Talk:1st South Carolina Volunteer Infantry Regiment (Colored)

Dead link
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!


 * http://mac110.assumption.edu/aas/Manuscripts/higginson.html
 * In 1st South Carolina Volunteers (Union) on 2011-05-25 06:54:32, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
 * In 1st South Carolina Volunteers (Union) on 2011-06-10 04:22:04, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'

--JeffGBot (talk) 04:22, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

drafted or volunteered
i have read.. i think.. there was an initial draft.. that caused concern by gullah that all men were to be taken to serve..

1st SC was NOT first "official" black regiment in the Union army
It is incorrect to say that the 1st SC Volunteers, mustered in on January 31, 1863, was the first "official" black regiment in the Union army. A similar argument has been made elsewhere that the 54th Massachusetts, mustered in on May 13, 1863, was the first "official" black regiment in the Union army, to the exclusion of the South Carolina unit (as well as other black units). None of these assertions have defined what is meant by "official." To the extent a military unit was mustered in the Union army, it was just as "official" as any other regiment. Thus, the 1st Regiment Kansas Volunteer Infantry (Colored) -- a Northern regiment in every sense of the word, mustered in federal service on January 13, 1863 -- alluded to in the current version of the article, preceded by some weeks the 1st South Carolina, and by four months the 54th Massachusetts. Moreover, the 1st Kansas was actually fighting in the field by early fall 1862, before the 1st SC or 54th MA. However, because of political controversy surrounding the use of federal black units in the North, it wasn't "officially" mustered in the Union army until early January 1863. Dyer's authoritative Compendium of the War of the Rebellion documents all the foregoing, and is reproduced in the federal Civil War Soldiers and Sailors database. For the entry regarding the 1st Kansas (later re-designated the 79th U.S. Colored Troops), see: http://www.nps.gov/civilwar/search-battle-units-detail.htm?battleUnitCode=UUS0079RI02C Therefore, I am amending the sentences of the article that dismiss the 1st Kansas as not "official." Don Columbia (talk) 18:37, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Active date
The information box indicates the unit was active from January 31, 1863, however the text has the unit conducting raids in November 1862, and indicates that Susie King Taylor was a nurse for "the men" (apparently of the regiment) from August 1862, which is also when the article on Taylor indicates that the regiment was organized. There seems to be something wrong here. Stevethk (talk) 17:12, 29 January 2024 (UTC)