Talk:Zebulon Vance/Archive 1

Racism - "However"
I dislike this paragraph: "Although considered progressive in his era, Vance was also a slave owner and is now widely considered racist. However, it is noted that he frequently spoke out against antisemitism." Specifically, I object to the "However" in the sentence. It acts as if Vance was critical of antisemitism despite his racism, but if you read the text of his "Scattered Nation" speech, it is very clear that he's a scientific-racist who "defends" Jewish people precisely because of his racism. Over and over again throughout the speech, Vance argues that Jews in general, and Western European Jews in particular, are superior to Black people and other people of color. Vance's philosemitism was not an exception to his racism, it was a manifestation of his racism. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 08:10, 18 June 2022 (UTC)


 * In "Scattered Nations," Vance also shows that he ranked Jews by skin color; that is, he believed European Jews were superior to Jews from the area that is now Israel. I do appreciate his progressive commitment to the education of minorities and the positive impact this had on NC, but don't think his praise to one group (Jews) forgives his racist remarks towards and treatment of another. Just as any positive impact of his building the railroad to western North Carolina does not forgive the policies that gave the project a work force of prisoners (freed slaves who were arrested for not having jobs).
 * The sentence beginning with "however" was added to the original intro. I too was not comfortable with it, but did not remove it. But I encourage you do to so, especially given your comments. Also, the scientific racism category was a great addition--didn't know that one even existed! Rublamb (talk) 14:43, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

My recent edits
Take a look at this discussion.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  23:23, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Second wife
In 1880, Vance married Florence Steele Martin of Kentucky.
 * Not logged in the infobox. Did his first wife Harriette pre-decease him? Valetude (talk) 21:26, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

'''His first wife did pre-decease. This is now in the text. However, I removed the wife from the infobox as she is not notable and is included in the text.Rublamb (talk) 11:53, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Vance County
The article on Vance County states that it was named for him but I don't see it listed in this article? A short history of North Carolina by Samuel Thomas Peace, Sr. refers to it as his Zeb''s Black Baby. FloridaArmy (talk) 11:23, 13 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Vance County is included in the list of honors. Rublamb (talk) 11:54, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Zebulon Baird Vance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20031209033827/http://www.ah.dcr.state.nc.us/Sections/HS/vance/vance.htm to http://www.ah.dcr.state.nc.us/sections/hs/vance/vance.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927004943/http://toto.lib.unca.edu/findingaids/books/vance_scattered_nations/default_vance_scattered.htm to http://toto.lib.unca.edu/findingaids/books/vance_scattered_nations/default_vance_scattered.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060705134106/http://statelibrary.dcr.state.nc.us/nc/bio/public/vance.htm to http://statelibrary.dcr.state.nc.us/nc/bio/public/vance.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:10, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

The Ballad of Tom Dooley, by Sharyn McCrumb
Angela, I'm reading a second novel by Sharyn McCrumb, which also discusses Vance considerably. As a bit of an expert on G. B. Grayson, I kind of backed into the study of Tom Dooley -- and hence Laura Foster, etc. Enjoy -- ResearcherQ (talk) 14:15, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Untitled
Zebulon Vance was not the 'boy colonel' of the 26th North Carolina. That was Henry K. Burgwyn, Jr. who was only 18 at the time he became colonel of the 26th.

He was, however, the colonel. Burgwyn was second in command.

Rough and Ready
@TarheelTroops has indicated that this fact is incorrect: "The Rough and Ready Guards followed Vance to the 26th." This sentence is sourced; I checked the source which is avaiable through Wikipedia Library. This is what is says, "Vance enlisted on May 3 as a private in a Buncombe County militia unit known as the Rough and Ready Guards and was elected captain. That June, the unit became Company F of the 14th North Carolina Infantry. On August 26, before Vance had ever seen battle, he was elected colonel of a different North Carolina regiment, the 26th, and soon got his old company transferred into his new command." As a result, I revesed the edit that removed the sentence in question, but thought this was worth discussion. I have not found a reliable source online that covers the Rough and Ready. Any suggestions? I have a few books to check but would prefer something online so everyone can see it. Rublamb (talk) 23:37, 24 October 2023 (UTC)


