Good evening. Im harold, the chair of the lincoln forum. It is time now for our main event. I am proud to welcome back to the forum two of my favorite people, not only as friends, but as colleagues in the civil war field. Gary gallagher and joan waugh. Individually and as a team, they are superlative interpreters of the civil war era who combine military history and social and cultural history and bring to their scholarship and engagement with readers and audiences great knowledge, sophistication, and style. As your packets enumerate, they have individually and together and live into the literature over the years. Gary gallagher is a Professor Emeritus in the history of the American Civil War at the university of virginia and he is former director of the now civil war Sector Center there. You are all familiar with his major works, the confederate war, the union war, lee and his generals in war and memory. He is also, like many in this room, an aficionado, but more, an expert on civil war films, but his passion inspired a terrific 2008 book, how hollywood and popular art shape what we know about the civil war. He is the coeditor that published new perspectives on the union war. Joan waugh is a professor of American History at ucla and the author of such books as the memory of the civil war on American Culture entity terrific u. S. Grant american here your american hero, american myth. Working together, they have not only cohosted important and in donating civil war conferences, they have worked together on the 2015 instant classic, the american war, a history of the civil war era, and this book, wars within a war, coedited by joan and gary gallagher. How better to start this then at the beginning . Although i have a funny feeling they will define the topic as they wish, as they always do. It is billed as what caused the civil war from two scholars who know the war from start to finish. Please join me in welcoming joan and gary. noise good evening, everyone. Gary and i were delighted when they asked us to participate in this years lincoln forum. We were a bit surprised when he said our sign topic was what caused the civil war. We have only 30 or 40 minutes to cover ground that has inspired a huge literature, so we decided to keep you for 30 hours. A huge literature by some of the best historians who have worked in our field, among them david potter, jim mick fierce and, and elizabeth therein. Nevertheless, we have a plan. We have to come up with one. The animating question for our presentation is a familiar one, yet one that is endlessly fascinating and vital. Was the civil war and irreplaceable conflict . To answer this question, what ensues is we are going to highlight a number of interpretive themes around nonsectional versus sectional issues, the importance of the revolution in communication and politics, western expansion, culture and society, the politics of slavery and the constitution, and the notion of two opposing civilizations. Is that enough or do i have to add some more . Included in our conversation are quotes from important figures at the time and a couple of historians. The conclusion brings us back to the causes and to the question of the inevitability of the war. I will repeat johns point about how difficult it is to Say Something fresh regarding this topic. We have both resistant heralds idea that we should talk about this. I will say to you all, harold runs the show. That is what we are doing tonight. But the problem is that offering something truly novel about this topic is about as likely as finding something worthwhile on twitter. Which is to say there is almost no chance whatsoever. But we are going to start with an aberration from david potter, he alerts as to the fallacy of reading history backwards. This might also be termed apple mattocks and drum, the phenomenon of beginning with the end of a historical story firmly in mind and then switching back in the evidence for things that seem to point to what you know the final result was. Within a civil war context, this is for example beginning with knowledge of the United States victory and emancipation, and ranging back in the evidence to find things that lead us to those outcomes. This approach almost always skews at least as much as it reveals. And it promotes a sense of historic inevitability that all of us should try to avoid. In lincoln and his party, potter cautions against assuming the Republican Leaders as they debated how to deal with the threat of secession in 1860 must have known that war was possible. As much as they had been the first to see and hear oppressive conflict regarding the common perception about republicans, quote, it seems impossible that they should have been the last to recognize that the conflict was on the eve of materializing. Potters discussion of evidence reveals how republicans easily could have misjudged the likelihood of secession and war. Sources from the time indicates that the only reliable indices of the future where the warnings of secession that came from southern politicians, editors, and legislators. Republicans as well as democrats as potter put it have long experienced the southern threats that had never led to action. For 40 years, the republicans flourished and expanded under constant threats of disillusion. President James Buchanan remarked in 1856, for example, that members of the Democratic Party quote, have so often cried wolf it is very difficult to make people believe it. Three years, later a republican congressman from indiana said humourously, our southern friends have dissolved the union 40 or 50 times. But we do have landmark speeches by president lincoln and William Henri steward. Both of them were delivered in 1858. That seems to support the idea of two divergent societies struggling to operate underneath one constitutional framework and proceeding towards some kind of inevitable conflict. This is the slide, the causes of the civil war. These four men are not, and i repeat, not the causes of the civil war. But they represent different strands and obviously stewart and lincoln are on your left. I will say that those of you who know professor gallagher know that he does not believe in power point presentations. So i am totally responsible for making sure this goes smoothly. Totally responsible. 