To Arms! To Arms! To Arms! For Dixie!- Confederate Steampunk

[Dr. Madd]

What you must realize is that we've been two nations for a long time now. We in the South are a different culture, a different people than those in New England.

[Professor Griffiths]

Madd, your mad! No one will follow this and restart the war!

[Dr. Madd]

Don't be so sure. As time passes and the Yankee government further tromps on the rights of the states and by default the people, the South will rise again and take a few midwestern states with it.

[Mechanic]

And while it may be true (for now) that the British Lion rules the waves , the American Eagle RULES THE SKIES.

Must go check my Mrs Beeton's for eagle recipes....

[Malcom Kane]

It has always confused me, given England's stand on slavery , why England supported the rebels?

[Professor Griffiths]

Umm, England began the slave trade.........

[MinistryOfTruth]

Britain didn't officially support the Confederates, they just "allowed" supplies to be run to them (with semi-covert government funding) so that the war would drag on as long as possible, doing as much damage to the United States as possible and leaving in a much weaker position economically afterwards so that it would not longer be a significant economic competitor to the British Empire.

[Malcom Kane]

Britain didn't officially support the Confederates, they just "allowed" supplies to be run to them (with semi-covert government funding) so that the war would drag on as long as possible, doing as much damage to the United States as possible and leaving in a much weaker position economically afterwards so that it would not longer be a significant economic competitor to the British Empire.

 Well that failed royaly

[Mechanic]

Britain didn't officially support the Confederates, they just "allowed" supplies to be run to them (with semi-covert government funding) so that the war would drag on as long as possible, doing as much damage to the United States as possible and leaving in a much weaker position economically afterwards so that it would not longer be a significant economic competitor to the British Empire.

 Well that failed royaly

Though you can draw analogies with the split in the Roman empire where in the older western portion went down (GB) while the newer eastern section (USA) kept going.

I thought brit support for the rebels was more to do with ensuring the supply of cotton. Of course it also kept yankee attention on the south and not looking north to the Canadas or over seas to more lucrative areas.

[Arvis]

It has always confused me, given England's stand on slavery , why England supported the rebels?

 Oh, I don't know... let's think about it along these lines. Let's suppose that maybe about a hundred years ago you were the world super power and was in the business of taming and colonizing the world to better the life styles of yourself and your people.
 Let's say now that a major part of your revenue decided it wasn't going to be a part of your enterprise anymore and that they would preffer to go "freelance" after all the hard work you put into building up thier end of your map.
 Soon after they thumbed thier nose at you they realize that they too may be well on thier way to world superpowerdom. By this time I'm sure you would be less than happy about the budding new country foolishly squandering away it's virgin resources that you believe should rightfuly belong to you! You certainly have no reason to celebrate July the 4th 1776. As a matter of fact by this time you probably still throw darts at that day on your calender.
 But wait! Now there's drama! That country has begun to bicker amongst it's own people to the point where it may actualy split into two seperate(and much easier to manage) countries!
 Hell, that's good news to you! For a few reasons.

 1. That future rival country has just been divided in two.

 2. Textiles just got a little cheaper since the separatist don't have to charge you for the tariffs imposed on thier goods.

 3. You already have a colony bordering your former holdings, what better than to have a strong ally on the other side of them.

 At this point it would be prudent of you to support your new friends. They are your "friends" after all. The enemy of my enemy is my friend! And they are willing to trade cotton for your surplus rifles!

 As far as slavery as a stand point is concerned. This is 1861. Human rights are not exactly first and formost on everyones agenda. And I wouldn't hand England all the credit for starting slave trade.
 Slave trading dates well before Englands very existance.(nationaly I mean) When you think about it, not having slaves in one form or another is a relatively new concept!
 Besides, many of those "trade ships" were Dutch.

