Posted on 07/12/2007 6:04:07 AM PDT by RDTF
Two old steamer trunks sit in the rare-book room at the Virginia Historical Society, looking worn and forlorn. The smaller one was once red but the paint has faded to a dull rust. The larger one is brown with a piece of tin patching a hole in the top. On one side, a name is stenciled: "M. LEE."
That's Mary Custis Lee, Gen. Robert E. Lee's adventurous eldest daughter. In 1917, she stored these wooden trunks in the "silver vault" in the basement of Burke & Herbert Bank & Trust in Alexandria. A year later, she died at the age of 83. Her trunks sat in a dusty corner of the vault for 84 years, unclaimed, until E. Hunt Burke, the bank's vice chairman, discovered them in 2002.
Burke called his high school classmate Rob E.L. deButts Jr., who is Robert E. Lee's great-great-grandson. Together, the two men descended into the vault. Burke carried a basket of old keys.
"The first one I pulled out was a perfect fit," he says.
The trunks were stuffed with Lee family papers -- a priceless cache of 4,000 letters, photographs and documents. DeButts carted them to the Virginia Historical Society in Richmond, which houses the world's largest collection of Lee papers. He spent a week there, sitting at a desk in the research library, reaching into Mary Custis Lee's trunks and picking out treasures and trash.
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
There are thousands of sources indicating the confederate army used black slave labor as part of their war effort. That doesn't mean that they were combat troops or considered fellow soldiers by their white peers.
Of course. We all know that the 1860 South was filled with the spirit of integrated, interracial brotherhood. </sarcasm>
From an 1862 report in the Official Records by Lt. Col. J. G. Parkhurst, Ninth Regiment Michigan Infantry about the battle of July 13, 1862 at Murfreeborough, Tennessee...
Better yet, how about an account from the OR from a Southern leader talking about his black troops? Or Southern documentation talking about black regiments? Any letter or report from Lee or Johnston or Cleburn or Hood or any other Southern general talking about their black troops? Something like that?
‘A pseudo historian on FR on another thread tried to discredit Shelby Foote b/c he was born in the South. I’ve heard it all now.’
It never ceases to amaze me.
#####It never ceases to amaze me.#####
Ditto. This thread intially was about the discovery of new Robert E. Lee materials. This isn’t the first time such a discovery has been made. Back in 1975, General Lee’s U.S. citizenship was restored by an act of Congress. Before his death, General Lee had filed papers requesting this, but the papers were somehow lost. He passed on without any action being taken on the matter. In 1975, someone stumbled upon the papers in an archive.
The discovery triggered a wave of national sympathy for General Lee, and Congress responded by overwhelmingly voting to restore his citizenship. Only ten members of Congress voted against the proposal. That’s right, a mere ten members, all of them the nuttiest left-wing types imaginable. Bella Abzug, Ron Dellums, John Conyers, etc.
America still had some life left in it back then. The cultural rot that started in the sixties had begun, but not yet reached a near terminal stage. If those papers had not been found in 1975, but were found today, it would take an enormous fight to get a proposal to restore General Lee’s citizenship through Congress in this day and age. It’s hard to imagine a scenario in which it would pass. Every Democrat today would surely vote no, and maybe 30% or so of the Republicans. And if anything, I might be overestimating the Republican votes, given their tendency to cut and run when race is invoked. If the bill was even given a hearing, all we’d hear for days on end would be people screaming “slavery!” over and over. Sponsors of the bill would have to bow and scrape and debase themselves by the time it was all over, probably in appearances on Al Sharpton’s radio show.
It’s just a shame what’s become of our country.
As you might have realized, the Confederate commander at Murfreeborough (where the Union commander reported blacks fighting against the Union troops) was none other than Nathan Bedford Forrest. Here's a link to what he said about them (Link to a Walter Williams column):
Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest had slaves and freemen serving in units under his command. After the war, Forrest said of the black men who served under him, "These boys stayed with me.. - and better Confederates did not live."
I found Forrest’s full quote: “These boys stayed with me, drove my teams and better Confederates did not live.” But they did fight.
Charles, the colored servant of Adjutant Burk, unaided, captured a prisoner armed with gun and pistol, and turned him over to the commanding general of the First Brigade.
I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
R. C. W. RADFORD,
Colonel Thirtieth Virginia Cavalry.
I imagine that a lot of the slaves and free blacks serving in subordinate roles in the Confederate army fought on occasion.
I've posted to you before the link to 3,000 free blacks serving in the Confederate Native Guards throughout the state of Louisiana (Link). When the Feds took over a part of the state they made their own contingent of Native Guards.
I see it the same way, except I believe this sort of cultural upheaval runs in cycles.
We’re just on the end of the downswing...then again I am an optimist about most things.
Hope the materials found are published soon.
There’s a very interesting book which just came out called “Enough Blame to go Around” which examines in detail Jeb Stuarts actions during Gettysburg and who was to blame for Jeb’s disappearance during the one of the most important battles of the war. Lee does not come out well which I expected given the vague open ended orders he gave Jeb at the begining of the campaign. This points to a major defect in Lee’s generalship - a poor staff and an inablility to communicate clear orders to subordinates. Combine this with Lee’s tendency to delegate enormous responsibility to his Corps commanders in a battle and it was often a reciepe for disaster. Conversely, it was said of Grant by his generals after the war that it was impossible to read on of his orders and not know exactly what he wanted you to do.
We see this failure of Lee again during the first day of Gettysburg. His order to Ewell to take cemetary hill “if practicable” was inexcusable. Lee had plenty of intelligence at that point to make the call instead of passing the buck. One cannot concieve of Grant ever telling one of his commanders in the heat of battle to accomplish an objective “if practicable”.
