What the Newspapers Said: The Black Confederate “Myth” Examined

jgoodguy · Oct 10, 2019

Andersonh1 said:
I have collected over 1400 articles dealing with this topic.

However, in each case, it is a personal interpretation that the article is about 'Black Confederates' the definition of which there is no general agreement.

rittmeister · Oct 10, 2019

jgoodguy said:
Interesting, but a myth involves people who do not exist. Which is it 'Black Confederates' are real people with names and unit designations or fabrications?

2300 stories averaging 100 words per story(a generous estimate) is 230,000 words or about the size of Uncle Tom's Cabin(180,242 words). Davis' Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government has 2200 pages averaging 300 words per page or 660,000 words.
A search of 'petticoat' on

results in 2200 articles just in 1861 to 1865 and 22274 articles 1861-1890.

Raw statistics prove nothing.

exactly

Andersonh1 · Oct 11, 2019

jgoodguy said:
Please present the articles as evidence.

You know where to find them.

jgoodguy · Oct 11, 2019

Andersonh1 said:
420 post-war articles,

Andersonh1 said:
I have stories from post-war articles from 1865 through 1941 concerning these men.

420 articles from 1865 to 1941 is 420 articles in 76 years or 5 articles (5.5) per year.
In the same 76 year period, there were 10249 results containing “the phrase "siamese twins"” b

I do not think a myth can be sustained on 5 random newspaper articles a year.

jgoodguy · Oct 11, 2019

Andersonh1 said:
You know where to find them.

I cannot find them. They are hidden in CWT's new forums off-limits to non CWT members.

jgoodguy · Oct 11, 2019

The first paragraph is a strawman argument. No one is arguing except the author "that black supporters of the Confederacy never existed, and that belief in their existence is embracing a known falsehood. '

We know that no official 'Black Confederate' soldiers existed until the last month of the war and we do not have unit designations or muster rolls for them. They have no existence outside of nameless faceless 'sable' blacks marching in a Richmond square, nameless faceless men seen at a distance on the Petersburg line and nameless faceless men scattered by Union cavalry who may be teamsters anyway. In short, if the 'myth' is black men in gray recognized as CSA soldiers by the CSA government in regiments or brigades, it is indeed a myth.

From Abbeville
https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/...ers-said-the-black-confederate-myth-examined/

Where did the belief in the “black Confederate soldier” originate? Did it begin in 1977, after the success of the television mini-series Roots caused people to reevaluate race and slavery during the Civil War? Were stories of these men absent before then, as one of many historians who tackles this topic claims? Is it accurate or indeed fair to describe these men as a “myth” either as individuals or collectively? Is attempting to highlight the service of these men some nefarious plot to downplay slavery as a cause of the Civil War? Certainly the history of black supporters of the Confederate States can be and has been abused or mischaracterized by some on both sides of this issue, but it is wrong to label this history as a “myth”, implying by the use of the word that black supporters of the Confederacy never existed, and that belief in their existence is embracing a known falsehood.

jgoodguy · Oct 11, 2019

Levin's simple definition of a 'Black Confederate'.

Blacks in the Confederate Ranks link

Another

Levin's argument, as I understand it, is that the idea of a significant number of willful black Confederate soldiers and the disingenuous revisionist elevation of body servants, cooks, etc to soldier status (including altering and otherwise deliberately misinterpreting period photographs to support this agenda) is a modern invention by the SCV and other Confederate sympathizers. Link

One more.

I'll let Levin tell us- "As this book will argue, claims that the Confederate government recruited significant numbers of black men into the army first emerged with the Confederate heritage community in the late 1970s in response to the gradual shift in popular memory of the Civil War following the civil rights movement." (p.3) Link

If the first paragraph of https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/...ers-said-the-black-confederate-myth-examined/ is the purpose of the article, what is the author attempting to rebut?

