Black Confederate Count Discussion thread

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
34,139
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#1
Discussion thread for Black Confederate Count. All posts with valid data are being put into a spreadsheet.

One more time this is an enumeration of Black Confederate claims. I am making little effort to evaluate the claims. The big one is that enlisted privates are assumed to be liable for combat and are combatants. Confederates recruiters/commanders may or may not be playing games with the term private or not well educated in CSA regulations, but I have no way to determine that. OTOH a private whose only duties are a cook can be determined from the spreadsheet, and evaluation is up to the observer.

The Work In Progress spreadsheet is here. I hope to have maximum information in it. Notes and links to evidence are provided. Anyone can use the data to make their own analysis.
 

(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)

19thGeorgia

Sergeant Major
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
2,286
#3
Then the Creole in question was not really a black Confederate soldier.
Leftyhunter
There were many Creoles ("Native Guards," "Corps D'Afrique") in the United States Colored Troops. How many times have you (and others) referred to the USCT as black ("black troops"/"black soldiers" etc)?

I've already checked- several times.
 
Joined
Jan 12, 2016
Messages
7,181
Location
South Carolina
#4
There were many Creoles ("Native Guards," "Corps D'Afrique") in the United States Colored Troops. How many times have you (and others) referred to the USCT as black ("black troops"/"black soldiers" etc)?

I've already checked- several times.
Perhaps they're only black if they served on the Union side, just as apparently they only had free will and freedom of choice if they served on the Union side. Black Confederates were apparently either always forced to do what they did, or had stockholm syndrome or something. The orthodoxy of our modern day seems to demand that black men who sided with the Confederacy can only be seen as victims.

Who isn't respecting the 19th century black man here?
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
34,139
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#5
Perhaps they're only black if they served on the Union side, just as apparently they only had free will and freedom of choice if they served on the Union side. Black Confederates were apparently either always forced to do what they did, or had stockholm syndrome or something. The orthodoxy of our modern day seems to demand that black men who sided with the Confederacy can only be seen as victims.

Who isn't respecting the 19th century black man here?
As I see it, one side wants photographic evidence of the subject in gray shooting someone in blue and the other side is arguing what degree of dark is black.
 
Joined
Jan 12, 2016
Messages
7,181
Location
South Carolina
#6
As I see it, one side wants photographic evidence of the subject in gray shooting someone in blue and the other side is arguing what degree of dark is black.
I just get frustrated with what appear to be a lot of minds already made up and closed on this topic. I had no real opinion on "black Confederates" until I started digging into it a few years back, and while I appreciate the need for caution in taking some things at face value, a lot of attitudes both here and among many historians I've read are very strident, and very absolute. I don't think the situation is as black and white as it's painted. I think we need to step back and be a bit more open minded and allow for human spirit and human decision making, even in the very difficult situation slaves and free blacks were in during the Civil War.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
14,882
Location
los angeles ca
#7
There were many Creoles ("Native Guards," "Corps D'Afrique") in the United States Colored Troops. How many times have you (and others) referred to the USCT as black ("black troops"/"black soldiers" etc)?

I've already checked- several times.
My point is only that the Alabama Creole did not actually fight in the U.S. Civil War
At least no evidence has been presented by you that he has.
Leftyhunter
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
34,139
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#8
I just get frustrated with what appear to be a lot of minds already made up and closed on this topic. I had no real opinion on "black Confederates" until I started digging into it a few years back, and while I appreciate the need for caution in taking some things at face value, a lot of attitudes both here and among many historians I've read is very strident, and very absolute. I don't think the situation is as black and white as it's painted. I think we need to step back and be a bit more open minded and allow for human spirit and human decision making, even in the very difficult situation slaves and free blacks were in during the Civil War.
True, but we have had 3 important pieces of evidence show up in here the Myth thread that interests me.
  • Evidence of Black Confederates being discharged because of color.
  • The first evidence of Black Confederate recruitment knowing it was against regulations.
  • A CSR about a black confederate evading capture by the enemy and returning to his unit.
It is your job to convince the audience with facts and good argumentation and not worry about the closed minds. I am happy to chase leaves to see where they go despite the catcalls.
 

