States and confederate territory. He argues that emancipation was a process achieved gradually rather than happening just by the emancipation proclamation. Professor taylor we will be focusing on the central question and Civil War History about why this war that starts over the issue of slavery, but becomes the war that ends slavery in the United States. There is nothing inevitable about the outcome, and this image, i want to start with, sums up the transformation of the civil war works in American Life about his elegantly about as eloquently than what i will say today. It this is an africanamerican boy who was enslaved. He ends the war as a drummer board. We will talk about black service on wednesday, but we are going to be thinking about why this war was the most significant social revolution and American Life. Slavery is abolished and 4 million men, women and children go free. Because it is not obvious in 1861 that this war is eventually going to end in slavery destruction. It succession happens, and seven is from the beginning of the war are fighting to preserve the institution of slavery, that does not mean that most northerners go to war to set out to end slavery. May be 10 , 15 of northern soldiers are out and out abolitionist and from the beginning, really believed they are fighting in an abolitionist war. You have to think of the context of the war after the defeat of the revolutions in europe anything 48, and looks like liberal republicanism is on the retreat worldwide, and americans see themselves as representatives of selfgovernment in a world full of monarchies. They see what the stakes are. If this rebellion and allowed to succeed and destroy the United States, that selfgovernment and small republicanism are going to be discredited worldwide. There is an idea about fidelity to the government of the founders and wanting to preserve the government drop fourth of the revolution. Those are the ideas that animate most northerners when they start fighting, but eventually, a mastication becomes a tactic union uses to win the war, and eventually, abolitionist become an end in themselves. Why does this happen . Why during in the civil war for the first time in American History is the federal government take the side of slaves versus slaveholder . That is the question looking at today. First, we need to understand in answering that question is what is radical about the election of Abraham Lincoln . It has become fashionable and that it has become fashionable in scholarly circles to point out the limits of lincolns antislavery and to point at his fundamental moderation and conservatism. There is a lot to be said in that sense can make and does not take office in 1861 dead set on this 1861 dead set on abolishing slavery. Is baseline position is preventing slavery further spread slaverys further spread. You can go too far the other way, right . And in underestimating the radicalism of Abraham Lincoln being in the white house and Republican Party being in power. What is radical about having Abraham Lincoln and the republicans in power . They are talking about killing slavery. They are simply talking about killing favoring gradually killing slavery gradually. Republicans believed that if slavery spread was restricted, slavery was not allowed to move into the territories, it would eventually weather and i if it was kept in the states where it already existed in 1861. This is a premise united most southerners and northern republicans. One of the reason southerners push as hard as they do for slaverys expansion into kansas, and one of the reasons there is so much postslavery support, like going into cuba or the caribbean and annexing land in there, is southerners see slavery needs to expand, or the it will die. They agree with republicans on this idea. Republicans are saying to anyone wholl listen in 1860 and 1861 we want to kill slavery, but not overnight. We are going to put in place a set of policies whose curative effect over a long period of time lincoln when asked how long will it take for slavery to die said probably a century. To have anyone saying that in the white house on power is around the thing in American History. With the possible exception of John Quincy Adams, the first president who, given the right set of circumstances, if things broke right, might take Decisive Action against slavery. I bring up John Quincy Adams because he is a relevant to what lincoln does during the war, and using his president ial war powers to forge a policy of military emancipation. Because the idea that a president in the event of a war over slavery, and a rebellion of the Southern States might have the 42 emancipate slaves as a military measure predates the civil war. It is not a new idea. It is articulated by John Quincy Adams on a number of occasions. He is defeated in 1828 in his bid for reelection by andrew jackson. He returns to the house of representatives and had a long career and the house of representatives. He became something of a continual born in the side of proslavery interests. If you remember, he let the fight against the gag rule, that prevented antislavery petitions in congress. The other think quincy adams did was respond to seven threats about succession in war over issues of slavery by articulating a doctrine that said it would fit it would be within the power of commanderinchief to emancipate slaves. He had a number of historical precedents to point to. You could point to the british during the