Tuesday, April 30, 2013

Everyman's War: A Rich and Poor Man's Fight in Lee's Army



During the American Civil War, the economic situations in the USA and CSA were comparable. Both nations found it difficult to fund the war effort and stretched the value of each dollar spent. Like every other war time effort in American History, there have been “the movers and the shakers”, the “big wigs”, and “the power houses” who could support the war effort or the government with which their loyalty lay. The historic saying that war is a rich man’s cause but a poor man’s fight comes to mind while reading an article published in the Civil War History journal in Volume 54, Number 3, September 2008.
                Joseph T. Glatthaar writes “In this Confederate war for independence, the rich man not only advocated the cause, he embraced it. Disproportionately high numbers of wealthy Confederates enlisted, remained in the ranks in spite of hardships and suffered more heavily on the battlefield” (Glatthaar, 2008). He goes on to say “…the rich and the sons of the rich enlisted in the army, incurred the risks, and fought desperately, right alongside their poorer comrades” (Glatthaar, 2008). These quotes serve to show that no matter the societal rank held in society during peace time or in their prior civilian lives, the wealthy man was a dedicated to the cause as anyone in the South.  Glatthaar puts forth the idea that many of the deserting Confederate soldiers may have done so, not because they lost faith in the cause, but because they did not have much worth fighting for since most were too poor to own slaves in the first place and had larger commitments at home to attend to.
                The article is an interesting read and makes one realize that there are lesser known and discussed events, which are just as interesting, during the war rather than the now-famous battles we are taught in school.


Glatthaar, Joseph T. “Everyman’s War: A Rich and Poor Man’s Fight in Lee’s Army” Civil War History. Vol               54. No. 3 (2008): 229-246. Web.

4 comments:

  1. I think that most of the rich plantation owners were fighting to keep their role as the social elite. The poorer Confederates needed to fight to keep the blacks at the bottom of the social ladder. When it was obvious that slavery was going end, the cause of preserving the south's way of life lost steam and bitterness and hatred was the result.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I argue that the confederate economy was not comparable to the Unions war effort on the basic facts that they were a war machine producing what was going to needed for the war effort as the confederates had to get loans from European countries and transport them to the United States. Confederacy with a food shortage what you hear of in the North is only of draft riots.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I do believe the confederate economy was no were near as advanced compared to the union considering the union was more industrilized and had more resources. Though the confederates were more based on southern pride and were more self orientated rather than the union working together.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It is an interesting point made I grant you and because of the chivalrous ideology that many of the southern elites held to, many more wealthy southerners may have indeed volunteered and fought until the bitter end. However I would put forward that many wealthy southerners bought commissions and thus were officers and not really the grunt foot soldiers and wealthy people have been finding ways to get out of fighting wars since the dawn of time so I doubt the civil war was the exception to that rule.

    ReplyDelete