By
Stephanie Porter-NicholsPublished: August 20, 2010By ROBERT "ROCKY" CAHILL/Columnist
This weekend is the annual re-enactment of the Battle of Saltville. It is a wonderful event for anyone interested in the history of the Civil War, especially that part of it that took place here in our immediate area.
Now let me be clear from the very first. I am no proponent of slavery or segregation. I have dear friends who are descended from slaves; that makes them no less a friend to me or any less equal in my eyes. It is wrong to treat any human as a slave, regardless of skin color or of national origin.
The federal government used the slavery issue to fan the flames of war. But, it strikes me as a strange thing, that the hallowed Emancipation Proclamation only freed the slaves in those states that actually dared to try and secede from the Union. In certain other areas, it was pretty much business as usual.
Folks from the northern region of this great land don't understand the fascination so many of us native to the South have for the Civil War, or as I usually refer to it, the War of Northern Aggression. I even have heard them say that they "just don't get it."
They seem to believe we should be ashamed of our ancestors and the heritage of the South. However, as is often the case when dealing in retrospect with any historical area, it is a double-sided issue.
Saltville played a far more prominent role in the conduct of the war than many realize. It was always a major producer of salt for the Southern states and by late in the war, the only one of any real size left producing this vital substance. For the average soldier in those days, salt was a necessity. As with us it was used to flavor food. However, its role was far more important than that adding taste.
In the mid-19th century, salt was used to preserve food, especially for larger groups such as soldiers. It was also used in tanning leather. That alone made it important due to the tremendous need for leather for everything from boots to bags, horse tack, storage bags, rifle straps, and such. There was no nylon or other synthetic materials now used for these items. Further, many of the pharmaceuticals used in the day had salt as a base or as a component. I once read somewhere (sorry the old memory cannot access the place at the moment) that Gen. Ulysses S. Grant once remarked that the fall of the salt furnaces at Saltville would do more to hasten the end of the war than the fall of Richmond.
However, while slavery existed in the region, it was not so widespread as in the deeper South. I have talked with Professor James I. "Bud" Robertson, a nationally known and respected Civil War historian. He is one of if not the nation's most learned and respected Civil War scholars. As a professor of history at Virginia Tech, his classes draw the largest number of students of any with over 300 students at a time. He is a well-known lecturer and speaker on the A&E network, the History Channel, C-Span and numerous public television stations. More importantly to me, he is a nice guy.
I have interviewed Professor Robertson on a few occasions. At first I was a bit in awe of speaking with one of the nation's foremost expert on the subject, but within minutes he put me at complete ease. He acted as though he were thrilled to death that I was interested in interviewing him. This is a fellow who regularly works with big-time interviewers.
After the first few minutes, we were chatting like two old buddies catching up on each other's adventures. And the knowledge I gained from him both enlightened me in many areas and affirmed what I had come to think through my own research.
As Robertson pointed out, while our particular region had a few larger farms with several slaves, the vast majority did not. Yes, some probably owned a few hundred. However, most were small farm families who did the majority of the labor themselves. The few slaves they did own were a significant financial investment for them and were treated almost like family. These farmers didn't have the wherewithal to have separate quarters for the three or four slaves they may have owned and these few usually became more like family than servants.
The next question might be, "Then why did they join the Confederate Army?" Well I tossed out a theory I had been pondering and to my amazement Dr. Robertson agreed. These people fought because they were fighting to preserve their homes and farms. They were facing an invasion by an army into their lands and farms and as most anyone in a similar situation would do, they were willing to fight to preserve what they saw as their homes and property. (Ever since Robertson agreed with me, I have been a huge fan of his.)
But the main reason folks from the South have such an enduring interest is our family histories, unlike many of the northern folks, is many of us live on or near lands that were in our families prior to the Civil War era. Our forefathers fought against the federal government, which they believed was unjust in invading their homes and hearths.
At least two (possibly all eight) of my great-great-grandfathers fought in the war. Both fought for the Confederacy. My g-g-grandfather on my mother's side was a Smith. Unbelievable as it may seem, I heard stories of him from his daughter, my great-grandmother "Granny" Alice Booth. She was born in 1862, during the second year of the war. Her father was off fighting in the Confederate Army at the time.
(An interesting side note, as an infant she developed bronchitis early on. There was little medicine available here and even less during the war years. She said her mom fed her sips of coffee and that helped her breathe. Of course, we now know that one of coffee's main ingredients is caffeine, which is used in most broncho-dilators. She lived to be 98 and drank strong coffee constantly.)
My g-g-grandfather Cahill fought in, I believe, the 8th Va Mounted Infantry. While I never met him, I did meet a fellow from the Rich Valley area who had been childhood friends with my g-grandfather Cahill and who said he and my g-grandfather used to spend Sundays sitting on the porch, listening to their fathers talk about the war and where they fought. As a kid, there was someone in our immediate family who had Patrick C. Cahill's sword, and we occasionally played with it but fear for our safety brought about its disappearance.
Memories like this are why we Southern souls are still interested in the War of Northern Aggression. We remember stories from our family members who heard them firsthand. We can drive by our old family home-places and remember the stories of relatives defending their homes against an invading army.
It is these old family ties and old family places that draw us back to our lineage and our historical place in the world. It is in our genes and our souls. I and most folks like me don't hate anyone, black or white. We don't hate our government. We just find our heritage compelling and fascinating. Not all the citizens of our country can show you where their great-great-grandfather grew up or even where their grandfather went to school.
It connects our souls to our Southern lands. Thank goodness for that.
A freelance journalist, Robert "Rocky" Cahill writes regularly for the News & Messenger. His Possum Philosophy column appears in each Saturday edition.
0 comments:
Post a Comment