american revolution. And you could point to the United States 1830s where officials offered freedom to the slaves of seminole indians that would come within u. S. Lines. You can look to president s in the greek and roman world. The point is, the idea that the president might have the power to emancipate in wartime is not new in 1861, and it rests on this idea that wartime and internal rebellion presents a novel situation in which the president , by virtue of this status as commanderinchief could call on war powers and do things that are extra constitutional that in peace time would be illegal. For because of the emergency of the war and other rebellion, are allowable. How many people bought this idea precivil war . I have no idea. It is impossible to know. It is for sure that leading republicans, charles sumner, william seward, and others this idea was accepted within republican circles. There is really not a whole lot of agreement precivil war of what the rules of warfare are. But the point is, you have some high end republicans that accept this premise going into the civil war. As a matter of fact, right after fort sumter, lincoln is in the white house. And antislavery senator waves around a copy of John Quincy Adams speech and calls to on the spot. Ok. Now lincoln, we know, in various ways during the succession crisis proves willing to compromise on slavery to a point. Hes not willing to compromise on his opposition to the extension of slavery into the territories, but he is willing to make gestures to proslavery sentiment in hopes of avoiding war. One of those gestures is his support for the amendment. It was a perspective a minute that got through congress which would have put it in the constitution that congress, the federal government, like the power to abolish slavery in the states where it already existed. In lincolns bind, it wouldnt have done anything. But lincoln is willing to compromise early in the war if it means avoiding war or ending the war early. One of the measures of radicalism of these four years is the first 13 commitment that goes through the state for ratification would have made slavery perpetual in the states where it are the existed, unless they even the pit of their own volition. So you see a Seismic Shift in those four years. With the word began, there was a Large Coalition of northerners and make it very clear that they see the potential for the war to turn into an eye slavery war, and if it does, they would withdraw their support. In july of 1861, there is a resolution passed in congress saying the war is being caught to preserve the union, not to destroy slavery. Johnson is andrew johnson, the only senator from a slave state to remain in congress after his state succeeded. So, early in the war, northerners affirm their food desire to remain this a war solely about union their desire to remain that this was a were solely about union. Emancipation proclamation had not happened yet. It does not come until the nature, but military emancipation stressing a lot earlier than historians gave it credit for. We talked about an interest in monroe were general Benjamin Butler, prewar democrat, not a particularly skilled general, pointed his position because he was a democrat, and lincoln was to build support against democrats in the war effort, he is faced it is a novel situation. There were three enslaved men come into union lines. A colonel comes the next day seeking their return. Butler announces a policy that brands these three enslaved men that come into union lines as contraband of war. It was well articulated it was wellestablished in the laws of warfare that a nation at war had the ability and could legally seize enemy property in service of the wherever. It is not clear how that law applied to slaves. Recognized in the constitution as both persons and property. What butler does is he plays with this legal claim that slaveowners make to property in the enslaved human beings they own to say this as contraband of war, and were seizing it. We are seizing the contraband of war like any other kind of confederate material they may see. He refuses to return these men. Annexing he does is right back to washington until secretary of war Simon Cameron what he has done and asked for instructions. When the captain met a few days later, there is no record of lincoln making a positive statement on this policy, which lincoln jokingly called butlers fugitive slave law. That is the only thing we have about making commenting on this directly, but he did not resend it. He loves his policy to stand. What happens from may forward is there is a flood of runaway slaves coming into butlers lines in virginia. And this is happening elsewhere. One of the things slaves understand across the south is whatever might be set in the north about the conservative purposes of the war, and this war is only about union, they understand that if these troops in blue marching south are fighting slaveholders, these troops in blue are their allies, and good things could happen in future lines of this army wearing blue. Slaves run away at the first opportunity and continuing make an issue of themselves. They continue to be an issue throughout the summer. Around the same time during the resolution is getting through congress, the First Military action of the war happens, the first battle of bull run. About 4000 casualties. That is the skirmish as compared to what came later, but it is the first real significant bloodshed of the