I invite you to check out these sites which have some interesting stuff:

[1] Grand Review Parade Week is coming to Washington, DC

Starting on Friday, May, 15, 2015, a number events will be held in Washington DC to commemorate the Grand Review Parade that was held by the Union army in May 1865 to celebrate the end of the Civil War and the preservation of the Union. The activities will culminate with the reenactment of the Grand Review Parade on May 17, 2015. In the 1865 parade, African American soldiers were not participants. In a fitting tribute to those black soldiers, the parade on May 17 will include reenactors from African American regiments, as well as descendants of black Civil War soldiers, along with reenactors from other Union regiments from around the country.

Scene from the 1865 Grand Review Parade, from the website for the 2015 Grand Review Parade Week.

Details are at the website, Grand Review Parade.org. The theme for the activities is “Grand Review Parade Weekend: A New Birth of Freedom and Union.”

The African American Civil War Museum of Washington, DC, is a major co-sponsor of the event. The Museum has planned several activities, starting on Friday, May 15, which are noted here.

This should be great fun and education for all. I hope you all can make it to my hometown of Washington, DC, for these events.

[2] African American Military Portraits from the American Civil War

This video discusses a museum exhibit of portraits of African American soldiers who served during the Civil War. There is an interesting and poignant story about one black soldier who served in various capacities in other wars, even after reaching 70 years of age.

[3] African American Civil War Reenactors in North Carolina

The New & Observer website has an article by Martha Quillin titled “Civil War saga: Black re-enactors tell their side of the story.” James White of Wilmington, NC, who is the commander of an African American Civil War re-enactment group, is featured in the piece.

Civil War re-enactors James White, center, his son, Jayden, left, and James’ brother, Joseph White. Courtesy of James White
Image Source: News & Observer, article dated January 24, 2015.

[4] African American Doctors in the Civil War

The picture quality is not great, but this is an informative discussion of African American doctors in the mid-19th century and the role they played in the American Civil War. The speaker is Dr. Robert Slawson, an author and docent at the National Museum of Civil War Medicine.

[5] The Belated Burial of the Confederate Flag

Artist, activist, and mathematician John C. Sims is seeking to stage a multi-site event in the former Confederate States on Memorial Day, May 25, 2015, for “The Belated Burial of the Confederate Flag.” The event, which is “to take place simultaneously in 13 Southern states, at sites to be determined” is part of Sims’ “Recoloration Proclamation” project. Sims and his team are inviting “poets, artists, activists and community leaders to participate” in the event. This appears to be a flyer for the event:

Read more here: “Call for Artists: Be Part of John C. Sims’ The Belated Burial of the Confederate Flag,” from the Nashville Sscene.com. Story and image both posted by Stephen Trageser.

Nina L. Brown with Daughters [Photograph of Nina L. Brown with Frances and Lois (daughters)], probably very late 1890s or early 1900s; additional details are here.
Source: Ohio Historical Society; from the Hallie Q. Brown/Frances Brown Hughes Collection. The photograph is located at the National Afro-American Museum and Cultural Center in Wilberforce, OH.

These photographs are from the Hallie Q. Brown/Frances Brown Hughes Collection at the National Afro-American Museum and Cultural Center in Wilberforce, Ohio. Hallie Q. Brown (1845? – 1949) was a teacher, elocutionist, civil and women’s rights advocate, and Wilberforce University graduate, instructor, and trustee. Nina L. Brown was Hallie Q. Brown’s sister-in-law.

The photos are part of an online exhibit at the Ohio Historical Society’s website, the African-American Experience in Ohio 1850-1920.

Nina L. Brown and Jere Brown Jr., circa 1906-07; additional details are here.
Source: Ohio Historical Society; from the Hallie Q. Brown/Frances Brown Hughes Collection. The photograph is located at the National Afro-American Museum and Cultural Center in Wilberforce, OH.

On the eve of the Civil War, in 1860, Ohio had the third largest population of blacks in the free states/the “North,” with 36,000 African American residents. Among northern states, only Pennsylvania (57,000) and New York (49,000) had more free blacks than Ohio. In fact, Ohio had more free blacks than any Confederate state, except the state of Virginia (58,000). Maryland, a “border” state that was considered part of the South, but was not part of the Confederate States of America, had the most free blacks of any state (84,000).

Hallie Q. Brown’s alma mater, Wilberforce University, was opened in the late 1850s as a place where youth of African descent could gain an education. It is one of the oldest private, historically black universities in the United States. It was named after William Wilberforce, the 18th century abolitionist. It was a joint collaboration of the Methodist Episcopal Church and the African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church, although the AME became its sole operator during the course of the Civil War.

“A Bit of History – The Veteran” by Thomas Waterman Wood, circa 1865-6. This is one of three images by Wood that shows the transformation of a man from a slave into a newly-recruited soldier for the Union army and finally into a veteran. Many soldiers wore the wounds and scars of the American Civil War into post-war life. Sadly, there were not always resources in their communities or beyond to help them with their health issues.
Image Source: Wikipedia Commons

I’ve been ill the past few days, and I wound up having to make a long visit with the doctor. Unlucky me – I have an abdominal condition that will probably require surgery. But at least I have health care, so I can go to a doctor and get back to wellness.

Today, US military veterans have access to health care via the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and its Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals. According to Wikipedia, there are currently 152 VA Medical Centers and approximately 1400 community-based outpatient clinics in the US. In 2014, the Veterans Health Administration was “rocked by scandal” due to “major problems with scheduling timely access to medical care.” But at least there is a system in place to attend to the health needs of our veterans.

Compare that to the circumstances for veterans, and especially black veterans, of the American Civil War. In the book Voices of Emancipation: Understanding Slavery, the Civil War, and Reconstruction through the U.S. Pension Bureau Files, edited by Elizabeth Regosin and Donald Shaffer, the editors note that

The vast majority of former slaves were poor… .medical problems (of Union veterans who were former slaves) both contributed to and were compounded by poverty. Illness left former slaves with the medical bills that they could not pay or without access to proper medical care, leaving them in a position where they had to treat to themselves with herbal remedies or patent medicine, forms of therapy that sometimes ameliorated symptoms but rarely provided a permanent cure.

The book goes on to site the case of black Union veteran Isaac Petteway, who served in the US Colored Troops, 37th Infantry Regiment, and his wife Rosa Pettetway. In 1889, Rosa filed for a pension after her husband passed away. The following is from the deposition that was filed with the pension request and found in the National Archives:

Q. After coming out of the Army did your husband the soldier ever have any fever or pneumonia or was he troubled with any cough or lung disease?

A. He had a bad cough and after he was taken down with his fatal illness he had a desperate cough. He was always subject to cold and he had the chills bad often.

Q. Tell me all you can about his condition from the time you say he was taken down until he died?

A. He was down in his bed three years, helpless as a child, and I nursed [him]. He was full of pains and misery, and that leg would pain him. He would holler so you could hear him holler along way. He had a very bad cough and complained of his side and chest, and I’ll cross his breast and stomach. The ulcer on the leg would run part of the time and there again would break out again. The sore or a corruption did not [intelligible] above the knee. There were no running sores on his body only the old one.
I didn’t think he had any hemorrhage or bleeding, not as I knows of.

