Author Topic: Historical accuracy check needed  (Read 7093 times)

Offline Pukin Dog

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 192
  • The frozen tundra of Madison, Wi
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Historical accuracy check needed
« on: January 27, 2006, 08:15:31 PM »
Although I'm not an NCOWS member (yet. . . . I'm gonna do it soon!) I always love reading the posts here as the members show time and again that they know (historically) what they speak of.

I've been having a lively discussion down in Books and Movies (Foote's Trilogy) over the subject of Black Confederates (combatants, not just wagon drivers and cooks, etc)

Here's a quote from one poster in reply to my suggestion that there might have been some but not enough to matter:

Quote
no significant numbers ? ... is 30,000 in-significant ? That is the current estimate.

This sounds ridiculousy high to me.  That is 3 divisions worth of troops.  Where are all the mentions of these troops in letters home?  In newspaper articles (i.e. Democratic and Copperhead newspapers up North)  In intelligence reports??  Campaign speeches by McClellan in 1864 (Don't you think that would be a pretty good line??  Why are we fighting the South when 30,000 Slaves are fighting for the "Cause"???)  How about memoirs of Confederate Officers and Non-Coms?? Battle reports???  Prisoner records???

What units were they attached too?  What battles did they fight in??

Am I just stupid??  Am I reading the wrong books (about 300 titles so far about the War)??  Is there a huge coverup or conspiracy to hide the fact that the Confederacy had tens of thousands of black men fighting for them and shouting the Rebel Yell???

I admit I'm being somewhat sarcastic and sceptical.  But I don't see any hard data that would support this assertion.  It seems VERY fuzzy and playing loose with the facts.  What say you all???
"Puking Dog" Danlbach

Soot Lord Junior Grade
Semi-Warthog


Offline St. George

  • Deputy Marshal
  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4827
  • NCOWS , GAF, B.O.L.D., Order of St. George, SOCOM,
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #1 on: January 28, 2006, 12:59:18 AM »
This from a single online query...Black Confederates in the Civil War - www.usgennet.org/usa/mo/county/stlouis/blackcs.htm

  It has been estimated that over 65,000 Southern blacks were in the Confederate ranks. Over 13,000 of these, “saw the elephant” also known as meeting the enemy in combat. These Black Confederates included both slave and free. The Confederate Congress did not approve blacks to be officially enlisted as soldiers (except as musicians), until late in the war. But in the ranks it was a different story. Many Confederate officers did not obey the mandates of politicians, they frequently enlisted blacks with the simple criteria, “Will you fight?” Historian Ervin Jordan, explains that “biracial units” were frequently organized “by local Confederate and State militia Commanders in response to immediate threats in the form of Union raids…”. Dr. Leonard Haynes, a African-American professor at Southern University, stated, “When you eliminate the black Confederate soldier, you’ve eliminated the history of the South.”
 
As the war came to an end, the Confederacy took progressive measures to build back up it's army. The creation of the Confederate States Colored Troops, copied after the segregated northern colored troops, came too late to be successful. Had the Confederacy been successful, it would have created the world's largest armies (at the time) consisting of black soldiers, even larger than that of the North. This would have given the future of the Confederacy a vastly different appearance than what modern day racist or anti-Confederate liberals conjecture. Not only did Jefferson Davis envision black Confederate veterans receiving bounty lands for their service, there would have been no future for slavery after the goal of 300,000 armed black CSA veterans came home after the war.
 
Resources:
Charles Kelly Barrow, et.al. Forgotten Confederates: An Anthology About Black Southerners (1995). Currently the best book on the subject.
Ervin L. Jordan, Jr. Black Confederates and Afro-Yankees in Civil War Virginia (1995). Well researched and very good source of information on Black Confederates, but has a strong Union bias.
Richard Rollins. Black Southerners in Gray (1994). Excellent source.
Dr. Edward Smith and Nelson Winbush, “Black Southern Heritage”. An excellent educational video. Mr. Winbush is a descendent of a Black Confederate and a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV).