war. In the aftermath of bull run, the debate over union policy towards slavery takes a bit of a shift. With significant bloodshed, you see for the first time, northerners who had been somewhat conservative on the slavery question willing to go a bit further in making the war about slavery than they had been prior to the outbreak of hostilities. In august of 1861, you get this first confiscation act, which legalizes the confiscation of slaves whose masters allow them to work to be used in service to the confederate war effort. That means if they are working on confederate fortifications, digging trenches, if they are serving as cooks, and they come into union lines, they can legally be confiscated. Now, that policy was a radical break with federal policy towards slavery in and of itself. But behind the scenes, Simon Cameron was still engaging in correspondence with Benjamin Butler over this issue of fugitives continually coming into butlers lines. Butlers question had evolved. Ok, i got the authority not to return slaves. Now, what is their future condition . They no longer owe service. They are no longer owned by their former masters. Does that mean they are free . Are they of the federal government . What is the policy here . And cameron writes back and tells butler not to make any distinctions about whether or not that slaves were coming into his lines were enslaved to loyal or disloyal masters. He tells butler to keep records of these slaves that come in to his lines so that any loyal slave owners who lose their does slaves through this policy may become the fate of postwar. But he does not save you need to figure out who is playing a loyal master versus a disloyal master because plays because slaves quickly figure out the dynamic of union antislavery policy. And all slave sex and the union lines are saying they are fleeing disloyal masters and all slaves fleeing to the union lines are saying they are fleeing disloyal masters. What cameron is doing is introducing a doctrine of emancipation taking the refugees coming into the lines and are not returning them. You are that allowed to entice slaves to run away. This is not a proclamation of general emancipation. That comes later. This is military emancipation that is happening from august of 1861 forward. Lincoln does hang back from an open embrace. This does not mean the emancipation proclamation just formalized policy already in place. The emancipation proclamation still is a big shift in union wartime policy toward slavery. Here is an open embrace a military emancipation as a means of winning the war. Right . In the interim between august 1861 period in september of 1862, when he announces the emancipation proclamation, he is criticized up and down by leading radical republicans, abolitionists, black leaders like Frederick Douglass, for not doing enough to emancipate and make more on slavery as a means of defeating the confederacy. One thing about this emancipation policy it really hinges on this communication between butler will very soon you generals and federal officials, and it is happening on the front lines. So, if you are not privy to this communication, or if you are on the front lines watching this happen, it is easy to miss how emancipation earlier in the war is part of the union were efforts. Ok . Lincoln does some things from 1861 into 1862 that suggest conservatism on the slavery question. Two of lincolns generals, fremont anything 61 and david hunter on the midatlantic coast of South Carolina and georgia in 1862 for claim emancipation in their does department and we can resend it both orders. That is often taken as lincolns conservatism on the slavery question. Black leaders, abolitionists Oliver Lincoln for doing this. Why is emancipation is happening at union army camps, wise lincoln resending these orders . He did not believe military commanders have the authority to issue an order that had the effect of determining the longterm ownership of property. Longterm, whether or not Property Rights would be voided. Congress might have had authority in the commanderinchief might have that authority, but a general, john see free modern david hunter, did not have that authority john c. Fremont and david hunter, did not have that authority. For one thing, he has to keep his coalition together. In the aftermath of fort sumter, lincoln enjoys broad support from basically all segments of northern society. Democrats are on board and republicans are on board with the war effort. But again, quickly, it becomes clear that there are many particularly democrats are republican to start saying, if this were becomes about antislavery, i will withdraw my support from the war. I no longer stand behind the government. There is a phrase that encapsulates this viewpoint. These were northerners fighting for the union as it was in the constitution as it is. They want to restore the prewar union. They are ok with that aim of federal war policy, but they do not want to see the war used to create a fundamental constitutional revolution in American Life. Lincoln has to worry about these people who are for the unit as it was, and a constitution as is. One of the things that happens in 1862 moving for, as a union comes to embrace method patient has wartime policy, the democratic opposition to the northern war effort becomes much louder. Most grammatically, symbolized by the draft rise in new york of 1863. But there is a widespread opposition to lincoln as emancipation more and