I’ve written a number of posts on this blog as well as in my new book about Dr. Henry Louis Gates’s confusion about the black Confederate myth. In this webinar sponsored by PBS Education he managed to confuse it even further.
Dr. Gates is still referencing his colleague John Stauffer’s piece in The Root, which is fundamentally flawed, but it is his understanding of basic facts and poor primary source analysis that I find appalling. You can listen for yourself beginning at the 55:00 minute mark.
At one point he references this well known illustration from Harper’s Weekly as vague evidence for the existence of these men.
This is the level of interpretation that you find on SCV websites and Facebook pages devoted to perpetuating this myth.
Later he offers a vague comment about the Louisiana Native Guard as somehow briefly serving the Confederacy. He isn’t sure whether the Confederate government officially recruited black men into the army at the very end of the war.
But what troubles me more than anything else is his insistence that historians disagree on this issue. THEY DO NOT! I don’t know a single reputable historian who believes that black men served as soldiers before March 1865.
Dr. Gates needs to do better with educators, who certainly see him as an authority figure on these matters. In the future I wish he would just admit that he doesn’t know enough about the subject and end it.
Do mulattoes count as legitimate black soldiers who served in the Confederate Military ?
You should consult official Confederate documents on this question. They are readily accessible if you know where to look.
Let me rephrase the question then, since you dodged my original request.
Do….. YOU …… Mr. Kevin M. Levin ….. count mulattoes as legitimate black soldiers who served in the Confederate military ? At this point, it does not matter jack squat, what Confederate documents say. I am asking the man himself, who wrote the book on the Civil War’s most persistent myth.
What I believe as a historian is irrelevant. The question that guided my research that resulted in the book, SEARCHING FOR BLACK CONFEDERATES, is what the government authorized. This question was very easy to answer given the availability of the documents themselves. What we do know is that early in the war Black southerners that were able to “pass” as white were quite often forced out of the military given Confederate policy. When it came to debating the question of Black enlistment in 1864-65 I was unable to find a single reference from any soldiers, politicians or anyone else on the Confederate home front (regardless of their position on this issue) who suggested that Blacks (mulattoes) were already openly serving as soldiers in the army. I hope this helps.
You ended with ” I hope this helps.”
My immediate response would be No, … this does not help.
In fact, your reply is quite comical, to say the least.
To begin with, you claimed that what you believe as a historian is irrelevant.
Therefore, by default, what you promote, as a so-called historian, is also irrelevant.
Next, you said your research is based on ” … what the government authorized ? ”
What the hell is this ?
So, does that mean there is also information that is classified and cannot be shared with the American people, since it is not ” authorized ” to be released ?
The ” unauthorized ” data doesn’t fit your propaganda ?
Your entire rant is bogus Kevin. You continued with the comment that black soldiers were eventually forced out by Confederate policy. You missed the entire point of your own argument. Why would Black men even attempt to join, if the Southern cause was based strictly on institutional racism & keeping the black man enslaved ? Truth is, Black men DID IN FACT sign up and serve. You claim in your book that this is total myth. From your lead – in above, you said ” ….. I don’t know a single reputable historian who believes that black men served as soldiers before March 1865.” This is bogus, BS.
How many examples would you like Kevin ?
To begin with, how about John Wilson Buckner, a black man who was born in Sumter County, SC. He joined the 1st South Carolina Artillery on March 27th of 1863. He later served in 2 different infantry companies as well, even though everyone around him knew that Buckner was a black man. Although it was illegal at the time for a black man to formally join the Confederate forces, he was the grandson of William Ellison & their family’s prestige nullified the law in the minds of Buckner’s comrades.
Buckner’s grandfather, William Ellison, was a former black slave who later became the third largest slave owner in South Carolina at the time of his death in 1861. Let that sink into your brain. A black slave, who later became a black slave OWNER himself. John Buckner was never forced out by Confederate policy, as you incorrectly claimed above. When John Wilson Bucker died in August of 1895, at his funeral, he was praised by his white veteran comrades as being a faithful soldier.
In addition, when the war began, there were well over 20,000 documented free black people living in the Confederacy. And, over 6,000 of them owned black slaves. Many of them served with the Rebel Forces in some capacity, to protect their own economic interests. They were wealthy land owners, just like the white plantation owners. They knew if the North invaded, they had a very good chance of losing their entire life’s fortune & sadly, most of them eventually did.
You ended your rant above by claiming ” When it came to debating the question of Black enlistment in 1864-65, I was unable to find a single reference from any soldier, politician or anyone else, who suggested that Blacks or mulattoes were already openly serving as soldiers in the army. ”
So, since YOU couldn’t find any, then they don’t exist, is that your point ? This is laughable beyond belief. And you claim to be a Civil War historian ? Also, why the narrow time frame of 1864-1865 ? What’s wrong with documented evidence readily available from 1861 to 1863 ?
Would you like ANOTHER example of a BLACK MAN who willingly served for the Confederacy ? No problem. Apparently, your research never included a black man named John Louis Brown. He ALSO came from a wealthy black family who were very successful farmers & also owned black slaves in Tennessee. John Louis Brown enlisted with the Confederate Army in May of 1861 & served with the 20th Tennessee Volunteer Infantry Regiment.
Would like another example my dear Mr. Kevin ?
Or is you brain ready to explode ?
How about James Cape, another black man who was a slave in Texas at the start of the war ? Did your research conveniently leave him out of your book ?
He eventually joined the Confederate forces and served under Sterling Price in both Tennessee & Missouri in 1864.
Would you like ANOTHER example of a BLACK MAN who served for the Confederacy ? No problemo. How about a black man named Gus Brown ? He began service as a body servant to his master, but eventually fought for the Confederate Army, under General Stonewall Jackson. He later fought & became wounded at the Battle of Manassas’s Gap , Virginia in 1863.