Problems with Documenting Black Confederates
 
1. Muster Rolls: Virtually all Confederate muster rolls do not contain any racial information. While it is fairly easy to identify American Indians and Hispanics by their non-Anglo names, most blacks, on the other hand, adopted European names. Although some individuals can be assumed to be slaves for lacking last names, but free blacks are virtually indistinguishable from their white comrades-in-arms. For instance, brothers, Arthur and Miles Reed both served as Privates in Co.D, 3rd NC Artillery (also in the 40th NC Infantry), but Broadfoot's Confederate roster (index of National Archives' service records) does not in any way identify them as black. Due to these difficulties, secondary sources including pension records, United Confederate Veteran files, and family records must supplement research in suspected black soldiers.
It should also should be noted that for some States, muster roll records are notoriously incomplete for a variety of reasons. For example in Alabama, many of this military records were destroyed or conveniently lost rather than hand them over to the Federal government where persecution of ex-Confederate was a very real possibility. In Missouri, a serious attempt to compile Confederate muster records did not begin until 1908, by that time many rolls were lost and many veterans had already passed away. As a result, the completeness of Confederate muster rolls are a recognized problem, not only for the black Confederate descendant but for many white Confederate soldiers as well.

2. Pension records: Only those surviving to pension age, or were aware of this benefit, or were fortunate enough to overcome postwar anti-Negro prejudice. Since pension files were controlled by State authority, they were often subject to a local county review board. This caused considerably differences in various States and from county to county. South Carolina, for instance, recorded 30 black Confederates pensioners in one county (York County) alone, Tennessee claimed 267, while the State of Missouri, which was rather hesitant to issue pensions to anyone, let alone to black Confederates, appears to have not issued any. Discrimination towards black Confederates was another real problem. For example, in South Carolina white Confederates could apply for old age pensions as early as 1887. Black veterans were denied pensions until 1923. By that time the majority of them were deceased.
One of the best resources about Black Confederates is the book, "Forgotten Confederates: An Anthology about Black Southerners", by Charles Kelly Barrow, J. H. Segars and R.B. Rosenburg. Not only packed full of very good historical accounts, it lists the names of hundreds of black Confederate veterans who received pensions for their service. While it is far from being comprehensive, it is the best resource available to date.

3. Classification: One must understand what is meant by the term, "black Confederate". Most black Confederate were NOT what one would considered as a "soldier" in the nineteenth century sense of the word. There was and still remains today an old bigoted argument that this "old boy was not a soldier but a slave" ? Well this is the same mindset that opposed compensation for black Confederates back in 1923. To be truthful and nondiscriminatory we must look either at their counterpart in the Union army or in today's modern army. Did U.S. servicemen ever serve as stable assistants, aides to Commissioned officers, cooks, teamsters, ect ? They certainly did. Plus many eye witness accounts of black Confederates testify that even some in these positions did occasionally carry arms. It would be wrong to claim that the bulk of black Confederates working in factories, repair shops, and hospitals far away from the battlefields, were soldiers even in today's standard. Most of these would NOT be considered "soldiers" but "employees of the Army". Nether the less we must be careful not to continuing to inject nineteenth century discriminatory bias on men that in today's Army would be considered soldiers. If they were serving on the battlefield or immediately behind frontlines of battle performing military service, then we should consider the modern Army equivalent. Unfortunately since we must use muster rolls, and other 1861-1865 era documents, many of these Southern black patriots will be forever unknown and forgotten. We must do the best we can to see that the few were can document are not forgotten.
     
How many black Confederates served the South in combat or direct battlefield support ? The numbers vary wildly from 15,000 to 120,000. The truth remains that nobody has an accurate figure. My estimate is that 65,000 blacks scattered across the entire South followed the Confederate armies from one battlefield to the next from 1861 to 1865. Larger numbers of blacks loyally served the Confederacy, not as soldiers but as employees of the Army, Navy, Confederate government or the individual State governments.

Where does this estimate of 65,000 come from ?
Dr. Steiner, Chief Inspector of the United States Sanitary Commission, observed that Gen. "Stonewall" Jackson's troops in occupation of Frederick, Maryland, in 1862: "Over 3,000 Negroes must be included in this number [Confederate troops]. These were clad in all kinds of uniforms, not only in cast-off or captured United States uniforms, but in coats with Southern buttons, State buttons, etc. These were shabby, but not shabbier or seedier than those worn by white men in the rebel ranks. Most of the Negroes had arms, rifles, muskets, sabers, bowie-knives, dirks, etc.....and were manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederate Army."

If we assume Dr. Steiner is somewhat reliable and assume that this 3,000 Negroes of Jackson's troops are a  representative number of black Confederates in a typical Confederate fighting force, then we may be able to make a rough calculation. First we must determine how many men were part of Jackson's troops ? If Lee had 50,000, was Jackson's force, 25,000 ? That would be a likely estimate. So then what percentage is 3,000 of 25,000 ? Answer: 12 %. So that would tell us that 12% of Jackson's force was black Confederates.  Now, if  we assume that Steiner meant 3,000 blacks soldiers    in Lee's entire 50,000 force that crossed the Potomac, then the percentage of black Confederates is reduced to 6%. Either way it is calculated, black Confederates were a considerable percentage of the total Confederate fighting force.