more becomes policy. Lincoln also has to worry about the border states. There were four slave states in the United States that remain within United States do not succeed with the confederacy maryland, missouri, kentucky, and delaware. And lincoln has to worry that if he takes too big of an action against slavery directly, one or more of these states might secede and the confederacy. And lincoln kentucky in maryland if they were to go for the confederacy, prove hugely logistically challenging for the union war effort. D. C. Would fall overnight, maryland went into the confederacy in all likelihood. This is a very significant worry for lincoln. Some of his critics said he was so worried about being president of kentucky that he did not have time to be president of the United States because he was so worried about how his policies would play in kentucky for the first several years of the war. The border states are a concern for lincoln as well. Another, i think, another factor that precluded some americans from seeing how quickly the war the union was imris emancipation was the fact that the policy announced by Simon Cameron and his correspondence from Benjamin Butler was coming from d. C. It was brittle over the United States. Cameron does not have it was spread all over the United States. Officials in d. C. Dont have control over people in the field. But everyone is following the orders. Some were returning slaves on a fugitive slaves to their masters when masters came to union army camps. William comes to sherman for a while. There is that gap between policy and enforcement going on as well. If you look at the black press, one of the things that it is filled with in 1861 and 1862 are outraged stories that leaked out of union army camps about fugitive slaves being returned to their masters. There are some pieces of federal policy that seem to indicate conservatism on slavery. It at the same time, republicans in 1862 are pressing home and antislavery agenda. D. C. Emancipation happens in the spring of 1862. And lincoln starts to work on a plan to start emancipation a process of gradual emancipation in the border states. Why is lincoln so concerned with the border states . Doesnt it seem like it would push them into the confederacy . What is he thinking there . One of lincolns fears about the confederacy was that confederates were kept in the field by the hope that these slave states in the union would eventually see the error of their ways and secede and run the confederacy. Lincoln believes that if emancipation started to happen, even in the really, really gradually in the states i can touch your maryland, it would send a message gradually in the states like kentucky or maryland, it would send a message that you are doomed and you should give up. Gradual emancipation started in the border states. In a message to congress in march of 1862, lincoln talks about the federal government being willing to give Financial Support to any state that voluntarily started a process of gradual emancipation, and also talked about federal funding colonization, that of deportation of slaves emancipated under a policy of gradual emancipation. In 1861 into 1862, he also started to work on a plan for emancipation gradual emancipation in delaware that would get through the delaware legislature. He had a few allies in delaware politics, it was ultimately not able to get that through the delaware legislature. He also famously in 1862 called border state congressman together at the white house and made a speech where he told them basically that you need to get on board with the process yourself. If you control the process yourself, you can control how quickly it happens and you can get compensation if you leave this all to chance in the fortunes of war, there is no telling what might happen. Lincoln on a few fronts is trying to push for emancipation in the border states. In 1861, 1852 and hes totally frustrated in his efforts. He finds very little support for sympathy in the border states for this. It had a big effect on lincoln and his perception of what would have to be done about slavery. One of the ideas behind going at delaware is that delaware is basically a slave state in name only anyway by 1861. The vast majority of africanamerican in delaware are already free. There are only a couple thousand phase in delaware anyway. If slavery ends in a gradual way, there would be no social revolution or a significant social of people. His very is that it should be easy to get through gradual emancipation in delaware. This would be kind of entering wedge to show other slave states that emancipation wont be this disaster and it can work. And delaware, if anything, the support for slavery grew. Delaware stakeholders got more jealous thinking about emancipation. And slavery in delaware outlasted the war. It did not die when it was ratified. One of the theories about republicans had about slavery is that it was weak and would collapse easily its it would collapse of its own internal weaknesses if it received outside pressure. This emancipation he is talking about, it would have taken decades. It is one key piece of why lincoln is willing to, in september of 1862, take the union into a more open embrace of emancipation. The war goes on longer than most americans on either side of the war anticipated it would. That first skirmish at bull run, that is just the beginning. You see shallow or manassas where the schedule to you see shiloh and manassas where