Blacks in the CS Ranks?

[Tom Dodson]

Re: Blacks in the CS Ranks?

Message deleted by
Tom Dodson

[FloridaConscript]

Re: Blacks in the CS Ranks?

I wouldn't put a whole lot of stock in period accounts of blacks carrying muskets, knapsacks, etc etc. I'll have to find the sketch in my notes, but it depicts a negro with 4 blankets rolls and a musket. you don't think those fellows who brough their slaves to war actually carried their own kit do you?

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Blacks in the CS Ranks?

I wouldn't put a whole lot of stock in period accounts of blacks carrying muskets, knapsacks, etc etc.

I am not necessarily asking you per say Bryant but this is something you see posted many times in response to certain research on matters CS.. Why ?

Don't confuse this with me personally promoting any historical assertion. I said my personal feelings earlier in thread. But just as sure as someone posts an "absolute" I can many times find something in my library or online libraries to contradict it and then find something to contradict that.

(spits in cup)

Its called R-E-A-D-I-N-G and R-E-S-E-A-R-C-H.

Was there reason to spin or falsely promote the events which are recounted in the dearth of period references relating to slave participation ? My reading shows me they were quite plain and unfettered in speaking of the causation and related issues...look at some of the very words of contemporary leaders...no mixing words there......so why the spin then ?

I take everything with a grain of salt, but view every primary sourced and well annotated quote, periodical or ephemera which meets a reasonable smell test of authenticity, as a another piece of understanding.

CJ Rideout
Tampa, Florida

[FloridaConscript]

Re: Blacks in the CS Ranks?

I am not necessarily asking you per say Bryant but this is something you see posted many times in response to certain research on matters CS.. Why ?

Don't confuse this with me personally promoting any historical assertion. I said my personal feelings earlier in thread. But just as sure as someone posts an "absolute" I can many times find something in my library or online libraries to contradict it and then find something to contradict that.

(spits in cup)

Its called R-E-A-D-I-N-G and R-E-S-E-A-R-C-H.

Was there reason to spin or falsely promote the events which are recounted in the dearth of period references relating to slave participation ? My reading shows me they were quite plain and unfettered in speaking of the causation and related issues...look at some of the very words of contemporary leaders...no mixing words there......so why the spin then ?

I take everything with a grain of salt, but view every primary sourced and well annotated quote, periodical or ephemera which meets a reasonable smell test of authenticity, as a another piece of understanding.

CJ Rideout
Tampa, Florida

CJ,

perhaps I didn't phrase that right. I'm not down playing 1st person accounts...they are the "holy grail" as it were on our end of this crazy hobby. This one account of a civilian seeing negro's carrying muskets should be taken at face value. It should not be inferred that on Sept 17 those same negros were on the working end of the ram rod.

on the other hand....

You can skin this cat just about any way you want to. I have an account that I will post later on from a lt. in the 45th Alabama. It is in the "Voices of the Civil War: Atlanta" series. Burrell is is his servant and often goes on picket duty with the fellows and aims to shoot a yankee one day. Nothing gets Burrell more fired up than being called an abolitionist, according to the young lieutenant. One gets the feeling that Burrell was considered much more a mascot than a comrade. Technically, he performed a soldiers duty be going on picket post (to cook and gather fire wood, no doubt) and even stood a post. Does that qualify as soldier status?
There is an accompanying image with the lt and Burrell (wearing what looks to be a confederate uniform).

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Blacks in the CS Ranks?

Do you see I posted the issue from just about every perspective less that of an actual slaves words who served (which I have ones ancestral legacy in his descendants words.... but that is another story and I would get cruxified if I posted that (Hell! Horace Fricken' Greeley's words are poopah'd by the internets historians) and as such, I am not relying on anything as I am not promoting any view ?

You know you invest time digging and typing in the spirit of "fair and balanced"...ah never mind....gwine to wurter my corn.

CJ Rideout
Tampa, Florida

[jake.koch]

Re: Blacks in the CS Ranks?

With this subject as with any in history, it is as important to look at the source as much as what the source is saying. If it was written after the war there is a good chance that there could be another agenda behind what is written, not to mention that time can put a certain slant on things. Many of the different Southern veterans magazines after the war would make a great deal out of individual African Americans that were said to have been soldiers. They may or may not have been, I am not supporting it or denying it, however I will say that those few have been overgeneralized to the point where some today claim that there may have been thousands of such men.