100 . 100 and 10 , never say that. Lincolns house divided speech of june 16th, 1858 to the Republican State Convention in springfield illinois is quoted endlessly. Sectional agitation argued lincoln will not cease until a crisis shall have been reached and passed. A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the union to be dissolved. I do not expect the house to fall but i do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, for all the other. I never get tired of that quote. Do you . William henri stewards heiress impressible conflict speech lebron rochester new york on october 25th and widely read and commented on at the time was even more strident. Our country is a theater which exhibits in full operation to radically different political systems. One resting on the basis of survival or free or slave labor. The other on the basis of the voluntary labor of freemen. These antagonistic systems, he continued, are continually coming into closer contact and collision results. It is an era precipice conflict between opposing and enduring forces. And it means that the United States must and will sooner or later become either entirely a slave holding nation or entirely a free labor nation. Before moving on with the rest of our discussion, we want to remind everybody in this room and there are so many of you, it is wonderful to see 350 people here who are so interested in lincoln. We want to remind you of something you already know. That is that no one in the United States between 1830 and to the end of the 18 fifties thought in terms of an antebellum era. No one woke up and said it is great to be an america in the antebellum era. I love the antebellum era. It is even better than before. Latin for before the war, you know the word came into play on the after the civil war ended and participants and then historians and other writers sought to label the decades proceeding the outbreak of fighting at fort summer. It has become a commonplace thing in literature for many generations. The word seward summons thoughts too often in my view of a young republic lurching towards inevitable political collapse. The planet of antebellum can create a sense of inevitability of citizens increasingly obsessed with sectional differences and of time taking inexorably towards bloodshed on a massive scale. Indeed, the word can drain all meaning, except as a prelude to four years of war for a 30year swath of National Advance and trends. We should be wary of such retrospective historical framing. As always with the past, americas prewar decades present an immensely complicated story, rather than one pointing clearly towards secession and military conflict. In fact, most citizens in the prewar era spent relatively little time thinking about sectional differences and had no sense that violence would engulf the republic in 1861. There are now concerns about home and about family and about work and business and about local politics, usually promenade. Joan and i will ask whether it is possible to identify and interpret themes between 1830 and 1860 that support a narrative not dominated by sectional issues. I drew the straw to say yes, there are such themes. I am going to mention three. One involved a revolution in communications and transportation that dramatically shrank time and space. The electrical telegraph first demonstrated by Samuel B Morris and 1844 open breathtaking possibilities. By 1861, western unions line connected the eastern seaboard and california. And the transatlantic cable carried its first message in 1858. You know that it failed shortly thereafter and would not be restored until 1866, but it was successfully demonstrated in 58. Railroads expanded exponentially, from just fewer than 3000 miles of track in 1840 to more than 30,000 in 1860. John just reminded me that i should direct your attention to george innis is wonderful painting of the lack of on a valley between 1856 that shows us a railroad. It demonstrates what is going on in the mid 18 fifties. The telegraph and trains allowed information and goods and passengers to move much faster, increasing the pace of life and commerce in ways that literally left observers at the time flabbergasted. We see technology move very rapidly now. It is hard to keep up. People had a sense of that in the late antebellum period as well. A second theme centered on demographics. The population maintained a dizzying growth through the 18 fifties and the entire three decades from 1830. On average more than 33 growth each decade in that period. Americans number just more than 12,800,000 in 1830. By 1860, the number was 31, 500, 000, as most of you know. Of that latter figure, more than 4 million were foreign born and approximately 10 were catholic. Those are large percentages that mark a tremendous difference in the demographic profile of the United States. It was largely due to germans and irish, both catholic and foreign born. My final third theme is that of geographical expansion and conflict. We have image number four, which shows territorial acquisitions during this period. After the addition of the huge mexican secession. It is in red on that map, that increase the size of the United States by 25 . The last piece of New Territory came with the gassed in purchase, which was finalized on thats the peace and dark red. It added almost 30,000 square miles and included modern day arizona and far southwestern new mexico, southern arizona. Tucson is in the ground that came with the gassed and purchase. The population of the territories grew