Civil War Interactive Discussion Board Home
Home Search search Menu menu Not logged in - Login | Register


Slaves as Southern soldiers? - General Civil War Talk - Civil War Talk - Civil War Interactive Discussion Board
 Moderated by: javal1 Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next Page Last Page  
 New Topic   Printer Friendly 
 Rating:  Rating
AuthorPost
 Posted: Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 07:36 pm
   
21st Post
Johan Steele
Life NRA,SUVCW # 48,Legion 352


Joined: Sat Dec 2nd, 2006
Location: South Of The North 40, Minnesota USA
Posts: 1065
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

http://civilwarmemory.typepad.com/civil_war_memory/2007/11/black-confede-1.html

Black Confederates on the Internet

There are plenty of black Confederates to be found on the Internet; in fact, they seem to run rampant in the world of cyberspace. The number of men in Lee's Army of Northern Virginia fluctuates widely depending on the number of black Confederates believed to have served. Sifting through the mire of shoddy websites is one of the most difficult and time-consuming tasks. This is especially true in the world of the Civil War. In a sense the Internet embodies the democratic principles that we hold dear and gives meaning to the notion that "everyman his own historian." However, this democratic tendency comes with a price. Historical truth or any related epistemological notion will mean very little if individual Internet sites cannot be properly evaluated.

Most of my students use search engines such as Google and click on one of the first five sites that appear without any understanding of why they make the top of the list. Despite PageRank being the most important method Google uses to rank websites, it is not the only one. Other factors taken into account when calculating the Google rankings include: the contents of the title bar of the site; the page's meta tags; how many times the keyword is in the content of the page and the text used in the links coming to the site (anchor text). The point is that Google does not evaluate the content of the website directly. In other words, the first five sites may be more unreliable than those sites listed on p. 10.

Uncovering the publisher of a website is one of the most important ways to evaluate its reliability. I tend to steer my students away from websites that are published by individuals and organizations other than historical societies and institutions of higher learning.

Let's consider the issue of black Confederates as an example. As I stated at the beginning of this post most of the so-called evidence for this can be found on Internet sites. Consider the Petersburg Express site, which includes a page titled "Who Is Hiding This Southern History?." The page includes a number of photographs of black men in Confederate uniforms along with a number of passages that include no interpretation whatsoever apart from the conclusion that they demonstrate that a certain aspect of history has been intentionally ignored. Here is a very simple way of evaluating this site. Go to http://www.easywhois.com and type the url http://www.petersburgexpress.com into the search bar that says "domain name". The results will include the individual or organization that applied for the domain name. You can now search the individual or organization and inquire into their credentials. What qualifications, if any, in the field of history can be demonstrated that would validate the information provided on the website? Who exactly is Ashleigh Moody and what are his credentials? Do you have any reason at all to trust the content of the website based on the credentials uncovered? You can also find out which sites are linked to Petersburg Express by going to Altavista. In the search bar type "link:http://www.petersburgexpress.com" which will take you to the websites that are linked. A great deal of information can be discerned based on the quality of websites linked.

You can also do this for the 37th Texas Cavalry, which is another one of my favorite sites. This site contains a number of pages on so-called black Confederates and is even sponsoring a monument to honor their service, which is reminiscent of the move in the 1920s by the U.D.C. to construct a faithful slave memorial in Washington, D.C.:

Time is, indeed, running out for the chance to Remember and Honor the tens of thousands of Black, Brown, Red and Yellow Southerners and those of foreign birth who wore the gray and fought to defend their homes and families. There are those who are making concerted efforts to abolish or deny documented evidence of their service.

So, what are we to make of this site? The easywhois search reveals one Michael Kelly and the altavista search for links shows roughly 90 sites. I don't know what qualifications this individual has or anything else about the reliability of his "research." This is one place that you will continue to find the image of the 1st Louisiana Native Guards being used as evidence for large numbers of black Confederates. This has been discredited by any number of scholars. I completely steer clear of sites created by individuals and "organizations" that I cannot identify and I recommend demand that my students do the same.

