Southern History

“They Learn Here to Despise Whites”

August 29, 2010 By Kevin Levin 4 Comments

One of the books that I am currently reading is Julie Flavell’s When London Was Capital of America (Yale University Press, 2010). It’s one of those books that allows you to shift perspective on an important period in American history. In this case Flavell pushes her readers to acknowledge the political and cultural significance that London held for many Americans in the last decade before the Revolution. I always remind my students that our tendency to view the colonists as Americans in waiting obscures the extent to which they tried desperately to remain British. This book is fleshing out that idea for me.

Chapter 2 focuses on the challenges that slaveowners experienced when bringing their property to the metropolis. American slaves were exposed to an entirely new set of conditions and influences, which, in turn challenged and reshaped the master-slave relationship. Flavell structures this chapter around Scipio, who was the slave of Henry Laurens of South Carolina. Scipio changed his name to Robert upon arrival in England. The author uses Robert to discuss stories of runaway slaves as well as the Somerset trial, which resulted in the freedom of one slave. None of this is new to me. What is new to me is Flavell’s discussion of the influence of poor/destitute whites on the perceptions of American slaves:

Back in the colonies there was nothing to equal what Robert saw. What buildings, what monuments, what dress, display and equipage! The townhouses and the plantations of the Carolina rich only gave a foretaste of the reality. But at the same time – what poverty, what deprivation! Even the slave quarters at home probably did not prepare him for what he encountered on his solitary perambulations through the Great City.

What he saw were some of the poorest white people in the empire, degraded, half-starved, stinking and desperate, stripped of all dignity, people whose conditions was enough permanently to change his idea of the white race. ‘[T]hey learn here to despise whites.’ So wrote a West Indian planter of the plantation slaves who were brought to London.

This got me thinking about the extent to which such an analysis may apply to the thousands of slaves, who were present in the Confederate army as personal servants and impressed workers. We’ve discussed how different roles played by slaves in the army challenged and shaped the master-slave relationship, but how did the sight of poor whites contribute to this dynamic? The sight of poor whites and yeoman farmers following orders and, at times, living in squalid conditions may have been a shock for slaves. More specifically, the strict discipline imposed on enlisted men by officers, who were also their social and political superiors in peace time may have challenged slaves’ assumptions about their own place within the antebellum racial hierarchy. How often did slaves see the kind of wartime discipline imposed on white men by other whites before the war? I think this is something that needs to be analyzed much more extensively.

Just a few thoughts on this beautiful Sunday morning.

Filed Under: Southern History Tagged With: black Confederates

The Heart of the Matter

August 19, 2010 By Kevin Levin 3 Comments

I know some of you are probably already sick and tired of the frequency of posts on black Confederates. Well, get use to it. I am in the process of co-writing an article about Silas Chandler and in the beginning stages of what I hope to be a book-length manuscript on the subject. Tomorrow I am finally going to film my segments for a documentary on the subject, which is being produced by a film professor at East Carolina University. As a Civil War enthusiast who is interested in memory I couldn’t be more intrigued by this subject. The most frustrating part of this debate for me is the way the question is all too often framed: Were there black Confederates and, if so, how many? As I’ve said before, if we are talking about soldiers than it is a pretty straightforward process of providing enlistment papers to demonstrate this particular status within the army. Anything else, including pension papers must be seen as inconclusive given what we know about the process. As I see it the number is so small that any account will have to demonstrate how the individual soldier managed to maneuver through the strict enforcement that the Confederate government instituted when it came to the recruitment of free and enslaved blacks. That, of course, will be an interesting story and one that I would love to hear more about.

