For fun What is a Black Confederate. Opinions, but please be very brief.

[Jim Klag]

Well then see what this slave had to say in letter he wrote, he could wrote because he was taught how and not regarded as trash many slaves were treated like family and freind. Had to screen shot this but the original is here too and it was in Black Confederates by Charles Kelly Barrow which stated at the bottom it was family owned and obviously donated or scanned at least.View attachment 3804View attachment 3805

Another bogus letter. Do you have proof who wrote it?

 

[General Lee]

Another bogus letter. Do you have proof who wrote it?

Really because it was family owned and scanned if you didn't see the original letter and names. So if you actually look and read it you would know these things.

 

[General Lee]

Another bogus letter. Do you have proof who wrote it?

It also says on the bottom if you had actually read it. Burn family papers, The South Carolina Library, USC, Columbia, S.C.

 

[Jim Klag]

It also says on the bottom if you had actually read it. Burn family papers, The South Carolina Library, USC, Columbia, S.C.

So? Who wrote it?

 

[Jim Klag]

Really because it was family owned and scanned if you didn't see the original letter and names. So if you actually look and read it you would know these things.

I actually read them and they could have been written by anybody. They are evidence of nothing.

 

[rittmeister]

Well then see what this slave had to say in letter he wrote, he could wrote because he was taught how and not regarded as trash many slaves were treated like family and freind. Had to screen shot this but the original is here too and it was in Black Confederates by Charles Kelly Barrow which stated at the bottom it was family owned and obviously donated or scanned at least.View attachment 3804View attachment 3805

he didn't write it, did he?

he will get it and read it to us

if they can't read they also can't write it - as to the language, that's surely not how slaves spoke.

it reminds me of the many wills catholic priests wrote in bavaria (for people who couldn't read or write) and in which (must have been god's hand) more often than not the holy mother church got the better part of the heritage.

 

[General Lee]

I actually read them and they could have been written by anybody. They are evidence of nothing.

Your just beings stubborn. It says the name and who to write back to. Also family shares the same last name and it was family owned and is where I showed you in S.C. library. The original was scanned on the transcript is what you read. Your simply refusing to accept what's right there in front of you because it challenges or debunks what you said before about 0 slaves willingly serving.

 

[General Lee]

he didn't write it, did he?

if they can't read they also can't write it - as to the language, that's surely not how slaves spoke.

it reminds me of the many wills catholic priests wrote in bavaria (for people who couldn't read or write) and in which (must have been god's hand) more often than not the holy mother church got the better part of the heritage.

He was obviously educated enough to read and write but that was the transcript I can hardly read the original letter in cursive. But the name is there the one who wrote it Wallace Burn.

 

[Jim Klag]

Your just beings stubborn. It says the name and who to write back to. Also family shares the same last name and it was family owned and is where I showed you in S.C. library. The original was scanned on the transcript is what you read. Your simply refusing to accept what's right there in front of you because it challenges or debunks what you said before about 0 slaves willingly serving.

I'm not being stubborn. I'm being realistic. You have a lot to learn about sources. To be accepted as a legitimate source, a document's provenance must be verified beyond doubt. That letter has no provenance that would satisfy a real historian. There are thousands of examples of forged letters that showed up in some historical collection. These fooled people for a while but all were eventually debunked.

 

[rittmeister]

He was obviously educated enough to read and write but that was the transcript I can hardly read the original letter in cursive. But the name is there the one who wrote it Wallace Burn.

he was not - it's there in the letter that one dr samuel d sanders will read the answer to them (i quoted that part above).


... did you actually read the letter?

 

[diane]

Yes, General, the letter is likely real BUT... This isn't proof he was a black Confederate. Rather, it is the report of a slave hired out to do dangerous work and he's letting his master know his property is being damaged and he might want to get it back to safety!

 

[rittmeister]

I'm not being stubborn. I'm being realistic. You have a lot to learn about sources. To be accepted as a legitimate source, a document's provenance must be verified beyond doubt. That letter has no provenance that would satisfy a real historian. There are thousands of examples of forged letters that showed up in some historical collection. These fooled people for a while but all were eventually debunked.

i think it's legit but someone (most likely dr sanders) wrote it for him. obviously he had no chance to check what was written. and the good dr kinda auto-corrected the contents.

 

[rittmeister]

Yes, General, the letter is likely real BUT... This isn't proof he was a black Confederate. Rather, it is the report of a slave hired out to do dangerous work and he's letting his master know his property is being damaged and he might want to get it back to safety!

exactly - having rubble fall onto your head ain't no fun at all

 

[General Lee]

I'm not being stubborn. I'm being realistic. You have a lot to learn about sources. To be accepted as a legitimate source, a document's provenance must be verified beyond doubt. That letter has no provenance that would satisfy a real historian. There are thousands of examples of forged letters that showed up in some historical collection. These fooled people for a while but all were eventually debunked.

It seamed to satisfy the state of South Carolina and the family that owned it.

 

[General Lee]

he was not - it's there in the letter that one dr samuel d sanders will read the answer to them (i quoted that part above).


... did you actually read the letter?

Did you actually read the letter? The officer is who the letter will go to so they can read it and the slave wrote it.

 

[General Lee]

Yes, General, the letter is likely real BUT... This isn't proof he was a black Confederate. Rather, it is the report of a slave hired out to do dangerous work and he's letting his master know his property is being damaged and he might want to get it back to safety!

I know I was saying that many slaves not all just to be clear but many were treated as family and freind and this one wrote to his master who he seamed to care about and he knew how to write so he was taught how. That really says something when somebody else says that no loyal slaves did things like this.

 

[Jim Klag]

It seamed to satisfy the state of South Carolina and the family that owned it.

South Carolina, the home of secession? The family has no idea who actually put pen to paper. But it was obviously not Wallace Burn - but the good doctor mentioned in the letter.

 

[rittmeister]

Did you actually read the letter? The officer is who the letter will go to so they can read it and the slave wrote it.

he will get it and read it to us

 

[General Lee]

South Carolina, the home of secession? The family has no idea who actually put pen to paper. But it was obviously not Wallace Burn - but the good doctor mentioned in the letter.

Now hold on because your point was my Lee quote is wrong based on his family not him. Well doesn't this look familiar

 

[Jim Klag]

he knew how to write so he was taught how

When it was illegal to teach slaves to read and write?