I posed a question yesterday…
But, how far back, before the 1850s, is it necessary to take such a study?
Of course, I meant, specifically… how the varying sentiments during the Civil War era South came to be… and how they might be traceable to earlier points in time.
Again, as one who concentrates heavily on the Shenandoah Valley, I look to the cultural differences that existed in the same area… which had existed for many, many years leading up to the 1850s. In thinking about this, I also pose another question…
Was there any carry-over of the pre-colonial mindset of the German-Swiss, even as far removed as the Civil War era?
I have a theory, but it’s one that I’m still testing.
One of the most simple features that suggest that there might be influence is the fact that there were still people of German-Swiss descent in the Shenandoah Valley, speaking and writing in German… well into the middle 19th century. To cling to that much suggests that some may have clung to even more. Was it because of religion that these folks held onto vestiges of the old world? Perhaps… and in some, it may have been more strong in some than others.
I should be clear, however, that… by the time of the Civil War, the length of time for any influences left over from pre-colonial German immigrants equated to an average of between 100-120 years. German-Swiss immigrants began pouring into the Shenandoah Valley, mostly from Pennsylvania (…and also from the descendants of Germanna Colony settlers, just across the Blue Ridge) as early as the 1720s, but there seems to have been a particularly strong surge between the 1730s and 1750s. So, again, we’re dealing with cultural influences that were able to carry over for about a hundred years.
I suggest that the influence varied… stronger in some than in others, and this was, I believe, based very strongly on religion.
What should be obvious in this is that there was a religious-based disdain for the institution of slavery. It even impacted the Hebron congregation, in the early 1700s, with Rev. Klug (who actually succeeded my ancestor, Rev. John Casper Stoever, after Stoever’s death on the voyage back from Germany) and his decision to go against the ideology of Halle (he appears to have been one of the very first who expanded his personal belief in “property” and began traveling down the path of slave ownership… I should write a post about this at some not-to-distant point). Granted, Halle’s influence was on the Lutherans, but there was similar influence in other religious practices in the Valley… and most certainly in those of the Brethren ideology.
But the disdain for slavery wasn’t the only religious-based influence projected as far forward as the Civil War era. There was also an ideology that was centered on expectations of government and allegiance. I may tap into this further in another post within the week.
So, again… how far back do we have to go to begin tracing the factors that influenced decisions regarding Civil War sentiment in the South?
It depends on where one might be focusing, within the South… and what may have trickled down over the years within that specific area… and, in some cases… even traceable to the cultural mindset of immigrant ancestors. I’ll also add that it is, in the case of some of German ancestry, taking in consideration the way in which they adopted the practice of slave-holding… or accepted the culture that centered on slave-holding… how they had become Anglicized, and adopted practices that modified the traceable influences of their ancestors before them.
Cenantua's Blog 
Vince
September 23, 2012
Very interesting questions. Some questions embedded within those that come to mind (and probably have received scholarly treatment) are:
1) What was the relationship between Shenandoah Valley Lutheran churches and the seminary at Gettysburg, which was probably the best supply of pastors in the decades leading up to the war but was also headed by the abolitionist Samuel Simon Schmucker?
2) During the 1850s, the Lutheran Church in America faced its own Civil War of sorts between Old Lutherans who advocated strict adherence to the Lutheran Confession and American Lutherans who were leading the church toward a more generic and evangelical Lutheranism that emphasized individual piety. If I recall correctly, most Southerners tended to be pietists, as well as the most ardent abolitionists, while the Pennsylvania Ministerium led the confessionalist charge. It would be interesting to know how this debate played out in the Shenandoah Valley, and how slavery entered into discussions.
With that said, I think there’s an economic and cultural aversion to slavery that Germans tended to display that might have as much if not more of an impact on feelings towards slavery than religion. I’m not sure how to articulate this, but it’s some combination of a work ethic that extended to the wealthy and an eagerness to participate in small-scale capitalist enterprises.
Finally and self-promotionally, here’s a list of a couple posts I’ve made about the Civil War experiences of Trinity Lutheran Church, Lancaster, a church that John Casper Stoever, Jr., founded (or at least started keeping records for) 150 years before the war, that highlight some of the issues facing the Lutheran Church nationally:
http://www.lancasteratwar.com/2012/05/troublous-times-trinity-lutheran-church.html
Robert Moore
September 24, 2012
Vince,
You raise some excellent points.
