News: FYI: We have three websites in our inventory: onnidan.com - news, recaps, blogs, black college sports page | onnidan1.com - this forum | onnidan2.com - composite hbcu football schedule
The monument honors Willis Howcott, who was the slave of William Howcott. William Howcott was a member of Harvey’s Scouts, a Confederate cavalry unit from Mississippi made up of around 128 soldiers. A history of Harvey’s Scouts, written by John Claiborne and published in 1885, is here. While the names of the Scout’s soldiers are listed, neither the names of the slaves who were with the soldiers, nor a count of those slaves, are indicated in Claiborne’s history.The Confederate Digest blog entry says that “William was 15 years old when he joined Harvey’s Scouts in 1864. Willis, his childhood playmate was only 13 but would not be dissuaded from going off to war with his friend. Willis was, tragically, killed in combat sometime in 1865 at the age of 14.” This is based on family memoirs and memories.This same blog entry makes the claim, which is largely discredited, that an “estimated 65,000 or more African American men, both free and slave, were Confederate soldiers.” Was Willis Howcott one of these black Confederate soldiers?First, some quick background. During the Civil War, many masters took their slaves with them as they went off to war. These slaves performed a number of tasks: they cooked, foraged for food, washed laundry, cut hair, cared for animals, etc. These slaves were not enlisted in the army; slave enlistment was prohibited by the Confederate government until March 1865. (One month later, Confederate general-in-chief Robert E. Lee surrendered at Appomattox, Virginia.)I read through Claiborne’s history of the Scouts, and found no mention of Willis Howcott. Claiborne’s list of the unit’s dead (12 men in all) does not include Willis Howcott’s name. If Willis Howcott did die in battle, it is not recorded in this history, which was developed “out of a considerable amount of material furnished by different persons, and placed at his (Claiborne’s) disposal.”In fact, Claiborne’s history of Harvey’s Scouts makes no mention of the unit’s slaves at all. Interestingly, Claiborne does document an encounter the Scouts had with a group of US Colored Troops, black men who enlisted in the Union army. Claiborne writes that the “Scouts fell in with a long wagon train from Natchez, guarded by a colored regiment. A desperate fight ensued. The negroes had been taught that we would show them no quarter, and fought like devils.” But there is no mention of the negroes who were with the Scouts. In Claiborne’s history, the slaves are not soldiers, but rather, invisible men.
Quote from: Bison66 on March 23, 2014, 05:32:54 PMTrue, Ken, for most!!But we do know for sure that there are always a few brainwashed and confused individuals who miscomprehend the situation and who "fight" against their own interests.There's a fascinating story of the Franklin Riot (Tenn) just after the Civil War. There were Black and white RADICALS advocating that former Confederates not be given too much leeway to regain power AND there were white and Black CONSERVATIVES (these were the labels applied to them in the Official Report of the incident, not by me) who opposed the Radicals.The Radicals did a series of marches in the Franklin area. During (the last?) one, they were confronted in the streets by the Conservatives led by TWO BLACK MEN (or were they pushed up front?). Shots rang out and two men were killed and several were wounded. Both sides were armed but disagreed about who shot first.It turns out that my Great Grandmother was a witness and gave a deposition to the investigators. I am HOPING that she was on the Radical's side, but I have my doubts. Visiting Franklin next month to see what more I can find out.Amazingly, I now have a book in which my great grandmother's DEPOSITION about the Franklin (Tenn) Riot is included. A local historian gave it to me during our enlightening visit to Franklin in April.Perhaps she saw more than she reported, but she basically only said that some of the wounded were brought to her home to be treated. She was a skilled mid-wife (requested by the "best families" of Franklin) and during the Civil War was sent to Montgomery, Ala (safely away from Union forces who might have liberated her) and worked with a Doctor also from Franklin.Apparently, her medical experience was the reason the wounded were brought to her home.