I think the fact that there is not a great deal of information in this regard on the Confederate side speaks volumes. You can trace the 1st Tennessee or other regiments in the West, the Texas Brigade in the East, yet where is the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Confederate Colored Troops documentation? There is none because there was no such unit and therefore no such troops. This is further proven by such fervent documentation about federal units such as the 54th and 55th Massachusetts and the USCTs.

I don't believe that there was large scale acceptance of African Americans in desegregated units in the South. The largest fear the South had until the Civil War was Slave Insurection. In many parts of the South it was punishable by death for a slave to be in possesion of a firearm. I doubt they were ready to arm black troops at that point as that idea is what made John Brown's Raid so incindiery. I know the units formed in Richmond at the end of the war were of combined organization where the companies were either white or black, but how much of that was for the very reason that Southern authorities wanted white troops at hand in case the black companies switched sides in the midst of battle? I find it hard to believe that the white male Southern society that fought Reconstruction and the bestowing of citizenship and the vote as well as basic rights on African Americans so hard after the war (for almost 100 years) would have been eager to take them as comrades and put guns into their hands.

There is a book written by David Blight and I can't for the life of me remember the name off the top of my head at this moment, but anyway it discusses the first fifty years after the war and how the history of African Americans were rewritten to the point that by the 1913 Reunion at Gettysburg, the only African Americans invited to attend were janitors. None of the veterans from the USCT or other organizations were even invited to attend. Reunification was the spirit of the time rather then a celebration of emancipation.

The North is as guilty of allowing the myth of the Black Confederate to rise beyond all proportions in the first fifty years after the war as those in the South that may have had different motives were for starting it. It was not until that last few decades that true historical research has shown the truth.

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Blacks in the CS Ranks?

Many of the different Southern veterans magazines after the war would make a great deal out of individual African Americans that were said to have been soldiers.

Yes, I have seen this posted here and elsewhere by very learned people. Yet, almost to a byte, it lacks definitive sourcing and/or primary support from such publications. I have read and archived a few volumes of Confederate Veteran or The Southern myself, is there a one in particular that stands out the most to you as an example ?

Always needing more arrows for the quiver be they for use against Neo-Confederates or Neo-HardTards.

It was not until that last few decades that true historical research has shown the truth

and as much truth you can send my way is, as always, obliged as well.

Thanks

CJ Rideout
Tampa, Florida

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Blacks in the CS Ranks?

Here is an example, from the leading Confederate veteran publication which supports a clear picture of slave involvement which is the exact, commonly accepted historical record:

THE NEGRO

“Most accounts of the negroes during the war agree that the slave on the whole was faithful to his master and rendered great service to the Confederate cause. Employed as workers on railroads fortifications plantations in arsenals and munition works they increased the fighting strength of the South by releasing men for the army. Many were employed as cooks musicians and servants in the army. On the plantations the negroes kept working and raising food for the armies. Their behavior was good notwithstanding the fact that most of the persons on the plantations were women and children the government having exempted from military service, but one white man as an overseer for twenty slaves. Mrs Smedes speaking of the slaves on her father's plantation says “that they made clothes and knit socks for the army and that they were our greatest comfort during the war”. Mrs Harrison tells in her book of her faithful slave helping to bury the valuables of the family in the ground as they were hurrying away before the approaching Federal army. LeConte also dwells on the faithfulness and good spirit shown by the negroes. Upon the passage of an act by the Confederate congress enrolling negro slaves as soldiers many slaves volunteered their services. That the negroes did not all look to the North for freedom is gleaned from Fremantle's statement that all the negroes whom he met spoke of the Yankees with great detestation and expressed the wish to have nothing to do with such bad people. Many of the negroes had become endeared to their masters and naturally participated in any feeling of enmity that the master might have had for the North. On the other hand there were negroes who ran away from their owners. The many advertisements for runaway slaves in the newspapers testify to this. Some owners stated that the negroes in question were attempting to reach the Union army. Some negroes served the Union army as guides and Southerners would not place a trust in strange negroes for fear of betrayal. Sherman stated that the negroes were frantic with joy upon the arrival of his army although the Daily Confederate of Raleigh stated that the negroes were not cordial toward Sherman. The Richmond Dispatch stated that out of ninety eight negro prisoners captured in a batch from the Union army forty six were runaway slaves. While there were individual instances of unfaithfulness on the part of some negroes due perhaps to their own character or to some disagreeable environment the mass of the slaves working in some cases under the direction of women and children proved faithful and performed their tasks in a way that was appreciated by their masters.”

