Where in Missouri does the South begin? (St. Louis, Springfield: car, rating)

[MOforthewin]

Originally Posted by aliasfinn

Missouri during the 1800s reminds me of a hornet nest.
There were always mean ones buzzing around but it wasn't until the Civil War disturbed the nest that they started swarming, and anyone in the vicinity got stung bad.

I agree. Lincoln should have been more hands off Missouri like he was with Kentucky.

However the elected lawmakers of KY were pro union mostly, even their governor was only neutral. Lincoln wasn't as worried as he was with Missouri possibly leaving the union.

Missouri's governor was full blown Confederate supporter with many of the lawmakers as well which being so vocal drew the attention of Lincoln and caused the union army to invade Missouri and put the lawmakers on the run.

If the union didn't invade so fast with general Lyon, the Confederates likely would have got control of more of the state instead of just the southern quarter of Missouri which is the only part they really got. I'll have to find a map that shows the Confederate lines. I had it saved.

[MOforthewin]

tonight on 60 minutes they were talking about coal country and jobs on 60 minutes regarding Eastern Kentucky. Anyway one of the guys featured in the story said we're not southerners, but Appalachians.

I can see how West Virginians and Eastern Kentuckians see themselves as a sub culture.

Would you say this is the same thing for the Ozarks? Even though a good chunk IS located in the south meaning about 20 miles north of highway 60 on southward is southern, but do you think most see themselves as Ozarkans? Even though they're southern Baptist and have an accent, culture and the ancestry of the south.

[SunGrins]

As a native Missourian I have heard several Ozark people laughingly describe themselves as hillbillies in a joking way and never heard any say they were southerners. I lived on the fringe of Little Dixie where you might encounter folks who self-identify as southern. I went to college in Cape Girardeau where some folks worked hard at being southerners. The Ozarks seemed not to be obsessed with it. My wife's family was from Shannon County and an ancestor fought at Wilsons Creek but abandoned the war and just went home and defended family and property against both sides. There was no benefit in it for small farmers who were not slave owners. I suspect that most people in the Ozarks don't think about it nearly as much as some do on this forum.

[MOforthewin]

Originally Posted by SunGrins

As a native Missourian I have heard several Ozark people laughingly describe themselves as hillbillies in a joking way and never heard any say they were southerners. I lived on the fringe of Little Dixie where you might encounter folks who self-identify as southern. I went to college in Cape Girardeau where some folks worked hard at being southerners. The Ozarks seemed not to be obsessed with it. My wife's family was from Shannon County and an ancestor fought at Wilsons Creek but abandoned the war and just went home and defended family and property against both sides. There was no benefit in it for small farmers who were not slave owners. I suspect that most people in the Ozarks don't think about it nearly as much as some do on this forum.

Hillbillies is also a term used on 60 minutes from the people of Eastern KY.

The Ozarks have a number of similarities to eastern KY, WV and Eastern TN as that is where many of the settlers came from and settles in southern Missouri and northern Arkansas. Eastern TN reminds me of the Ozarks except the hills/mountains are more rugged.

The transition zone begins in mid Missouri at highway 50 but some pockets north of that still have fairly strong southern influences such as places around Lexington and that in the Little Dixie area.

The Ozarks of southern MO and northern AR were pretty split. Some areas were very pro confederate such as Oregon and Ripley Counties were very pro Confederate despite not having much slaves since they're not farming areas.

Southwest Missouri was also pro Confederate in areas such as Neosho where the secession convention took place. Places like Neosho and Noel Missouri are pretty southern still.

My aunt used to have a lake house in Southern Missouri on Bull Shoals about 5 miles from Arkansas. There was nothing Midwestern about that area of Missouri. It's all southern there. same way when I lasted visited Table Rock 4 years ago near Branson. Many of the locals I ran into especially old people had the distinct accent and it's not the Midwest down there. Again though these places are near highway 60 in Missouri which is a part of the state that is southern and doesn't have Midwestern influences. Might as well be an extension of Arkansas.

[SunGrins]

Originally Posted by MOforthewin

Would you say this is the same thing for the Ozarks? Even though a good chunk IS located in the south meaning about 20 miles north of highway 60 on southward is southern, but do you think most see themselves as Ozarkans? Even though they're southern Baptist and have an accent, culture and the ancestry of the south.

I think the question here is how do they see themselves and I would make a distinction between the more staunchly southern communities, like Lexington for example, and many Ozark communities. They may fall into the linguistic and culturally southern zone but identify more as Ozark people. It seems that this conversation takes place on several levels but how they perceive themselves is the most important aspect. Scholars might make a linguistic judgement and historians might make their own judgement and a few partisans have their opinions but the final analysis should be how they perceive themselves in the 21st century.