To extend this reasoning across the entire Confederate Army, what does this represent ? That depends on the total number of men that served in the CS Army, which is also in itself debatable as muster rolls are notoriously incomplete.

For example, let's use for example the 1,000,000 listed names in Broadfoot's Confederate roster compiled by the National Archives. Yes, there is some repeat names, but let's use that figure as an example. What percentage is 12% ? This would translate to 120,000 black Confederates and half that, 60,000. As such, the 65,000 estimate is not an unreasonable estimate. Debatable ? Yes. Refutable ? Absolutely not. Black Confederates imaginary ? Ridiculous

Could Dr. Steiner have been wrong regarding the numbers ? Yes, absolutely. In fact, many Army officers routinely made mistakes at estimating the enemies numerical strengths. However, the smaller the body of troops one is estimating, the more likely that number is correct. While Steiner failed to accurately estimate Lee's total forces (I recall he estimated 80,000 instead of 50,000), in my opinion, it is unlikely he erred as significantly with a handful of 3,000 black troops. So even if Steiner made an overestimate of 30%, we still are in the range of 40,000 to 80,000.

--------------------------------------
 What About Black Confederates in Missouri?
Across the South there was a significant minority of slaves and black freemen that sided with the Confederacy. Normally the free blacks, serving with the Confederacy received equal pay of the white Confederate private. For the slaves, the receipt of pay was not guaranteed. Their pay went according to their master's wishes, but often a portion did go for his personal up-keep. Others were promised freedom, mainly in return for faithful service by their masters.  Missouri was a far journey from the Confederate capital of Richmond, so the offers of freedom for service late in the war by the Jefferson Davis administration never made it to the far West.  But like the rest of the South, some black Missourians sided with the Confederacy, not because they were fighting to preserve slavery but  because they believed it was their duty to defend their people (as they saw them, both black and white) from the Yankee invader. But in Missouri this was less true than in most of the South.

In Missouri, since most slave owners were pro-Union, and the State was occupied by the Union Army, there were very few black Confederates.  Black Confederates rarely came to service without their masters (or more affectionately, "white folks").  For free blacks in Missouri, the Confederacy had nothing to offer to rally them to their cause. The Missouri River was patrolled by Union gunboats, so essentially the upper half the State was cut off from serious Confederate influence.  It is true a dozen or so rode with Confederate guerilla forces of Quantrill and a few served elsewhere. But their numbers in Missouri do not compare with the visibility of black Confederate in other southern States. One uncommon example would be George McDonald, of Osceola, Missouri (see link below).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About the Author:  Scott K. Williams is a St. Louis historian and writes articles for the American Local History Network and The Missouri Civil War Museum at Jefferson Barracks.  He is  a kinsmen of Lt. Col. James B. McCreary, who submitted a petition to the Confederate Congress, on behalf of Confederate soldiers, requesting slaves be recruited as soldiers in the Confederate Army. He is also a descendant of Union soldiers, abolitionists, and a member of the U.S. Grant Camp, Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War. He is also author of , "Slavery in St. Louis",  "U.S. Colored Troops" (And the Plight of  the Refugee Slave),  and "Benton Barracks".
Online Resources Regarding Black Confederates:
Terrell's Texas Cavalry, a historical multi-racial Confederate unit.

George McDonald, Proud Black Confederate of Missouri

Black Confederate Pensioners of Marshall County, Mississippi.

Rev. William Mack Lee Narrative (Gen. Robert E. Lee's black servant) "I was raised by one of the greatest men in the world. There was never one born of a woman greater than Gen. Robert E. Lee, according to my judgment. All of his servants were set free ten years before the war, but all remained on the plantation until after the surrender."

Given this excerpt - you'll see that the numbers are reasonably explained.

By reading the entire article - more illumination's provided on a very overlooked aspect of the war.

Vaya,

Scouts Out!
"It Wasn't Cowboys and Ponies - It Was Horses and Men.
It Wasn't Schoolboys and Ladies - It Was Cowtowns and Sin..."

Offline Steel Horse Bailey

  • Jeff "Steel Horse Bailey" - BP Warthog & C&B Shooter
  • NCOWS Member
  • Top Active Citizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 6164
  • A Master of the Sublime & Holy Order or the Soot
  • SASS #: 27463
  • NCOWS #: 1919
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #2 on: January 28, 2006, 05:45:36 AM »
Well, P.D., here's sure an answer to your question.  St. George seems to specialise in all things military.

