The Touchy Subject of Black Confederate Soldiers

mikegriffith1

Mike Griffith
Joined
Oct 23, 2012
Messages
7,374
Reaction score
4,455
Points
1,085
Location
Virginia
For those who might be interested, I've web-published an article on the touchy subject of black Confederate combat soldiers on my Civil War website. The article is titled "Black Confederates, Political Correctness, and a Virginia Textbook: Black Soldiers in the Confederate Army."

Both sides in the Civil War debate have mistakenly argued or assumed that admitting that some blacks fought for the Confederacy invalidates emancipation. Many (not all, but many) pro-Confederate authors have cited the evidence of black Confederate soldiers to discredit emancipation, and most orthodox scholars seem to have unfortunately accepted this false premise and have gone to the extreme of dismissing the substantial evidence that several thousand blacks voluntarily fought for the Confederacy.

The article is available on my Civil War website:

The American Civil War: An Alternative View

Here is the direct link to the article:

Black Confederates, Political Correctness, and a Virginia Textbook: Black Soldiers in the Confederate Army

EXCERPT:

The chief inspector of the U.S. Sanitary Commission in the Army of the Potomac, Dr. Lewis Steiner, reported that he saw about 3,000 well-armed black Confederate soldiers in Stonewall Jackson’s army in Frederick, Maryland, and that those soldiers were "manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederate Army." Jackson’s army was part of Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia. Said Steiner,

Wednesday, September 10 -- 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 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. They were seen riding on horses and mules, driving wagons, riding on caissons, in ambulances, with the staff of Generals, and promiscuously mixed up with all the rebel horde. (Report of Lewis H. Steiner, New York: Anson D. F. Randolph, 1862, pp. 10-11)

None other than African-American abolitionist Frederick Douglass complained that there were “many” blacks in the Confederate army who were armed and “ready to shoot down” Union soldiers. He added that this was "pretty well established":

It is now pretty well established, that there are at the present moment many colored men in the Confederate army doing duty not only as cooks, servants and laborers, but 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. . . . (Douglass' Monthly, September 1861, online copy available at Frederick Douglass :: Fighting Rebels With Only One Hand | radical journal | Edited by Saswat Pattanayak)

In a Union army battle report, General David Stuart complained about the deadly effectiveness of the black Confederate soldiers whom his troops had encountered. The “armed negroes,” he said, did “serious execution upon our men."
 
For those who might be interested, I've web-published an article on the touchy subject of black Confederate combat soldiers on my Civil War website. The article is titled "Black Confederates, Political Correctness, and a Virginia Textbook: Black Soldiers in the Confederate Army."

Both sides in the Civil War debate have mistakenly argued or assumed that admitting that some blacks fought for the Confederacy invalidates emancipation. Many (not all, but many) pro-Confederate authors have cited the evidence of black Confederate soldiers to discredit emancipation, and most orthodox scholars seem to have unfortunately accepted this false premise and have gone to the extreme of dismissing the substantial evidence that several thousand blacks voluntarily fought for the Confederacy.

The article is available on my Civil War website:

The American Civil War: An Alternative View

Here is the direct link to the article:

Black Confederates, Political Correctness, and a Virginia Textbook: Black Soldiers in the Confederate Army

EXCERPT:

The chief inspector of the U.S. Sanitary Commission in the Army of the Potomac, Dr. Lewis Steiner, reported that he saw about 3,000 well-armed black Confederate soldiers in Stonewall Jackson’s army in Frederick, Maryland, and that those soldiers were "manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederate Army." Jackson’s army was part of Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia. Said Steiner,

Wednesday, September 10 -- 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 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. They were seen riding on horses and mules, driving wagons, riding on caissons, in ambulances, with the staff of Generals, and promiscuously mixed up with all the rebel horde. (Report of Lewis H. Steiner, New York: Anson D. F. Randolph, 1862, pp. 10-11)

None other than African-American abolitionist Frederick Douglass complained that there were “many” blacks in the Confederate army who were armed and “ready to shoot down” Union soldiers. He added that this was "pretty well established":

It is now pretty well established, that there are at the present moment many colored men in the Confederate army doing duty not only as cooks, servants and laborers, but 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. . . . (Douglass' Monthly, September 1861, online copy available at Frederick Douglass :: Fighting Rebels With Only One Hand | radical journal | Edited by Saswat Pattanayak)

In a Union army battle report, General David Stuart complained about the deadly effectiveness of the black Confederate soldiers whom his troops had encountered. The “armed negroes,” he said, did “serious execution upon our men."
gee i wonder why.....
 
