Muslim soldiers in the Civil War.

There was a thread on this site a couple of years ago which addressed that. It included a reference to Capt. Moses Osman of the 104th Illinois.

Great, it looks like we've found a few. How was Muslim participation relevant to the War?

The next thread is going to be about the LBGTQEDTYW community's decisive contribution and "preferred pronouns" during the 1860s, I am sure.
 
Great, it looks like we've found a few. How was Muslim participation relevant to the War?

The next thread is going to be about the LBGTQEDTYW community's decisive contribution and "preferred pronouns" during the 1860s, I am sure.
A question was asked, and answered. If you've no interest in the subject, why comment?
My understanding was this forum was for people to discuss the civil war, has that changed? One could ask how relevant any group was to the war, or any individual- private Khan was detained after Gettysburg because he didn't look 'white' and therefore couldn't be a soldier. He managed by extraordinary efforts to rejoin his unit, only to be shot in the hand during the Wilderness. He later became a sharpshooter.
Personally, I find that interesting.
And if someone wants to start a thread on personal pronoun preference, I won't stop them. I may not comment in it. But I certainly won't belittle them for creating it.
 
Can one assume that at least a couple of the US sailors form India and some other areas where Muslims make up a large percent of the population were Muslims? I seems difficult to believe every single US sailor from India was a Christian, some may well have been Hindus or Muslims. I kind of like the concept that at least one sailor was a follower of Zoroastrianism.
Lascars often referred to Muslim sailors from India, and they were found worldwide. I'd be surprised if there weren't at least a few in the USN, but it would be hard to prove.
 
A question was asked, and answered. If you've no interest in the subject, why comment?

Because modern politics are supposed to be forbidden here and yet we see it over and over with threads like this, injecting modern issues into the guise of Civil War study.

I'm glad you will be tolerant of the inevitable "preferred pronouns" thread. Hint: There weren't any in the 1860s, when people spoke English and left it that way.
 
Because modern politics are supposed to be forbidden here and yet we see it over and over with threads like this, injecting modern issues into the guise of Civil War study.

I'm glad you will be tolerant of the inevitable "preferred pronouns" thread. Hint: There weren't any in the 1860s, when people spoke English and left it that way.

Thank you @Drew .
 
Because modern politics are supposed to be forbidden here and yet we see it over and over with threads like this, injecting modern issues into the guise of Civil War study.

I'm glad you will be tolerant of the inevitable "preferred pronouns" thread. Hint: There weren't any in the 1860s, when people spoke English and left it that way.
Not seeing anything related to modern politics. Just a lot of attempts to derail the thread about actual muslim soldiers.

BTW, your comment about people speaking English and leaving it that way is one for the funniest things I've ever heard about the 1860s. "I fights mit Siegel" and the 11th corps and all that...
 
I was in the Saudi desert during Ramadan, the Saudi soldiers were beyond kind. I had tea and cookies sitting in the featureless desert. "No thank you, 6 sugar cubes in a small cup of tea is enough." To this day I do not find half cooked iguana tasty, but the company was excellent. And no, half cooked iguana does not taste like chicken.
I spoke to a Pakistani the other day in 7-11, seemed likable enough, the 7-11 doughnut did taste like a doughnut however, not seeng the relevance of either story to the ACW really though
 
Not seeing anything related to modern politics. Just a lot of attempts to derail the thread about actual muslim soldiers.

BTW, your comment about people speaking English and leaving it that way is one for the funniest things I've ever heard about the 1860s. "I fights mit Siegel" and the 11th corps and all that...
Well when your going into well into the 20th century, your well hinting at modern politics, which aren't supposed to be referenced here, even by innuendo...… I would agree stories about the Saudi desert do seem modern attempts to derail the thread, unless someone somehow views Desert Storm a continuation of the ACW...........which if so, I'll agree to disagree it was a continuation of the ACW
 
Not seeing anything related to modern politics. Just a lot of attempts to derail the thread about actual muslim soldiers.

BTW, your comment about people speaking English and leaving it that way is one for the funniest things I've ever heard about the 1860s. "I fights mit Siegel" and the 11th corps and all that...

