A True Confederate's Genealogy

I am not sure how I missed this before  but David Tatum, an officer of the SHPG runs his own blog, A True Confederate.   Recently David has posted snippets of his family record for the world to see. Let me start by saying I think this is a fabulous idea. Bringing genealogy to the mass public to help in research is always a good idea and I encourage it. I can remember the countless hours my Grandfather and I spent combing through libraries in the hopes of finding the name of the ship Maurice Baker traveled to Virginia on in 1640. How wonderful it would have been to have some outside influence and thoughts come in to that search. Even if they were dead wrong the new addition can reveal a truth and spur a new direction. Why just look at the inquisitive nature of David, Kindred Blood and myself as we try to figure out what random words mean in David's snippet of genealogy in order to reveal the larger picture.

(Please go to David's blog as I do not have his permission to post his snippet of information.)

If anyone knows what "Sound Bacon" is, please let me know. What I want to address however, is David's original comments when making this post.

"This post shows the weekly food allowance for the slaves owned by an ancestor."

As it does. The document indicates this very well. What some of the items are on that list, is obviously still in the works.

"I can see it now - a Yankee blogger crying / " But what did the owners eat"?[sic]"

I'm not a Yankee....and I try not to cry so I guess I will have a go at this. I do not consider that a relevant thought. It is probably a safe bet that masters ate better than the slaves, so I will just move on from that pointless question.

(The "Yankee Bloggers" follow up) ""What type of home did the owners have as compaired to the slaves"?[sic]"

Pretty much the same premise as above. 

"Yea I guess that's fair / but what do the CEOs of major companys [sic] have for dinner as opposed to the guy in the mail room? And what about living conditions ?"

This is where I take a different path than David. I don't think either questions are really the interest here. I am much more interested in solving the issue of what exactly the slave rations were for W.H. Tatum's slaves in 1840. After that chestnut is cracked, then I can move on to broader questions. But making the comparison of CEOs of major companies to their workers is not the same comparison as master to slave. Though I agree this modern corporate feudalism is a seemingly justified comparison, it still is improper. We have to keep schema in mind. The 21st century mindset cannot co-exist with the 19th century mindset. In order to have a better understanding, historians have to attempt to simulate the mindset of that time. We do this by using resource material such as primary source documents. After all, the worker of that major company can leave. Yes he will probably starve and be unemployed, but he still has that freedom.A slave cannot.

This is not however, a slam on David or his attempt at researching genealogy. It is just an example of why proper methodology is important when researching history and sometimes even genealogy.

Silas Chandler Coming to the Forefront

"he is pictured alone and out from behind the shadow of Andrew Chandler." - Kevin Levin

Coming to news stands near you is a new article about Silas Chandler. This new publication in the Civil War Times is co-authored by Kevin Levin at Civil War Memory and Myra Chandler Simpson, a descendant of Silas.  I am looking forward to reading this article in the hopes of it shedding some light on the life and narrative of Silas and his involvement in the Civil War.

For those of you late to the game, Silas Chandler has been a figure of myth and legend so to speak for some time. He has appeared on many websites over the years under the guise of Black Confederate (Here, Here and Here).

Recently on an episode of Antique Roadshow, Silas took main stage again when a famous photo of him and one Andrew Chandler. Andrew's family owned Silas as a slave and Andrew took him to war.

This presentation thrust Silas back on to center stage and I am hopeful the recent attention and appeal will bring this new article by Levin and Simpson to a more diverse crowd.

I want to thank both Levin and Simpson for taking the time and putting in the work and man hours to make a publication such as this possible. I am looking forward to the read and analysis.

Black Confederate Naval Officer Blown Out of Proportion

Royal Diadem (Ann Dewitt) and the folks at the SHPG are at it again. In their never ending quest to unearth the great and elusive unicorn (Black Confederate);  they have brought up the story of Moses Dallas.

"Gary, we keep presenting facts," yes, but lets look at those facts. Upon making a deeper inquiry, Moses was a slave that was given the rank of Captain in order to drive the boat. This rank carried no authority with it as the rank of captain usually would. In this snippet of information that Royal presents, it appears as though Moses's salary is being increased. This is not the first instance that slaves would be paid for their work in Confederacy. In defense of Vicksburg Gen. Pemberton paid slaves to dig trenches. In most cases the pay was not given to the slave but to the slave's master. There were a few Confederate Naval Pilots that were slaves. This is mainly due to their previous work navigating rivers and coastlines. They were basically being used. In Moses's case, this seems to be exactly the issue. Using a research based narrative entitled  "Water Witch", which can be found on the Georgia Department of Transportation's website, we can see the entire quote: "I have also been compelled to increase the pay of Moses Dallas from $80 to $100 per month in order to retain him. He is a colored pilot and is considered the best inland pilot on the coast." This quote was taken from the Navy and Marine Living Historical  Society. From the quote we can tell that the pay increase was in order to "retain," Moses.  Pay special attention to that word, retain. Why was retention important in a time of war when conscription was already in place? That is because Moses lived as property of another. The Confederacy rose the pay in order to keep him. This means someone at that time moved to get Moses back and pay had to be increased. This makes me think that the pay was going to the master and not to Moses. I cannot assume that for certain as documentation is not provided.

A little more about Moses, he died in a raid in 1864. This was a raid performed by the Confederate Navy on a Union ship. Why Moses was there taking part is not known. He might have been brought by his master, forced to row one of the boats alongside the Union ship. The account given of  his death, doesn't even mention him actually fighting but rather just standing and watching. Until something else presents itself to further our knowledge of his death, it is stuck in limbo. There is an amazing story though about his death being faked and Moses becoming a Union Naval Pilot. This is a great Counterfactual but the story does not have enough proof to be valid in my opinion. Of course when dealing with the definition of proof the SHPG has, maybe there is enough after all. 

