What the Newspapers Said: The Black Confederate “Myth” Examined

[jgoodguy]

From Abbeville
https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/...ers-said-the-black-confederate-myth-examined/

My first question will be OK show me the newspaper articles with the term 'Black Confederate' otherwise we are in yet another definition/interruption mire.

 

[jgoodguy]

Second question. Is there any evidence of the myth outside of wartime newspapers 1861-65. Myths have a life outside of newspapers. Myths would exist in magazines, books, journals, and articles.

 

[jgoodguy]

Third question. How much evidence of the 'Black Confederate' Myth from 1865 to the 1970s exists in books, magazines, journals, and articles. Is there any evidence of it in the Lost Cause literature. How many references does the Confederate Veteran make to 'Black Confederate' soldiers?

 

[O' Be Joyful]

From Abbeville
https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/...ers-said-the-black-confederate-myth-examined/

Holmes County Republican


From its beginnings as the Holmes County Whig, which started in Millersburg, Ohio in 1844, the weekly Holmes County Republican stood in opposition to the county’s predominantly Democratic voices and their paper, the Holmes County Farmer. In its August 21, 1856 inaugural issue, the Holmes County Republican declared its firm stance against slavery and for the preservation of the Union: “We believe that the extension of Slavery may be prohibited and the Union maintained—that a return to the policy of the Fathers of the Republic is the only way in which the aggressions of slavery are to be constitutionally restrained and the peace and harmony of our country, and the perpetuity of our free institutions secured.” The Republican and the Farmer were bitter rivals, and according to James O. Lehman and Steven M. Nolt, “engaged in ferocious political rancor” throughout the Civil War (Mennonites, Amish, and the American Civil War [Baltimore: John Hopkins Press, 2007], 112). The Farmer was particularly antagonistic toward the Republican Party, and, at times, quoted the Holmes County Republican in order to undermine its political viewpoint.

Noted for its accurate home and neighborhood news, the Republican was widely circulated throughout Holmes, Wayne, and Coshocton Counties and considered one of the best advertising outlets for that region. The paper, however, occasionally suffered financial problems and was suspended and revived several times. The Holmes County Farmer was generally considered the stronger of the two papers, with support from the county’s overwhelmingly Democratic and Amish population. J. Caskey served as editor of the Republican until April 1862, when he announced that it was to be sold to G.T. Griffith of Cincinnati. Under Caskey’s leadership, the paper reported on mostly local and national news, including letters from Union soldiers. Throughout its entire run, the paper supported Republican political candidates, including Abraham Lincoln and 1856 presidential hopeful John C. Frémont.

https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn84028820/

The Daily Press, The Penny press and Cincinnati daily Press


The Cincinnati Daily Press was established in 1858 at Cincinnati, the seat of Hamilton County, Ohio, as the Daily Penny Press. With each issue costing only one cent, one-sixth that of a typical newspaper, the Press made news accessible to citizens outside the upper class, such as former slaves, laborers, and immigrants. Cincinnati had seen significant growth since the beginning of the 19th century, due to the introduction of steam navigation on the Ohio River in 1811 and the completion of the Miami and Erie Canal in 1845 which connected the Ohio River in Cincinnati to Lake Erie in Toledo. By the year 1850, Cincinnati’s population had risen to over 115,000, creating a large audience for newspapers. Penny papers appealed to members of lower classes because they were inexpensive. Nor were they commonly associated with any political party. Rather than relying on subscriptions and daily sales, they depended heavily on advertisements for financial support. Penny papers typically provided information not commonly found in the larger papers, focusing heavily on court news and local gossip.

Independent in politics, the Press was published every day but Sunday. It served Cincinnati and the surrounding communities, including Covington and Newport, Kentucky. In February 1859, it changed its name to the Daily Press before it became known as the Penny Press on July 18, 1859. Later, in 1860, the Penny Press changed its title to the Cincinnati Daily Press to coincide with a change in appearance and larger size. The Press was owned by Henry Reed who began the paper with his brother Samuel Rockwell Reed. Henry Reed held a prominent place in Ohio journalism, formerly serving as editor of the Daily Ohio State Journal, the Daily Cincinnati Atlas, and the Daily Cincinnati Commercial. Reed described the Press as a paper that included current news, in addition to providing independent commentary and discussion on topics of the day. The paper reported on a variety of subjects, including Washington news and gossip, amusements, army correspondence, and home interests. The Cincinnati Daily Press ceased publication in 1862.