Andersonh1 · Oct 11, 2019

jgoodguy said:
The first paragraph is a strawman argument. No one is arguing except the author "that black supporters of the Confederacy never existed, and that belief in their existence is embracing a known falsehood. '

I have seen a number of posters state outright that there were "zero" or "no" black Confederates. It's not a straw man. The Abbeville article is not just addressing Levin's book, though obviously it's in the mix having just been published.

jgoodguy · Oct 11, 2019

https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/...ers-said-the-black-confederate-myth-examined/

In my previous article, “Black Southern Support for Secession and War“, I focused primarily on financial and volunteer labor by the Southern black population in early 1860 as reported by the newspapers, in an attempt to get away from modern historians and their spin and go back to contemporary wartime opinion and reaction. That approach is even more valuable here because we’re examining “belief”, and wartime newspapers are full of editors telling the reader what they believe. It may be obvious, but I will state it anyway: stories about black men in uniform fighting for the Confederate States did not originate in 1977. In fact, they pre-date the opening shots of the war, and began because of the actions of southern black men themselves.

As noted in https://www.jggscivilwartalk.online/index.php?threads/what-the-newspapers-said-the-black-confederate-“myth”-examined.523/page-2#post-7240. The issue of 'stories about black men in uniform fighting for the Confederate States did not originate in 1977. ' does not appear to be an issue outside of this author's opinion.

Taking a look at this.

The black Confederate narrative emerged to perform a specific function, but many people today who accept the existence of black men in Confederate ranks are unaware that this mythical narrative does not date to the war years or even to the postwar period extending well into the twentieth century. The origins of this myth do have roots in the war itself. Much of the confusion today centers on the failure to understand with precision the critical roles African Americans occupied in the Confederate war effort.
Levin, Kevin M.. Searching for Black Confederates (Civil War America) (p. 6). The University of North Carolina Press. Kindle Edition.

jgoodguy · Oct 11, 2019

Andersonh1 said:
I have seen a number of posters state outright that there were "zero" or "no" black Confederates. It's not a straw man. The Abbeville article is not just addressing Levin's book, though obviously it's in the mix having just been published.

These are anonymous bloggers, forum denizens and trollers posting unsupported opinions and not credentialed historians. Why does the article reference "as one of many historians who tackles this topic claims? " and "in an attempt to get away from modern historians and their spin "suggesting something other than that.

Andersonh1 · Oct 12, 2019

jgoodguy said:
These are anonymous bloggers, forum denizens and trollers posting unsupported opinions

Doesn't Levin argue against the same type of people? They're voices in the debate.

jgoodguy · Oct 12, 2019

Andersonh1 said:
Doesn't Levin argue against the same type of people? They're voices in the debate.

That's Levin's problem.
Your problem is finding names to go with your assertion "as one of many historians who tackles this topic claims? " and "in an attempt to get away from modern historians and their spin "

jgoodguy · Oct 12, 2019

https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/...ers-said-the-black-confederate-myth-examined/

We don’t have to establish firmly what the official legal status of these men was or why they acted as they did to recognize that their very public actions in support of their state and the Southern war effort unsurprisingly attracted the attention of the press. Not everything published about them was factual, but if we’re looking simply for a belief in black Southern soldiers, examples are not hard to find.

On January 5, 1861, the Cincinnati Daily Press offered this short account that may be the earliest publicized example of free black men announcing that they planned to fight for their state.

A large number of the native free negroes of Louisiana have, through the Delta, proposed to fight for her in 1861 as they did in 1814-15. – Cincinnati Daily Press, January 05, 1861

Back to looking for myths.

We have an inconsistency. The author claims "the Cincinnati Daily Press' makes what 'may be the earliest publicized example of free black men announcing that they planned to fight for their state.' Yet this earliest published example is a report of an earlier published article. This is a great example of how the peer-reviewed process of a credential historian, the very ones panned by this author, keeps real historians out of simple traps.

