The Civil War; Breaking The Sphere

Created with Padlet

Women in 19th century America were in a very interesting position. Up to that point in time, American women were mainly subjugated to the home. A women was thought to have a role in the home and nothing more. Women were expected to care for the children, educate the girls in the house and keep the home clean and her husband fed and happy. This restrictive attitude towards women and their activities was known as keeping women inside their sphere of domesticity. Many people during this time period frowned upon a women stepping outside of her sphere, citing it as not ladylike and incorrect. However, during the American Civil War many women did end up stepping outside their sphere to help in any way they could with the war effort. Women became nurses and even soldiers that answered the call of duty in any way they saw fit, even if other men and women thought they were not needed. This was also one of the first times that women were able to hold a position of power over men, which did not hold well with the men they commanded. Many refused to follow the women's orders and directly disobeyed only because she was a women in a line of work that had been dominated by men for the longest time. One women who held one of the most powerful positions of any women in the war was Dorothea Dix. Dix had been appointed the commander of the nurses in Washington D.C. and also controlled most of the medical equipment in the capital. She was also revered by her nurses as an almost nun like stickler for the rules, forcing her nurses to dress extremely conservatively and ignore many of the temptations that Washington offered after work. In short, women stepped outside their sphere because they wanted to help the war effort in anyway they could, even if it defied the men that had always held power over them.

The Civil War; Battles Breakdown

During this past lesson, our history class participated in perhaps one of the most entertaining lesson of the year. We were split into pairs and tasked with creating clues and Google documents for a scavenger hunt. These clues would be hidden around the school and would have scannable QR codes that allowed easy access to each groups Google doc. Each Google doc created by a pair of students had a description of a different battle from the civil war. These battles were all extremely important in shaping the war into what it was, a bloodbath between brothers. The battles varied from eastern to western theater, from naval to land battles and from union to confederate victories. My Google doc, which can be found here, was focused on the battle of Hampton Roads which was the first time both sides utilized the new naval technology ironclads. Ironclads changed the way naval battles were fought, not only in the civil war, but other wars in other parts of the world as well. These QR codes were then hidden around the school and it was our job to find them, scan them and analyze the information given to answer the essential questions. To answer the essential questions, our class used a program called padlet which allowed all students to give their own input on what they believe the answer is and why. The first padlet, which can be found here, answers the question of who was the victor in each theater during the war. The victor of the eastern theater was overall the confederacy due to strong leadership and tactics which allowed the larger confederate army to edge out the invading northern forces. Such battles as Spotsylvania and the battle of cold harbor were won by the confederates and provided huge boosts to the moral of the confederacy. However, many other confederate victories were much closer which allowed the union to work its way through the south by waging a war of attrition, slowly bleeding the south dry of all supplies needed to sustain a fighting force. In both other theaters, the union dominated the fighting, only losing one battle in the western theater (that we studied) while obliterating the confederates in all others. The same was true for the naval battles, although one battle was closer because of value of the supplies lost, and was eventually ruled inconclusive although the union took slightly greater losses. The second padlet, found here, helped to answer the question of what commonalities can be found in each armies respective victories. Simply put, when the confederacy won battles, it was largely due to their superior military leadership and overwhelming numbers. Many of the battles were held in southern territory which allowed the confederates the privilege of knowing the area and easier movement of troops then the north. When you combine that with brilliant military planning that generals like Robert E. Lee brought to the confederates, they dominated the fighting. When the Union wee the victors, it was mainly due to their overall army and nation being much larger than the south, allowing greater numbers of resources to be produced and larger armies to be formed. This meant by the end of the war, the north had a much larger capable fighting force than the south which allowed generals Grant and Sherman to march their armies into enemy territory with little worry and large chances of success. These questions summarize beautifully what our class learned during this scavenger hunt and gave many students insight on just how and why the north was able to triumph over the south in the American Civil War.

The Civil War; A Battle of Morals

In a persons life, some of the hardest decisions one must face involve whether a person is willing to put their body, their life on the line in order support a cause. The ability to do so shows incredible courage and selflessness, along with proving just how loyal they are to the specific cause. During the civil war, many men and boys had to make this very decision as did the men before them in the wars long before them. The difference this time was that the war hit much closer to home, turning brother against brother, father against son as men chose which side they believed fought for the greater good. Yet, men on both sides of the conflict still lined up for a chance to defend the rights they believed in. This is also incredible when you take into account that the weapons of the time were far more powerful and advanced than the soldiers and tactics used to put them into action, which would mean a much higher mortality rate on both sides. Weapons like grenades, Minie balls and ironclads were used to making the job of manslaughter easier in a technical sense than it had been before. The Minie balls were especially brutal as they did not just pierce a body that had been hit, but almost completely destroyed any part of the body they touched, ripping through flesh and shattering bone on contact. The major problem with the development of this technology was that it far surpassed the fighting tactics used at the time. This lead to an enormous amount of casualties as the new weapons were able to decimate soldiers who had no chance against such things as the minie ball and other developments such as grenades.
As the weapons had advanced beyond their time, medical personnel were tasked with the job of keeping up with the gruesome injuries and casualties caused by the advancement of technology. Unfortunately, medicine had evolved nowhere near as far as weapons had which made treating the wounds terribly barbaric and brutal for anyone involved. Amputation was one of the most common ways to try and treat wounded soldiers. At least 30,000 men on both sides of the war were amputees by the end of it. Amputation involved the complete removal of the afflicted part of the body and was used when field doctors thought there was no other way to prevent an infection from spreading from the wound through the rest of the body. This happened way more often then it should have because of how little supplies field doctors had at the time and even fewer supplies that allowed for safe removal of shrapnel and other alien objects from the body. Many times, although the amputation was successful, soldiers would just perish from another infection that entered through the large open wound left by the amputation. Yet, though survival was such a slim chance during the war, men still volunteered to fight for their side, to fight for the rights they believed in. These soldiers believed that service to their country was more important than anything, even their own safety and would sacrifice their very lives if it meant gaining an edge in the war.

