Civil War History - General DiscussionFor Discussions on Civil War Era Personalities, Politics, Issues, Campaigns, Battles, and more. Serious Civil War Discussions Only Please! All other posts will be deleted.
Dear Dred,
Welcome to the board. Please refer to the threads "Black Confederates" in the Secession and Politics forum, and an older thread "Spanish Forts Mobile" in the South Western forum. Also in the giant slavery thread there are a couple of sections. Levine's Confederate Emancipation thread is on the topic too.
The issue is discussed and disputed from every possible angle, over and over and over again. The same points are raised, the same responses made.
I don't see how a reasonable person could look at the record and think that more than an insignificant handful of African Americans fought for the Confederacy. But since there are lots of creationists, holocaust deniers and folks who think the moon landings were faked I shouldn't be surprised.
And thank you, for choking down the concept that the South left the Union PRIMARILY over the issue of slavery.
primarily. 1. At first : ORIGINALLY. 2. Principally : chiefly.
Exchanges of learning can take place.
Sincerely,
Unionblue
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
65,000 (Confederate) + 170,000 (Federal) = 235,000 Total
65,000 / 235,000 = 28%
I have no idea what the 65,000 number is based on. Would you be able to provide some basis for it? Are you counting, for instance, the 20,000 slave laborers the Confederacy authorized in 1864, which the Confederacy did not count as "soldiers"? Or the various impressed slaves (impressed from their owners as property, not as men serving as "soldiers") who dug entrenchments in many places during the war?
The USCT in the Union Army numbered well over 180,000, and when you subtract out the white officers and such who served in it, you come to 179,000 black men serving against the Confederacy. While some of those were free men before the war (and some came from outside the US, such as Canada -- which might well mean they were escaped Southern slaves who got there via the Underground RR), those 179,000 were overwhelmingly men who had been slaves. This does not count those black men serving in the Union Navy.
The USCT were military units. The men in them were soldiers, enlisted in the Army and paid as such. They were part of the chain of command of the Union Army. We can find the histories of the units, the names of their commanders, the record of where they were stationed and what they did, the reports of their officers in the Official Records. While they most commonly served as small garrisons and in rear areas, we also have a clear and undeniable record of their service in several major battles of the war, in units as large as division size (such as the battle of The Crater). We even have, by the end of the war, Confederates commenting on the bravery of their charge at the Battle of Nashville. All of this can be documented, and has been many, many times.
But when people talk of "black Confederates", all we see are references to one black man here and two there. We see a convoluted argument based on inferences and exaggerations. We see references to "black units" that no one can track down (like the story in the Antietam invasion) or that were never accepted by the Confederacy (like the blacks in New Orleans before Farragut took the city) or the 2 small companies in Richmond in 1865 (which existed for approximately 1 month when the Confederacy was falling apart). We see an insistence that black men who were with the Confederate Army were "soldiers" when the Confederate government insisted they were not.
We don't count a Union officer's camp servant as a "soldier" unless he was enlisted in the Union Army. We don't count a Union teamster as a "soldier" unless he was enlisted in the Union Army. We don't count a Union day laborer as a "soldier" unless he was enlisted in the Union Army. Just as we don't count all those "contractors" in Iraq today as "soldiers" -- because they are not "soldiers". Why in the world should we count blacks doing the same thing for the Confederacy -- particularly slaves, who had no legal choice in the matter and might be physically punished for disobedience -- as "soldiers"?
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
I saw this topic developing, and as I thought about it, I remembered that somewhere in my stack of magazines and books, I had an article on blacks in the Confederate Army, and whether it was a myth or reality. It was a broad article, and in no way totally in depth, but it was a good start.
As has been mentioned by several already, there were blacks in the Confederate Army. However, it is not clear as to how many of them were actually combat troops. The reason for this is, there isn't a clear record of it anywhere. There is evidence that the Confederate Congress tried to pass bills to bring slaves into military service for reasons other than labor (digging trenches, building fortifications, teamsters, etc.) and that this didn't occur until late in the war, when the cause was all but lost. The 1st Louisiana Native Guard was an all black Confederate unit from the New Orleans area, made up of free blacks, mind you, not slaves; however, there isn't much evidence to say that they actually fought in Confederate service and they were disbanded when New Orleans was captured, to be replaced with a Union unit of the same name.
There are also reports of blacks in other theatres of operation in Confederate uniforms, carrying weapons and such. However, there is no evidence that they were actuallyl soldiers, and it is very likely they were body servants to men serving in the army who were just carrying their master's weapons. (They weren't trusted to fight, but they could carry weapons? strange indeed.)
The thing is, there is no clear record of blacks, either slave or free, fighting for the south. That isn't saying that they didn't. There are scattered reports of it that very well may be true. What I am trying to say is that there isn't clear, irrefutable evidence that blacks fought in organized regiments for the Confederacy. Several well known and respected historians have gone through thousands of letters and documents from the war and haven't found any evidence of it, saying that if they were there, it was rare, and it will be hard to scare anything up to prove it. I do think it possible that yes, a few probably took up arms against the Union. However, these were more likely to be free blacks who were doing what many white southerners were doing: fighting for their homes.
