Comments on: Thanks Dixie Outfitters http://cwmemory.com/2008/12/02/thanks-dixie-outfitters/ Where History, Heritage, and Education Intersect Sat, 11 Feb 2012 19:35:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Leonard Lanier http://cwmemory.com/2008/12/02/thanks-dixie-outfitters/#comment-13490 Leonard Lanier Tue, 02 Feb 2010 20:08:58 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/?p=1953#comment-13490 It does sound suspiciously like something from The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government, but the information actually comes from a more dubious source.<br><br>On July 17, 1864, James Jaquess and J. R. Gilmore met with Jefferson Davis and Judah P. Benjamin. Gilmore, a northern journalist, and Jaquess, a Methodist clergymen and college president from Illinois, traveled to Richmond with hopes of finding possible ground for a negotiated end to the war. Both Gilmore and Jaquess possessed connections with the Copperheads.<br><br>Although not officially sanctioned by Lincoln, the president did know about Gilmore and Jaquess's mission. Just like the more noted Hampton Roads Peace Conference later in 1864, nothing came of the effort since Davis and the Confederate government still insisted on Southern independence as a basic condition for talks.<br><br>After his return to the North, Gilmore published an account of his mission in the Atlantic Monthly entitled "Our Visit to Richmond." The quote listed above comes from that article. While based partly on his notes, evidence suggests that Gilmore made up a large part of the narrative. For instance, Judah Benjamin's account of the meeting disagrees heavily with Gilmore's version.<br><br>I doubt that the earlier poster actually got the quote from the original article. Due to that one phrase about slavery, it seems that neo-confederate websites, like <a href="http://federationofstates.org" rel="nofollow">federationofstates.org</a>, picked up Gilmore's account as evidence that the Confederacy did not fight to protect slavery. No matter that Davis probably never said the words that Gilmore attributed to him.<br><br>For further information, McPherson details the whole Gilmore-Jaquess Peace Mission in better detail on page 768 of The Battle Cry of Freedom. It does sound suspiciously like something from The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government, but the information actually comes from a more dubious source.

On July 17, 1864, James Jaquess and J. R. Gilmore met with Jefferson Davis and Judah P. Benjamin. Gilmore, a northern journalist, and Jaquess, a Methodist clergymen and college president from Illinois, traveled to Richmond with hopes of finding possible ground for a negotiated end to the war. Both Gilmore and Jaquess possessed connections with the Copperheads.

Although not officially sanctioned by Lincoln, the president did know about Gilmore and Jaquess's mission. Just like the more noted Hampton Roads Peace Conference later in 1864, nothing came of the effort since Davis and the Confederate government still insisted on Southern independence as a basic condition for talks.

After his return to the North, Gilmore published an account of his mission in the Atlantic Monthly entitled “Our Visit to Richmond.” The quote listed above comes from that article. While based partly on his notes, evidence suggests that Gilmore made up a large part of the narrative. For instance, Judah Benjamin's account of the meeting disagrees heavily with Gilmore's version.

I doubt that the earlier poster actually got the quote from the original article. Due to that one phrase about slavery, it seems that neo-confederate websites, like federationofstates.org, picked up Gilmore's account as evidence that the Confederacy did not fight to protect slavery. No matter that Davis probably never said the words that Gilmore attributed to him.

For further information, McPherson details the whole Gilmore-Jaquess Peace Mission in better detail on page 768 of The Battle Cry of Freedom.

]]> By: Kevin Levin http://cwmemory.com/2008/12/02/thanks-dixie-outfitters/#comment-13489 Kevin Levin Tue, 02 Feb 2010 15:35:11 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/?p=1953#comment-13489 I assume it is from Davis's 2-volume history of the Confederacy, but I can't confirm it. Of course, it shouldn't override anything that Davis and the rest of the Confederacy's stated in clear language during the secession crisis and 4 years of war. I assume it is from Davis's 2-volume history of the Confederacy, but I can't confirm it. Of course, it shouldn't override anything that Davis and the rest of the Confederacy's stated in clear language during the secession crisis and 4 years of war.