19thGeorgia

Sergeant Major
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
2,286
#9
My point is only that the Alabama Creole did not actually fight in the U.S. Civil War
At least no evidence has been presented by you that he has.
Leftyhunter
That's why I put a question mark beside combatant. I don't know.
Most of these Compiled Service Records are uneventful. A soldier could have been in a several battles, but the cards (transcribed from muster rolls) don't tell us that individual was in a battle unless he was killed, wounded or captured.
 
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
14,882
Location
los angeles ca
#10
That's why I put a question mark beside combatant. I don't know.
Most of these Compiled Service Records are uneventful. A soldier could have been in a several battles, but the cards (transcribed from muster rolls) don't tell us that individual was in a battle unless he was killed, wounded or captured.
I will leave this thread,alone and see just how many black Confederate soldiers are,actually verified as,being in a combatant role.
Leftyhunter
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
34,139
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#11
That's why I put a question mark beside combatant. I don't know.
Most of these Compiled Service Records are uneventful. A soldier could have been in a several battles, but the cards (transcribed from muster rolls) don't tell us that individual was in a battle unless he was killed, wounded or captured.
Comments and remarks are put in the notes on the row of the spreadsheet with the subject.
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
34,139
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#13
My point is only that the Alabama Creole did not actually fight in the U.S. Civil War
At least no evidence has been presented by you that he has.
Leftyhunter
If the estimates are to be believed. Reference
kwc-totals_0.jpg

There were an estimated 1.5 million casualties reported during the Civil War.​

There were an estimated 3 million that served.

Civil War Service by Population
csa-usa-totals_0.jpg

That implies that with perfect paperwork, At best about 50% of Civil War soldiers serving can be documented to be in one battle by being documented as a casualty. IMHO accounting for Camp of Instruction and disease deaths, that figure drops considerably.

In short proving a given person actually engaged in combat is elusive.
 

gary

Captain
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
6,244
#14
Apply the standards of the time and not today's standards. Cooks, musicians, teamsters and servants were not soldiers in the Confederacy. They were subject to military laws, but were not fighting men per se.

Regarding the Confederate Navy, standards were different. There was a Chinese and a Cuban in the Georgia Coast Guard (admittedly not the Navy). Recall though with sailors it was a job skill whether one was a topman (worked with the sails) or a deck ape (WW II slang) who worked on the main deck. These were specialities that the landsmen were unskilled and unfamiliar with. When there's a shortage of sailors, you take what you can get (and many so called Confederate sailors were Englishmen who sought prize money).

The Union Navy itself granted petty officer status to black sailors who were skilled and these black petty officers could command white sailors. It wasn't until the New Navy (think 1880s onward) that the USN segregated itself and only permitted minorities to serve as cooks or stewards aboardship.
 
Last edited:

19thGeorgia

Sergeant Major
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
2,286
#15
Apply the standards of the time and not today's standards. Cooks, musicians, teamsters and servants were not soldiers in the Confederacy. They were subject to military laws, but were not fighting men per se.
Where in Confederate records does it say that enlisted men are not soldiers? I've found that many of these cooks, musicians, and teamsters are also listed as "private" on some rolls.
 

DaveBrt

Sergeant Major
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
Messages
2,071
Location
Charlotte, NC
#17
FWIW, the Regulations for the Army of the Confederate States for the Quartermaster Department, 1862 lists, among other things, the rooms and fuel to be provided, page 6. Fifteen individuals or groups are listed, one of which is:

Each non-commissioned officer, musician, private and washerwoman

Note that the musician is not covered by the term "private," just as the washerwoman was also not covered by that term.
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
34,139
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#19
Apply the standards of the time and not today's standards. Cooks, musicians, teamsters and servants were not soldiers in the Confederacy
Please comment on this quote from the 1864 Army Regulations of the Confederacy.

14. The extra pay allowed to soldiers acting as cooks and nurses in hospitals, will be paid by the Quartermaster Department, the extra service being noted on the hospital muster rolls.​
 

DaveBrt

Sergeant Major
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
Messages
2,071
Location
Charlotte, NC
#20
Please comment on this quote from the 1864 Army Regulations of the Confederacy.

14. The extra pay allowed to soldiers acting as cooks and nurses in hospitals, will be paid by the Quartermaster Department, the extra service being noted on the hospital muster rolls.​
Soldiers could be detailed to duty as a cook or nurse at hospitals. This was not common, but I have seen it noted. The great majority of hospital cooks, nurses and washer women were hired as such.
 



(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top