From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sections

Hi, Stevietheman. What section headings do we need? I suggest chronological (as you might have guessed ;) CQ 16:51, 23 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Yes, for now, I suggest breaking it up into the individual years from 1861 to 1865, and perhaps "Pre-war" and "Post-war", like I did in Louisville in the Civil War. We can always refine this at a later time. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 16:55, 23 August 2006 (UTC) reply
By the way, some content in Louisville in the Civil War could be reused here. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 16:56, 23 August 2006 (UTC) reply
OK. There. I made sections 1861, 1862-1863, 1864-1865, and a Timeline section which will eventually become transcluded from Kentucky in the Civil War/Timeline which I removed from Timeline of Kentucky history CQ 17:34, 23 August 2006 (UTC) reply

suggestions

I did a minor cleanup a few minutes ago and did not attempt to add any significant content. But here are some suggestions as you develop the article:

  1. List of prominent Kentucky people involved with the war, such as John C. Breckinridge
  2. List of Kentucky regiments (and the Orphan Brigade)
  3. Map of the state that shows where battles occurred
  4. List of memorials (battlefield parks, statues, museums, etc.)
  5. Discussion of how the Cumberland Gap was a potential invasion route to Eastern Tennessee, critical to the Union (which is why the Battle of Mill Springs was important)
  6. You may find Image:ACW Corinth2Perryville.png of use.

Hal Jespersen 19:52, 23 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Many thanks for the assistance. I added your suggestions to the todo list. Cheers! Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 20:00, 23 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Yes many thanks! I've reduced the article to Stub-class for a while. The American Civil War task force is now seeking recruits. Please consider joining. Thanks! • CQ 22:17, 23 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Show American Civil War?

Currently, the template {{ American Civil War}} is showing at the bottom of major Civil War articles. Does anyone object to adding it to this one? Or, is it too early? Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 22:42, 23 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Certainly not. I'm looking at Missouri in the Civil War. It's also a Border state (Civil War). I started a template based on Template:Missouri in the Civil War — Template:Kentucky in the Civil War. The "See also" section now has links to other "[some adjacent state] in the Civil War" articles that I could find. Maybe WP:ACW can help to "homogenize" a bit of this sort of content and context. BTW. I'm going ahead with the "Timeline" idea per that project (but it's long range) so I moved Kentucky in the Civil War/Timeline to Timeline of Kentucky in the Civil War per Krill's recommendation. • CQ 23:34, 23 August 2006 (UTC) reply
I like the template idea--it would help keep all the "Kentucky in the Civil War" events in perspective. Re: states, {{ American Civil War}} already lists all the states that have articles or categories of "[state] in the Civil War". I'm happy to see you take the lead on a lot of this. I will, of course, help out where I can. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 23:58, 23 August 2006 (UTC) reply

Union OOBs and abstracts which I added

I added 3 abstracts, from 1862, 63, and 64 to give an idea of the strength, composition, and location of the Union Forces. At the bottom, I gave a year-by-year breakdown of the various units and their commanders. However, it could be cleaned up and formatted better, I'm not really the expert on wikicode and I used plain old HTML. Let me know any questions, comments, suggestions, complaints, and/or requests for further information, I have a copy of the OR as well as the Order of Battle books used to generate this information. MrPrada 07:19, 4 August 2007 (UTC) reply

E.A. Paine and the District of Western Ky

Also, I was VERY suprised after I read this to see that Brig. Gen. Eleazer A. Paine is missing from the article. Burbridge's actions were outrageous, yes, but he was never convicted of anything. Paine, and a congressmen, both went to jail for illegally taxing the citizens of the Western District(which I believe included just the Columbus area, I think Lousville and Paducah were in Ewing's command, and the rest of the state fell under Hobson). Anyway, I think the following should be addressed:

  • Add a major section on Eleazer A. Paine and his actions
  • Expand 1864-1865 and the information about Burbridge(a lot of it is over in Lousville in the Civil war, but it pertains more to this article)
  • Add a section about Granger's Army of Kentucky, explain the Command and Control Relationship between the Granger and Nelson in 1862
  • Explain the command and control relationship between Parke/Foster/Burnside (Department of Ohio), the IX Corps, XXIII Corps and the Kentucky Districts in 1863
  • Eliminate all of the red links, and add references up top

Once that is completed I think this would be a fantastic FA candidate, and Project Civil War Task Force could definetly use more of those. MrPrada 07:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC) reply

William T. Sherman

Also, for FA-status, the article really needs to hilight Sherman's removal in 1861 amidst allegations of insanity. The articles on Hugh Ewing and Lorenzo Thomas get into it a bit and hilight some of the background information. It is probably one of the most interesting incidents of the history of Kentucky in the Civil War, and should feature prominently in the article. MrPrada 09:15, 4 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Confederate states infobox