Q. What did you believe was the immediate cause of his death?

A. That leg, the pain in it run up into his body and took his life away from him

Q. How do you know that it was not pneumonia or consumption he died of?

A. I don’t know, only I think it was the leg.

Q. When you found your husband was dying was there no way you could have secured a doctor, is there no State or county provision for Doctors for the poor?

A. No Sir, You can’t get a doctor here [Beaufort, N.C.] without the cash… We were not able to employ any doctor. I just treated my husband with herbs and such like—we never had any Doctor

It doesn’t seem right that a veteran should go out this way, to use a colloquial expression. Dignified service should have resulted in dignified care. But our health care policies have evolved for the better since then, and thankfully so. I hope Isaac and Rosa Petteway are resting in peace with the knowledge that their country is trying to do better by the soldiers who followed him.

“The Union Army Entering Richmond, VA., April 3,” from Frank Leslie’s Illustrated Newspaper, April 25, 1865.
As depicted in the illustration, African American soldiers led the way into Richmond when it was captured near the end of the Civil War. Just a week earlier, these same soldiers had marched in review for President Abraham Lincoln.
This is a colorized versions of an image from Frank Leslie’s Illustrated News by the postcard publisher Southern Bargain House of Richmond, VA.
Image Source: From MetroPostcard.com

For the Confederates, it was time to do the unthinkable: enlist slaves in their war to create a slaveholders’ nation. For the Union, it was time for black soldiers to strut their stuff in front of the president of the United States.

Such was the state of the American Civil War in March 1865. These two very different stories are discussed in the book HISTORY OF THE NEGRO TROOPS IN THE WAR OF THE REBELLION 1861-1865, by George Washington Williams. The historian Williams was a veteran of the Union army as a member of the United States Colored Troops, or USCT. The section of his book which is cited below shows how the contrasting policies of the Union and Confederacy toward black enlistment played out in the closing months of the war.

By March 1865, the Confederate States of America (CSA) was on the verge of military defeat, and desperate times dictated desperate measures. After several months of intense debate, the Confederate Congress approved a measure that allowed slaves to enlist in the Confederate army. The administration of Confederate president Jefferson Davis added rules which required that slaves be conferred the status of freemen by their owners prior to enlisting; although I have seen some debate as to whether slaves so enlisted were to be temporarily free during their enlistment, versus being  permanently free both during and after their time as soldiers. In any case, it was a way to gain manpower at a time when the Confederacy was critically short of men to fight.

As it turned out, the new policy of enlisting slaves was too little too late. In April of 1865, CSA General in chief Robert E. Lee would surrender his Army of Northern Virginia at Appomattox, and the remaining Confederate forces would follow his example over the next few months. But for a moment, African American soldiers were the great black hope of the white men in grey.

For the Union, meanwhile, hopes had been realized. In July of 1862, the Union Congress passed laws which allowed African Americans to enlist in the military, and gave freedom to slaves who did so. Eventually, some 200,000 black men would join the Union army and navy and they were a key part of the Union war effort.

By March 1865, Union forces that included black soldiers were on the brink of capturing Richmond, Virgina, the capital of the Confederacy. Indeed, on April 3, 1865, members of the USCT would take the lead in capturing the fallen city. With the end of the war so close, president Abraham Lincoln came to the Richmond area from Washington, DC, to see the events unfold.

On Lincoln’s itinerary was a review of the black troops. (A review is basically a military parade. In a military review, soldiers march in a formation that has been practiced through drilling.) As noted by George Washington Williams in HISTORY OF THE NEGRO TROOPS, some 25,000 black soldiers, “well drilled, well armed, and well officered, passed in review before the President, General (Ulysses) Grant, and the general officers of the Army of the James and the Army of the Potomac.” While noting the irony that Lincoln had initially “protested” against the use of black soldiers early in the war, Williams said that now, “Lincoln was deeply moved at the sight of these Negro troops.”

This was the last such review of black troops that Lincoln would see; an assassin’s bullet cut his life short on April 15. But for that one bright moment, the president was presented “one of the most magnificent military spectacles of the civil war.”

From the book HISTORY OF THE NEGRO TROOPS IN THE WAR OF THE REBELLION 1861-1865, page 292-293:

On the 28th of January the Lower House of the Confederate Congress had resolved to employ Negroes as soldiers, but on the 7th of February the Senate refused to concur in the action of the House. On the 18th of February General Lee urged his plan of the military employment of Negroes, and on the 20th the Confederate House passed a bill authorizing the employment of two hundred thousand Negroes in the armed service of the Government, but the Senate promptly rejected the measure. The Negro, who had been manifestly and confessedly the cause of the war, was now the hope of both Union and Confederate governments. Fair hands that had been stained with the blood of bondmen, but which were now impotent in disaster, were outstretched to Ethiopia. But “Ethiopia’s hands long stretching mightily had plead with God,” and the cause of the despised Negro had become the cause of humanity and civilization the world over.

But the movement finally received the force of law, as shown in the following, which is the last part of the last Special Order issued from the Adjutant and Inspector General’s Office at Richmond :

“Adjutant and Inspector General’s Office,

” Richmond, April 1, 1865.
“Special Orders No. 78.

“XXIX. Lieutenant John L. Co wardin, Adjutant Nineteenth Battalion Virginia Artillery, is hereby relieved from his present command and will proceed without delay to Halifax County, Virginia, for the purpose of recruiting Negro troops, under the Act of Congress approved March 13th, and General Orders No. 14, Adjutant and Inspector General’s Office, current series.”

On the 23d of March the first company of Negro State troops was mustered into the Confederate service, and by a strange coincidence President Lincoln left Washington city to review his Negro soldiers on the James River on the same day. (NOTE: A company is a group of 75-100 soldiers.)

The review was one of the most magnificent military spectacles of the civil war. The weather was fair and the atmosphere pleasant for the moving masses of troops. Twenty-five thousand Negro soldiers, in bright, new uniforms, well drilled, well armed, and well officered, passed in review before the President, General Grant, and the general officers of the Army of the James and the Army of the Potomac. The troops were reviewed between General William Birney’s headquarters and Fort Harrison, in full view of the enemy at Fort Gilmer.

The troops marched with company front, with banners flying and bands playing. Nearly every slave State had its representatives in the ranks of this veteran Negro army, while Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Ohio, and Illinois, of the Northern States, had regiments in the line. President Lincoln was deeply moved at the sight of these Negro troops, against whose employment he had early and earnestly protested. Hundreds of white officers and thousands of white soldiers witnessed the review with keen interest, and were loud in their praise of the splendid soldierly bearing of their Negro comrades in arms.

The entire review was highly satisfactory, and made a deep impression upon the minds of the civil and military chiefs who witnessed it.

US Colored Troops reenactors/living historians at the 2010 Pennsylvania Grand Review commemoration in Harrisburg Pennsylvania.
Image Source: All photos courtesy Yulanda Burgess.

