Confedrate history about race?

[bodecea]

Forgery or not, it still doesn't take away the fact that blacks fought for the Confederate cause.

It also fails to take into account that most of the men fighting for the confederacy also had handmade uniforms and their own weapons.

I don't understand why it's so hard to face the fact that blacks fought for the south. These people obviously don't have any knowledge about that part of history. Here in the County I live in our Commissioners just passed a resolution making April Confederate History and Heritage Month, since April marked the month that Texas joined the Confederate States. There was a little fuss about it at first, but most here realize that at the time 98 percent of Texans were not slave holders and that the Civil War wasn't about slavery as much as it was about States rights. I've included a copy of the resolution.

98% of Texans were not slaveholders?

Look at these stats:
Furman: Ratio of Slaveholders to Families

 

[HUGGY]

I never made the distinction between slaves or free blacks. I simply stated accurately that blacks fought for the Confederate cause.

Black Southerners fought alongside white, Hispanic, Indian, Jewish and thousands of foreign-born Southerners. They fought as documented by Union sources:

Frederick Douglass, Douglass' Monthly, IV [Sept. 1861,] pp 516 - "there are at the present moment many colored men in the Confederate Army - as real soldiers, having muskets on their shoulders, and bullets in their pockets, ready to shoot down loyal troops, and do all that soldiers may do to destroy the Federal government...There were such soldiers at Manassas and they are probably there still."

"Negroes in the Confederate Army," Journal of Negro History, Charles Wesle, Vol. 4, #3, [1919,] 244-245 - "Seventy free blacks enlisted in the Confederate Army in Lynchburg, Virginia. Sixteen companies of free men of color marched through Augusta, Georgia on their way to fight in Virginia." "The part of Adams' Brigade that the 42nd Indiana was facing were the 'Louisiana Tigers.' This name was given to Colonel Gibson's 13th Louisiana Infantry, which included five companies of 'Avegno Zouaves' who still were wearing their once dashing traditional blue jackets, red caps and red baggy trousers. These five Zouaves companies were made up of Irish, Dutch, Negroes, Spaniards, Mexicans, and Italians."

Noe, Kenneth W., Perryville: This Grand Havoc of Battle. The University of Kentucky Press, Lexington, KY, 2001. [page 270] From James G. Bates' letter to his father reprinted in the 1 May 1863 "Winchester [Indiana] Journal" [the 13th IVI ["Hoosier Regiment"] was involved in operations around the Suffolk, Virginia area in April-May 1863 ] - "I can assure you [Father,] of a certainty, that the rebels have negro soldiers in their army. One of their best sharp shooters, and the boldest of them all here is a negro. He dug himself a rifle pit last night [16 April 1863] just across the river and has been annoying our pickets opposite him very much to-day. You can see him plain enough with the naked eye, occasionally, to make sure that he is a "wooly-head," and with a spy-glass there is no mistaking him."

The 85th Indiana Volunteer Infantry reported to the Indianapolis Daily Evening Gazette that on 5 March 1863: "During the fight the [artillery] battery in charge of the 85th Indiana [Volunteer Infantry] was attacked by [*in italics*] two rebel negro regiments. [*end italics*]." After the action at Missionary Ridge, Commissary Sergeant William F. Ruby forwarded a casualty list written in camp at Ringgold, Georgia about 29 November 1863, to William S. Lingle for publication. Ruby's letter was partially reprinted in the Lafayette Daily Courier for 8 December 1863: "Ruby says among the rebel dead on the [Missionary] Ridge he saw a number of negroes in the Confederate uniform." Federal Official Records, Series I, Vol XVI Part I, pg. 805: "There were also quite a number of negroes attached to the Texas and Georgia troops, who were armed and equipped, and took part in the several engagements with my forces during the day."

Federal Official Records Series 1, Volume 15, Part 1, Pages 137-138: "Pickets were thrown out that night, and Captain Hennessy, Company E, of the Ninth Connecticut, having been sent out with his company, captured a colored rebel scout, well mounted, who had been sent out to watch our movements."

Federal Official Records, Series I, Vol. XLIX, Part II, pg. 253 - April 6, 1865: "The rebels [Forrest] are recruiting negro troops at Enterprise, Miss., and the negroes are all enrolled in the State."
Federal Official Records, Series I, Vol. XIV, pg. 24, second paragraph - "It is also difficult to state the force of the enemy, but it could not have been less than from 600 to 800. There were six companies of mounted riflemen, besides infantry, among which were a considerable number of colored men." - referring to Confederate forces opposing him at Pocotaligo, SC., Colonel B. C. Christ, 50th Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry, official report of May 30, 1862 "Sargt said war is close to being over. saw several negros fighting for those rebels."