For one, I didn’t consider the fact that Lutheran pastors had cycled through the seminary in Gettysburg… headed by an abolitionist. That merits futher consideration.
As a “bigger picture”, I’m going to need to look more closley at those posts you mention. While most of my work focuses on the Shenandoah Valley, I do take into account a very parallel culture that existed in the lower Cumberland Valley… in Washington County, Maryland. So, it would be interesting to look at Lutheranism and its influences in southern PA.
Maybe I need to look at your posts before I ask, but do you see clear differences in the Lutheran Confession crowd and American Lutherans, when it comes to sentiments regarding the war? I’m not sure that I see Southern pietist Lutherans as being staunch abolitionists. Funny thing is, my Moore kin, in western Maryland… were Scots descended, but assimilated into a Lutheran Evanglical church, and were Southern Unionists. On the other hand, I have other ancestors, here in the Shenandoah, who were more of the traditional variety Lutherans, and were Confederate. Then again, within these same families in the Valley, slave ownership wasn’t high… and there were rifts between fathers and sons when it came to the matter of secession and embracing the Confederacy.
Vince
September 24, 2012
“If I recall correctly, most Southerners tended to be pietists, as well as the most ardent abolitionists, while the Pennsylvania Ministerium led the confessionalist charge.”
I apologize for this awkwardly constructed sentence. What I meant to say was that the pietist camp tended to include both the most ardent pro- and anti-slavery factions within Lutheranism while the confessionalists tended to be more moderate on slavery. In essence, the Lutheran Church faced two civil wars simultaneously (the nation’s and its own over radically different visions of the church), so it’s interesting to see who aligned with whom.
What we now think of as “traditional” Lutherans (liturgy, gowns, Augsburg Confession, etc.) is mostly a product of the 1850s and a revolt by the younger generation against an older generation headed by Samuel Simon Schmucker. I think Washington County, Maryland, was a hotbed of activity for Schmucker and the pietist movement in the 1820s-1840s. Their newspaper was the Lutheran Observer, which was then in Baltimore.
So, the interesting question is how far did pietist influences extend up the Valley? Did Schmucker’s abolitionism leave a mark? Did they adopt pro-slavery versions of pietist practices? Did they jump onto the confessionalist movement led by Pennsylvanians in the 1850s, who often weren’t as interested in tackling slavery as a moral issue?
Robert Moore
September 24, 2012
Thanks for the clarification. That makes sense now.
I would agree with you regarding Schmucker’s influence in Washington County. Kathleen Ernst offers insight into this through her book, Too Afraid to Cry.
It will take a bit more digging, however, regarding the Valley. One of the more interesting factors, if included in the muster rolls, would have been to which church each soldier belonged! The Lutheran ministers in the Valley, however, are easier to trace and might provide a little more clarity in the pursuit of more information.
I think this will prove to be an interesting study.
Robert Moore
September 26, 2012
Vince,
I tapped into my resources regarding Lutherans in Virginia, and I’ve come up with some interesting data on Schmucker in the Valley. For one, it seems odd that most online resources don’t mention the fact that he was at the pulpit of several Lutheran churches in the Valley in the 1820s. His connections with the Valley, however, do not end there. I hope to post something this week. Thanks much for the tip… though I haven’t really looked into his potential impact in later Valley Lutheran clergy in the years after his time in the Valley, and from his term while at the head of the Seminary in Gettysburg.
Vince
September 26, 2012
Excellent. I’ll be interested in seeing what you’ve found. I think I saw something about Schmucker’s wife being from around Winchester and that her family owned slaves, but I’m guessing you’ll be putting that into context.
Anyway, I wouldn’t be surprised if being Lutheran in the Shenandoah Valley has no correlation to opinions about the Confederacy. After all, the Lutheran Church was one of the few (the only?) to not split over slavery before the war and for better or worse has generally been slower in addressing social issues (see Mark Noll’s essay, “The Lutheran Difference”:)
http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft9202/articles/noll.html
However, it would be very interesting if continued contact with Gettysburg Seminary and Schmucker would have influenced opinions on the Confederacy, at least anecdotally, which could indicate one way that the Valley’s German heritage resulted in a decreased level of support for the Confederacy.
Robert Moore
September 26, 2012
I also found… it seems… that he shifted slightly in his stand on abolition, going from a somewhat moderate stance to one that was clearly more determined. Have you found the same?
Vince
September 26, 2012
I don’t know Schmucker’s biography in enough detail to say anything intelligent. My recent reading has mostly been on the pietism vs. confessionalism debate on the eve of the war.
