Re: Price & MO supply line
- From Connie:I've noticed that Missourians still see the war in personal terms, but even more importantly when they talk about it, their view of the war is confined to the narrow space of Missouri. It's as though the broader landscape from Richmond to Vicksburg, from Lee to Grant, from railroads to the telegraph, from Greeley's Times to the refugees clogging Georgia byways were only secondary glitches that happened "over there" while the main force of the war was in Missouri. Am I wrong?Response from Jack: Connie, thanks for the response. I am sure many feel as you do. Though I do have a different view. The view probably depends on which Civil War you are looking at, the battles or the people. First of all I have never lived in Missouri but maybe the people of Missouri do not feel that "over there" (the east) there was a "Civil War". The following is what I used as the introduction to the little book I compiled about Harrison B. Talbert and his times in MO.
The war in the West, and specifically in Missouri, was truly a "Civil War". The people of Missouri were from both the North and the South. The conflict was not just about a Northern Army fighting a Southern Army, it was also a personal war with neighbor threatening neighbor, hangings, bushwhackings, citizens following the armies for protection and refugees moving from county to county and state to state.
I think Louisa, Harrison's sister in Indiana where there was not a "Civil War" of neighbor against neighbor sums up in a letter to Harrison the difference in what was going on in the eastern states and the "Civil War" going on in Missouri.
[Notice she definitely is not describing the CW in MO]
When I think of the hardships and exposures of the soldiers, standing between us and thee Enemy, securing to us peace and Homes wherein we can dwell in safety and worship God under our own vine and Fig, Free where none dare interupt or make us afraid, My Heart is filled with Love and sympathy for the Brave and True Hearted Soldier.
In summary I think every Missourian would agree there were big and major battles back east. Union or Reb I think the people of Missouri feel the war was constantly present at their front door for four years and that they were personally involved so they had a Civil War where "over there" if the army did not pass through there was no war. (Such as with Louisa in Indiana the war was not constantly upon her nor never directly effected her. If she lived in MO for four years the CW would have been another story.) Myself, when I listen to people talk about Civil War battles and stop there then to me the broader landscape of the war, the effect on the people is lost, and a lot of what is important that we should learn from the war is lost.