From the diary of James Miles, 185th N.Y.V.I., entry dated January 8, 1865 Black Southerners also demonstrated loyalties based not on ownership, subservience or fear. The Confederate Burial Mound for Camp Morton, Indiana, at Indianapolis, Indiana, has bronze tablets which list the nearly 1200 Confederates who died at that camp. Among those names are 26 Black Southerners, seven Hispanic Southerners and six Indiaan Southerners. At a time when those Black Southerners could have walked into the Camp Commander's office, taken a short oath and signed their name to walk out the gates free men obliged to no one they chose instead to stay even unto death. Your understanding of that choice is likely nonexistent.

I saw two black guys fighting last night. Do you suppose they were still battling the civil war like you are?

Battling the Civil War? Are you that stupid? This is a discussion on whether or not blacks fought for the southern cause. So either contribute to the discussion or shut the fuck up.

Discussion? what is that? code for you getting your ass kicked?

This thread has done covered the territory. You are the only one that has not figured it out.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

It also fails to take into account that most of the men fighting for the confederacy also had handmade uniforms and their own weapons.

I don't understand why it's so hard to face the fact that blacks fought for the south. These people obviously don't have any knowledge about that part of history. Here in the County I live in our Commissioners just passed a resolution making April Confederate History and Heritage Month, since April marked the month that Texas joined the Confederate States. There was a little fuss about it at first, but most here realize that at the time 98 percent of Texans were not slave holders and that the Civil War wasn't about slavery as much as it was about States rights. I've included a copy of the resolution.

98% of Texans were not slaveholders?

Look at these stats:
Furman: Ratio of Slaveholders to Families

According to the resolution I linked to.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I saw two black guys fighting last night. Do you suppose they were still battling the civil war like you are?

Battling the Civil War? Are you that stupid? This is a discussion on whether or not blacks fought for the southern cause. So either contribute to the discussion or shut the fuck up.

Discussion? what is that? code for you getting your ass kicked?

This thread has done covered the territory. You are the only one that has not figured it out.

Call it whatever you want to. Fact is blacks fought for the south, that was my original point and so far it hasn't been disproven. Thank you for playing. You may go now.

 

[paperview]

Confederate Veteran, June 1915 - “If there were any such troops [black Confederates] enlisted, there is no official record of same”

a) “The whole Black Confederate soldier thing is bogus” - Ludwell Johnson of the Museum of the Confederacy

b) “It’s B.S., wishful thinking.” - Edwin Bearss, historian emeritus, NPS

c) “They were never mustered into the Confederate Army,” – James Hollandsworth, Associate Provost at the University of Southern Mississippi in Hattiesburg.

d) “It’s mostly moonshine They’ve taken a core of true information and ballooned it all out of proportion.” - James McPherson, Princeton professor emeritus and author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning Civil War history Battle Cry of Freedom. -

g) “Of course If I documented 12 [black Confederates out of 150,000 CSA soldiers researched] someone would start adding zeros,” - Robert Krick, author of 10 books on the Confederacy

h) Ervin Jordan Jr. - a black archivist and assistant professor from the University of Virginia. In Black Confederates and Afro-Yankees in Civil War Virginia, were he proved there were black confederates, he admits that he hasn’t uncovered tens of thousands of black Confederates in wartime Virginia - in fact, he’s found barely a fraction of that.

i) “There was no black Confederate unit in Mobile, it was a Creole unit. It would be a long, long stretch to say that it was a black unit. There was no counterpart to the black divisions that fought on the Union side.” - Sheila Flanagan, assistant director of the Museum of Mobile. - Mobile Register, August 23, 1998

j) “Many thousands of Jews did slave labor in military production factories in Nazi Germany - but that certainly didn’t make them “thousands of Jewish soldiers fighting for Germany.”” Truman R. Clark, professor of history, Tomball College. - The Houston Chronicle, Aug 29, 1999

I cited union sources, eyewitness accounts that claim negroes were in fact fighting for the Confederacy. One of the eyewitnesses is Fredrick Douglass. So pardon me if I take eyewitness accounts over a few historians.