How many more examples would like Kevin ? Your problem is, you cannot accept the Truth. Apparently, you have too much to lose. Your reputation, your book sales & your credentials as a self – ordained Civil War revisionist. I will be waiting patiently for your reply. …. In the meantime, Cheers Mr. Kevin.
(( And, if you fail to post my reply, like you did with my good friend Mr. Joseph T. Alden, then I will know for a fact that you are simply a revisionist coward. ))
I look forward to reading your published work on this subject. Thanks for the comments.
Gates always struck me as a contrarian. If a vast majority of scholars say BC’s are a myth, the more he’ll insist they’re real.
One of the things that Gates likes to point out is that African American history is complex and that that they occupy many spaces in history. The black Confederate narrative easily fits into this view, but it does so at the expense of any attempt to do serious research.
As it stands, the Union used 180,000 AA soldiers and 20,000 AA sailors. AA Union soldiers fought in 40 major engagements and about 450 other skirmishes, where 16 AA received medals of honor. In contrast, no AA units fought for the Confederacy.
On 23 March 1865, Confederate President, Jefferson Davis issued a general order declining to accept any slaves as soldiers without their own consent and their owners’ consent to their freedom. However, the war ended two and a half weeks later, and no engagements never transpired. The fact is, the Confederates refused to arm slaves, because it undermined their reason for succession altogether – the continuation of slavery.
There were many people that lived in the CSA but many were just “confederates” due to their address, not because of their politics or loyalty to the Union. Just ask the 200,000 white “confederates” plus their families that volunteered for and supported the Union.
My point being, that slaves, free blacks, mixed race etc. wouldn’t have “citizenship” therefore…
Being a Confederate simply by virtue of geography is, I think, a fair point. But I would say that could entail either citizenship or permanent residency. For example, would slaves living in the United States be considered “American”? They were not citizens. But for those who were born in the United States, who lived their entire lives and then died there, what else could they be? Was a slave who lived his entire life in South Carolina a South Carolinian, regardless of the lack of citizenship? Geographically, if nothing else, what else could they be?
I think there is a tendency sometimes to look at Confederates simply as an ideological movement, and to only assign the “Confederate” label to those who embraced it, but the Confederate States were also meant to be a republic, a nation, with a government and territory and borders, so it’s not quite as simple as just an ideology.
Right, because its origins had everything to do with a commitment to the ideology of slavery and white supremacy. That’s exactly what the vice-president stated in his “Cornerstone” speech.
So refreshing to hear the white New England historians educating the black man…
Dr.Gates doesn’t support the divisive narratives you or the “lost cause” keep spewing.
Wow! Looks like you have some issues to work through.
I have written extensively as to the concerns I have with Dr. Gate’s understanding of this subject. I have written about it on this blog as well as in my new book. I would be happy to talk about that, but it doesn’t sound like you are very serious. Good day.
Henry Louis Gates does it again with his bizarre take on what he calls ” the complexity of the African American experience “. There are no historians who support the belief that Black men fought in the Confederate army. Where are their photos? And that photo of some slave dressed in a Confederate uniform doesn’t count for that was staged. Gates is clearly out of his league and needs to let the real Civil War historians speak on history.
Although I usually don’t support all of your narratives regarding succession, My feelings are that one would need to be a citizen of the Confederacy in order to be considered a “confederate”
I believe Dr. Gates would accept the ample documentation that would refute the Black Confederate Soldier myth if one makes the effort to share it with him.
At this point he could have easily sought out the truth. This is not rocket science.
My thought exactly, Kevin. Gates is pulling down millions right now. I’d be SURPRISED if he gives a rip. I’d be relieved to find I’m wrong …
There were black and mixed-race soldiers in multiple Louisiana parishes, a Creole unit that was authorized in the city and county of Mobile in late 1862 (the one that was rejected for service in the PACS), and at least one small black unit in Pensacola early in the war. The Louisiana units took an oath to uphold the Constitution of their state and of the Confederate States. All of these men were obviously Confederate by virtue of the states they enlisted to fight for, and particularly given the oath they took, regardless of the fact that they were in various state military units and not enlisted in the federal military.
In any case, I find your definition of a “black Confederate” as an armed, enlisted soldier in the Confederate army to be too narrow. There were Confederate civilians. One did not have to be in the military to be a Confederate.
A number of militia units were raised in various places that offered to fight for the Confederacy. None of them were accepted. I am sorry you don’t approave of my definitions. You should take that up with the history that Confederates left us on this issue.
There had been black men fighting as soldiers on this continent for hundreds of years, The remarkable thing is the both the Union and the Confederacy refused to use black troops at the outset of the War.
It is this “dog that didn’t bark” that explains a lot.
You are absolutely right and this is a point that I try to remember to make at every talk.
“All of these men were obviously Confederate”
So, I’m a Navy SEAL then, since as you would argue the Navy has no business saying who and who is not allowed to join. I just recited the SEAL Creed, and I’m in.
But really, I’m not a SEAL because I do not meet the mental, physical, moral and training standards that the Navy sets.
The men you speak of were not CSA soldiers because they did not meet the requirement of being “white.”
If you want to know was and who was not a Confederate soldier just look at the relevant archival sources. They were very clear about this throughout the war, which is why the question of whether to recruit slaves as soldiers in 1864-65 was so divisive.
I was on that webinar & posted an abbreviated version of this post. Trouble is the messages scrolled so fast, I don’t think anyone saw it.
Thanks for doing that. I noticed a couple of comments and Amazon sold a couple of copies that day so I suspect that a few people saw it.
It’s so sad. I have a great deal of respect for Dr. Gates. His series on Reconstruction is wonderful, but his response on this issue has been and continues to be inexcusable.