Strategy and Success in the Civil War

Our infograph answers the question, “How did the differences between the North and the South affect each regions strategy and success in the Civil War?” We used different types of c harts and graphs to show what the answer was. All of the four statistics we have show the north having an advantage in the Civil War. The total U.S. population at the time is shown in a size comparison chart. The north had a bigger population than the south  which helped them  because they had more people people to fight in the Civil War. The total slave population is shown in a pictograph. It shows that the South had more than five times as many slaves as the North. This was an advantage to the North because so much of the South’s population was slaves who were advanced in agriculture and not fighting. Next we had a pie chart showing the railroad mileage in the North and South. More than half of the railroad tracks were in the North which was an advantage because the movement of food, troops, and supplies was easier and quicker. Finally we had a bar graph showing the amount of industrial workers in the North and South. The North once again had an advantage because they had ten times more industrial workers than the South. This made it easy to manufacture weapons and technology. The North had a great advantage going into the War and that is why they won. The infogram website was an easy way to display statistics for the Civil War.

Here is a link to our infograph:

Semester Project on Civil War✔

For the semester one research project we worked in pairs to research a specific event that somehow led up to the Civil War. Each group had to find at least twelve primary sources that related to the event and make a scrapbook with the sources and captions. We also wrote an essay for an introduction and made a bibliography. We were given the freedom to present our scrapbook in any way so my partner and I made a prezi. It was an easy, organized way to put all of our information together. Once the scrapbooks were finished we got to view all of the other scrapbooks. Then we made a timeline of all of the events leading up to the Civil War in chronological order. The timeline made it easier to understand the other events that contributed to the war and it was more exciting then taking notes.

Our timeline: Civil War Timeline

Our prezi:


Something New and Different

Last week our class experienced an EdCafe for the first time. Instead of having a socrative seminar to discuss the different aspects of slavery  we had an EdCafe. In an EdCafe everyone has a partner and each group comes up with a topic and discussion to present to a small group. Then when you were done presenting you could pick another group whose topic interested you and attend their discussion. I really enjoyed this way of learning. I liked how you could choose which topic you wanted to learn about making it independent. Also, I liked participating in discussions and working in small groups. It was not as stressful as a socrative seminar which also made it enjoyable. If we have an EdCafe again there are some things we could improve on. I think that we could prepare some more questions to discuss and I also think people should use more visuals. Some people did not have any visuals at all which made their presentation boring. It would also be fun if we bring in food for next time.

When I presented with my partner I felt that it when well. We had prepared everything and the presentation went smoothly. We had a solid topic that made it easy to come up with a lot of good questions. We incorporated quotes and images in our presentation that made it better and more interesting. Next time we could improve on having some more questions to make the discussion flow better. I also believe that if some more people attended our discussion it would flow better because their would be more people to talk about their opinions. Overall I think our presentation went well.

I enjoyed being an attendee at other EdCafe discussions and I think I was good at it. I contributed all of my thoughts and took many notes. I was respectful to the presenters and engaged in conversation with them. My notes were a good representation of what I learned and discussed. Overall the EdCafe was an enjoyable new way to learn about different topics and I would love to do another one.

Antebellum North and Slavery

The Dewolf mansion in Bristol Rhode Island

The North is known for being against slavery in American history but after learning about the North, a conclusion was reached that they were not completely anti-slavery. In class we watched a clip called “Traces of the Trade” and it was about an old, wealthy, American family in the North called the Dewolfs. The current descendants of the Dewolf family reflect on their family history, finding out that they were the largest slave trading family in U.S. history. They brought over 10,000 slaves to our country even though it was illegal to trade slaves at the time. They made a compromise with the President, allowing them to use a process called the triangle trade. This process started at the Dewolf’s rum distillery in Rhode Island, they then shipped the rum to Africa and traded it for slaves. Then they stopped in Cuba, leaving some slaves there to work the sugar plantations they owned, and collected the sugar to bring back to the distillery. The rest of the slaves came to the U.S. and were traded. To make their slave trading system work they had an insurance company, bank, and shipping business so they could buy their own ships.Today the memebers of the Dewolf family are ashamed of how inhumane their family was and they feel guilty for it. The Dewolf family is an example of the North not supporting slavery economically because they depended on slaves to make a living. If they did not have slaves they would not have nearly as much money as they did. Another example of the North supporting slavery economically is the Lowell Mills and other Cotton factories. When cotton production increased the mills got more workers so cotton plantations needed more slaves. The North relied on slaves to produce cotton so they could have success economically and make money. Also the South relied on the northern industry in order to purchase clothes for the slaves. They benefited from the slave population to require goods and sell a final product.