Provided by: Ohio Historical Society, Columbus, OH

https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn84028745/

 

[5fish]

This thread should have put an end the black confederate myth....

LINK:https://civilwartalk.com/threads/faithful-slave-monuments-and-lost-cause-marketing.149574/

The whole Black Confederate debate is nothing more than the "Lost Cause" movements marketing campaign to imply the loyal slaves supported the Southern Cause objectives during the Civil War.

Many of these groups are motivated by a laudable desire to acknowledge the shared histories of black and white Southerners, rather than telling the story of the Civil War from a purely white perspective, but they go too far when they suggest that black Southerners' service on behalf of the Confederacy demonstrates voluntary support for its objectives.

It actually started at the end of the 19th century...

After the war, many different groups and governments proposed interpretations of African Americans' service to the Confederacy. The Southern Claims Commission, established by the United States Congress to compensate loyal Southerners for property taken by Union forces during the war, tended to assume that black Southerners (especially slaves) had remained loyal to the Union. They saw black service on Confederate fortifications or in businesses supporting the Confederate war effort as the result of force rather than inclination. Early in the twentieth century, most southern states expanded their pension laws to offer compensation to black men and women who had worked on behalf of the Confederacy, but those laws contained no provisions suggesting that black men could claim pensions as soldiers. The United Daughters of the Confederacy proposed a series of monuments to "loyal slaves" as part of its commemorative efforts late in the nineteenth century, while the United Confederate Veterans took pains to highlight the occasional black man who attended a reunion wearing a Confederate uniform. (The "loyal slave" is a traditional feature of the Lost Cause view of the war.)

Here is one... best one at Arlington

Perhaps the most striking manifestation of this impulse was a decades-long campaign to erect a monument to black "mammies" in Washington D. C. As early as 1904, members of the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) began campaigning for a memorial to "faithful slaves," and Southern congressmen took up the cause, unsuccessfully seeking federal funding for a monument in 1907 and 1912.2 A milestone in the UDC's campaign to commemorate both the Confederacy and "faithful slaves" was the erection of the Confederate Monument in Arlington National Cemetery in 1914. Sculpted by Moses Jacob Ezekiel, a Confederate veteran and prominent sculptor, the imposing monument includes thirty-two life-sized reliefs, including a frieze depicting a loyal black slave accompanying his Confederate master into battle and another that portrays a departing Confederate soldier bidding farewell to his children, who cluster around an "old Negro mammy." According to Hilary A. Herbert, who wrote a history of the monument in 1914, the monument depicted "the kindly relations that existed all over the South between the master and the slave – a story that can not be too often repeated to generations in which "Uncle Tom's Cabin" survives and is still manufacturing false ideas as to the South and slavery in the ‘fifties.' The astonishing fidelity of the slaves everywhere during the war to the wives and children of those who were absent in the army was convincing proof of the kindly relations between master and slave in the old South."3

Why???

Even after the erection of the Confederate Monument at Arlington, UDC activists remained committed to a national monument dedicated to "mammies." The value of such a monument was clear to its supporters: one proponent explained that "a noble monument" to the memory of black "mammies" and to "their loyal conduct refutes the assertion that the master was cruel to his slave."4

The United Daughters of the Confederacy proposed a series of monuments to "loyal slaves" as part of its commemorative efforts late in the nineteenth century, while the United Confederate Veterans took pains to highlight the occasional black man who attended a reunion wearing a Confederate uniform.

Here is what Black Confederates did... everything except fighting in battle.

