A Conversation for Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
- 1
- 2
Peer Review: A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Florida Sailor All is well with the world Started conversation Jun 30, 2013
Entry: Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War - A87800664
Author: Florida Sailor Visit my Club at A87794248 - U235886
There were several questions asked in the Peer Review thread about my General Sherman Entry.
I thought the Guide might be improved by an Entry about some of the confusing terms that are often used on this subject.
All comments welcome!
F S
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Elektragheorgheni -Please read 'The Post' Posted Jun 30, 2013
Thanks for this FS. It might help the rest of the world get a better handle on this. I think that the English Civil War was a little less complicated in that you had basically two sides --the Royalist and the Antiroyalists. But the Confederacy with its states rights attitude had a lot more variants in it.
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Tavaron da Quirm - Arts Editor Posted Jul 1, 2013
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Bluebottle Posted Jul 1, 2013
A very useful article!
Just a couple of questions, if I may. Firstly, although you say 'It was not until 1863 that the 'Emaciation Proclamation'...' someone with no knowledge of the war would not know how far into the conflict that is, as you've not said when the war begins or ends.
Also, you've mentioned 'Blue coats', so were the Confederates actually known as Grey coats, or is this a modern anachronism?
Is there any reason that Mississippi is twice spelt with an apostrophe?
Do naming discrepancies apply to sea battles as well as those on land?
What's in a name? A Hampton Roads by any other name would smell as sweet.
<BB<
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Sho - employed again! Posted Jul 2, 2013
nice entry!
you mentioned that it was only in 1863 that the question of the emancipation of the slaves was brought in as a reason for the war of the North against the South, but from your timeline South Carolina seceded in 1860. What were they fighting about until then?
The Generals - which side did they fight on? (you might have mentioned it but I read it twice and was none the wiser. Although it seems clear that Lee was from the south?
Also, under Grant's section you wrote >>After the Civil War began he rejoined the Army and quickly rose in rank.<< I think you mean that he rejoined after the outbreak of the civil war?
And now I have the Dukes of Hazard in my head-cinema...
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Florida Sailor All is well with the world Posted Jul 3, 2013
Thank you all for your interest
Eleckra;
The English Civil was was religious war, between Cavaliers and Round-heads - COE vs Puritan. I sometimes wonder what the Catholics did? I don't think wars about God are ever easy
<BB<
I added a brief time-line for the start and end of the war, the '4 bloody years' might be a cop-out, but to add more gets into personal judgement that I might rather avoid, along with 10,00 items
Added a section on 'The Blue and the Grey' certainly worth a mention. (I added 'Blue Coats' just because I wanted another term for "Yankee" that could be used in a family setting)
The apostrophe after 'Mississippi' was only because I started to put the nanes into a paragraph with single quotes. When I switched to the list I removed 'most' of the quotes
I have not seen any discrepancies in naval battle names, but as only one side had a 'real' navy this is not too surprising
Hi Sho
I added a whole paragraph about the Southern reasons for the war. Much of this still results in serious combat over here, but I stand by my remarks. It is usually an over simplification to say the war was started over only slaves, but in the aftermath - it was the major result. My statement is primarily the Southern viewpoint, I will justify it by saying it is the side that is not often heard today. Just for the record, I do not believe that anyone has the right to suppress his fellow man.
I tried to better identify the Generals. Do we need a section on the flags? (Dukes of Hazard) The St Andrew's Cross by itself was only a unit battle flag, There were three Confederate National Flags.
F S
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Sho - employed again! Posted Jul 3, 2013
Thanks for clarifying the Generals - I'm woefully under educated about the Civil war.
The part explaining the South's reasons for the war is a useful addition for me - are you sure you don't want to add to that of the North
As for the English Civil war - I think it was over more than religion though... but that's a whole other entry and I'm not going to go there.
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Icy North Posted Jul 3, 2013
I can only add further praise for writing this.
I guess Americans know this stuff by the age of 5. I've never had it adequately explained to me until now.
You reminded me of the scene in The Good The Bad and The Ugly when Tuco and Blondie cheer for the grey uniforms when they see soldiers approaching. When they arrive, they brush the grey dust off their jackets to show the blue underneath.
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Florida Sailor All is well with the world Posted Jul 3, 2013
Sho
I added a paragraph on the reasons for the Northern response
The trouble is there is so much that can be added, I just don't want to overburden the reader. I am tempted to add a section on the theatres of war, including the blockade, the northern-most and western-most battles. But I don't want the Entry to become a burden to read. Comments welcome
F S
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Sho - employed again! Posted Jul 4, 2013
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Icy North Posted Jul 4, 2013
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Bluebottle Posted Jul 4, 2013
The American Civil War is a huge subject that is suitable to being covered by a number of entries.
Anything that doesn't fit into this entry is a good starting point for one or more other entries.
<BB<
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Florida Sailor All is well with the world Posted Jul 4, 2013
Added several links. A few of them offer the same information I have provided here, but I think this is unique enough to stand on its own.
F S
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Dmitri Gheorgheni, Post Editor Posted Jul 6, 2013
Terrific! We need this, because every time I write anything about the wa-wuh, somebody asks me again who was who.
Kind of like my baby sister at Gettysburg, who caused us mortal embarrassment by asking, 'Where are the Yankees at?' as we stood on Little Round Top.
'Ft Sumter was fired on' - you'd better tell them by whom. They won't know.
