The South

[Polkergeist]

I was reading somewhere that the region that is defined the South is not solely defined by the states that seceded to form the confederacy but differ depending on whom you ask. Therefore I ask how do you define the south ?

(This question is especially for those of the southern persuasion)

[KEmperor]

I was reading somewhere that the region that is defined the South is not solely defined by the states that seceded to form the confederacy but differ depending on whom you ask. Therefore I ask how do you define the south ?

(This question is especially for those of the southern persuasion)

I am not really of the southern persuasion, but I'll try to answer.  The South starts with Mason-Dixon line(the border between Pennsylvania and Maryland.  Basically running west from Maryland, you have West Virginia, Kentucky, and Missouri.  Everything south of those states, plus Oklahoma and Texas are Southern.

[??????????]

The South

[muon2]

I'd mostly agree with StatesRights map, but TX, MO, and MD all get split. Dallas and Kansas City both have more to do with the plains than they do with the south. Baltimore is more like the Mid-Atlantic PA and DE. That being said there are pieces of all three states that are still very southern. I'd also add the southern third of IL and IN to the "cultural" south.

[Polkergeist]

Thanks for that !

[danwxman]

Baltimore/DC/NoVA definetely align themselves with the NE corridor. But Southern Ohio/PA align themselves more with the South.

[opebo]

Maryland is not the South.  West Virginia definitely is.  I used to believe Missouri was not the South - and I still think St. Louis is an island of Eastern civilization.  But much of the state has proved to be Southern in nature. 

[Filuwaúrdjan]

WV is sort of in the "South" (ie: it's south of the Mason-Dixon line, used to be part of Virginia... etc) but in several other ways in definately isn't "Southern" (virtually non-existant rural black population, loyal to the Union, political (and non-political) culture shaped in opposition to the Virginia Plantocracy, Unions (especially UMW) very, very strong, agricultural patterns a world away from the South... etc etc).

Interestingly, similer remarks can be made about Eastern Kentucky.

[raymondluxuryyacht]

I don't believe the South is a definable region.  It is more of a culture, which is why southern Illinois can be in some ways more "Southern" than Miami, Florida.

[muon2]

Maryland is not the South.  West Virginia definitely is.  I used to believe Missouri was not the South - and I still think St. Louis is an island of Eastern civilization.  But much of the state has proved to be Southern in nature. 

The Annapolis area and the MD Eastern Shore are the remaining areas of the "South" in that state.

Everything in MO south of the Missouri River, except for the St. Louis and Kansas City areas is with the South. I'd add Eastern OK to that as well.

[Nation]

Maryland has many parts, most of which if you were to drive through them or live in them, are not this typical left-wing place you'd think it to be:


There's Montgomery Conty (places like Silver Spring and Takoma Park where I grew up are very nice, and one of the few nuclear-free zones left in America), which is liberal, Prince George's County which is mostly black and rather religious. Bowie, MD (in PG) is one of (if not THE) richest majority-black cities in America.

There's Baltimore County which is pretty moderate, and Baltimore CITY (where most of the left-wing vote comes from). Baltimore is about 7/8 run-down and poverty stricken, while the other 1/8 is pretty nice.

Then you have Western MD which fits in better with West Virginia and Western PA than it does with the rest of the state. Not Southern, but certainly not yankee country.

There's the eastern shore, which is EXTREMELY beautiful and where I've lived most of my life in Cecil County. Eastern shore is fairly conservative and some parts are mostly blue-collar small towns, but overall, I'd say it fits in better with the south than the north.

Southern MD is probably the closest you'll get to any part of MD that actually fits in with places like Virginia, North Carolina, etc. You even get folks there that still have some southern accents, and a unique dialogue (MD has its own weird way of saying things).

Truthfully, all of MD cannot be fit into one region, there's about 3-4 different ones within the whole state.

[KentonNgo]

Maryland for the most part has transitioned to the NE corridor.

NoVa is no longer the South. Demographically and culturally, Fairfax County won't fit with the South.

[Rob]

A common definition of the South is the old Confederacy plus Oklahoma and Kentucky.

[??????????]

A common definition of the South is the old Confederacy plus Oklahoma and Kentucky.

Kentucky is part of the old confederacy. It just never "officially" seceded according to the Northern historians who have written the majority of history books. The southern government did recognize Kentucky and Maryland however with stars on the flag.

[J-Mann]

I like your map, States - almost exactly the way that I portray the south in maps that I've made.  I usually leave out Missouri, but have no good reason why.  As far as electoral regions, I usually include it with the Midwest.

[??????????]

The reason I exclude Oklahoma is for two reasons. It is a "migratory" state and it was not a state when the war began and was considered Indian territory. Southerners migrated to that state after the war to farm. Although I know many Okies and they have a very southern/Texas accent it would be a stretch to throw Oklahoma into the same column as the Carolinas/Georgia/Bama etc.