More importantly, the contours of this debate prevents us from honestly exploring the lives of individual free and enslaved blacks during the war. We lump all of them together as “loyal” “devoted” servants, who along with their white comrades “sacrificed” all for the Confederacy. In this we learn next to nothing about the individuals themselves and how they understood the experience of camp life/battle and the time away from loved ones. Consider the number of narratives that include the servant/slave bringing home his wounded master. Just about all of these accounts come from the postwar period, but I’ve never come across an article written by the slave in question, which, of course, is not surprising given the illiteracy rates. We know that Silas Chander escorted Andrew Chandler home after the latter was wounded in battle. In most Online accounts this is reduced to his supposed faithfulness and devotion to Andrew, which fall neatly into the broader postwar slave narrative. Now there is little doubt that servants shared the challenges of camp life and even, on occasion, the dangers of the battlefield with their masters. As historians we must be receptive to the ways in which the war shaped the relationship between slave and master. I have little reason to doubt that certain bonds of affection would have been established as a result, but this cannot be the beginning and end of our analysis of these men. In the case of Silas he had a wife and child back in Palo Alto, Mississippi. But even if Silas did not have a family we should not be surprised that he might choose to bring his master home. After all, he was still legally bound to his owner and may have viewed running away as more of a risk even though thousands of fellow slaves did just that. What I find the most troubling about all of this is the extent to which slaves like Silas and even those who turn out to be legitimate soldiers (however small the number) will be ignored because it turns out that most people are not really interested in recounting their experiences. The approach is to engage in hard-headed reductionism that may satisfy those desperate to vindicate a certain view of the past, but gets us nowhere in terms of understanding these men and the unique challenges they faced as black southerners. Unfortunately, I suspect that in just about all of these cases we will be able to say very little because of a lack of sufficient documentation. Of course, this will not stop the SCV from continuing to butcher this part of the past by placing headstones that distort the distinction between slave and soldier. They did it with Weary Clyburn and in the case of Silas Chandler they placed an “Iron Cross” in front of his marker. This needs to be denounced, not simply as bad history, but as a blatant attempt to use the lives of others as a means to an end.

My point is simple. We have got to get over ourselves when confronting the past. I do not claim complete objectivity when doing history nor do I believe anyone achieves such a perspective, but we can help ourselves by asking the right questions and by exercising a healthy dose of skepticism.

Filed Under: Civil War Culture, Civil War Historians, Lost Cause, Memory, Slavery, Southern History Tagged With: black Confederates, Silas Chandler

Why Are Whites So Interested in Black Confederates?

August 18, 2010 By Kevin Levin 30 Comments

I think this is a question that anyone interested in this subject eventually has to come around to. For the moment let’s set aside H.K. Edgerton and the very small number of African Americans who have involved themselves in this movement. When you get right down to it, this is a subject that whites, who are mainly associated with Southern heritage groups are interested in promoting. You don’t find black Americans celebrating the participation of freed and enslaved blacks in the Confederate army as part of Emancipation Day celebrations at the turn of the twentieth century and you will be hard pressed to find references to these individuals during the 1960s, at a time when the African American community had rediscovered its Civil War past as part of the broader Civil Rights Movement.

You don’t even find whites highlighting the sacrifices of black Confederate soldiers until relatively recently. What you will find are plenty of ceremonies, monuments, and markers to the “faithful slave” that dot the landscape in parts of the South. As I pointed out in a previous post the subject of black Confederates can be traced to the late 1980s- early 90s and I suspect in reaction to the success of the movie, Glory. Why did the black community of Petersburg not recognize Richard Poplar before five years ago or even Weary Clyburn. [Note: The evidence suggests that Poplar may have indeed served as a soldier, but I still have some questions about the documentation.] What about the rest of the ceremonies that have taken place over the past few years? Why are whites the ones who get so enraged when I write about this subject and question the veracity of claims made about these men? Apart from one comment by H.K. Edgerton I have never heard from an African American who was upset with me for addressing this issue or believed that I was somehow denigrating the Southern past. As some of you know I am currently co-authoring an article with a descendant of Silas Chandler, who is one of the most visible black Confederates. It turns out that almost nothing about the popular account is right.

