.

....

“We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.
. . . .

“That in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.


Georgia Ordinance of Secession adopted January 19, 1861

“The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slaveholding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. “
....

“The question of slavery was the great difficulty in the way of the formation of the Constitution. While the subordination and the political and social inequality of the African race was fully conceded by all, it was plainly apparent that slavery would soon disappear from what are now the non-slave-holding States of the original thirteen. The opposition to slavery was then, as now, general in those States and the Constitution was made with direct reference to that fact. . . . .”
Click to expand...
As always, very well researched @VikingsGuy. You might find Apostles of Disunion interesting if you haven't read it already.

I do think there is a distinction to be made between the political reasons for secession-- which was undoubtedly slavery-- and the political reasons for opposing secession--which was more preservation of the Union, particularly in the Midwestern states. Further, there is a distinction to be made between the political reasons for the war--again, largely slavery-- and the reason why a particular individual chose to fight. Not all Confederate soldiers were ardently pro-slavery (although I would assume the vast majority were) nor were all, or even most, Union soldiers abolitionists at the beginning of the war. Pulitzer Prize winner James McPherson's For Cause and Comrades: Why Men Fought in the Civil War was very illuminating in that regard.
 
Sheltowee said:
. . . You might find Apostles of Disunion interesting if you haven't read it already.

I do think there is a distinction to be made between the political reasons for secession-- which was undoubtedly slavery-- and the political reasons for opposing secession--which was more preservation of the Union, particularly in the Midwestern states. Further, there is a distinction to be made between the political reasons for the war--again, largely slavery-- and the reason why a particular individual chose to fight. Not all Confederate soldiers were ardently pro-slavery (although I would assume the vast majority were) nor were all, or even most, Union soldiers abolitionists at the beginning of the war. Pulitzer Prize winner James McPherson's For Cause and Comrades: Why Men Fought in the Civil War was very illuminating in that regard.
Click to expand...
Agree whole heartedly.
 
Handlebar said:
I agree with you on the concept of inherited culpability. I disagree with you that the officer was a traitor.
Click to expand...

To clarify some definitions:

For a professional military officer these words have real meanings and consequences, and these concepts are codified in the oath we swear and the code of military justice that governs our service. They aren't about feelings or sentiments. If a sworn professional military officer takes up arms against the government they swore an oath to, they are committing treason. It is cut and dry. You don't have to like it.

I am certain those confederate officers knew they were committing treason. They understood the consequences of their decisions, and based on their convictions, were prepared to confront them should they lose. This is no different than the founding fathers, they acknowledged it, and there are probably some brits that still consider Americans traitors.

The problem is the majority of American citizens have never shouldered these kinds of decisions and personal responsibility, and are uncomfortable with the idea of a personal decision having that level of gravity.
 
MinnesotaHunter said:
To clarify some definitions:

For a professional military officer these words have real meanings and consequences, and these concepts are codified in the oath we swear and the code of military justice that governs our service. They aren't about feelings or sentiments. If a sworn professional military officer takes up arms against the government they swore an oath to, they are committing treason. It is cut and dry. You don't have to like it.

I am certain those confederate officers knew they were committing treason. They understood the consequences of their decisions, and based on their convictions, were prepared to confront them should they lose. This is no different than the founding fathers, they acknowledged it, and there are probably some brits that still consider Americans traitors.

The problem is the majority of American citizens have never shouldered these kinds of decisions and personal responsibility, and are uncomfortable with the idea of a personal decision having that level of gravity.
Click to expand...
I swore the oath as well. When an officer resigns his commission is he no longer obligated to that oath.
In your opinion was the Officer Corp of the Continental army traitors? this is not trying to be a gotcha.
 
Handlebar said:
I swore the oath as well. When an officer resigns his commission is he no longer obligated to that oath.
In your opinion was the Officer Corp of the Continental army traitors? this is not trying to be a gotcha.
Click to expand...

So two parts, and I will caveat this with the fact that I am an infantry officer not a JAG officer, so my understanding is constrained to the aspects of this that apply to me.

1. The uniformed code of military justice only applies if you are currently enlisted or have an active commission. An officer cannot unilaterally resign their commission, it must be approved by the service component. General Lee sent a letter attempting to resign his commission from the US Army in 1861, but accepted command of the Army of Virginia only 2 days after sending his request; which in that day had never even been reviewed much less approved.

2. If they had been commissioned officers in the British Army, and never resigned, then yes.

It is also important to note that civilians can also commit treason if they take up arms against the country they maintain citizenship in.
 
Colonial Williamsburg shows just how much the Brits are a bunch of losers. The Governor in 1774 had his house full of guns and swords and now they don’t want anyone to have them..


IMG_5186.jpegIMG_5185.jpegIMG_5184.jpeg
 
I would encourage all to look into how the units from your state participated. The 1st Minnesota played prominently at Gettysburg...

https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/charge-1st-minnesota

https://www.mnmilitarymuseum.org/files/7313/3799/8529/Rev._First_Minn_and_Battle_of_Gettysburg.pdf

The 1st Minnesota was recruited out of south eastern MN and federalized at Fort Snelling; which is immediately adjacent to the MSP airport, for those who have flown in/out.

When Col. Colville was given the order to charge into the Confederate advance, his response was "To the Last Man"; which lives on as the unit motto of an infantry battalion in today's Army that traces its lineage to the 1st Minnesota. A monument to Col Colville exists in Cannon Falls, MN for any interested.

The colors of the 28th Virginia still hang in the MN state capital. For over 100 years the state of Virginia has been asking for it back, and every time the Governor of MN has refused to return it.
 
MinnesotaHunter said:
I would encourage all to look into how the units from your state participated. The 1st Minnesota played prominently at Gettysburg...

https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/charge-1st-minnesota

https://www.mnmilitarymuseum.org/files/7313/3799/8529/Rev._First_Minn_and_Battle_of_Gettysburg.pdf

The 1st Minnesota was recruited out of south eastern MN and federalized at Fort Snelling; which is immediately adjacent to the MSP airport, for those who have flown in/out.

When Col. Colville was given the order to charge into the Confederate advance, his response was "To the Last Man"; which lives on as the unit motto of an infantry battalion in today's Army that traces its lineage to the 1st Minnesota. A monument to Col Colville exists in Cannon Falls, MN for any interested.
Click to expand...
Read The Last Full Measure: The Life and Death of the First Minnesota Volunteers just a few months ago. Fantastic work with a lot of primary source material in it.
 
Looks like a great trip shrapnel, my wife and I have been wanting to make a similar trip, hopefully the year after next. Thanks for sharing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Random ramblings…
Replies
1
Views
214
lovethehunt86
L
beaglegun
  • Locked
Voting Hunters
5 6 7
Replies
131
Views
4K
Hammsolo
Hammsolo
M
GREAT FALLS, MT
Replies
8
Views
595
golfer
G
Redraider7
  • Poll
Off Season Poll: How did you get your start into hunting?
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
achadwick
A
Flatlander3
Montana Anniversary Vacation
Replies
12
Views
410
Dsnow9
Dsnow9
GOHUNT Insider

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,668
Messages
2,028,977
Members
36,275
Latest member
johnw3474

Share this page

Back
Top