For those who might be interested, I've web-published an article on the touchy subject of black Confederate combat soldiers on my Civil War website. The article is titled "Black Confederates, Political Correctness, and a Virginia Textbook: Black Soldiers in the Confederate Army."

Wow, more of Axis Mikey's crazy revisionist history.



Long and short... yup, the Officer Class brought their slaves along to cook and clean for them, because heaven forbid these people do their own work.
 
This part of history and is often overlooked for the sake of political correctness.
 
Sure there were one-offs but I've yet to see where black Confederate Infantry/Cavalry/Artillery were organized on the unit level in CSA forces.

There are a few instances were black laborers in CSA service received pensions.


I'd call it revisionist claptrap that serves no end. 😐
 
This part of history and is often overlooked for the sake of political correctness.

because it isn't true.

Blacks were SPECIFICALLY FORBIDDEN from serving as soldiers or bearing arms.

That was the whole point.

The main reason why Southerners fought to maintain slavery was not that they wanted to own slaves (most of them didn't), but because they were absolutely terrified about what blacks were going to do to whites if they ever were freed. They looked at how the whites were slaughtered in Haiti.

After the war, when blacks didn't seek revenge, and kind of went along with the imposition of Jim Crow, that's when you started hearing the "Lost Cause" revisionist bullshit about tariffs and states' rights.
 
Wow, more of Axis Mikey's crazy revisionist history.

Long and short... yup, the Officer Class brought their slaves along to cook and clean for them, because heaven forbid these people do their own work.

Of course, "Hitler Wasn't the Problem" JoeB131, you clearly did not even bother to read my article but immediately went looking for sources that say what you want to believe on the subject. Do you ever plan on dealing with all the Union reports of black Confederate soldiers that I cite in my article? Nah, no need for that, right?

Speaking of "crazy revisionist history," oh boy, readers might like to know that JoeB131 has argued in this very forum that "Hitler wasn't the problem" (that's an exact quote), that the Nazis had valid reasons for hating the Jews, that the Jews sabotaged Germany after WWI, that Israel purposely attacked the USS Liberty in 1967 (never mind that all U.S. Government investigations have said it was an accident), that Jews controlled the Navy Court of Inquiry investigation into the USS Liberty incident, that Mao was less brutal than Chiang Kai-shek, that there was no such as Free China, that Red China was better than Free China, that Stalin did not murder tens of millions of Russians, that Hamas is the victim and Israel is the aggressor, that there's an international Zionist conspiracy, that Jesus never existed, that U.S. intelligence was following and harassing Iris Chang, and on and on I could go.
 
Of course, "Hitler Wasn't the Problem" JoeB131, you clearly did not even bother to read my article but immediately went looking for sources that say what you want to believe on the subject.

Speaking of "crazy revisionist history," oh boy, readers might like to know that JoeB131 has argued in this very forum that "Hitler wasn't the problem" (that's an exact quote), that the Nazis had valid reasons for hating the Jews, that the Jews sabotaged Germany after WWI, that Israel purposely attacked the USS Liberty in 1967 (never mind that all U.S. Government investigations have said it was an accident), that Jews controlled the Navy Court of Inquiry investigation into the USS Liberty incident, that Mao was less brutal than Chiang Kai-shek, that there was no such as Free China, that Red China was better than Free China, that Stalin did not murder tens of millions of Russians, that Hamas is the victim and Israel is the aggressor, that there's an international Zionist conspiracy, that Jesus never existed, that U.S. intelligence was following and harassing Iris Chang, and on and on I could go.
All that has shit-all to do with the subject.

Please to provide muster rolls/official unit designations of black CSA troops in any branch of CSA service.....Other than one-offs you can't because blacks serving on the unit level for the CSA are nonexistent.
 
because it isn't true.

Blacks were SPECIFICALLY FORBIDDEN from serving as soldiers or bearing arms.

That was the whole point.

The main reason why Southerners fought to maintain slavery was not that they wanted to own slaves (most of them didn't), but because they were absolutely terrified about what blacks were going to do to whites if they ever were freed. They looked at how the whites were slaughtered in Haiti.

After the war, when blacks didn't seek revenge, and kind of went along with the imposition of Jim Crow, that's when you started hearing the "Lost Cause" revisionist bullshit about tariffs and states' rights.
You must have flunked US History 101.
 
Speaking of "crazy revisionist history," oh boy, readers might like to know that JoeB131 has argued in this very forum that "Hitler wasn't the problem" (that's an exact quote), that the Nazis had valid reasons for hating the Jews, that the Jews sabotaged Germany after WWI,

There's an old saying. "Even the Wicked get worse than they deserve". Everyone likes to pretend the Weimar period didn't happen and Germany just went crazy one day.