Answering that question kinda makes flying A-6s seem a little simple and straightforeward, eh?!  (And I DON'T mean that in a demeaning way, pard!)
"May Your Powder always be Dry and Black; Your Smoke always White; and Your Flames Always Light the Way to Eternal Shooting Fulfillment !"

Advertising

  • Guest
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #3 on: Today at 04:21:12 PM »

Offline Bristow Kid

  • I've got a touch of hangover beuracrate. Don't push me
  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 724
  • Matthew(Matt) Bohach
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #3 on: January 28, 2006, 06:20:33 AM »
Dang ya learn something new everyday.  I had no idea there were black confederate soldiers.  Thats for starting this post and or all the information.
Prayer Posse
SCORRS
NCOWS #2540
Grand Army of the Frontier #437
Department of the Missouri
PWDFR #149
RATS #233
SASS #68717
WARTHOG

Offline Ottawa Creek Bill

  • Vietnam Vet 1966,67 First place, Southeast Asia Rifle Team, "66/67"
  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1970
  • OCB, A Newer, More Gentler NCOWS Member...........
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #4 on: January 28, 2006, 07:31:26 AM »
The fact that a non NCOWS member would come to this board for historical information as important as this topic speaks volumes for our organization. St. George is amazing regarding historical research.....
Now, if P.D. will take the plung and crossover to the real west we would be glad to have him as a member of NCOWS..

Bill
Vice Chairman American Indian Council of Indianapolis
Vice Chairman Inter tribal Council of Indiana
Member, Ottawa-Chippewa Band of Indians of Michigan
SASS # 2434
NCOWS # 2140
CMSA # 3119
NRA LIFER


Offline Major 2

  • "Still running against the wind"
  • Deputy Marshal
  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 15874
  • NCOWS #: 3032
  • GAF #: 785
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 421
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #5 on: January 28, 2006, 08:34:07 AM »
I suppose because I made that 30,000 reference I should respond....

I offer this.... it includes several photos ,one of Louis Napoleon Nelson the Grandfather of my friend & who knew him

http://www.rebelgray.com/BlacksForced.htm

I highly recomend "Black Southerners in Confederate Armies"  I had suggested to you eariler.
when planets align...do the deal !

Offline Pukin Dog

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 192
  • The frozen tundra of Madison, Wi
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #6 on: January 28, 2006, 10:05:04 AM »
My main problem with this whole thing is how to define a "Black Confederate".  I'm not interested in cooks, laborers, wagon drivers, man servants.  I don't dispute that there were thousands of these type of blacks toiling for the South.  You can throw numbers around all day long depending on how you define what a "Black Confederate" was.  My definition would be:

"Blacks who believed in the 'cause' of the Confederacy and were front line soldiers, charging the embankments through the smoke and cannister and hollering the "Rebel Yell" right along side Johnny Reb" 

How many do you come up with now?? 

If there were tens of thousands of these types of "Black Confederates" one would think that "Billy Yank" would have written home about it.  As I recall after the emancipation proclimation there was alot of gripping that "we fight for the union not some damn N______s".  Seems to me if they were fighting thousands of Black men, rounding them up as prisoners, burying them after battles, they might have noted it in some of their letters home.  Don't ya think??? 

Wouldn't Newspaper men of Democratic or Copperhead leanings have trumpeted it in the press?  Where are all the articles in extant papers? 

Don't you think McClelland would have had a field day with it in the 1864 elections?  " That ape Lincoln, that butcherer is sending millions of boys to die for the Union and here we find that hundreds of thousands of Slaves are fighting for the South!!  Its a travesty I say!!
(I rounded it up to 100,000s+ as McClelland was prone to exagerate a bit eh??) 

Where is the evidence in intelligence reports?  The Union conducted thousands of interrogations of prisoners.  Gosh, if some of those prisoners were black that might have been an interesting thing to note, eh??  And if during interogations it was mentioned that "We have 3 black Regiments", that might have gotten some interest, yes? 

Bottom line is I don't think that this fuzzy revisionist stuff need to be disproved by historians.  You don't need to disprove something that wasn't there.