As noted in Wikipedia, “The Grand Review of the Armies was a military procession and celebration in Washington, DC, on May 23 and May 24, 1865, following the close of the American Civil War. Elements of the Union Army paraded through the streets of the capital to receive accolades from the crowds and reviewing politicians, officials, and prominent citizens, including the President Andrew Johnson.” The Grand Review was basically a victory parade for the Union as it celebrated its defeat of the Confederate States of America.

Some 180,000 African Americans enlisted in the Union army, and were part of the US Colored Troops (USCT) – the part of the army that was created for the organization of black soldiers into the Union army. Yet, none of the regiments from the USCT were represented in the Grand Review. Some say this was a slight of black soldiers; others have noted that the USCT was engaged in other activities that made them unavailable for the Grand Review (a number of troops were sent to Texas over concerns for the protection of the Mexican border). For whatever reason, the black soldiers were not there for this glorious celebration of victory.

The state of Pennsylvania, and African Americans leaders in the state, would see to it that black solders soldiers got their chance to bask in the glow of glory, recognition, and appreciation. As noted here,

Black veterans held a parade in Harrisburg on November 14, 1865. Thomas Morris Chester, Harrisburg’s most distinguished African American, served as grand marshal. The parade formed at State and Filbert Streets (now Soldier’s Grove). The soldiers marched through Harrisburg to the South Front Street residence of U.S. Senator and former secretary of war Simon Cameron. Cameron reviewed the troops from his front porch and thanked them for their service to the nation.

Other speakers included Octavius V. Catto, an African American educator and USCT recruiter from Philadelphia; William Howard Day, abolitionist and clergyman; and Brevet Major General Joseph B. Kiddoo, former commander of the 22nd Regiment USCT. Pennsylvania was the only state to thus honor black soldiers who had helped save the Union.

Harrisburg is the capital of Pennsylvania, and a more central location for the state’s African American population. At the start of the war, Pennsylvania had the largest black population of any northern state, with 56,949 black residents. Pennsylvania also provided the most black soldiers of any northern state to the Union army, some 8,600 men in all.

In November 2010, a reenactment of the Pennsylvania Grand Review was held in Harrisburg. Various USCT reenactors from around the country participated. In addition to the reenactment of the Review Parade, there were numerous educational and cultural activities in the days before the march. It was a grand event.

Yulanda Burgess, who is a living historian, took a number of photographs from the event which are shown above and below. These belie the notion that African Americans are not interested in the Civil War.

This was the first Civil War type event that I had ever attended. I found it informative, enlightening, and even inspiring. And hey, now I’m even doing this blog.

From the 2015 Emancipation Day Celebration in Tallahassee: Tallahassee resident Brian Bibeau (center) portrays Brigadier General Edward McCook and presents a dramatic recitation of the Emancipation Proclamation from the front steps of the historic Knott House Museum. He is joined by the Leon Rifles 2nd Florida Volunteer Infantry Regiment Co. D, Captain Chris Ellrich Commanding, and the 2nd Infantry Regiment U.S. Colored Troops Reenactment Unit & Living History Association, led by Sgt. Major (Ret.) Jarvis Rosier.
Source: Museum of Florida History, via CapitalSoup.com

May 20, 2015, marked the 150th anniversary of the reading of the Emancipation Proclamation in Tallahassee, the capital of Florida. That date is observed as Emancipation Day in the state; thus, Florida Emancipation Day is the equivalent of Juneteenth in Texas. Activities were held throughout the state to commemorate the event, including a reenactment of the Proclamation reading in Tallahassee.

Here’s the history behind the Day: on May 10, 1865, Union soldiers under the command of Brigadier General Edward McCook entered Tallahassee. This was weeks after April 1865, when Confederate General Robert E. Lee surrendered his forces in Virginia, and Confederate General Joseph E. Johnston surrendered his forces in North Carolina. Successive waves of Confederate surrenders followed throughout the South. McCook and his men came to Tallahassee from Macon, Georgia, to facilitate the end of hostilities in the state and begin Union control. On May 20th, General McCook announced the Emancipation Proclamation in the city. Freedom in Florida was now “official.”

Of course May 20, 1865, was not the first time that slaves in Florida had heard of the Emancipation Proclamation or gained freedom as a result of the war. Union forces made forays into Florida throughout the Civil War. The state was not strategically important enough for the Union to conduct many operations there. But Union troops did, for example enter Jacksonville during the war, and that city changed handed hands several times throughout the conflict. Some of the Union forces consisted of men from the US Colored Troops (USCT). In NE Florida for sure there was an awareness of the Emancipation Proclamation, and slaves seesawed from slavery to freedom and back more than once as the Union and Confederacy took turns at controlling Jacksonville.

The 2nd U.S.C.T. was attached to the District of Key West, Florida, Department of of the Gulf, in February, 1864, and saw duty in New Orleans and Ships Island, Mississippi. In May the unit also participated in an attack on Confederate fortifications at Tampa, resulting in the destruction of the Confederate positions. The 2nd participated in several operation along Florida’s west coast between July 1st and 31st, 1864; including raids from Fort Myers to Bayport, and from Cedar Key to St. Andrew’s Bay. During the St. Andrew’s Bay expedition the 2nd skirmished with Confederate troops on the 18th of July.

There is a monument to the 2nd USCI in Fort Myers, FL, which is south of Tampa/St Petersburg:

My guess is that many slaves in west-central Florida – and admittedly, the huge part of the slave population resided in the northern part of the state – would have been aware of the Proclamation from Union soldiers.

From the 2015 Emancipation Day Celebration in Tallahassee: a member of the 2nd Infantry Regiment U.S. Colored Troops Reenactment Unit speaks to a group of school children.
Source: Museum of Florida History, via CapitalSoup.com

From the 2015 Emancipation Day Celebration in Tallahassee: USCT Reenactors at the Knott House Museum
Source: Photograph copyright WTXL TV, “2015 Knott House Museum Hosts Emancipation Day Celebration”

Fort Pickens was an island fort just outside Pensacola, Florida that remained in Union hands throughout the war. It is somewhat infamous in some circles as one of the first federal locations where slaves sought refuge from bondage, but were turned back. (This happened after the first rash of Confederate secessions, but before the attack on Fort Sumter). The book Blockaders, Refugees, and Contrabands: Civil War on Florida’s Gulf Coast, 1861-1865 by George Buker talks of how the war affected Florida’s western coast. The book notes that as the war progressed, many slaves (also called “contrabands”) escaped, and some sought out the Navy blockaders as a path to freedom. Some slaves joined the U.S. Navy and Army. (During the Civil War, the Union established a naval blockage over southern ports to prevent Confederate commerce with other nations.)

One of the most famous Civil War battles in the state was the Battle of Olustee, also called the Battle of Ocean Pond. It occurred in Baker County, Florida, roughly 50 miles west of Jacksonville, on February 20, 1864. The battle, which included several USCT regiments (54th Massachusetts Infantry, the 8th Infantry USCT {from Pennsylvania}, and the 35th Infantry USCT {from North Carolina}), was a loss for the Union, and a bloody one at that.