Confederate Veteran, Volume 30 p .182 (1922)


By Confederated Southern Memorial Association (U.S.), Sons of Confederate Veterans (Organization), United Confederate Veterans, United Daughters of the Confederacy

Standing by for someone to run their Truth-O-Meter over this.

CJ Rideout
Tampa, Florida

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Blacks in the CS Ranks?

Lincoln' thoughts:

“There are but few aspects of this great war on which I have not already expressed my views by speaking or writing. There is one the recent effort of our erring brethren sometimes so called to employ the slaves in their armies. The great question with them has been “Will the negro fight for them?” They ought to know better than we and doubtless do know better than we. I may incidentally remark that having in my life heard many arguments or strings of words meant to pass for arguments intended to show that the negro ought to be a slave if he shall now really fight to keep himself a slave it will be a far better argument why he should remain a slave than I have ever before heard. He perhaps ought to be a slave if he desires it ardently enough to fight for it. Or if one out of four will for his own freedom fight to keep the other three in slavery he ought to be a slave for his selfish meanness. I have always thought that all men should be free but if any should be slaves it should be first those who desire it for themselves and secondly those who desire it for others. Whenever I hear any one arguing for slavery I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally. There is one thing about the negro's fighting for the rebels which we can know as well as they can and that is that they cannot at the same time fight in their armies and stay at home and make bread for them. And this being known and remembered we can have but little concern whether they become soldiers or not I am rather in favor of the measure and would at any time if I could have loaned them a vote to carry it. We have to reach the bottom of the insurgent resources and that they employ or seriously think of employing the slaves as soldiers gives us glimpses of the bottom. Therefore I am glad of what we learn on this subject “

President Abraham Lincoln. March 17, 1865 address to an Indiana regiment

The Civil war: the National View By Francis Newton Thorpep. 354-353 (1898)

CJ Rideout
Tampa, Florida

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Blacks in the CS Ranks?

“We must also pay a deserved compliment to the companies of free colored men all very well drilled and comfortably uniformed. Most of these companies quite unaided by the administration have supplied themselves with arms without regard to cost or trouble.”

The New Orleans Picayune February 9 1862

CJ Rideout
Tampa, Florida

[jake.koch]

Re: Blacks in the CS Ranks?

I beleive that your last quote speaks of the same units previously discussed that immediately joined the Union when given first oppurtunity to do so and spearheaded the assault at Port Hudson.

As far as exact issues of those magazines, no there is not a specific issue that comes to mind, it has been awhile since I have looked through them. However I do remember reading such articles.

As far as my mention of truth in scholarship over the last few decades, anyone that has studied this era indepth should be able to acknowledge that until the last few decades other then [I]The Sable Arm[I] African American contributions in the war were overlooked in both North and South, and when they were spoken of it was done so in the spirit of the loyal slave such as in Gone With The Wind. This is due to the fact that the South may have lost the war, but did win Reconstruction.

Following is a review I wrote last semester regarding a book mentioned multiple times previously in this thread for those of you that have not had a chance to read it.

In Confederate Emancipation: Southern Plans to Free and Arm Slaves During the Civil War, Bruce Levine attempted to “set the whole story squarely in the context of the war’s progress, its impact upon on the social and political psychology of the Confederate leadership, soldiers, and citizenry, the evolution of Union policy toward the slaves and slavery, and especially the conduct of the South’s black population.” He showed that the attempt by the Confederate government to recruit, free, and then arm slaves to serve as combat troops during the closing stages of the war was an utter failure, and that although there were a few companies of black troops raised in Virginia at the end of the war, it was not proof that blacks supported the Confederacy, or that Confederate leaders such as Davis and Lee were ready for eventual equality between whites and blacks.

Levine began and focused throughout on the proposal offered up by Confederate General Patrick Cleburne in early 1864 to free slaves in exchange for their service as combat troops in the Confederate Army. Levine showed that Cleburne’s plan was not the first to be forwarded to the government; however it was the plan that would eventually be adopted to a degree. The late date of the plan’s implementation showed how unpopular the idea was in the Confederacy, as well as how desperate the Confederacy was that they would implement the freeing, and arming of slaves.

Levine used a wide variety of sources, making sure to capture the thoughts of the full spectrum of Southern society. An interesting point he made was that even people that had been on opposite sides of the issue of secession to begin with, the men that had remained unionists until their states had seceded, such as William W. Holden of the Raleigh North Carolina Standard, as well as the fire eaters that pushed secession along, such as Robert Barnwell Rhett of the Charleston Mercury, “agreed on one central and fundamental point, one that they considered nearly self-evident – that the South had withdrawn from and made war upon the old Union primarily to safeguard its “peculiar institution.””