Most likely, those men had served as body servants rather than actual soldiers during the war. Black men had formed a large and highly visible portion of the population at every major Confederate army encampment, but not as soldiers. They washed clothes, cooked meals, cared for the personal property of individual owners, groomed horses, drove wagons, unloaded trains, built walls and bridges, and nursed the wounded. One former slave, when interviewed by an employee of the Works Progress Administration, claimed he had done a soldier's work during the war, and this was certainly a valid interpretation. Black men serving the Confederate army did almost all of the tasks that actual Confederate soldiers did on a regular basis—everything except fighting in battle. And while it is possible (perhaps even probable) that a few of the personal body servants or hired slaves working in camp could have picked up a gun and joined a battle at one point or another, there is no credible evidence to suggest that large numbers of them did so. Certainly, their numbers are statistically insignificant when compared with the thousands of black men who were forced to perform manual labor for the Confederate armies.

The Black Confederate and Faithful Slave movements were just "Lost Cause" marketing...

Here is one... marketing...

In 1894 The Confederate Veteran, a magazine edited and published by Confederate veterans of the Civil War, offered an op-ed proposing the erection of new statues throughout the South in honor of the “faithful” slaves who stayed behind on their enslavers’ properties during the war. To wit:

"It seems opportune now to erect monuments to the Negro race of the war period. The Southern people could not honor themselves more than in cooperating to this end. What figure would be looked upon with kindlier memory than old “Uncle Pete” and “Black Mammy,” well executed in bronze? By general cooperation models of the two might be procured and duplicates made to go in every capital city of the South at the public expense, and then in the other large cities by popular subscription . . . There is not of record in history subordination and faithful devotion by any race of people comparable to the slaves of the Southern people during our great four years’ war for independence."

Here is this...

In the early 1920s, the United Daughters of the Southern Confederacy lobbied congress to pass a bill for the construction of a National Mammy Monument. Having pushed for and been successful in constructing several such memorials throughout the south, the UDSC wanted ground broken in Washington, DC in order to pay tribute to the loyal female domestics of the South. The appropriation for the monument was passed in 1923 by the Senate, but stalled in the House of Representatives. The artist commissioned for the memorial was George Julian Zolany, and the finished product was envisioned as three white children assembled around a black maid who was seated. An elaborate fountain was also part of the design.

Here is the whole "Black Mammy" debate...

Robin Bernstein of Harvard University reviewed Micki McElya’s book. What she points out is directly related to this blog post:
Through prodigious research in the UDC archives, McElya has reconstructed the process by which the Daughters claimed that their “memories” of faithful slaves, especially mammies, gave them “specialized racial knowledge” (64). The Daughters constructed memories of benign servitude through dialect performances, “epistolary blackface”(59) in which white women wrote in the voices of mammies, and, in a most spectacular effort, a nearly successful push to establish a national monument to the mammy to stand “in the shadow of Lincoln’s memorial” in Washington, DC (116). The contest over mammy [End Page 151] memorials illuminates the competing, high-stakes concerns that intersected in this mythic figure: the UDC wanted the mammy memorial to substantiate their memories as “official ‘truth’” (118) and thus to authorize elite white women such as themselves as the guardians of antebellum American history. Furthermore, against the backdrop of labor unrest, race riots, lynching, and the Great Migration of African Americans from rural South to urban North, the UDC wanted to posit an imagined past through which to envision a future of racial harmony based on black subservience.

African Americans understood these stakes, and they responded in well-organized protests, which McElya tracks through the black press. African American newspapers argued that white fantasies of faithful slaves, particularly mammies, “did not stand in opposition to this violence [of lynching and other attacks on African Americans] but was very much a part of it” (160). The UDC claimed that their proposed memorial commemorated affection, and African American newspaper writers countered not by claiming that enslaved caregivers and white children never felt affection for each other, but instead that such affection “was itself a form of violence and that the memorialization campaign itself was deeply vicious” (161). New Negro writers and activists confounded the UDC and other mammy fantasists by honoring enslaved mothers who struggled, often to the point of self-sacrifice, to care for their own children despite impediments that included forced labor in white households. New Negro writers and political cartoonists also explicitly showed how fantasies of asexual physical intimacy between white child and black mammy masked white anxieties about another form of interracial congress: white men’s rape of enslaved African American women. For example, a political cartoon in the African American newspaper the Chicago Defender in April 1923, critiqued the mammy memorial by proposing a parallel “white daddy” statue in which a white man assaults an African American woman. Protests such as these successfully prevented the national mammy memorial from ever being built.