]]> By: Jamie http://cwmemory.com/2008/12/02/thanks-dixie-outfitters/#comment-13488 Jamie Tue, 02 Feb 2010 07:45:14 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/?p=1953#comment-13488 What is the source and date of this Jefferson Davis quote? And why should it override the countless quotes that suggest slavery was indeed the main issue, including the documents by which several of the Southern states declared their independence? General Lee was against secession. He considered slavery evil. Yet he owned slaves and fought for the Confederacy. Why? Dedication to his home state, and a misguided belief that slavery would simply fade away in its own time. I can see questioning the motivation of the North to fight, as the abolitionist cause was seen as a fringe group that was not embraced by the majority of people anywhere in the nation. But the cause by which elite southern leaders rallied the populace to fight for was grounded in slavery. States rights was only used a justification for the legality of secession, not the cause. What is the source and date of this Jefferson Davis quote? And why should it override the countless quotes that suggest slavery was indeed the main issue, including the documents by which several of the Southern states declared their independence? General Lee was against secession. He considered slavery evil. Yet he owned slaves and fought for the Confederacy. Why? Dedication to his home state, and a misguided belief that slavery would simply fade away in its own time. I can see questioning the motivation of the North to fight, as the abolitionist cause was seen as a fringe group that was not embraced by the majority of people anywhere in the nation. But the cause by which elite southern leaders rallied the populace to fight for was grounded in slavery. States rights was only used a justification for the legality of secession, not the cause.

]]> By: Kevin Levin http://cwmemory.com/2008/12/02/thanks-dixie-outfitters/#comment-13477 Kevin Levin Mon, 01 Feb 2010 22:50:32 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/?p=1953#comment-13477 Thanks for the comment/quote. <br><br>If you are looking for Davis's views on secession and slavery I highly recommend that you read his speeches in 1861. Thanks for the comment/quote.

If you are looking for Davis's views on secession and slavery I highly recommend that you read his speeches in 1861.

]]> By: dewey barber http://cwmemory.com/2008/12/02/thanks-dixie-outfitters/#comment-13476 dewey barber Mon, 01 Feb 2010 22:45:41 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/?p=1953#comment-13476 "I tried all in my power to avert this war. I saw it coming, for twelve years I worked night and day to prevent it, but I could not. The North was mad and blind; it would not let us govern ourselves, and so the war came, and now it must go on till the last man of this generation falls in his tracks, and his children seize the musket and fight our battle, unless you acknowledge our right to self government. We are not fighting for slavery. We are fighting for Independence, and that, or extermination."<br> <br>-- President Jefferson Davis, CSA “I tried all in my power to avert this war. I saw it coming, for twelve years I worked night and day to prevent it, but I could not. The North was mad and blind; it would not let us govern ourselves, and so the war came, and now it must go on till the last man of this generation falls in his tracks, and his children seize the musket and fight our battle, unless you acknowledge our right to self government. We are not fighting for slavery. We are fighting for Independence, and that, or extermination.”

– President Jefferson Davis, CSA

]]> By: Jamie http://cwmemory.com/2008/12/02/thanks-dixie-outfitters/#comment-12852 Jamie Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:45:16 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/?p=1953#comment-12852 In short comments such as these, it's difficult to avoid generalizations. Politics and ideology indeed have their role, and I would be a fool to deny that. But I think it a fair hypothesis to put forth the notion that the psychological pressure of bonds to friends and kinsmen is greater on average than the individual's actual feelings about the justness of the cause. How committed was Robert E. Lee to the institution of slavery? My understanding is that his rejection of an offer to serve for the Union army was based first and foremost on his unwillingness to raise arms against his native home of Virginia. The influence of society on the actions of the individual is a powerful force that should not be underestimated. If it were not so, then one might argue that such an event as the Holocaust came about because Germans are inherently evil. Being of German descent, I certainly hope this isn't the case. Of course, after the deed is done and the truth is laid out for all to see, it's sometimes difficult to reconcile that truth with how we see ourselves. Dixie Outfitters is thus practicing capitalism at its finest...they saw a need, and they filled it. In this case, it's the need of white Southerners to feel good about themselves and their history. Personally, I feel there are far better ways to accomplish this goal than to live a lie. I guess I'm an idealist! Thanks for responding to my comment. I hope I've done a better job expressing my thoughts this time. Of course, I must admit, I'm most likely wading into subject matter that is over my head. In short comments such as these, it's difficult to avoid generalizations. Politics and ideology indeed have their role, and I would be a fool to deny that. But I think it a fair hypothesis to put forth the notion that the psychological pressure of bonds to friends and kinsmen is greater on average than the individual's actual feelings about the justness of the cause. How committed was Robert E. Lee to the institution of slavery? My understanding is that his rejection of an offer to serve for the Union army was based first and foremost on his unwillingness to raise arms against his native home of Virginia. The influence of society on the actions of the individual is a powerful force that should not be underestimated. If it were not so, then one might argue that such an event as the Holocaust came about because Germans are inherently evil. Being of German descent, I certainly hope this isn't the case. Of course, after the deed is done and the truth is laid out for all to see, it's sometimes difficult to reconcile that truth with how we see ourselves. Dixie Outfitters is thus practicing capitalism at its finest…they saw a need, and they filled it. In this case, it's the need of white Southerners to feel good about themselves and their history. Personally, I feel there are far better ways to accomplish this goal than to live a lie. I guess I'm an idealist! Thanks for responding to my comment. I hope I've done a better job expressing my thoughts this time. Of course, I must admit, I'm most likely wading into subject matter that is over my head.