Yet this is not a myth but a report of an actual event. This article is confusing about its inability to stay on factual or mythical subjects. It is typical of Abbeville Institute ameatur hour. Does it describe a 'belief in black Southern soldiers'. Not to me. It is simply a random article tossed on the wall to see if it sticks.

jgoodguy · Oct 12, 2019

https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/...ers-said-the-black-confederate-myth-examined/

These men had put a notice in the Delta newspaper that they were ready to fight for Louisiana, which had not even seceded at that point and would not for another three weeks. The press did not seek them out, these men used the press to publicize their statement. They wanted their intentions publicly known. They drew a comparison between the crisis of 1861 and the one during the War of 1812. Black military service decades earlier under then-General Andrew Jackson had not been forgotten by the public, and that is significant. We don’t often think of the Antebellum South as having black military veterans, but they did.

Outside of the Creoles of Mobile and New Orleans, there was no memory of armed nonwhites fighting in the Mind of the Southern Public.

5fish · Oct 12, 2019

I think I found what these Freemen Confederate Negro's the newspapers talk about. They were labor regiment... Read the second paragraph...

Link: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3031531?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

jgoodguy · Oct 13, 2019

https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/...ers-said-the-black-confederate-myth-examined/

The earliest mention I have found that uses the word “soldier” in relation to black Southerners is in an article about these men, and it’s not the only time we’ll see that term applied to black Southerners.

THE FREE COLORED SOLDIERS. – We some days ago mentioned that the Creole free colored population downtown had taken the war question into consideration, and determined to offer their services to Gov. Moore, for home defence. At the meeting held for this purpose, some 1500 men were present. With one voice and with the greatest enthusiasm they agreed to offer themselves, and did so. The Governor accepted them, and they are now forming companies, as their fathers and grandfathers did in 1814 and ’15. Should their services be needed, they will be among our hardest and best fighters. Jordan Noble, better known as “Old Jordan,” the Drummer of Chalmette, is raising a free colored company; and we learn a similar company is being organized in Jefferson City. When the down-town free colored men form their regiment (and it will be a rousing one.) they will make a show as pleasing to all, as it will be surprising to many of our population. We will give further particulars as the organization progresses. – New Orleans Daily Crescent. April 27, 1861

Note the use of the term 'colored' and not black. This is important because the CSA consistently reject men who appeared to be black as slaves as soldiers. This makes the use of 'black' in the term 'Black Confederate' questionable.

These men would of course go on to form the First Louisiana Native Guard, a group of free black and creole volunteers. This group got quite a bit of press over the course of their existence and even after they disbanded, as they were brought up by Union General Benjamin Butler who used the exact words of Louisiana Governor Thomas O. Moore’s order praising the group’s patriotism and authorizing their existence as a military unit to try and silence Southern critics of Butler’s own enlistment of locals blacks as soldiers for the Union.

The so-called 'Confederate soldiers' only fighting was for the Union, also the only nation to arm and provide uniforms.

Modern critics of my even mentioning these men would say that they were not in fact Confederate soldiers, and to the extent that they were Louisiana state volunteer troops rather than enlisted in the Confederate army, that is true, though in response I would have to ask just what uniform they wore, and which side they were aligned with. The answer seems obvious. Many contemporary newspapers did not make the same fine distinctions as some modern historians either. To them, an armed and uniformed man in any Southern state’s military was considered Confederate.

Because the CSA rejected them as 'soldiers', that appears to support the notion they were not Confederate 'soldiers'. The State of Louisiana was unsure they were soldiers, refusing to arm them or provide uniforms initially, formally disbanding them on February 15, 1862, then restating them on March 24, 1862 issuing them a few ancient flintlock muskets with a final disbanding on April 25, 1862, when the so-called 'Confederate soldiers' refused to rejoin the Confederate forces that abandoned them and New Orleans. If neither the CSA nor the State of Louisiana regarded them as soldiers, why should we?

Andersonh1 · Oct 13, 2019

jgoodguy said:
However, in each case, it is a personal interpretation that the article is about 'Black Confederates' the definition of which there is no general agreement.

