Google
 

View Full Version : MO and the mason dixon line


Fordman50
01-18-2002, 08:48 AM
My boss is calling me a yankee because I was born in MO. I know MO had conderate forces but I am looking for a map with the entire mason dixon line to see what side MO is on.

DaOgre
01-18-2002, 01:02 PM
Im pretty sure you could own slaves in Missouri... thats about as southern hick as it gets so dont worry... your safe :D

92Notch
01-18-2002, 01:26 PM
LOL ... yeah, you aint no yankee

Snouter
01-18-2002, 02:45 PM
Here is the supporting info from Encyclopedia Brittanica.

Here is the supporting info from Encyclopedia Brittanica. The use of the term "Mason and Dixon line" to designate the boundary between the free and slave states (and in general between the North and South) dates from the debates in Congress over the Missouri Comprimise in 1819-1820. As so used, it may be defined as not only the Mason and Dixon line proper (39* 43' N. between Maryland and Pennsylvania) but also the line formed by the Ohio River from its intersection with the Pennsylvania boundary to its mouth, thence the eastern, northern and western boudaries of Missouri, and thence westward the parallel 36* 30' the line established by the Missouri Comprimise to separate free and slave territory in the Louisiana Purchase, except as regards Missouri.

If I understand that correctly, the Mason Dixon line is very specific to border situation between Maryland and Pennsylvania, but the Ohio River became the theoretical border between North and South. The Ohio River ends up in the very Southeast corner of Missouri it looks like, but Missouri itself seems to be included as part of the South (below Mason Dixon) although potential new states west and north of Missouri's southern border are considered "North."

I don't know. I think Ian is a Yankee at heart. ;)

Criminal
01-21-2002, 11:13 PM
Originally posted by Fordman50
My boss is calling me a yankee because I was born in MO. I know MO had conderate forces but I am looking for a map with the entire mason dixon line to see what side MO is on.
You mean to say that there still people who use the word "Yankee" to describe northerners? How old is your boss anyway?

Criminal
01-21-2002, 11:20 PM
BTW: This might be an interesting question to post in the Lounge, Where does the South begain anyway? I normally think of Kentucky as being south but the nicest suburbs of Cincinnatti are located in that state and Cincinnatti is definately a northern city. I have a friend from Oklahoma who insists Oklahoma is in the "West" and not the "South". I think Northern and Southern has more to do with ones mentality or perhaps the way one talks. For instance, how do you pronounce your "A"s. A yankee will pronounce it like aaaaa (in Massachussetts its "Paaak the caa in Haaaa-vaaaad Yaaaaaaaad") But a southerner would say "Po-rrrrk the coooorrrrr in Horrrrverd yeeerrrrd". I think you get the idea.

86Dude
01-22-2002, 05:02 PM
Trust me, Oklahoma, and Missouri are definitely not southern,
that is if we view the south as defined by the geographical constructs of the civil war, as many do. Early in the war MO was very much in play until March 1862, when a massive confederate force of nearly 20,000 was defeated at Pea Ridge AR by a much smaller union army, in what was the most unique battle of the civil war. As far as I know, MO was never seriously threatened after that. Had that battle not been lost, that same Confederate force having attained such great amounts of war material, would have easily marched on St. Louis, and secured MO for the confederacy.

Once you get about 50 miles into MO, people are no longer southern at all. They don't act, talk, or even look like it. They stop drinking redneck beer like Busch, and start drinking, Budweiser, Sam Adams, Rolling Rock, and even the that strange malt liquor crap. Wierd.


Oklahoma is a western state. Indian territory during the war. Texas aside, Oklahoma is where the south stops completely on the western side. Unlike the south except for Texas, its flat, ugly, and competely boring to look at.

Sorry Ian, but I am afraid that your a damn Yankee! Better you than me. :)

Fordman50
01-25-2002, 12:53 PM
Originally posted by 86Dude
Trust me, Oklahoma, and Missouri are definitely not southern,
that is if we view the south as defined by the geographical constructs of the civil war, as many do. Early in the war MO was very much in play until March 1862, when a massive confederate force of nearly 20,000 was defeated at Pea Ridge AR by a much smaller union army, in what was the most unique battle of the civil war. As far as I know, MO was never seriously threatened after that. Had that battle not been lost, that same Confederate force having attained such great amounts of war material, would have easily marched on St. Louis, and secured MO for the confederacy.

Once you get about 50 miles into MO, people are no longer southern at all. They don't act, talk, or even look like it. They stop drinking redneck beer like Busch, and start drinking, Budweiser, Sam Adams, Rolling Rock, and even the that strange malt liquor crap. Wierd.


Oklahoma is a western state. Indian territory during the war. Texas aside, Oklahoma is where the south stops completely on the western side. Unlike the south except for Texas, its flat, ugly, and competely boring to look at.

Sorry Ian, but I am afraid that your a damn Yankee! Better you than me. :)


Great post! hick ;)

86Dude
01-28-2002, 04:31 PM
Well thanks city boy. ;)

last_laugh
02-02-2002, 04:47 PM
Originally posted by DaOgre
Im pretty sure you could own slaves in Missouri... thats about as southern hick as it gets so dont worry... your safe :D

The Supreme Court's refusal to hear the Dred-scott V. Sanford case in effect made slavery legal in all states.

Google