[MOforthewin]

Originally Posted by SunGrins

I think the question here is how do they see themselves and I would make a distinction between the more staunchly southern communities, like Lexington for example, and many Ozark communities. They may fall into the linguistic and culturally southern zone but identify more as Ozark people. It seems that this conversation takes place on several levels but how they perceive themselves is the most important aspect. Scholars might make a linguistic judgement and historians might make their own judgement and a few partisans have their opinions but the final analysis should be how they perceive themselves in the 21st century.

True. Doesn't mean they're technically not southern though. The Ozarks, Appalachian areas of Eastern TN, KY, WV and parts of Louisiana in areas have a creole culture separate from the typical south. With LA though you also have French ancestry and Catholics too unlike the typical south most think of.

One interesting thing is that the Ozarks, especially in far southern and southwestern Missouri are some of the most Republican voting areas of the country. Almost all the state house and senate seats don't even have democrats running against the Republicans anymore and many of those counties voted 80 percent Trump with one I think close to 85 percent. Only other areas I see rivaling that is some places in Northeast GA and Eastern TN.

That can explain the strong expansion for gun rights in Missouri too as the Ozarks are some of the most pro gun and to the right parts of the country. Thanks to them MO is near the top for firearms freedoms now.

[R.A.P]

Yet again, here we are arguing about Missouri's identity. I grew up in south central Missouri, and I identify as southern. As does my family. It truly just depends on how you grew up. Missouri's true, and exiled govt voted to leave the union in 1862 I believe, but were exiled to Neosho Missouri. We have a star on the Stars and Bars, and many residents I know feel more connected to the south. That's my take.

[James Bond 007]

Interesting thing I've noticed here in KC is, you can get two people growing up next to each other, and one will have a Southern accent (even if a mild one) and the other won't. As far as I can tell, it basically depends on where the family comes from.

[MOforthewin]

Originally Posted by R.A.P

Yet again, here we are arguing about Missouri's identity. I grew up in south central Missouri, and I identify as southern. As does my family. It truly just depends on how you grew up. Missouri's true, and exiled govt voted to leave the union in 1862 I believe, but were exiled to Neosho Missouri. We have a star on the Stars and Bars, and many residents I know feel more connected to the south. That's my take.

What part of south central MO? The southern line, dialect seems to spike upwards a bit in the central part.

I have no doubt to believe you though. South central MO is pretty southern minus southeast Missouri since that's the most southern part of the state.

Also that vote to leave the union is debatable because one, there is a debate if there was a quorum for both houses meaning enough present to make the vote official and two who the legit government was. The constitutional conviction had NO authority to evict the lawmakers. Nothing says they can't leave the capital and meet in other parts of the state. The governor signs bills all over the state for example. IMO they were the legit government because there was no authority to evict them. I have heard of some evidence that there might have been a quorum in both chambers found. Really doesn't matter now though.

Also Confederate Congress admitted both Kentucky and Missouri as Confederate states. So you can say they were claimed by both sides.

One thing to note regardless of the legality of the "Neosho Conviction" is that it at least was more legit that Kentucky's secession which wasn't even done by the lawmakers. During the civil war Missouri as a whole it's lawmakers were pro confederate while most of Kentucky's were very pro union. KY governor was neutral while Claiborne Jackson was very vocal about wanting to join the Confederacy which was the downfall. If he would have kept his mouth shut more and laid low preventing Lincoln from acting so fast on Missouri he probably would have been able to secure the state for the Confederacy. The union army swiftly advanced into Missouri putting the lawmakers on the run before the MO state guard could defend it and get Confederate army help.

The Battle of Pea Ridge was the deciding factor most historians agree. If the Confederate forces won that, they would have kept control of the state for the Confederacy and today we'd probably be calling Missouri a legitimate confederate state instead of border state.

Price's raid in 1864 was supposed to reclaim MO for the elected government, but that ended in a total disaster.

[SW Missouri Dave]

Originally Posted by MOforthewin

The Battle of Pea Ridge was the deciding factor most historians agree. If the Confederate forces won that, they would have kept control of the state for the Confederacy and today we'd probably be calling Missouri a legitimate confederate state instead of border state.

The Union victory at Pea Ridge secured Union control of Missouri, but a loss here would not have "kept control of Missouri for the Confederacy" since they never had control of the state, nor was there ever any serious threat of the Union losing control of Missouri. They best they could do was held onto Springfield for nearly three months after Wilson's Creek and were unable to take it again in January 1863.

What the outnumbered Union victory did do was give the Union Army control of much of northern Arkansas for the remainder of the war.