So, although General McCook did read the Emancipation Proclamation (EP) in Tallahassee at the time noted, many slaves throughout the state were aware of the EP; an untold, perhaps relatively small number gained freedom as a result of Union occupation or the proximity of Union army and navy forces; and a number of African American soldiers and sailors were involved in military activities in the state. So there is a depth of black Civil War experience in Florida that goes beyond just the reading of the EP on that day in May 1865. Of course, the surrender of Confederate forces and a more widespread Union occupation made the proclamation of freedom into the reality of freedom. But if the “grapevine telegraph” was at all active throughout the state, it was probably abuzz with the idea that freedom might be coming, and McCook confirmed that the rumors and their hopes were true.

Emancipation Day has been observed throughout the state for many years. However, just in the past few days, I have met a handful of Florida residents who were not aware of it. Which is further proof that we must do more to ensure that our history – America’s history – of freedom, emancipation, and service are remembered and commemorated.

Emancipation Day Parade: Lincolnville, Florida (1920s). Lincolnville was community in St. Augustine, FL that was founded by former slaves after the Civil War.
Source: FloridaMemory.com Blog, “Emancipation Day Celebrations in Florida”

St. Paul A.M.E Church float, Emancipation Day, Lincolnville, Florida (1920s)
Source: FloridaMemory.com Blog, “Emancipation Day Celebrations in Florida”

The Queen and her court, Emancipation Day, Lincolnville, Florida (1920s)
Source: FloridaMemory.com Blog, “Emancipation Day Celebrations in Florida”

African Americans, fleeing bondage, ford the Rappahannock River and enter Union lines, circa July-August 1862; near Rappahannock, Virginia, close to the site of the Second Battle of Bull Run (AKA Second Manssass).
During the American Civil War, tens of thousands – perhaps a hundred thousand and more – African Americans escaped enslavement and sought refuge in Union occupied territory. Before the war, they might have been captured by slave patrols, groups of men who guarded their neighborhoods against runaway or wayward slaves. The presence of Union troops in the South, and the loss of white southern men to Confederate military service, gave slaves the opportunity to free themselves from captivity. The Union gave refuge to the runaways in return for their labor and other support. Many of the African American men in these groups become Union soldiers or sailors.
Image Source: Library of Congress; see also here.

The Union Line
by Alan Skerrett

Baby girl is crying so loud
Maybe mother’s milk isn’t right
If she’s too loud, a patroller might hear
And if we get taken back to massa
Lord knows what he’ll do to us
But we’ll be free
If we can make it
to the Union line

Young son is shivering
It’s not always this cold in November
Is it bad luck? Or a warning?
But I made up my mind
I heard the Yankees have tents and blankets
We’ll be warm
If we can make it
to the Union line

Where are you mama? Where are you papa?
They sent me down that river so long ago
You told me never to forget you
And to be a good nigger
I guess I can do one
And maybe not the other
Maybe I won’t be a nigger at all
If we can just make it
To the Union line

I’m holding my wife and children’s hands so hard
I’ll never let them go
The road, it whips us
The rain, it whips us
The hunger is whipping us
Well, we’ve been whipped before
But we ain’t whipped yet!
Our hands are strong
Strong enough to push and pull ourselves to freedom
Once we make it
To the Union line

Enlistment papers for Spotswood Rice, AKA Spottswood Rice. Spottswood Rice escaped from bondage during the American Civil War and joined the Union army. Rice lived in Missouri, which was a Union slave state. The Emancipation Proclamation, issued by Abraham Lincoln at the start of 1863, did not apply to Missouri and the other Union slave states. But by February 1864, when Rice enlisted, the Union was accepting enslaved men from its slave states into the army, sometimes without the explicit permission of the owner. Once enlisted, the slaves were legally free; hence the term, “enlistment emancipation.” For the 39 year old Rice, military enlistment was an act of liberation.

(NOTE: More about Spottswood Rice is here.)

For Spottswood Rice, life as a slave in Missouri was hell. And the Emancipation Proclamation wasn’t helping.

Issued by President Abraham Lincoln on January 1, 1863, in the midst of a bloody Civil War, the Emancipation Proclamation declared “that all persons held as slaves” within rebelling states “are, and henceforward shall be free.” But that only applied to states that had seceded from the Union to form the Confederate States of America. Missouri and several other slave states (often called the Border States, because they bordered the North and South) that remained in the Union were unaffected by the Proclamation. There was a logic to this policy: the Union did not want to lose the loyalty of its slave states, lest they join forces with Confederates. And after all, those states were not in rebellion against the United States. But it must have been bewildering and frustrating to Border state slaves like Rice.

But the “military necessity” mentioned in the Proclamation would yet serve to free tens of thousands of black men in the Border States. As the war wore on, the overriding need for soldiers led the Union to enlist Border state slaves. In October 1863, the War Department ordered the recruitment of black soldiers in Maryland, Missouri and Tennessee (none of which were covered by the Emancipation Proclamation), with compensation to loyal owners for their lost property. Enlistment had a unique benefit for enslaved males: it gave them the status of free men. I have dubbed this “enlistment emancipation.” Enslaved men throughout the border states fled their masters and enlisted, gaining their freedom in the process. [1] Spottswood Rice was one of those men.

The freedom stories (individual accounts of how people moved from slavery to freedom) of men like Spottswood Rice have not always survived, but in this case, we are lucky. One of his children, Mary A. Bell, was interviewed about her life as a slave for the Federal Writers’ Project of the Depression-era’s Works Progress Administration. Born in 1852, she was 85 at the time of her interview. But she had a keen memory of the “hard times” faced by herself and her parents. She recalled how her father, who was nicknamed “Spot,” led a group of men to escape enslavement and enlist in the Union army. He was, she said proudly, a man who would “fight for his rights.” This is from her narrative of life as a slave:

I was born in Missouri, May 1, 1852 and owned by an old maid named Miss Kitty Diggs. I had two sisters and three brothers. One of my brothers was killed in de Civil War…

I so often think of de hard times my parents had in dere slave days, more than I feel my own hard times, because my father was not allowed to come to see my mother but two nights a week. Dat was Wednesday and Saturday. So often he came home all bloody from beatings his old nigger overseer would give him. My mother would take those bloody clothes off of him, bathe de sore places and grease them good and wash and iron his clothes, so he could go back clean.

But once he came home bloody after a beating he did not deserve and he run away. He scared my mother most to death because he had run away, and she done all in her power to persuade him to go back. He said he would die first, so he hid three days and three nights, under houses and in the woods, looking for a chance to cross the line but de patrollers were so hot on his trail he couldn’t make it. He could see de riders hunting him, but dey didn’t see him.

After three days and three nights he was so weak and hungry, he came out and gave himself up to a nigger trader dat he knew, and begged de nigger trader to buy him from his owner, Mr. Lewis, because Marse Lewis was so mean to him, and de nigger trader knew how valuable he was to his owner. De nigger trader promised him he would try to make a deal with his owner for him, because de nigger trader wanted him. So when dey brought father back to his owner and asked to buy him, Mr. Lewis said dere wasn’t a plantation owner with money enough to pay him for Spot. Dat was my father’s name, so of course that put my father back in de hands of Marse Lewis.

Lewis owned a large tobacco plantation and my father was de head man on dat plantation. He cured all de tobacco, as it was brought in from the field, made all the twists and plugs of tobacco. His owner’s son taught him to read, and dat made his owner so mad, because my father read de emancipation for freedom to de other slaves, and it made dem so happy, dey could not work well, and dey got so no one could manage dem, when dey found out dey were to be freed in such a short time.

