First Kansas Colored Infantry Regiment

Started by W. Gray, July 21, 2011, 09:29:29 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Diane Amberg

Steve, it's a series of 10 volumes, the size of encyclopedias. Since you've never seen the series you sure are quick  to dispute it. How can you know?
I just went and pulled one out. Contributing to it are Randolph H. McKim, Army of Northern Virginia CSA, Allen C. Redwood, Army of Northern Virginia CSA and a number of others. I never said it was the complete authority, but it's mighty good for it's time. It has lots of Confederate photos too. It is very much complimentary to the south and the soldiers.
   Here's one small example from McKim in the section "A glimpse of the Confederate Army."
"These Confederate armies must present to the historian who accepts the common view that the South was fighting  for the perpetuation of the institution of slavery a difficult - in fact insoluble- problem. How could such a motive explain the solidarity of diverse elements that made up those armies? The Southern planter might fight for his slaves: but why the poor white man who had none? How could slavery generate such devotion,such patient endurance, such splendid heroism, such unconquerable tenacity through four long years of unequal struggle.? The world acknowledges the  superb valor of the men who fought under the Southern Cross-and the no less superb devotion of the whole people to the cause of the Confederacy." There are many, many more pages in this section.

srkruzich

Quote from: Diane Amberg on August 06, 2011, 03:00:52 PM
Steve, it's a series of 10 volumes, the size of encyclopedias. Since you've never seen the series you sure are quick  to dispute it. How can you know?
I just went and pulled one out. Contributing to it are Randolph H. McKim, Army of Northern Virginia CSA, Allen C. Redwood, Army of Northern Virginia CSA and a number of others. I never said it was the complete authority, but it's mighty good for it's time. It has lots of Confederate photos too. It is very much complimentary to the south and the soldiers.
   Here's one small example from McKim in the section "A glimpse of the Confederate Army."
"These Confederate armies must present to the historian who accepts the common view that the South was fighting  for the perpetuation of the institution of slavery a difficult - in fact insoluble- problem. How could such a motive explain the solidarity of diverse elements that made up those armies? The Southern planter might fight for his slaves: but why the poor white man who had none? How could slavery generate such devotion,such patient endurance, such splendid heroism, such unconquerable tenacity through four long years of unequal struggle.? The world acknowledges the  superb valor of the men who fought under the Southern Cross-and the no less superb devotion of the whole people to the cause of the Confederacy." There are many, many more pages in this section.

I wasn't disparaging the book. I was just pointing out that its not a complete and accurate record.  The north spent years destroying the truth after the war, and silencing those who would stand up and speak the truth.   You got punished for saying anything in the south after the war about it.   

DID You know or did anyone here know, that after the civil war, veterans of the civil war could not erect any statue, any headstone or any graveyard dedicated to the confederate soldiers?  That was prevented under the truce agreement.   The only thing that was allowed was the perpetuation of the myth that the North was the victor over slavery and the south was so evil the north had to come in and dictate what they did. 

So where did all the cemeteries and statues come from?  The women of the south, stood up and told the northern oppressors to stick it in their ear, they didn't make any such treaty and they erected statues, headstones and plaques honoring the valiant service of every confederate soldier.

There was a journal that came out about 10 years ago, think its in the civil war museum in stone mountain georgia that was written by a southern belle when shermans thugs marched to savannah.  She wrote about the wounded coming into her home for treatment.  Children tortured by troops, women raped burned and disfigured by the troops, and even Yankee troops that were shot up and missing limbs and all kinds of wounds came in.  She treated all. Didn't give a rats fanny about their affiliation.  She did hate them for what they were doing but she was a woman that had compassion for a human even when they were being inhuman.  I don't think i could have had that fortitude.  I probably would have tossed them out and let them die after seeing what they had done to my home.    I do know there were some northern ladies that did the same. But honestly its not the same as their home was not destroyed, nor did they have to deal with the inhumanity that shermans thugs doled out to the civilian population
Curb your politician.  We have leash laws you know.

thatsMRSc2u

  I've always been interested in history of the War.....my gr. gr. gr grandfather died in Feb. 1865 in a Union prison camp in Little Rock Ark. He was a lieutenant in Crandalls Ark. Cavalry...it's part of my geneology research to find out as much as possible. I had ancestors on both sides.
I agree with you steve that Sherman was a butcher and a cruel sonofabitch, he proved it in the War and re-proved it in the Indian wars.
Slavery was just the rally point the north used to whip up sentiment...it was about states rights and freedom from government tyranny......


Diane Amberg

Sherman was a bad piece of work. Great Grandpa knew  both he and Custer and had nothing good to say about either of them.  Pam, I think the point of view from the south is better known by people, even now, than was thought. Again from 1911,
  "Everyone who was conversant, as I was during the whole war, with the opinions of the soldiers of the Southern army, knows that they did not wage that tremendous effort for slavery. That was a subject very little in their thoughts or on their lips.
Not one in twenty of those grim veterans, who were so terrible on the battlefield, had any financial interest in slavery. No, they were fighting for liberty, for the right of self -government. They believed the Federal  authorities were assailing that right. It was the sacred heritage of Anglo-Saxon freedom, of local self government won at Runnymede, which they believed in peril when they flew to arms as one man, from the Potomac to the Rio Grande. They may have been right, or they may have been wrong, but that was the issue they made. In that they stood. For that they died."

W. Gray

Here is my take on this interesting subject concerning the Elk Falls cemetery and the Buffalo Soldiers:

During the Civil War, the area in and around Elk Falls was an Indian reservation not legally open to white folks, although that did not prevent some from intruding into that reservation after the war was over. The state of Kansas seemed to encourage these intruders intrusion on the Osage.

The 10th US Cavalry was formed at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, in 1866. Along with the 9th Cavalry and the 24th and 25th Infantry, the men of these units did not become known as Buffalo Soldiers until several years later.

Congressional authorization to form these black regiment's in 1866 would seemingly have been in response to the successful deployment of all the federal black regiments during the Civil War.

The earliest burial I could find in the Elk Falls Cemetery took place in February 1871. The town company probably established the cemetery sometime after the town company was incorporated with the state in March 1870--while Elk Falls was still well within an Indian Reservation. More evidence that the state did not object to white intruders.

There are four unmarked graves at the cemetery which are listed only as "Soldiers Grave." It would be interesting to know the backgrounds of these individuals.
"If one of the many corrupt...county-seat contests must be taken by way of illustration, the choice of Howard County, Kansas, is ideal." Dr. Everett Dick, The Sod-House Frontier, 1854-1890.
"One of the most expensive county-seat wars in terms of time and money lost..." Dr. Homer E Socolofsky, KSU

redcliffsw

#15
Liberty.  The north destroyed that liberty that both sides had before that war.

Thanks to Lincoln and the Republicans, the Marxists got on the inside track there.
And over the years, they've out distanced themselves in the Democrat party.
Now look what we have - liberals and moderates in both parties.

Many coloreds, free and slave, supported the Constitution by their efforts for the South.  Can't say that
about the 1st KS.

doobie

Thanks for the additional info on the elk falls cemetary Waldo.  The folks on the board of directors for the place are trying to find me more details.  So many facts were word of mouth, the men and women that knew the most have passed on many, many years ago

doobie
CAUTION: if instrument is shaken sufficiently to cause arm to swing violently, damage may occur!

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk