Actually, Glatthaar refrains from referring to black Confederates in his latest study, General Robert E. Lee’s Army: From Victory to Collapse. When the book first arrived I was tempted to skip directly to chapter 24 which is titled "Blacks and the Army", but decided to read through just in case his analysis hinged on issues discussed in previous chapters. I was hoping that Glatthaar would address the controversy surrounding this subject, but by the time I finished the chapter I understood why he avoided it. The book is essentially a biography of the Army of Northern Virginia and the narrative tends to avoid explicit references to broader historiographical themes; the endnotes list the massive amount of primary sources utilized in this study as well as more detailed statistical analysis culled from his sample size. [In contrast, consider Chandra Manning’s endnotes which are filled with interesting references to historiography, though this is not surprising given that the book was based on her dissertation.] That said, anyone familiar with recent interpretive themes from the past 2-3 decades will easily recognize that this is a sophisticated narrative which situates the Army of Northern Virginia within a broader social and political context. What I like about is that it is organized chronologically, including chapters that address various topics such as religion, home front, discipline, supply, and organization.
By discussing blacks in the Army of Northern Virginia as opposed to black Confederates Glatthaar avoids the semantic pitfalls that accompany the debate. By chapter 24 the reader understands how important the institution of slavery was to a large percentage of the men who served in the army [See my earlier reference to this.] and the role of the army as an extension of a government whose professed goal it was to protect it and the racial hierarchy of the South. Glatthaar surveys the various functions that blacks provided in the army throughout the war, including the impressment of slaves and the experiences of those who accompanied their masters into camp and on occasion into battle. Such a survey – both within the army and in terms of the threat of slave unrest on the home front – serves as a reminder that the burden is on those who would have us believe that large numbers of slaves and free blacks served as soldiers in Lee’s army. In other words, the goal cannot simply be trumpeting photographs, news articles, and other sources that vaguely point to black men in Confederate uniforms or engaged in an activity as a sign of loyalty or as an indication that the ANV is somehow to be understood as an interracial army. The only way you can do so is if you ignore the large body of scholarship that has emerged over the past few decades which demonstrates the centrality of slavery to the Confederate experience. Without saying as much Glatthaar’s brief chapter on this subject brings into sharp focus the fact that the people and organizations who continue to push the black Confederate narrative are completely oblivious to serious scholarship on race and slavery in the Civil War. Sometimes there is no way of getting around having to read those pesky scholarly studies.