Wednesday, October 9, 2019
Sunday, July 28, 2019
Kevin Levin (A "historian" in denial)
I've written a couple of blogs about Mr. Levin (the expert on the American Civil War) if you count re-writing history as being an expertise these days. My publisher has insisted that I become more active on social media and my wife has forced me to learn new things. One new thing she has introduced me to is something called twitter. My wife went and subscribed me to everyone that tweets on the Civil War and other history. That's how I came to hear the garbage that Mr. Levin is posting on social media.
He has written a book about the myth of the black Confederate soldier and I'm sure it's as accurate as the garbage he put out in his book on the Battle of the Crater. Mr. Levin doesn't allow the truth to get in the way of his version of history. I recently received a tweet from Mr. Levin with a picture of a black Confederate soldier sitting next to a young white lady at a Confederate reunion. Mr. Levin immediately tells his followers that "this individual showed up at a Confederate reunion in Tampa, Florida." Well, Mr. "Lying" Levin, you are wrong again. This individual happened to show up at a Confederate reunion in Memphis, Tennessee. He had his photograph taken with the granddaughter of the colonel of the regiment which happens to be the 5th Alabama Cavalry. This man is Reuben Patterson of Florence, Alabama.
As he was known in North Alabama "Uncle" Reuben Patterson
This is probably over Kevin Levin's head, but in the South, if one is respected he is called "Uncle." This is what "Uncle" Reuben was called following the war. Once the war ended, Reuben ran a bootblack stand. His chairs, boot polish, and boot stands were purchased for him by the Daughters of the Confederacy. Uncle Reuben loved to tell tales of his war service. He often foraged for the colonel, and the colonel actually stated that he never worried about having a horse or food as long as Reuben was well. He also served as bugler of the regiment or as Reuben called it "the horn blower."
Uncle Reuben didn't just attend his regimental reunion, but was known to attend state and national reunions. His wife once stated that Reuben was the most unreconstructed Rebel around. Fortunately, Uncle Reuben's bugle, hat, and bootblack stand are preserved in Pope's Tavern Museum in Florence, Alabama. Also preserved in the museum is a photograph of a Confederate reunion held in Florence with several black Confederate's posing beside the white Confederate veterans.
About a mile from Pope's Tavern is the Florence City Cemetery where Uncle Reuben rests today. As per his request, he is buried beneath a marker designated for only Confederate soldiers. Beside him rests another black Confederate and the Sons of Confederate Veterans camp in Florence keeps a Confederate battle flag on these graves in their honor.
Grave of Uncle Reuben in Florence City Cemetery
Now I've had numerous discussions with these New England "historians" about there being black Confederate soldiers. They always bring the subject around to these men are not listed on a muster role of the regiment so therefore they are not soldiers. If you go into battle (in cavalry regiments the bugler had to go into battle to sound the various orders to the troopers), do you think a bullet cares if you have your name on a piece of paper? The next thing they tell me is that these men were body servants and cooks. Well, I used to work with a guy that served in Vietnam a year as a cook. Although the United States Army calls him a veteran, by the New England "historians" perspective, he wasn't even a soldier. I mean you can't have it both ways.
Another question I would like answered is this: If these men weren't soldiers, why were they given Confederate pensions? In order for a white Confederate to receive a pension, he had to prove he served faithfully, and never deserted. Do you think the states in the financial shape they were in following the war would give these men money without proof of service?
There is the story of captured Federal prisoners at Murfreesboro being whacked over the head with a saber by a black man named Jake. These men were terrified to be captured thinking the Confederate soldiers might kill them. Jake advancing with the 8th Arkansas Infantry whacked these prisoners on the head and shouted, "You ought to get home, then!" I'm sure Jake wasn't a soldier, he probably just picked up a saber to beat his liberators over the head with (makes New England sense I guess).