Shadow, I don't post here the way I used to but it's good to pop in and see you back here. I'm going to take your advice and ignore the thread that's coming, "Preferred Pronouns and the Civil War." There won't be anything modern about that one.

Carry on, Sir, I will take leave of this thread.
 
Did any fight for the south ? Very interesting thread ….

You cant look at the past and see it in todays eyes you have to see it through theirs then … there's good and bad in all races and faiths..

But comes down to how close you follow your faith.
 
Did any fight for the south ? Very interesting thread ….

You cant look at the past and see it in todays eyes you have to see it through theirs then … there's good and bad in all races and faiths..

But comes down to how close you follow your faith.
In the other thread its said a few fought for the south and around 292 combined for both sides....not even a brigade, its about like a black confederate thread as far as the miniscule numbers go, maybe there were least lots of Islamic cooks, teamsters, ect
 
Thank you
I'm all for recognizing anyone's individual contribution, and at least in this thread no one has seemed to try to deny their existence, which would seem the ultimate disrespect of ones service.

But at the same time when discussing the minuscule number of black Confederates or Muslims to the war over all, it does seem fair as Drew has here and others have in Black Confederate threads to point out realistically as a whole the contributions were rather insignificant.
 
that's not true at all or their wouldn't have been discrimination, BTW the example of NH not allowing anyone but Protestants to serve in legislature would have precluded Muslims as well as Jews........
New Hampshire had few Moslems at all until maybe the last thirty odd years. If you actually study modern history one will see that the US actually got along quite well with Moslem nations and was well regarded until rather recently.
In the 19th Century there was no US /Moslem dispute.
Leftyhunter
 
New Hampshire had few Moslems at all until maybe the last thirty odd years. If you actually study modern history one will see that the US actually got along quite well with Moslem nations and was well regarded until rather recently.
In the 19th Century there was no US /Moslem dispute.
Leftyhunter

yes they bought their people as slaves, quite nicely indeed.......And frankly discriminating against non Protestants is still discrimination regardless of the number ding discriminated against. Surprising how many seem fine with discrimination.
 
yes they bought their people as slaves, quite nicely indeed.......And frankly discriminating against non Protestants is still discrimination regardless of the number ding discriminated against. Surprising how many seem fine with discrimination.
Which is relevant to Moslem soldiers in the ACW exactly how?
Leftyhunter
 
Moses Osman, who is cited as the highest ranking officer with a Muslim name in the Union army was confirmed in the German Lutheran Church on 3/26/1843, in Harrisburg Pa. His father's name was Robert and his mother was Catherine. (see ancestry.com for this information).

As for W. B. Osman, listed as being the first person with an Islamic name buried in a National Cemetery, his full name was William Boman Osmun. He was in G, 49th Pa. His widow, Matilda, got a pension. He was born in Pennsylvania. His family tree is available on Ancestry.com and traces his family's roots back to England and Germany. There is not a hint of Islamic involvement anywhere.
 
Which is relevant to Moslem soldiers in the ACW exactly how?
Leftyhunter
Gee if up to 30% of the early slaves were Muslims....its how and why many where even here....its not really that hard to pickup on.......Or did you miss that most of the early Muslims in the US came here as slaves, it was one of the early posts.....?

So now slavery and discrimination are both irrelevant to the history of Muslims in the US..... Or are you claiming none of the 290 were ex slaves now?
 
Last edited:
At some point many Americans were discriminated prior to the Civil War. Are we using if one or one's ancestors were discriminated against in the United States, as a measure of if they should or should not be honored for their Civil War service? If so the majority of Civil War soldiers should not be honored.
 
Gee if up to 30% of the early slaves were Muslims....its how and why many where even here....its not really that hard to pickup on.......Or did you miss that most of the early Muslims in the US came here as slaves, it was one of the early posts.....?

So now slavery and discrimination are both irrelevant to the history of Muslims in the US..... Or are you claiming none of the 290 were ex slaves now?
I never claimed that more then a relative handful of ACW soldiers were practicing Moslems. My main point was that until relatively recently there was no major antagonism between Americans and Moslems.
Leftyhunter
 
Back
Top