<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for GeneaBlogie</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.geneablogie.net/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.geneablogie.net</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:16:16 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Restore My Name:&#8221; The First Edition of the Carnival of African-American Genealogy by 1st Edition ~ Carnival of African-American Genealogy: Restore My Name – Slave Records &#38; Genealogy Research &#171; Our Georgia Roots &#124; Our Ancestors of Washington-Wilkes</title>
		<link>http://blog.geneablogie.net/2010/03/18/restore-my-name-the-first-edition-of-the-carnival-of-african-american-genealogy/comment-page-1/#comment-1592</link>
		<dc:creator>1st Edition ~ Carnival of African-American Genealogy: Restore My Name – Slave Records &#38; Genealogy Research &#171; Our Georgia Roots &#124; Our Ancestors of Washington-Wilkes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:16:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.geneablogie.net/?p=2426#comment-1592</guid>
		<description>[...] Craig Manson presents “Restore My Name:” The First Edition of the Carnival of African-American Genealogy posted at GeneaBlogie. Craig of GeneaBlogie thinks the budding dialogue between descendants of [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Craig Manson presents “Restore My Name:” The First Edition of the Carnival of African-American Genealogy posted at GeneaBlogie. Craig of GeneaBlogie thinks the budding dialogue between descendants of [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Black Confederates: Inconvenient Truth or Racist-inspired Revisionism? by Dorsey</title>
		<link>http://blog.geneablogie.net/2010/03/10/black-confederates/comment-page-1/#comment-1590</link>
		<dc:creator>Dorsey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 14:46:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.geneablogie.net/?p=2398#comment-1590</guid>
		<description>Welcome back Craig! Great article. A number of Black Confederates were actual slaveholders who were mostly likely fighting to protect their property which would be the case of of William Ellison (1790-1861) of Fairfield District, South Carolina. Ellison was a strong supporter of the Confederate cause. His eldest grandson, Buckner Ellison, fought in the 1st South Carolina Artillery in 1863, while his children invested their late father’s estate into the Confederate cause, buying bonds, treasury notes, certificates, and Confederacy currency in support of the war.

There are a variety of reasons why African Americans fought on the side of Confederate. 

On a side note, it was interesting to see the name Henry Marshall from De Soto Parish, Louisiana. He served as the guardian for the children of Edward Means, the brother of William B. Means. Edward owned my great great grandfather.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Welcome back Craig! Great article. A number of Black Confederates were actual slaveholders who were mostly likely fighting to protect their property which would be the case of of William Ellison (1790-1861) of Fairfield District, South Carolina. Ellison was a strong supporter of the Confederate cause. His eldest grandson, Buckner Ellison, fought in the 1st South Carolina Artillery in 1863, while his children invested their late father’s estate into the Confederate cause, buying bonds, treasury notes, certificates, and Confederacy currency in support of the war.</p>
<p>There are a variety of reasons why African Americans fought on the side of Confederate. </p>
<p>On a side note, it was interesting to see the name Henry Marshall from De Soto Parish, Louisiana. He served as the guardian for the children of Edward Means, the brother of William B. Means. Edward owned my great great grandfather.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Memorial Day 2009 by Womens History Month: Womens Airforce Service Pilots</title>
		<link>http://blog.geneablogie.net/2009/05/25/memorial-day-2009/comment-page-1/#comment-1588</link>
		<dc:creator>Womens History Month: Womens Airforce Service Pilots</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 02:34:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.geneablogie.net/?p=1561#comment-1588</guid>
		<description>[...] and updated from &#8220;Memorial Day 2009&#8243; which first appeared simultaneously at GeneaBlogie and The Peripatetic Graveyard Rabbit on May 25, [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] and updated from &#8220;Memorial Day 2009&#8243; which first appeared simultaneously at GeneaBlogie and The Peripatetic Graveyard Rabbit on May 25, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Black Confederates: Inconvenient Truth or Racist-inspired Revisionism? by Styln</title>
		<link>http://blog.geneablogie.net/2010/03/10/black-confederates/comment-page-1/#comment-1586</link>
		<dc:creator>Styln</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 02:40:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.geneablogie.net/?p=2398#comment-1586</guid>
		<description>Wow!  What an interesting and a great(photo)find.  It&#039;s such a great feeling to find photos of your ancestors in books and old newspaper articles.  This why I love Google Books and Google News.