rapidly. Washington increased tenfold between 1850 and 1860. Utah territory almost quadrupled. Oregon more than quadrupled. New mexico increased by 50 . Nebraska, kansas, colorado all grew rapidly. California in 1850, minnesota in 1858, oregon in 1859, kansas in 1861. They all achieved a population requisite to enter the union as states. All those unity themes are fairly interesting. But especially so because they all have exceptional dimension. The Communications Revolution meant that word of sectional strife in part of the nation quickly spread elsewhere,. Two examples among many come to mind. Charles sumner in 1856 getting chained and the rate of Harpers Ferry in october 1859. Those both quickly reached a National Audience and accelerated ill feeling between the sections. As seward noticed in his era press will conflict speech, these antagonistic systems are continually coming into closer contact and collision results. Thus, sectionalism, the idea that each section north and south could afford its own interests in the nation before the nations characterize the National Political scene in the 18 fifties. In terms of demographics, your second theme, the fact that population growth in the free states far outstripped that of the slave Holding States created a deepening set of i, am so excited by the map, you can understand why i love my maps. I have to say. I cant imagine. It is hard to imagine. I just cannot believe. It is perfect. I think it is more than perfect. Lets just say slave holders were in peril. They felt the admission of california, oregon, and minnesota increase the number of u. S. Senators from non slave Holding States with no prospect of new slave Holding States to counter this trend. In fact, florida and texas both admitted in 1845 for the last slave Holding States to join the union. The admission of kansas as the 34th state in 1861 solidified a trend that alarm slave holders for a decade and more. It totals at 19 free states and 15 slaves states. Moreover, most of the nations new immigrants in the 18 fifties settled in the north. Many in the rapidly growing cities that made that region far more urban than a slave holding south. Of the 25 biggest cities in 1860, 19 were free states and only three in states that would be in the confederacy. New orleans, richmond, and charleston. The north possess overwhelming advantage in the nations industrial commercial and financial areas. As for your third theme of geographical expansion, that stood at the center of sectional tensions. I have to be careful because i had a student come to me once in my office and say, professor roy, i understand why the north and south hated each other, but what did sexual tensions have to do with it. laughs i know. And what was your answer . That remains private. The app for mentioned Gadsden Purchase was strongly supported by secretary of war Jefferson Davis and many other slave holders, because it offered a chance for the south to have a route that would be favorable to a Transcontinental Railroad through the south. Political debates intensified and heat and anger regarding the question of slavery is expansion into the federal territories. Beginning in the late 18 forties, large numbers of northerners supported a Free Soil Movement that sought to prevent slaverys introduction into the territories. The population of the free states and 1860 was 98. 8 white and most residents thought in terms of federal territories as being reserved for free white men and their family, proving if we did not already know this, it was possible to be anti slavery and racially prejudiced. Religious, cultural, and social reform movements in the north also contribute and contributed mightily to sectionalism. Notable where the splits between northern and southern wings of the major protestant denominations, such as the baptist and methodists. That further supported a portrait of the union headed toward disintegration. Also notable, the rise of militant abolitionists. That was led by black and white men and women such as david walker and Frederick Douglas and Harriet Tuchman and William Lloyd garrison, as well as the publication of great novels such as Uncle Toms Cabin by harriet beach or stow. Even though radical militant abolition elysium did not capture the majority of northern hearts. A more modern influential anti Slavery Movement seized on the connection between freeing slaves and the ideology of free labor. In fact, slavery offered a disturbing picture to northerners. It seemed that it was backwards. The system was bad for both races. It stripped people of ambition. In short, it seemed increasingly clear that slavery and modernizing capitalism, the capitalism of the market revolution, were polar opposites. A number of mile post or signposts marked the road of sectional friction. Major events such as the missouri controversy of 1820, the war with mexico 1846 through 1848, there will be a quiz afterwards, i already said the missouri compromise. The compromise of 1850. The kansas nebraska active 1854, the campaigning of Charles Sumter in 1856. The dred scott decision of 1857. This is all 1857, in case you did not know. And john browns rate in 1859, comprised quite a dividend shocking timeline of the northern and southern dissension. I want to thank jones for pointing out the sectional dimension, that cto in dimension of my three teams all have flaws. And i have to admit, my list also omitted one theme that is crucial to understanding the 18 fifties. That is the breakdown of the Second Party System in the United States. The party system was dominated by the whip party and the Democratic Party. The evidence up here shows political successors to the whip party. The whip party dissolved in the 18 fifties. Its southern and northern wings at odds. The party in effect became a southern dominated Sectional Party that elected dough faces. That is a derisive term for northern man of southern