Then you are calling Chief Inspector Steiner a liar, because his report specifically states that. Although 3,000 in that one particular instance with Jackson's Army. As to the "side by side" part, Steiner said they were "promiscuously mixed up with all the rebel horde." Without a doubt the majority of black Confederates throughout the South were support personnel, that is true, but it is also true that many thousands participated in combat roles. Black Confederate combat soldiers are a fact of history, whether it fits current PC-revisionism or not. Frederick Douglass did not lie.
You would like us to believe that the same society that placed restrictions on any ownership by firearms by blacks would suddenly welcome them in the ranks.
Absolutely. Slaves were often allowed the use of arms. At home, those responsible for the master's family especially were. It was part of their role. Slaves wielding arms in defense of their families was written about many times by invading Northern soldiers. BTW, you are definitely calling Chief Inspector Steiner a liar now, because he specifically mentions them being armed with muskets, pistols, etc., and you are also definitely calling Frederick Douglass a liar as well. Why do think Mr. Douglass "lied" about it? I think he told the truth. See, I didn't even mention Horace Greeley.
The same states which had laws, sometime Constitutitons, against free blacks living in their state would welcome armed blacks in their regiments. The society that went to tremendous lengths to segregate their institutions would integrate their army. That is the ridiculous part.
Now ain't that the pot calling the kettle black. Your description of Northern society is quite apt, and the Northern Army did not integrate it's Army. While it may be true that officially the Confederate government in Richmod did not sanction the use of blacks as soldiers, but did as cooks, musicians, and servants, what the individual States and unit commanders decided to allow was another matter. As I previously mentioned, Tennessee for one specifically allowed it by law within her units. Did any Northern states do the same? Blacks on the Confederate army payroll were paid the same as whites by law. Where blacks in the Northern Army paid the same as whites? This can go on and on.
And that same society which, according to you, owed so much to the efforts of free black confederate soldiers during the war would repay that loyalty by passing the Black Codes after the war that placed those loyal black veterans, some of whom must have been free for decades, to a condition as closely resembling slavery as possible.
Have you ever read the Northern Black codes? Pot and Kettle again. The Southern ones were more strict, as an over-reaction to the crimes committed during reconstruction. That is not a justification, it is an explanation of what led to the severity. Other than that, they were like the North, and guilty of race prejudice. This may shock you, but most Americans, North and South, had race prejudice back then. A person may have looked at a black and thought him inferior, but that does not mean he wouldn't fight next to him. Unless he was from up North, I guess. Most Southern whites had interacted with blacks all their lives, unlike Northern whites, which probably explains that.
The 14th Tennessee was in the Third Brigade of Heath's Division. They did not participate in Pickett's Charge. Be careful of what you believe.
ROFLMAO!!! I will certainly be careful of believing any history from you. The "3rd Brigade of Heth's Division" was ARCHER'S BRIGADE. Now you maintain that Archer's Brigade did not participate in the charge of Pickett, Pettigrew, and Trimble. There is no end to your revisionism. I suggest you throw out whatever book of crap told you Archer's Brigade did not participate in that attack. The 14th Tennessee left their colors planted on the rock wall at that part of the line. Check your history. Archer's Brigade, and the 14th Tennessee Infantry with it, did most certainly participate in "Pickett's" Charge.
Nonsense, I'm suggesting that you are putting words into Dr. Steiner's mouth. He mentions several thousand mixed in with the army but his description of them riding mules, wagons, ambulances and caissons or with the command staffs resemble more servants and laborers than combat soldiers. Unless, of course, you're suggesting that maybe they were part of the planning staff for the generals in question? And it still doesn't explain his comment on "the horror rebels express at the suggestion of Black soldiers being employed in the National Defense." Why did the idea of facing black Union combat soldiers inspire horror if blacks were serving in the ranks with them?
Slaves were often allowed the use of arms.
The heck they were. In Tennessee the state Constitution noted that only "free white men of this state have a right to keep and bear arms for their common defense." In North Carolina the state Supreme Court ruled in State v. Newsom that free blacks could not own weapons or carry them without a permit. Since they weren't allowed by law to vote then they weren't citizens and weren't entitled to the same protections a white person was. Likewise, in Georgia the Supreme Court ruled that the constitutional right to carry concealable weapons only pertained to white people. In fact every single southern state had laws preventing the ownership of guns by slaves and severely restricted the owenrship of guns by free blacks. And, according to you, they just tossed those aside in their rush to admit blacks into the ranks as combat soldiers.
Now ain't that the pot calling the kettle black. Your description of Northern society is quite apt, and the Northern Army did not integrate it's Army.
We're not talking about Northern society, we're talking about the Southern one. There is no doubt at all that conditions for free blacks up North were abysmal. But at that it was no worse, and in many cases was much better, than conditions down south. Since the idea of integrated units was not sanctioned by the North, the idea that the south would do different is ridiculous.
Blacks on the Confederate army payroll were paid the same as whites by law.
What law was that?
Have you ever read the Northern Black codes? Pot and Kettle again. The Southern ones were more strict, as an over-reaction to the crimes committed during reconstruction.
Again, you show that you don't know what you're talking about. The Black Codes were passed by southern legislatures in 1865 while reconstrution didn't start until 1867. Why would they pass restrictions which returned blacks into a condition as closely resembling slavery as possible, including those who had been free prior to the war and those, according to you, fought for the south? And why would those who fought for the south participate in what you would call crimes during reconstruction? Where was the loyalty you spoke of then?
Most Southern whites had interacted with blacks all their lives, unlike Northern whites, which probably explains that.
But not as equals. If they interacted with blacks then it was with them as slaves and the white, regardless of economic position, a free man and the barrier was insurmountable.
ROFLMAO!!! I will certainly be careful of believing any history from you. The "3rd Brigade of Heth's Division" was ARCHER'S BRIGADE. Now you maintain that Archer's Brigade did not participate in the charge of Pickett, Pettigrew, and Trimble. There is no end to your revisionism. I suggest you throw out whatever book of crap told you Archer's Brigade did not participate in that attack. The 14th Tennessee left their colors planted on the rock wall at that part of the line. Check your history. Archer's Brigade, and the 14th Tennessee Infantry with it, did most certainly participate in "Pickett's" Charge.
Archer was captured on the first day. Command of his brigade went to Fry it was involved in the charge. I stand corrected.