| ||||
Civil War Interactive Discussion Board > Civil War Talk > General Civil War Talk > Slaves as Southern soldiers? |
| ||||
Civil War Interactive Discussion Board > Civil War Talk > General Civil War Talk > Slaves as Southern soldiers? |
| Moderated by: javal1 | Page:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7   |
|
||||||||||
| Slaves as Southern soldiers? | Rating: 
|
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Tue Nov 4th, 2008 08:43 pm |
|
61st Post |
|
David White Member 
|
the total, this year alone, is now : 7  Black Confederate Soldiers? 
|
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Nov 4th, 2008 09:07 pm |
|
62nd Post |
|
javal1 Grumpy Geezer 
|
Sgt - Took you up on your offer to delete that post. Not up to you to judge others here. Please don't fan flames when I'm trying to put a fire out.
|
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Nov 4th, 2008 09:21 pm |
|
63rd Post |
|
barrydancer Member 
|
Old Blu wrote: My only question to this is why didn't huge numbers of slaves escape instead of going back South? There were some that escaped but there were also some Confederate white soldiers that stayed north. Escaping would have been easier in theory than in practice. Keep in mind that those 7000-10,000 slaves are surrounded by 50,000+ armed soldiers. Some could, and I would imagine did, escape, likely in ones and twos to avoid notice. It would be easier to get lost in the crowd, become inconspicuous, etc. An escape attempt en masse, though, would have been noticed immediately.
|
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Nov 4th, 2008 11:26 pm |
|
64th Post |
|
pamc153PA Member
|
Please forgive my ignorance, but just how did those black teamsters, cooks, etc. become part of the Confederate army's support staff? I know that some probably "joined up" when their owners did, but what about the others? Would owners really "rent" their slaves out to the army, if they were so reluctant to allow them to leave their plantations? Some good points about the escape rate of those black "soldiers." Running away sounds easier than it was, in all instances, I think. Do you think the Confederate army would have been able to support itself if it'd had to rely on white civilian wagoneers, engineers, etc.? Or was it just an extension of the way slaves were already being utilized in the Southern culture? Just some thoughts. Pam
|
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Tue Nov 4th, 2008 11:48 pm |
|
65th Post |
|
CleburneFan Member 
|
pamc153PA wrote: Please forgive my ignorance, but just how did those black teamsters, cooks, etc. become part of the Confederate army's support staff? I know that some probably "joined up" when their owners did, but what about the others? Would owners really "rent" their slaves out to the army, if they were so reluctant to allow them to leave their plantations? One of the books I read recently did discuss the practice in the south of "renting out slaves" to those who didn't have them but needed them for, say, planting or harvesting, or some similar short term work. Note, the slave's owner received the rental money, not the slave. That said, I'm not sure that owners rented slaves to the army because the army would have had to ante up the money to pay the rent. Now, I have to dig into my piles of books. Did I read somewhere that at one time slave owners, especially those who owned ten or more slaves, were either asked or required to "lend" some slaves to the war effort? Maybe someone else recalls. I don't want to start a myth if this notion is totally unfounded. You do bring up a good point that I never did consider. The number of support staff in the rear of the army driving mule and ox teams, cooking, laundry and all manner of collateral chores, male hospital nurses, and so on, did represent a huge number of blacks both in Lee's armies and the other Confederate armies. Where all of these blacks came from (Freedmen or slaves), whether they were all coerced or some, did in fact volunteer or even were paid a humble amount for their services I don't know. Last edited on Wed Nov 5th, 2008 01:51 am by CleburneFan |
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed Nov 5th, 2008 12:02 am |
|
66th Post |
|
CleburneFan Member
|
CleburneFan wrote: pamc153PA wrote: My answer would be no, the Confederacy could not have continued long with only white males in support roles. Why? Because the Confederacy was already undermanned relative to the Union armies, so to take white men and put them in support roles would have lowered the number of actual fighting men even lower...in fact...substantially lower. In fact, I doubt the Confederacy ever seriously considered such a notion. Much of the support work was menial labor that self-respecting white males, especially slave owners would not do. To do so would have represented an unacceptable reduction in status. Now back to Pam's question. Where did all that support personnel come from? Were they mostly slaves forced into the labor, slaves who wanted to do it and eagerly volunteered or freedmen? Could some of the slaves have done so thinking they might be freed as a result? Pam has offered us a very interesting question.