I guess we could explain this new direction in Southern history as one of whites coming to the rescue of African Americans in revealing a history that was somehow forgotten or even intentionally ignored. No doubt, that is a comforting explanation. Unfortunately, it’s a bit more complicated. Perhaps the fact that the Confederate government and military explicitly denied the right of free and enslaved blacks the right to serve as soldiers has something to do with this. That would leave us with the question of why whites are so interested in black Confederates. Of course, I think I know the answer to this question.

Filed Under: Civil War Culture, Lost Cause, Memory, Slavery, Southern History Tagged With: black Confederates

Earl Ijames, Henry Louis Gates, and “Colored Confederates”

August 15, 2010 By Kevin Levin 11 Comments

[Hat-tip to Patrick L. Lewis]

I have written extensively about Earl Ijames’s mishandling of evidence related to the presence of black southerners (free and enslaved) in Confederate armies, but it is truly disturbing to learn that a historian such as Henry L. Gates endorses his shoddy research. You can find the following in Gates’s book, Lincoln on Race and Slavery:

pp.xxxviii-xxxix “The pioneering research of Earl Ijames reveals that some slaves bore arms, and some free Negroes in the South actually enlisted and fought in the Confederate Army, as Frederick Douglass as early as 1861 warned Lincoln they would do, in an attempt to persuade Lincoln to authorize the use of black men as soldiers.”

And the subsequent footnote, p.lxvi n13. “Earl L. Ijames, correspondence, November 17, 2008; … Ijames, the curator of the North Carolina Museum of History, says that, among others, the Fortieth Regiment of North Carolina Troops, Company D, included several free black men who enlisted voluntarily and fought with guns in combat against the North. His book Colored Confederates is forthcoming.”

First, it is important to acknowledge that Ijames has done nothing that would count as serious research on this subject. In 15 years of study he has not published a single peer-reviewed article and there is no evidence of a forthcoming book on the subject. I suspect that Gates first made contact with Ijames during the filming of his recent PBS documentary “Looking for Lincoln.” One episode includes a ceremony sponsored by the SCV honoring Weary Clyburn as a Confederate soldier, which I am unable to pin down. Ijames spoke at this ceremony, though he has waffled on drawing any firm conclusions about Clyburn’s status.

Ijames is scheduled to give a talk this coming Wednesday [Aug. 18] at the North Carolina Museum of History in Raleigh, North Carolina. It is unfortunate that a branch of the North Carolina Office of Archives and History, which is also Ijames’s employer, would allow him to speak on this subject. No doubt, his talk will follow the same line as a recent presentation which was recorded and can be accessed here. [Click here for an outline of this talk.]

Filed Under: Civil War Culture, Lost Cause, Memory, Slavery, Southern History Tagged With: black Confederates, Earl Ijames

Lights…Camera…Action & Black Confederates

July 6, 2010 By Kevin Levin 12 Comments

This coming Friday I am scheduled to spend the day with a film crew from Eastern Carolina University, which is producing a documentary on the subject of “black Confederates.” I am excited about my first foray into the world of film and just a little apprehensive about how my commentary will be used. Still, I do think it is an opportunity that I can’t pass up given that my next book project will be a study of memory and black Confederates. The filming will be done at my home and we plan on spending about 4-5 hours discussing the subject.

I am going to put together some information sheets that I can refer to during the interview. My overall goal is first and foremost to help the audience to properly frame the discussion around the correct terms. This is a discussion about how the Confederate war effort altered the institution of slavery and not one about soldiers. We need to use the correct terminology. As anyone who is familiar with the primary evidence can tell you any examples of black southerners who actually served as soldiers are incredibly rare and therefore constitute and exception to this framework. As I’ve pointed out over the years this is not a problem confined to the general public, but even among those who work as public historians such Earl Ijames of the North Carolina Museum of History.