Above is a link to a chart that shows the increase in the slave population as the number of textile factories goes up.

Although the mills in the North depended on slaves and supported slavery economically, they did not support slavery on moral grounds. Specifically mill girls in the Lowell mills connected themselves to the abolitionist. They considered there plight similar to slaves because they were treated bad, worked in unsafe conditions and they were forced to do dangerous tasks. However mill girls never knew what it was like to be captured or become property because they choose to work in the mills and they were paid. The Lowell mill girls joined abolitionist society’s and signed petitions to end slavery. One petition they sent to Washington D.C. had 1634 signatures and was 27 feet long . In conclusion the North did not support slavery on economic grounds but they did support slavery on moral grounds.

Reform Annotation

“Men of Massachusetts, I beg, I implore, I demand pity and protection for these of my suffering, outraged sex. Fathers, husbands, brothers, I would supplicate you for this boon; but what do I say? I dishonor you, divest you at once of Christianity and humanity, does this appeal imply distrust. If it comes burdened with a doubt of your righteousness in this legislation, then blot it out; while I declare confidence in your honor, not less than your humanity. Here you will put away the cold, calculating spirit of selfishness and self-seeking; lay off the armor of local strife and political opposition; here and now, for once, forgetful of the earthly and perishable, come up to these halls and consecrate them with one heart and one mind to works of righteousness and just judgment.”

Dix, Dorothea Lynde. Memorial to the Massachusetts Legislature. 1843.

Dorothea Dix played a major role in establishing institutions for the mentally ill to be treated in the United States. Dix was born in 1802 and lived until 1877. She was a teacher and one day she decided to teach a Sunday class in a prison. She was shocked by the conditions the mentally ill prisoners were living in. There was no heat and they were kept in chains and inadequate clothing. Dix began to observe the mentally ill in Massachusetts prisons for one year and then she made a report of her observations to present to legislature. The above quote is an excerpt from her speech to the Massachusetts State Legislature. The purpose of this speech was to receive funds for proper mental institutions. Dix felt that the mentally ill deserved a proper place to be treated so she fought for it. This source is reliable because Dix wrote the speech herself after experiencing and observing, first-hand, the deplorable conditions of the mentally ill. This document describes in specific stories and the conditions of the mentally ill, giving us a complete picture of the event. She said, “The present state of insane persons confined within this Commonwealth, in cages, closets, cellars, stalls, pens! Chained, naked, beaten with rods, and lashed into obedience. . .” Dix also used specific words to describe the conditions in prisons such as “horrific” and “foul”. Dix presented solid arguments and evidence to the legislature and successfully got funding. She ended the speech with, “Your action upon this subject will affect the present and future condition of hundreds and of thousands. In this legislation, as in all things, may you exercise that “wisdom which is the breath of the power of God.”


Andrew Jackson “People’s President”?


Andrew Jackson was the seventh president of the United States of America. He was a very controversial president.  Jackson was either very well-liked or not liked at all there wasn’t really an in between. One thing Jackson achieved during his presidency was the removal of Indians. The US government wanted the Indians land, specifically the Cherokees because they thought they would make it more civilized and make better use of it. Therefore Andrew Jackson forced the Cherokees, along with a few other Native American tribes, to leave Georgia and walk all the way to Oklahoma on what is referred to as the Trail of Tears. Jackson believed he was helping the tribes by removing them because eventually he said their culture would wipe out if they stayed around white culture. The Cherokees made themselves more civilized by dressing better, creating an alphabet, and establishing a European style government, all so they could stay. Even with all their efforts they were forced to move to a completely different land where food and water supply was bad and it was also forcing them to blend with other cultures they did not know. In the cartoon above, Jackson is seen sitting in a chair with small Native Americans all around him. He is supposed to be like the father to the Indians and they look up to him. The author is unidentified but he is satirizing Jackson. He is showing Jackson as a father figure because he thinks he is doing a great thing and protecting the Indians’ culture by sending them away. In reality Jackson is forcing these people to leave everything behind and start over new. Also, he is unintentionally killing out a race because on the Trail of Tears small pox and cholera spread causing around 2000 deaths.