principles, as everyone in this room knows. Men such as Franklin Pierce and the ever popular titan from pennsylvania, James Buchanan. I will give you a moment to contemplate buchanans greatness. That is enough. laughs in the minds of many in the free states, the Democratic Party served as a mere tool of slave holding all the darks. The republican party, a purely sectional organization with no appeal in the south, first ran a candidate in 1850, six as we all know. The pathfinder. The platform called for a total ban of slavery is expansion into the territories. White southerners quickly associated republicans with abolitionists, although the two were by no means, as john suggested, synonymous. And National Conventions at charleston and then reconvened up all to more at 1860, the Democratic Party also foundered on the issue of slavery in the territories, leaving the country without a single National Political party. I am going to ask that even if we can see the pervasiveness of these kinds of sectional issues, should we assume that people paid the most attention to them at the expense of other issues at all times in the 18 fifties . I will use new york lawyer George Temple ten strongs famous diary as an instructive piece of evidence on this. Everyone in this room knows he kept one of the great diaries in American History. There are four large volumes published in 19 fifties, coedited by milton halls the thomas. Diary covers a vast array of topics, as you all know. It also reveals the sectional issues did not always prevail. His voluminous entries for 1857 contained not one mention of the dred scott decision. They have detailed coverage of that years economic collapse, the panic of 1857. That was part of a wider World Economic crisis that hit the north harder than the south and caused considerable dislocation in the Railroad Industry and cultural markets and banking sector. Strong recorded on october 10th, we seem floundering. Affairs are worse than ever today in a period of general insolvency. It seems close upon us. Towards the end of the month, he lamented that the depression continues. The tide is still running out, and everything is drifting down with it or else stuck fast already on the black mud flaps of insolvency and destined to rot there and parish long before the tide comes back. Later in the decade, the Colorado Gold rush of 1858 and 59 garnered considerable attention throughout the nation as the discovery of Precious Metals in colorado, inspired the cry pikes peak or bust, lured more than 100,000 immigrants to the Rocky Mountain region by way of comparison, 75,000 to 90,000 had come to california in 1848 through 49. For many americans, the prospect of new wealth in the Rocky Mountains, as well as what harpers weekly called the likelihood of statehood for colorado, would have been more interesting than whatever sectional squabbles receive coverage in the press. I have seen your eyes drawn to the next thing on the screen there. I will tell you what it is. That is wealth estimates in 1860. It has a tenuous connection to the panic of 1857. Then lets move on to the idea of two diverging civilizations trapped within a single republic. Who, it sounds like the new superman movie or something. Powerful ties connected citizens across sectional lines. Political and cultural ligaments included a common language, a protestant christiana de that claimed millions of adherents, and a shared history that celebrated the revolutionary generations successful rebellion against great britain. At the same time, northern and Southern States indisputably developed in divergent ways that could be traced to the institution of slavery. We had a dual system of Property Rights in this country. Free labor and slave labor and out of that dual system came legal and political cultural ramifications. Historians have disagreed. I cannot tell you how many times i have used that phrase when i give my lectures to ucla students. Historians have disagreed and will continue to disagree about whether the north and south could become quite separate entities by the late 18 fifties. Were they a true nation . Or were they two geographical regions sharing common federal boundaries, but divided across a political and ideological frontier delineated by slavery . By the mid 18 fifties, free labor ideology had taken firm root across much of the north. Free labor, free land, freeman. Abraham lincoln seized on these ideas, depicting himself as an example of how a poor man could rise. And he painted a picture of glorious capitalist development. Lincoln claimed that the penniless wage for but he saves a surplus with which to buy tools or land for himself. He neighbors on his own account and at length hires another new beginner to help him. He proclaimed that quote, free labor, the just and generous, and prosperous system, which opens the way for all, gives hope to all, and energy and progress, and improvement of condition to all. Many northerners believed that the social and economic structures in the south mocked the democratic promised bequeathed to the nation by the founding generation. Lets take a moment to think a lot about what was happening. One example. The north was increasingly celebrating the ideals of free labor. The fact that northern states had abolished slavery, freed northerners from the hypocrisy of celebrating american liberty while human beings were being bought and sold under their free noses. The 4th of july celebrations in this country in the mid 19th century looked different. And you heard different kinds of speeches whether you are in the north or south. Of course, northerners were morally implicated in the system of slavery. We know that. But they did not celebrate that. Northerners increasingly vented views about slavery in the popular press. They tolerated public expression to a much greater extent than in the Southern States. For white residents of the slave Holding