Customer Reviews

Black Southerners In Gray

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

When the South put down the gun they picked up the pen and have aquitted themselves handsomely in the ensuing years. This little book is an eyepopping surprise especially in the face of so much recent revisionist, politically correct "history". Blacks served willingly and honorably in the Confederate army. They appied for and received Confederate pensions. This volume is a "must have". This is a compelling volume of the most significant new research in 50 years.

History is written by the winners. This book is a collection of essays which present the other another and mostly forgotten side of the story regarding blacks in the South during the Civil War. Largely forgotten and often ignored by revisionists, it details the contributions of black Southerners, both slave and freemen, in the South's struggle for independence. Through their own words, this book examines not only what contributions were made, but the reasons for them.

The idea that the Confederate Army consisted of any black soldiers at all is a refutation to the modern notion the all Southern whites hated all Southern blacks in pre-Civil war days. That the ranks of black soldiers were more than an insignificant smattering turns conventional wisdom on its head.

According to the thoroughly documented essays in this volume, black support for the confederacy was broad and intense. Some of the black supporters were free blacks--many of whom owned slaves themselves. No doubt some were uneducated slaves duped by unscrupulous Southern partisans to back a cause they did not understand. Some must have been forced to aid the confederacy against their wills, but the majority of individuals discussed in these pages wholeheartedly agreed with the objectives of the rebellion.

To those who may dismiss the findings of this work, their legitimacy seems proven by the extensive documentation. At times the superscript weighs down the pages as assertion after assertion is annotated. Six different authors contributed to the collection and at times the facts are illogically tautological. Two essays by Richard Rollins-allegedly about different subjects--rehash much of the same data. Especially disturbing is the second offering titled "Black Confederates At Gettysburg," which barely touches on that subject. While this disorganized presentation is a sizable detraction, the work is a genuine eye-opener.

Those of us living in the twenty-first century will probably find the choices made by these slaves as impossible to comprehend as the fact that human beings could ever be bought and sold as property. One of Mr. Rollins vignettes makes an essential point concerning "the need to be sensitive to the historical figures we deal with in the context of the time they lived, rather than allow the ideological and intellectual assumptions of our own day to dictate what we have to say about the people of the civil war era-both black and white." Centuries from now common folk may very well look back at our "enlightened era" aghast that we condoned partial-birth abortion and euthanasia.

Our rightful revulsion to the slave trade should not allow us to forget that many confederate soldiers-both black and white--were noble men. Nothing in this conglomeration makes any attempt to diminish the horror that all decent people know slavery was. Perhaps it is the institutionalized unfairness of their lives that makes the profiled black patriots' sacrifices all the more doughty. The book's most challenging postulation may be Ervin L. Jordan's lament that the slaves and free black citizens served the confederacy "not as a consequence of white pressure but due to their own preferences. They are the Civil War's forgotten people, yet their own existence was more widespread than American history has recorded. Their bones rest in unhonored glory in Southern soil, shrouded by falsehoods, indifference, and historians' censorship."

History is made up of the stories surrounding events and this book adds another story worth reading.
Many people still believe the Civil War was about slavery, not state rights. Many people also do not realize that right before slavery was officially banned by the U.S. governement, there were over 400 blacks that worked as slaves to help build the capital building. Blacks had been selling their own people (and whites) into slavery long before the U.S. got involved in the trade. True, it was a serious mistake that has repercusions that are still being felt in this country.
It is interesting to note, however, that considering how bad the pre-Civil War South is made to sound, the American Africans in this country have long enjoyed better standards of living and health than in any other country, especially their countries of origin. This book points out that many blacks were in favor of preserving the Southern government. Not only that, it points out that even after receiving freedom, many chose to go back and work for their old masters pretty much as before. There were many blacks loved and adored by their families and this is one unfortunate piece of Civil War history often overlooked. It seems the concepts that founded this country are gradually being lost. Now more than ever, the issue of states rights needs to be re-visited to protect the sovereignty, strength and long-term well-being of the U.S. Or we will pass from United STATES to something akin to the United KING-DOM.

Currently the Political Correctness crowd has tried to place a "moral spin" on the Civil War, wanting us to believe, the purpose of the War was to "Free the slaves".