Rather those who tout it need to prove with overwhelming evidence (and there are tons of documents, letters, newspapers, battle reports, memoirs, etc, etc) from the War that should show it.  I don't believe that it does. 
"Puking Dog" Danlbach

Soot Lord Junior Grade
Semi-Warthog


Offline O.T. Buchannan

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 244
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #7 on: January 28, 2006, 11:06:06 AM »
Black Confederates?  First, the official position of the Confederate government was that the idea of arming and using blacks as soldiers was NOT acceptable.  One Confederate General, Patrick Cleburne, was threatened with losing his commission for even suggesting it.  However, by March of 1865, the situation in the Confederacy was so desperate that this official position was changed, and blacks were in fact enrolled at that point...but to late for actual use, as it was all over by April 1865.

Now, did blacks fight for the Confederacy?  On an individual basis, yes, some did.  One common role was that of Manservant, a trusted position that was NOT the same as being a field hand.  One such notable individual who served in this role was Bass Reeves himself, who rode armed, alongside his master (Colonel George Reeves) in combat.

Now, as to whether or not blacks served in some wholesale fashion on an equal basis with white Confederates?  No, I dont believe so.  Blacks DID serve in Confederate ranks in a variety of laborer roles, and I don't consider it inconceivable that on an individual basis, blacks may have been allowed to 'pick up the musket' and fight in Confederate ranks.  I see this as something that may have occurred on some level on an individual basis, but not as a wholesale Confederate practice.

Consider if you will, that despite 'hints' and 'suggestions' that 65,000 blacks fought for the Confederacy on an equal basis with whites, no one can actually PROVE this.....we can only look at Confederacy enrollment figures and 'speculate' that some were black soldiers, or we can 'speculate' that some of those black laborers were actually soldiers.  We can speculate and come up with all of the studies we want, but no one has actually been able to PROVE it yet.  WHY?  Why can't we prove it?  Well, to answer this, perhaps we need to understand why it has NOW become important to us to try to prove such a thing in the first place.

When you take a little kid as a student, and you are teaching that kid American History, the idea is not necessarily to teach 'factual history'. The idea is to teach that student pride in where they come from, and pride in their country.  The idea is to shape their view of what America is all about.  

What was I taught in school?  Hmmm....let me see, Columbus came over and discovered America in 1492, which of course was a good thing, and then some English folks came over on the Mayflower 100+ years after that, and then a few more came over, and colonies developed.  Then, England kept taxing the colonists beyond their ability to pay, so America declared her independence, which gave us our 4th. of July holiday, and George Washington became head of the American Army, and despite privations and suffering at places like Valley Forge, we prevailed in that conflict, and George Washington eventually became the first president of the new nation.  Fast forward a few years to 1861, and we fought a Civil War, and that ended slavery, and everything was pretty much ok.....oh, well, a few black folks had to sit in the back of the bus and things of that nature, but then Martin Luther King came along and marched a couple of times, and that ended that, and now everything is cool.  Pretty much sums it up, right?

To most Americans, that's it, that is our story, and that's what I was taught, along with most other folks.  However, if we start to try to discuss it further, problems arise. For example, my last name (which originates as 'old High German') is Ingram.  If I ever find myself discussing geneology with whites, someone will inevitably ask if my ancestry is from Germany.  When I say, "Oh no ma'am, my family were slaves in Byhalia, Mississippi", the whites I am talking to will usually apologize, and or put their head down, or change the subject.  If I want to discuss slavery or lynching, whites will commonly say "Can't we just forget about all that?"  Think about it for a moment:  If I were to go to anyone of you, and ask you to forget all about your family history, that wouldn't go over to well, would it?

This brings us directly back to the question of why we must NOW try to prove that blacks fought in the Confederacy on an equal basis with whites.  We live in what is now the 'information age'.  That history that I was taught, that I related above?  We now know that there is MORE to the story, and much of that 'more' is unpleasant stuff.  We are now hard pressed to try to answer how it is that you can have slavery in the 'land of the free'.  We are hard pressed to try to answer how we can say 'liberty and justice for all', while at the same time, lynching and mutilating and murdering people by the THOUSANDS, for offenses varying from trying to vote, or simply looking at white women.  These things ARE in fact part of our history as Americans, but they are embarrasing parts of it, and so what we are trying to do now is 'damage control'.