States, slavery served not only as a form of labor control, but also as the key to the south social order. This is a very colorful slide that almost i think everyone even in the back can see. It is the white class structure. Only about one third of white southern families owned slaves, and most of those held fewer than five. All white southerners had a stake in the system of slavery, because as white people, they belong to the regions control and class. White southerners, regardless of economic status, were made equal by the fact of black slavery. For this reason, and because of genuine fear of what would happen or could happen should large numbers of black people be freed in the south, white southerners saw slavery as a necessary and generally Benign Institution reacting very offensively from criticism from the north. We could argue either way, and historians have, that people were more alike or more different. But often overlooked in this debate about similarities and differences between the sections is the fact that substantial numbers of white northerners and white southerners believed that there were profound differences. Usually trumps reality and dictating behavior is because people act according to what they perceive to be the truth. However, that perception might differ from reality. By the eve of the civil war, many northerners saw in the south a society fundamentally, and many would have said perniciously, shaped by the presence of slavery,. For their part, white southerners thought that northerners and battling people determined to undermine the south slavery based social system. It mattered little whether a real chasm separated people in this way. The new york daily tribune put it well in the spring of 1856. Quote, the truth is that though we are about one nation, we are two peoples. We are a people of equality and a people of inequality. These two peoples are united by a bond and political union. But when every collision comes which brings out the peculiar characteristics of the two, they are seen to be as on like it is almost any two civilized nations on the face of the earth. That same year, in 1856, a young north carolinian, a cadet of west point, son of a slave holder, offered a southern viewpoint. Our feelings and education are as if we are a different nation, he wrote. Indeed, everything indicates plainly a separation. In the wake of James Buchanans triumph in 1856, this cadet, a staunch democrat, adopted a very gloomy stance. It was typical of many young people who more often than Older Americans tended to be less forgiving of those across the sectional divide. He believed this cadet quote, any man of the smallest observation can plainly see that the union of the states cannot exist harmoniously. This must and can and will be a disillusion. Wise, peaceful, and equitable i hope, but at whatever cost it must come. Look out for a stormy time in 1860, he added. The south ought to prepare for the worst. Let her establish armorys, collect stores, and provide for that most desperate of all calamities, civil war. Okay. It seems like thats a little bit of a quote that supports my contention. But never mind. There are themes relating to slavery i think all of this is about york intentions. I want to make sure we keep our eye on the ball. I am so glad you said that. There are themes related to slavery, themes not dominated by issues related, to slavery in the late antebellum period. Northerners and southerners alike were alike in some ways and different and others. That is heavy. What does all this mean in terms of the wars inevitability, i ask you. As we told you, when we heard from herald, we knew we would be breaking ground we never imagined we would be covering tonight. But here is one thing that we do know. What do we . No we know that Abraham Lincolns election provoked just seven of 15 slave Holding States to succeed between december 20 1860 and february won 1861. Seven states that contained less than a third of the white south population. And here is my queue to point to the screen again. Here is the very famous and reproduced innumerable times, a special edition of the charleston mercury announcing that the union is dissolved. Ubiquitous, you could call. It yes, i would call at that. We also know the republicans attacked pro secessionists as enemies of the union, threatening the accomplishments of the founding generation. But many northern democrats denounced the idea of forest reunion and that idea was also the sentiment in the eighth slave Holding States that remained within the union. In other words, a significant part of the nation was willing to consider, if not applaud, the ideal of a peaceful separation of the deep south. I think the fact that eight slave Holding States chose not to secede inspired hope for compromise among friends in the union and free states as well as those south of the potomac and ohio river. Is an early 1861, a group of upper south unionists and Northern Leaders who hope to eradicate and rivers the secessionist frenzy in the deep south were posed a 13th amendment. One of the ironies in our history is the juxtaposition of this proposed 13th amendment and the 13th amendment that is in our constitution. This proposed 13th amendment prevented any future amendment that would empower congress to abolish slavery or interfere with slavery and states where it already existed. The core win amendment, so called because republican Kamala Harris men john coren of ohio received the necessary two thirds vote in both chambers of congress and on march 2nd 1861, the outgoing president , James Buchanan signed it as a symbolic gesture. The president has no role in this but, buchanan signed it anyway. This action reflected the fact that in the early spring of 1861, the majority of white people in the free states, including Abraham Lincoln, were constitutional conservatives who believe the republics founding document