 Do you think the French and the Spanish "loaned" us ships and guns back in the late 1870's because they admired our gumption and our rights to be a country free of tyranical rule and unjust taxation? No, they did it for some of the above stated reasons. They had been at war with England for hundreds of years at one time or another before the U.S. of A. had even been discovered.
 Again, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

 This may be over simplified but it's the way I see it. I have other opinions as well but they can become pretty heated topics so I'll leave'm be.

 Arvis

[Arvis]

And while it may be true (for now) that the British Lion rules the waves , the American Eagle RULES THE SKIES.

Must go check my Mrs Beeton's for eagle recipes....

 Try this one.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIt89l0VZb0

[Dr. Madd]

It has always confused me, given England's stand on slavery , why England supported the rebels?

Because England saw it for what it was... A larger nation, the Union, applying a double standard to the confederacy. The Yankees were bullies who thought that people in northern cities should tell the South what to do. The South wanted leadership who understood the delicacies of Southern society, and Yankess were woefully lacking.

[MinistryOfTruth]

Just thinking, maybe you could do with something like this:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[Dr. Sniderbunk]

HIstorically speaking You are going to have to look at the allies of the confederacy in order to look at where the possibilities of what weapons would be developed after the war.

Now historically the south had the seven American Indian tribes as allies, so the close combat would have been quite devestating with tomahawks, and war clubs still in use.  

While openly, the Brits supported the North, there were a number of Arms dealers (as well as a few ships sold) that dealt and made quite the profit off the war dealing with both sides.

However, considering the industrial power of the north it is not likely (historically) that the south would have developed the steam tank before the north.

Harry Turtle Dove did a wonderful series of books dealing with this topic. He gives a nice alternate reality of what could have happened if the south won the war. (No not talking Guns of the south).  Not going to say how accurate he had it after all he also wrote a series about WWII where Aliens attack Earth during the war, but it does offer a nice read of possibilities.


Disclaimer: I have lived on both sides of the Mason Dixon line so hard to say I am a loyalist, or even a carpet bagger.

[Professor Griffiths]

Just thinking, maybe you could do with something like this:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Even though I'm Union, that is the most awesome thing ever!

[Professor Ross]

Just thinking, maybe you could do with something like this:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Even though I'm Union, that is the most awesome thing ever!

Seconded.

[Dr. Madd]

That rebel has my mutton chops!

[Xenos]

Figured I'd chime in here, since an alternate timeline involving the Second American Revolution HIGHLY interests me (what with writing a story about it and all)...

Being southern born, and related to General Braxton Bragg, I can clearly, and without a doubt say, the South was doomed from the start.  We were outmanned, out gunned, and underfuneded.  Not to mention that Jefferson Davis (rest his soul) was, from all accounts, a VERY incompetant leader.

Now that THATS out of my system, on to all them guns...

Perkins Steam Cannon.  That's a must.  Coilguns have a certain steampunk flare to them if done correctly (I have the plans drawn up around here somewhere, and am working [slow and steady] on making the props).  A nice Navy Cutlass at your side never goes amiss, either.

For some inspiration (and I'm shocked it's not been linked yet), the venerable Mr. PitYak (Studios) designed quite a nice Air Cavalry outfit for the CSA:

AWESOMENESS

Hope that helps you along your way!

[Arvis]

Just thinking, maybe you could do with something like this:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

 His kepi and collar suggest that he's an artillery officer. Odd to me considering his weapon. I would think that this battle harness would be more for "direct fire" rather than "indirect fire" making it better suited to infantry or possible marines. It is my opinion that a soldier in this uniform should be lightly armed (hand held weapon) but standing along side a B.A.C. (big a$$ cannon).
 The only thing I would change on this rig is the color of his head gear and collar from red to light or dark blue for infantry or marines respectively.

 Outside of that, he's bad ass!

 Arvis

[Dr. Madd]

the London Times of 7 Nov 1861 stated: "The contest is really for empire on the side of the North and for independence on that of the South....".