Allow me to tell you another story of a black servant that also lived in Florence, Alabama when the war began. When William "Billy" Patton entered Confederate service, his best friend as a boy was a servant the same age and owned by Billy's father. This servant was named Sam. Sam promised Billy's mother that he would go to war with Billy and if anything should happen to his best friend he would bring the body home. William A. Patton was elected a lieutenant in Company C, 16th Alabama Infantry. At the Battle of Shiloh, the regiment was part of General Wood's Brigade. Wood was also from Florence, Alabama. Advancing past Shiloh Church the unit overran Waterhouse's artillery battery near Water Oaks Pond. During this assault, Lieutenant Billy Patton was killed. Sam brought the body back to the church and remained with it during the night. The next morning Sam found a mule and began the long road back to Corinth where he could place Billy's body on a train back to Alabama.
During the day, the Confederate army began its retreat to Corinth and coming upon Sam and his best friend's body, they confiscated his mule because they needed all they could get to pull off the wagons, captured artillery, etc. Sam would not let that stop him from keeping his promise, but placed William's body over his shoulder and continued to Corinth. He delivered the body to his home which is called the "Sweetwater Mansion." Thanks to Sam, Billy's funeral was held in the parlor of the home. The house still stands there today.
Now New England "historians" have a hard time understanding the South. Most know very little about how life was here, yet they can sit and proclaim how evil the South was and how holy the north was without daring to research their subject. They rely on presentism. Using modern standards to judge history. This is extremely unfair. One more question they can never seem to answer for me is this: If slavery were so bad and harsh, why didn't the slaves rise up in rebellion when Lincoln issued his emancipation proclamation? With all the white men gone to war, this would have helped the Union win the war, yet it never happened. This was one of Lincoln's hopes when he issued his proclamation. He was losing a war that was quickly becoming unpopular in the north. People were growing tired of the long casualty lists. Newspaper reporters were jailed for speaking the truth. Members of state legislatures (Maryland) were arrested in the dead of night. The largest mass execution of 38 Native Americans by the U.S. Government in 1862. Yet the New England "historian" ignores all the things that portray his side of the fight as evil. Thus Kevin Levin.
Tuesday, February 5, 2019
Robert Selden Garnett
Robert S. Garnett was born in Essex County, Virginia in 1819. Robert graduated from the United States Military Academy in 1841 ranked 27th out of 52 cadets. Despite his lower ranking, he was placed in the artillery. Most graduates ranked outside the top ten ended up in the infantry. Garnett did eventually become an infantry officer where he served during the Mexican War. Twice he was praised for his bravery there. Robert was the first cousin of Richard Brooke Garnett who would also become a Confederate brigadier general and would lose his life at Gettysburg.
Prior to the Civil War, Robert would see more action against the Native Americans of Puget Sound. In 1857, he married Marianne Nelson and a year later they had a son named Arthur Nelson Garnett. Both Marianne and Arthur would come down with what was then termed "bilious fever" and both died. Marianne was from New York and both were laid to rest in Green-Wood Cemetery in Brooklyn, New York. Marianne was twenty-six years old. Arthur was seven months old and outlived his mother by six days.
When the Civil War began, Garnett was made a brigadier general and sent to western Virginia where he was given command of green troops, poorly armed, and heavily outnumbered. Before leaving Richmond, Virginia for his command, Garnett had told a friend, "They have not given me an adequate force. I can do nothing. They have sent me to my death."
Upon arriving at his command, he attempted to extricate them from the mountains and back to the Shenandoah Valley. The Federals under McClellan were pursuing the Confederate force. Garnett personally managed his rearguard during the retreat. Rains had turned the roads into a mess. Upon reaching a place called Corrick's Ford on the Cheat River, Garnett attempted to fight another rearguard action here to delay his pursuers. He placed the 23rd Virginia Infantry on the shore under future Brigadier General William B. Taliaferro.
The Federals arrived and were repulsed two times by Taliaferro's regiment. Garnett was recommending a position to place skirmishers when several Federal soldier's opened fire. Garnett's aide Sam Gaines was mounted at his side and ducked the shots. Garnett scolded his assistant for dodging bullets. During the war, commanding officer's had to inspire their soldiers by standing bravely while bullets passed close by. Gaines apologized saying he felt the wind of the bullet and it caused him to flinch. Garnett quickly changed his tone and spoke compassionately to Gaines about how an officer should act in combat.