Even though this infobox shows Kentucky as a border state, the infobox's presence may be misleading to many readers. Kentucky was never officially a confederate state. This needs to be ameliorated somehow. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 20:11, 10 August 2008 (UTC) reply

Depends. To the CSA, it was official. We could place it in the Confederate government of Kentucky article.-- King Bedford I Seek his grace 20:19, 10 August 2008 (UTC) reply
I was just looking, and the other three border states have the infobox. Plus, should this article ever make FA, it needs an infobox like this.-- King Bedford I Seek his grace 20:23, 10 August 2008 (UTC) reply
I agree it needs an infobox, but perhaps one for border states. And perhaps that one could be shown on this and the other three instead of the Confederate infobox. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 20:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC) reply
I just created a userbox for the bad guys, and placed it on the individual pages. As for as border, I probably need to.-- King Bedford I Seek his grace 21:08, 10 August 2008 (UTC) reply

Kentucky was recognized by the Confederate States of America Government as the 13th state. They were admitted to this status just as Alabama, Georgia, etc..etc.. were. The Federal Government did not recognize the Confederacy, never removed any of the 13 stars of the Confederate States. During the war, Kentucky was deemed a Rebel State by the US Government, but never called a Confederate State. This is why after the war, Kentucky did not receive the reconstruction as the other Southern states did and the effects of that shows in our economy today. the state never recovered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andypreston2010 ( talk • contribs) 02:28, 27 December 2010 (UTC) reply

Kentucky officially never was part of the Confederacy. Frankfort was seized temporarily, very temporarily. Just because some breakaway citizens formed an alternative government in Bowling Green doesn't mean it was an official declaration. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 13:03, 27 December 2010 (UTC) reply
If Kentucky was deemed a "rebel state" and all the other things that followed from that, as you state, are there references for this material and how should it be incorporated into the article? Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 13:06, 27 December 2010 (UTC) reply

Definition of KY in the CW

Please do not reply to a twelve year old discussion. Start a new section if you wish to discuss updates to the article. — The Hand That Feeds You: Bite 17:32, 2 February 2023 (UTC) reply

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

During the Civil War, Kentucky was geographically a Southern State and militarily a Border State with soliders serving both the Union and Confederate Armies.

Kentucky furnished 75,000 soldiers to the Union and an Est. 50,000 to the Confederacy. 14,000 of the Union total included the Home Guard who were more or less military police that did not leave the state. The number of Confederates from Kentucky is complicated becuase many Kentuckians served in other state units, because Neutrality prevented enlistment or formations of state troops.

If you look at the actual Ky Units that fought on the battlefield, the total of Union and Confederate Kentuckians would be close to the same number.

It is hard for people today to understand that Kentucky Union Soldiers considered themselves Southerns, actually many refered to themselves as "Southern Unionist". They did not like to be called a "Yankee". Many of their diaries, which apparently historians of today do not read give a very different view of the Union Soliders from KY. They believed in Henry Clay, who worked to keep the USA together. They fought for the Nation and yes many of them owned slaves...When Lincoln sent out the Emancipation--It is documented that many KY Units had to be held by force to not leave the army, but some did. Proof of all of this is that after the war, when KY was elected ex-Confederates in local and state offices---Where was the ex-union soldiers?

Kentucky was a state of Federal occupation and that sums it up. Men like Jerimiah Boyle and Stephen Burbridge are proof of this--There actions in KY during the war made KY as Confederate as any of the other 11 states.

There were no "Southern Sypathizers" in Kentucky, becuase everyone believed themselves to by Southerns...There were Confederate Sympathizers and Union Sympathizers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andypreston2010 ( talk • contribs) 02:22, 27 December 2010 (UTC) reply

