Some more screenshots (in Spanish on the Spanish forum)

[unmerged(10416)]

Oos :wacko:
I had looked on the main forum page if there was already a thread about it, but I must have overlooked it.

 

[Syt]

Originally posted by Karl Martell
Oos :wacko:
I had looked on the main forum page if there was already a thread about it, but I must have overlooked it.

No worries.

 

[unmerged(10416)]

Originally posted by Penultimate
Two questions:

1. How did the confederates get Oklahoma?

From what I've gathered, Oklahoma was not a state but an Indian Territory back then, and the Indians were on the southern side. I think it was in part because they loathed the federal government and in part because they had slaves, too. (Not black slaves but other Indians) Since there really weren't that many Indians, and both sides had moved the vast majority of their forces east of the Mississippi, there was not that much action between Federals/CSA/Indians.

After the ACW the US Army stomped most of the Indian tribes. (the ones that had exploited the war situation and raided all over the frontier)

 

[Spruce]

Originally posted by Karl Martell
From what I've gathered, Oklahoma was not a state but an Indian Territory back then, and the Indians were on the southern side. I think it was in part because they loathed the federal government and in part because they had slaves, too. (Not black slaves but other Indians) Since there really weren't that many Indians, and both sides had moved the vast majority of their forces east of the Mississippi, there was not that much action between Federals/CSA/Indians.

After the ACW the US Army stomped most of the Indian tribes. (the ones that had exploited the war situation and raided all over the frontier)

There were 2 groups in the indian camp. The pro-csa and pro-federalists. The latter mainly due to the fact that they were harassed by the former. The pro-csa faction was bigger i guess...

The pro-csa indians either had slaves or were following the confederate cause because they were promised to get their old lands back - after the war...

there were some campaigns in the Indian territory but of not much importance - mostly to drive away the unionists,

 

[unmerged(7365)]

Ok was not part of the Confederacy historically. That is why it looked so odd on the screenie.

 

[Spruce]

Originally posted by Penultimate
Ok was not part of the Confederacy historically. That is why it looked so odd on the screenie.

well, it can be considered as a part of the confederacy because leaving it with the Union is also absurd and a neutral camp is also unlikely,

was Kentucky neutral?

 

[Dark Knight]

Originally posted by Penultimate
Ok was not part of the Confederacy historically. That is why it looked so odd on the screenie.

It was a "reservation" for Indians, and the Indian tribes living there were divided between which side to support, resulting in the outbreak of internal warfare.

 

[Demetrios]

Originally posted by Spruce
was Kentucky neutral?

For about 5 months (April - August 1861). However, the state was heavily Unionist (as elections during the summer of 1861 showed), and as soon as a choice between the two sides had to be made, the state quickly alligned with the North. The only reason the state even went neutral is because the Governor was just about alone in his wish to lead the state into the CSA, and declaring the state neutral was the best he could do...

 

[unmerged(11457)]

hmm... i wonder if the french and german forums have screenies too...

 

[Earl Uhtred]

Originally posted by Demetrios
The only reason the state even went neutral is because the Governor was just about alone in his wish to lead the state into the CSA, and declaring the state neutral was the best he could do...

Smart lad, a neutral Kentucky was probably worth more to the CSA than a rebel one. It blocked the federales from any early push southwards.