The Federals quickly closed to within fifty yards of Garnett's position. He ordered his skirmishers to fall back as a bullet struck him in the back. He fell from the saddle and Gaines attempted to pick him up and place him back on his horse. About to be captured, he climbed into the saddle and galloped away, leaving Garnett to the mercy of the Federals. He died a few moments later. Some reports stated that his body actually fell off the horse into the Cheat River. One Federal soldier reported finding Garnett just moments before he died and hearing the general say that he believed he'd been accidentally killed by friendly fire.
General McClellan praised the gallant conduct of Garnett in this action and had his body placed on ice and sent through Confederate lines to be given to his family for a descent burial. Ironically, his body would pass back through Federal lines where he would temporarily be buried in Green Mount Cemetery in Baltimore, Maryland. Just after the war, he was reinterred beside his wife and son in Green-Wood Cemetery in Brooklyn, New York. Robert Selden Garnett was 41 years old. Had he not been killed there is little doubt that he would have attained higher rank because General Robert E. Lee had great confidence in Garnett's ability. He may have become one of Lee's best corps commander's had he lived. We will never know.
Obelisk over the grave of Garnett, his wife, and son
Saturday, February 2, 2019
Judge Michael Graffeo of Birmingham proudly wedding same sex couples
You of course know the rule about lawyers, politicians, and of course judges (they are lawyers also). They will do anything for a dollar and a vote is a dollar. Now follow closely where I'm going with this blog.
Pretend your father was called on by his government (the state of Alabama) to go fight a war against an invading force. Let's pretend your father was a poor farmer who could barely own shoes, but he went to war because his state asked him to. The war was four long bloody years and he either got sick or was killed in combat. What could make a person more proud than for his family member to have given his life fighting for his home, his country.
Now you need to fast forward a hundred and fifty years and find that a certain group of people have twisted what your father fought for. They've made him appear to be evil. They hate what and who he fought for. Pretend this group is a minority group that cries all the time about how mistreated they are and what the majority group owes them. Then throw in some spineless politican or lawyer just like Judge Michael Graffeo of Birmingham, Alabama. He is know to stir controversy to get attention and a vote, the laws of the government be damned because he needs a vote. Now a monument was raised to your father and others who gave his life for the state of Alabama. The state passes a law protecting all historical monuments, but Judge Graffeo (a liberal democrat if that happens to surprise anyone) rules in court that Alabama law is null and void in Birmingham, Alabama.
Well, isn't that ironic? Judge Graffeo just proved the state of Alabama and everyone else that fought the Federal government in that war were correct and that anyone can declare law void that wants to. So, I should say I am declaring my personal property free of any government laws just like Judge Graffeo has done. I'm not paying income taxes, property taxes, or any other taxes because I just declared those tax laws unconstitutional.
Now remember this about lawyers. They ask these young men to go fight a war for them and then later turn on them. They turn on the very soldiers that they sent to fight. You can't be any more of a coward than that. Judge Graffeo is a typical "kiss ass" attorney attempting to weaken this country by kissing up to those that will give him what he wants. This is why I could never be a politician. I have too much dignity and morals to do the things they are willing to do. A prostitute would be more honorable.
Now you must wonder why the state of Alabama is broke. We are paying legislaturer's to make laws and after they spend a year finally getting it pushed through, one judge decides to take it upon himself to rule it unconstitutional. How stupid is this republic? Pretty damned stupid. I've just learned that a Revolutionary War monument was vandalized in Wilkesboro, North Carolina and even more ridiculous is the fact that the state of Texas are passing around the idea of renaming the state capitol of Austin. Austin is named after Stephen F. Austin. Some people are offended by the city being named after this man (imagine someone being offended today).
Stephen F. Austin
Stephen Austin is called the "Father of Texas." Born in 1793 in Virginia, Austin was a politician who took 300 people and settled in Texas. He eventually became Secretary of State of Texas and periodically during his life he owned slaves. The man had conflicting views on slavery and hoped Texas would eventually abolish the practice. Fast foward to today and they want to change the name of the capitol of the state he helped found. Things are just going to get worse.