Leading the Black Confederate Narrative to the Promised Land

I sincerely hope this is not the best they can do in regards to proving the Black Confederate myth. Snippets from Primary Sources have been used by groups such as the SHPG for some time now to prove their position. It would seem that these 'amateur historians' need to read Marc Bloch or study some historiography. You cannot take random unique accounts and claim them as fact. Why? Because there is no validity in it. If  I wrote down that Russians attacked the United States today, and a hundred years from now someone uncovers that; does that mean it happened? Absolutely not! Find more sources proving the same thing. Cross reference and use cross examination to make sure your sources can stand on their own. I hope they make this effort. Of course, this is the same group that advocated the entire company of confederate cooks, so I won't hold my breath.

The Civil War Meets 9/11

Recently I attended a Civil War re-enactment/living history in Tunnel Hill, GA. Usually these events are marked with their own oddities, colorful characters, and 'education.' This tremendous event set itself apart from the regular run of the mill reenactment by taking place on the immortal anniversary of September 11. As one might expect, there was a memorial service on the 11th, that was complete with a full Union and Confederate honor guard. This had the makings of a moment that could have been truly remarkable, but notice the use of the words 'could have.'

 I had uneasy feelings about the memorial service on the day before when the Commanding Confederate General (basically the guy that is running the event and thinks he commands armies) revealed to the battalion that there was going to be a memorial service and a prayer. This seemed ordinary, very much the thing one would expect. But it was his next couple of sentences that bothered me. He told us we were going to have a prayer, and that "if we didn't like what they were saying, bear with us, if you still don't like it, leave us." Now usually at such events I don't attend the church services due to different reasons but on this occasion, given that it was going to be the 11th, and after what the "General" had told his troops I felt compelled.

 

          The next morning we ccrutred up (re-enactor slang for putting on gear) and marched out to parade ground. It was a magnificent column of fours with bayonets fixed and flashing in the morning sun. We formed up after the parade march and stood at attention while our commanding officer gave the ceremonial speech.  The gist of his speech was acceptable. Remembrance of the tragic day and for the families that lost loved ones. What bothered me was when our "General" issued his own commentary. Apparently, according to him, the United States has enemies of freedom. That there are those in the world that want to attack us because the United States is a 'Christian nation.' This is an assertion I have heard before and I usually just take a deep breath and let said person continue, but then "General" crossed the line. He went on to state, that despite what people think, we are a Christian nation and that there were "Revisionist historians" attempting to undermine that. That was the basic summation, 9/11 happened because America is a Christian nation, that Muslims hate because were are Christians and have freedom. He was right, I didn't like it, and I wanted to leave but maintained enough composure, as did the rest of the people in my company.

There are a couple of things I would like to address here. The Civil War re-enactments/Living Histories are an opportunity to educate a mass amount of people that are there for entertainment and in some ways to learn. Re-enactors would do well to remember their place as living historians and not champions of opinion. Our so called "General" decided to use his position of power (event coordinator) to stand on his pedestal and deliver his personalized ideology. It would appear that our pseudo-leader spends too much time reading David Barton material on Wallbuilders.com. He then of course makes the personal attacks of "Revisionist Historian," which I must say has become my recent favorite insult. It is usually bestowed upon actual historians by those that have no formal training in history. The reason for that new title is because historians usually disagree with an ideology or apologetic position that others might have. Thus the conclusion by these faction groups is that the historians are wrong. I guess those that disagree with me can label me as a liberal revisionist historian because I have yet to see any proof that this nation is founded on Christianity or any other religion. I am basing this on James Madison's documentation of the Constitutional Convention, Letters of James Madison, Thomas Jefferson and Samuel Adams, and of course the 1st Amendment of the Constitution. Our "General" is also lacking in knowledge of foreign policy in the Middle East. Any study of our actions in that area indicate that our hostile imperialism in the area and continuous presence in foreign nations, foster harsh sentiments  towards America. After studying, continuously mind you, American foreign policy in the Middle East since 1900, I can state purely that the United States was not attacked because we are "Free" or a "Christian Nation," (which we are not), but because we are over there. Our policies overseas use systems of espionage that usually result in eventual blowback putting American citizens in harms way. For this analysis I recommend Chalmers Johnson, as his books use very accurate in detail and often cite CIA documentation.

Whatever the reasons for our "commanding officer" to use this time of remembrance as an opportunity to progress his own ideology and political agenda was unjustified. Not only did he insult an entire field of study, but he also insults the memory of those fallen by not telling the audience in attendance the reasons why. The crowd can go home, some in an ignorant bliss without the knowledge of why those that were attacked met their end. Meanwhile I guess the "Revisionist Liberal Historians" will have to sit on the side while "Generals" of the pseudo-confederacy dictate how history will be written.

Looking at the Civil War 150 Years Later

The Virginia Historical Society is outdoing itself by leaps and bounds in research material and educational displays for the Civil War sesquicentennial. For anyone out there that is doing any sort of teaching or classwork on the Civil Wars. An example would be this great bookend to the Civil War and Reconstruction Units.

The Historical Society is also producing videos on the war's impact in Virginia which is great material on the war's effect on society and not just military tactics and history.

This is only part 1 of a several part video series. I am currently working on  fitting these in to lesson plans. For further reading on displays and research done by the Virginia Historical Society can be seen here at their website.
http://www.virginiacivilwar.org/