the casualties were huge. He said that one big victory would have ended the war but after shiloh i realize only one big conquest would in the war. At the expense of men and resources of money, the war effort drives many northerners to be able to embrace more antisable more radical antislavery measures. Northerners marching south sees how much slavery helps to the confederate war effort function. Slave laborers are the agricultural laboring force that feed the south and feed southern armies and allow such a High Percentage of white southern manpower of military age to be off fighting in the first place. Slightly slavery is clearly the most important crop prop to the confederate war effort. Even those northerners who are as racist as anyone else was in the 1860s, they see the logic of emancipation can in the war can end the war. You have northerners who going to the south and see slavery in its daily operation. See fugitive slave interunion army camps and see than the emtnter union army camps and be sent back. One thing Union Soldiers do is write home all the time, whenever they can and do transmit their changing perceptions of the war to the homefront. Lincoln and republican officials in d. C. Are getting a steady stream of pressure from the army, from certain segments of the army to do war against slavery and that pressure increasingly comes from northern civilians as well. There are plenty in the north who had the exact opposite the and said this should not be a war about slavery at all. Lincoln is getting pressure from both sides. It is in july of 1862 that he announces that he has decided to issue a emancipation proclamation. July of 1862 it is not until september that lincoln actually issues the emancipation proclamation. Does anyone remember why he waits . He needs a victory first. Why . He is worried that france and england will accept the confederacy. The war is going badly in september 1862. He gets it by for that if you emancipate now, you will be read as a last act of a desperate government and it might inspire french or british intervention in the war. [indiscernible] wasnt there a debate that in order to come up to the disagreement maximo was asking about debating in congress on the 13th amendment. Did you ever question . [indiscernible] the momentum of that and the introduction of the emancipation proclamation. Northerners are more likely to react positive after a victory. Antietam in september of 1862, it provides lincoln the victory he needs. To step back for a second in the timeline, antietam is a crucial turning point in the civil war. When George Mcclellan is so close to richmond that he can hear the bells chiming about six miles outside of richmond in the spring of 1862. It looks like the war is going to be over, so much is that the union suspends recruiting. Robert e. Lee takes over the army of Northern Virginia and not mcclellan back and to the war and the war goes on. It seems like the war is about to be over, some northerners thinking about what we are going to do after the war ends and then do nothing so dramatically reversed that by september of 1862, not only is the war over, but robert e. Lee is driving into maryland. That shift in morale is the crucial turning point. If the war had ended at that point in september 1862, you would not see the end of slavery as a result of the civil war. The emancipation proclamation happened in september of 1862. What it said to be southerners is you have 100 days until the end of the year to resume your allegiance to the United States or any areas in rebellion on january 1, 1863 or any slave living in rebellion inon january 1, 1863, will be freed. Theres speculation in the months in between the announcement of this policy and the emancipation proclamations actual Effective Date where theres speculation about whether or not lincoln is going to go through this. Speculation both on the southern and northern side. Obviously lincoln does issue his emancipation proclamation. And it ended slavery well here is a map. As you can see, it covers most of the confederacy. It does not cover the border states and it does not cover certain parts of virginia and louisiana. The emancipation proclamation is one of the most important, it is the most important executive order in American History. It is also one of the most misunderstood moments in American History or misunderstood acts because sometimes you hear the emancipation proclamation ended slavery in the United States at the stroke of a pen and then you hear that the emancipation proclamation did not free anybody at the sweep of a pen. The emancipation proclamation is a wartime measure and it acts against states that are in rebellion. States where there are flavors slavers who have violated their Property Rights by measure of rebellion against federal authority. You see lincoln criticized for leaving out the border states. If he is so antislavery, why did he let loyal slaveowners own their slaves. This is a legal document and it is justified by legal war powers. He cannot justify this policy in kentucky, missouri, delaware and maryland because of the states of not seceded. Why louisiana . They were parts of the confederacy that had come under they had restored some semblance of civil government loyal to the United States. And there were places in the Mississippi Valley that it come under Union Occupation that had not restored civil government and in those parts of the confederacy, slaves are free. There are