What did Civil War soldiers fight for?

[Mr. Kobayashi]

Aka the War Between the States, you know, the Civil War. These days the motives of the footsoldiers in past wars are often conflated with the overarching theme of the conflict itself.

There are few conflicts with such obvious focus points as the Civil War and the issue of slavery. Over 3 million soldiers fought in that war. What are your educated guesses for what really motivated these men to take up arms? How much of a factor was slavery?

I'm finding it really hard to imagine that even a small fraction of Union soldiers went to battle confident that they fought the good fight to free the negro slaves. Similarly, I can't imagine any Confederate soldiers eager to throw their lives away to maintain the southern status quo for slaveowners far wealthier than they. Particularly interested to hear what kind of percentages you might assign for the various motivations (I've no doubt some went to war simply for the loot, some went for bloodlust, but how many?).

[pseudotriton ruber ruber]

They fought for four years.

[XT]

What did Civil War soldiers fight for?

For the most part, they fought for the same things every soldier in history fought for...their neighbors, their buddies, their friends and the other soldiers in their immediate circle. Sure, some fought for higher ideals or the cause, but for the most part people fight for their friends and neighbors standing beside them and against the other guys who are standing across from them.

[Little Nemo]

They fought because their country was at war.

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by pseudotriton ruber ruber

They fought for four years.

Only the lucky ones.

[Jas09]

We can add a few more reasons as well. They fought because the Home Guard would kill them or their families if they didn't. They fought because they were paid to so wealthy sons wouldn't have to.

[wedgehed]

A captured Confederate soldier pretty much summed it up for his side....

"I'm fighting because you're down here."

[tomndebb]

Originally Posted by Jas09

We can add a few more reasons as well. They fought because the Home Guard would kill them or their families if they didn't. They fought because they were paid to so wealthy sons wouldn't have to.

I doubt that there were five men in the United States between April, 1861 and April 1865 who joined an army because they were afraid that some local hooligans would kill them or their families. I have never seen any reference to anything like this--ever.

= = =

As to the OP: fighting to "free the Negroes" was never a major issue in the North and only became a minor issue in 1863, after Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation. At that point, it became part of the overall recruiting effort, but it still was subordinate to the major point over which men enlisted: secession.

There was a very strong resistance to the idea that any state or collection of states had the right to break the Union. It was such a strong feeling that few in the South entertained it until 1860. (In fact, when much earlier in the history of the country, a few people in the North suggested that act as a reaction against the War of 1812, there was a strong outcry and condemnation in the South against that idea--even to the point of threatening war to ensure the union, despite already being locked in a struggle with Great Britain.)

The South, as a region, seceeded on a political platform of preserving slavery, although most of its recruits joined up to show that their state or region had a right to go its own way rather than actively seeking to "fight for slavery."
In the North, preservation of the Union was the focal point of the vast majority of recruitment. (Note how often the word Union is asociated with that war and its aftermath while the word Abolition is only associated with individuals and their ideas.)

[MEBuckner]

Originally Posted by tomndebb

As to the OP: fighting to "free the Negroes" was never a major issue in the North and only became a minor issue in 1863, after Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation. At that point, it became part of the overall recruiting effort, but it still was subordinate to the major point over which men enlisted: secession.

In general, I'm sure this is absolutely true. (For example, see Sullivan Ballou's famous letter--it's all about "love of country", not "freeing the slaves".) There were approximately 186,000 Union soldiers who probably had somewhat different priorities.

[tomndebb]

Regarding the payment of bounties to avoid the draft: somewhat more than 5% of the Federal Army included men who had accepted money to fight. That would be about 100,000 men out of the two million who served. This is not a small number, but it is overwhelmed by the number of volunteers who served. (Another 2% - 3% were drafted, so volunteers "only" made up about 92% of the Northern forces.)

[BrainGlutton]

A great many, I'm sure, North and South, fought for no more compelling reason than that it was a chance to fight. People back then had different attitudes towards war.

[John Mace]

We've done this before several times. The South was fighting to defend slavery, but the North was fighting to prevent the South from seceding. The average soldier, though, probably fought because his state said it was the right thing to do. Antebellum US was state-cetnric in a way that few people today can appreciate.

[wedgehed]

Originally Posted by John Mace

The South was fighting to defend slavery....