I told my buddy Tommy Hubbert that in our lifetime we will probably see Washington, D.C. changed to something else. I'm guessing it will be called Lincoln, D.C., Obama, D.C., or perhaps MLK, D.C. Everything in this country white needs to be erradicated. As congressman Mo Brooks said, "This country has declared war on white people."
Friday, January 11, 2019
Jane Dailey of the University of Chicago
During my last blog we discussed how the Northern politically correct historians change the truth to suit their agenda's. We talked about how Jane Dailey (shown above) changed the historical painting entitled "Lee and His Generals" to suit her agenda. She either doesn't know that only corps and army commanders were pictured in the painting, not brigade and division commanders or she is ignorant of what she claims to be a historian of. She claims that William Mahone was left out purposefully because he attempted to take care of the black race following the war. I was speaking with a colleague recently and stated, "You would think a professor of history would understand why a division commander would be missing from a painting of all corps and army commanders. After all, the greatest division commander in the Confederacy was Patrick R. Cleburne and he wasn't in the painting." My friend replied, "You would think, but most historians today don't have a clue. They write to make their side of the argument sound legitimate."
Mrs. Dailey could have written about General Pierre Gustave Toutant Beauregard of New Orleans who was an army commander and was in the painting. Following the war, he fought to help blacks obtain equal rights and what "thanks" did he get for that? Well, the mayor of New Orleans had his monument removed from public places. So, there you go, write a story about that one Mrs. Dailey.
To add to their view of Southerners we need to read Kevin Levin's blog post asking if the Sons of Confederate Veterans truly want to restore the home of William Mahone. The home in question is William Mahone's boyhood home in Courtland, Virginia. Levin (an obvious psychic who knows what people are planning in the future) states that the S.C.V. will no doubt interpret the story about Mahone's pre-war career while ignoring his post-war career. Hey Kevin, perhaps you can avert some future murders and save lives since you already know what a group is planning to do in the future.
The problem with these modern day "northern historians" is the fact that they think all Southerner's are ignorant and only a "Yankee" can be intelligent. They don't understand that the S.C.V. has a charge to remember those who fought for the Southern states. It has nothing to do with post-war politics or racism. There happen to be black S.C.V. members as bad as that galls the "northern historians." Even Levin states that Mahone would not want the Sons of Confederate Veterans in his home. Since Levin knows so much about what all these people from the war wanted, perhaps he can channel General Robert E. Lee and ask him what his thought process was before deciding on Pickett's Charge. It would be a great help to the true historians that only deal with the facts, not assumptions that fit our agenda.
What these modern day revisionist historians from Chicago and Boston fail to tell everyone is the fact that race relations in the South would have always been favorable if not for the interference of northerners. Why did things go wrong following the war between the races. To start with, the republican northern congress wanted to maintain control of congress and by doing so, they outlawed anyone associated with the Confederacy from voting. That meant all male's above the voting age in the South. They allowed uneducated blacks the right to vote and hold office and make a complete shamble of the Southern economy. This is where the trouble began. The black race was taken advantage of by northern politicians for their own benefit (imagine any politician doing something like that if you can). I hear the "northern politically correct historian laughing at me already," but I can provide examples to the fact behind this.
When the republicans came to power in South Carolina following four long bloody years of warfare, the state debt stood at 5.4 million dollars. That doesn't sound like a lot of money today, but let's see what happened following the republicans placing uneducated blacks in the state legislature. Once reconstruction ended in a time of peace, that debt had gone from 5.4 million dollars to 18.5 million dollars. Guess who had their taxes raised to pay for all this graft? The white race that had recently been made poor by four years of a losing war. How long did it take South Carolina to repay the 18.5 million dollar debt? It was after World War II, but don't tell these modern northern historians because they can just pretend none of this happened.