Very good analysis of the ANV’s command and control as it existed after the shakeup required after Jackson’s death in May of 1863.
I’ve never been impressed by Lee’s offensive abilities. He was the master of the counterattack, but his own offensive attacks were almost always completely disjointed. Gettysburg’s three days are a case in point.
The same can be said for most of the ‘Seven Days’ battle when he originally took over command for Joe ‘The Great Retreater’ Johnson. Jackson in particular was curiously lethargic/inactive. Was it due to ‘vague’ orders?
Perhaps. Or perhaps Jackson’s legend was realized due to the incompetence of those he faced in the Valley Campaign that made him a world renowned General.
Lee was a great General, nobody thats ever seriously studied the era can say otherwise. But he had his own weakness as you demonstrate.
Where did the family move after moving from Arlington?
‘To the point where he left thousands of wounded behind to fall into the hands of the Union army because the wagons that might have carried them were used to move goods instead.’
Thats absurd in the extreme. He suspected he would be fighting for the very life of the ANV before he could recross the Potomac, knew the river was rising due to the rains, and knew he had to get the hell out of enemy territory after the disaster we call Picketts Charge.
He also knew the medical treatment his troops would receive if they were left behind would exceed what his own doctors could provide, given they exhausted their medical supplies over the course of the campaign.
Finally, the length of the trains carrying everything - including thousands of wounded, stretched for about 17 miles under the command of Imboden as I recall. With Stewarts horse’s ‘blown’ from his ill advised ride, they couldn’t provide security for those trains. There are literally dozens upon dozens of accounts of that nightmare ride to the Potomac over bad roads, the cries of the wounded with every bounce clearly heard to one and all.
At that point in the war the two sides were still routinely paroling/exchanging prisoners. Lee knew he had to get his men healthy quickly, knew he would ‘get them back in exchange’ and as such his decision was well founded.
To suggest he left his own wounded in favor of ‘supplies’ is ridiculous, completely inaccurate, and ill informed as to ‘how things worked’ in that era.
‘If I lost a war for something as evil as slavery, I might find some comfort in attempts to wrap it in some noble cause too. But I hope I wouldn’t get sucked into believing it 150 years later and calling disbelievers ignorant. ‘
This is a perfect example of whats meant about ‘winners writing the histories’.
The average Southerner wasn’t fighting for slavery. It was a huge issue, no denying it. But your point of view seems to be based on every single soldier in the CSA was a planation owner.
That simply wasn’t the case at all.
Yeah, I've read Williams' BS before. Now allowing for the post war Southron revisionism, it'd still be be nice if you could provide something along the lines of the official report you posted for the Union officer. Surely with all the bazillion black confederate soldiers you claim existed someone must have reported something?
Well, one at least. But as I've stated before nobody is denying that the confederate army brought along thousands of slaves to act as cooks, servants, teamsters, laborers, and the like. Here is an example of one of them. But Colonel Bradford doesn't describe him as a soldier, does he? He's a servant. He was no doubt Adjutant Burke's property. I doubt he had a lot of choice being there. And no doubt his actions caused a great deal of amusement among Bradford's fellow officers. But was he considered a soldier? Bradford doesn't seem to indicate that.
Your article mentions that 3,000 free blacks volunteered their services but fails to mention that that service was refused by the confederate authoritities who refused to allow blacks into the army in any capacity until much later in the war.
If that were true then why devote the troops to getting those wagons of supplies confiscated from the civilian population of Pennsylvania? Lee made sure that the wagons were well underway and guarded before pulling back from Gettysburg. And in the process he left tens of thousands of wounded behind. A calculated decision on his part.
He also knew the medical treatment his troops would receive if they were left behind would exceed what his own doctors could provide, given they exhausted their medical supplies over the course of the campaign.
Lee took his wounded with him after Antietam, he didn't after Gettysburg. The reason is obvious.
To suggest he left his own wounded in favor of ‘supplies’ is ridiculous, completely inaccurate, and ill informed as to ‘how things worked’ in that era.
I suppose that this is another one of those subjects where you know the data involved intimately. Even more than men like Kent Brown who wrote whole books on the subject.
Show me where I've claimed that there were huge numbers of black confederate soldiers. You can't, because I haven't. But that hasn't stopped you from making up claims.
What's the matter, non. Have you no Internet searching skills? Colored servant of Adjutant Burk
He was also the principal author of the Federalist Papers, without which the Constitution would probably have never been adopted at all.
Not in the same form, at least. I think it is very interesting to read Brutus's objections to the Constitution in the Anti-Federalist papers and see how stunningly accurate that the predictions are. Perhaps given the long-term short-comings of our present government, it might have been better had the anti-federalist prevailed. Obviously it's just pure speculation, but it's one worth thinking about given the failures of the Federalists' system.
Perhaps, but the Articles of Confederation had proven insufficient.
I cannot help but wonder why so many conservatives believe that replacing politicians in Washington with politicians in state capitals would solve so many problems. Just where do you suppose national politicians come from? Yes, they start out as local politicians. And human nature, so far as I know, operates on local politicians as much as it does on national ones.
Personally, I consider the view of so many conservatives that state sovereignty would lead to some sort of conservative utopia as extremely naive.
Incidentally, outside the United States nearly all conservatives and rightwingers advocate strong centralized government.
And incidentally, while Patrick Henry was the most outspoken Anti-Federalist before the Constitution was adopted, after he lost that fight he became a loose-construction Federalist whose last public act was to argue against the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions. And besides, wasn't the purpose of the Alien and Sedition Acts to protect America from Jacobinism?
The Forrest quote about the blacks who served under him was made after the war as Williams' quote said and as such was, of course, not in the Official Records. But you knew that.
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.