|
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed Nov 5th, 2008 01:07 am |
|
67th Post |
|
Johan Steele Life NRA,SUVCW # 48,Legion 352 
|
There was a little bit of all of the above. A freeman might be paid $2 a day as a teamster. A slave might garner their master the same. A skilled slave could command considerably more. Robert Smalls made his master $20 a day as a river pilot. I've read of press gangs of slaves used by local military commanders, often over the objection of their owners because once the army got ahold of them it was difficult to get them back or even to get paid for them. As to the slaves utilized by Lee's Army on the way to Gettysburg... the ANV was followed closely by slave catchers rounding up any black person they found and sending them south. Stuart at one point grew furious when he came across a batch of slave catchers that were better mounted than his own men. He had his men trade their worn down horses for the slave catchers fresh ones; he may or may not have done it at gunpoint. For a slave to run away from his the army also meant running away from his family back to home. Often if a runaway wasn't caught punishment was inflicted on his family and that punishment could be brutal. To runaway wasn't only a risk for the runner but those who stayed behind.
|
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed Nov 5th, 2008 02:28 am |
|
68th Post |
|
CleburneFan Member
|
I've been thinking about this topic. I'm thinking if I'm a young, male slave when war breaks out, I would jump at the chance to be a teamster or cook or make and apply horseshoes or repair saddles and bridles or set up tents or whatnot for the Confederate army because those men probably enjoyed a degree of autonomy unknown on the plantations of the South. They were probably pretty much their own bosses for the first time in their lives. At least I wouldn't be bent over all day long in the hot sun picking cotton or stuck up to my knees in watery rice fields. Here's a question if Pam doesn't mind my piggy-backing on her original question. Often wagon trains or parts of wagon trains were captured. What happened to the slaves that Union forces captured? Were they put to work for the Union or were they imprisoned along with their white male Confederates or how did such an event play out for the captured slaves?
|
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed Nov 5th, 2008 02:45 am |
|
69th Post |
|
ole Member 
|
Here's a question if Pam doesn't mind my piggy-backing on her original question. Often wagon trains or parts of wagon trains were captured. What happened to the slaves that Union forces captured? Were they put to work for the Union or were they imprisoned along with their white male Confederates or how did such an event play out for the captured slaves? What an absolutely wonderful question! I have no idea. (Ever think you'd hear that from me?) ole
|
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed Nov 5th, 2008 11:44 am |
|
70th Post |
|
Old Blu Member
|
Another point that interest me is the Wagoners Fight that Imboden did in Falling Waters. If the Wagoners were black that would mean slaves fought for the Confederacy when the Wagoners were armed to protect Lee's wagon train.
|
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed Nov 5th, 2008 12:48 pm |
|
71st Post |
|
HankC Member 
|
Duke, This reminds me of interesting points regarding the differences between Roman and American slavery. It's one I run across fairly often, mostly along the lines that 'Jesus condoned slavery', at least implicitly. Roman slaves were usually prisoners of war. Typically there choice was to be killed or to be enslaved. These days we might call them indentured servants. It was [not] their skin color that enslaved them but rather their fighting for, or living in, a conquered province. Bondage was seldom for life, it was more akin to the captured German soldiers laboring in US fields and factories during World War II. In other words, Roman slaves paid for the costs of conquering their homeland. Many Roman slaves lived apart from their masters and came to 'work' for regular hours. Their families were not considered slaves, though they were not citizens either. Slavery did not include the slaves family and descendants. Note again that I am speaking of slaves in the Roman empire from about 300 BC to 100 AD. The Old Testament Jewish slaves in Egypt are a completely different story and *very much* parallel the history of slavery in the US. HankC Last edited on Wed Nov 5th, 2008 12:50 pm by HankC |
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed Nov 5th, 2008 11:38 pm |
|
72nd Post |
|
The Iron Duke Member 
|
The Africans taken by the slave traders were often prisoners of war as well. Don't forget that in Rome crucifixion was reserved only for slaves and criminals. That's a pretty horrible way to die. I don't consider the slaves aiding the Roman legions to be soldiers just as I don't consider the slaves doing menial labor for the Confederate army to be soldiers. Last edited on Wed Nov 5th, 2008 11:38 pm by The Iron Duke ____________________ "Cleburne is here!" meant that all was well. -Daniel Harvey Hill |