No doubt many of you are far ahead in ways to evaluate websites, but most people don't know the first thing about vetting Internet sites. Following these suggestions is a first step.



 Posted: Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 07:36 pm
   
22nd Post
Johan Steele
Life NRA,SUVCW # 48,Legion 352


Joined: Sat Dec 2nd, 2006
Location: South Of The North 40, Minnesota USA
Posts: 1065
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

http://www.mdgorman.com/Events/black_confederates.htm

Note the dates and locations on all... the period sources just aren't out there.

http://www.mdgorman.com/Events/slaves_&_slavery.htm



 Posted: Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 07:37 pm
   
23rd Post
Johan Steele
Life NRA,SUVCW # 48,Legion 352


Joined: Sat Dec 2nd, 2006
Location: South Of The North 40, Minnesota USA
Posts: 1065
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

CONFEDERATE STATES OF AMERICA, WAR DEPARTMENT,
Richmond, Va., December 30, 1864.
Maj. Gen. HOWELL COBB:
"...Soldiers are our greatest necessity. What is your opinion as to the practicability and policy of employing negroes as soldiers;...
James Seddon, [Confederate] Secretary of War


HDQRS. GEORGIA RESERVES AND MIL. DIST. OF GEORGIA,
Macon, Ga., January 8, 1865.
Hon. JAMES A. SEDDON,
Secretary of War, Richmond, Va.:

"...I think that the proposition to make soldiers of our
slaves is the most pernicious idea that has been suggested since the
war began..."
"...You cannot make soldiers of slaves, nor slaves of soldiers. The moment you resort to negro soldiers your white soldiers will be lost to you;...
"...The day you make soldiers of them is the beginning of the end of the revolution. If slaves will make good soldiers our whole theory of slavery is wrong—but they won’t make soldiers."

Howell Cobb
Major General



 Posted: Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 07:56 pm
   
24th Post
Johan Steele
Life NRA,SUVCW # 48,Legion 352


Joined: Sat Dec 2nd, 2006
Location: South Of The North 40, Minnesota USA
Posts: 1065
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

"...To substantiate tens of thousands or refute the presence of documentable few hundreds throughout all threater of operations during the conflict are both ridiculous.

The bottom line really to this subject is that it is a proven fact that both enslaved and free blacks were used by the Confederate government including their armies and its citizens to sustain the war effort. This subject, fascinating as is, loses critical elements that many a Confederate soldier would have gone hungry without the sustainment of slavery (as well as crops turned over, sold, or confiscated) in the production of corn and wheat. Many a Confederate soldier would have had less clothing without slave labor in cotton growth. Many a Confederate soldier would have died without the labor of black men and women in hospitals from Richmond to Texas. Many Confederate soldiers would have not been able to shield themselves from sheets of bullets and shrieking shells had not black men been engaged in the construction of miles of fortifications. Many Confederate soldiers would have lacked ammunition, weapons, and transportion without black men employed in factories and for railroad companies. These efforts for whatever reason have been pushed to the side to uphold combatants. Ultimately, millions of black Southerners, free and enslaved, were critically important to the Confederate war effort. Just the same whether the United States government took up the fundamental issue of enslavement or not, tens of thousands are clearly noted as having fled into Union lives and began to carve out a new life as free people. Richard Eppes of Prince George County never had a serious runaway issue until May-August 1862 when of 130 slaves, 106 ran away with the Army of the Potomac and their naval escort, one more ran after this period. At war's end, six had served with the U.S. Navy and one lied about his age and enlisted with the 19th U.S. Colored Troops. Only a few of his former slaves returned to work as freedmen.

Critically important to the Union war effort were thousands of fleeing people who never fired a shot at Confederate troops. These people unloaded thousands of ships, cooked for troops, were paid servants to Northern citizens who also ended up with Union troops, labored in hospitals, constructed fortifications, worked on railroads, and drove wagons.

