[Michael.SF.]

For varied reasons - chiefly the triumph of pro-Southern post-war history, or "Tara"-vision - this incident has been omitted from most accounts. But Sears and McPherson cite witnesses of the pogrom

First I have ever heard of the defeated being able to control the press of the victorious.

BIAS ALERT: Assume this is true for a moment. They state that the fee blacks were "kidnapped and herded south". Then they refer to the 'pogrom.' Which was it? A slaughter or an organized kidnapping?

[stainlessbanner]

One look at the location of publishing houses should hold the answer.

[Restorer]

It's quite well established that southern troops captured escaped slaves during all their advances, and they weren't always all that scrupulous about their legal status. Guven the ideology they were upholding, it made perfect sense to do so.

This is not an example of PC South-bashing, although there has been a lot of that going around in recent years. There were some very ugly realities about the southern side of the war, as well as of the northern side. As with all wars.

[Non-Sequitur]

A slaughter or an organized kidnapping?

An organized kidnapping. This happened both times the Army of Northern Virginia invaded the North. In the words of one of the soldiers who was there:

"We took a lot of negroes yesterday. I was offered my choice, but as I could not get them home I would not take them." - William S. Christian, confederate officer, June 28, 1863

[Grand Old Partisan]

Pogroms were not mass slaughters. The ywere mass expulsions. So, rebels capturing blacks and "expelling" them South could be called a pogrom.