__________________ "The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize." George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796
Why not? Are you saying that every two-year old and granny is subject to military service?
Quote:
Originally Posted by blue
65,000 (Confederate What? Cooks, laborers, etc?) + 4,000,000,000 SLAVES (no guess work involved).
"65,000" -This is the number supplied by Dred.
Please address your question to him.
__________________ POWER & MONEY
"Your New-York bankers and merchants are shrewd people, but I never gave them credit for so much sagacity as when they took the Government Loan. It was not merely patriotism, it was a high stroke of policy. It has saved the Government, and what they will regard as equally important, saved them from a great financial disaster."
this is the thread I will check first everyday. behave yourselves
I believe the intent of some here is to close down the thread.
~
I posted this because I found a few more interesting cases of blacks in Confederate service-
* a pilot on a blockade runner the "Huntress" (said to be the first ship to fly the Confederate flag on the open seas)
* some described as "free & black" meaning they were not forced to be there
* a boy (officers servant) sent to Elmira prison camp
(I don't believe officers were sent to Elmira...only enlisted...so he did not go to Elmira because of the officer)
* Two on the rolls as "privates." One buried at the Confederate cemetery in Chicago, IL.
__________________ POWER & MONEY
"Your New-York bankers and merchants are shrewd people, but I never gave them credit for so much sagacity as when they took the Government Loan. It was not merely patriotism, it was a high stroke of policy. It has saved the Government, and what they will regard as equally important, saved them from a great financial disaster."
New York Times, 27 September 1861
Last edited by Battalion : 07-03-2007 at 09:28 AM.
I have no idea what the 65,000 number is based on. Would you be able to provide some basis for it? Are you counting, for instance, the 20,000 slave laborers the Confederacy authorized in 1864, which the Confederacy did not count as "soldiers"? Or the various impressed slaves (impressed from their owners as property, not as men serving as "soldiers") who dug entrenchments in many places during the war?
The "65,000" number is from Dred. Please address your question to him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trice
The USCT in the Union Army numbered well over 180,000, and when you subtract out the white officers and such who served in it, you come to 179,000 black men serving against the Confederacy. While some of those were free men before the war (and some came from outside the US, such as Canada -- which might well mean they were escaped Southern slaves who got there via the Underground RR), those 179,000 were overwhelmingly men who had been slaves. This does not count those black men serving in the Union Navy.
My number (170,000) is from the OR.
169,624 to be exact...that enlisted during the rebellion.
Why would you want to count those that enlisted after the Civil War?
Are you wanting to inflate the numbers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by trice
The USCT were military units. The men in them were soldiers, enlisted in the Army and paid as such. They were part of the chain of command of the Union Army. We can find the histories of the units, the names of their commanders, the record of where they were stationed and what they did, the reports of their officers in the Official Records. While they most commonly served as small garrisons and in rear areas, we also have a clear and undeniable record of their service in several major battles of the war, in units as large as division size (such as the battle of The Crater). We even have, by the end of the war, Confederates commenting on the bravery of their charge at the Battle of Nashville. All of this can be documented, and has been many, many times.
This is true...
...but...
...they were paid less than white soldiers...
...so were they regarded as equals?...or as some sort of auxilliary?
The only duty of some USCT was to dig ditches (the entire war). They were called "engineer troops"...but were they any different from the "laborers" that did the same for the Confederates?
__________________ POWER & MONEY
"Your New-York bankers and merchants are shrewd people, but I never gave them credit for so much sagacity as when they took the Government Loan. It was not merely patriotism, it was a high stroke of policy. It has saved the Government, and what they will regard as equally important, saved them from a great financial disaster."
For a while now I have been doing research online of stats and facts of alot of aspects of the Civil War. It is during this research that I came across the 65,000 number. Unfortunately I did not cite sources for any of my information... Do'h! I think maybe I need to start over and pay attention to that next time! So I guess Ya'll will have to judge for yourselves whether it is a fair approximation or not. One thing I do remember is the information did not distinguish between black volunteers and forced conscripts from slave owners or what have you.
After a bit of research I found the page that had the 65,000 listed. altho it is a Texas reenactment group and member of the SCV So I'm not sure how accurate this is or is not. And the author does not list his source or how he arrived at this number. 65,000 seems to be a fair approximation. Since it is doubtful that the Black confederates numbered as many as their union counterparts, but it is widely known that some did serve in one capacity or another. http://www.37thtexas.org/html/BlkHist.html
__________________
"In mortal combat, a man may and will become so infuriated by the din and dangers of a bloody fight that his heart will turn to stone and his every de sire [be] for blood."
John Hadley, 7th Indiana after the battle at Port Republic
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
