Two confused sentences[edit]

The sentences I refer to are these, in the third paragraph under "Coverage": "Some 20,000 to 50,000 slaves were freed the day it went into effect in parts of nine of the ten states to which it applied (Texas being the exception). In every Confederate state (except Tennessee and Texas), the Proclamation went into immediate effect in Union-occupied areas." I will number the questions these two sentences raise.

1. "20,000 to 50,000" must refer to slaves who were physically, not merely legally freed, because the introduction says that more than 3.5 million were legally freed. If I am correct, then we should say that they were physically freed. We should also say how it happened that 20,000 to 50,000 were physically freed, and why weren't any freed in Texas? Was it because 20,000 to 50,000 were in Union-occupied areas, so the slaves could flee to Union lines, and were there no Union-occupied areas in Texas?

2. Regarding "(except Tennessee and Texas)," footnote 6 explains that the EP did not apply in Tennessee because Tennessee was under Union control. But why not in Texas? The EP explicitly names Texas as one of the states where it applies, so Texas was not an exception.

3. The statement that "the Proclamation went into immediate effect in Union-occupied areas" does not make sense. I am assuming that "Union-occupied" means occupied by the Union army, whereas "Union-controlled" means that the state was politically controlled by the Union. Therefore, the statement that "the Proclamation went into immediate effect in Union-occupied areas" does not refer to Union-controlled areas, in which the EP did not apply. The EP went into immediate effect in all areas where it applied, Union-occupied or otherwise. If an area was Union-occupied, then slaves were able to enter Union lines and become physically free. But that is a separate matter from the EP's taking immediate effect. Should "the Proclamation went into immediate effect in Union-occupied areas" instead say that slaves became immediately free in Union-occupied areas? But we've already said, "Some 20,000 to 50,000 slaves were freed the day it went into effect in parts of nine of the ten states to which it applied."

This is a mess and is beyond my ability to clarify. Maurice Magnus (talk) 20:41, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I deleted the two confused sentences.Maurice Magnus (talk) 13:12, 22 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Weren’t there former slaves in the Union Army before Emancipation Proclamation?[edit]

There were escaped slaves and freeman in the Union States before the Civil War, and they joined the Union Army at the start of the Civil War, so there were many in the Union Army before Emancipation Proclamation was made. 2601:647:4000:12E0:419F:F438:9F20:CB35 (talk) 15:53, 19 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Questionable footnotes[edit]

The questionable footnotes follow this passage: "In December 1861, Lincoln sent his first annual message to Congress (the State of the Union Address, but then typically given in writing and not referred to as such). In it he praised the free labor system for respecting human rights over property rights; he endorsed legislation to address the status of contraband slaves and slaves in loyal states, possibly through buying their freedom with federal money; and he endorsed federal funding of voluntary colonization."

The annual message does not mention contrabands. The pages in Striner that are cited do not mention contrabands, slaves in loyal states, or colonization. Maurice Magnus (talk) 00:18, 12 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No mention of the Battle of Stones' River?[edit]

Contrary to popular belief, it wasn't Antietam which allowed Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation to go through, it was Stones' River, which the contemporaries then recognized. Yourlocallordandsavior (talk) 04:34, 15 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Add For[edit]

74.14.200.10 (talk) 21:15, 27 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Inserting page numbers[edit]

In the first paragraph under "Political impact," which begins "The Proclamation was immediately denounced," I corrected the quotation (the original does have "an utopian"). The two "page needed"s in that paragraph, after the two "note 107"s, is page 64 (it's at Google Books), but I don't know how to enter it. If someone will do that, then I'll know how and I will be able to enter the page numbers of subsequent footnotes. Maurice Magnus (talk) 13:43, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]