Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Interesting note! There were two distinct waves of secession. The Lower South (although often used in history books, the term "Deep South" wasn't coined until the early part of the 20th Century): South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana and Texas. These states made up the original CSA formed in Montgomery, Alabama.
The Upper South states initially voted down secession until the incident at Ft. Sumter made it "either/or" Then, Virigina, Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee joined up.
Just a mention in the trivia department! LOL
Studying my history, Virginia seemed more pro-Confederate than any "border" state at that time. Granted the split of West Virgina- however, even West Va had many Confederate regiments. Virginia was such a large state that it really needed to split anyway.
Even Loudoun County- in extreme Northern Virginia voted heavily in favor of sucession. North Carolina and TN were not as in much in favor. But Virginians and South Carolinians are very similar in culture.
And we all know South Carolinians were the first to stand up for Dixie.
Studying my history, Virginia seemed more pro-Confederate than any "border" state at that time. Granted the split of West Virgina- however, even West Va had many Confederate regiments. Virginia was such a large state that it really needed to split anyway.
Yes, this is true. Virginia was the first of the "Upper South" states to secede and join the Confederacy. It went like this:
All the Upper South states initially voted to either not consider the question of secession, or to vote it down. However, after Lincoln called for troops to put down "the rebellion" following Ft. Sumter, these states were confronted with the choice of either joining their Lower South sisters in the newly formed Confederacy, or casting their lot with the North. It wasn't a hard choice! LOL
Thanks. I bet you got rid of "NOVA" Virginia would be much higher on that list, lol
I would bet you are probably right, Blueva. I don't know much about what y'all call "NOVA" but I think I can relate to the general idea simply because many of the large urban areas in Texas are so full of yankee/California transplants these days that many areas of the same are not even recognizable as "Texas" anymore...
On a somewhat related tangent, I wanted to backtrack and once again address an earlier post of yours when you mentioned some friends of yours from Midland, Texas, considering themselves "westerners" as opposed to "Southerners".
Not withstanding that (in going back to earlier surveys cited) even most West Texans (exception being El Paso area) consider themselves to live in the South and be Southerners, there is something else at work that has to be considered when the topic is Texas' regional affiliation.
And it is not always easy to translate to someone who has never been to Texas.
Even many Texans have problems with it. Simply put, someone from Tyler, Texas has much more in common with someone from Oxford, Mississippi, than they do with fellow Texans in El Paso. The former is where the Deep South begins...the latter is truly SW (which most of Texas assuredly is NOT! LOL).
Anyway -- to try and get back on topic -- taking Texas as a whole (as opposed to its seperate parts) it is, again and emphatically, essentially a Southern state. However, the paradox is that this is something that you alluded to earlier even if you didn't intend it so (and please don't think I am being condecending).
It sorta boils down the this: There are at least two "Wests". There is the modern day West of the Rocky Mountains and John Denver "Rocky Mountain High" majesty and the desert painted color of Georgia O'Keefe's true Southwest. My own g/f is from "that" West (Colorado native) and is adament that Texas is not part of it. That it is Southern and she saw the distinction of Arizona and Colorado vs. Texas from the first time she visited here...starting with when accents changed to "Southern" right away in West Texas and Southern Baptist Churches were in every town she passed thru. And I agree totally.
There is another "West" though, as well. And that one is the mythic West of post-bellum frontier days. This is the one of cowboys and cattle drives and ranching and such and the icons made famous in the classic western movies. A goodly portion of Texas is very much part of that. And take justifiable pride in it.
The kicker is, however, that this particular "west" is not, in essence, seperate from "the South." Seperate from the "Old South" or Deep South or Southeast? Yes, for sure. But not from a cultural and historical connection with an entity known as The South.
And this aspect is what I think many west Texans who might call themselves westerners as opposed to Southerners don't always "get" in all its historical nuances. They are true westerners in the frontier sense of the word and what evolved from it, and that is what most who define themselves procede from.
BUT? When (and I have done this before with West Texas friends of mine) asked what church they belong to, listen to their speech patterns, question if they eat black-eyed peas on New Years Day? Then they are Southern.
WESTERN Southern to be sure, but they are most likely to belong to a Southern Baptist Church, call a soft-drink a "coke", say "y'all" and if asked if they eat black-eyed peas on New Years Day or know who Robert E. Lee is reply "Hail yes...what sorta grab-assin' question is THAT?"
Speaking of the latter, Midland, Texas main high school is the Midland Robert E. Lee Rebels. Dixie is their fight song!
I use to live 1 1/2 hours from Amarillo and Lubbock and I never thought of it as Southern either, not til you get around Dallas I would say, I've never been to San Antonio or Austin so I dont know what the feel is there, but I always thought of Dallas to be more like a big Amarillo really and I agree with El Paso, to me it blends in more with New Mexico or Mexico than it does with the majority of Texas.
I always heard Texans were Southerners until they hit the Balcones Escarpment- where they became Plainsmen.