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Wed Nov 5th, 2008 11:42 pm |
|
73rd Post |
|
The Iron Duke Member
|
The Confederate army often impressed slaves from their masters. This was one of the many continual complaints made against the Confederate government. Even when they finally did pass that bill in 1865 to arm slaves, they could only be allowed to serve in the army if their masters first gave permission. If there really had been 20-30,000 black Confederates, then there would have been no reason for Cleburne to make his proposal. Last edited on Wed Nov 5th, 2008 11:45 pm by The Iron Duke ____________________ "Cleburne is here!" meant that all was well. -Daniel Harvey Hill |
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Nov 6th, 2008 03:37 pm |
|
74th Post |
|
Sgt. Biggenbottom Blowhard 
|
Various posters quoted or wrote:
Daddy always said if you throw a rock into a pack of dogs, the only one that yelps is the one that got hit, and that's true enough. It's also true that if you throw a handful a gravel at that same pack, you shouldn't be surprised if they all come back after you. My granddaddy was a klansman. His daddy was a klansman. His daddy was a slave-holder and Confederate Veteran. His daddy was a slave-holder and so on all the way back to Jamestown. I am a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans. I am a member of a Confederate Living History organization. I fly Confederate National Flags on my property. Fom this simple statements of facts, someone with an agenda would make certain assumptions about my personal beliefs. These may be accurate or not, but they would still be assumptions. Or, to use another word, prejudice. I, for one, feel no need to "try to legitimize the Confederacy", by fair means or foul. I lose no sleep worrying that there are people who spend every waking moment online trying to discredit any Southern Heritage organization, whether mainstream or fringe. There have always been Vocal Yankees who paint with a large brush and when confronted with people who just don't agree with their exact point of view, talk louder. (The reason for the longevity of the sobriquet "The War to Supress Yankee Arrogance".) The tension and arguments in this thread has not been about how many black men served under arms in the Confederate Army. This is a legitimate, if tired, discussion. The problem, not only in this thread, but throughout this entire board, and indeed, most Civil War forums, is the personal enmity aroused when that handful of gravel is tossed at a pack of dogs that have no concern for or interest in the personal agenda of the thrower. Some of them dogs bite.
|
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Nov 6th, 2008 10:57 pm |
|
75th Post |
|
Johan Steele Life NRA,SUVCW # 48,Legion 352
|
Kaho'wa
|
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Thu Nov 6th, 2008 11:37 pm |
|
76th Post |
|
Sgt. Biggenbottom Blowhard
|
Kaho wa nete matte ? {For good luck, sleep and wait.} or {Success comes to the one who sleeps and waits.} Oh, yeah: Omae wa usotsuki. Omae wa sagishi. Minna ni barasu zo. Kusotare .... edit: {unless you're speaking Lakota ....then it's something about striking with a knife ....  }{Lel wau slolyewacin.  }Last edited on Fri Nov 7th, 2008 12:31 am by Sgt. Biggenbottom |
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri Nov 7th, 2008 12:42 am |
|
77th Post |
|
CleburneFan Member
|
Say what?
|
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri Nov 7th, 2008 12:43 am |
|
78th Post |
|
Sgt. Biggenbottom Blowhard
|
That's what I thought, but ....
|
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri Nov 7th, 2008 01:32 am |
|
79th Post |
|
Johan Steele Life NRA,SUVCW # 48,Legion 352
|
Lakota: Kaho'wa: hit the dog so it barks.
|
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Posted: Fri Nov 7th, 2008 03:26 am |
|
80th Post |
|
Sgt. Biggenbottom Blowhard
|
hmmm. Perhaps "strike dog until (it) cries". The verb-ending and animate plural object pronoun are problematic. (Kahe'wa ?) And I was confused by your use of the instrumental/stative verb prefix ka- (by striking) with wa- (by use of knife); I'm unclear on the modulation of subject-object-verb constructions in formal sentence structure versus verb-pronoun constructions in such phrases as the example. (Ka-sunka-wakan, &etc.) But then, this not exactly my forte. I only realized it was most likely lakotaiyapi after posting; I had assumed it was something else on first glance. Interesting.... or just pasluka.
|
|||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
| Current time is 01:01 pm | Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 |
| Civil War Interactive Discussion Board > Civil War Talk > General Civil War Talk > Slaves as Southern soldiers? | Top |