'Confederate Ship Shenandoah disarmed herself. I'm sure that's technically correct, for to us non-sailors, it excites risibility. How about, 'The Confederate Ship Shenandoah was surrended at Liverpool'?
The bullet list - it's excellent. But you've changed tenses in the middle. Present or past. Use one tense.
I think it's 'Pittsburg Landing'. 'Pittsburgh' is in western Pennsylvania.
Reconstruction: I have a couple of bones to pick.
While it is true that a lot of Bad Stuff happened during Reconstruction, there were positive aspects. (Don't believe ALL the propaganda they told you in school.) Reconstruction was not merely an attempt to punish the South for seceding.
I'd suggest you mention the fact that the Confederacy was now a 'failed state', add the expression 'sign the pardon', and point out that the states couldn't rejoing the Union until they ratified that 13th Admendment. Oddly Mississippi got away with not doing it. They finally fixed it this year:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/18/its-official-mississippi-finally-ratifies-13th-ame/
I'm not sure hwo they got away with that, but then, it's Mississippi.
I'd also suggest a quick explanation of the work of the Freedman's Bureau - which accomplished a lot of good before it was sabotaged.
Oh, and while it's perfectly true that many freedmen became sharecroppers, so did many poor whites.
James Earl Jones' father was a sharecropper. So was Johnny Cash's. What you said about this form of debt peonage is true, though.
Thanks for doing this - it's really valuable.
And it reminds me that one of these days, I have to write an entry on Robert E Lee's pet chicken.
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Florida Sailor All is well with the world Posted Jul 7, 2013
Thanks Dmitri
>>Kind of like my baby sister at Gettysburg, who caused us mortal embarrassment by asking, 'Where are the Yankees at?' as we stood on Little Round Top.
Probably made the entire 20th Maine roll over in their graves, several almost in earshot!
I revised and extended my remarks on Reconstruction, probably not as much as you would like. I am really trying to keep this fairly simple. The entire subject should really be its own entry, and I believe it needs to extend at least to the 1960's - if not 'to the time of this writing'.
I don't think we can get into the 'Freedman's Bureau' without a mention of the KKK, voting rights, Jim Crow - and all that followed.
Not disagreeing, only trying to keep focused.
BTW Looking forward to reading about the chicken
F S
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Dmitri Gheorgheni, Post Editor Posted Jul 7, 2013
I hear you about keeping it focused. You've done an admirable job here. That's just enough.
I think it's clear without being too much information.
And I've done that chicken thing.
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Bluebottle Posted Jul 8, 2013
You could maybe clarify that you do actually mean Liverpool, home of the Beatles, and not a place in America called Liverpool. And/or link to A280892
Not many people in the UK would know that the Confederate Navy was 'based' in the UK...
<BB<
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Bluebottle Posted Jul 30, 2013
Just wondering if you've got any comment to make on the last unanswered comment, about adding a link to the article on Liverpool or adding something to state that yes, Liverpool in the UK and not a potential Liverpool in the States?
Other than that, I take it that everyone here is happy with such a useful article?
<BB<
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Icy North Posted Jul 30, 2013
That distinction would best be made in a brief footnote.
A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
Bluebottle Posted Jul 30, 2013
True - either a footnote or possibly just a link to the article on Liverpool. It isn't worth a long explanation on the role of Liverpool during the 1860s.
<BB<
Key: Complain about this post
- 1
- 2
Peer Review: A87800664 - Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
- 1: Florida Sailor All is well with the world (Jun 30, 2013)
- 2: Elektragheorgheni -Please read 'The Post' (Jun 30, 2013)
- 3: Tavaron da Quirm - Arts Editor (Jul 1, 2013)
- 4: Bluebottle (Jul 1, 2013)
- 5: Sho - employed again! (Jul 2, 2013)
- 6: Florida Sailor All is well with the world (Jul 3, 2013)
- 7: Sho - employed again! (Jul 3, 2013)
- 8: Icy North (Jul 3, 2013)
- 9: Florida Sailor All is well with the world (Jul 3, 2013)
- 10: Sho - employed again! (Jul 4, 2013)
- 11: Icy North (Jul 4, 2013)
- 12: Bluebottle (Jul 4, 2013)
- 13: Florida Sailor All is well with the world (Jul 4, 2013)
- 14: Dmitri Gheorgheni, Post Editor (Jul 6, 2013)
- 15: Florida Sailor All is well with the world (Jul 7, 2013)
- 16: Dmitri Gheorgheni, Post Editor (Jul 7, 2013)
- 17: Bluebottle (Jul 8, 2013)
- 18: Bluebottle (Jul 30, 2013)
- 19: Icy North (Jul 30, 2013)
- 20: Bluebottle (Jul 30, 2013)
More Conversations for Confusing the Situation -Naming Conventions in the American Civil War
- A88048100 - Jacques Bellot's 1586 Phrasebook: How to Speake English Perfectlye [16]
36 Minutes Ago - A88047110 - 'Persuasion' - a Novel by Jane Austen [1]
4 Days Ago - A88045059 - Is There a Doctor in. . . ? Paging Dr Gregory House [5]
Feb 17, 2024 - A88043510 - Mergansers - Saw-billed Ducks [1]
Jan 22, 2024 - A88040207 - 'Now and Then' - the Final Beatles Song [3]
Jan 15, 2024
Write an Entry
"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a wholly remarkable book. It has been compiled and recompiled many times and under many different editorships. It contains contributions from countless numbers of travellers and researchers."