The point was, Jews were the leaders of the revolution that toppled the Kaiser. And when the Weimar period turned to shit, guess who got the blame for that?

that Israel purposely attacked the USS Liberty in 1967 (never mind that all U.S. Government investigations have said it was an accident),

Not even in dispute. They attacked the Liberty three times.


that Mao was less brutal than Chiang Kai-shek, that there was no such as Free China, that Red China was better than Free China,
Again, you need to talk to some Chinese; most of them revere Mao as the savior of their country.

On the other hand, even the Chinese on Taiwan treat Chiang like a bit of an embarrassment.

that Stalin did not murder tens of millions of Russians,
Nope. Nowhere close.

I'm curious how Stalin could have murdered 50 million people, supposedly, but the population of the USSR went up by 61 million despite losing 20 million in WWII.

Either - the Tens of millions figure is Bullshit, or those Russian babes were ******* like rabbits.

Of course, "Hitler Wasn't the Problem" JoeB131, you clearly did not even bother to read my article but immediately went looking for sources that say what you want to believe on the subject. Do you ever plan on dealing with all the Union reports of black Confederate soldiers that I cite in my article? Nah, no need for that, right?

Naw, there's only so much crazy you can really tolerate in one morning.

I'm sure the union saw lots of blacks who were in conscripted support roles.

What they didn't see was blacks shooting at Union Soldiers because they just looooved being slaves so badly
 
All that has shit-all to do with the subject.

Please to provide muster rolls/official unit designations of black CSA troops in any branch of CSA service.....Other than one-offs you can't because blacks serving on the unit level for the CSA are nonexistent.
Thank you.

Mikey loves his Confederate apologia.
 
Thank you.

Mikey loves his Confederate apologia.
Well I'm sure as hell am not on the side of Lincoln's aggression.....My ancestors pretty much all fought with the 33rd Virginia Inf..


I won't make up shit to suit me like the OP seems to want to do to perpetuate what is basically a myth.

Now if he wants to talk at length about blacks that were organized as units (with white Yankee officers in charge) then I could live with that.

 
Well I'm sure as hell am not on the side of Lincoln's aggression.....My ancestors pretty much all fought with the 33rd Virginia Inf..

My grandfather fought for the Kaiser in WWI.

I'm not terribly proud of that, given what an absolutely useless war that was.

I've never gotten this love people in the South have for the Confederacy. That sounds more like something you should be embarrassed about.
 
My grandfather fought for the Kaiser in WWI.

I'm not terribly proud of that, given what an absolutely useless war that was.

I've never gotten this love people in the South have for the Confederacy. That sounds more like something you should be embarrassed about.
Well, by and by we just sorta moved on but the dem faction still wants to hold on to their plantation blacks.
 
I've never gotten this love people in the South have for the Confederacy. That sounds more like something you should be embarrassed about.
They started a war to prove they were better than the slaves and lost.

Nothing to be proud of there.
 
15th post
The existence of Black soldiers fighting for the Confederacy is pretty meaningless, in my opinion. Most soldiers do not fight out of ideological commitment to the cause. The black soldiers may have joined the Army hoping that carrying a rifle, even in war, would be less unpleasant than chopping cotton.
 
All that has &^%-all to do with the subject.
Oh! So you think those genuinely obscenely nutty views don't discredit him as a source?! Well, okay, to each his own. Personally, and this is just me, I think anyone who expresses the downright disgusting fringe views that JoeB131 has expressed discredit themselves and proves they are not to be taken seriously. But, again, that's just me.

Please to provide muster rolls/official unit designations of black CSA troops in any branch of CSA service.....Other than one-offs you can't because blacks serving on the unit level for the CSA are nonexistent.

"One-offs"?! The 3,000 black Confederate combat troops whom Steiner saw in Jackson's force hardly qualify as "one-offs"; rather, they were, said Steiner, "manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederate Army." Since when are 3,000 soldiers "one-offs"?

How about the Union army reports that noted encounters with black Confederate soldiers? Huh? Those were internal Army reports intended to provide higher-ups with accurate information about combat encounters. What possible reason would men like Allabach, Parkhurst, and Stuart have had to fabricate such accounts?

How about Christian A. Fleetwood, who had been a sergeant-major in the 4th U.S. Colored Troops--what reason would he, an African American, have had to lie about black Confederate soldiers?

Folks, you're seeing the liberal mind at work in these reflexive summary dismissals of the evidence that at least 4,000 blacks voluntarily fought for the South. Most of these guys appear to have responded without even bothering to read the article.
 
Back
Top Bottom