probably 50,000 slaves they go free immediately under the terms of the emancipation proclamation and lincoln has to worry. The emancipation proclamation is also criticized for being dry and legalistic. It is basically. Richard hofstetter, a famous historian has this famous phrase that the emancipation proclamation has all the moral grandeur of a bill of lating. A bill of lading is an old term for the list of goods that are going to be on a ship coming into port. Lincoln does urge at the urging of his secretary, a line about this being an act of justice. This is a legal document. Lincoln have to worry how this will play in court. Lincoln assumes the Supreme Court will eventually roll on the emancipation proclamation and he knows he is playing somewhat fast and loose with the constitution in the assumption of the war powers we talked about. He knows also that roger tawney is sitting on the court. He tries to write it in the most lawlike way he can. One of the reasons he pushes for the 13th amendment is is that this could be vulnerable to be overturned postwar and slaves better freed under the proclamation might be returned to slavery. Key phrases it so you can get himself the best legal cover that he can. The other thing you hear about the emancipation proclamation is that we cannot lincoln only freeze of the slaves he does not have only frees the slaves he does not have the power to flee. The slaves he promises to free are behind enemy lines in 1863. They are not going to be affected on that day. You can kind of say the same thing about the declaration of independence in 1776. Declare independence all you want, if you do not defeat the british army, you are still part of the british empire. For lincoln, emancipation proclamation clarifies and for americans on both sides of the work, the emancipation proclamation clarifies the terms of the war and makes it clear what the likely result of a Union Victory will be. It will be the fundamental reordering of Southern Society and it will be the death of slavery. It will happen sooner rather than later if the union wins. On both sides of the conflict, we see a hardening of resolve because although there are these exemptions, the border states and these areas in the confederacy that are exempted, both americans are savvy enough to realize where things are heading antislavery dive in georgia if slavery doesies in georgia, alabama and mississippi, it is unlikely it will continue in this border region of the United States. Slavery is at stake during the war. The emancipation proclamation is a turning point in several ways. It openly invites black enlistment. Black service has been happening in some small ways already but this is an open announcement of a black service as policy and the historian barbara fields has a wonderful line, the emancipation proclamation is as good as the army moving forward in forcing it. It is said to black men that if they put their bodies on the line, they have the nerve to believe in it. Hundreds of thousands of black men showed they had the nerve to believe in it. 200,000 fall for the union over the course of the civil war. Their service came at a crucial time when white recruiting was falling off and it may well have met, this black infusion of manpower into the army may well have meant the difference between victory and stalemate. One thing the emancipation proclamation does not do is say anything about colonization. Another blemish on lincolns record and the record of antislavery republicans in general is a this association with colonization. For a long time in lincolns life, he was aces your believer in colonization he was a sincere believer in colonization. The necessary adjunct of emancipation for many white americans was colonization which is a nice even if a a nice euphemism that masks the policy of deportation and ethnic cleansing. Lincoln in the summer of 1862 is publicly supporting colonization. He calls black leaders from d. C. Into the white house to give them a lecture on the benefit of colonization and as late as december of 1862, he is talking about colonizing slavery slaves freedom under the terms of the proclamation. Some historians argue that lincoln is manipulating northern public opinion. He may have thought colonization with a good answer to the problem of Race Relations in American Society but lincoln was too much of a pragmatist to think you could put the resources together to deport 400 Million People he knows that if he starts talking publicly about colonization like he does in a meeting with black leaders in august of 1862, many racist white northerners will be a lot more likely to accept emancipation with colonization than simply emancipation. The argument is lincoln is trying to soften up northern opinion on emancipation. Is that true . Lincoln does after the january 1, 1853 issuance of the emancipation proclamation, he never mentions colonization in a public speech again. He does give some support to a quite scheme of emancipation and there is question over whether he maintained private support for it but he did not mention it in public, which lends support to the idea he was using colonization as a tool. The emancipation proclamation is a momentous shift in federal policy towards slavery during the war. The emancipation proclamation is not enough by itself to kill slavery, however. Again, by republican orthodoxy, slavery is weak and slavery in wartime will just crumble. This is a weak socioeconomic order and cannot share