Tags
![Lamar Rifles [Company G, 11th Mississippi], taken on the Main Street on the side of the county courthouse square, about 1861. New York Historical Society collection.](http://pooreboysingray.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/lamar-miss-rifles.jpg)
Lamar Rifles [Company G, 11th Mississippi], taken on the Main Street on the side of the county courthouse square about 1861. New York Historical Society collection.
An episode of the animated TV series The Simpsons captured how political correctness is used to overcome attempts to discuss the complicated causes behind the Civil War.
In the episode, immigrant Apu is taking a test for citizenship and has this exchange with the test proctor:
Proctor: All right, here’s your last question. What was the cause of the Civil War?
Apu: Actually, there were numerous causes. Aside from the obvious schism between the abolitionists and the anti-abolitionists, there were economic factors, both domestic and inter. . .
Proctor: Wait, wait. . .just say slavery.
Apu: Slavery it is, sir.
(Episode: 3F20, Much Apu About Nothing)
And so “slavery” is the easy answer to the question “Why did young men from Mississippi enlist to fight for the Confederacy?”
Such an easy answer, however, ignores the complicated issues faced by the Poore brothers and others in the Piney Woods region of Mississippi.
The Piney Woods, because of its soil, was not a major cotton-growing or slave section
Recruiting poster for the Confederate States of America, Floyd County, Virginia, February 1862. Image courtesy of learnnc.org.
of the state. A few steaks of rich, black soil allowed for a handful of large cotton plantations with many slaves. Yeoman farmers who, like the Poore family, owned five or fewer slaves usually focused on growing corn, cattle, hogs and, for a cash crop, a little cotton. Most other farmers in the region owned no slaves at all.
Some Piney Woods families split over secession. Strong pockets of unionist and anti-Confederate feelings existed in the region throughout the war. Even pro-Confederate Newton County historian A. J. Brown had to admit that during the secession crisis “quite a number of voters of the county . . . were ‘Union men.’”
Strongly pro-Union, anti-secession or anti-Confederate men and their families in the region bedeviled Confederate authorities during the war. Some men who fought reluctantly at first for the rebels later deserted and joined local guerillas and fought determinedly against Confederate authorities.
After Lincoln called out thousands of Northern troops to force Southern states back into the Union, Mississippi needed men to meet them in defense of hearth and home.
There is little doubt the Poore brothers supported slavery, but their opinions on secession are not known. Regardless of the Poore brothers’ views, the choice for them once Mississippi left the Union became one of fighting with the secessionists or against them.
About 73 out of every 100 young men aged 18 to 24 in Mississippi enlisted. This made the Poore brothers and other Mississippi young men among the most motivated recruits in either the Southern or Northern army.
The Poore brothers no doubt enlisted, at least in part, because they saw a duty to defend their state.
Did your ancestor leave a record as to why he enlisted? Can you tell if the region he lived in was either strongly unionist or secessionist? What does that say about his choice?
I have wondered about this myself. I have ancestors from Benton County, TN that didn’t own slaves, nor did most people in the county, but they all faught for the Confederacy. I figure that they wanted to defend their state, or had a strong belief in the state’s rights.
Melissa, historian Victoria E. Bynum found that when a Piney Woods family and its kinfolk held slaves they were more likely to support the Confederacy. Those families who didn’t own slaves and whose kin also didn’t own slaves were more likely to oppose the rebellion.
Did the uncles and cousins of your Tennessee ancestors own slaves? That also may offer a clue as to why they fought with the rebels.
My great great grandfather (Stephen Subra) and his brother (John Subra) both fought for the Union, in different units from Wisconsin. John enlisted twice (the first time discharged with some disability), serving in infantry units.
Though there were several reasons for people in the North to fight (slavery, saving the Union, patriotism, bonus money), John’s pension records indicate that he primarily joined as a source of income (probably including any bonus money) so that he could provide a house for his parents. John’s father (my g-g-g grandfather, Etienne Subra, an emigrant from France in 1832) was partially disabled and unable to earn as much as a healthy man. John (the oldest child of Etienne) had assisted in providing for his parents and family before enlisting, as indicated by his pension records (which exist because his parents sought his pension, being desolate).
One affidavit in the pension records testified that John had stated that he would give his right leg to get a house for his parents. He did more. He was killed in Dallas, GA on 31 May 1864.
Great story! Thanks for sharing. This is a great example of the info you can find in Union pension records.
Yes. I even received (most of) a handwritten “marriage record” of John’s parents in his pension records. What a wonderful surprise. ;>D
Some of my Fraser ancestors wrote letters from the front that mention “despotism” quite a bit. They also want to prove that “South Carolina boys” are stronger and faster than Yankees. But in the letters I’ve found, there is not much about slavery. Not surprising, I suppose, because it was not an explicit issue until mid-War with the Emancipation Proclamation?
Mariann,
A number of historians have noted that Southern soldiers didn’t talk much about slavery in their letters. But this seems to be because it was taken for granted.
Historian James McPherson found evidence of very strong patriotism in the letters of Southern soldiers. Most believed they were fighting for freedom and liberty, but that was limited to whites.
You have a nice blog and I have enjoyed reading through your posts.
I have often wondered why a particular ancestor of mine living in Georgia did not enlist along with his brothers and brother-in-laws. While he was married, so were they. I have wondered if it was any indication of his feelings towards the war itself or if there were other factors. None of these families were wealthy, nor had any slaves and I seriously doubt they were fighting for the right to have slaves. .
Thank you for the kind words.
Unless your ancestor left a written account of his thoughts on the war, of course, you can’t be sure why he didn’t enlist. But look for some clues as to his reasons in his actions after the war.
Try to find out what groups and organizations he belonged to. Were they the types of groups that unionists tended to join, or were there a lot of Confederate veterans on their membership lists? Did the area in which he lived after the war tend to vote strongly Republican? Did he get involved in populist and farmers’ movements?
The old saying that “You can know a man by the company he keeps” goes for our ancestors, too.
Whatever the reasons they joined to begin with, and social pressure would not have been an insignificant reason, when the war was well underway, they were fighting for each other and to defend the folks at home from Yankee invasion. They left the politics to the big bugs, as they used to call the social elite. Historians today claim they were fighting for slavery and their chance to buy slaves someday. But I expect that simple survival was a much more important reason.
Dick, I tend to agree with you. I have often tried to figure out what I (with all my 21st century beliefs and sensibilities) would have done if I were to somehow find myself in the South during the Civil War. I’m still not sure. Of course I wouldn’t be fighting for slavery, and wouldn’t have fought against my family.