Let us look at these people the Federal government placed in power in the South Carolina legislature during this time. Of 63 members in 1868, 50 were black and 13 were white. Of the 63 members, only 22 could read, 8 could write correctly, and 41 had to make a mark for their signature. Only 19 were tax paying members of society and yet they voted to levy $4000.00 worth of taxes on each white person in the state. That is poor white people who had lost everything in the bloody Civil War. Why are these facts never mentioned by these modern "northern revisionist historians?" I think we already know the answer.
Sunday, January 6, 2019
Major General William Mahone
I was recently doing what I do best and that was studying information on Confederate generals. I came across an article that would have made me laugh if it wasn't for the fact that most people will read what this woman has written and believe it. The lady's name is Jane Dailey, an associate professor of history at the University of Chicago (of course). She begins her article mentioning attending a conference in Charleston, South Carolina. She had gone to an old marketplace to browse the shops for a souvenir for her son. She complained that all she could find was "Confederate memorabilia." That was when she noticed a painting (one of which I have hanging in my living room at this moment) called "Lee and His Generals."
Allow me to quote her directly here. "Inspecting it, I saw that something-or rather, someone-was missing. I was looking for a tiny, bearded, Major General, a divisional commander who was with Lee at Appomattox and who shared in the decision to surrender that April day in 1865. I was looking for General William Mahone of Virginia, and I did not find him because he was not there.....How did such a high-ranking Confederate commander wind up missing in action in a Charleston gift shop? Not, I think, by accident."
She then proceeds to say that Mahone has been erased from Confederate history because of his association with African Americans following the war. Now, one would think a professor of history would be able to study this painting and figure out why Billy Mahone isn't in it. It has absolutely nothing to do with what he did following the war or for any reason that Jane Dailey has come up with.
Lee and His Generals
Allow me to introduce the painting to you. "Lee and His Generals" was painted by G.B. Matthews and was copyrighted in 1907. Jane Dailey is correct, you will not find William Mahone in the picture. Would you like to know the real reason why? Any historian worth their salt will quickly figure the answer out without writing a dishonest article to fit what they want history to read like. Let's see why Major General Mahone isn't in the picture. From left to right are the top commanders in the Confederacy. In the Confederate Army, General's commanded army's, Lieutenant General's commanded corps, Major General's commanded divisions, and Brigadier General's commanded brigades. From left to right in the painting are General John Bell Hood (commander of the Army of Tennessee in 1864), Lieutenant General Richard Stoddard Ewell (commanded a corps in Lee's Army), General Braxton Bragg (commanded the Army of Tennessee from 1862-1863), General Albert Sidney Johnston (commanded the Army of Mississippi from 1861 to 1862), Lieutenant General Wade Hampton (commanded Lee's Cavalry Corps late in the war), General Edmund Kirby Smith (commanded all forces west of the Mississippi), Lieutenant General Jubal Anderson Early (commanded a corps under Lee in 1864), Lieutenant General Ambrose Powell Hill (commanded a corps under Lee from 1863 until his death in 1865), Lieutenant General Richard Heron Anderson (commanded a corps in Lee's army in 1864 and ironically Mr. Matthew's painted the wrong general here, he accidentally painted Virginia Brigadier General Joseph Anderson), Major General John Brown Gordon (commanded a corps in Lee's army at the end of the war), Lieutenant General Theophilus Holmes (commanded a corps in Arkansas), Lieutenant General William J. Hardee (commanded a corps in the Army of Tennessee), General Joseph E. Johnston (commanded the Army of Northern Virginia and the Army of Tennessee), Lieutenant General Simon B. Buckner (commanded a corps in the Army of Tennessee), Lieutenant General James Longstreet (commanded a corps in Lee's army), Lieutenant General Leonidas Polk (commanded a corps in the Army of Tennessee until his death in 1864), General Robert E. Lee (commanded the Army of Northern Virginia and in 1865 became commander of all Confederate armed forces), Lieutenant General Nathan Bedford Forrest (commanded a cavalry corps in Tennessee), General P.G.T. Beauregard (commanded the Army of Tennessee), Lieutenant General Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson (commanded a corps in Lee's army), General Samuel Cooper (the highest ranked general in the Confederacy), Major General Jeb Stuart (commanded the cavalry corps of Lee's army until his death in 1864), Lieutenant General Richard Taylor (commanded a corp in Louisiana), Lieutenant General John C. Pemberton (commanded the army at Vicksburg), and Lieutenant General D.H. Hill (commanded a corps in the Army of Tennessee).