This in fact was a national war and everyone from Maine to California, black, white, Indian, Chinese, and mixed heritage were affected by the war. No one should deny any of these players the place they deserve to be remembered in our own minds and in society at large."
__________________
Sincerely,
Emmanuel Dabney, Moderator
Atlantic Guard Soldiers' Aid Society
http://www.agsas.org

My addition to the conversation follws:

"My wife portrays a free woman of color w/ an impression more based on the day to day life of a black woman in 1860-65. It is something that is sorely underrepresented in pretty much any aspect of CW Re-enacting or Living History. Her own research came first from sitting at the feet of her grand mother and great aunt and just listening to the stories from those still directly connected to slavery.

My wife has concentrated far more upon the civilian aspect; the everyday life of a woman of color. While I have looked more at the military aspect.

Several years ago I started a project to educate myself on the roles & experiances of the Civil War era black man and woman. This was partly fueled by a crow eating experiance where I took for granted as legitimate some information on Black Confederates. A learning experiance for me that forced me to check much of what I thought to be legitimate research.

I was specifically told about a major Black CS force at the battle of "Dingles Mill" near Sumter SC in the last monthes of the war. I took for granted that the SCV man knew what he was talking about when he spoke of 300+ black confederate soldiers opposing Sherman's men there (in his defense he was merely repeating what he had been told). Upon further research I came to realize that Dingles Mill was so insignificant a skirmish that it isn't listed upon the rolls of battle for the war and to add insult to injury the 300 + black soldiers present were USCT men w/ nothing to do w/ Sherman. Some of the further research pointed that there MAY have been some black men manning one of the two guns contesting the USCT but that in reality they were likely the men who manhandled the guns there in the first place.

I spent the better part of two years (maybe 600 hours) on the project taking a lot of time looking through my copies of period diaries & letters and every other period letter or diary I could lay my paws on, to the tune of 2200 different authors. In all I found just over a dozen specific incidents referencing black men in any way directly aiding the CS cause by carrying arms. IIRC they were almost all Tennessee, Arkansas and Texas troops referred to. I was able to coalate a number of about 140 names of black men who might have been considered under arms; I added in the numbers of black men who joined the CS army in the last chaotic days of the CS outside Richmond and several other accounts, all told I came to a number of a little less than 1300 and gave myself an error rate that would put the numbers closer to 1400. I have since seen the referenced number of 13,000 and the methodolgy that came to such a number and feel it a reasonable number. While I consider it quite high I can understand it and feel it was reached through legitimate research.

THe only verified account of large numbers of black men in direct combat w/ US forces I have found were those men who took up arms at the last minute at Chickamauga. And IIRC I owe a big note of thanks to Mr White of the NMP for putting me on that track.

Mr Dabney puts forward a vital point when referencing black men and women of the Confederacy; the majority were directly involved with the war effort in a support role. Without which the war effort of the CS would have crumpled like so much newspaper. When one studies the works prepared around Petersburg, Vicksburg, Atlanta or all through the CS the majority were built by slave labor, the rapid and efficient repairs to damaged rail lines were accomplished by slave labor and the majority of foodstuffs used by the CS Army were procured through slave labor. The work done in factories to create many of the arms and munitions utilized by the CS was done through very efficient and effective slave labor. So that when one looks at it thus the amount of black support for the CS was nearer to three millions. Then question then becomes how much of it was willing?

THus Mr Dabney point is the salient one of this or any other discussion dealing with black men and women in the Confederacy.
"The bottom line really to this subject is that it is a proven fact that both enslaved and free blacks were used by the Confederate government including their armies and its citizens to sustain the war effort. This subject, fascinating as is, loses critical elements that many a Confederate soldier would have gone hungry without the sustainment of slavery (as well as crops turned over, sold, or confiscated) in the production of corn and wheat. Many a Confederate soldier would have had less clothing without slave labor in cotton growth. Many a Confederate soldier would have died without the labor of black men and women in hospitals from Richmond to Texas. Many Confederate soldiers would have not been able to shield themselves from sheets of bullets and shrieking shells had not black men been engaged in the construction of miles of fortifications. Many Confederate soldiers would have lacked ammunition, weapons, and transportion without black men employed in factories and for railroad companies. These efforts for whatever reason have been pushed to the side to uphold combatants. Ultimately, millions of black Southerners, free and enslaved, were critically important to the Confederate war effort."