prevented congress from abolishing slavery in the Southern States where it already had taken root. During his first weeks in august, lincoln sent letters to each governor conveying the proposed amendment and calling attention to buchanans endorsement. By the end of may, 1861, kentucky, ohio, and rhode island had ratify the amendment and maryland and illinois later followed suit. The outbreak of violence which came a little bit later in 1861 is what doomed this effort to find this type of peaceable solution to the sectional crisis. Violence prove to be the final factor in. The six month drama that illuminates how contingency figured in the outbreak of war. Shortly after lincolns inauguration, events reached a climax at fort some tour in charleston harbor. Lincoln claimed some tour as u. S. Property while confederates countered that it lay on South Carolina soil and best belong to their new nation. The forts garrison needed to be supplied, and lincoln pressed by northern opinion not to abandon some tour, decided to send an unarmed vessel with provisions. He alerted South Carolinas governor and hope the slave Holding States that remained in the union would be sympathetic. The government of Jefferson Davis, under similar pressure from their citizenry to seize the fort, and wished to avoid firing the first shot. In the end, the confederate asked major robert anderson, the forts commander, to surrender his garrison before the relief ship arrived. Anderson refused, and on april 12th, the confederates commenced a bombardment. 36 hours later, the fort capitulated. On april 15th, lincoln issued a call for 75,090day volunteers to suppress the rebellion. Quote, i appeal to all loyal citizens to maintain the honor, the integrity, and the existence of our National Union and the perpetuity of government and to address wrongs already long enough endured. All who oppose this assertion of federal authority, lincoln continued, should disperse and retire peace ability to their respective abodes within 20 days from the state. The firing on fort some durant lincolns call for volunteers called the final scenes in the long running drama of sectional tensions that stretch back several decades. Contemporary sources in the sometimes baffling complexity help us gauge the degree to which we should understand the antebellum era as one dominated by this sectionalism. We do know that no one at the time of lincolns call for volunteers knew exactly what lay ahead. But people in the United States and in the confederacy understood they had reached a momentous point. Never was no such excitement caused by mr. Lincolns proclamation. A woman in eastern North Carolina wrote in her diary adding the whole south flew to arms. Far to the northwest in indiana, another man reacted. The surrender of fort sumter confirmed. North and south both preparing for war. The south needs victory and the north is ready to resist the injury and disgrace of the flag of the country. Maybe earnest hemingway read this diary. These kinds of quotations convey to us a sense that people at the time knew that the stage had been set for some kind of transformative event, but kind that we know would be the great transformative event in our history and and understanding of which is essential to understand all the rest of our history looking both back and forward. We began this discussion with a quote by new yorks republican senator, soon to be lincolns secretary of state, william seward. He famously said the division between the free labor north and the slave labor south, would lead to an era preferable conflict between opposing and enduring forces. He was no radical, but like many at the time. He believed slavery was at the heart of the conflicts tearing the nation apart. What we will end with it is just taking some opposing viewpoints of the cause of the civil war and wasnt any repressive or conflict. Yes, and i drew the it was not inevitable straw and so here i go. Sectional tensions arising from issues related to the institution of slavery were inevitable in fact, they have been present since the muggy summer of 18 when the founders had compromised on slavery in order to get a document that everyone could send out to the states for consideration. That was inevitable. But secession was not inevitable in 1860 and 1861, nor was warren edible in the wake of succession. Contingency, a word joan has already used, is the crucial element. Between april 1860 and june 1861, a sequence of political nominations individual president ial decisions in both washington and richmond yield in a situation where 11 Confederate States squared off against the loyal states and what would become an all encompassing military and political and social conflict. Was the war and irreplaceable conflict . I say yes. Two elements of Southern Slave Society helped make the succession crisis and helped to make it in europe preferable conflict. Economic self interest and a race based social system. Economic self interest meant that slavery was linked closely with Southern Society and identity before the civil war. Does it make sense to you that nearly 400,000 slave holders should worry and fret about their largest Capital Investment . Yes, it does make sense. I will answer it. Alarmed by the prospect of freedom for slaves, James Hammond of South Carolina said quote, wherever any people civilized or savage persuaded by arguments human or divine to surrender voluntarily 2 million dollars. The second point, tied up at the first, is racial subordination. Preservation of slavery as an Economic System and preservation of white supremacy, democratic white supremacy, was a central and inter related concern. This mix of economic and racial bondage explains the passion it reaction to perceived and real threats to the south from the north. The Southern States succeeded to protect slavery from perceived northern attacks. The cbsa was founded to preserve it. Because