Thanks for the information, but you are going to need a wartime source. Is this man listed as a solider on a muster roll? Is there a way to check the source used for this postwar sketch? This is not sufficient evidence.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES
” SOLOMON SAWYER, confectioner, came to Kansas in December, 1868. Commenced present business in June, 1879. Was born in Surrey Co., N.C., July 1, 1840. Was pressed into the service of the Confederate army in 1861, and was compelled to work for the Southern cause in various ways for over three years, but finally made his escape to his native county, and remained concealed until the surrender of Gen. Lee. Came North in 1866, and went to Ohio where he remained until 1868, when he came to Kansas. Was married in June, 1869, at Topeka, to Mrs. Jane Woods, who died about five years ago. Was married again June 13, 1882, to Miss Sarah Mitchell, of Topeka.”

Robert Moore @ Cenantua’s Blog

Interesting. What documentation do you have to show that two free blacks were “forced into service” with the 21st?

Thanks for sharing.

Strangely, he does not appear on any of the existing muster rolls for Company H on file at the NA. The information for Sawyers is from a roll compiled by the Adjutant General of North Carolina. The roll was made out ca. 1863. It was borrowed by the NA after the war.

The service record next to John Sawyers is Solomon Sawyers (same company/same enlistment date). His record is also based on the Adjutant General’s roll and does not appear on any muster rolls.

To me it looks like there was some mixup on who and what comprised Company H of the 21st Regiment.

I can easily imagine a slaveholder giving a slave a gun during the war. As historians, however, we don’t live in the world imagination. We would have to explain the decision given that the extent to which white southerners worked to prevent violent slave uprisings throughout the antebellum period and especially in the wake of Nat Turner’s Rebellion.

Larry,

It’s exactly what is needed when discussing this issue. I admit that I am not sure whether this guy served as a legitimate Confederate soldiers. All we have is the evidence and our ability to interpret. I have no clue how Ijames interprets the documents in his possession since all he did was throw a name at me as if that alone is sufficient. What I do know is that at this point the evidence is not conclusive. And that is the problem with most of the examples that I’ve come across. Someone throws out a newspaper article, image, pension file, etc. and draws a conclusion w/o spending any time thinking about alternative interpretations. It shows laziness, dishonesty, and a failure to understand the historical process.

As I’ve said before, I have no doubt that a few free blacks served as soldiers in Confederate ranks; however, this in no way implies that we rethink the relationship of slavery to the Confederate government as well as how the men in the ranks viewed the war and blacks. I agree with Michael Lynch on this. We have a few cases of women who disguised themselves and served with the Union army. That said, no one would suggest as a general statement that women served in the Union army without a qualification: http://pastinthepresent.wordpress.com/2009/05/18/its-all-about-the-numbers/