And if Ijames wasn’t disturbing enough for you than have a look at this essay written by Bernhard Thuersam, who is the director of the Cape Fear Historical Institute in Wilmington, North Carolina. The essay is a rough survey of the role of black soldiers in the Revolution, War of 1812, and Civil War. I am not going to sum up the entire article. I neither have the time nor the patience. On top of some of the same old pieces of evidence that appear in every article/website on the subject consider the following:

Who Is Reverend Herman White?

June 4, 2010 By Kevin Levin 15 Comments

Yesterday I briefly touched on a story out of Valdese, North Carolina involving Reverend Herman White, who was asked to address a group of students as part of the area’s Founders Day Festival. Rev. White shared his own version of the region’s history that included stories of loyal and happy slaves and other scenes out of his Lost Cause playbook. The most disturbing aspect of this story is that the entire situation was easily avoidable. A number of people associated with the school administration claimed that they could not know what Mr. White would touch on in his remarks.

Unfortunately, even a basic online search would have raised any number of red flags. This is the same Rev. White who was responsible for the course at Randolph Community College back in 1998 in which he spewed his racist nonsense of happy slaves and tens of thousands of loyal black Confederate soldiers. Clearly, this man doesn’t belong anywhere near students in a learning environment. I blame the school officials for not taking the proper steps to do even a simple background check on Rev. White.

Filed Under: Civil War Culture, Lost Cause, Slavery, Southern History Tagged With: black Confederates

Black North Carolinians Plan to Erect Faithful Slave Marker

May 15, 2010 By Kevin Levin 25 Comments

A group of historians and other concerned citizens recently lobbied the commissioners of Union County to “recogniz[e] the contributions of 10 black Confederate pensioners, known as colored troops during the Civil War.” We’ve seen all this before and it doesn’t look like anything will steer certain folks away from making this all too common mistake regarding the conditions under which black Southerners were given pensions after the Civil War. The assumption seems to be that a pension indicates that a given individual served as a soldier in the Confederate army. [For some reliable commentary on pensions please read James Hollandsworth, Jr., Robert Moore, and the Library of Virginia.] The group wants to install a small monument to these ten individuals in front of the old courthouse in Monroe.

The most disappointing aspect of this story is to read the words of the descendants of these men who were forced to endure the horrors of war as property, ultimately without any choice in the matter.

Aaron Perry of Charlotte is the great-grandson of one of the pensioners, also named Aaron Perry, a Union County slave who fought with the North Carolina 37th Company D. Although the Confederate States lost, their story should be remembered. “I think it’s a great thing,” said the younger Perry, 72. “It’s been a long time ago, so I’m not going to overlook that. What’s so bad about it? They’re honoring these 10 North Carolina soldiers for being helpful to their country, even if it was under slavery. “They lost that war, but my great grandfather helped rebuild the camp at Fort Fisher,” Perry said. “He played his part, even though he was under slavery and somebody else’s command. When you enlist in the service, you’re taking orders from somebody.”

Notice how Mr. Perry completely collapses the distinction between status as a slave and citizen. In what way was the Confederacy “their country” given the constitution’s provisions that specifically protect the institution of slavery? Even worse is the failure to distinguish between having to take orders within a military command – a responsibility that under certain conditions is conferred on citizens – and status as a slave which views the individual as an extension of his master’s will. What could be clearer?

Of course, it should come as no surprise that Earl Ijames is involved in this nonsense. Ijames works as a curator at the North Carolina Museum of History, which is part of the NC Department of Archives and History. I guess Ijames couldn’t resist referencing Weary Clyburn, who happens to be his favorite “Colored Confederate.” Unfortunately, Ijames isn’t even sure whether Clyburn was a slave or a free man at the time of the Civil War.

Between Perry and Ijames we get a sense of the quality of “research” and thought that seems to be behind this project. I am sad to say that in 2010 we have two African American men, who are essentially hoping to erect a monument to faithful slaves of the Confederacy. What could be more pathetic?

Filed Under: Lost Cause, Memory, Public History, Slavery, Southern History Tagged With: black Confederates, Earl Ijames, Weary Clyburn