I believe the average Confederate soldier was fighting to defend his home. As far as defending slavery, it seems to me that a better defense would have been to stay in the Union & block every piece of anti-slavery legislation that came before Congress. Fortunately, the fire-eaters in the south weren't that bright.

[RandMcnally]

Soldiers also fought then for why they fight now: chance at an adventure.

[Dallas Jones]

It is important to remember the way that soldiers were recruited and the fighting units were formed. Rather than being an individual signing up and going away to fight alone, like it is today, fighting units were formed often from guys who grew up together. Sons, fathers, your friends, might all join and fight in the same unit.

If all the young men in your town or county were forming up to go to war, well, you were going to go too. Peer pressure, family honor, how are you really going to stay home and talk about the issues involved. You went.

Because of this practice there were some very sad days after a major battle when a whole unit got wiped out, when small towns might learn that none of their men would be coming home.

[Jas09]

Originally Posted by tomndebb

I doubt that there were five men in the United States between April, 1861 and April 1865 who joined an army because they were afraid that some local hooligans would kill them or their families. I have never seen any reference to anything like this--ever.

Thank you for the correction. After some reading (which I obviously should have done before posting) it's clear you're right. I was surely conflating some fictional account with historical reality.

[Trinopus]

Early on, at least a few of 'em signed up in order to wear those cool Zouave uniforms!

[Ibn Warraq]

According to Mark Twain it was because Southern women wouldn't have sex with men who refused to fight. He obviously put it a bit more delicately.

More seriously, he blamed Sir Walter Scott and others for creating the concept of chivalry and honor which became so integral to the Southern character and the expectations of Southern men that caused so many of them to throw their lives away in such a stupid cause.

[DrDeth]

Well, many on each side just plain didn't like the other side.

Abolitionists were a minority in the North, but by no means a tiny one. It appears about 1/3 were Abolitionists of one sort or another up North. I'd hazard a guess that another 1/3 didnt like slavery but were unwilling to fight about it.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by wedgehed

I believe the average Confederate soldier was fighting to defend his home. As far as defending slavery, it seems to me that a better defense would have been to stay in the Union & block every piece of anti-slavery legislation that came before Congress. Fortunately, the fire-eaters in the south weren't that bright.

You're right. I should have have posted something like:

Originally Posted by John Mace

The average soldier, though, probably fought because his state said it was the right thing to do. Antebellum US was state-cetnric in a way that few people today can appreciate.

Fortunately, though, you cut off my quote just before that part.

[Johnny Bravo]

For a lot of poor folks (especially immigrants fresh off the boat in the north), they signed up for a pair of the best boots they'd ever owned and the promise of three meals a day and steady income.

[Der Trihs]

Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq

According to Mark Twain it was because Southern women wouldn't have sex with men who refused to fight.

I've heard the same; to such an extent that men who avoided fighting (by, say paying someone to take their place as mentioned) were held in such contempt by women that prostitutes would spit on them. The idea that women = anti-war is a modern one; the Spartan mothers telling their sons "come back with your shield or on it" is more the historical norm.

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by Der Trihs

I've heard the same; to such an extent that men who avoided fighting (by, say paying someone to take their place as mentioned) were held in such contempt by women that prostitutes would spit on them. The idea that women = anti-war is a modern one; the Spartan mothers telling their sons "come back with your shield or on it" is more the historical norm.

So, umm, 411 BC is "Modern"?

Lysistrata would disagree with you. True, women can be just as bloodthirsty as men, no doubt.

[wedgehed]

Originally Posted by John Mace

Fortunately, though, you cut off my quote just before that part.

OK, so I'm a defensive Southerner whose ancestors wore grey. Just go ahead & steal my chickens!

[PrettyVacant]

Money, manufactured patriotism, peer pressure, social pressure, the owners of capital - all twisted and distorted through the filter of a 'doing the right thing' morality.

[Captain Amazing]

Originally Posted by wedgehed

As far as defending slavery, it seems to me that a better defense would have been to stay in the Union & block every piece of anti-slavery legislation that came before Congress. Fortunately, the fire-eaters in the south weren't that bright.

They might not have been that bright, but they weren't dumb either. And they could read demographic trends. The President had just gotten elected without any southern support. In the House , only 90 of the 238 congressmen were from the South...a number swamped by even the size of the House Republican caucus, which made up 108 members.

Things were a little better in the Senate, where the South was better able to maintain parity due to raw state numbers. But if you look at a map, there was a lot more territory waiting to be settled, most of it in places slavery wasn't really able to take root in. All those territories would some day be demanding statehood, and the Senators in those states wouldn't be able to be counted on to defend slavery.