There is a lot of glorious, powerful history in the South.  At the time of the American Civil War, there were actually Union men who owned slaves, and Confederate men who DID NOT.  Robert E. Lee thought slavery was immoral, and he didn't own any, and in fact, he did NOT fight for slavery...and he was not alone.  Others, such as Nathan Bedford Forrest, had their ENTIRE wealth tied up in the slave trade, and in fact, in 1861, there were four million blacks held as slaves in the south.  The glory of the 'lost cause' of the south has always been a great American theme, but in our 'information age', a lot of that history is now becoming tainted when we look at certain harsh facts.  So, how do we counter this?  We go back and try to 'change it' and revise it.  We go back and try to 'soften' the race issues.  We now come up with claims that slavery really 'wasn't that bad', and Jim Crow 'wasn't that bad', and everything was fine.  We claim that no one ever really beat a slave....we now say that was a myth.  And yes, we now say that blacks fought in the Confederacy on an equal footing with whites (despite official Confederate policy) so that we can prove that race in America was never really an issue.  If we can convince people of all of that, then we no longer have to apologize for certain parts of American history, and we no longer have to say "Can't we just forget about all that?"

There is in fact a move afoot to try to go back and 'soften the racial issues' from a historical perspective.  Don't take my word for it, GO READ IT FOR YOURSELF.  Type in KKK as a search, and read some of the information on the websites....some of them will give instructions that members (and other interested parties) should go forth to various websites and push some of this very 'softening' information that I've talked about.....including the idea that 'lots of blacks fought for the Confederacy.'



    
"If the grass is greener on the other side, water your OWN lawn."

Offline Chantilly

  • NCOWS Member
  • Top Active Citizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 325
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #8 on: January 28, 2006, 11:41:06 AM »
Excellent thread!  Not trying to change the subject here but not only are our views of black people's lives not recorded accurately and taght to us in school, the same is true for women.  Women during this period and that of the Victorian period in general, we are taught, knitted and sewed and raised families and walked around in cool dresses  - that is if they are mentioned at all.  I'm no way an expert in this area but as I've started down the road reading diaries, etc., I'm learning that women were property, often abused, and most had amazing grit.  Just another area that needs more attention to reality - and yes, some women fought in the Civil War primarily taking on the role of a man.

A six-shooter makes men and women equal.  - Agnes Morley Cleaveland (1818-1889)

I should like a little fun now and then.  Life is altogether too sober.  - Elizabeth Blackwell (1821-1910)

Offline Ottawa Creek Bill

  • Vietnam Vet 1966,67 First place, Southeast Asia Rifle Team, "66/67"
  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1970
  • OCB, A Newer, More Gentler NCOWS Member...........
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #9 on: January 28, 2006, 01:07:26 PM »
Well.............................I don't wnat to get started on this, other then to say...,Marlan, great response..., As far as I'm concerned......Columbus never existed......................

Bill
Vice Chairman American Indian Council of Indianapolis
Vice Chairman Inter tribal Council of Indiana
Member, Ottawa-Chippewa Band of Indians of Michigan
SASS # 2434
NCOWS # 2140
CMSA # 3119
NRA LIFER


Offline Books OToole

  • NCOWS Member
  • Top Active Citizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 2677
  • Michael Tatham
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 91
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #10 on: January 28, 2006, 01:08:58 PM »
This really is not my field of study but:

I seem to remember that there were two colored regiments raised for the Confederacy in New Orleans.  (These may have been free men of color as were the three battalions of free men of color that defended the city in 1815).  When Benjamin Butler took over the city he gave them the option of fighting for the Union, which they took.  This can be confirmed by consulting The Sable Arm by Dudley Taylor Cornish.

Closer to my area of knowlege is the two colored infantry regiments and one battery of artillery that were raised in Kansas.  The battery had a least one colored officer!!

The two New Orleans regiments and the 1st Kansas Colored all pre-date the 54th Mass.

Books
G.I.L.S.

K.V.C.
N.C.O.W.S. 2279 - Senator
Hiram's Rangers C-3
G.A.F. 415
S.F.T.A.

Offline Pukin Dog

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 192
  • The frozen tundra of Madison, Wi
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #11 on: January 28, 2006, 01:45:14 PM »
O.T. Buchanan,
Thank you for your response.  Pretty much sums up this whole revisionist movement as far as I'm concerned.

All these claims are based on fuzzy definitions, assumptions, extrapolation, and guestimates.  I could ask dozens more questions.  In fact here are some that I would like answered:

- If the Confederate Govt did not recognize the right of a black to join the military, how did they go about joining or affilitating the various units?  Were they in segregated units or just mingled in with the whites?  Did they share the same utensils, latrines, tents, etc??  I suppose not.

If they couldn't join officially prior to March 13, 1865 did the Confederates show some fantastic efforts in getting 30,000+ men armed and organized in the last 3 weeks of the war??

- How much training did they get?  How effective might they have been?? Would they stand and die or skeddadle on the first sound of a shot??  My guess is the latter since not too many seem to have been captured or buried.

