Visited Gettysburg for the first time last weekend

[mybreakingpoint]

As a former giant Civil War nerd, I was stoked. I enjoyed the entire experience except for one part.

On the far wall, there was a display showing the number of enlistees from each state, and most territories, to both the Confederate and Union sides in the war. i.e. It would say: Alabama--Union: however many, Confederacy: however many. They seemed to cover every territory and state, I even noticed Washington Territory was listed, even though they apparently didn't even have 400 enlistees. Not even 400. That didn't bother me until I noticed that Indian Territory, now Oklahoma, wasn't mentioned. I grew up in Oklahoma, attended a couple of re-enactments they've had in the state, and I know for a fact there were hundreds of Native American enlistees to both the Union & Confederate sides in the war, well over 400, that's for sure. So why were their numbers not included in this display? I couldn't find anyone to ask who really knew, so I was hoping there was someone who could shed some light on this for me. Why are 400, presumably white, volunteers from Washington territory worthy of being listed, and the hundreds, probably thousands, of Native American soldiers from Indian Territory not?

If someone could shed some light on this for me, or possibly point me in the direction of someone who could, it would be greatly appreciated.

[screamoutmyname]

I'm not really sure about that, man. However, I would like to say that Gettysburg is a really, really awesome place. My friend's parents actually bought a house there, and I'm hoping to make a trip down there this summer.

Also, my band shot our album cover there after ghost hunting. That place brings back good memories.

[saysmydoctor]

As a former giant Civil War nerd, I was stoked. I enjoyed the entire experience except for one part.

On the far wall, there was a display showing the number of enlistees from each state, and most territories, to both the Confederate and Union sides in the war. i.e. It would say: Alabama--Union: however many, Confederacy: however many. They seemed to cover every territory and state, I even noticed Washington Territory was listed, even though they apparently didn't even have 400 enlistees. Not even 400. That didn't bother me until I noticed that Indian Territory, now Oklahoma, wasn't mentioned. I grew up in Oklahoma, attended a couple of re-enactments they've had in the state, and I know for a fact there were hundreds of Native American enlistees to both the Union & Confederate sides in the war, well over 400, that's for sure. So why were their numbers not included in this display? I couldn't find anyone to ask who really knew, so I was hoping there was someone who could shed some light on this for me. Why are 400, presumably white, volunteers from Washington territory worthy of being listed, and the hundreds, probably thousands, of Native American soldiers from Indian Territory not?

If someone could shed some light on this for me, or possibly point me in the direction of someone who could, it would be greatly appreciated.
I wasn't aware Washington Territory supplied troops to either side of the war but the absence of Indian Territory isn't surprising. The Cherokee tribes went from neutrality to breaking their ties with the United States and allied themselves with the confederacy. The Confederates, numerically, didn't really have the ability to take the Union out of commission really, it was 2:1. The first three years of the war of what appears to be confederate supremacy is generally a well operated defense by superior generals.

The Trans-Mississippi theater stems from Scott's blockade plan and the Confederates used the Indians who the allied themselves with to defend the river. Not mention, while tribal leadership allied themselves with the Confederates, there was a split amongst the people themselves. Any confederate units from that area were generally kept there to stop the Union from taking Indian territory along with Mexico, Arizona, etc.