I've spoken on this before - perhaps you were unaware of the timeline and history surrounding that quote from Douglass:

I'm too busy right now to type it out again, so I'll just lay this out for you:

"Frederick Douglas reported, 'There are at the present moment many Colored men in the Confederate Army...'">

This quote often found on pro-Confederate websites is taken from Douglass' September, 1861 essay entitled "Fighting the Rebels with One Hand" which was also orated by Douglass in front of a predominately black audience during January, 1862.

It was during this period that Douglass was upset with the Lincoln Administration for failing to make the War one for ending slavery, for rescinding General Fremont's Missouri emancipation proclamation, and for referring to escaped slaves as "contraband" rather than as persons.

Douglass began a series of speeches and essays for the purpose of embarrasing the Lincoln administration and forcing them to turn the War into a war, with the assistance of Blacks, to end slavery.

What better way to embarrass Lincoln into action then to let people think that a portion of the country that broke away to protect the institution of slavery has no problem using those blacks to kill and maim the boys and men of the North while Lincoln lets the Union's black males sit idle.

This was also the purpose of another abolitionist whose report is oft used as proof of Black Confederate soldiers...Dr. Lewis Steiner, a member of the Sanitation Commission. The main organizers of the U. S. Sanitation Commission such as Frederick Law Olmstead and Mary Livermore were abolitionists whose funding in part came from other well known abolitionist such as Rev. Henry Ward Beecher and William Lloyd Garrison. Abolitionists or those with their sympathies, such as Steiner, were prevalent in the Sanitary Commission. These same abolitionists were bringing increasing pressure on the Lincoln Administration to enlist Blacks in the Union army. If one reads Steiner's report and its glaring inconsistancies, you can't help to see it as nothing more than a piece of propaganda written to prod the North into enlisting black soldiers. In the _Report of Lewis H. Steiner, M.D., Maryland, Sept 1862_ on pg. 10, he wrote the following:

"At four o'clock this morning the rebel army began to move from our town, Jackson's force taking the advance. The movement continued until eight o'clock P.M., occupying sixteen hours. The most liberal calculations could not give them more than 64,000 men. Over 3,000 negroes must be included in this number. 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, sabres, bowie-knives, dirks, etc. They were supplied, in many instances, with knapsacks, haversacks, canteens, etc., and were manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederacy Army."

Steiner claimed that there were "over 3,000 negroes" that were in Confederate uniforms and armed and "supplied, in many instances, with knapsacks, haversacks, canteens" yet later on in his report, he described the regiments of white Confederates marching thru Frederick as men "mostly without knapsacks; some few carried blankets, and a tooth-brush was occasionally seen pendant from the button-hole of a private soldier." Now what is wrong with this picture? Negro Confederate soldiers with better equipment than their white counterparts?

Steiner, by writing of the armed black Confederates in his report, is attempting to shame the Union for not arming the Blacks in the North. Steiner's report was not written to glorify the Southern soldier because the remainder of his report portrayed the Confederate troops as stupid, filthy and braggards. Whether you agree or not that an agenda on both Douglass' and Steiner's part was present, the fact is that there is no other corroborating evidence from any source showing that there were armed black Confederate soldiers at Antietam or at First Manassas as mentioned by Douglass nor any letters from a Southern soldier or residents of the Bull Run or Frederick area which mentions anything about them. No mention is made of dead or wounded black soldiers following the battles, nor mention of any Black POW's. Why?" -History Board

 

[paperview]

I don't understand why it's so hard to face the fact that blacks fought for the south. These people obviously don't have any knowledge about that part of history. Here in the County I live in our Commissioners just passed a resolution making April Confederate History and Heritage Month, since April marked the month that Texas joined the Confederate States. There was a little fuss about it at first, but most here realize that at the time 98 percent of Texans were not slave holders and that the Civil War wasn't about slavery as much as it was about States rights. I've included a copy of the resolution.

98% of Texans were not slaveholders?

Look at these stats:
Furman: Ratio of Slaveholders to Families

According to the resolution I linked to.

lol.

You point to a 2010 resolution and you think that somehow that refutes the actual 1860 census numbers.

Too funny.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Texas: approximately 600,000 people in 1860 of whom more than 180,000 were slaves.The slave ownership was far in excess of 2%. LL, stop lying.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

You have it backward. South Carolina had nothing to say about federal property. To fire on it under any situation was treason. End of story on that. Yes, Lincoln knew that the South would fire, and he told the nation that only under the South would war come to the Union. He was right, the South was wrong, and he murdered it for its treasonous conduct. America has been blessed a million times over because of Lincoln and has avoided a million tribulations because the South was sent to hell.