It should not seem hard to believe that Black people, ( Free and slaves), would fight to defend their homes, the same as the Southern white people, Jewish people, Southern American Indians that joined the Confederacy, the Mexicans, the Southern Irish. The Civil War was truly a war between two countries. Not a War for the purpose of "freeing slaves".

From the book, "In May 1861, Governor Thomas O. Moore of Louisiana issued a proclamation providing for the enrollment of free blacks in an all-black regiment with some black officers. By early 1862, nearly 3000 men had joined this regiment and other nearby units around New Orleans. Their officers were skilled tradesmen, craftsmen, and even a few slave owners. There were several sets of fathers and sons and sets of brothers in this regiment, and "all the males in the large Duphart family were members" pages 22-23). Black officers included:

Captain Noel Bachus, 40, a carpenter and landowner;

Captain Michael Duphart, a 62-year old wealthy shoemaker, and

Lt. Andre Cailloux, a cigar maker and boxer.

The 1st Louisiana Native Guards was a 1307 man regiment with some black officers. It included many of the leading individuals in the New Orleans black community. Like most Southern militia regiments early in the war, they provided their own arms, and uniforms. They spent the greater part of their Confederate service as Provost Guards, although there is some indication that part of the regiment saw action at Fort Jackson during the New Orleans campaign (Official Records of the War, I, 6, 858).

Black Louisianans played a significant part in Louisiana's military history ever since the beginning of settlement. They fought for, and against, the French, the Spanish, the English, as well as with Andrew Jackson in the Battle of New Orleans in 1815. By late 1861, about 3000 black Louisianans were enrolled in state troops and militia organizations, in the state, in service to the Confederate cause (Pages 22; 167-168)

This book covers a topic that should be read by every Civil War buff, historian and African-American. It is truly an interesting book.

Nothing is so upsetting to a liberal as the idea that Blacks willingly supported the Confederacy. It assails their preconceived notions about slavery and their assumptions about how Blacks should think and act. They simply cannot accept the idea that some slaves and many freemen willingly supported the CSA and many served in its' armies. The fallback position is that they were not soldiers as they lacked weapons being only cooks, teamsters or body servants. The same group will accord soldier status to a man who drove the Red Ball in WWII but not a teamster driving a wagon for the AoNV.

This book takes a very close look at Black Confederates, proves that they do exist, and shows how much information was never recorded. The sad part of their story is that it is untold. This is a vital book for anyone interested in the subject.

The research and the premise behind this book are seriously flawed, thus "an errant stroll down an irrelevant path." Some very notable Civil War scholars have all taken the time to read this tedious tome, and have managed to shed some light on the nature of the misinformation presented by Bergeron. First, most of the names that Bergeron produces prove to be support personnel: cooks, teamsters, man servants, and the like. Most of the gun-toting "Confederates" that Bergeron does produce actually turn out to be "home guards," a loosely organized group of militia that never actually operated with the Confederate army and certainly never saw combat. One of the few "black" combatants that Bergeron *does* manage to produce actually turns out to have been mistakenly admitted to the Confederate Army under the assumption that he was white. When the truth was discovered, he was promptly discharged.

For perhaps the ultimate authority on this matter, we should look to Robert Krick, chief historian for the National Park Service at Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville and author of ten books on the Confederacy. He has researched over 200,000 service records, and says he's come across maybe "six, or 12 at the very most" who might have been black. Hardly supportive of the notion that there were more than a handful of black Confederate combatants.

However, this is all a very amusing stroll down an irrelevant path. Even if Bergeron managed to provide real evidence of several thousand black soldiers fighting for the Confederacy instead of the shoddily researched handfuls that he does give us, what would be the point? Many of the Wermacht soldiers were of Jewish lineage, and 77 of Hitler's highest ranking officers were either Jewish or married to Jews. Does this lead us to feel any less horrified by the actions of the National Socialists? Are we to believe that a smattering of collaboration is somehow equal to a wholesale endorsement?

This book is another sad example in the ongoing struggle to rewrite history. Rather than read this, I suggest you do yourself a favor and read a serious book about the attitudes of the south prior to the war, most notably "Apostles of Disunion" and "Crisis of Fear."