Civil War History - General DiscussionFor Discussions on Civil War Era Personalities, Politics, Issues, Campaigns, Battles, and more. Serious Civil War Discussions Only Please! All other posts will be deleted.
Neil, I don't know anything about the 37th TX pic; my post was referencing his take on the faked pic of 1st LA NAtive Guards. Sorry for the confusion.
A couple of friends of mine, Steve Merserve and the recently deceased Brian Pohanka, used to collect stories on "black Confederates". Steve told me last week they had been able to verify less than two dozen of them, all told. Steve also told me soldiers serving as teamsters in the CSA made $13/month; free black teamsters made $2/day and were not subject to conscription. Which do you think free black men chose?
The day after that, I had a moment with two of our tour guides as we were leaving Appomattox. One was the recently retired head historian for 25 years at NPS Appomattox, Ron Wilson; the other was Ed Bearss. I pointed out that we had just seen 2 of the 3 sites where the "Black Confederates" organized in Richmond in 1865 were verifiably seen: Farmville (where they dug some entrenchments) and the attack on Lee's trains a little further East (they were part of the wagon guard, and deployed in line, may even have fired one volley). They laughed. They said those were the ONLY 3 verifiable sightings of ANY black Confederate units in the history of the Civil War.
There isn't the slightest doubt they existed. The wild claims thrown about for the number of black men serving the Confederacy as soldiers is another thing altogether.
Was that a still from the old Amos and Andy TV show?
The photo in question is in William C. Davis, _The Photographic History of the Civil War, Vol. 1: Fort Sumter to Gettysburg,_ p. 154. The caption reads: "Many Confederates, even private soldiers, appeared for muster with their bodyservants in tow. Andrew Chandler brought his slave Silas Chandler with him, and both armed for a fight. Men who once feared arms in the hands of slaves now though little of handing them knives and shotguns."
The 37th Tx website's trying to pass slave Silas Chandler off as a bona fide black soldier in the confederacy is indicative of the mendacity that accompanies the argument for black confederates in large numbers--especially from that website, which is infamous for its misrepresentations.
There isn't the slightest doubt they existed. The wild claims thrown about for the number of black men serving the Confederacy as soldiers is another thing altogether.
Regards,
Tim
I agree, Tim. There were a few blacks who did fight for the confederacy, but not nearly in the numbers claimed.
Yes, he was. It was ILLEGAL for blacks to be in the confederate army at that time.
Regards,
Cash
"...This Silas was a former slave owned by his parents, who was papered out just before the war. Even though he was granted his freedom, he insisted on going off to war with Andrew..." http://37thtexas.org/html/chboys.html
"...This Silas was a former slave owned by his parents, who was papered out just before the war. Even though he was granted his freedom, he insisted on going off to war with Andrew..." http://37thtexas.org/html/chboys.html
Quoting the same unreliable site isn't providing support.
"At age sixteen my great grandfather, Andrew Martin Chandler, pictured on left, volunteered for service with Company F, 44th Mississippi Regiment on August 8, 1861. He took with him his body servant Silas Chandler, pictured on the right. They were both of the same approximate age at the time of enlistment. ...
"It is very likely that without Silas' help and assistance, his master's life would have been in jeopardy." [Andrew Chandler Battaile, "The Story of Andrew and Silas Chandler," in Richard Rollins, ed., _Black Southerners in Gray,_ p. 171]
He was a slave. And he was used during the war as a body servant, not as a soldier.
Quoting the same unreliable site isn't providing support.
"At age sixteen my great grandfather, Andrew Martin Chandler, pictured on left, volunteered for service with Company F, 44th Mississippi Regiment on August 8, 1861. He took with him his body servant Silas Chandler, pictured on the right. They were both of the same approximate age at the time of enlistment. ...
"It is very likely that without Silas' help and assistance, his master's life would have been in jeopardy." [Andrew Chandler Battaile, "The Story of Andrew and Silas Chandler," in Richard Rollins, ed., _Black Southerners in Gray,_ p. 171]
He was a slave. And he was used during the war as a body servant, not as a soldier.
Regards,
Cash
"...This Silas was a former slave owned by his parents, who was papered out just before the war. Even though he was granted his freedom, he insisted on going off to war with Andrew..."
"...notes from an interview with Andrew Martin Chandler conducted in 1912..."
Andrew Chandler himself... ...not a great-grandson
"...This Silas was a former slave owned by his parents, who was papered out just before the war. Even though he was granted his freedom, he insisted on going off to war with Andrew..."
"...notes from an interview with Andrew Martin Chandler conducted in 1912..."
Andrew Chandler himself... ...not a great-grandson
I wouldn't believe anything posted on that website. Fabrication is not beneath them. I'll take the family history and William C. Davis, a highly respected historian, over the 37th Texas website any day.
Would be interested in knowing who interviewed Andrew Martin Chandler in 1912 ... and who reported that interview. Hmmmm. 1912. Wasn't that about the time the Lost Cause Crusaders were reaching their peak?
Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
