It is April 1861; the Civil War has just begun with the first attack on Fort Sumter. The Southern states have already seceded from the Union and formed the Confederate States of America. Now the country is split, Union in the North and the Confederacy in the South. Both the Union and the Confederacy will soon be in need of resources especially since war is about to be declared by Abraham Lincoln. Leadership for the Union and the Confederate armies are given away mostly to those with seniority rather than to those who deserve it by merit. James Ewell Brown (“Jeb”) Stuart is among the Confederacy leaders to gain his position as general not only because of his age but also because of his experience with fighting the Indians and other whites on the frontier in Bleeding Kansas. Jeb Stuart along with thirteen other Virginian’s was part of the Confederate leadership which was made up of a total forty-four men. Jeb Stuart was given his position because of the seniority he had over the other men signed up for the war, but did he also earn the position by merit and if so, does he keep his merit throughout the Civil War?
Jeb Ewell Brown Stuart was born on February 6, 1933 on a plantation in Patrick County, Virginia. Stuart was the seventh child of eleven children, but the youngest son to Archibald Stuart. Jeb Stuart was well educated and attended Emory and Henry College from 1848 to 1850. Archibald Stuart was a lawyer and according to Burke Davis’ book, Jeb Stuart: The Last Cavaliert. Jeb Stuart was determined to escape from the life of a “petty-fogger lawyer” and his way of going about doing that was by joining the army. Stuart then entered the United States Military Academy on July 1, 1850 Stuart graduated in 1854 from West ...
... middle of paper ...
...Stuart." The Journal of Southern History 69, no. 1 (2003): 188-189. http://www.jstor.org/stable/30039884 (accessed November 14, 2013).
"J.E.B. Stuart Biography." J.E.B. Stuart Biography. http://xroads.virginia.edu/~ug97/monument/sturtbio.html (accessed November 14, 2013).
Lunt, James. "JEB STUART, CAVALIER OF THE CONFEDERACY." History Today, Aug 01, 1961. 536, http://search.proquest.com/docview/1299037405?accountid=12085.
Martin, S. Walter, and W. W. Blackford. "War Years With Jeb Stuart." The American Historical Review 51, no. 3 (1946): 518.
Newman, Ralph G. "Gallant Symbol of the Confederacy." Chicago Daily Tribune (1923-1963), Sep 15, 1957. 1, http://search.proquest.com/docview/180274550?accountid=12085.
Thomason, John. "Jeb Stuart." The Mississippi Valley Historical Review 18, no. 1 (1931): 96-98. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1897460 (accessed November 13, 2013).
What The South Intends. THE CHRISTIAN RECORDERS August 12, 1865, Print. James, Edward, Janet James, and Paul Boyer.
It is 1865, and the war between the states has just ended. Booth’s rage is peaking as he recalls Union General Ulysses Grant’s participation in the fall of the Confederacy….
Carter, Dan T. Scottsboro: A Tragedy of the American South. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 2007. Print.
When we compare the military leaders of both North and South during the Civil War, it is not hard to see what the differences are. One of the first things that stand out is the numerous number of Northern generals that led the “Army of the Potomac.” Whereas the Confederate generals, at least in the “Army of Northern Virginia” were much more stable in their position. Personalities, ambitions and emotions also played a big part in effective they were in the field, as well as their interactions with other officers.
In addition to a crumbling national identity, the necessities of war diminished morale among citizens of the Confederacy. Early on, the South believed that Europe would a...
The Battle of Fredericksburg is remembered as the Confederate Army’s most one-sided victory in its campaign against the Union Forces of the North. It was the first battle to occur shortly after President Abraham Lincoln had delivered his “Emancipation Proclamation” and the President was hard pressed for a victory to bolster public support for it. It would be remembered as the first major campaign for the newly appointed General of the Army of the Potomac. General Ambrose E. Burnside was given command of the Union Army due to an increased frustration President Abraham Lincoln was experiencing with his predecessor. However, General Burnside’s inexperience would cost him dearly on the battlefield. Historical data and battlefield analysis reports show what led to the Unions defeat at Fredericksburg. An alternative outcome was possible had General Burnside
Correspondence of John C. Calhoun. J. Franklin Jameson, ed. Annual Report of the American Historical Association 1899. II. 1900.
The Union Army was able to match the intensity of the Confederacy, with the similar practice of dedication until death and patriotism, but for different reasons. The Union soldiers’s lifestyles and families did not surround the war to the extent of the Confederates; yet, their heritage and prosperity relied heavily on it. Union soldiers had to save what their ancestors fought for, democracy. “Our (Union soldiers) Fathers made this country, we, their children are to save it” (McPherson, 29). These soldiers understood that a depleted group of countries rather than one unified one could not flourish; “it is essential that but one Government shall exercise authority from the Gulf of Mexico to Canada, and from the Atlantic to the Pacific” (Ledger, 1861).
III. After reading this journey of a man who was born in North Carolina, raised in Tennessee, and became a statesman for both Mississippi and Alabama, I honestly believe I have learned a lot about a great and knowledgeable man. Before reading this book, I had no wisdom of this man nor his accomplishments. I had no previously knowledge of George Strother Gaines
Washington, Mary Helen. Introduction. A Voice From the South. By Anna Julia Cooper. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. xxvii-liv.
10 Clinton 123, 124, 128; Robertson 185; East 238, 247; "Sister Writes from Vanquished South"; Berry; Woodward 153.
Barnett, Ida B., and Ida B. Barnett. Southern horrors and other writings: the anti-lynching campaign of Ida B. Wells, 1892-1900. Boston, MA: Bedford Books, 1997.
John Brown became a legend of his time. He was a God fearing, yet violent man and slaveholders saw him as evil, fanatic, a murderer, lunatic, liar, and horse thief. To abolitionists, he was noble and courageous. John Brown was born in 1800 and grew up in the wilderness of Ohio. At seventeen, he left home and soon mastered the arts of farming, tanning, and home building.
Imagine a historian, author of an award-winning dissertation and several books. He is an experienced lecturer and respected scholar; he is at the forefront of his field. His research methodology sets the bar for other academicians. He is so highly esteemed, in fact, that an article he has prepared is to be presented to and discussed by the United States’ oldest and largest society of professional historians. These are precisely the circumstances in which Ulrich B. Phillips wrote his 1928 essay, “The Central Theme of Southern History.” In this treatise he set forth a thesis which on its face is not revolutionary: that the cause behind which the South stood unified was not slavery, as such, but white supremacy. Over the course of fourteen elegantly written pages, Phillips advances his thesis with evidence from a variety of primary sources gleaned from his years of research. All of his reasoning and experience add weight to his distillation of Southern history into this one fairly simple idea, an idea so deceptively simple that it invites further study.
More confederates than unions were illiterate due to the fact that most held professional or white-collard jobs (36). To make the Union soldiers sample fair sense most blacks couldn’t read or write, 2 who could were included in the sample (36). The levels of patriotism differed from the upper and lower south given to the fact that the upper south were mainly cotton states. The confederates felt as if it was a “rich mans woar but the poor man has to do the fifting” (16). The confederates were mainly fighting for “independence, property and way of life” (27). Some characteristics the soldiers had in common were McPherson’s calculations for the Union. He came to seeing that out of 562 Union soldier’s letters read only 67 percent voice strong patriotic motives. This is the same as the two-thirds of Confederates. As a result from reading McPherson’s book, research showed that the Union and Confederate soldiers expressed about the same degree of patriotic and ideological convictions. Even though they both had different reasons for fighting the levels of sincerity and dedication in their notes were