We must become critical consumers of history again. Our present-day society demands it. We as black historians and consumers have a new black power. We finally have a platform to give our studied opinions on history.
Black historians are finally having a place at the table. And that place at the table is more important than ever. Especially with the rhetoric behind Critical Race Theory (CRT) and the banning of books, we must be vigilant about the history we ingest and repeat. Now with this new black power, isn’t it our right, and duty, to challenge history written by biased historians and provide our own critical review of historical events?
The myth of black Confederate soldiers is one of those biased historical myths that need critical review. Some historians and today’s neo-Southern Confederate sympathizers, some descendants of Confederate soldiers, Lost Causers, Redeemers, and slavery apologists would have you believe that there were Southern black people who gladly “volunteered” to defend the Confederacy.
They are the same people who would have you believe that Confederates fought to “defend themselves from Northern invaders,” or to “protect state’s rights” or fought the Civil War for a variety of reasons besides slavery. They will also tell you that Robert E. Lee did not own any slaves and he was against slavery.
But as a critical consumer of history, some of these statements should strike you as untrue and even absurd. Yes, there have always been and always will be people who act against their own self-interests.
But let’s look at the facts.
On December 20, 1860, South Carolina declared its secession from the United States of America. South Carolina’s position is clearly stated in its secession statement:
Citing “an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding states to the institution of slavery,” South Carolina insisted that the Northern states had breached their constitutional obligation to enforce federal laws like the Fugitive Slave. “We, therefore, the People of South Carolina . . . have solemnly declared that the Union heretofore existing between this State and the other States of North America, is dissolved.”
In case the reason for South Carolina and other Southern states seceding from the Union has not been made clear, on January 9, 1861, Mississippi became the second state to secede. Here is Mississippi’s secession statement:
“Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery– the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization.”
All the subsequent seceding states made similar statements about the need for continuing slavery as the reason for secession from the Union.
Robert E. Lee married Mary Ann Custis, whose father held a large number of slaves, and Lee inherited slaves from his mother Ann Lee. So whatever “complicated” relationship he is said to have had with the vile institution is moot: Robert E. Lee was a slave owner.
On April 12, 1861, the Civil War began with the attack of Fort Sumter in South Carolina. The story of the Louisiana Native Guard is a cautionary tale about being critical consumers of history. On April 17, 1861, Louisiana’s Governor Moore issued this order:
“The President of the Confederate States having made a requisition upon the Governor of Louisiana for five thousand infantry to serve for twelve months, unless sooner discharged, (this force being in addition to the three thousand already called for,) I, Thomas O. Moore, Governor of the State of Louisiana, do hereby proclaim that volunteers will be received in accordance with the requisition of the President of the Confederate States, each company to be composed of not less than sixty-four privates, four sergeants, four corporals, one captain, one first lieutenant, and one second lieutenant. Volunteers will be received by companies, battalions or regiments. Those offering will address Adjutant-General M. Grivot, at New Orleans, stating the force of their command, will remain in the parish in which they form, perfect themselves in drill, etc., and hold themselves in readiness at a moment’s notice, subject to the orders of the Governor. The Governor appeals to the patriotic citizens of this State to respond to this proclamation for the protection of the rights of the State.”
On April 22, 1861, more than 2,000 free men of color met at New Orleans’ Catholic Institute and 1,500 men volunteered. If one were to take the notice in the Times-Picayune at face value, it would appear 1,500 free Creole and African-American men “volunteered” for the Louisiana’s Native Guard in 1861. But if readers just scrape the surface of this story and look one level deeper they will find a first-hand story that directly contradicts the newspaper.
One of those men that “volunteered” was Arnold Bertonneau. Bertonneau was a successful wine merchant and haberdasher in New Orleans. Bertonneau gave the reasons for his and the other free men of color “volunteering”. In a speech in 1864 given in Boston, here is what he said:
“When the first fratricidal shot was fired at Sumter, and Louisiana had joined her fortunes with the other seceding states, surrounded by enemies educated in the belief that ‘Africans and their descendants had no rights that white men were bound to respect,’ without arms and ammunition, or any means of self-defense, the condition and position of our people were extremely perilous. When summoned to volunteer in the defense of the state and city against Northern invasion, situated as we were, could we do otherwise than heed the warning and volunteer in the defense of New Orleans? Could we have adopted a better policy? In the city of New Orleans, under the Confederate government, we raised one regiment of 1,000 men, the line officers of which were colored.”
Bertonneau’s statement clearly states that he and the other free men of color felt coerced into “volunteering” for the Confederacy because they and their businesses and families would be in peril if they didn’t. Before the Civil War the actual freedom of free people of color hung by a thread. In 1859 there was legislation introduced into the state legislature to enslave free people of color, seize their property and give each one a white “guardian” to handle their business affairs.
In January 1862, the Louisiana State Legislature passed a law stating only “free white males” could be a part of the militia. The 1st Louisiana Native Guard was disbanded in February 1862. New Orleans was captured by the Union Army in April 1862.
But Bertonneau along with other free men of color and slaves were soon given the singular honor of volunteering for the Union Army. Bertonneau again gave his first-hand view of the reason he and others volunteered.
“When General Butler captured New Orleans, and drove the rebel soldiers from the state, the colored people were the most truly loyal citizens to welcome his coming. Indeed, from the time that General Jackson, when Louisiana was threatened during the last war with Great Britain by an overwhelming British force, issued his famous appeal to the ‘noble-hearted, generous free men of color’—for so he called them in his proclamation, censuring the ‘mistaken policy’ before pursued, of exempting them from military service, calling upon them as ‘Americans’ and ‘sons of freedom’ for aid and support—our fathers rallied to arms, and drove the red coats from the soil. I say, from that time to the present, the free colored people of Louisiana have always been loyal and ready and willing to defend the ‘Stars and Stripes.’ General Butler understood this. He knew instinctively who were loyal and who were not, on whom he could implicitly rely, in whose fidelity he could safely trust; and adopting the policy of that noble, brave and clear-sighted general who dared to take the responsibility, he received into his ranks of the Union army, the colored volunteer soldiers of New Orleans.”
So, as critical consumers of history, who do we believe? The Times-Picayune from 1861, a Southern newspaper that endorsed slavery and Louisiana succession from the Union, a newspaper that regularly blamed people of color for criminality and agitating slaves or do we believe a free man of color who was a first-hand participant in the events of being called on to “volunteer” for the Confederacy and then actually volunteering for the Union?
It should be noted that when free men of color “volunteered” for the Confederacy in Louisiana, only about 1,500 mustered in. But when volunteers were needed by the Union nearly 4,000 free men of color, Creoles and escaped slaves swelled the ranks of the Louisiana Native Guard, which had to create two additional battalions to accommodate the number of volunteers.
If we believe the myth that free men of color “volunteered” for the Confederacy, we overlook the fact that this was against the self-interest of every free person of color and slave for them to do so.
If you believe that free people of color and slaves “volunteered” or happily joined the Confederacy, you deny the fact that the Confederate Army in Louisiana issued a general order directly forbidding anyone but “free white males” from serving in the Confederacy.
Yes, there were men of color who fought for the Confederacy, but there are no reliable numbers available. It is very safe to say that the numbers were small (maybe a few thousand) compared to the 200,000 men of color who helped the Union win the war.
So just like blacks who did not vote for Obama or Jews that helped the Nazis, or blacks who supported Trump, there will always be people who go against their own self-interest. But the statement that blacks volunteered for the Confederacy in any number is a myth; most that did were probably coerced.
