Posted on 10/20/2010 8:19:20 AM PDT by Palter
A textbook distributed to Virginia fourth-graders says that thousands of African Americans fought for the South during the Civil War -- a claim rejected by most historians but often made by groups seeking to play down slavery's role as a cause of the conflict.
The passage appears in "Our Virginia: Past and Present," which was distributed in the state's public elementary schools for the first time last month. The author, Joy Masoff, who is not a trained historian but has written several books, said she found the information about black Confederate soldiers primarily through Internet research, which turned up work by members of the Sons of Confederate Veterans.
Scholars are nearly unanimous in calling these accounts of black Confederate soldiers a misrepresentation of history. Virginia education officials, after being told by The Washington Post of the issues related to the textbook, said that the vetting of the book was flawed and that they will contact school districts across the state to caution them against teaching the passage.
"Just because a book is approved doesn't mean the Department of Education endorses every sentence," said spokesman Charles Pyle. He also called the book's assertion about black Confederate soldiers "outside mainstream Civil War scholarship."
Masoff defended her work. "As controversial as it is, I stand by what I write," she said. "I am a fairly respected writer."
The issues first came to light after College of William & Mary historian Carol Sheriff opened her daughter's copy of "Our Virginia" and saw the reference to black Confederate soldiers.
"It's disconcerting that the next generation is being taught history based on an unfounded claim instead of accepted scholarship," Sheriff said. "It concerns me not just as a professional historian but as a parent."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
With relatives who fought on each side of CW I, I can say with conviction that the war was over economic control of the future of the United States and its future.
Every other issue was a smokescreen.
Period.
I'm not an expert on uniforms, so I cannot be 100% sure, but those soldiers look like they are wearing CSA uniforms. The officer is wearign something darker, obviously. It might even be blue. But you have to remember that the entire federal army wore blue in 1860 (before the war). In the early battles, there were quite a few men in blue fighting for the South. It was confusing.
I believe that photo represents a Southern unit, and I believe the officer is CSA -- but I'm not an expert.
Many Slaves did serve the Confederacy. They considered themselves Southerners. It was their homes and families being effected by the war. They often referred to the civil war as the ‘war of Northern aggression’. Their own words are found here:
Testimonies of Freed Slaves, A 1937 WPA project. Records prepared by the Federal Writers’ Project 1936-1938 assembled by Library of Congress Work Projects, Admin. Dist. Of Columbia
http://www.gutenberg.org/browse/authors/w#a3906
Yes, but confederate army officers did not wear their rank on shoulder patches. Rank insignia was worn on the collar and the cuffs. That is clearly a Union Army officer's uniform.
Maybe I should have spent more than five seconds, oh well.
Excellent post.
and how do we know for sure your photo is not an internet photo shop fake?
Thanks for the added information.
But, do you admit that some blacks fought for the South? That's the real issue. The photo in question is simply a distraction.
They are Union Army uniforms. That is evident by the hats and the overcoats and the presence of brass U.S. badge on the diagonal strap that is centered on the chest and which is visible on several of them. The officer is dressed in the standard U.S. uniform with his rank worn on the shoulder. Confederate officers wore their rank on their collars and their cuffs.
I believe that photo represents a Southern unit, and I believe the officer is CSA -- but I'm not an expert.
Sorry, but you're incorrect.
The sole purpose of the dispute is to keep the demand for reparations alive.
>>Could you provide a source?<<
I’m sorry. I heard him say it when he was subbing for Rush.
Some did, but in nowhere near the numbers that have been bandied about on this thread. The overwhelming majority served unofficially in supporting roles as teamsters, cooks, servants, laborers, and the like, and there is no doubt that by doing so they freed up a lot of white men to do the actual fighting. A very small percentage may have served in the ranks. But the idea that tens of thousands of blacks served side-by-side with their white counterparts as combat soldiers is not supported by any evidence I've seen.
>>Even though he had documentation showing his ancestors were free blacks in New Orleans who owned slaves and who fought in the Confederacy, they refused to allow him to tell his story. It did not fit their PC presentation.<<
WOW!
Because I’ve seen in in books going back decades. Besides, why would a rebel Louisiana regiment be wearing Union winter uniforms? Especially in light of it’s brief existence?
Earl Ijames from the NC Museum of History is researching this topic.
We heard him speak and I think his presents a solid case.
His research has not been well received among academics and he has refused to debate the topic. I asked him about that and he told me he did not want to put all his research out there as he possibly would write a book.
This is a no brainer. There were Blacks in the CSA or there were not. Photographic evidence, records seem to confirm blacks served in the Armies of the south. Was slavery evil—yes, but this is about the army of the south. History can’t be changed just because it looks better with a few adjustments. Some Jews fought for Hitler too. Indians fought for the south as did Irish. We should be beyond this by now.
Well,who are you gonna believe? An edjumacated perfesser or your lyin’ eyes? Obviously, that picture had to be photoshopped. :=)
I had relatives in both NJ infantry and VA cavalry units, and I agree. I view CW I as a conflict between anti-federalism and federalism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.