Think we almost had a national "Black Mammy" monument...

 

[jgoodguy]

This thread should have put an end the black confederate myth....

LINK:https://civilwartalk.com/threads/faithful-slave-monuments-and-lost-cause-marketing.149574/

The whole Black Confederate debate is nothing more than the "Lost Cause" movements marketing campaign to imply the loyal slaves supported the Southern Cause objectives during the Civil War.

Many of these groups are motivated by a laudable desire to acknowledge the shared histories of black and white Southerners, rather than telling the story of the Civil War from a purely white perspective, but they go too far when they suggest that black Southerners' service on behalf of the Confederacy demonstrates voluntary support for its objectives.

It actually started at the end of the 19th century...

After the war, many different groups and governments proposed interpretations of African Americans' service to the Confederacy. The Southern Claims Commission, established by the United States Congress to compensate loyal Southerners for property taken by Union forces during the war, tended to assume that black Southerners (especially slaves) had remained loyal to the Union. They saw black service on Confederate fortifications or in businesses supporting the Confederate war effort as the result of force rather than inclination. Early in the twentieth century, most southern states expanded their pension laws to offer compensation to black men and women who had worked on behalf of the Confederacy, but those laws contained no provisions suggesting that black men could claim pensions as soldiers. The United Daughters of the Confederacy proposed a series of monuments to "loyal slaves" as part of its commemorative efforts late in the nineteenth century, while the United Confederate Veterans took pains to highlight the occasional black man who attended a reunion wearing a Confederate uniform. (The "loyal slave" is a traditional feature of the Lost Cause view of the war.)

Here is one... best one at Arlington

Perhaps the most striking manifestation of this impulse was a decades-long campaign to erect a monument to black "mammies" in Washington D. C. As early as 1904, members of the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) began campaigning for a memorial to "faithful slaves," and Southern congressmen took up the cause, unsuccessfully seeking federal funding for a monument in 1907 and 1912.2 A milestone in the UDC's campaign to commemorate both the Confederacy and "faithful slaves" was the erection of the Confederate Monument in Arlington National Cemetery in 1914. Sculpted by Moses Jacob Ezekiel, a Confederate veteran and prominent sculptor, the imposing monument includes thirty-two life-sized reliefs, including a frieze depicting a loyal black slave accompanying his Confederate master into battle and another that portrays a departing Confederate soldier bidding farewell to his children, who cluster around an "old Negro mammy." According to Hilary A. Herbert, who wrote a history of the monument in 1914, the monument depicted "the kindly relations that existed all over the South between the master and the slave – a story that can not be too often repeated to generations in which "Uncle Tom's Cabin" survives and is still manufacturing false ideas as to the South and slavery in the ‘fifties.' The astonishing fidelity of the slaves everywhere during the war to the wives and children of those who were absent in the army was convincing proof of the kindly relations between master and slave in the old South."3

Why???

Even after the erection of the Confederate Monument at Arlington, UDC activists remained committed to a national monument dedicated to "mammies." The value of such a monument was clear to its supporters: one proponent explained that "a noble monument" to the memory of black "mammies" and to "their loyal conduct refutes the assertion that the master was cruel to his slave."4

The United Daughters of the Confederacy proposed a series of monuments to "loyal slaves" as part of its commemorative efforts late in the nineteenth century, while the United Confederate Veterans took pains to highlight the occasional black man who attended a reunion wearing a Confederate uniform.

Here is what Black Confederates did... everything except fighting in battle.

Most likely, those men had served as body servants rather than actual soldiers during the war. Black men had formed a large and highly visible portion of the population at every major Confederate army encampment, but not as soldiers. They washed clothes, cooked meals, cared for the personal property of individual owners, groomed horses, drove wagons, unloaded trains, built walls and bridges, and nursed the wounded. One former slave, when interviewed by an employee of the Works Progress Administration, claimed he had done a soldier's work during the war, and this was certainly a valid interpretation. Black men serving the Confederate army did almost all of the tasks that actual Confederate soldiers did on a regular basis—everything except fighting in battle. And while it is possible (perhaps even probable) that a few of the personal body servants or hired slaves working in camp could have picked up a gun and joined a battle at one point or another, there is no credible evidence to suggest that large numbers of them did so. Certainly, their numbers are statistically insignificant when compared with the thousands of black men who were forced to perform manual labor for the Confederate armies.