sources:
NOVEMBER 17, 2012, 9:30 PM, Under the Knife By TERRY L. JONES
Strategies review article
http://www.history.com/photos/civil-war-gettysburg/photo4

The Civil War by the Numbers

    The civil war remains to this day as one of the most bloody and costly wars fought by the United States. This was to be somewhat suspected, however, as the only lives that were lost on either side of the battlefield were American. The war began with the southerns states finally proclaiming that they had had enough of the laws and regulations that the north was trying to create, most of which dealt with the long fought over topic of slavery and the rights of the slave. When you compare the resources that each side had at its disposal during the war, many people wonder how it is possible that the south lasted even a week against the far larger and more prepared northern states. As can be viewed from the info graph above, the north led the US in railroad mileage, number of industrial workers and number of manufacturing plants. Seemingly the only advantage the south had was they possessed a vast majority of the slaves in the US and the south controlled the cotton trade which is not on the info graph, but the south did in fact control 100% of the United States cotton industry.
    The south did have one advantage however; the fact that the wartime success of the south did not rely on taking land from the north, but only on defending their own land from the northerners who believed it should once again be rejoined as the United States. This was still no small feat as the north still held a large resource advantage over the south, and they extended that even further when they decided to create a naval blockade around the southern states, ceasing all imports and exports from leaving southern shores. Also, the north had a much more extensive railway system when compared to the south. This allowed a quick and steady movement of troops to the points along the Dixie line where they were needed most. Also, the north had far greater amounts of manufacturing power and industrial workers who were ale to mass produce the essential items needed to keep a fighting force as strong and able as it possibly can be. These conditions all added up in the end to spell the end of the Confederate states as they just had no hope of keeping up with the northern juggernaut.

A New Look at The Compromise of 1850

Before I explain what the Compromise was, please view my groups whole project using this link.

The Compromise of 1850 was one of the many compromises and resolutions at the time that was issued in an attempt to stave off conflict between two parties, the abolitionist northern US and the slave dependent southern US. As can be seen from the timeline to the left, the compromise was not the first to be passed by the government in hopes that it would quell the rage brewing on both sides of the conflict. However, The Compromise of 1850 was one of, if not the largest compromise to be successfully passed, so large in fact that it had to be broken into five smaller bills just so all parts could be passed by the government. Some of the most important parts of the compromise were the admittance of California into the union as a free state, the slave trade was banned in Washington D.C. (however slavery itself was still permitted) and slave states received the Fugitive Slave Act which forced free northern states to assist southern slave states by returning any runaway slaves found, whether in the borders of a free or slave state, to the slaves owner. This last act was one that drew the most controversy as abolitionists in the north were disgusted at having to return men and women to slavery and felt that their very rights were being violated by forcing them to do so. The compromise was drafted by Henry Clay and Stephen Douglas, members of the Whig and democratic party respectively. Both men firmly believed in democracy and how it should be the driving force in deciding whether laws be passed or failed and whether policies should be adopted or not. Both men were against slavery in certain ways but neither would claim to be abolitionists. They simply wanted to return America to peace once again and hoped this document could do so. Although the document seemed successful at doing so for a time, the US would inevitably fall to its knees under the weight of the conflict and a full blown war would be ignited because of it.

Ed Cafe Wrap Up

The Edcafe was certainly an interesting experience and the first time I have ever done an activity like it at school. It was a different way to learn the material that was taught, giving more emphasis on student interaction which kept the lectures more interesting even if the topics themselves were not. Also, the level of interactivity was raised which allowed students to have an input on how they were receiving the material, which allowed students to acquire the essential components of each lesson without having to deal with any excess information that may not be useful. My first lecture that i attended dealt with the relationship slaves had with their masters. I was able to take away from the lecture that each slave owners relationship with their slave was depending on the slave owners personal morals and how he wanted himself to be viewed by both the slaves and the other people around him. Some used fear and harsh punishment to drive their slaves and keep them from acting up, lest they wish to endure the pain and agony of whatever punishment the master would want to use. Others kept good relationships with their slaves, treating them with more respect which kept them from running away as they felt that they had no need to. The second lecture I attended was centered around the emotional toll that wanes on slaves and their families when they are forced into slavery. It was especially hard on some families as they could easily be separated and sold to different masters, tearing mothers from children and wives from husbands. This made some slaves more resentful to their masters for not trying to keep the family together, increasing the chance that they run and try to reconnect with their lost family. The pain of losing a family also gave slaves new drive, making it so they never stop trying to pursue freedom, even if they had to risk their own lives just so they could see their family again and be together with them. The lecture that i ran with my partner was also on slave relations with their masters and went reasonably well. The only inconvenience was that we only had one other student to lecture with, making it harder to pool more information together. It was somewhat beneficial, however, because it allowed all three of us to remain active in the discussing and kept us on topic, which was somewhat harder in the larger groups. To summarize, the edcafe seemed like a success to most students and introduced a more interesting and innovative way to teach students and kept students more involved in the subject matter.