After learning about Jackson’s act of forcing the Indians out, my opinion is that he is not really the democratic ideal. A democrat is supposed to give everyone equal rights and equal  opportunities and Jackson is not allowing the Indians to be a part of their civilization. The Indians had lived among whites peacefully for forty years so it was not necessary for Jackson to make them move. Andrew Jackson should not have a reputation of the “people’s president” because he did not  take into mind what he was doing to the Indians by forcing them to leave their ancestral land.

19th Century America’s “Democracy”


In Mirriam-Webster dictionary a democracy is defined as a government by the people;  especially rule of the majority. In a democracy everyone should have the chance to vote for their government leaders. The United States in the nineteenth century was not as democratic as everyone believed they were. The painting above is called “The County Election” by George Caleb Bingham. It shows a scene from a county election in 1852. After looking closely at the painting there are some parts that indicate the elections were not taken seriously. There is an African American man pouring drinks for a few white men before they vote. There is a drunk man in the back of the painting who can’t even stand. Also there are little boys playing. Those two things show that not everyone took voting seriously if they were drunk and children were allowed to play. The voters also had to say there vote out loud so everyone heard it and they didn’t know if it was being recorded properly. Another important thing to notice is no women were at the election so only men were allowed to vote then. The voting scene in 1852 is completely different then how it is now. It was not very democratic because not everyone had voting rights and voting was not taken seriously.

Another example of America’s nineteenth century “democratic government” being bad is the Dorr War of 1841. The government required voters to own a certain amount of land. This rule allowed only a few people to vote and in a democracy everyone should have the right to vote. It was changed over time in most states so any white man could vote, but it did not change in Rhode Island. The people of Rhode Island wanted to abolish voting requirements so the Dorr War began. Eventually property and tax-paying requirements were abolished leaving America more democratic as a country. Most changes occurred between 1790 and 1855.  Tax-paying requirements were raised and then decreased so they were not effective. The property requirement decreased in states during this time period until there were almost no states that had the rule. Americans also changed their way of electing a president.  In 1816 most states elected a president by legislature but by 1836 most states ended up allowing the people to elect their own president. It is more democratic for the people to elect their own president because everyone gets to have a say. Even though America was not very democratic in the 19th century they soon learned how to make their government more democratic and satisfy everyone.

Romanticism Movement

romanticism blog

Romanticism is a movement in literature, music and the visual arts that reacted to the order imposed by the enlightenment. The ideas of Romanticism are the complete opposite of the Enlightenment ideas. Romanticism focuses on six themes, awe of nature, emotion, importance of the individual, irrational, horrific and grotesque, and nationality. The image to the right is a painting done by the French painter Jean-Victor Schnetz. It is called The Battle for the Town Hall, 28 July 1830. This painting includes a few themes of romanticism. There is a French flag that stands out circled in white. The flag represents the theme of nationality; the people in the painting are fighting together for a nationalistic country. There is also a man circled in blue and he represents the importance of the individual. He is in the middle of the painting and when first looking at the image you immediately notice him. Circled in red is a dead man laying on the ground who represents the horrific and grotesque theme. Everyone has to step over his dead body because he has been killed in battle. There is a green square around the whole picture because the emotional theme is shown throughout the painting. People are dying while trying to fight for their beliefs. The Battle for the Town Hall, 28 July 1830 by Jean-Victor Schnetz is a perfect example of a painting from the Romanticism movement.

