Lorna, After reading your post on the list and the mentioning of colored infantry, I wanted to share something that many people don't realize, especially people who know very little about the war. During the war, the Union had regiments known as United States Colored Troops. In most cases, these units are shown by the abbreviation of USCT. These units were actually segregated, usually with the only white men being their commanding officers, although there were many black non-commissioned officers (sergeants & corporals) who served. The Confederates, on the other hand, did not segregate their troops and the men who served, no matter what race, creed, religion, color, or nationality, fought along side each other. Another point of interest is that the USCT were paid less than their white counterparts of the same ranks versus those in the Confederate Army who were all paid the same according to their rank. Although most Black Confederates served as body servants, cooks, teamsters, etc., there are many documented instances where Union soldiers wrote of being attacked by and fighting against Black Confederate soldiers. One example of this was in a diary written by a Union doctor who was captured behind enemy lines. In 1862 he observed the Army of Northern Virginia moving toward Sharpsburg and noted the following: "Wednesday, September 10 At 4 o'clock this morning the Rebel army began to move from our town, Jackson's force taking the advance. The movement continued until 8 o'clock P.M., occupying 16 hours. The most liberal calculation could not give them more than 64,000 men. Over 3,000 Negroes must be included in the number.... They had arms, rifles, muskets, sabers, bowie-knives, dirks, etc. They were supplied, in many instances with knapsacks, haversacks, canteens, etc., and they were manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederacy army. They were seen riding on horses and mules, driving wagons, riding on caissons, in ambulances, with the staff of generals and promiscuously mixed up with all the Rebel horde." Another example is from a letter that a Union soldier wrote home to his local newspaper in Indiana about his unit's exchange of fire with Black Confederates in the Fall of 1861. This one story ended up being printed in newspapers all over the North. "..a body of seven hundred Negro infantry opened fire on our men, wounding two lieutenants and two privates. The wounded men testify positively that they were shot by Negroes, and that not less than seven hundred were present, armed with muskets. This is, indeed, a new feature in the war. We have heard of a regiment of Negroes at Manassas, and another at Memphis, and still another at New Orleans, but did not believe it till it came so near home and attacked our men.... One of the lieutenants was shot in the back of the neck and is not expected to live." One of the most famous units of USCT was the Massachusetts 54th of which the movie "Glory" was made about. Although they volunteered to be the first to assault Battery Wagner in South Carolina, the sad fact is so many times, the Union used the USCT as cannon fodder with a prime example being the Crater at Petersburg. In my German GG Grandfather's memoirs, he noted the following about this: "After a short while the Yankees made a heavy charge against the break they had made. They charged with their Negroes in front, and the white Yankees behind them, with their bayonets fixed. It was certain death for a Negro not to advance upon the charge. Our Regiment, the 61st under the command of Major Henry Harding (one of my ancestors) was sent to assist in repelling the charge. When the Yankees attacked and our men found the attackers were Negroes, the cry of "No Quarter" was given. Men clubbed their rifles, others drove their bayonets through them. It was a fierce hand to hand fight. The poor Negroes would cry for quarter but no quarter they received. The whole were killed. It was a heavy slaughter. Some two thousand were killed or more." These are just a few facts about the war that many people are not aware of. If we're to study the history of this war, we must learn everything about it that we can, including, "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly." Actually, in so many of today's "modern" books on the war, the authors tend to give their personal opinions on what happened, omitting many details of what actually did happen. In my studies and research, I've found the best books to be older ones (pre 1990) along with diaries, memoirs, and other first hand accountings of what happened. To me, nothing can beat these first hand accountings of things that happened by those who were actually there. Lastly, as a local historian, I always try to abide by Cicero's statement in regard to history, which states, "The first law of the historian is that he shall never dare utter an untruth. The second is that he shall suppress nothing that is true. Moreover, there shall be no suspicion of partiality in his writing, or of malice." Its kind of like old Sergeant Joe Friday's line from the old Dragnet series...."Just state the facts, Maam." Edward