And the colonies were "property" of Great Britain, and to declare independence and fire on the Crown under any situation was treason. Right?

Yes it was...and the Founders would have been hung as traitors....IF....we had lost.

The doctrine of "might makes right" is utterly ridiculous. Either the right to secession exists, as our founders put forth in the Declaration of Independence, or it does not. It doesn't only exist so long as you win a war.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The colonies revolted against an empire in which they had no representation. The southern states committed treason against the American people, of which they were a part and whose national government they had representation and a voice.

Your comparison, KK, is absolutely in accurate.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The colonies revolted against an empire in which they had no representation. The southern states committed treason against the American people, of which they were a part and whose national government they had representation and a voice.

Your comparison, KK, is absolutely in accurate.

And the Crown was simply trying to get the money it was owed by the colonies for fighting a war on their behalf, unlike Lincoln who simply wanted to take the southern states' money and give it to the north.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your facts are false, and your comparison is still unfactual. You are lagging badly on the issue of the right of secession. Give you a hint? It did not exist.

 

[bodecea]

I saw two black guys fighting last night. Do you suppose they were still battling the civil war like you are?

Battling the Civil War? Are you that stupid? This is a discussion on whether or not blacks fought for the southern cause. So either contribute to the discussion or shut the fuck up.

Discussion? what is that? code for you getting your ass kicked?

This thread has done covered the territory. You are the only one that has not figured it out.

Huggy...are you a military vet? If you are, prepare for Lonestar to call you a parasite.

 

[bodecea]

The colonies revolted against an empire in which they had no representation. The southern states committed treason against the American people, of which they were a part and whose national government they had representation and a voice.

Your comparison, KK, is absolutely in accurate.

And the Crown was simply trying to get the money it was owed by the colonies for fighting a war on their behalf, unlike Lincoln who simply wanted to take the southern states' money and give it to the north.

I'm still waiting for evidence of Lincoln wanting to do that very thing.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Confederate Veteran, June 1915 - “If there were any such troops [black Confederates] enlisted, there is no official record of same”

a) “The whole Black Confederate soldier thing is bogus” - Ludwell Johnson of the Museum of the Confederacy

b) “It’s B.S., wishful thinking.” - Edwin Bearss, historian emeritus, NPS

c) “They were never mustered into the Confederate Army,” – James Hollandsworth, Associate Provost at the University of Southern Mississippi in Hattiesburg.

d) “It’s mostly moonshine They’ve taken a core of true information and ballooned it all out of proportion.” - James McPherson, Princeton professor emeritus and author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning Civil War history Battle Cry of Freedom. -

g) “Of course If I documented 12 [black Confederates out of 150,000 CSA soldiers researched] someone would start adding zeros,” - Robert Krick, author of 10 books on the Confederacy

h) Ervin Jordan Jr. - a black archivist and assistant professor from the University of Virginia. In Black Confederates and Afro-Yankees in Civil War Virginia, were he proved there were black confederates, he admits that he hasn’t uncovered tens of thousands of black Confederates in wartime Virginia - in fact, he’s found barely a fraction of that.

i) “There was no black Confederate unit in Mobile, it was a Creole unit. It would be a long, long stretch to say that it was a black unit. There was no counterpart to the black divisions that fought on the Union side.” - Sheila Flanagan, assistant director of the Museum of Mobile. - Mobile Register, August 23, 1998

j) “Many thousands of Jews did slave labor in military production factories in Nazi Germany - but that certainly didn’t make them “thousands of Jewish soldiers fighting for Germany.”” Truman R. Clark, professor of history, Tomball College. - The Houston Chronicle, Aug 29, 1999

I cited union sources, eyewitness accounts that claim negroes were in fact fighting for the Confederacy. One of the eyewitnesses is Fredrick Douglass. So pardon me if I take eyewitness accounts over a few historians.

I've spoken on this before - perhaps you were unaware of the timeline and history surrounding that quote from Douglass:

I'm too busy right now to type it out again, so I'll just lay this out for you:

"Frederick Douglas reported, 'There are at the present moment many Colored men in the Confederate Army...'">

This quote often found on pro-Confederate websites is taken from Douglass' September, 1861 essay entitled "Fighting the Rebels with One Hand" which was also orated by Douglass in front of a predominately black audience during January, 1862.