[bgwah]

The reason I exclude Oklahoma is for two reasons. It is a "migratory" state and it was not a state when the war began and was considered Indian territory. Southerners migrated to that state after the war to farm. Although I know many Okies and they have a very southern/Texas accent it would be a stretch to throw Oklahoma into the same column as the Carolinas/Georgia/Bama etc.

I once read that the Indians supported the Confederacy more than the Union. Is that true? If so, why not include it in the South?

[J-Mann]

The reason I exclude Oklahoma is for two reasons. It is a "migratory" state and it was not a state when the war began and was considered Indian territory. Southerners migrated to that state after the war to farm. Although I know many Okies and they have a very southern/Texas accent it would be a stretch to throw Oklahoma into the same column as the Carolinas/Georgia/Bama etc.

I once read that the Indians supported the Confederacy more than the Union. Is that true? If so, why not include it in the South?

It's been awhile since I've had Indian History, but I think that's true in some cases.  If I remember right, promises of land retention was the main reason that some tribes fought with the South.  States doesn't include it in his map because obviously Oklahoma is now Oklahoma, not Indian territory.  And just because Oklahoma was Indian territory doesn't mean they were the ones supporting the Confederacy.  If I remember right, the pro-South tribes tended to be deeper in the South, in Alabama and Mississippi.

[J. J.]

I define the South, for geo-political purposes as all states completely south of the Potomac and the Ohio, or whose eastern boarder is on the Mississippi or the Gulf of Mexico.

That excludes WV, because, until the last two cycles, it had a North East voting pattern.  I may have to modify my description to say all states at least partly south of the Potomac.

You will note that while this includes all of the states that were in the Confederacy, it is not limited to that.  You will also note that it excludes a number of "slave states."

I list Oklahoma as being in the West, and treat the states boardering the Pacific as a separate group, the "Pacific Rim."

[??????????]

Yes, Indians did support the confederacy moreso then the Union considering the way the US government treated them for years before the war. One famous confederate indian was Stand Watie. Here is a link to his biography http://www.civilwarhome.com/watiebio.htm.

[Rob]

I know the Creek, Cherokee, and Choctaw tribes of Oklahoma (then Indian Territory) fought for the Confederacy.

[J-Mann]

Yes, Indians did support the confederacy moreso then the Union considering the way the US government treated them for years before the war. One famous confederate indian was Stand Watie. Here is a link to his biography http://www.civilwarhome.com/watiebio.htm.

Stand Watie - that's the one!  I may post some info on him later...I read some good stuff about him last year.

[patrick1]

A common definition of the South is the old Confederacy plus Oklahoma and Kentucky.

Kentucky is part of the old confederacy. It just never "officially" seceded according to the Northern historians who have written the majority of history books. The southern government did recognize Kentucky and Maryland however with stars on the flag.

There is a huge problem with basing the definition of the South on the Confederacy because if you break down the map further you would have to exclude many areas.  During the Civil War, there were Huge swaths of land that were pro-union in sympathies and in vlounteering. Excluding Missouri and Kentucky there were over 100,000 white men in the C.S.A. proper who fought for the Union.  The most significant areas of Union support were Northern Alabama, North Georgia,  East Tenessee, East Kentucky, West North Carolina and parts of coast, West Arkansas, West Texas, Southwestern Virginia (today) i.e. basically areas that had few blacks, mountain areas and had small white farmholders as opposed to the plantocracy.  Missouri provided almost 3 times as many Unions troops and St. Louis was very pro-union with it large German population.  The Cajuns and Acadia also tended pro Union.  It should also be noted that Confederate raiders inflicted massive damage on Union loyalist areas that would make Sherman blanche.  My point is that the Confederate cause was very unpopular in large areas of the south and beame even more so when conscription was enacted.

[minionofmidas]

I know the Creek, Cherokee, and Choctaw tribes of Oklahoma (then Indian Territory) fought for the Confederacy.

Actually about three times as many Cherokee fought for the Union (including, as in the Upper South), thousands who first enlisted as Confederates, then switched sides).
Stand Watie, a large slaveowner who, despite being a fullblood, spoke English as well as Cherokee (at a time when most Cherokee spoke no English whatsoever), had played a large role in the fraudulent treaty of NEw Echota and was very much sidelined in Cherokee Nation politics in Oklahoma in the 40s and 50s. Most Cherokees consider him nothing but a traitor, which is exactly what they treated him as after 1865. He was one of the last Confederate commanding officers to surrender, though.

[J. J.]

Actually, Albert Pike (Arkansas, I believe) commanded several regiments of Amerindian troops. 

There were also, several regiments of free Black troops serving in the Confederate Army, from New Orleans I think.

One of Grant's officers, who was with him at the surrender at Appomattox and drafted the surrender document, Ely S. Parker, was also an Amerindian.