I&#039;ve heard about the body slaves who were taken into war by their confederate masters.  I&#039;ve seen a couple of photos depicting that situation.  I&#039;d never heard of any volunteer Black or Mulatto confederates.

Your article alerted me to the fact that some of my Virginia &quot;Free Negro&quot; ancestors could very well have been Black/Mulatto confederates. Thanks so very much for sharing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow!  What an interesting and a great(photo)find.  It&#8217;s such a great feeling to find photos of your ancestors in books and old newspaper articles.  This why I love Google Books and Google News.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve heard about the body slaves who were taken into war by their confederate masters.  I&#8217;ve seen a couple of photos depicting that situation.  I&#8217;d never heard of any volunteer Black or Mulatto confederates.</p>
<p>Your article alerted me to the fact that some of my Virginia &#8220;Free Negro&#8221; ancestors could very well have been Black/Mulatto confederates. Thanks so very much for sharing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Black Confederates: Inconvenient Truth or Racist-inspired Revisionism? by Mavis</title>
		<link>http://blog.geneablogie.net/2010/03/10/black-confederates/comment-page-1/#comment-1582</link>
		<dc:creator>Mavis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 13:21:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.geneablogie.net/?p=2398#comment-1582</guid>
		<description>Great research on this subject. I&#039;m 49 and had always been taught there were no blacks serving in the confederacy. My mom has even said maybe if the confederacy had let blacks serve they would have won.

After all these years, when you first begin hearing that there actually were those that fought for the confederacy it&#039;s a little tough to wrap your mind around the idea.

I appreciate the balanced approach that you used in addressing the subject.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great research on this subject. I&#8217;m 49 and had always been taught there were no blacks serving in the confederacy. My mom has even said maybe if the confederacy had let blacks serve they would have won.</p>
<p>After all these years, when you first begin hearing that there actually were those that fought for the confederacy it&#8217;s a little tough to wrap your mind around the idea.</p>
<p>I appreciate the balanced approach that you used in addressing the subject.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Black Confederates: Inconvenient Truth or Racist-inspired Revisionism? by Diana Ritchie</title>
		<link>http://blog.geneablogie.net/2010/03/10/black-confederates/comment-page-1/#comment-1577</link>
		<dc:creator>Diana Ritchie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 13:46:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.geneablogie.net/?p=2398#comment-1577</guid>
		<description>Hi Craig ~
What a wonderful, balanced article!  I’m so glad you are back from your surgery and providing us such thoughtful, and thought-provoking, things to read :-)

I agree with Tim that I am generally turned off when people present theories – especially regarding events that they did not witness – as either/or.  I also agree that, while I believe that some blacks - regardless of whether we want to say &quot;many&quot; or &quot;few&quot; - served in the Confederacy of their own volition that does NOT serve to somehow justify either the Confederacy or even slavery itself.  It reminds me of another argument I’ve heard thrown into conversation, “Black people owned slaves too you know.”  Well yes, I do believe that to be true, but again, I fail to see why that somehow makes a difference in whether slavery was an inhuman institution.  

It sort of reminds me of people who want to dispute the number – 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust.  They are quick to point out that they DO believe that some numbers of Jews were killed.  THEY are not “Holocaust deniers.”  It’s just not 6 million.  I asked someone one time, “So, let’s just say it was a *mere* 600,000.  So now what?  Are the Nazis somehow not as bad?”  No real clear answer to that was forthcoming, just more argument about numbers etc.  I just had to walk away.