- How are we ever going to determine if they willingly joined or were forced into service??  And come up with any reliably accurate percentages?  Remember they were "Slaves" so they didn't have a whole lot of choice in the matter.

- Someone claims that N.B. Forrest brought along 45 slaves that served with him.  OK, I'll buy that. Did they come along willingly?  Who knows, Forrest owned them and had life and death control over them.  You think they had a choice?  And what did they do?  Were 95% of them fodder wagon drivers?  I suppose if they had a bowie Knife they got counted as "Rebels"  And then someone said that 'ol Nathan told them they were free to leave if they wanted.  Geez, wonder what the life expectancy of an armed black man wearing a confederate uniform wandering around Alabama or Mississippi in 1864 would be???  "Hey, Nathan said I could go home!  You believe me dont' ya??"

Quote
1. Muster Rolls: Virtually all Confederate muster rolls do not contain any racial information. While it is fairly easy to identify American Indians and Hispanics by their non-Anglo names, most blacks, on the other hand, adopted European names. Although some individuals can be assumed to be slaves for lacking last names, but free blacks are virtually indistinguishable from their white comrades-in-arms.

That is rather convienient for the revisionist don't you think.  Kind of like the hanging chads in Florida 2000.  Is it a vote for Bush or Gore?  What or who is what??  Thomas King, George Simpson, etc.  Yeah, could be a black.   Well, lets "assume" 12% or 15% or <put any number you would like depending on what you are trying to prove>.  This is good history??

If we are going to put this kind of stuff in the History books I would hope that a lot of qualifications are noted.   

"Puking Dog" Danlbach

Soot Lord Junior Grade
Semi-Warthog


Offline Books OToole

  • NCOWS Member
  • Top Active Citizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 2677
  • Michael Tatham
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 91
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #12 on: January 28, 2006, 03:01:32 PM »
Dog;

I can answer one of those.  I'm not sure of the numbers but Forrest did free his own slaves and used them as teamsters.  That they stayed with him through out the war was a testiment of their loyalty to him.  My source is First With The Most by Robert Selph Henry.  This is a very good biography of Nathan Bedford Forest who had an excellent reputation among slaves a being a good master.

Books
G.I.L.S.

K.V.C.
N.C.O.W.S. 2279 - Senator
Hiram's Rangers C-3
G.A.F. 415
S.F.T.A.

Offline Pukin Dog

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 192
  • The frozen tundra of Madison, Wi
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #13 on: January 28, 2006, 03:57:28 PM »
Quote
I can answer one of those.  I'm not sure of the numbers but Forrest did free his own slaves and used them as teamsters.  That they stayed with him through out the war was a testiment of their loyalty to him.  My source is First With The Most by Robert Selph Henry.  This is a very good biography of Nathan Bedford Forest who had an excellent reputation among slaves a being a good master.

I think you are making a big assumption there.  Who knows if they were loyal or just had no where else to go?  As I mentioned earlier, how were they supposed to go home in the back roads of Alabama or Mississippi without the high possibility of being killed or impressed back into slavery.

How did his reputation stand up after he became the Grand Wizard of the Klu Klux Klan with his former slaves?  I bet they all thought he was just a grand old guy.
"Puking Dog" Danlbach

Soot Lord Junior Grade
Semi-Warthog


Offline Books OToole

  • NCOWS Member
  • Top Active Citizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 2677
  • Michael Tatham
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 91
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #14 on: January 28, 2006, 04:06:15 PM »
Dog;

You need to read the book.  It is well written by a historian held in high regard.  One of the stories therein is of a slave approaching Forest in Memphis (I believe) and asking Forest to buy him from his current master/owner.

As for the KKK, Forest started it as an organization to fight for the rights of Confederate veterans.  When their rights to own property, vote and hold office were returned he disbanded it.  Later it was reformed as the terrorist organization that we are famiiliar with today and Forrest denounced it.

Books
G.I.L.S.

K.V.C.
N.C.O.W.S. 2279 - Senator
Hiram's Rangers C-3
G.A.F. 415
S.F.T.A.

Offline Pukin Dog

  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 192
  • The frozen tundra of Madison, Wi
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #15 on: January 28, 2006, 04:23:27 PM »
You know what?? I think I will get the book.  I know that he was a brilliant military leader but could never bring myself to read much about him as I didn't think I could enjoy reading about someone who formed such a dispicable organization.

You have reminded me that one must try to think in the mores and ways of their time rather than ours.  I did not realize that the organization was twisted into something other than what it was when founded.

