The problem here is that many of these people arguing have not qualified the meaning of "service". Most "black Confederates" were "serving" the Confederacy as cooks, butlers, bodyservants, and particularly teamsters. In fact, it was partly this Confederate black "service" that kept the lesser populated white South able to provide men to the fighting armies. Ending this was one (not the only) factor in the Contraband Acts, and the Emancipation Proclamation. Many of these slave/servants in better equipped companies can be clearly seen in surviving photography wearing Confederate uniforms. (their service would also qualify them for pensions)
But were they soldiers? That question is tricky and relies on very few sources. Some free blacks offered their services to the CSA in 1861 but were turned down. Monetary contributions were accepted. The New Orleans Native Guard, a wealhty mulatto/Creole militia group of War of 1812 fame offered theirs in 1862 but were turned down and joined the Union Army. The other famous account were the two companies raised in April 1865 (only because of RE Lee's demands "we should decide if these people should fight for us or against us") and who drilled in Richmond. They never saw action.
The rest is heresay. I think probably many light-skinned black folks "passed" as whites. Probably no diffferent than women who fought and passed as men. Also there are accounts of body servants of officers (slaves who "grew up" side by side with their masters) picking up a rifle a time or two. This certainly happened on many (or at least several) occasions. The problem here is that this story was later interpreted in post-war literature as "the loyal Darky". It can be found in the book "in Ole Virginia" (forgot the author). It was overemphasized to contrast "loyal" blacks during segregation to "troublemakers", a segregationalist "morality play" in a way.
The point here is we forget how hard it was to have black troops raised for the Union Army. In the Confederacy it was a conflict to the social order. For example paraphrasing Howell Cobb "if they make good soldiers they justifiable can not be held as slaves". We forget that between the 18th century and 1860's in the south we had Gabriel Prosser, Nat Turner, and John Brown's rebellions/raids. That generation of Southerners were much more uncomfortable with guns in the hands of slaves than their grandfathers were. (see the slave codes of the 1830's). It was difficult enough for Cleburne and a man like even Lee to get black soldiers raised. We must understand the threat that posed to the southern worldview.
This is not to bash the south or anyone's Confederate ancestor. The mean-spirited "south as losers" attitude is self righteous and discounts northern attrocities/ inconsitancies. Only the truly cold-hearted person could stand at Gettysburg and not feel their bravery and sacrifice. My opinion, however humble, is that the black Confederate is mythology. By advocating it, you play into the hands of political correctness. Even if you were to prove 70,000 C.S.A. black soldiers served, your opponents would discount them as "sellouts" and "Uncle Tom's". It would not affect their South bashing one iota.
"...there are accounts of body servants of officers (slaves who "grew up" side by side with their masters) picking up a rifle a time or two. This certainly happened on many (or at least several) occasions. The problem here is that this story was later interpreted in post-war literature as "the loyal Darky". It can be found in the book "in Ole Virginia" (forgot the author). It was overemphasized to contrast "loyal" blacks during segregation to "troublemakers", a segregationalist "morality play" in a way."
The Re-Fighting of the Civil War fer the last 140 years has resulted in self-serving spin from both sides, but that doesn't change the fact that Slavery was/IS Evil and is an embarrassment for the South...nor does it change the FACT that the Federal Guv'ment overstepped it's constitutional limitations in not allowing the South to secede!!
IMHO...MUD
black CSA veterans fought alongside white, hispanic, indian & asian servicemembers on the same basis as other soldiers.
no less an authority than GEN N.B.Forrest said that his "sable warriors" fought as well as any soldier for the TRUE CAUSE.
Professor H. R. Blackerby,the noted late/former chair of history at Tuskeegee University, estimates that there were at least 100,000 black CSA servicemembers in the army,navy & CSMC, who served in EVERY sort of military job.
it is a REVISIONIST lie to suggest otherwise, especially given the THOUSANDS of service records of blacks in the US archives & the number of pension records in state archives.
damnbyankee apologists like ravison,x,ditto & ole' WP TRY hard to discount their VALIANT service for the CAUSE, as it makes their LIES more plausable to the un-informed.
did you know that the south's 1st naval HERO-MARTYR was a black naval lieutenant? his name was LT Moses I. Dillon, CSN who btw was given the first CSA "state funeral". (i'd bet you didn't know that there were some black CSA commissioned officers.there are service records of at least FIVE.)
free dixie,sw
....IMHO it's pretty clear cut.....no one in 2003 would deny veteran's status to present day Army truck drivers, cooks, mechanics, bandsmen, medics, welders ect....they're not any different than the cooks, teamsters, grooms, litter bearers, ferriers, smiths, butchers, saddlers, harness makers ect of 165 years ago....without those kind of people neither Lee nor Grant could have kept an Army in the field very long....
And ya know,,,,I don't think anything will.