The Black Confederate and Faithful Slave movements were just "Lost Cause" marketing...

Here is one... marketing...

In 1894 The Confederate Veteran, a magazine edited and published by Confederate veterans of the Civil War, offered an op-ed proposing the erection of new statues throughout the South in honor of the “faithful” slaves who stayed behind on their enslavers’ properties during the war. To wit:

"It seems opportune now to erect monuments to the Negro race of the war period. The Southern people could not honor themselves more than in cooperating to this end. What figure would be looked upon with kindlier memory than old “Uncle Pete” and “Black Mammy,” well executed in bronze? By general cooperation models of the two might be procured and duplicates made to go in every capital city of the South at the public expense, and then in the other large cities by popular subscription . . . There is not of record in history subordination and faithful devotion by any race of people comparable to the slaves of the Southern people during our great four years’ war for independence."

Here is this...

In the early 1920s, the United Daughters of the Southern Confederacy lobbied congress to pass a bill for the construction of a National Mammy Monument. Having pushed for and been successful in constructing several such memorials throughout the south, the UDSC wanted ground broken in Washington, DC in order to pay tribute to the loyal female domestics of the South. The appropriation for the monument was passed in 1923 by the Senate, but stalled in the House of Representatives. The artist commissioned for the memorial was George Julian Zolany, and the finished product was envisioned as three white children assembled around a black maid who was seated. An elaborate fountain was also part of the design.

Here is the whole "Black Mammy" debate...

Robin Bernstein of Harvard University reviewed Micki McElya’s book. What she points out is directly related to this blog post:
Through prodigious research in the UDC archives, McElya has reconstructed the process by which the Daughters claimed that their “memories” of faithful slaves, especially mammies, gave them “specialized racial knowledge” (64). The Daughters constructed memories of benign servitude through dialect performances, “epistolary blackface”(59) in which white women wrote in the voices of mammies, and, in a most spectacular effort, a nearly successful push to establish a national monument to the mammy to stand “in the shadow of Lincoln’s memorial” in Washington, DC (116). The contest over mammy [End Page 151] memorials illuminates the competing, high-stakes concerns that intersected in this mythic figure: the UDC wanted the mammy memorial to substantiate their memories as “official ‘truth’” (118) and thus to authorize elite white women such as themselves as the guardians of antebellum American history. Furthermore, against the backdrop of labor unrest, race riots, lynching, and the Great Migration of African Americans from rural South to urban North, the UDC wanted to posit an imagined past through which to envision a future of racial harmony based on black subservience.

African Americans understood these stakes, and they responded in well-organized protests, which McElya tracks through the black press. African American newspapers argued that white fantasies of faithful slaves, particularly mammies, “did not stand in opposition to this violence [of lynching and other attacks on African Americans] but was very much a part of it” (160). The UDC claimed that their proposed memorial commemorated affection, and African American newspaper writers countered not by claiming that enslaved caregivers and white children never felt affection for each other, but instead that such affection “was itself a form of violence and that the memorialization campaign itself was deeply vicious” (161). New Negro writers and activists confounded the UDC and other mammy fantasists by honoring enslaved mothers who struggled, often to the point of self-sacrifice, to care for their own children despite impediments that included forced labor in white households. New Negro writers and political cartoonists also explicitly showed how fantasies of asexual physical intimacy between white child and black mammy masked white anxieties about another form of interracial congress: white men’s rape of enslaved African American women. For example, a political cartoon in the African American newspaper the Chicago Defender in April 1923, critiqued the mammy memorial by proposing a parallel “white daddy” statue in which a white man assaults an African American woman. Protests such as these successfully prevented the national mammy memorial from ever being built.