Last edited on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 07:58 pm by Johan Steele



 Posted: Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 07:59 pm
   
25th Post
ole
Member


Joined: Sun Oct 22nd, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 2027
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Back when Cleburne made his proposal, it might have been possible to equip, train and feed black troops. By the time Davis, Lee and the Confederate Congress got around to authorizing the raising of 200,000 troops, it was a pipe dream.

ole



 Posted: Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 08:01 pm
   
26th Post
Johan Steele
Life NRA,SUVCW # 48,Legion 352


Joined: Sat Dec 2nd, 2006
Location: South Of The North 40, Minnesota USA
Posts: 1065
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Just as a note to why I so adamantly dispute most of the accounts of the Black CS Soldier. When I was living in SC I visited a plave called Dingles Mill the site of a "ferocius battle where thousands died" according to a local SCV man and there were hundreds of black Confederates there. I was intrigued and quite impressed by the story I was told and came to firmly believe there were 30,000 or more black Confederate soldiers... I have since revised my opinion downward dramaticly.

I repeated the story, often... then I met a women by the name of Connie Boone who forced me to question the incident. I did my own research and discovered several things: 1. the battle was so insignificant that it isn't listed in any listing of CW battles. 2. The black troops there in most evidence were USCT men not CS. 3. due to a shortage of horses local slaves had been impressed to pull the CS guns and may or may not have manned them. 4. Almost everything I had been told about the incident was pure fabrication from the numbers involved to the tactics used.

Upon further research I discovered that what I was told about this particular incident was NOT an unusual distortion. For that alone I owe Connie a great apology which can never be given.

I have run sources to ground that claim hundreds of blackConfederates in arms to find one or sometimes 2 zeros added to the orignal number. Creative editing done w/ a very sick agenda.

My process for coming to the number of 1300 actual fighting black CS men is simple. I have run to ground approx 130 verifiable incidents involving black Soldiers fighting w/ the CS (40 approx w/ Forrest) and that is all. I figured that w/ Jim Crow and creative bookkeeping I was likely missing a goodly number in short I suspect I only found 10%. Most of these black men served in western Regiments. Arkansas, Texas, Tennessee etc.

I have NEVER read a first person account from the Union perspective of facing black CS troops in battle, or of capturing them or of burying them. Many of the letters I have read were written by abolishionists and perhaps 75-80% were written by western troops some of who were extremely racist men that would have complained or commented about seeing black CS soldiers. Having now read Union letters & diaries to the tune of better than 2000 different authors I think I stand on fairly firm ground.

I see the modern habit of finding a single account or a dozen of black men fighting for the CS and then I see the numbers carried all out of proportion. Why? Some feel the South must be vindicated and will willingly lie, distort & attempt to rewrite history to do so. Others feel that the US can do no good and "proof" that black CSers fought against this country only furthers that belief.

Thankfully there are a few, and I do mean a few, who attempt to use actual research to come to their own conclusion... unfortunately they are a minority.