I apologize for my sarcasm.
"Puking Dog" Danlbach

Soot Lord Junior Grade
Semi-Warthog


Offline Major 2

  • "Still running against the wind"
  • Deputy Marshal
  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 15874
  • NCOWS #: 3032
  • GAF #: 785
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 421
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #16 on: January 28, 2006, 05:46:23 PM »
Revisionist ... ???!
I had to look that one up
The area of {theory change} in which preservation of the information in the theory to be changed plays a key role. A fundamental issue in belief revision is how to decide what information to retract in order to maintain consistency, when the addition of a new belief to a theory would make it inconsistent.  Usually, an ordering on the sentences of the theory is used to determine priorities among sentences, so that those with lower priority can be retracted.  This ordering can be difficult to generate and maintain.

Guess if I understand that as written ... I'm Guilty  :)

I presented links to Photo's, named but a few Black Confederate's.

Personally know a real Grandson of :
Private Louis Napoleon Nelson, 7th Tennessee Cavalry, shown in a postwar photo.
Nelson delivered General Nathan Bedford Forrest's  proclamation to the Union garrison
at Fort Pillow, Tennessee on April 11, 1864.



  Maybe contributions such as this can help set the record straight.

 
 
Lt. General Nathan Bedford Forrest (1821-1877)  well-respected citizen by both blacks and whites alike.

The Independent Order of Pole-Bearers Association (predecessor to the NAACP) was organized by Southern blacks after the war to promote black voting rights, etc. One of their early conventions was held in Memphis and Mr. Forrest was invited to be the guest speaker, the first white man ever to be invited to speak to the Association.

After the Civil War, General Forrest made a speech to the Memphis City Council (then called the Board of Aldermen). In this speech he said that there was no reason that the black man could not be doctors, store clerks, bankers, or any other job equal to whites. They were part of our community and should be involved and employed as such just like anyone else. In another speech to Federal authorities, Forrest said that many of the ex-slaves were skilled artisans and needed to be employed and that those skills needed to be taught to the younger workers. If not, then the next generation of blacks would have no skills and could not succeed and would become dependent on the welfare of society.

Forrest's words went unheeded. The Memphis & Selma Railroad was organized by Forrest after the war to help rebuild the South's transportation and to build the 'new South'. Forrest took it upon himself to hire blacks as architects, construction engineers and foremen, train engineers and conductors, and other high level jobs. In the North, blacks were prohibited from holding such jobs. When the Civil War began, Forrest offered freedom to 44 of his slaves if they would serve with him in the Confederate army. All 44 agreed. One later deserted; the other 43 served faithfully until the end of the war.

Though they had many chances to leave, they chose to remain loyal to the South and to Forrest. Part of General Forrest's command included his own Escort Company, his Green Berets, made up of the very best soldiers available. This unit, which varied in size from 40-90 men, was the elite of the cavalry. Eight of these picked men were black soldiers and all served gallantly and bravely throughout the war. All were armed with at least 2 pistols and a rifle. Most also carried two additional pistols in saddle holsters.  At war's end, when Forrest's cavalry surrendered in May 1865, there were 65 black troopers on the muster roll.  Of the soldiers who served under him, Forrest said of the black troops: "Finer Confederates never fought".

Forrest was a brilliant cavalryman and courageous soldier. As author Jack Hurst writes: a man possessed of physical valor perhaps unprecedented among his countrymen, as well as, ironically, a man whose social attitudes may well have changed farther in the direction of racial enlightenment over the span of his lifetime than those of most American historical figures.

When Forrest died in 1877 it is noteworthy that his funeral in Memphis was attended not only by a throng of thousands of whites but by hundreds of blacks as well. The funeral procession was over two miles long and was attended by over 10,000 area residents, including 3000 black citizens paying their respects
 

I offer this as a Revisionist

Do your research , enjoy the ride,  it's all eye opening.
IF !  you were Sarcastic then apology accepted
when planets align...do the deal !

Offline Silver Creek Slim

  • Buckaroo
  • Deputy Marshal
  • Top Active Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 18459
  • NCOWS #: 2329
  • GAF #: 144
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 107
Re: Historical accuracy check needed
« Reply #17 on: January 30, 2006, 02:06:13 PM »
Great info.

Slim
NCOWS 2329, WartHog, SCORRS, SBSS, BHR, GAF, RBCS, Dirty RATS, BTBM, IPSAC, Cosie-in-training
I love the smell of Black Powder in the morning!

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk

© 1995 - 2023 CAScity.com