]]> By: Kevin Levin http://cwmemory.com/2008/12/02/thanks-dixie-outfitters/#comment-12851 Kevin Levin Wed, 25 Nov 2009 07:47:15 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/?p=1953#comment-12851 Thanks for the comment. Civil War soldiers went off to war for any number of reasons. It is a mistake, however, to write off politics/ideology so quickly. Historians such as Earl Hess, Chandra Manning, and James McPherson have showed that soldiers did indeed join and remain in the ranks because of issues of nationalism and politics. I certainly agree that Dixie Outfitters is pushing a fantasy-style narrative of the war. Thanks for the comment. Civil War soldiers went off to war for any number of reasons. It is a mistake, however, to write off politics/ideology so quickly. Historians such as Earl Hess, Chandra Manning, and James McPherson have showed that soldiers did indeed join and remain in the ranks because of issues of nationalism and politics. I certainly agree that Dixie Outfitters is pushing a fantasy-style narrative of the war.

]]> By: Jamie http://cwmemory.com/2008/12/02/thanks-dixie-outfitters/#comment-12850 Jamie Wed, 25 Nov 2009 07:42:08 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/?p=1953#comment-12850 War is rarely about good vs. evil. Power is usually the driving political force, while loyalty to God or country is the motivation for the average soldier (not ideology). The irony to me is that during the war, Lincoln was fearful that whites in the North would not fight for the freedom of blacks in the South, and so he distanced himself from the cause of abolition for the first half of the war. Meanwhile, in the South, the threats posed to the institution of slavery were grounds for secession. The issue of states rights was never a concern when southern leaders pushed through the Gag Rule and Fugitive Slave Law. How confused they would be by the arguments we make today over why they went to war. In my opinion, Dixie Outfitters attacks one fictional view of the war with another, and whatever the goal, the result is only a reinforcement of negative stereotypes about southerners and rascism. War is rarely about good vs. evil. Power is usually the driving political force, while loyalty to God or country is the motivation for the average soldier (not ideology). The irony to me is that during the war, Lincoln was fearful that whites in the North would not fight for the freedom of blacks in the South, and so he distanced himself from the cause of abolition for the first half of the war. Meanwhile, in the South, the threats posed to the institution of slavery were grounds for secession. The issue of states rights was never a concern when southern leaders pushed through the Gag Rule and Fugitive Slave Law. How confused they would be by the arguments we make today over why they went to war. In my opinion, Dixie Outfitters attacks one fictional view of the war with another, and whatever the goal, the result is only a reinforcement of negative stereotypes about southerners and rascism.