It's obvious who and what the stories are about. And do you ever get tired of playing the "we can't agree on a definition" game? Pick one and start evaluating. That's what I've done. Otherwise it's just arguing for the sake of arguing, and no answers will ever be arrived at.

Andersonh1 · Oct 13, 2019

jgoodguy said:
We have an inconsistency. The author claims "the Cincinnati Daily Press' makes what 'may be the earliest publicized example of free black men announcing that they planned to fight for their state.' Yet this earliest published example is a report of an earlier published article. This is a great example of how the peer-reviewed process of a credential historian, the very ones panned by this author, keeps real historians out of simple traps.

Publicized and published are two different things. The free black men of Louisiana had a letter published in the Delta, and the Cincinnati Daily Press publicized it elsewhere. I don't see that you have a real problem here, just nitpicking for the sake of it.

Andersonh1 · Oct 13, 2019

jgoodguy said:
Note the use of the term 'colored' and not black. This is important

No, it's not, because the word "colored", "negro" and "black" were often used interchangeably.

Because the CSA rejected them as 'soldiers', that appears to support the notion they were not Confederate 'soldiers'.

Which side was Louisiana aligned with at the time of the existence of the Native Guard? The idea that they were not Confederate is absurd, of course they were. They were a volunteer military unit of a Confederate state, what else could they be? Answers on a postcard, please.

The State of Louisiana was unsure they were soldiers,

Please provide a source that demonstrates this, preferably orders from the state militia or commentary from the state house or senate. The Governor certainly recognized them as soldiers since her authorized their existence as a military unit, which as commander in chief of the state militia he had the authority to do. Since the duly authorized authority recognized them, your statement is false.

refusing to arm them or provide uniforms initially,

Who was responsible for uniforming the state militia? How about volunteer state troops? Regulations, please. Provide proof that the Native Guard were treated any differently than other state military units.

formally disbanding them on February 15, 1862,

What do you based this on? The militia law requiring "white men" was not substantially different than the 1853 law in place when the Native Guard was formed.

then restating them on March 24, 1862

The governor called on them to "maintain their organization" in his orders. You don't maintain things that don't exist, you can only maintain pre-existing things. The wording indicates that they were not disbanded, but still in existence.

issuing them a few ancient flintlock muskets with a final disbanding on April 25, 1862,

Why were better weapons not available? Do you know?

when the so-called 'Confederate soldiers' refused to rejoin the Confederate forces that abandoned them and New Orleans.

Were they abandoned? Or did they remain behind? Evidence please.

From what I see here, you have very little actual understanding of who these men were, and how their organization was authorized. I'm not sure you're able to make an accurate judgment about their status.

5fish · Oct 13, 2019

There is enough info to search backwards to the units they were in and see if they were on the rosters and they are not...

John Buckner, of Stateburg the well known colored man, died on Saturday, August 17th, aged 60 years. John Buckner was always a freeman and at the breaking out of the war enlisted as a regular soldier in Capt. P. P. Gaillard’s company. He served subsequently in Capt. Boykin’s company and later as a scout. He was a faithful soldier, and when the war was over he remained true to his friends and was a true and tried democrat. – The Watchman And Southron (Sumter South Carolina) Wednesday, August 28, 1895

Buckner is not listed on Capt. P. P. Gaillard’s company (27th Regiment, South Carolina Infantry (Gaillard's)) roster... per NPS soldier search...
https://www.nps.gov/civilwar/search...arolina"&fq[]=Battle_Unit_Function:"Infantry"

What the Newspapers Said: The Black Confederate “Myth” Examined

Webmaster

trekkie in residence

Well-Known Member

Webmaster

Webmaster

Webmaster

Webmaster

Well-Known Member

Webmaster

Webmaster

Well-Known Member

Webmaster

Webmaster

Webmaster

Well-Known Member

Webmaster

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member