Levine also spent a great deal of space discussing the way that the topic of black Confederate soldiers has been treated since the war. His work effectively silences one of the myths of the Lost Cause, that thousands of blacks freely volunteered to fight against the North in order to serve their masters, and that the plan itself showed that the Southern elite did not care about slavery, but rather that they had seceded only to gain their independence. Levine argued against slaves’ loyalty to the system that kept them in bondage by giving examples of the fact that “The slaves’ wartime conduct – forcing masters to grant concessions, escaping altogether from their masters, aiding Union soldiers, becoming Union soldiers by the tens of thousands in order to defeat the slaveholders’ republic – demonstrated their determination to become free men and women.”

Levine made it clear that the proposal to arm slaves was no attempt by Southern leaders to reward loyal servants, but in fact was the only way to salvage the Old South. The white Southern elite planned to keep political power in their own hands, even if the slaves were “freed”. In the event of the Confederacy’s success, they would have attempted to make laws that controlled both wages and where the “freedmen” could work. The black Southern workers would have been forced by law to remain on the plantations, working for extremely low wages. Levine compared this possible scenario more than once to the serfs of Europe.

Levine clearly and succinctly laid out the Confederacy’s plan and motives, and successfully attacked the Lost Cause writers that praised the adoption of a plan to raise black troops as proof of the loyalty of the South’s Black population. For those that claim thousands and in some cases tens of thousands of black combat troops fought for the South, Levine can find proof of only two hundred, which he claimed was a large estimate. These men never even saw combat, and judging from reports of the way they acted during their drilling, they were not at all eager to be a part of the Confederate Army.

Levine made excellent use of a wide range of primary source material that captured every viewpoint of the topic. These sources completely supported his thesis. Of special interest was his reassessment of the idea that General Robert E. Lee was in support of freeing the slaves. He successfully used Lee’s own words to show that the nearly sainted General was not a firm supporter of ending slavery as he has often been painted as being, but rather believed that “While slavery was indeed an evil, Lee argued that, it was “useless to expatiate on its disadvantages” because “the painful discipline” that the slaves “are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race.” He added that “The relation of master and slave, controlled by humane laws and influenced by Christianity and enlightened public sentiment,” was “the best that can exist between the white and black races while intermingled as at present in this country.”

Levine did an excellent job of explaining the different steps of Cleburne’s plan. He successfully silenced all critics of the idea that blacks did not unconditionally love and obey their masters. He laid out his information clearly and supported it strongly.

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Blacks in the CS Ranks?

I believe that your last quote speaks of the same units previously discussed that immediately joined the Union when given first opportunity to do so and spearheaded the assault at Port Hudson.

Yes but the difference is ....I posted annotated, primary support from a wide variety of sources and perspectives.

Color me Old School.

Christopher Rideout
Tampa, Florida

[jake.koch]

Re: Blacks in the CS Ranks?

I don't appreciate the patronization, I have seen you do that to quite enough people when they continue to discuss things with you that you don't seem to agree with. I'm not playing the game. I'm done with this thread.

[OldKingCrow]

Re: Blacks in the CS Ranks?

I don't appreciate the patronization, I have seen you do that to quite enough people when they continue to discuss things with you that you don't seem to agree with. I'm not playing the game. I'm done with this thread.

Son I am not patronizing you one iota, know this. don't get this thread locked I have spent hours laying out historical support here. I only ask the same of you and I expect more in light of the shingle you hang out.

You think there is an argument or that I don't agree with....please what is it that I don't agree with ?

I am sorry for coming across snarky and edited my post. I was wrong.

CJ Rideout
Tampa, Florida

[jake.koch]

Re: Blacks in the CS Ranks?

Refering to me as "son" is not patronizing either I suppose. If that is the case I apologize for taking offense to both personal references to me. The fact is that you seem to getting into constant arguments with people on the forum and I was slightly defensive in that light because I could not tell if you were purposely trying to provoke me with the seemingly condescending tones. If that is not the case I do sincerely apologize.

I do appreciate the fact that you used primary sources, however the fact is that I am on lunch at work and not near a place where I can dig into any primary sources. I happened to have my zip drive with me that included that review. Included in the review were many quotes taken from the book spoken of in this thread, many of which were direct quotes from primary sources or analysis of them.