 * The original source author, Robert H. Fowler, made an incorrect statement. Vance did recruit and become captain of a company which called itself the "Rough and Ready Guards," which eventually became Company F of the 14th North Carolina Infantry. This company was from Buncombe County. Vance was indeed elected Colonel of the 26th North Carolina Infantry and went over there. He did not bring his old company with him. The "Rough and Ready Guards" from Buncombe County remained as Company F of the 14th North Carolina for the remainder of the war. For confirmation, check Weymouth T. Jordan, North Carolina Troops: A Roster, Vol. 5(Raleigh: North Carolina Office of Archives and History, 1975), 444-454. ''
 * When Vance became Colonel of the 26th North Carolina, there were already 10 companies (the full complement for the regiment) in place, none of which was from Buncombe County--two were Caldwell County, two were from Chatham County, one each was from Anson, Ashe, Moore, Wake, Wilkes, and Union Counties. You can find the full roster for the 26th North Carolina in Jordan, North Carolina Troops: A Roster, vol. 7, pp. 455-601. ''
 * In practical terms, the army did not exchange companies at the whims of commanders, which would have led to managerial chaos. Once a company became part of a regiment, it essentially remained with that designation for the duration of the war, unless the regiment itself was disbanded.
 * The Civil War Times Illustrated, the source for this information, is a secondary source, and unsourced itself. So no one can see what primary source Fowler used to justify his claim that Vance got the company transferred. He never cites a source for that information. The Roster volumes I cite are primary sources that show clearly that Company F of the 14th remained Company F of the 14th, no matter what Vance did or wanted. I'm not sure how deeply you wish for me to go here, but if you go to Fold3.com and look under Civil War Service Records for North Carolina, and scroll down to the 14th North Carolina Regiment, I can give you 100 names of men to look up to verify that those men joined the Rough and Ready Guards on May 3, 1861, and never at any time were transferred or designated as part of another regiment until they surrendered at Appomattox on April 9, 1865. TarheelTroops (talk) 00:06, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, that is not a book that I have access to. And we cannot use primary souces such as those in Fold3; it is one of the quirks of Wikipedia guidelines that can be frustrating at times. It is also important to understand that Wikipedia does not require a secondary source to have citations, especially if it is published by a what is considered to be a reliable source. Instead, we are supposed to evaluate the author and the publication or publisher. But maybe both are the issue in this instance?
 * Unless another editor finds an online source, I will dig through my books tomorrow; I am pretty sure what you say will be in one of them based on what I see online in unusable sources. (Why hasn't someone written an article on the Rough and Ready for NCpedia or the Vance Birthplace website?) There is one possiblity: since many of the original regiments enlisted for around six months, maybe some Rough and Ready members moved at a later date. However, that detail is not worth looking for as it would not enhance this article; this info is only important if the group he formed stayed with him IMO. Anyway, thanks for noticing this. I keep meaning to come back and work on this article some more. Rublamb (talk) 01:09, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I understand that you are obeying the rules, and I don't have a gripe with you. But I fear that logic is not winning in this case. You probably won't find a source that explicitly says, "The Rough and Ready Guards did not go with Vance to the 26th North Carolina," because no one would even think to state that. It didn't happen, so why say that it didn't happen?
 * Robert Fowler was the founder of the Civil War Times journal in 1962. It is not peer reviewed. And when he published this article, no one at Civil War Times is going to say no to the founder of the journal at which they work, or dispute what he says. But Fowler did not cite any sources for his statement. I don't know where he got it, or if he imagined it, but he was (and is) just wrong.
 * By the logic you have indicated, I could start an online journal, and publish an article saying that Robert E. Lee sodomized Stonewall Jackson every day of the week except Sunday. And then I could add that statement to Lee's Wikipedia page, and cite it as my non-peer-reviewed journal article. If you evaluate the author you will find that he is a tenured professor of Civil War History at a respectable state university, and passes the sniff test. But no one would be able to remove that erroneous statement about Lee's sexual habits because it was sourced (even though the original source was wrong), and no one would be able to find any published piece anywhere saying that Lee was not sodomized by Stonewall. Because, of course, no one would think to have to make that statement. TarheelTroops (talk) 16:49, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I will be looking for a source that gives the history of the Rough and Ready. If you are coming to Wikipedia from academia, you will probably find it helpful to review WP:RELIABILITY. I struggled at first with some of the guidelines. For example, a newspaper is a reliable secondary source but we cannot use Census records or birth records because they are primary sources. Think about that one for a minute. There is a process for reviewing sourced content that is challenged; we don't go by someone's personal knowledge. Have patience and trust the system. It works. Rublamb (talk) 17:35, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Some sources, including membership of the Know-nothings and I think his racism
https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Dictionary_of_North_Carolina_Biography/BdAGnn0SZX0C?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Zebulon+Baird+Vance+%22know+nothing%22&pg=PA301&printsec=frontcover https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Shapers_of_the_Great_Debate_on_the_Civil/ci-_0WzfX_cC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Zebulon+Baird+Vance+%22know+nothing%22&pg=PA391&printsec=frontcover Zebulon B. Vance: A Confederate Nationalist in the North Carolina Gubernatorial Election of 1864 Author(s): Joe A. Mobley Source: The North Carolina Historical Review, OCTOBER 2000, Vol. 77, No. 4 (OCTOBER 2000), pp. 434-454 Published by: North Carolina Office of Archives and History Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/23522169 Zebulon B. Vance: A Confederate Nationalist in the North Carolina Gubernatorial Election of 1864

ZEBULON BAIRD VANCE: A PERSONALITY SKETCH Frontis W. Johnston https://www.jstor.org/stable/23516187 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug Weller (talk • contribs) 13:48, 28 November 2021‎