Replies

You certainly picked your screen name well. My Texas public school education (Bryan Adams High School, Dallas, TX) taught me that Standwaite Waite, the half-Cherokee confederate general was the last to surrender his command in 1865. Like your namesake did in 1865, you continue to fight a rear guard action. Unlike your namesake, you fail to realize when the jig is up.

Waite, your reaction to every comment or observation that does not fit your view of the world is that it's "damnyankee propoganda." I truly do not think you have the intellectual capacity to assemble a reasoned argument. Your answers are usually knee-jerk reactions. You rarely cite your sources. In my conservative, private university education, I was taught that if your are staing opinion, then say its opinion, and when your are quoting fact, give your source. I'm not always as diligent as I should be, but you almost never are.

Let's look at the comment that there were "at least 100,000 black servicemen (in the confederate service) and that "US Archives and state archivists" prove it. First of all, most reputable military historians would not consider slaves who are used as cooks, wagon drivers, officers' servants, etc., to be "servicemen." A slave used by a slave-owing army is not a soldier. Certainly, some black slaves fought when given freedom as an incentive - this was true during the Revolutionary War too. IO can cite the 1st LA native Guards (about 3,000) and the Richmond Howitzersn (about 1,000).

Let's look at the numbers quoted in the Diary of Dr. Lewis Steiner with regard to Lee's Army of Northern Virginia about the time of the Battle of Antietam. Steiner noted that Lee had about 64,000 men. 40,000 of those were "effectives" (soldiers capable a carrying firearms and fighting). Steiner also noted that Lee had about 3,000 "negros." Most were engaged in servile roles, however, about 1,000 were comabat soldiers - that is to say they took part in battle, either as infantry men, or more often, as part of artillary crews. The highest documented estimates of black service in all capacities in the confederate military is about 7 to 8 percent. The highest reasonable estimates of black combatants is 1 to 2 percent.

The Confederate Congressional Record clearly shows how vehement the Southerners were against using "coloreds" as soldier. It wasn't until Lee pleaded with the confederate government, as his army was on the verge of collapse, to allows black openly into the army, was something done about it. "Authority for this was finally received from the State of Virginia and on April 1st 1865, $100 bounties were offered to black soldiers. Benjamin exclaimed, "Let us say to every Negro who wants to go into the ranks, go and fight, and you are free Fight for your masters and you shall have your freedom." Confederate Officers were ordered to treat them humanely and protect them from "injustice and oppression"." It is easy to understand why some white southerners would be nervous about arming people who still carried scars on their backs from the whippings they had received.

I recently read a piece by a military historian (whose name I forget), who has been reserching the letters written by Confederate soldiers. This historian reported he had looked at over 10,000 letters and had found NO mention of black soldiers. One could reasonably argue that the black soldiers were illiterate and did not write, but one would think that there would be at least a mention of "negro" or "colored" soldier - but their is none. This is not "propoganda." This is research that points to the fallacy of your "100,000 black soldiers" claim. Sure, I've read some of the historical websites and see the 65,000 85,000 and 100,000 numbers, but I see no documentation.

With regard to "massacres," rather than use sensationalized newpaper accounts, I like to read the first hand accounts from the participants. Go back and read what Forrest said after the Fort Pillow Incident. I paraphrase, "We wanted to shows the Northerners that coloreds couldn't stand up to Southerners." At Fort Pillow, 3/4th of the blacks were killed - much higher percentage than the white troops. The Southern accounts suggested that many blacks were shot after surrender. To his credit, NB Forrest did not order the massacre.

If you would like more, read Dale's account of the Owensboro, Ky, raid. In that one, the rebels caught a group of black Union soldiers, executed them, and then burned their bodies on a flatboat they had set adrift. Dale was a rebel participant - no Northern revison here.

You suggest that I am "south hating." In fact, I have irons in both fires. I have an ancestor who was captured at Fort Donelson when his cowardly Confederate political generals fled in the night. He was later traded and discharged because of his medical condition - lived a long life post-war. I have another eastern Tennesee relative who was a loyal Unionist. He was a cousin of another loyal Unionist, Sam Houston. Then another branch of the family from New England, "Black Republicans," fought honorably for the north. One of them is planted out here in California, where he came in the 1880's. They were abolitionists, and there were a lot more than 10,000 by 1860.

Someday, I hope, you will be able to "edumakate" yourself about the history of our country, rather than live in your delusional reality. That's the truth, "nothing more, nothing less."