This is a photo of my great great grandmother.
She was born during the time of the so-called
American Civil War, of which her father was a
veteran in what is today called Oklahoma.
I like her hat.
She looks a little bit like another 19th-century woman, Mary Baker Eddy (founder of the Church Of Christ, Scientist):
She doesn’t look old enough.
Steve
“So-Called” American Civil War? I guess it depends on who’s side you were on. Of course Okalahoma wasn’t a state yet so it’s a moot point.
For those not of US ancestry, the southern states considered it their right to leave the federal government at any time according to the Constitution. The Federal government felt otherwise. Therefore, to a southerner it wasn’t a “civil war” because a they had declared themselves a soveriegn nation legally and as such were invaded by a foreign country. The Federal government and the northern states believed the Confederacy was not a soveriegn nation and therefore it was a rebellion.
You decide. I feel that because the Confederacy was not recognized by England nor France they were not legally a country. On the other hand I think they did indeed have a righ to declare independance but in this PC age that statement is tantamount to saying you support slavery. This is pure poppycock since the real reason for the US, so-called “civil war” was the issue of “states rights”. One might argue that the “state right” most vehemenantly in question was indeed slavery and therefore the cause of the war was slavery. I tend to avoid the argument completely. I’m more interested in what happened than I am of the right and wrong of it.
I will happily discuss the War of Northern Aggression, Civil War, War between the States for days upon end with anyone who wants to.
Did Walden say “so-called Civil War” because of another meaning of the word civil—polite?
I thought the word “civil” in Civil War just meant a war between the citizens within a country. I didn’t realize that people on one side or another would object to calling it that. It seems like a term that doesn’t go beyond stating that it was between citizens of the same country rather than between two different countries.
From a Quaker perspective, no war or violence can possibly be civil. And I seriously doubt that most non-pacifists would argue that point, for that matter…
Well, I don’t think that violence can be polite, i.e. civil, from anyone’s perspective! That is why I thought maybe Walden was possibly making a joke about the two meanings of the word “civil”.
The Cherokee Nation suffered more per capita deaths in this war than any state. Part of the justification for turning Indian Territory into Oklahoma was undergirded by a notion that the tribes had violated their treaties with the United States by supporting the Confederate cause.
I think there was plenty wrong on all sides.
Whether it was a rebellion, a revolution, or just resisting aggression was a matter of controversy at the time. Whatever it was, it was miserable. Not only miserable, but something people have looked back on and tried to make sense of, ever since. The fact that it has not repeated says something about the sort of lesson both North and South learned.
I suppose from a Cherokee Nation point of view it could be seen as a conflict between two rival groups of insurgents.
You may be right. Walden? Were you playing on the word “civil”?
And yes Cynth, the term means what you say which is why some folks did not consider it a civil war because they believed the fight was between two nations.
That’s for sure.
The fact that it has not repeated says something about the sort of lesson both North and South learned.
Hopefully not to be forgotten in future generations.
Bye the way, I forgot to mention how great the old pictures are.
Yes, many within the Cherokee communities saw it as exactly that, especially those who wanted no involvement. As for Confederate sovereignty not being recognized by France and England, the Confederate States of America were recognized by treaty with such sovereign nations as the Cherokee and the Muscogee Creek, though they, themselves, were ultimately defeated, at war, by the Union.
In a sense. I have frequently stated that it was a very uncivil war.
I’d not really intended to start a discussion or debate on the War. Great Great Grandma lived her life after the conflict.
I started to post about the American Civil War here, but decided it would be better not to, since Walden’s already said he doesn’t want the thread to go in that direction.
Now returning you to your previously scheduled topic…
–James
I didn’t find the post you deleted to be inappropriate.
I didn’t either.
Do you have any idea how old she would have been when the photo was taken?
That was my fault. I got off on one of my tangents again. Sorry.
I don’t go into these things with the intent of hijacking. I will watch it in the future.
I wish I could have seen what Peeplj wrote though.
Well, you need to check the board every 3 minutes during the day time and constantly from 10:00pm-7:00am, as Walden and I do! 
I could venture a guess. I could post a second photo of her with her children, and let you make a guess based on comparison, and the children’s year of birth, compared with hers. But it would still be just speculation.
I think she looks like Calamity Jane! 