Okay here's my take:
New England- what you'd expect: Me, Vt, NH, Mass, RI, and maybe Ct
Northeast: Ny, Nj, Pency, western Md, Del, northern Va. Fla south of Ocala, Ohio (eastern 1/3)
SE: Rest of Va (S. of Petersburg), eastern Md, NC, SC, GA, Ala, Miss, La, Fla north of Ocala. Tn, Eastern Ky. WVa, and Ohio (s. of Columbus and w. of Zanesville), E. Texas . Missouri (s. of I-70)
Midwest (southern): Ill (south of Champaign), Indiana ( outside of Chitown metro and Mi border co's), rest of Ohio. Mo north of I-70., W. Ky.
Midwest (northern) Dakotas, Mn, Wi, N. Ill, Ia, Lake and Porter Cos in Indiana along with Mi border Co's., Mi
SW: rest of Tx, Okla, NM, Az, southern Utah.
Intermontane: Colo, Wy, Mt, rest of Ut, Nevada (except for Vegas and Reno). E. Wa and Ore
California: San Fran south, and throw in Vegas and Reno.
PNW: N. Calif, Ore and Wa. (w. of Cascades)
Alaska and Hawaii are their own entities.
My best guess.
Holy crap!
I left 3 out:
Ks, Neb- Southern Midwest. "Cable Guy" is from Wahoo, Ne, for example.
I use to live 1 1/2 hours from Amarillo and Lubbock and I never thought of it as Southern either, not til you get around Dallas I would say, I've never been to San Antonio or Austin so I dont know what the feel is there, but I always thought of Dallas to be more like a big Amarillo really and I agree with El Paso, to me it blends in more with New Mexico or Mexico than it does with the majority of Texas.
The very upper Panhandle area of Texas (generally that north of and possibly including Amarillo) is another area of Texas which, like El Paso, is somewhat "different" -- both culturally and historically -- from most of the rest of Texas. Specifically, this area was settled originally by many from the southern Midwest in numbers that least rivaled that of Southerners so as to have shaped into one where the "Plains Midwest" influence was and still is very noteable.
As to the rest of West Texas (again excluding the trans-pecos area) my contention and earlier point (for what little it may be worth! LOL) is that while it certainly doesn't fit -- in terms of physical geography at the least -- into the popular image conjured up when considering "The South"...this area was overwhelmingly settled by Southerners and thus is still, for the most part, Southern in culture and history.
A VERY unique and independent sub-region of the "Greater South" to be sure, but more akin to the "southeast" in the aforementioned ways than it is to New Mexico and Arizona when all factors save topography and certain other superficial characteristics are taken into account.
I always heard Texans were Southerners until they hit the Balcones Escarpment- where they became Plainsmen.
Okay here's my take:
New England- what you'd expect: Me, Vt, NH, Mass, RI, and maybe Ct
Northeast: Ny, Nj, Pency, western Md, Del, northern Va. Fla south of Ocala, Ohio (eastern 1/3)
SE: Rest of Va (S. of Petersburg), eastern Md, NC, SC, GA, Ala, Miss, La, Fla north of Ocala. Tn, Eastern Ky. WVa, and Ohio (s. of Columbus and w. of Zanesville), E. Texas . Missouri (s. of I-70)
Midwest (southern): Ill (south of Champaign), Indiana ( outside of Chitown metro and Mi border co's), rest of Ohio. Mo north of I-70., W. Ky.
Midwest (northern) Dakotas, Mn, Wi, N. Ill, Ia, Lake and Porter Cos in Indiana along with Mi border Co's., Mi
SW: rest of Tx, Okla, NM, Az, southern Utah.
Intermontane: Colo, Wy, Mt, rest of Ut, Nevada (except for Vegas and Reno). E. Wa and Ore
California: San Fran south, and throw in Vegas and Reno.
PNW: N. Calif, Ore and Wa. (w. of Cascades)
Alaska and Hawaii are their own entities.
My best guess.
Don't know how you can put FL "south of Ocala" in the NE. There are many native Floridians there who consider themselves Southerners in all ways. True, they are outnumbered now by the newer arrivals, but they are a presence, just as I'm sure they are in NoVa. Also, the Northeastern transplants have congregated largely on the Atlantic coast, while the Gulf Coast of FL is heavily populated by Midwesterners from MI, OH, IL. And you are leaving out the huge Cuban, South American and Carribean presence, particllarly in Miami-Dade, FL's largest county. Using your criteria, you'd have to consider Detroit a Southern city!
i known why because we dont have deep south ways or old south mentally most places went to put me catogory in northeastern or call me a yankee we dont have roots like other as other ones miss al ga north fl thas true miami its more uquioe most place its has south not really southern catorgory
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There are many native Floridians there who consider themselves Southerners in all ways. True, they are outnumbered now by the newer arrivals, but they are a presence, just as I'm sure they are in NoVa. Also, the Northeastern transplants have congregated largely on the Atlantic coast, while the Gulf Coast of FL is heavily populated by Midwesterners from MI, OH, IL. And you are leaving out the huge Cuban, South American and Carribean presence, particllarly in Miami-Dade, FL's largest county. Using your criteria, you'd have to consider Detroit a Southern city! 