[DrDeth]

Originally Posted by PrettyVacant

Money, manufactured patriotism, peer pressure, social pressure, the owners of capital - all twisted and distorted through the filter of a 'doing the right thing' morality.

Except, the North really was "doing the right thing".

[PrettyVacant]

Cue: States Rights vs. blah, bleh, meh.

[Freddy the Pig]

Joining the army was a great long-term career move--if you lived to tell about it. Civil War veterans had huge advantages in politics and business. If you were young and healthy and didn't fight, you'd spend the rest of your life explaining why, just as later politicians were dogged by avoiding service in Vietnam. As a northern veteran, by contrast, you would join the Grand Army of the Republic, a clubby fraternity with great networking opportunities whose members cared for each other in good times and bad. Best to sign up, dodge rebel bullets and dysentery, and brag about it for the rest of your life.

[Left Hand of Dorkness]

Originally Posted by wedgehed

I believe the average Confederate soldier was fighting to defend his home.

My wife recently read a book by an historian whose primary primary documents were letters written by Confederate soldiers to their families. So take this as a tertiary at best source .

Anyway, one interesting finding is that a lot of Confederate soldiers were fighting to defend their homes, by maintaining slavery. Every white person in the South was well aware of the Haiti example, in which slaves engaged in a bloody uprising and slaughtered many white people. There was a fear among white Southerners that if slavery ended, there might be a similar massacre in the South, as freed slaves sought revenge. While there might have been some legitimacy to this fear, given the Haitian precedent, it was no doubt exacerbated by racist impressions of the brutality of black people.

A white Confederate soldier who had no slaves might nevertheless want to keep the institution of slavery strong, as a way of protecting his wife, mother, sister, daughter.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by wedgehed

OK, so I'm a defensive Southerner whose ancestors wore grey. Just go ahead & steal my chickens!

I burning your chickens!

[Bridget Burke]

Many reasons have been mentioned; most of them valid. Beginning in 1862, men on both side joined because they were conscripted; the procedure was phased in over the following years.

As mentioned, prosperous Yankees had the option of paying somebody else to take their place. Rebels who owned enough slaves were exempt; see also Desertion in the Civil War.

[Evil Captor]

There was a lot of ambivalence even in the South about the war. The people in the mountains rarely had big farms, or slaves, and were not NEARLY so enamored of slavery as the people in middle and south Georgia where they had the big plantations. In fact, one county in north Georgia is called "Union County" because it went for the Union throughout the Civil War. Cite.

[wedgehed]

Originally Posted by Evil Captor

In fact, one county in north Georgia is called "Union County" because it went for the Union throughout the Civil War. Cite.

Not quite.

Cite

There's also a Lincoln County in Georgia. It's not named for Abe though.

[Jim's Son]

A lot of Northerners felt that if they were to keep having a republic, they had to fight for it when it was threatened. Even if that threat was one-third of the states leaving it. You had some 80 years of hearing how their grandfathers fought for freedom in the Revolution and many thought to prove themselves worthy of being free men. they had to defend it. Certainly this was reinforced by many units being made up of people from the same area-which had devastating effects if that unit suffered severe casualties.
From a later war, E.B. Sledge in his book on World War II in the Pacific says "If a country is worth living in, then it is worth fighting for." I think a lot of people 150 years ago had that attitude.

[Evil Captor]

Originally Posted by wedgehed

Not quite.

Cite

There's also a Lincoln County in Georgia. It's not named for Abe though.

Hmm. The origin of the name was wrong but the cite reinforces the larger point about the ambivalence of north Georgians toward secession and the Civil War.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by Evil Captor

Hmm. The origin of the name was wrong but the cite reinforces the larger point about the ambivalence of north Georgians toward secession and the Civil War.

Damn Yankee Georgians!

[Darth Panda]

Originally Posted by Trinopus

Early on, at least a few of 'em signed up in order to wear those cool Zouave uniforms!

That's a really good point. No way you're getting away those pants any other way.

[tomndebb]

Originally Posted by Bridget Burke

Many reasons have been mentioned; most of them valid. Beginning in 1862, men on both side joined because they were conscripted; the procedure was phased in over the following years.