True, Ken, for most!!But we do know for sure that there are always a few brainwashed and confused individuals who miscomprehend the situation and who "fight" against their own interests.There's a fascinating story of the Franklin Riot (Tenn) just after the Civil War. There were Black and white RADICALS advocating that former Confederates not be given too much leeway to regain power AND there were white and Black CONSERVATIVES (these were the labels applied to them in the Official Report of the incident, not by me) who opposed the Radicals.The Radicals did a series of marches in the Franklin area. During (the last?) one, they were confronted in the streets by the Conservatives led by TWO BLACK MEN (or were they pushed up front?). Shots rang out and two men were killed and several were wounded. Both sides were armed but disagreed about who shot first.It turns out that my Great Grandmother was a witness and gave a deposition to the investigators. I am HOPING that she was on the Radical's side, but I have my doubts. Visiting Franklin next month to see what more I can find out.
Slaves did not rise up and attack "massas's" women in the big house. They tilled the fields and made it possible with their free labor for the confederates to put armies in the field that were nearly equal to that of the Union with six times the white population. Some servants (slaves) accompanied their masters to the fields in service with the CSA armies. General Robert E. Lee opposed the idea of arming blacks in the service of the Confederacy in the dying days of the conflict.So why should we respond to this and every one else who uses us for their next paper? Why don't we talk about radical reconstruction after 1876 and the savage lynching of blacks that follow for the next 100 years. Glad to know that some got compensated for their service to the Confederacy. So what? Tell that to the relatives of black men hung from tree limbs and brutalized before dying.
Thanks Bison66. As you know, I accept your and EB's words as the truth and always enlightening. It is just hard to keep up with you guys. And this coming from a Maroon Tiger.
...The Confederates lost their last major army in the Upper South. They suffered some 6,000 casualties and the loss of six generals at the preceding Battle of Franklin (about thirty miles south of Nashville) on November 30, 1864. Then some 10,000 casualties (dead, wounded, and prisoners) were suffered on the Nashville battlefield just two weeks later. Some barefooted and shivering Confederate soldiers were glad to be captured by black soldiers. General Hood headed the remanants of his confused army south across the Tennessee River, then through Alabama into Oxford, Mississippi, where he resigned in humiliation by January 15, 1865. The commanding Union general at Nashville, George H. Thomas, said: "The blood of white and black [Union] men has flowed freely together for the great [American] cause, which is to give freedom. Colonel Charles H. Thompson of the 12th USCT Regiment and his brigade of Colored Troops exhibited courage and steadiness that challenged the admiration of all who witnessed the charge." The Nashville True Union reported, "The hills of Nashville will forever attest to how desperately the despised slave will fight when he strikes for freedom." When the USCT marched from the battlefield, the men sang a moving rendition of John Brown's Body ("Glory, Glory, Hallelujah! His soul is marching on!"), leaving few spectators without tears. John Brown, a fanatical white abolitionist, and his black and white vigilantes attacked Harper's Ferry, Virginia, on October 16, 1859, and fired the first shots of the coming Civil War in a futile effort to free and arm the local slaves. Brown, his son, and the black and white vigilantes lost their lives either in the battle or by hanging. Brown's memory and heroic efforts were preserved in the melodious songs of black people. Before the last black regiments were mustered out of service in 1866, about 5,107 USCT casualties were suffered from capture, disease, wounds, and death in Tennessee. The graves of the USCT still can be found in various national cemeteries: Nashville (1,909); Memphis (4,208--including the "Fort Pillow" section); Chattanooga (103); Knoxville (663); Cumberland River (12); and Stones River (186). After the war, some blacks made annual pilgrimages (even as late as 1979-1995 in Nashville) to the local national cemeteries to honor the black Union soldiers and view their tombstones marked distinctively USCT. There was a category of "black Confederates." Nearly 2,000 blacks (some voluntarily, but most involuntarily) served the Confederate Army of Tennessee in various capacities, including impressed