Think we almost had a national "Black Mammy" monument...

No effort to raise monuments to the 'Black Confederate' soldier?

 

[Andersonh1]

From Abbeville
https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/...ers-said-the-black-confederate-myth-examined/

I appreciate the questions, but very little so far actually addresses the arguments that are actually made. This is an examination of probable origins for the belief in black supporters of the CS, and when that began.

- "it bears repeating that the belief in black Confederate soldiers was not invented by white men desperate to downplay slavery and push “lost cause” history. It was based, at least in part, on two things: newspaper editors who were willing to publish the accounts, and the very public actions of the black population themselves. "

- "a belief in black Confederates has existed for as long as the history of the war has been written."​

 

[O' Be Joyful]

For example, a political cartoon in the African American newspaper the Chicago Defender in April 1923, critiqued the mammy memorial by proposing a parallel “white daddy” statue in which a white man assaults an African American woman.

I have searched endlessly and in vain for that "white daddy" cartoon, perhaps someone will have better "luck". But, I did find this one from The Chicago Defender:

View attachment 420

 

[jgoodguy]

- "a belief in black Confederates has existed for as long as the history of the war has been written."

That is very much unsupported. BCs in any form disappear in 1865 from the literature, with a couple of exceptions for 110 years until the 1970s. Their existence, therefore is discontinued and 'existed' is not correct.

 

[Andersonh1]

That is very much unsupported. BCs in any form disappear in 1865 from the literature, with a couple of exceptions for 110 years until the 1970s. Their existence, therefore is discontinued and 'existed' is not correct.

There are examples in the article from the 1860s through the 1890s. They did not "disappear".

 

[jgoodguy]

There are examples in the article from the 1860s through the 1890s. They did not "disappear".

Then they did "disappear" in 1890. The statement 'They did not "disappear".' is factually incorrect and that is before a detailed examination of the evidence.

For there to be no disappearance, there needs to be continuity into the mid 20th century especially in literature outside of newspapers.

 

[jgoodguy]

- "it bears repeating that the belief in black Confederate soldiers was not invented by white men desperate to downplay slavery and push “lost cause” history. It was based, at least in part, on two things: newspaper editors who were willing to publish the accounts, and the very public actions of the black population themselves.

Let's say the ancient Greeks invented something which was lost for 2,000 years, then independently rediscovered. When was it invented? For all practical purposes that something is a modern invention. Nothing in the world prevents independent inventions.

The other issue is that 'Black Confederates' are invented in the 1970s and folks went looking to prove they existed and found the Newpapers. The invention of 1861-5 had expired. There was no continuous tradition. No continuous invention.

What was the motive of the 1860-65 newspapers reports? How many reports were there against the 100s of millions of wartime reports written.

79849 results containing “confederate”
1 results containing “black confederate soldiers”
0 Results were found for the search “armed negro confederate soldiers”
22 results containing “negro confederate soldiers”

There does not seem to be much there there.

 

[Andersonh1]

79849 results containing “confederate”
1 results containing “black confederate soldiers”
0 Results were found for the search “armed negro confederate soldiers”
22 results containing “negro confederate soldiers”

There does not seem to be much there there.

I have collected over 1400 articles dealing with this topic.

 

[Andersonh1]

Then they did "disappear" in 1890. The statement 'They did not "disappear".' is factually incorrect and that is before a detailed examination of the evidence.

For there to be no disappearance, there needs to be continuity into the mid 20th century especially in literature outside of newspapers.

I have stories from post-war articles from 1865 through 1941 concerning these men. For much of that period many of the men were still alive and clearly known to some extent, given that their stories were printed.

 

[Andersonh1]

I have collected over 1400 articles dealing with this topic.

Just tabulated, and that's old numbers. I have a total of 1901 wartime articles and 420 post-war articles, for a total of 2300 stories. That's a lot of ink to spill over people who don't exist.

 

[5fish]

I have searched endlessly and in vain for that "white daddy" cartoon, perhaps someone will have better "luck". But, I did find this one from The Chicago Defender:

I found descriptions of the cartoons... so far... now you know what we are looking for...