By the way, I see Stephen Longenecker’s _Shenandoah Religion_ talks briefly about the theological controversy in the Lutheran Church:
http://books.google.com/books?id=WyfKJEVRwYoC&lpg=PA202&ots=JckKsuy8Vc&dq=shenandoah%20religion%20schmucker&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q=schmucker&f=false
Longenecker basically says that the Valley Lutherans were divided among pietists (aligning with the Synod of MD & VA) and confessionalists (aligning with the TN Synod) led by the Henkels.
My question, then, is whether these divisions are correlated with differences of opinion on slavery and the Confederacy. In particular, might we see dissent coming from Valley pastors/churches who affiliated with the Synod of MD & VA, for whom Schmucker was the strongest voice on the pietist/confessionalist debate? Or did they just take Schmucker’s leadership on church matters but disregard anything he said about slavery?
mib8
September 23, 2012
Hmmm, I recall a discussion with a co-worker from central PA. I’d mentioned to him that there were places in MN and MO and OH where people still held German cultural festivals, and there’s a portion of Cincinnati called Over-the-Rhine (but which includes a little triangle named for one of the cavaliers, Pendleton). He countered that there were big areas in PA where the language primarily spoken in homes was a variant of German (down to about 1.3M in 1990 across the USA according to Brimelow).
David Durant mentioned Germans skilled in mining were brought to Raleigh’s “lost colony” at Roanoke island SE of Norfolk. There was another group of about 150 German construction workers brought in to build Bermuda Hundred, but how many stayed and survived, and how many were shipped back I know not. B. Bailyn and others mention 40 iron-workers from Nassau-Siegen on the Rhine brought to Germanna around 1714.
But the original European settlers in the Shenandoah Valley were the von Swearingen family and Hans Justus Heydt/Yost Hite (which got mangled and more or less re-standardized — as much as any names are — as Hite) who brought along his children including adult children and their spouses and children in the winter of 1730-1731, while the Scots-Irish followed a bit after, some who had already temporarily settled in PA, and then there were the Schwyzzer-Deutsch descended from Hans Graf/Groff/Grubb/Grove, who may have been Swiss who settled all across northern VA and south-central and western PA.
Even by 1685, William Penn wrote of the diversity of settlers in/near Philadelphia. Thomas Sowell mentions 5K to 12K Hessian troops (leased out by their baron rather than volunteers) becoming citizens during and after the Revolution, but that from the Revolution until 1828 immigration from German lands was less than 1K per year (for comparison, less than current immigration from India), and James Truslow Adams mentioned Jefferson’s generous treatment of German POWs held near Monticello.
Aargh, I’m not finding it in my notes, but there was a series of sociology journal articles, written, as I recall in the 1940s or 1950s, and partially prompted by a local history written by one of their ministers, about a few counties in the NW (I’m thinking WI, MN and/or the Dakotas) where people were still farming, marrying, speaking, worshipping the way they had when they immigrated from Germany, and keeping themselves mostly to themselves… and the conflicts as others pushed for them to assimilate. (It could be that, rather than violate copyright, because it was tempting to transcribe half a dozen pages into my notes, I merely snagged the source citation into my “to read” list and have nor lost it, but as I recall, I ran across it in Jon Gjerde 1998 _Major Problems in American Immigration and Ethnic History_.)
Robert Moore
September 24, 2012
My hesitation about cultural festivals is based on whether or not most of the people involved participate as a long-standing family tradition, going back a century or more… or if they were/are trying to re-identify with cultural roots, and yet have no genuine “memory” of that identity to culture. The same goes with those of Scots heritage, whereby the attempt to re-identify is much greater than the traditional carry-down.
Regarding early German-Swiss settlers of the Valley being of the “von Swearingen… and Heydt/Hite” varieties… not entirely true about the original settlers of the Valley, and the Rockingham County Miller family (often heralded as the first documented Germannic settler in the Valley) is an a good example of the more modest class. I’ve found even more who might even be considered among an even more struggling class of immigrants. They were not all of the well-to-do class.
The settlers of the original Germanna colony numbered 40, but there were more that followed later. There are a number of works that detail the growth of the Germanna groups. Many remained in the Madison-Rappahannock county area, but as seen in the surname traces, the overflow into the Valley proved to be significant.