of slaverys importance, it makes sense that the election of 1860 triggered the succession crisis. In the, and the republicans were too great a threat to southerners and lincolns election precipitated a series of sectional confrontations, culminating in the secession crisis of 1860 and 1861 that made the war an era precipice conflict and the cause of the war slavery. Thats it. noise jerry has asked me to say that he will take all the questions. I did not say that. A carol is going to take the questions, i guess. I am going to invite the questions. We have a microphone here. Please step up, and i will handle it. Thank you. All right. Thank you for that. I have come to believe that even if Stephen Douglas had won the election, we wouldve had the civil war. The oh stand agreement manifesto revealed the oligarchy in the south had put a plan together for cuba and for the Golden Circle around the caribbean. With a dred scott decision the, fugitive slave act, they were on a roll. They were convinced they would be able to extend slavery forever and that took the pressure off of them. When that hesitated with the election of 1860, it was either lincoln or steven douglas. Even popular sovereignty with something which would be restricting their agency. They have control of communications. They had control of the theology. What then would have hit off the war . There is a very great difference between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas. There is a problem of expansion and i will start and you can take it from there. In terms of perceptions in the south, they are not the same person. Not by any stretch of the imagination. Lincoln poses a far greater threat to the slave holding oligarchics, to use your phrase, of the south to Steven A Douglas who has a stake in a plantation in the south himself. Lincoln and the republicans from the southern point of view are virtually equivalent to abolitionists. Steven a douglas is not the equivalent of an abolitionist interview of people in the south. I am not saying that douglas would have had an easy time mending fences in the deep south, but i would take issue with the idea that there is no real difference between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas in terms of what degree of threat they pose to the slave holding south. I totally agree with you. I do. And i think that it comes back to reading back in history what you know already happened. That is so powerful. I want to go back and fix things. I want to say we needed someone besides James Buchanan as president in 1856. We needed for someone not to make the dred scott decision. But all of these things happened, and it is just harvard in so many ways to see how it turned out and how it could have turned out any differently. My name is bob from pennsylvania. A question for both of you. Has modern Technology Helped or hindered your research and writing on the American Civil War. . It has modern technology . I think it has added a lot to it. It has added and made it a lot easier to search documents. Newspapers used to be unbelievably awful. What you can do with newspapers now and the body of newspaper evidence we have available in surgical format, it is an incredible boon to what we try to do. It is really remarkable. In other words, it is so much easier for people now than it used to be. I dont understand how people in that generation who did so much work did what they did compared to what we have now. Do you think they made it up . laughs laughs laughs i did not say that. When the twitter world lights up about our saying that they made everything up, for the 11 people who remember who alan evans was, which is sad, it was joan who said that. When the members of congress debated the core win agreement, did anyone point out that it would have no effect because it could be repealed if there were an inclination to ban slavery . That there would be votes to repeal the corwin amendment . The language said they couldnt do that, but i dont know how you could guarantee that something cannot be taken care of with another. A lot of these efforts late in the game, as we approach lincolns inauguration, people trying to find their way out of this. All of them are making concessions to the south. Every attempt at compromise is another saw up to the south. That is one reason to let lincoln decide that he could not let sumter go. There have not been enough concessions to the south. To go back to the question about douglas and lincoln, this still does not take care of the problem. It only takes care of the problem where slavery exists. The republican platform had conceded that and white southerners didnt believe it. They said stewart and lincoln are on record in 1858 saying it will be all one thing or the other. The republican platform is saying we will accept slavery for everywhere and they will say they are liars and might have had harsh words in that description beyond just modifiers that would upset some people. I wont use them. Dont trigger me. I am not going to. But they would have used them. I really think it speaks to our feeling of profound sadness when we think of all the death and destruction wreaked by this war. But they did not know it. You all know the narrative of the civil war, and at every stage, the other side thought the other side would give up. War broke out, but they thought it would be a short or. That was something to be considered. I was unaware of the financial panic of 1857. Could you explain how this might have figured into the picture . And also, given the extreme lawlessness of this administration, could we be inching towards some kind of civil war . I am very happy not to address the second part of that. I feel much more comfortable in the 19th century than in the 21st century in many ways. So we will just leave current politics aside. There is a panic we all know. We would call it a depression. There was one 1819 and one