 Posted: Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 08:02 pm
   
27th Post
Johan Steele
Life NRA,SUVCW # 48,Legion 352


Joined: Sat Dec 2nd, 2006
Location: South Of The North 40, Minnesota USA
Posts: 1065
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

"The Confederate authorities never intended to use black troops for any mission with real importance. If the Native Guards were good for anything, it was for public display." [James G. Hollandsworth, Jr., The Louisiana Native Guards: The Black Military Experience During the Civil War,_ pp. 10-11]

The largest concentration of black Men to see combat I have ever read about was at Chickamauga, about 40 IIRC, part of TN Cav regt. Officers servents who got sick of getting shot at and went to work to stop it. There were some black men at 1st Manasas w/ the Washington Arty. "The Creole Guard" and they manned a pair of guns... IIRC 17 men. What happened to them after is as god a guess as any as they never again manned CS guns anywhere that I've managed to find. THen the two companies outside Richmond, which may have given a volley at some US Cav before hightailing it. They aren't listed on any parole record and they dissolved into the countryside before Appomatox.

There is no real evidence that large numbers of black men would have willingly served the CS as soldiers. Everywhere the US Army went in the south they were followed by huge numbers of former Slaves. The 1st LA Native Guard is often touted as proof that the CS was willing to enlist black men as soldiers. The only problem is the 1st LA Native Guard was never paid, equipped, armed or used in a military role by the CS. No one has ever been able to show me otherwise. They were disbanded and sent home. After New Orleans fell 1/4 to1/3 ended up back in the Army... the US Army forming the cadre for several Regiments.

Roughly 180,000 black men willingly served the US in pulling down the CS flag. From my own research maybe 1200 served the CS as soldiers. I've seen the number of 13,000 put forward, looked at the methodology used to come to that number and find that reasonable, that said I've seen nothing to trump my own number of 1200-1400.



 Posted: Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 08:33 pm
   
28th Post
barrydancer
Member


Joined: Wed Apr 23rd, 2008
Location: Norwalk, Connecticut USA
Posts: 135
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Great points, Johan. I agree with you criticisms of people touting the Native Guards as proof of black soldiers in the Confederacy. (I think Dixie Outfitters even has a t-shirt about them.)

From my own Louisiana research it appears as you say. The Cs authorities never had any intention to actually use them, and it isn't altogether clear that the members of the Native Guards were willing participants in the Confederate war effort. If I recall correctly, their numbers were largely made up by the gens de couleur of New Orleans, who probably rightly feared some retaliation if they didn't look to be supporting the state in which they had achieved prominence.



 Posted: Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 12:08 am
   
29th Post
CleburneFan
Member


Joined: Mon Oct 30th, 2006
Location: Florida USA
Posts: 1021
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Johan, amazing reading and effort on your behalf to provide the other side of the story. I really appreciate all you have done to add to this discussion.

I was taken aback by the web site that described slaves  in numbers in the tens of thousands who actively fought in the Confederate Army. It didn't square with what happened to Cleburne when he proposed doing just that very thing. Davis's reaction and the even more extreme reactions of some Confederate officers simply couldn't have happened if tens of thousands of slaves were already fighting along side white Confederate males. One officer even wanted Cleburne charged as a traitor for suggesting anything so preposterous.  

Back to the web site in question. I find the statue of a slave-soldier marching along side his white male fellow soldiers interesting. There isn't enough shown of this statue to find out when this scene may have taken place, where the statue is and what the statue is meant to portray.



 Posted: Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 11:58 am
   
30th Post
PvtClewell
Member


Joined: Wed Jun 13th, 2007
Location: North Carolina USA
Posts: 420
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

CF,

Here's a web site featuring the Confederate monument in question:

http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/csa-mem.htm

If you scroll down to the fifth and then to about the 9th or 10th photo, you'll see a closer view of the slave-soldier in question, and the first thing that jumped out at me is that he is not carrying a weapon, as far as I can tell, thus implying (to me at least) that he is serving as something else other than a front-line grunt. That might speak volumes right there. Perhaps it's a more accurate depiction than we might otherwise first want to give credit for?



You have chosen to ignore Bama46. click Here to view this post


 Posted: Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 04:23 pm
   
32nd Post
Johan Steele
Life NRA,SUVCW # 48,Legion 352


Joined: Sat Dec 2nd, 2006
Location: South Of The North 40, Minnesota USA
Posts: 1065
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Bama, yes there were. But frankly the number was insignificant. Those who did fight and serve should be honored. However, there are quite a few who willingly and eagerly inflate their numbers.