Father told his owner after he found out he wouldn’t sell him, dat if he whipped him again, he would run away again, and keep on running away until he made de free state land. So de nigger trader begged my father not to run away from Marse Lewis, because if he did Lewis would be a ruined man, because he did not have another man who could manage de workers as father did. So the owner knew freedom was about to be declared and my father would have de privilege of leaving whether his owner liked it or not. So Lewis knew my father knew it as well as he did, so he sat down and talked with my father about the future and promised my father if he would stay with him and ship his tobacco for him and look after all of his business on his plantation after freedom was declared, he would give him a nice house and lot for his family right on his plantation. And he had such influence over de other slaves he wanted him to convince de others dat it would be better to stay with their former owner and work for him for their living dan take a chance on strangers they did not know and who did not know dem. He pleaded so hard with my father, dat father told him all right to get rid of him.

But Lewis had been so mean to father, dat down in father’s heart he felt Lewis did not have a spot of good in him. No place for a black man.

So father stayed just six months after dat promise and taken eleven of de best slaves on de plantation, and went to Kansas City and all of dem joined the U.S. Army. Dey enlisted de very night dey got to Kansas City and de very next morning de Pattie owners were dere on de trail after dem to take dem back home, but de officers said dey were now enlisted U.S. Soldiers and not slaves and could not be touched.

My husband died May 27, 1896 and I have been a widow every since. I do get a pension now, I never started buying dis little old 4-room frame dwelling until I was sixty-four years old and paid for it in full in six years and six months.

I told you my father’s name was Spot, but that was his nickname in slavery. His full name was Spottwood Rice and my son’s full name is William A. Bell. He is enlisted in de army in de Philippine Islands.

I love army men, my father, brother, husband and son were all army men. I love a man who will fight for his rights, and any person that wants to be something.

[1] The slave states that were exempted in full from the emancipation proclamation are Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, Tennessee, and West Virginia. Those states provided 62,000 of the 179,000 black soldiers that enlisted in the Union army. See here.

Request for Compensation, for the loss of a slave due to military enlistment. The owners of slaves who joined the Union military were compensated for the loss of their chattel property, if they were loyal to the Union. After the Civil War ended, James Lewis, the former owner of Spottswood Rice, filed this form to seek recompense for his slave’s enlistment emancipation. 

African American soldier in Union uniform with wife and two daughters.
Source: Library of Congress, Reproduction Number: LC-DIG-ppmsca-36454

In February of 1864, Spottswood (AKA Spotswood or Spottwood) Rice, a slave in Missouri, made a momentous decision: he fled bondage and enlisted in the Union army. Rice’s story is discussed in the previous blog post. Army enlistment gave Rice his freedom, but it did not free his children. But he was determined that he would have them.

One of Rice’s children, whose adult/married name was Mary A. Bell, was “owned by an old maid named Miss Kitty Diggs.” Back then, members of slave families might have different owners, and that could complicate the process of reuniting them.

By September 1864, Spottswood Rice had apparently made attempts to get his children, but was frustrated by his lack of success. He wrote two letters, one to his daughter Mary, the other to owner Katty (Kitty) Diggs, to let them know his plans. The letters, dated September 3, 1864, were written from Benton Barracks Hospital, St. Louis, Missouri, where Rice was recovering from chronic rheumatism.

Three things are striking in these letters. The first is Rice’s contempt for, and indignation at, the idea that he could “steal” his own children from their slaveowners. He tells Kitty Diggs “you call my children your pro[per]ty not so with me my Children is my own and I expect to get them.” Anyone who tries to prevent him from getting his children, he tells Diggs, is his “enemy.”

The second things that is striking is the sense of power and empowerment Rice has gotten from being a soldier. When Rice comes to get his daughter – and he says forcefully that he is coming – he warns that he “will have bout a powrer and autherity to bring hear away and to exacute vengencens on them that holds my Child… this whole Government gives chear to me.”

And finally, one cannot help but be struck by the religious language employed by Rice. He tells Diggs that his daughter Mary “is a God given rite of my own” and that “the longor you keep my Child from me the longor you will have to burn in hell.” He tells his daughter that Diggs “is the frist Christian that I ever hard say that aman could Steal his own child especially out of human bondage.” Although in fact the idea that slaveholder property rights trumped the slaves’ family rights was a common belief of most white southern Christians at the time. Unsurprisingly, Rice became a reverend in the African Methodist Episcopalian (A. M. E.) Church after the war.

Rice speaks with a righteous voice that proclaims, with God and government behind me, I shall prevail. His daughter would fondly recall many years later that she loved army men, and any man who would “fight for his rights.” And, she might have added, she loved men who fought for their children, just as her father fought for her.

This is Rice’s letter to his children, dated 9/3/1864:

My Children I take my pen in hand to rite you A few lines to let you know that I have not forgot you and that I want to see you as bad as ever now my Dear Children I want you to be contented with whatever may be your lots be assured that I will have you if it cost me my life on the 28th of the mounth. 8 hundred White and 8 hundred blacke solders expects to start up the rivore to Glasgow and above there thats to be jeneraled by a jeneral that will give me both of you when they Come I expect to be with, them and expect to get you both in return. Dont be uneasy my children I expect to have you. If Diggs dont give you up this Government will and I feel confident that I will get you

Your Miss Kaitty said that I tried to steal you But I’ll let her know that god never intended for man to steal his own flesh and blood. If I had no cofidence in God I could have confidence in her But as it is If I ever had any Confidence in her I have none now and never expect to have And I want her to remember if she meets me with ten thousand soldiers she [will?] meet her enemy I once [thought] that I had some respect for them but now my respects is worn out and have no sympathy for Slaveholders. And as for her cristianantty I expect the Devil has Such in hell You tell her from me that She is the frist Christian that I ever hard say that aman could Steal his own child especially out of human bondage

You can tell her that She can hold to you as long as she can I never would expect to ask her again to let you come to me because I know that the devil has got her hot set againsts that that is write now my Dear children I am a going to close my letter to you Give my love to all enquiring friends tell them all that we are well and want to see them very much and Corra and Mary receive the greater part of it you sefves and dont think hard of us not sending you any thing I you father have a plenty for you when I see you Spott & Noah sends their love to both of you Oh! My Dear children how I do want to see you

[Spotswood Rice]

This is Rice’s letter to Katty Diggs, also dated 9/3/1864:

I received a leteter from Cariline telling me that you say I tried to steal to plunder my child away from you now I want you to understand that mary is my Child and she is a God given rite of my own and you may hold on to hear as long as you can but I want you to remembor this one thing that the longor you keep my Child from me the longor you will have to burn in hell and the qwicer youll get their for we are now makeing up a bout one thoughsand blacke troops to Come up tharough and wont to come through Glasgow and when we come wo be to Copperhood rabbels and to the Slaveholding rebbels for we dont expect to leave them there root neor branch but we thinke how ever that we that have Children in the hands of you devels we will trie your [vertues?] the day that we enter Glasgow

I want you to understand kittey diggs that where ever you and I meets we are enmays to each orthere I offered once to pay you forty dollers for my own Child but I am glad now that you did not accept it Just hold on now as long as you can and the worse it will be for you you never in you life befor I came down hear did you give Children any thing not eny thing whatever not even a dollers worth of expencs

now you call my children your pro[per]ty not so with me my Children is my own and I expect to get them and when I get ready to come after mary I will have bout a powrer and autherity to bring hear away and to exacute vengencens on them that holds my Child you will then know how to talke to me I will assure that and you will know how to talk rite too I want you now to just hold on to hear if you want to iff your conchosence tells thats the road go that road and what it will brig you to kittey diggs I have no fears about geting mary out of your hands this whole Government gives chear to me and you cannot help your self

Spotswood Rice

Notes:

[1] Slavery was abolished in Missouri in February, 1865. The13th Amendment, which abolished slavery nationwide, was ratified in December 1865.