I'm sorry the list is so long, but any true historian will readily notice why William Mahone is not in the picture. Each commander above commanded at least a corps or an army. Division commanders are not pictured at all. William Mahone was not ranked high enough to warrant his picture being in the painting because he never commanded more than a division. There are two major generals pictured above. Major General Jeb Stuart who commanded Lee's cavalry corps and would have eventually been promoted lieutenant general had he not been killed in the spring of 1864. The other is Major General John B. Gordon who also commanded a corps in Lee's Army in 1865. Had the war lasted longer, he no doubt would have been promoted. He actually claimed to have been promoted to lieutenant general in his memoirs, but he signed his parole at Appomattox as major general. There are other major general's who commanded corps for brief and long stretches during the war who did not get their pictures in the painting. Major General Benjamin F. Cheatham commanded a corps in the Army of Tennessee for over six months, yet he didn't get his picture in the painting and he deserves his image there more than Mahone. Major General Patrick Cleburne (one of the Confederacy's top generals also commanded a corps briefly, yet he is not in the painting. You would think a historian would understand this, but it doesn't help sell her story to admit the truth.
There is another sly falsehood that she slips into the story and figures it will not be noticed. Allow me to quote her again. "After the war, Robert E. Lee recalled that, when contemplating a successor, he thought that Mahone 'had developed the highest qualities for organization and command.'" Now General Lee did make the above statement about General Mahone's ability as a commander, but did he seriously contemplate making Mahone his successor? This was written by General Mahone and he quoted Lee after the war as making this statement to Lieutenant General Wade Hampton in which he overheard the remark.
I'm not calling General Mahone a liar, it is quite possible that General Lee made this statement as a compliment to General Mahone's leadership abilities. General Lee was a product of the old army. He better than anyone understood that a division commander does not have near the responsibility as a corps or army commander. I find it hard to believe that Lee would have wanted to promote a division commander to command of the army above all his corps commanders. We also know that General Lee thought highly of the ability of James Longstreet, who was ranked just behind Lee in the Army of Northern Virginia. There is more information about who Lee wanted to succeed him should he fall. Late in the war, after assigning Major General John B. Gordon to corps command, Lee came to respect his ability at such responsibility. Lee respected Gordon so much, that on his last two offensives (Fort Stedman and Appomattox), Lee entrusted these important attacks to his new corps commander. Lee went so far as to tell Confederate President Jefferson Davis that if he were to be killed that he thought it best for the Confederacy and the army for John B. Gordon to be given command. He didn't mention General Mahone at all during the war as a likely successor. There was nothing General Mahone had ever done to warrant jumping two grades to army command.
Furthermore, at Gettysburg, the attack was made en echelon from right to left. This means that one division would advance and strike the enemy and hopefully when the Federal army shifted reinforcements from one sector to assist in the defense, the next division would advance into a gap in the line, thus breaking the Federal army. The assault began with Hood's division, then McLaws's division, followed by Richard Anderson's division. Pender's division was slated to advance following Anderson's, yet this never occurred. A brigade commander in Anderson's division dropped the ball. This man seemed to lose his nerve and never advanced, causing the en echelon attack to stall. Pender's division never entered the battle because of one man and that man was General William Mahone. Jane Dailey fails to mention this failure in her article of pure praise for General Mahone.
I am in no way downplaying General Mahone's ability as a commander. No one knows why he lost his nerve at Gettysburg, but as a division commander fighting around his home town of Petersburg, he was excellent. He understood the ground there because of his work with the railroad before the war. Mahone understood how to use every defile to move his troops into a position to catch the Federal's unexpectedly. General Mahone was a fine combat commander. I will go into more on Jane Dailey, Kevin Levine, and William Mahone in part 2 of this blog.