List me the Regiments and the battles were thousands of black CS soldiers made a difference.

All that can be done is to list Black CS soldiers by ones and twos here and there. Because that is the reality of it. It is telling that the one monument w/ a Black CS soldier does not show him bearing arms.

It was not until the last desperate days of the CS that a serious effort was made to recruit black men for service in the CS army. By then it was too late... and even then there was rabid condemnation of such an idea. All the while the USCT had been in the field for years, plural, and giving stellar service. Roughly one in six soldiers in the US army east of the Appalachians was a black man. None could deny their effectiveness and yet many in the CS congress did. March 1865, need more be said than: "note the date?"



 Posted: Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 04:43 pm
   
33rd Post
Texas Defender
Member


Joined: Sat Jan 27th, 2007
Location: Texas USA
Posts: 920
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Johan-

  I have no problem with your estimate of 1300 black Confederate soldiers, and your belief that most served in western regiments. Its more than I would have guessed, but obviously, you have researched the question more than I have.

  I agree that those who maintain that there were: "Tens of thousands" should be challenged and refuted. But the ones who bother me more are those whose prejudices prevent them from acknowledging that ANY black men could have voluntarily served as Confederate soldiers.



You have chosen to ignore Bama46. click Here to view this post


 Posted: Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 06:11 pm
   
35th Post
Johan Steele
Life NRA,SUVCW # 48,Legion 352


Joined: Sat Dec 2nd, 2006
Location: South Of The North 40, Minnesota USA
Posts: 1065
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Bama it is telling that while all the others soldiers on the monument are armed he is not. While a possible explanation might be that he was intended to portray a teamster or cook. That isn't what the revisionists think or say. It is also telling that is what you picked out to attack me with, not TD, PvtClewell or any others who have replied to the thread. When considering the rest of the information on this thread it is very telling indeed.

There stands one, count it, one monument to Black CS soldier erected by those who were there. There have been a couple more erected that honor individual black men who bore arms. The big monuments w/ black men potrayed or honored are missing. The CS solider monuments in SC, NC, VA, MS, AL etc don't mention ot portray the black man. Do you really think so little of the men who were there to think they would belittle their own if they had been in the ranks? I do not.

There are four monuments to the USCT erected prior to 1916 and thousands, yes I said thousands, of smaller ones. Every single white stone provided by the US over a grave is a monument. Every single GAR star or metal badge is one as well.

Yes, there were black men who fought for the CS. The number was small, probably less than 13,000 IMO less than 1300. So spend your time honoring those who actually did fight and stop trying to spread the myth of tens of thousands. I've seen the patently ridiculous number of 250,000 put forward on other boards. I believe all for a purpose: to denigrate the USCT and put forward the idea that black men served by the thousands because slavery wasn't really all that bad.

As to giving a soldier or soldiers an apology... I have owed some soldiers an apology and when I do owe them one I provide one. Perhaps you owe the 4 millions who were held in bondage in the CS an apology for forgetting the role they had in keeping your CS alive for four years. For w/out that slave labor there would have been no CS war effort. Look hard at what Ranger Dabney had to say on the subject farther up the thread.

As to whether I was in combat arms depends entirely upon what point in my career you're asking about but suffice it to say I was carrying or in reach of a firearm for a good portion of that career. It doesn't matter. A firearm does not a soldier make. For example when you pick up an AR-15 and call yourself a soldier; are you? I know the US Army doesn't think so.

Show me the muster rolls, the records of arms, uniforms, Accoutraments, pay etc that were provided to the tens of thousands of black CS soldiers and maybe I'll give you a bit of credence. At best, you can show a couple here and thre scattered throughout the CS. Hands down Forrest is the only large scale, if 40 odd can be considered large scale, existance of Black CS soldiers.