[2] The two letters from Rice were forwarded to Union General William Rosecrans, Commander of the US Army’s Department of the Missouri, by F. W. Diggs. Diggs was the brother of Kitty Diggs, and owned one of Spottswood Rice’s children. Diggs wrote to the general, “I write this to ask the favour of you to send the scoundrel that wrote (the letters) down to the army  I do not think that he should be allowed to remain in the state… to be thus insulted by such a black scoundrel is more than I can stand.” All of the correspondence is in Freedom: A Documentary History of Emancipation, 1861–1867; Series 2, The Black Military Experience, ed. Ira Berlin, Joseph P. Reidy, and Leslie S. Rowland; pages 689-691.

One of the more controversial issues concerning the Civil War is, what was the “cause” of Confederate secession? Why did the slaveholding states feel the need to reject the election of president Abraham Lincoln, and form a separate Confederate nation?

Many say that the central issue of secession was slavery. Others say the central issue was the desire to protect their states rights.

Myself, I don’t think those are mutually exclusive statements. I believe that Confederate secession was about states rights – that is, the states’ rights to maintain slavery.

But don’t take my word for it. Let’s let the Southerners tell their own tale.

South Carolina was the first state to secede from the Union. On December 24, 1860, the state issued its Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union. This document is South Carolina’s declaration of independence from the Union.

The following text is an excerpt from the document, and a very large excerpt at that. For emphasis, I have bolded the word slave, or other references to slavery, such as labor, which refers to slave labor; and persons. In some cases, I’ve added a parenthetical note, with the abbreviation Ed. (for Editor), to explain a comment which might not be immediately understood by the reader. I make some comments on the text further below.

I think it’s quite clear when you read this: South Carolina politicians believed that the institution of slavery was in peril, and they seceded as a way to protect that institution. Here, in their own words, is South Carolina’s reason for leaving the Union:

The people of the State of South Carolina, in Convention assembled, on the 26th day of April, A.D., 1852, declared that the frequent violations of the Constitution of the United States, by the Federal Government, and its encroachments upon the reserved rights of the States, fully justified this State in then withdrawing from the Federal Union; but in deference to the opinions and wishes of the other slaveholding States, she forbore at that time to exercise this right. Since that time, these encroachments have continued to increase, and further forbearance ceases to be a virtue.

And now the State of South Carolina having resumed her separate and equal place among nations, deems it due to herself, to the remaining United States of America, and to the nations of the world, that she should declare the immediate causes which have led to this act.

In the present case, that fact is established with certainty. We assert that fourteen of the States have deliberately refused, for years past, to fulfill their constitutional obligations, and we refer to their own Statutes for the proof.

The Constitution of the United States, in its fourth Article, provides as follows: “No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.”

This stipulation was so material to the compact (i.e., the Constitution – Ed.), that without it that compact would not have been made. The greater number of the contracting parties held slaves, and they had previously evinced their estimate of the value of such a stipulation by making it a condition in the Ordinance for the government of the territory ceded by Virginia, which now composes the States north of the Ohio River.

The same article of the Constitution stipulates also for rendition by the several States of fugitives from justice from the other States.

The General (federal) Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution.

The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution.

The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress.

In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation.

The ends for which the Constitution was framed are declared by itself to be “to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.”

These ends it endeavored to accomplish by a Federal Government, in which each State was recognized as an equal, and had separate control over its own institutions. The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor (i.e., runaway slaves – Ed.)

We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of (abolitionist – Ed.) societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States.

They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.

For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the common Government. Observing the forms of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself.

A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man (Ed. note: Abraham Lincoln) to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that “Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free,” and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction.

This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety. (Ed. note: The infamous Dred Scott decision was seen by many as declaring that African Americans could not be US citizens.)

On the 4th day of March next, this party (Ed. note: Lincoln’s Republican Party) will take possession of the Government. It has announced that the South shall be excluded from the common territory, that the judicial tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States.

The guaranties of the Constitution will then no longer exist; the equal rights of the States will be lost. The slaveholding States will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the Federal Government will have become their enemy.

Sectional interest and animosity will deepen the irritation, and all hope of remedy is rendered vain, by the fact that public opinion at the North has invested a great political error with the sanction of more erroneous religious belief.

We, therefore, the People of South Carolina, by our delegates in Convention assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, have solemnly declared that the Union heretofore existing between this State and the other States of North America, is dissolved, and that the State of South Carolina has resumed her position among the nations of the world, as a separate and independent State; with full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent States may of right do.

Adopted December 24, 1860

Some readers might think I’m just “cherry picking” selected pieces of text, and taking words out of context to prove my point. For those persons, I challenge you to read the whole thing for yourself. The entire text is here:
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp

Several things are notable about this document.

First, it is stunningly unequivocal in the declaration that slavery is THE reason for seceding from the United States. The language is clear, and beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Second, the declaration is single-minded in stating that slavery was central to the secession decision. There were numerous issues that South Carolina could have cited as their reasons to secede. For example, they could have talked about conflicts over tariffs and taxes, which lead to the nullification crisis in the 1820-30s. But the document dwells solely on slavery-related issues to make the case for leaving the Union.

Third is the use of the terms “slaveholding state” and “non-slaveholding state.” In many discussions of the Civil War’s antagonists, the terms “North” and “South” are used. But note that here, the terms slaveholding state and non-slaveholding state are used quite often.

Indeed, the secession declarations for Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas all use the terms “slaveholding state” and “non-slaveholding state.” This was an important rhetorical distinction that they were making. They were saying in words, this conflict isn’t about geography, it is about policy and law concerning the institution of slavery… this is about our identity as slaveholders.

Interestingly, I have seen that quite often, people who deny the centrality of slavery to the secession decision avoid using the terms “slaveholding state” and “non-slaveholding state,” terms that were keenly used by secessionists themselves. Why do some folks today avoid this language? Perhaps they are worried that if those term were used in these modern debates over the reasons for secession, it would undercut the argument that the War had “nothing to do with slavery”…

But in the end, we have to reckon with what the secessionists said, in their own words. They said that secession was about slavery. That’s not my opinion, that’s their opinion. And if they said it, I don’t know why we shouldn’t believe it.