in the mid 18 thirties and one 1857. Theres one 1873. One of the mid1890s. They come every 20 years. The reaction to that in much of the south was it is mainly affecting the north. Isnt that a shame . There were very few tears shed south of the potomac about the economic situation. They didnt suffer very much. It did not hit the south very much. It hit the north. It is very uneven. My only point in bringing that into our discussion tonight was to say that for someone like George Temple turned strong, in a year that we associate with dred scott, powerfully with dred scott, he does not even mention dred scott. He is a very perceptive fellow, but he writes at length in numerous entries about the depression of 1857. Andy havoc wreaked on the Financial Markets in new york and the north more generally. And he had money in the stock market. Yes he did. He was a lawyer, as many of you know. I have two quick things. One is, what are the causes that you touched on in here, the loss of power of the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party separated. They had one opportunity. Lincoln was an unqualified, hated candidate. Most of those people thought that he was Better Qualified for that and i thought that that help this issue go through forward in trying to succeed and as you mentioned, the firing on fort sumter. Nobody but a fool would risk going to war over and unfinished fort. But once it was attacked, it was like pearl harbor or 9 11 and virginia would vote and changes vote for that, and do you see that movement inside the attack as being that sort of separation . Distill that down to a question for us, please. The attack on fort sumter triggered the civil war because many thought of a peaceful separation being possible without that sort of move. Its not possible . Something . Yes. laughs the real problem, and i dont want to drag this out, is lincolns call for 75,000 volunteers. That was triggered by it sends the upper south out. They will be complicit in this anyway. There we go. One more question. Last one. The pressure to make it a really good one. I will do my best, guys. People will hunt you down. Thank you, i appreciate that. I wonder if you might speak briefly to the role of for a lack of a better term white racial anxiety and triggering this. Whenever i read the leaders of the confederacy during secession winter of 16 61, it seems like time and again it comes back to this notion of we need slavery to keep intact white civilization against an onslaught of possible race riots or race wars. It has always struck me as rather odds, ten southerners dominated the federal government to this point and rick the dred scott majority is almost there. I was running if you could speak to the role of anxiety as a white civilization under attack somehow . Peace and we could just talk about john browns raid which just fireds hysteria throughout the south. They had reason to fear. They were freight of sleep insurrection. They never appeared but they were afraid of it and i think rightly so. White racial anxiety was also tied to the fact that their economy was based on sleeveless uber. There were more wealthy people in the south than any other you saw the chart up there. It was amazing. All of whites out is worried about that. Not just slaveowners. They talk about haiti a lot. There are parts of the south where there are 95 and sleeved people and 10 white people. And the specter of a real race war is real. They saw john brown as an equity is white northerners republicans and people in support of john brown and yes that that scare them and something got attention recently, did not get it for a long time. Series of unexplained fires in texas in 1860 that spread eastward and these were attributed to people who were trying to create havoc and help some kind of racial uprising. They got a great deal of attention at the time. They had begun to get little scholarly attention. Not much for a long time, but you put that together with john brown in these other imaginings of what a republican republican coming in might do and you have a very in volatile situation on just the question that you are talking about. If you want responses to how much this bothered people in the confederate context, look at responses in early 1863 to news of the final proclamation of emancipation, including robert e. Lees letter lee is he used to be seen as a moderate. His response to the proclamation is deeply angry and really striking. That carries over to reconstruction. Yes it does. Very brief. As somebody who distances side in cincinnati i want to point something. Out Alexander Hamilton predicted civil war in 20 years. He missed it by a few years. So he was wrong. That the reason he predicted it, he said if you do not deal with slavery there will be a civil war. Thank you all very much. Thank you. applause . It this is been an extraordinary first night. I just want to remind everyone that breakfast begins tomorrow at 6 30. You do not have to have breakfast at 6 30 and we will begin here promptly at 9 am. Thanks again. applause other Peter Carmichael uses letters by union and confederate soldiers to and political outlook. He argues that the daily life of the Civil War Soldier required adaptability to survive the brutal environment of wartime. The lincoln form symposium hosted this event. applause good morning everyone. My name is Jonathan White and i am vice chair of the lincoln form and it is my pleasure to welcome you to the session. We are on Hallowed Ground and it is altogether fitting and proper that we come to gettysburg every november to commemorate the life and legacy of Abraham Lincoln. Our first speaker this morning is Peter Carmichael peter is the robert sea floor professor of civil war studies and the director of the Civil War Institute at gettysburg college. I have seen some see w. I hats around wonderful to see those here. He holds his ph. D. In history from penn state