[MinistryOfTruth]

His kepi and collar suggest that he's an artillery officer. Odd to me considering his weapon. I would think that this battle harness would be more for "direct fire" rather than "indirect fire" making it better suited to infantry or possible marines. It is my opinion that a soldier in this uniform should be lightly armed (hand held weapon) but standing along side a B.A.C. (big a$$ cannon).
 The only thing I would change on this rig is the color of his head gear and collar from red to light or dark blue for infantry or marines respectively.

 Outside of that, he's bad ass!

 Arvis

I decided on artillery rather than infantry because it seemed more logical to me to give a piece of heavy, experimental machinery to someone who would at least be more familiar with heavy weaponry than most regular infantrymen.  I see your point, though.  It's always difficult, I suppose, to work out where exactly to place a piece of equipment so radically different from anything that existed at the time.

Also (major uniform nerdery coming up) Confederate marines' uniforms had collars, cuffs and kepis in the same colour as the rest of the uniform, even for officers, not dark blue - the blue used to mark out infantry uniforms varied, with some regiments using light blue and some dark blue.

[Arvis]

I decided on artillery rather than infantry because it seemed more logical to me to give a piece of heavy, experimental machinery to someone who would at least be more familiar with heavy weaponry than most regular infantrymen.  I see your point, though.  It's always difficult, I suppose, to work out where exactly to place a piece of equipment so radically different from anything that existed at the time.

Also (major uniform nerdery coming up) Confederate marines' uniforms had collars, cuffs and kepis in the same colour as the rest of the uniform, even for officers, not dark blue - the blue used to mark out infantry uniforms varied, with some regiments using light blue and some dark blue.

 Ah! I did not realize this rendering was your art work. You have a keen eye for detail and your well versed in the uniform in question as well. Right down to the braids on his kepi. 1st lieutenant I'm guessing, looks like two bars on his collar but it could be three?`
 I've actually been trying to assemble a Steampunk confederate artillery uniform. Unfortunately thrift stores in my area haven't been very forth coming in the clothing department. (I'm probably just being too picky) So I'll be saving my pennies to shop on line for the over all uniform but make all the equipment myself. (Weapons, equipment and tactical gear. This much I can do.) I started a new set of "range finding" goggles today to begin with. ( My current optics are a bit too small and the next set will fit over my spectacles.)

 Love your work.

 Arvis

[MinistryOfTruth]

Ah! I did not realize this rendering was your art work. You have a keen eye for detail and your well versed in the uniform in question as well. Right down to the braids on his kepi. 1st lieutenant I'm guessing, looks like two bars on his collar but it could be three?`
 I've actually been trying to assemble a Steampunk confederate artillery uniform. Unfortunately thrift stores in my area haven't been very forth coming in the clothing department. (I'm probably just being too picky) So I'll be saving my pennies to shop on line for the over all uniform but make all the equipment myself. (Weapons, equipment and tactical gear. This much I can do.) I started a new set of "range finding" goggles today to begin with. ( My current optics are a bit too small and the next set will fit over my spectacles.)

 Love your work.

 Arvis

Thanks, I'm glad you liked it.  As for his rank, he's supposed to be a Captain - there are supposed to be three bars on his collar, it's just that, for some reason, the middle one is difficult to see when the image is scaled down on the page.

Good luck with your uniform as well - I hope you'll post some pictures here once you've got some of it together.

[Lazaras]

Sir. That is an outstanding picture.

Willing to put that lad on a smoke and soot battlefield and offer prints for sale?

[robcraufurd]

Because England saw it for what it was... A larger nation, the Union, applying a double standard to the confederacy.

Not to mention the fact that there seemed to be very little between the sides in terms of their stance on slavery. We need to remember that the Union still contained slave states like Missouri, which in 1861 had tried to extradite an escaped slave from Canada to have him burned alive, and that when General Fremont proclaims limited emancipation there Lincoln countermands it. In the light of this, and the virulent anti-British rhetoric of papers like the New York Herald, there isn't any reason for the passionate anti-slave trade activists Palmerston and Russell to do anything but stand back and let the two sides fight it out.