I have seen the supposed Ed Bearrs quotation before, but I have never seen its original source. In any case Bearrs is correct that black history was largely ignored or discredited in the US in the latter part of the 19th century and early 20th century. Teddy Roosevelt is a fairly good example, as during the Spanish-American War he celebrated the achievements of black volunteer soldiers, only to virtually ignore them in the years after the war. Gary Gerstle's book "American Crucible" is a good study of this phenomenon in US history.

In any case, neither Bearrs' comment or Jordan's book (from what I've read from it or about it) proves the claim that thousands of blacks voluntarily fought for the Confederacy.

There is no doubt that thousands of blacks labored in various forms for the Confederacy. After all, there were around 4 million slaves in the South to perform labor. Unfortunately, some people have blended the line between coerced black labor and idealistic black service. As Levine, and even Ervin Jordan, writes, many (likely most) slaves served in various roles for the Confederate armies (as laborers, cooks, mule drivers, etc.) for self-interest. This self-interest often included an opportunity to escape (which happened hundreds, if not thousands of times) and an attempt to gain favor, and perhaps more lenient treatment, from Southern whites. Bruce Levine quotes escaped Virginia slave Joseph T. Wilson's account of blacks in Confederate lines. Wilson recalled that, "The negro who boasted the loudest of his desire to fight the Yankees, who showed the greatest anxiety to aid the Confederates, was granted the most freedom and received the approval of his master." (quoted in Levine, "Black Confederates," _North & South_ 10, no. 2 (July 2007): 42)

Now, certainly there were examples of slaves and servants who, through an emotional attachment to their masters or the like, displayed genuine concern for the Confederate cause. But the idea that tens of thousands (as the 37th Texas website claims) of blacks enthusiastically served and fought for the Confederacy flies in the face of available evidence.

Consider the two most well-documented cases of Southern black units---the Louisiana Native Guards and the last-ditch black unit raised in Richmond at the end of the war. The Louisiana troops were volunteers in well-organized military units that offered their services to the Confederacy. These men were free blacks, often "mulattoes," who enjoyed a level of freedom not found anywhere else in the South. This group, far from being absolutely devoted to the Confederacy, was primarily concerned with maintaining their status and protecting their local interests. In any case, the Confederacy turned them down. So, when Union forces occupied New Orleans, these black soldiers promptly offered to fight for the Union (which was, eventually, accepted).

The last-ditch effort by some officials in Richmond to organize black soldiers also demonstrates the problem with the idea of widespread black enthusiasm for the Confederacy. Lee and Davis, who came to approve of the plan, both agreed that emancipation would be allowed to volunteers. Lee even wrote to John C. Breckenridge on March 15, 1865 that unless blacks were guaranteed freedom, "we shall get no volunteers." (Levine, 43)

If those individuals, like Cleburne, and Lee, and eventually Davis, all agreed that freedom was a ncessary reward for black military service, then the idea that Southern blacks enthusiastically served the Confederacy without such promises throughout the war falls apart.

Finally, the idea that slavery wasn't the "hot button" issue at the beginning of the war cannot stand. One must only look at the proposed compromises introduced by concerned Americans during the secession crisis to realize what was at stake. The Crittenden Compromise is a particularly good example. The planks of that compromise ALL deal with slavery.