It was during this period that Douglass was upset with the Lincoln Administration for failing to make the War one for ending slavery, for rescinding General Fremont's Missouri emancipation proclamation, and for referring to escaped slaves as "contraband" rather than as persons.

Douglass began a series of speeches and essays for the purpose of embarrasing the Lincoln administration and forcing them to turn the War into a war, with the assistance of Blacks, to end slavery.

What better way to embarrass Lincoln into action then to let people think that a portion of the country that broke away to protect the institution of slavery has no problem using those blacks to kill and maim the boys and men of the North while Lincoln lets the Union's black males sit idle.

This was also the purpose of another abolitionist whose report is oft used as proof of Black Confederate soldiers...Dr. Lewis Steiner, a member of the Sanitation Commission. The main organizers of the U. S. Sanitation Commission such as Frederick Law Olmstead and Mary Livermore were abolitionists whose funding in part came from other well known abolitionist such as Rev. Henry Ward Beecher and William Lloyd Garrison. Abolitionists or those with their sympathies, such as Steiner, were prevalent in the Sanitary Commission. These same abolitionists were bringing increasing pressure on the Lincoln Administration to enlist Blacks in the Union army. If one reads Steiner's report and its glaring inconsistancies, you can't help to see it as nothing more than a piece of propaganda written to prod the North into enlisting black soldiers. In the _Report of Lewis H. Steiner, M.D., Maryland, Sept 1862_ on pg. 10, he wrote the following:

"At four o'clock this morning the rebel army began to move from our town, Jackson's force taking the advance. The movement continued until eight o'clock P.M., occupying sixteen hours. The most liberal calculations could not give them more than 64,000 men. Over 3,000 negroes must be included in this number. 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, sabres, bowie-knives, dirks, etc. They were supplied, in many instances, with knapsacks, haversacks, canteens, etc., and were manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederacy Army."

Steiner claimed that there were "over 3,000 negroes" that were in Confederate uniforms and armed and "supplied, in many instances, with knapsacks, haversacks, canteens" yet later on in his report, he described the regiments of white Confederates marching thru Frederick as men "mostly without knapsacks; some few carried blankets, and a tooth-brush was occasionally seen pendant from the button-hole of a private soldier." Now what is wrong with this picture? Negro Confederate soldiers with better equipment than their white counterparts?

Steiner, by writing of the armed black Confederates in his report, is attempting to shame the Union for not arming the Blacks in the North. Steiner's report was not written to glorify the Southern soldier because the remainder of his report portrayed the Confederate troops as stupid, filthy and braggards. Whether you agree or not that an agenda on both Douglass' and Steiner's part was present, the fact is that there is no other corroborating evidence from any source showing that there were armed black Confederate soldiers at Antietam or at First Manassas as mentioned by Douglass nor any letters from a Southern soldier or residents of the Bull Run or Frederick area which mentions anything about them. No mention is made of dead or wounded black soldiers following the battles, nor mention of any Black POW's. Why?" -History Board

I see so everyone lied. Got it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

There is none.

 

[bodecea]

And the colonies were "property" of Great Britain, and to declare independence and fire on the Crown under any situation was treason. Right?

Yes it was...and the Founders would have been hung as traitors....IF....we had lost.

The doctrine of "might makes right" is utterly ridiculous. Either the right to secession exists, as our founders put forth in the Declaration of Independence, or it does not. It doesn't only exist so long as you win a war.

It does not. And winners make the rules....always. You'd be a fool to think otherwise.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I see so everyone lied. Got it.

No, only you.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

98% of Texans were not slaveholders?

Look at these stats:
Furman: Ratio of Slaveholders to Families

According to the resolution I linked to.

lol.

You point to a 2010 resolution and you think that somehow that refutes the actual 1860 census numbers.

Too funny.

Those weren't actual 1860 census numbers, they were approximations. Read the *note at the bottom.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Texas: approximately 600,000 people in 1860 of whom more than 180,000 were slaves.The slave ownership was far in excess of 2%. LL, stop lying.

Lying? Hardly.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The colonies revolted against an empire in which they had no representation. The southern states committed treason against the American people, of which they were a part and whose national government they had representation and a voice.

Your comparison, KK, is absolutely in accurate.

And the Crown was simply trying to get the money it was owed by the colonies for fighting a war on their behalf, unlike Lincoln who simply wanted to take the southern states' money and give it to the north.

I'm still waiting for evidence of Lincoln wanting to do that very thing.

Well you were provided with a link.