This is an interesting question. On one hand, the fight over slavery, the enslavement of Black people, would be on face value, holding importance regarding the conflict. Yet, once the conflict began, the issue of race seemed to disappear. I agree with the previous thoughts echoed on this point. I think that each side might have entered the conflict with some premise of race on their plates, but once it commenced, the priorities shifted away from race. Again, it seems odd because the abolitionist voices in the North and the anti- abolitionist voices in the South were very loud and filled with rancor. Yet, each side became relegated to the sidelines once the conflict started. The South was not really driven by slavery as much as seeing victory against the North as something that would silence them once and for all. The South also saw the war as a way to demonstrate their own superiority and confidence in their own way of life. Slavery was a part of this, but it was broached in the larger sense to include "tradition" and the "right to be left alone." These are more Constitutional in nature and not driven by race. The North was animated by the preservation of the Union. Once the war started, there was little in way of motivation to equalize out racial conditions or speak for a voice that had been silenced for centuries. Race seems to have played a prominent role on the outset, but then became a silent one throughout. Perhaps, this speaks quite lucidly to the condition of race in America as one in silence, and not being able to experience full articulation.