DID YOU KNOW: South Carolina issued its secession declaration in 1860. According to the US Census of 1860, 57% of the state’s population was of African descent.

This is a portrait of a young man in a Union Army camp during the Civil War, circa May 1863, in Virginia. He is probably a former slave who found work with the army. A high-resolution version of the image is here. The caption at the bottom of the picture reads “Dick Sketched on the 6th of May, the afternoon of Gen. Hookers retreat across the Rappahannock.” This was after the Battle of Chancellorsville, where forces led by Union General Joseph Hooker were beaten by Confederate forces led by Generals Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson.

This picture is from the Prints and Photographs collection of the Library of Congress (LOC), and is titled “Dick, sketched on the 6th of May, on return to camp / E.F.” The drawing, of an African American man holding a mule by a rope, is by artist Edwin Forbes (1839-1895), and was done in May, 1863. The LOC Reproduction Numbers for the image are: LC-DIG-ppmsca-20539 (digital file from original item), LC-USZC4-4219 (color film copy transparency), LC-USZ62-21374 (b&w film copy neg.). The LOC Call Number is DRWG/US – Forbes, no. 64 (A size).

Statue of Jefferson Davis statue on Monument Avenue, Richmond, Virginia, after being defaced.
Image Source: Courtesy and copyright Richmond Times-Dispatch.

Statue dedicated to “Confederate Defenders of Charleston” in White Point Garden, Charleston, SC, after being defaced.
Image Source: TWITTER/PHILIP WEISS via The Root

The above acts of monument defacement are wrong. I hope the people who did this will just stop. The defacing of public monuments is unacceptable, and we should all righteously condemn the people who are responsible.

I have heard some people speculate that these were the acts of white supremacists. The theory goes that, like alleged serial killer Dylann Roof, these folks are trying to incite a race war by doing things which cause the ire and anger of various ethnic groups. I do not know if this theory is correct. I have nothing to say to such people, except that what they did was wrong and condemnable.

Some say these were the acts of foolish young people, who had nothing better to do than vandalize public property. I do not know if this is true. I have nothing to say to such people, except that what they did was wrong and condemnable.

Some say that this was indeed the work of “Black Lives Matter” activists, and that for various reasons, they decided to place their message on Confederate monuments. For them, I have two comments, beyond the usual statement that two wrongs don’t make a right.

First: the defacement of public memorials sets a horrible precedent. Once it becomes “OK” to vandalize some monuments, it opens the floodgates to vandalizing any and all of them. So, for example, we might see tit-for-tat or copycat defacements of memorials to the Underground Railroad or Civil Rights workers. Do we really want that to happen? I hope not.

Second: the use of vandalism is an ineffective and counter-productive way to put forth the message that black lives matter. The method used to deliver the message overshadows, cheapens, and debases the message. The people who see this stuff will not get the idea that black lives matter. The message they get is that the folks who did this are disrespectful, unlawful, uncaring, and self-serving idiots. For many people, these acts serve only to reinforce the idea that black people are nothing but thugs.

Simply put, there is no righteous justification for these acts of vandalism and defacement. All of us should reject and condemn them. Surely there are other, more creative ways of non-violent protest to advance the cause of positive change.

EDIT: Some have suggested that what we see above are, in effect, protests against these monuments (as opposed to agitation for the “Black Lives Matter” cause). Let me provide my comments on that.

I support the idea of engaging in discussions about the appropriateness of these monuments in today’s public spaces. To those who are committed, I say go ahead and build movements that advance the case and cause for change, and at least try to see if some type of democratic process can be used to affect that change.

But I do not support defacement as an appropriate means of protesting against monuments that many of us don’t like. Other citizens have rights, too. They have as much a right to support these monuments as others have to reject them. Vandalism and defacement serve only to delegitimize fair protest, it ruins objects that are fairly called works of art, and which, for good or ill, say something about our history. And, as mentioned above, these acts can lead to the general feeling that any memorial that anybody finds objectionable can be defaced and vandalized.

Regarding the defacement of memorials: just don’t it. Don’t even think about it. It is wrong.

Many people are concerned about the presence of this…
Image: Confederate Battle Flag
Image Source: Wikipedia Commons.

…but many more should be concerned about the relative absence of this.
Image: African American Civil War Memorial, Washington, DC
Image Source: Wikipedia Commons.

The Civil War Sesquicentennial–the multi-year commemoration of the 150th anniversary of the Civil War–is just about over. There are all ready discussions about commemorating the Reconstruction Era, which followed the war. For example, the National Park Service is considering the development of sites that will memorialize Reconstruction Era events.

But recent controversies over the Confederate Battle Flag (see here and here and here, for example) suggest that the job of properly commemorating the war in our public and private spaces is not yet done.

I understand how and why the Confederate Battle Flag (CBF) is such a lightening rod for debate and dispute. But my own concern is not with the presence of the CBF on public or other spaces. I am concerned about the relative absence of memorials, monuments and other objects that reflect the roles and experiences of African Americans during the American Civil War. This is something that we Americans need to talk about, and hopefully, address with collective action.

There are easily hundreds of, if not over a thousand, statues, monuments and other objects that commemorate the Civil War. Overwhelmingly, these objects feature white soldiers, sailors, and civilians. The Civil War era presence of African Americans on the “commemorative landscape,” as many call it, is inadequate, if not woefully so.

This situation is a result of our history. Nine out of ten Civil War era African Americans lived in the Union and Confederate slave states, which were considered “the South.” After the Reconstruction Era, which saw many advances toward racial equality, the South devolved into a state of racial supremacy for whites, and racial subjugation for African Americans. Political, financial, and social conditions inhibited or even prevented African Americans from creating memorials that fairly depicted their wartime experience. The result was a commemorative landscape in which Civil War era black folks were out of sight and out of mind. Someone raised in the South prior to this century could look at the commemorative landscape of the era and easily (and wrongly) conclude that black people were a negligible and inconsequential part of the war.

Things have gotten better. For example, since the 1989 movie Glory, over a dozen or more monuments to black Civil War soldiers have been installed. (A review of monuments to African American Civil War soldiers is here.) But much more needs to be done. In way too many places, children of all backgrounds are growing up in a commemorative environment where the back presence in the Civil War in under-represented, or even unrepresented. We have the power to fix that.

The following are just are a few suggestions for new memorials that depict various aspects of the Civil War history of African Americans. The list is not meant to be comprehensive, but it’s a good place to start. If anyone has their own suggestions to offer, feel free to note them in the comments section below. I hope this becomes part of a conversation about creating a commemorative landscape that fully and truly reflects the richness and diversity of the Civil War experience.

So, here we go:

1) No state is more significant in the history of African American soldiery during Civil War than Louisiana. Louisiana provided more African American soldiers to the Union than any other state. Three of the first five black Union regiments were formed in the state. And finally, Louisiana probably produced the most black army officers of any state. A portion of these soldiers were free black Creoles, while others were former slaves. Many enlisted in the Louisiana Native Guards regiments that were organized in New Orleans.

Officers of Company C of the 1st Louisiana Native Guard at Fort Macomb, Louisiana, per Wikipedia
Image Source: Harpers Weekly, February 28, 1863, via Wikipedia

Yet, there is no monument or memorial to black soldiers in the city of New Orleans. Per my research, there is only one monument to black soldiers in the entire state — at Donaldsonville, Louisiana (which is between New Orleans and Baton Rouge).