Given references, how do you propose updating the article? The talk page is about making the article better. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 13:08, 27 December 2010 (UTC) reply
I just added a key takeaway from Anne Marshall's Creating A Confederate KY, which is a must read.
"Although counterintuitive politician and periodical editor Robert J. Breckinridge represented the majority of Unionist Kentuckians in his belief that the federal government was the optimal system for preserving slavery. Thus, during the early onset of the war the majority of Kentuckians supported the Union, regardless of their position on slavery. As the war unfolded the federal goals of emancipation squandered Kentucky's support for the Union, most notably after the declaration of the Emancipation Proclamation. The destruction of institutionalized slavery uprooted the foundations of racial hierarchy and shattered antebellum social structures."
So many Unionist Kentuckians were actually fighting to preserve slavery and protect Kentucky's immense slave trade to the deep south. Louisville shipped 2500 to 4000 enslaved people into the Natchez MS and New Orleans slave markets annually. Slavery represented 20% of the city's total tax revenues and the demand in the deep south was growing as was Kentucky's slave markets. The Smithsonian Institute is referring to this as the "Slavery Trail of Tears". KY and VA were the largest exporters. I also added a direct observation made in 1865 about the collapse of Union support in KY by wars end
"This is documented in Louisville by a prominent Washington DC journalist, Whitelaw Reid who accompanied Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase for a tour of the south from May 1, 1865, to May 1, 1866 . Reid observed in 1865 “At Louisville a pleasant dinner party enabled us to meet the last collection of men from the midst of a Rebel community. At that time there was more loyalty in Nashville than in Louisville, and about as much in Charleston as in either. For the first and only time on the trip, save while we were under the Spanish flag, slaves waited on us at dinner. They were the last any of us were ever to see on American soil.”
Kentucky was actually a very southern state and that includes Louisville, Lexington, and N. KY. 2603:8001:6E00:2AC2:4DC8:C720:7AAC:81FC ( talk) 18:19, 31 January 2023 (UTC) reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Key importance

OK, maybe this is addressed elsewhere and I didn't see it. But aside from Lincoln's assessment, why are we stating Kentucky was a border state of "key importance"? Firstly, Lincoln was a politician, not a military man (prior to becoming C-in-C of course), and therefore does not represent an expert opinion. He could have just been expressing a heartfelt desire not to lose his birth state. People cared about such odd things back then.

In fact, the entire "above the fold" section of this article 'seems' to me to be a collection of statements designed to support the "key importance" statement without, you know, actually *supporting* it with sources.

The sort of things I would be looking for in a state of "key importance" would be things that drastically affected the overall course of the war and helped determine the winner. For instance, Virginia was obviously of key importance - not only for being a major battleground and occupying territory between the opposing capitals, but for the might-have-beens of its secession alone. Had mighty Virginia not seceded, it wouldn't have taken Robert E. Lee along with it - and he was a large part of the reason the CSA held on as long as it did.

Or how about Tennessee? The long and bitter battles of Tennessee were critical to the course of the war. With Chattanooga fell the CSA's last hope of protecting the Deep South from invasion. It opened the door to Sherman's devastating march and the burning of Atlanta. Tennessee was clearly of key importance.

I'm just not seeing it for Kentucky. They had horses, and important people were born there, and their people were highly divided. But being from the midwest, I've driven through Kentucky a lot, and it's a lot of flat open nothingness, geographically, so I doubt it was an important transportation bottleneck. One can't even say that winning Kentucky was critical to Lincoln's reelection since he lost the state but still won. If it had gone over entirely to the CSA is anyone seriously suggesting a might-have-been involving an invasion of Indiana? :P If it had ever been firmly in Unionist hands would it truly have been that big a help? Where is the key importance in this state?

I'm not trying to offend any Kentuckians who might be reading this. I'm just puzzled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.107.165.92 ( talk) 01:18, 7 June 2011 (UTC) reply

Complete control of Kentucky by the CSA would mean that the Confederate could harass Ohio River trade, as well as increase the chances of invasion of Indiana and Ohio, plus increasing the liklihood that the other border states with slaves like Missouri and Delaware would also secede. Plus, with Louisville and Lexington the CSA would have gain up to 90,000 additional soldiers.-- King Bedford I Seek his grace 01:34, 7 June 2011 (UTC) reply
Were there any border or Confederate states that weren't considered important? It seems to me that someone somewhere is always making the case for why this state or the other was very important to the Union or the Confederacy. Well, maybe not Alabama. Rissa, copy editor ( talk) 00:38, 16 June 2014 (UTC) reply

A map would be helpful

For non-American readers of this article, it would be really helpful to have a map of Kentucky to illustrate what is meant by a "border state" in the US Civil War. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz ( talk) 04:50, 19 March 2023 (UTC) reply

You're probably looking for this map from the main article on the American Civil War. The yellow territories are "border states" which did not secede, but were allowed to maintain slavery until the end of the war. — The Hand That Feeds You: Bite 09:32, 19 March 2023 (UTC) reply
Which of those yellow states is Kentucky? Serious question, from a non-American. That’s why a map of Kentucky itself in this article would be helpful. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz ( talk) 14:10, 19 March 2023 (UTC) reply
Ah! Fair point. I may have to see if there's any good maps on Commons, but the article on Kentucky should fill you in for the moment. — The Hand That Feeds You: Bite 23:22, 19 March 2023 (UTC) reply
Yes, that is helpful, thanks! Still think a map for this article would be a good addition. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz ( talk) 16:26, 7 April 2023 (UTC) reply
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Kentucky_in_the_American_Civil_War&oldid=1203246902"