]]> By: Jamie http://cwmemory.com/2008/12/02/thanks-dixie-outfitters/#comment-12460 Jamie Wed, 25 Nov 2009 03:45:16 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/?p=1953#comment-12460 In short comments such as these, it's difficult to avoid generalizations. Politics and ideology indeed have their role, and I would be a fool to deny that. But I think it a fair hypothesis to put forth the notion that the psychological pressure of bonds to friends and kinsmen is greater on average than the individual's actual feelings about the justness of the cause. How committed was Robert E. Lee to the institution of slavery? My understanding is that his rejection of an offer to serve for the Union army was based first and foremost on his unwillingness to raise arms against his native home of Virginia. The influence of society on the actions of the individual is a powerful force that should not be underestimated. If it were not so, then one might argue that such an event as the Holocaust came about because Germans are inherently evil. Being of German descent, I certainly hope this isn't the case. Of course, after the deed is done and the truth is laid out for all to see, it's sometimes difficult to reconcile that truth with how we see ourselves. Dixie Outfitters is thus practicing capitalism at its finest...they saw a need, and they filled it. In this case, it's the need of white Southerners to feel good about themselves and their history. Personally, I feel there are far better ways to accomplish this goal than to live a lie. I guess I'm an idealist! Thanks for responding to my comment. I hope I've done a better job expressing my thoughts this time. Of course, I must admit, I'm most likely wading into subject matter that is over my head. In short comments such as these, it's difficult to avoid generalizations. Politics and ideology indeed have their role, and I would be a fool to deny that. But I think it a fair hypothesis to put forth the notion that the psychological pressure of bonds to friends and kinsmen is greater on average than the individual's actual feelings about the justness of the cause. How committed was Robert E. Lee to the institution of slavery? My understanding is that his rejection of an offer to serve for the Union army was based first and foremost on his unwillingness to raise arms against his native home of Virginia. The influence of society on the actions of the individual is a powerful force that should not be underestimated. If it were not so, then one might argue that such an event as the Holocaust came about because Germans are inherently evil. Being of German descent, I certainly hope this isn't the case. Of course, after the deed is done and the truth is laid out for all to see, it's sometimes difficult to reconcile that truth with how we see ourselves. Dixie Outfitters is thus practicing capitalism at its finest…they saw a need, and they filled it. In this case, it's the need of white Southerners to feel good about themselves and their history. Personally, I feel there are far better ways to accomplish this goal than to live a lie. I guess I'm an idealist! Thanks for responding to my comment. I hope I've done a better job expressing my thoughts this time. Of course, I must admit, I'm most likely wading into subject matter that is over my head.

]]> By: Jamie http://cwmemory.com/2008/12/02/thanks-dixie-outfitters/#comment-12448 Jamie Wed, 25 Nov 2009 01:42:08 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/?p=1953#comment-12448 War is rarely about good vs. evil. Power is usually the driving political force, while loyalty to God or country is the motivation for the average soldier (not ideology). The irony to me is that during the war, Lincoln was fearful that whites in the North would not fight for the freedom of blacks in the South, and so he distanced himself from the cause of abolition for the first half of the war. Meanwhile, in the South, the threats posed to the institution of slavery were grounds for secession. The issue of states rights was never a concern when southern leaders pushed through the Gag Rule and Fugitive Slave Law. How confused they would be by the arguments we make today over why they went to war. In my opinion, Dixie Outfitters attacks one fictional view of the war with another, and whatever the goal, the result is only a reinforcement of negative stereotypes about southerners and rascism. War is rarely about good vs. evil. Power is usually the driving political force, while loyalty to God or country is the motivation for the average soldier (not ideology). The irony to me is that during the war, Lincoln was fearful that whites in the North would not fight for the freedom of blacks in the South, and so he distanced himself from the cause of abolition for the first half of the war. Meanwhile, in the South, the threats posed to the institution of slavery were grounds for secession. The issue of states rights was never a concern when southern leaders pushed through the Gag Rule and Fugitive Slave Law. How confused they would be by the arguments we make today over why they went to war. In my opinion, Dixie Outfitters attacks one fictional view of the war with another, and whatever the goal, the result is only a reinforcement of negative stereotypes about southerners and rascism.

]]> By: Toby http://cwmemory.com/2008/12/02/thanks-dixie-outfitters/#comment-4741 Toby Wed, 03 Dec 2008 16:54:18 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/?p=1953#comment-4741 "John Brown's body lies a mould'ring in the grave, but his taxes go marching on .... " Naw, doesn't even rhyme ... “John Brown’s body lies a mould’ring in the grave,
but his taxes go marching on …. ”

Naw, doesn’t even rhyme …

]]> By: Woodrowfan http://cwmemory.com/2008/12/02/thanks-dixie-outfitters/#comment-4740 Woodrowfan Wed, 03 Dec 2008 15:53:37 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/?p=1953#comment-4740 Funny how when the Southern states tried to secede they complained much more about the North interfering with slavery than they did about tariffs. An oversight on their part I am sure... Funny how when the Southern states tried to secede they complained much more about the North interfering with slavery than they did about tariffs. An oversight on their part I am sure…

]]>