Revolutions of 1830 and 1848

Battle between Poland and Russia in 1830

It has been concluded by many historians that the revolutions of 1830 and 1848 were failures, but they were not. We made a scale in class that measures failure to success and we talked about where all the revolutions fell on the scale. A complete failure was defined as there being fewer political rights then before, a lot of violence, and the revolution resulting in no changes. A success would be all changes wanted and independence achieved with little violence. The middle of the scale would be the revolutionaries gaining some rights but oppressors are still in power. In between the middle and failure was the revolution was crushed but the revolutionaries ideology did not die and in between the middle and success was goals are achieved but with much violence. The revolution of Poland in 1830 is an example of a revolution that was not a complete failure. The people of Poland wanted independence from Russia. Russia had already given Poland a constitution so they thought they did their part but the constitution was not enough for Poland. Poland put up a fight against Russia and held them at bay for a few months but the Russians took Warsaw which was a major city in Poland and defeated the weakened Polish army. Even thought the Polish revolution was crushed their nationalistic pride never died. They would fall in between the middle and failure on the scale so they this revolution was not a complete failure. Another revolution that was not a complete failure was France in 1848. There were two groups of revolutionaries in this revolution, liberals and radical republicans. The liberals were seeking moderated political reforms and a constitutional monarchy while the radical republicans wanted to abolish the monarchy and end private ownership of property. These revolutionaries achieved their freedom for a short time and voted in a new ruler, Louis Napoleon. Louis Napoleon ended up restoring the monarchy and the empire returned. Even though the empire was restored the French achieved independence for a small amount of time so this revolution was not a complete failure. A final example of a revolution that was not a complete failure was the Frankfurt Assembly of 1848. This revolution was held in Germany and the liberals and nationalists of the Frankfurt assembly revolted against the German upper class and conservatives, and the Prussian army. The assembly wanted national unity and liberal reforms. Their revolution was crushed when the Prussian army started to kill many revolutionaries and send a lot to prison. During this time many of the rebels fled to the USA so the ideology of the Frankfurt assembly never died. Therefore it was not a complete failure either.

The Right Way to React

The United States had to react fast to the dominant conservative ideology of the Quintuple Alliance. The alliance was between Great Britain, Prussia, Russia, Austria, and France. These countries had just attended a peace conference called the Congress of Vienna and they came up with a constitution. Word had gotten out to the United States president, James Monroe, that the alliance was going to assist Spain to regain their countries in Latin and South America. Monroe was not pleased with this so he issued a speech now known as the Monroe Doctrine. The speech addressed three woes. One was the Quintuple Alliance helping Spain, another was what America would do about Russia claiming land in the North West United States, and it also addressed the type of relationship the United States would have with Great Britain. First he addressed Russia claiming land on the North West coast. He stated, “. . . At the proposal of the Russian Imperial Government, made through the minister of the Emperor residing here, a full power and instructions have been transmitted to the minister of the United States at St. Petersburg to arrange by amicable negotiation the respective rights and interests of the two nations on the northwest coast of this continent.” America will negotiate a deal with Russia on who gets what parts of the land. Second Monroe discussed America’s policy in regard to Europe. He said,”Our policy in regard to Europe, which was adopted at an early stage of the wars which have so long agitated that quarter of the globe, nevertheless remains the same, which is, not to interfere in the internal concerns of any of its powers.” The United States will not completely ally with Britain but they will maintain a friendly relationship with them. Monroe did not think it would be a good idea to get involved in European affairs. Lastly Monroe addressed the alliance assisting Spain in regaining their colonies. Monroe said,”But with the Governments who have declared their independence and maintain it, and whose independence we have… acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States.” He believed any former colonies that are now independent nations should maintain their independence without European governments interfering. He says that if a European government does try to claim the colonies again it would be offending the United States and they would have to fight. Monroe handled the ideas of the Quintuple Alliance in a good manner and was confident in his speech.

In the picture to the right I look content and there is a quote from the Monroe Doctrine. The quote says, ““Our policy in regard to Europe… nevertheless remains the same, which is, not to interfere in the internal concerns of any of its powers.” In the picture I express the reaction a Russian Diplomat would have to the second topic addressed in the doctrine. President Monroe decides that the United States will maintain their policy and not intervene with foreign affairs. The United States would maintain a friendly relationship with Britain but not get too involved. A Russian Diplomat would be happy with this because Britain had the strongest navy and if they allied with the United States that would be a big threat. A Russian Diplomat would also be slightly suspicious of Britain for wanting an alliance with the United States in the first place.