History can be emotional.  I have cried when I have read things about my family that aren’t nearly as horrific as being enslaved.  I would never want to take emotion out of history.  But surely there is a way to look at the history of what happened – to talk about something that isn’t “as tidy as we now would wish it to have been” – without slipping over into name-calling.  

Sorry for the long comment – when really all I’m trying to say is that I agree with you – and you did a much better job of saying it all!!!

Thanks!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Craig ~<br />
What a wonderful, balanced article!  I’m so glad you are back from your surgery and providing us such thoughtful, and thought-provoking, things to read <img src='http://blog.geneablogie.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>I agree with Tim that I am generally turned off when people present theories – especially regarding events that they did not witness – as either/or.  I also agree that, while I believe that some blacks &#8211; regardless of whether we want to say &#8220;many&#8221; or &#8220;few&#8221; &#8211; served in the Confederacy of their own volition that does NOT serve to somehow justify either the Confederacy or even slavery itself.  It reminds me of another argument I’ve heard thrown into conversation, “Black people owned slaves too you know.”  Well yes, I do believe that to be true, but again, I fail to see why that somehow makes a difference in whether slavery was an inhuman institution.  </p>
<p>It sort of reminds me of people who want to dispute the number – 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust.  They are quick to point out that they DO believe that some numbers of Jews were killed.  THEY are not “Holocaust deniers.”  It’s just not 6 million.  I asked someone one time, “So, let’s just say it was a *mere* 600,000.  So now what?  Are the Nazis somehow not as bad?”  No real clear answer to that was forthcoming, just more argument about numbers etc.  I just had to walk away.</p>
<p>History can be emotional.  I have cried when I have read things about my family that aren’t nearly as horrific as being enslaved.  I would never want to take emotion out of history.  But surely there is a way to look at the history of what happened – to talk about something that isn’t “as tidy as we now would wish it to have been” – without slipping over into name-calling.  </p>
<p>Sorry for the long comment – when really all I’m trying to say is that I agree with you – and you did a much better job of saying it all!!!</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Black Confederates: Inconvenient Truth or Racist-inspired Revisionism? by John</title>
		<link>http://blog.geneablogie.net/2010/03/10/black-confederates/comment-page-1/#comment-1576</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 12:18:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.geneablogie.net/?p=2398#comment-1576</guid>
		<description>Good article. I agree with both of your final two statements.

Tim - There is no doubt reading the secession statements by most of the legislatures - that the official reason was for slavery.  However, the reason individuals took up arms is another matter.  I can definitely see someone not understanding all the politics going on around them and just seeing the North attack their land.  I also can see illiterate slaves not being told what was going on, and voluntarily helping out when they saw the land attacked.

Per the League of the South quote, I definitely see arguments for and against racism, but there is no doubt in my mind that the SPLC is correct that it is a hate group.  The League of the South feels everyone in the South should follow the gospel of Christ.  That is hate.  A different hate, but it still qualifies.

Here&#039;s the Southern Poverty Law Center&#039;s page on The League of the South:

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/league-of-the-south</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good article. I agree with both of your final two statements.</p>
<p>Tim &#8211; There is no doubt reading the secession statements by most of the legislatures &#8211; that the official reason was for slavery.  However, the reason individuals took up arms is another matter.  I can definitely see someone not understanding all the politics going on around them and just seeing the North attack their land.  I also can see illiterate slaves not being told what was going on, and voluntarily helping out when they saw the land attacked.</p>
<p>Per the League of the South quote, I definitely see arguments for and against racism, but there is no doubt in my mind that the SPLC is correct that it is a hate group.  The League of the South feels everyone in the South should follow the gospel of Christ.  That is hate.  A different hate, but it still qualifies.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s the Southern Poverty Law Center&#8217;s page on The League of the South:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/league-of-the-south" rel="nofollow">http://www.splcenter.org/get-i.....-the-south</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Black Confederates: Inconvenient Truth or Racist-inspired Revisionism? by Tim Agazio</title>
		<link>http://blog.geneablogie.net/2010/03/10/black-confederates/comment-page-1/#comment-1575</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Agazio</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:04:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.geneablogie.net/?p=2398#comment-1575</guid>
		<description>Craig,