Link: https://books.google.com/books?id=GH6LAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA43&lpg=PA43&dq=“white+daddy”+statue+in+which+a+white+man+assaults+an+African+American+woman&source=bl&ots=et6BCnartb&sig=ACfU3U1k5UVI1zOw55bg0GLB01iqkJhEmg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj9pO22xJLlAhXNjp4KHUR_CI0Q6AEwAXoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=“white daddy” statue in which a white man assaults an African American woman&f=false

I forgot just type in Chicago Defender Political cartoons and you get some poignant ones...

 

[O' Be Joyful]

I found descriptions of the statues... so far... now you know what we are looking for...

Link: https://books.google.com/books?id=GH6LAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA43&lpg=PA43&dq=“white+daddy”+statue+in+which+a+white+man+assaults+an+African+American+woman&source=bl&ots=et6BCnartb&sig=ACfU3U1k5UVI1zOw55bg0GLB01iqkJhEmg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj9pO22xJLlAhXNjp4KHUR_CI0Q6AEwAXoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=“white daddy” statue in which a white man assaults an African American woman&f=false

I forgot just type in Chicago Defender Political cartoons and you get some poignant ones...

The Mammy Washington Almost Had
In 1923, the U.S. Senate approved a new monument in D.C. "in memory of the faithful slave mammies of the South.


(snip, my bold)

What you probably won't picture is a massive slave woman, hewn from stone, cradling a white child atop a plinth in the nation's capital. Yet in 1923, the U.S. Senate authorized such a statue, "in memory of the faithful slave mammies of the South."

As a Southern Congressman stated in support of the monument: "The traveler, as he passes by, will recall that epoch of southern civilization" when "fidelity and loyalty" prevailed. "No class of any race of people held in bondage could be found anywhere who lived more free from care or distress."

Today, it seems incredible that Congress sanctioned a monument to so-called Faithful Slaves -- just blocks from the Lincoln Memorial, which had been dedicated only months earlier. But the monument to the Great Emancipator masked the nation's retreat from the "new birth of freedom" Lincoln had called for at Gettysburg, three score and ten years before. By 1923, Jim Crow laws, rampant lynching, and economic peonage had effectively reenslaved blacks in the South. Blacks who migrated north during and after World War One were greeted by the worst race riots in the nation's history. In the capital, Virginia-born President Woodrow Wilson had recently segregated federal facilities and screened Birth of a Nation at the White House. The overtly racist movie exalted the Ku Klux Klan, which peaked at two million members in the 1920s and won control of mayors' office and state legislatures across the land. ​

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/05/the-mammy-washington-almost-had/276431/

 

[5fish]

The Mammy Washington Almost Had

A Photo... of what would have been the mammy statue... http://mallhistory.org/items/show/512

In 1922, Congress received a proposal from the Washington, DC, chapter of the United Daughters of the Confederacy to create the "Faithful Slave Mammies of the South" memorial recognizing the supposed loyalty of enslaved women to their owners during the Civil War. African American newspapers, including the Chicago Defender condemned the proposal as an insult at a time when Congress was unwilling to pass laws protecting African Americans from lynching. The Senate approved the proposal in 1923, but pressure from citizens and the press prevented passage of the bill in the House, and the memorial was never built.

 

[jgoodguy]

Just tabulated, and that's old numbers. I have a total of 1901 wartime articles and 420 post-war articles, for a total of 2300 stories. That's a lot of ink to spill over people who don't exist.

Interesting, but a myth involves people who do not exist. Which is it 'Black Confederates' are real people with names and unit designations or fabrications?

2300 stories averaging 100 words per story(a generous estimate) is 230,000 words or about the size of Uncle Tom's Cabin(180,242 words). Davis' Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government has 2200 pages averaging 300 words per page or 660,000 words.
A search of 'petticoat' on

results in 2200 articles just in 1861 to 1865 and 22274 articles 1861-1890.

Raw statistics prove nothing.

 

[jgoodguy]

I have stories from post-war articles from 1865 through 1941 concerning these men. For much of that period many of the men were still alive and clearly known to some extent, given that their stories were printed.

Please present the articles as evidence.