servants, cooks, laborers, herders, and teamsters. When the Tennessee General Assembly amended the 1906 Confederate Pension Law in 1921 to include former ("loyal") black Confederate "workers, there were several black applicants. Recorded in the file of Caesar Hays are his words: "I stayed with my master until we were captured, and that was all I could do." Richard Lester of Wilson County could get no pension because he escaped when his master was captured at Fort Donelson. Monroe Stephenson of Maury County remained with Company B, 9th Tennessee Cavalry, until the last surrender. The Confederates in Richmond tried to organize black regiments. After receiving written support from General Lee, the Confederate Congress passed a law to organize slave soldiers in March of 1865. On the same day that President Lincoln made an impressive review of 25,000 black Union army soldiers on the James River, the Confederates precipitously paraded a slave regiment in Richmond, where they hoped that "our loyal slaves" would fight as effectively for the Rebels as the USCT then performed for the Yankees. But it was too late for a dying and desperate Confederacy. Blacks were of no real use to the Confederate war effort. There were too many barriers for the Confederates to overcome: their deep racial hatred for blacks; the slaveowners' opposition to the military use of valuable slaves; and the blacks' loyalty to the Union. All these factors negated any real gains the Confederates could realize through forced black participation in a white southern rebellion. In his book, Southern Negroes, 186l-1865 (1938), southern historian Bell I. Wiley wrote, "It hardly seems likely that slaves who greeted the Yankees and grasped freedom with such alacrity under ordinary circumstances would by the donning of Confederate uniforms have been transformed into loyal and enthusiastic fighters for the establishment of the institution of slavery." (p. 162.) The slavocracy moaned that the "slaves trusted most" were often the first to flee to the Yankee side.
Thanks, MyTeVyKn.That poor woman!And she took the decision to leave her other children behind. THAT was a heavy cross to bear!!P.S. Meant to say that one of the co-authors, Joe Reidy, is (or was) a prof at Howard.
Quote from: ‘87 Alum on October 13, 2014, 01:25:17 PMI may have to stop & visit Franklin on our next trip to BHM. BHM?Black History Museum?Where is it?Thanks!
I may have to stop & visit Franklin on our next trip to BHM.
Quote from: Bison66 on March 15, 2016, 03:33:51 AMThanks, MyTeVyKn.That poor woman!And she took the decision to leave her other children behind. THAT was a heavy cross to bear!!P.S. Meant to say that one of the co-authors, Joe Reidy, is (or was) a prof at Howard.You're welcome. I found this book to be a very good read with factual accounts throughout. It opened my eyes even more so to the testimony of struggle, pain, torture, strength, and courage from men, women, and children of the black race during the days of slavery and beyond. It was a fascinating read and causes me to love my people deeply.
This was terrible. One of my white neighbors and I have a lot in common and we are always talking. He grew up on a farm in Alabama before working as a contract intelligence officer and traveling out of the US "in government service". He once told me that a old black man who had been a slave who lived on the farm next to his family told him that "slavery not so bad". Why should he say anything else to a child? It was comments like this from adults that I was talking about when I think that you thought that I was criticizing you Bison66. It was not meant to be. I would tell people 'I am not interested in what your black friend said. Half the time it was a subordinate on the job. And I would ask "what makes you think that you know more about me and my people than I do. Next I would not discuss anything with them unless they were a true friend.
Quote from: MyTeVyKn on March 15, 2016, 10:16:28 AMQuote from: Bison66 on March 15, 2016, 03:33:51 AMThanks, MyTeVyKn.That poor woman!And she took the decision to leave her other children behind. THAT was a heavy cross to bear!!P.S. Meant to say that one of the co-authors, Joe Reidy, is (or was) a prof at Howard.You're welcome. I found this book to be a very good read with factual accounts throughout. It opened my eyes even more so to the testimony of struggle, pain, torture, strength, and courage from men, women, and children of the black race during the days of slavery and beyond. It was a fascinating read and causes me to love my people deeply. MTVK,Question: Does that book explore the question of Africans/Blacks serving AS SOLDIERS in the CSA Army?Incidentally, y'all, that prof at Howard is white.
News