People of Hessian descent are still in the Valley… some came from the Convention Army (post-Saratoga surrendered), which was held for a while at Charlottesville; others came in by other means during the war (it’s not difficult to find a stone house, here and there… from Frederick County up to Augusta County, built by Hessian POWs). The assimilation into this area was natural considering the large number of German speaking people already here.
The heavist German-Swiss area of the Valley (and likely the heaviest populated from the straming flow, down from Pennsylvania) was the central Valley, encompassing what is now Shenandoah, Page, and Rockingham counties (Rockingham also showed something that might have been culturally influenced in its stronger support of Stephen A. Douglas over John Breckinridge). Frederick County had a very interesting cultural blend (especially with the added element of the Quakers), and those of German descent were part of it. There were even some from the Germanna colonies who found there way to Frederick first, and then made their way further up the Valley, toward area that were more heavily settled with those of German and Swiss descent. There were offshoots in Augusta County, but that was more heavily Scots-Irish. Clarke County is the high-end variable in the Valley, as it was, in many ways, an extension of Tidewater Virginia. I’ve done too little with Warren County to speak confidently about it.
The question, however, centers on what was at the core of the culture, in these German-Swiss (and others, such as in the Quakers), which found a home in the ideology of people in the Valley even to the point of the Civil War. Though based initially on the mere continued use of the German language, well into the mid-19th century, my argument is that other things, within the ideology of descendants here, were also passed down through the generations… and it all may have been better preserved because of 1) the geography (thanks to the natural boundary of the Blue Ridge, and the agricultural differences with the Tidewater), and 2) religious influence that was, because of a very strong Germannic-rooted folks that settled here, often heavily influenced by early Lutheran-type doctrine.
I’d also add that religion may have influenced agricultural practices here (both, in what was grown and the manpower behind cultivation).
Jim Schmidt
September 28, 2012
Robert – Yet another excellent post with comments that are every bit as interesting and informative as the post itself! I found this esecially interesting because it comes closer to the non-native Unionism of German Texans that we discussed offline in relation to my looking at dissent in Galveston before and during the Civil War. While there didn;t seem to be any church-related schisms in Galveston, there certainly were in Austin, TX. Many thanks to everyone who contributed to this thread.
Robert Moore
September 28, 2012
Thanks again, Jim! The entire Germans in pre-war Texas thing is an interesting study, both from the relatively recent (at the time) immigration pattern, and the Unionist sentiment. I wonder how the different German (or German-descent) communities varied throughout the South.
Vince
September 28, 2012
Stepping back, I wanted to ask another question: did Shenandoah Valley residents with (non-Anabaptist) German heritage exhibit roughly the same or noticeably less support for slavery or for the Confederacy compared to the rest of the population?
I assumed that you wrote your post after concluding that there was noticeably less support among the Germans. Is that correct?
Robert Moore
September 28, 2012
The Brethren in the Valley were clearly reluctant at supporting the Confederacy. Search my Southern Unionists Chronicles blog for a post I wrote about Elder John Kline. There are some great details about the reasoning. I would attach a link, but I’m not on a computer right now. Let me know if you can’t find it.
Robert Moore
September 28, 2012
If you’re ever in the Valley, there are two museums that address the Anabaptist in the war. One is nearby, in Winchester. Of course, the one in Rockingham County is the most specific on the matter.
Robert Moore
September 28, 2012
Forgot to add… I wrote the post with the thought that the Anabaptist lack of support toward the Confederacy was a given. Based on some details of doctrine in the 1700s, I suspected there might be rifts among the Lutherans. I especially suspect family rifts, between older and younger family members.
Robert Moore
September 29, 2012
Just in case, the link to my post about Elder John Kline.
Vince
September 29, 2012
Thank you for the suggestions, but I was actually asking about the Germans who were not Anabaptists, as I’ve read some on the Brethren and Mennonites in the Valley. In particular, the loyalties of Lutherans who emigrated through Pennsylvania a few generations prior to the war would be interesting to track to see if they differed from the population at large. Your hunch about the Lutherans and generational differences would be interesting to track in more detail.
Robert Moore
September 29, 2012
Oh, sorry… my mistake. I probably shouldn’t have answered while out and about. Actually, no… I haven’t seen any specifics about non-Anabaptists of German heritage in the Shenandoah Valley. I had thought there might be something for Washington County, Md., in Kathleen Ernst’s book, but no luck. It remains a theory, with a good bit of legwork.