The draft was a real phenomenon, but as I noted earlier, fewer than 3% of Federal troops were drafted. (In fact, I was surprised to find that more men joined up as paid substitutes than actually served as conscripts--although the total percentages of both groups were still pretty low.)
What I had remembered, but might come as a surprise to those who romaticize the Southern war effort, is that the Secessionist states instituted a draft earlier than the Union states.

[WillFarnaby]

Originally Posted by DrDeth

Except, the North really was "doing the right thing".

That is a fitting name considering your view of the War of Northern Aggression.

It remains the deadliest war in American history, resulting in the deaths of an estimated 750,000 soldiers[5] and an undetermined number of civilian casualties. Historian John Huddleston estimates the death toll at ten percent of all Northern males 20–45 years old, and 30 percent of all Southern white males aged 18–40

.

[Left Hand of Dorkness]

Originally Posted by WillFarnaby

That is a fitting name considering your view of the War of Northern Aggression.

"Northern Aggression"? You couldn't name it less accurately if you called it the War of Mutant Tomato Worms.

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by WillFarnaby

That is a fitting name considering your view of the War of Northern Aggression.

Unless you're posting in the Pit, please skip the personal remarks.

[Mk VII]

The South did draft people increasingly as the war went on, and the draft laws were enforced on deserters and people who tried to evade it. Cold Mountain is not entirely imaginary.

[furdmort]

Originally Posted by WillFarnaby

That is a fitting name considering your view of the War of Northern Aggression.

.

That's a really odd thing to say, considering that it was the confederates who fired the first shot by capturing Fort Sumter:

From Wikipedia

Hostilities began on April 12, 1861, when Confederate forces fired on a U.S. military installation at Fort Sumter in South Carolina.

[Der Trihs]

Originally Posted by WillFarnaby

That is a fitting name considering your view of the War of Northern Aggression.

Well, too damned bad for them. They were defending something that was in its own way at least as evil as Nazi Germany, and as deserving of destruction. Oh, I have at least some sympathy for some of the random civilians; but I wouldn't feel any compassion for their military and leadership if it had been exterminated to the last man.

And "War of Northern Aggression"? If we want to use such a propagandistic label, how about "The War Against the Treasonous Southern Enemies of Humanity"? A bit more awkward, but at least it has the virtue of accuracy.

[robertliguori]

Originally Posted by Der Trihs

Well, too damned bad for them. They were defending something that was in its own way at least as evil as Nazi Germany, and as deserving of destruction. Oh, I have at least some sympathy for some of the random civilians; but I wouldn't feel any compassion for their military and leadership if it had been exterminated to the last man.

And "War of Northern Aggression"? If we want to use such a propagandistic label, how about "The War Against the Treasonous Southern Enemies of Humanity"? A bit more awkward, but at least it has the virtue of accuracy.

"Slaver's Rebellion" is punchier.

[Der Trihs]

Originally Posted by robertliguori

"Slaver's Rebellion" is punchier.

Agreed.

[nachtmusick]

Originally Posted by furdmort

That's a really odd thing to say, considering that it was the confederates who fired the first shot by capturing Fort Sumter:

From Wikipedia

Haven't you read history? The commander of Fort Sumter touched off hostilities by attacking thousands of peaceful Southern cannonballs with his aggressive fort.

[BrotherCadfael]

Originally Posted by Freddy the Pig

Joining the army was a great long-term career move--if you lived to tell about it. Civil War veterans had huge advantages in politics and business.

This is a nice case of 20-20 hindsight. While veterans absolutely did have the huge advantages cited, this certainly would not have been obvious to the ordinary citizen before the war, or during it.

[greenslime1951]

I only have seen this mentioned once so far, but for the average Joe, North and South, life on the farm was pretty boring. You also never had any actual money to spend, for the most part. You joined the army, you got clothed, fed, and paid, you got to travel (most had never ridden on a train before, or been out of the county they were born in), and you got to meet people from all over the country. The possibility of getting killed was just part of the job, and probably outside of a few of the bloodiest battles, not really any greater than spending the equivalent amount of time on the farm (accident, disease, no real medical care, etc.).

I doubt that any more than a tiny fraction of the soldiers on either side thought much about the "cause" or the sociopolitical issues involved. As the war went on, many Confederates viewed themselves as defending their homes from Northern invaders, but at any given moment, most members of a Southern army were hundreds of miles from their actual homes. I don't think you feel any particular passion to defend Mississippi if you're from Virginia, for example.