Great article, and welcome back!  I don&#039;t think we should doubt the presence of &quot;Black Confederate[s].&quot;  Both my father-in-law and an old Army buddy told me their ancestors weren&#039;t slave owners and weren&#039;t fighting for slavery.  They were fighting to protect their homes and families from the invading North.  Maybe that&#039;s also revisionism in an attempt to feel better about their ancestors, but it could be true.  I think it&#039;s entirely possible some black people living in the South felt the same way.

I always reject theories that are all or nothing...the human condition always guarantees those frustrating shades of gray and blurred lines.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Craig,</p>
<p>Great article, and welcome back!  I don&#8217;t think we should doubt the presence of &#8220;Black Confederate[s].&#8221;  Both my father-in-law and an old Army buddy told me their ancestors weren&#8217;t slave owners and weren&#8217;t fighting for slavery.  They were fighting to protect their homes and families from the invading North.  Maybe that&#8217;s also revisionism in an attempt to feel better about their ancestors, but it could be true.  I think it&#8217;s entirely possible some black people living in the South felt the same way.</p>
<p>I always reject theories that are all or nothing&#8230;the human condition always guarantees those frustrating shades of gray and blurred lines.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Black Confederates: Inconvenient Truth or Racist-inspired Revisionism? by Denise Olson</title>
		<link>http://blog.geneablogie.net/2010/03/10/black-confederates/comment-page-1/#comment-1574</link>
		<dc:creator>Denise Olson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 10:19:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.geneablogie.net/?p=2398#comment-1574</guid>
		<description>Fascinating article. I have notes that several former slaves from one of my Confederate ancestors stayed with the family after the war - probably a matter of survival since this was an area decimated by Sherman&#039;s troops. I don&#039;t have any information yet on what this ancestor was doing during the war other than her fiancé died in a Union POW camp.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fascinating article. I have notes that several former slaves from one of my Confederate ancestors stayed with the family after the war &#8211; probably a matter of survival since this was an area decimated by Sherman&#8217;s troops. I don&#8217;t have any information yet on what this ancestor was doing during the war other than her fiancé died in a Union POW camp.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Lewis LeJay (1835-1921) by Black Confederates: Inconvenient Truth or Racist-inspired Revisionism?</title>
		<link>http://blog.geneablogie.net/2010/02/20/lewis-lejay-1835-1921/comment-page-1/#comment-1571</link>
		<dc:creator>Black Confederates: Inconvenient Truth or Racist-inspired Revisionism?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 01:43:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.geneablogie.net/?p=2380#comment-1571</guid>
		<description>[...] The photograph of my second great-grandfather was in a book titled Black Confederates (Pelican Publishing 2001), which its editors and publisher  tout as a compilation of historical accounts, photographs and documents relating to blacks who served with rebel forces in the Civil War.  Lewis LeJay (1835-1921) is described in the book through an account given by Francis Chandler Furman, a Missouri geologist, who says he heard the story in 1970 from his father Greene Chandler Furman, who in turn heard it from his father, Francis Scrimzeuor Furman, who is the white man in military uniform standing next to Lewis LeJay in the photo. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The photograph of my second great-grandfather was in a book titled Black Confederates (Pelican Publishing 2001), which its editors and publisher  tout as a compilation of historical accounts, photographs and documents relating to blacks who served with rebel forces in the Civil War.  Lewis LeJay (1835-1921) is described in the book through an account given by Francis Chandler Furman, a Missouri geologist, who says he heard the story in 1970 from his father Greene Chandler Furman, who in turn heard it from his father, Francis Scrimzeuor Furman, who is the white man in military uniform standing next to Lewis LeJay in the photo. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