This is an oversight that borders on being shameful. I hate to use such strong language. But it is past due that New Orleans and other places in the state recognize the pivotal role these African American soldiers played during the Civil War.

2) When the Civil War began, president Abraham Lincoln and the US Congress made it clear: the Union had no intent of disturbing the institution of slavery where it stood. Why? At the least, they hoped to maintain the loyalty of the slave states that had not seceded and joined the Confederacy. At best, they hoped that the Confederate states, secure in the promise that slavery was safe, would return to the Union, thereby avoiding a war. (Note that, Lincoln was adamant that slavery would not spread to the western territories – a policy stance that the secessionists found unacceptable.)

But the slaves had their own agenda. They saw the war as an opportunity for freedom. On May 23, 1861 – just weeks after the war began at Fort Sumter, South Carolina – Frank Baker, James Townsend and Sheppard Mallory fled bondage and sought asylum at a Union occupied fort outside of Hampton, Virginia, named Fort Monroe.

The fort’s commander, General Benjamin Franklin Butler, had no duty to return the slaves; in fact, by Union policy, he should have returned them to their master. But he reasoned that because the slaves were property being used by Confederate insurrectionists, it was within his rights to confiscate that property and use it for the Union’s purposes. This was the beginning of the Union’s contraband policy.

Union General Benjamin Butler receives runaway slaves Frank Baker, James Townsend and Sheppard Mallory at Fort Monroe, Virginia, May 1861
Image Source: From The Daily Press, Newport News, Virginia

The contraband policy, which gave bondsmen asylum from slavery in return for their providing labor to the Union, eventually morphed into the Emancipation Proclamation. But the Proclamation might never have happened if not for the three brave men who took the risk of liberating themselves and seeking aid and comfort with their master’s enemy. We need a monument outside of Fort Monroe, which still stands, to commemorate their actions and those of Gen. Benjamin Butler.

3) In 1865, African American soldiers were the first to enter and liberate the cities of Charleston, South Carolina, and Richmond, Virginia from Confederate rule and slavery. I talk about these two events here and here.

What a truly sublime moment it must have been, for these black soldiers to end the bondage of their brethren, and for the bondsmen to see their own people as their liberators. Charles B. Fox, a major in the 55th Regiment of Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry (a black regiment), wrote in his diary that “(t)he glory and the triumph of this hour may be imagined, but can never be described. It was one of those occasions which happen but once in a lifetime, to be lived over in memory for ever.”

“Marching on!”–The Fifty-fifth Massachusetts Colored Regiment singing John Brown’s March in the streets of Charleston, February 21, 1865
Photo Source: Drawing from Harper’s Weekly, March 1865; image is at the Library of Congress, Reproduction Number: LC-USZ62-105560 (w film copy neg.) LC-USZ62-117999 (w film copy neg.)

Those wondrous moments should be set in marble or bronze, in a prominent spot in both of those cities. I don’t know much about the lay of the land in Richmond, but the city’s Monument Avenue, which includes several monuments to Confederate military figures (and one to African American legend Arthur Ashe, who was raised in the city) would be an excellent place to commemorate the liberation of that city by black Union soldiers.

4) Many people, myself included, make the point that African Americans were part of the process for ending slavery during the Civil War. This is not to say that African Americans freed themselves by themselves; the point is that, by their actions, black folks were agents of their own liberation, and should be acknowledged as such.

But that doesn’t mean that all the slaves gained their freedom during the war. In fact, most of people who were enslaved at the start of the war were still enslaved when it ended. They gained their freedom only with the arrival and occupation of the Union army, which had the military power to enforce emancipation upon former slaveholders.

As in the case of Charleston and Richmond above, it must have been an amazing moment, when both enslaved and enslaver were told that now and forever, human bondage is dead. Although the initial euphoria might have been tempered by the fear and uncertainty of the future: the freedmen surely wondered: “now that we are free… now what do we do?”

From the 2015 Emancipation Day (May 20) Celebration in Tallahassee: Tallahassee resident Brian Bibeau (center), in a portrayal of Union Brigadier General Edward McCook, reenacts the reading of the Emancipation Proclamation from the front steps of the historic Knott House Museum. He is joined by the Leon Rifles 2nd Florida Volunteer Infantry Regiment Co. D, Captain Chris Ellrich Commanding, and the 2nd Infantry Regiment U.S. Colored Troops Reenactment Unit & Living History Association, led by Sgt. Major (Ret.) Jarvis Rosier.
Image Source: Museum of Florida History, via CapitalSoup.com

No matter what the reaction, the announcement of emancipation in places like Tallahassee, Florida on May, 20, 1865, or in Galveston, Texas, on June 19, 1865, was a life changing event that the freedmen probably never forgot. And we shouldn’t forget it either. It would be great to capture their memories in memorials that are placed in the public square.

5) During the Civil War, seven African American sailors who won the Medal of Honor. Four of them-William H. Brown, Wilson Brown, James Mifflin, and John Henry Lawson-earned their medals while serving on different ships during the Battle of Mobile Bay, an important Union victory in 1864.

There are very few monuments to Civil War sailors, and I know of only one monument that features a black sailor. (Refer to the image of the African American Civil War Memorial in Washington, DC, at the top of this blog post.) I recommend placing a monument to the four men I mentioned earlier in Mobile, Alabama. Alternatively, a monument can be placed at the site of the Naval Museum in Columbus, GA, to commemorate all the black sailors who won the Medal of Honor during the war.

John Henry Lawson Per Wikipedia: “John Lawson (June 16, 1837 – May 3, 1919) was a United States Navy sailor who received the Medal of Honor for his actions during the American Civil War.”
Image Source: Library of Congress, Lot 11931, Digital ID: cph 3c18553, Reproduction Number: LC-USZ62-118553, via Wikipedia Commons

6) Do you know who Abraham Galloway was? Abraham Lincoln did. Galloway was a North Carolina spy and recruiter for the Union army. Per his biography by David Cecelski, Galloway “also stood at the forefront of an African American political movement that flourished in the Union-occupied parts of North Carolina, even leading a historic delegation of black southerners to the White House to meet with President Lincoln and to demand the full rights of citizenship. He later became one of the first black men elected to the North Carolina legislature.”

Galloway is a prominent example of the many black civilian leaders and activists who were agents of freedom and progress during and after the war. Their history deserves commemoration. I recommend a statue of Galloway and the black soldiers he recruited for the Union Army, or perhaps, a statue of Galloway and his delegation in meeting with Abraham Lincoln.

****

Again, this is not meant to be a complete, comprehensive list. But it highlights that there are many places out there which merit our attention as opportunities to memorialize the black experience during the war. Once installed, these monuments will educate, enlighten, and maybe even inspire broader swaths of the American public. I hope that as the Sesquicentennial winds down, and the brouhaha over the Confederate Battle Flag dies down, we can catch our collective breath and get to the unfinished work of creating a commemorative landscape that properly reflects all the people who lived, suffered, fought, and strived during the American Civil War.