The words of the men of the day aren't good enough for you and for that perhaps you are the one who owes someone an apology. The CS soldier did not consider the black man beside him a soldier because there weren't many there. The CS high command did not consider a black man a soldier for exactly the same reason. And the CS politicos... didn't consider a black man a soldier because they had a hard enough time considering a black man a human being. This is quite clear from reading what was said in the CS halls of power. Was the US any better? No, the black man got the short end of the stick in the face of American racism. Was it better for a black man on the ranks of the US than on the plantation? Yes, for he was being paid. He was often being given a chance to learn to read to receive a degree of education that was denied him, by law, in the CS. And by the end of the war he was treated w/ a modicum of respect that comes w/ wearing the uniform.

On another thread you demanded that I reply with an answer on what I thought the role of the SCV, SUVCW was. I did and I stand by that. For your lack of a response... nothing more need be said. The role is to honor the men who fought and died. I do, by supporting the fiction of tens of thousands of black CS soldiers you do not. That is the difference. I support history not fantasy. And I shall continue to support the memory of those who died as well as those who lived.

I bid you a good day.

Last edited on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 06:12 pm by Johan Steele



 Posted: Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 06:31 pm
   
36th Post
ole
Member


Joined: Sun Oct 22nd, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 2027
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

You claim to be the champion of the soldier. do you consider this man less of a soldier because he is not depicted as being armed?
If he was enlisted, paid, and equipped as a soldier, it doesn't much matter what he carried -- whether musical instruments or cooking implements, hammers, shovels or axes, he was a soldier. The thing is, most counted as black Confederates were slaves (servants), impressed slaves, or employed freedmen. (Enlisted is missing.)

Much has been said about Forrest's 45 slaves who rode with him. One can't doubt that each of them picked up a rifle now and then -- and did some shooting; but describing them as soldiers stretches the definition.

And your "evidence" is well-known in CWforum circles. It's trotted out frequently everytime the subject comes up. It doesn't improve with age.

ole



You have chosen to ignore Bama46. click Here to view this post


 Posted: Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 06:46 pm
   
38th Post
javal1
Grumpy Geezer


Joined: Thu Sep 1st, 2005
Location: Tennessee USA
Posts: 1503
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Once again a promising thread is ruined. I'm not taking anyone's side, but if you people can't learn to discuss a subject without jumping to personal comments and demands for apologies, then don't discuss at all.

Pam, I apologize that another of your well thought-out threads got sidetracked. I can't tell you how fed up I am with this.



 Posted: Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 06:49 pm
   
39th Post
ole
Member


Joined: Sun Oct 22nd, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 2027
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

I agree that those who maintain that there were: "Tens of thousands" should be challenged and refuted. But the ones who bother me more are those whose prejudices prevent them from acknowledging that ANY black men could have voluntarily served as Confederate soldiers.

Well said, TD. I do hope you will grant us the leeway to have a few fools and scoundrels on our side, as well.

It can't be doubted that, among such a significant population of freed or enslaved blacks, there would be some who would voluntarily serve what they considered to be their best interest.

I know of no one who will deny that there were gun-toting black Confederates. There had to have been hundreds if not thousands -- but certainly not 10's of thousands. I suppose that it boils down to the definition of a soldier. Ten's of thousands did serve the Confederate cause, but were they soldiers?

In my way of thinking, a servant who looks after his master cannot be counted. The thousands of slaves impressed to build fortifications cannot be called soldiers. Civilian freedmen hired to be teamsters, musicians, cooks, and laborers cannot be called soldiers. Yes, they served the Cause. But were they soldiers?

Enlisted, paid, and equipped by any entity authorized to carry out the government's policies can legitimately be called a soldier. "Enlisted" is the key word.

Much appreciate your input.

ole



You have chosen to ignore Bama46. click Here to view this post


 Current time is 03:15 pmPage:  First Page Previous Page  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next Page Last Page  
Top




UltraBB 1.17 Copyright © 2007-2008 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.5222 seconds (22% database + 78% PHP). 30 queries executed.