Vince
September 29, 2012
This is from Nashville and not the Shenandoah Valley, but it does give a fantastic example of a Lutheran pastor at odds with his congregation over the war and slavery. Eggers was the lone representative from the South at the May 1862 General Synod Convention and a critical voice in the debate over Slavery. (http://www.lancasteratwar.com/2012/05/lutherans-make-statement-on-war-slavery.html) Actually, you can read the debate over slavery embedded in that page to get a good idea of the range of views held by Lutheran pastors.
I’m not sure where Eggers was trained, but appears to be from Pennsylvania (I think Pittsburgh, where a connection to Schmucker would have been through W A Passavant).
Anyway, Eggers took the successfully passed antislavery resolutions to present them to President Lincoln in person, testifying: “I am the only minister who dares to pray for President Lincoln and the reason I am allowed to do it is because I pray in German and the rebels don’t understand German, but the Lord does.”
From the (cached version of the) 1st Lutheran Church of Nashville’s website, Eggers recounted his time there:
But some days later Fort Summers was attacked and taken by the rebels and the war, the terrible war of four years began. Our meetings became smaller. When it became known that Tennessee would fight on the side of the rebels my best and wisest American friends advised me it would be better for me to go to the North, where I could live safer and have my daily bread. A preacher who would not be with the people would be disliked. I said in my sermons that if it should be the will of God if the Union should be divided then I would have to accept his will as every one else, and to recognize the de facto government as the one who according to God’s will would be the administrator of the law to protect us but I could not even raise the little finger to promote such work. I advised all the young men not to go to the enlisted but better to live in the North during the war. I had the satisfaction to see that among the hundred Germans who went into the Southern army there was at least one who visited regularly our services. He was a catholic who later died in the battle of Perryville, Kentucky. All the other Germans were children of the world. But when I was determined to move away there were some German wives who said, that a good shepherd would not leave the sheep but only the hire one. We all had one opinion and had really nothing to do with the rebellion. We preachers and church members had to stand together and should strengthen and get comfort from Gods word. This changed my mind to stay. The preacher of the Methodist church left, and the remaining group visited with us. The services were numerous, and the time of need tough (sic) to pray and to listen to God’s word. My salary was enough for a living. The 6th of February 1862 Fort Donaldson surrendered and the ten days later Federal troops took Nashville. There were days of looting and terror. One of our friends saved the melodeon which I had given for use in the services of the Courthouse. It would have been destroyed with other valuables….”
I wonder if any Lutheran pastors in the Shenandoah Valley had similar experiences.
Robert Moore
September 30, 2012
That’s great stuff, Vince. The one portion is especially interesting…
“I advised all the young men not to go to the enlisted but better to live in the North during the war. I had the satisfaction to see that among the hundred Germans who went into the Southern army there was at least one who visited regularly our services.”
But with a hundred joining the ranks of gray, it looks like his appeals didn’t reach as many as he would have preferred.
Vince
September 29, 2012
Two sources emphasizing support for Confederacy among Shenandoah Valley Germans, and demonstrating that something similar to your basic question, Robert, has been around for at least 100 years:
Address of John E. Roller, of Harrisonburg, VA, to the Pennsylvania-German Society (1903):
http://archive.org/stream/pennsylvaniagerm21penn#page/n11/mode/2up
The German Element of the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia by John Walter Wayland (1907, see page 148):
http://books.google.com/books?id=micSAAAAYAAJ&lpg=PA114&ots=ml5zHZ93Fp&dq=%22shenandoah%20valley%22%20lutheran%20pastors&pg=PA148#v=snippet&q=%22Civil%20War%22&f=false
Robert Moore
September 30, 2012
I’m familiar with Wayland more so than Roller. As you point out, yes, both shine through as more Confederate-leaning in their writings, but I notice that neither wrote of the Unionists among those of German descent of the Valley. It’s especially interesting to rehash Wayland’s quote that, essentially… these people of German descent didn’t believe in slavery, and therefore had large families and worked their own fields… and it’s true, mostly, but people of German descent did, in fact, own slaves here. I feel he also makes the link to the war, emphasizing that those of German descent in the Valley fought more for their homes than slavery (and Roller appears to do the same)… and I would agree, but it’s not that easily explained away, especially when we can see, in the Valley, others who make a clear and distinctive connection between slavery and support for the Confederacy. One Brethren Southern Unionist, who I featured recently in a post, made it quite clear that support for secession and the Confederacy was clear support for slavery, and that, of course, was part of the reason why it was against Brethren ideology.