the pressure of wartime. Republicans go into the war thinking slavery is going to destroy itself. That is clearly not happening as the war moves into 1864. And in the summer of 1864, it looks very unlikely that lincoln is going to be reelected because union offenses in both the eastern and western theaters of the war had installed and with had stalled and with casualties rising beyond what southerners and northerners had gotten used to, there are many calling for a cessation of hostilities and peace talks with the confederacy. It is the fall of atlanta in september of 1854 1864 that saved lincoln and allow them to be reelected but there is a moment in the summer of 1864 were lincoln is pretty sure he is going to lose. What are the things he does in the summer of 1864 is called Frederick Douglass to the white house and in a private conversation talks over this momentous scheme to have douglas head a network of recruiters or messengers, black men whose job it would be to go into the south, behind confederate lines and give news of the emancipation proclamation to slaves far from the scenes of battle and far from the lines of the union army and encourage them to make for federal lines, to run away. In 1864, Abraham Lincoln talking over a plan of mass slave runoffs that is not so dissimilar with what Frederick Douglass had talked about. Lincoln is thinking he is going to live in 1864 and he sees most slaves remain enslaved. Upwards of 500,000 enslaved men and women run away to union lines during the war but the vast majority remained behind confederate lines. The vast majority did not come within union lines as they extended south. Lincoln sees the emancipation proclamation is not going to be enough and even after atlanta falls, his political fortunes change and it becomes clear that is going to be reelected, lincoln is still worried about the fate of slavery postwar. Into early 18641865, it is becoming clear that the war is going to be over pretty soon. Slavery still lives in the United States and that is why you give this push for a 13th amendment. You are also getting a push for state abolition. Lincoln and the republicans are pushing to end slavery any way they can late in the war. Why . Because slavery calls to the war and what good is caused the war and what good is ending the war if youve not got rid of this institution in American Life . They abolished voluntarily in states like maryland. In states like arkansas that come under Union Control and put together loyal governments, abolition happens that way on a state level but there are large swaths of the south that are not covered that, when the war in, that union armies never touched. Slaves in those areas, it is not clear they have been freed under the terms of the emancipation proclamation because they have not come within union lines. Those scenarios to develop are one of the reasons he is for a 13th amendment. It is not ratified until december of 1865 and slavery survive in many parts of the country until that date and the foremost historian on the subject estimates that it may be that more slaves received their freedom in this month, december of 1865, then any one time. Slavery survive the war for a few months. That may seem like a piece of trivia. In historical shorthand, it is perfectly acceptable to say slavery died with the civil war, but i bring this up because it shows the strength of the institution. There is this idea out there, working at the smithsonian, having conversations with people about the civil war, there is an idea that the civil war was not necessary, that slavery was a dying out anyway, that it is incompatible with the modern age or maybe industrial capitalism, it would have just died had these abolitionist held back for a while. How long it wouldve taken to die, knowing get specific but the idea was that slavery was on its way out and the war was unnecessary, there are a lot of problems with that theory. One of the ways you argue against it is by pointing out how strong slavery is. It takes of this cataclysmic war, this cataclysmic destruction in American History where about 750,000 people died. It takes a fundamental restructuring of the constitution my friend who is a war historian has this great phrase, the reconstitution of the constitution to kill slavery in the United States and is still survives the war and that is how strong of an institution it is. In terms of arguing against this idea that slavery was on the way out, first of all there is the assumption that in the years and decades that in this alternate timeline where the civil war does not happen and slavery dies gradually, that the suffering and torture and death of black lives under slavery would be preferable to the deaths of so many white soldiers in the civil war. I think that is a problem. Another problem with that theory is history shows that slavery is adaptable as an institution. Slavery has not gone away. Slavery has proven present adaptable to industrial capitalism. If you were in richmond in the civil war, you would of seen slaves working making cannonballs. You saw slavery used in regimes like the nazis and the soviets, there are millions of slaves in the world today. Their slavery does not look like the antebellum United States and some of it does. Some of it is sex slavery and some of it is mineral and when we talk about the civil war having been unnecessary and suggestive slavery would have died gradually, we are arguing against what history tells us