Well, the reaction to the History Detectives show on “the Chandler Boys” continues, and I must say that many of the proponents of the myth that a significant number of blacks willingly served the Confederate cause have started showing their true colors. Take, for example, Kirk David Lyons, co-founder of the Southern Legal Resource Center, who now declares:
And I say for the 18,000th time, if he was slave or free, in the South and did his job, whatever it was during the war, you can call him Confederate – it doesn’t matter whether or not he had a gun or wore a uniform – any loyal Black is a Confederate! – Got it?
How one determines loyalty when one is enslaved is an interesting question.
And then there’s Ann DeWitt, who, having declared that various (unnamed) bloggers have divided the descendants of Andrew and Silas Chandler for their own professional gain, now offers the following suggestion:
Why not highlight how the Chandler Tintype has brought these two men, a descendant of a slaveholder and a descendant of a slave, together? You know. Focus on the positive in the story; and bring people together in peace and harmony. I sure will!
I’m sure you will, Ms. DeWitt. And doubtless you’ll explain how they did this despite the relentless efforts of unnamed bloggers to create rifts for their own gain through a television show that brought these men together in an act you celebrate.
Of course, what I find interesting about this image is how the two poses (photograph and tintype) seem quite similar … and I also note that only one of the men is smiling. I wonder why that is.
I guess Ms. DeWitt will no longer claim Silas Chandler was a black Confederate soldier. That leaves us with when she’ll address that regiment of black cooks that she was so proud to tell us about.
But, as usual, pride of place might as well go to good old Connie Chastain, because, after all, Michael Hill of the League of the South says:
Connie, I just love readin’ your stuff–it makes sense (unlike most of what’s out there).
I’m sure Dr. Hill will get a kick out of what Connie told Kevin Levin over at Civil War Memory:
I’m more focused on the motives and activities of critics of the Confederacy and the South, such as yourself, than on the war itself.
Trust me when I say that you can find plenty of evidence for that claim at Connie’s own blog, which exists in part to remind me of just what an appreciative audience I must have for someone to spend so much time on me, although I admit it pales in comparison to the attention Connie lavishes on Kevin. You ain’t nothing until Connie trashes you. For a while that stopped when she had computer trouble … although she wondered if her machine was simply the victim of Yankee treachery.
Trust me, it wasn’t. I want to keep the laughs coming. And now that I know that Michael Hill likes her work, well, isn’t that special?
Again, it’s heritage, not history, for these folks. And it’s a heritage constructed to fit their own needs, wants, desires, and fantasies, not to honor the past, let alone understand it.
Crossroads 
I predict these particular folks will, at some point in the not-too-distant future, again claim Silas Chandler was a black confederate soldier.
>> I’m more focused on the motives and activities of critics of the Confederacy and the South, such as yourself, than on the war itself.
Cart before horse. And I’d love to read the backstory behind that picture. The picture itself is kinda weird.
One interesting point from the HD episode was by the guy who pointed out that the weapons Silas was holding were almost surely photographer’s props.
So now it’s a “job”. You know, that 12-14 hour/7 days a week stint in the cotton fields fot Massa. while the Mrs. and the kiddies are for sale down at the town square so they can get “hired” as well. The Confederacy’s own full employment program. Who knew.
John who can forget Shelby Foote declaring the CW was between one side that hired a man temporarily and one side that hired a man for life.
Wow. Was he being tongue-in-cheek? That’s an intriguing comment.
No Foote was being dead serious, he said in on Ken Burns The Civil War documythery
John-I also love Kirk Lyons’ assumption that slaves who had been impressed into doing the dirty work (literally) for the Confederate army was doing the aforementioned “job” out of loyalty and not coercion.
BTW, did you know that Kirk Lyons married the daughter of an Aryan Nation’s leader in a ceremony conducted by the head of the organization and held at its then Idaho compound?
So I have heard. Meanwhile, Connie Chastain’s been forced to admit her embrace of the League of the South.
I was forced? LOL! What sort of force do you imagine was applied to me? How do you define “embrace”? Having been a member of a group in the past is embracing? LOL! Do you “embrace” all the groups you’ve ever been a member of? Do you know how ridiculous your comment is?
Professor, while I’m here, let me ask, are you the person who accessed my private home page on my private webspace provided by my ISP and sent the link to one (at least one) of your anti-confederate fellow travelers?
Say it however you want, Connie, but you’ve now admitted your association with the League of the South. Of course, you haven’t commented on whether you agree with what Dr. Hill said in the address to which I provided a link, leaving us all wondering as to why you are afraid to do so.
You’ve been visiting several websites recently to gather information for your blog, and each time blogging software picks up the source. You know that yourself as a blog operator who has mentioned who visits what sites. You’re the one spreading about your own information. I haven’t sent that link to anyone … although you’re the one who provided it to me. It says something about your state of mind that you would try to pretend otherwise.
Take care, Connie. You have your own blog, and so you can continue to rant from there. Your last comment suggests you’ve gone a little nuts in your obsession with me.
I’ve seen the page you are likely referring to as your “private home page.” It’s turned up several times lately in my blog’s webstats (as recently as Friday), and I occasionally look to see who’s linking to my blog. There’s a link to my blog on that page, as well as to many other sites. Every time anyone clicks on one of those links, it sends a referring back-link to that other site. While you may not intend for that page to be public, every time you clicks on one of those links, it sends the URL of your “private” webpage out across the Internet and stores it in someone else’s web stats. There’s nothing malicious or secretive about that; it’s just how the Web works.
For the record, I have not (1) shared that link with anyone, (2) shared any information from it with anyone, or (3) made a record of anything there. Also for the record, none of my “anti-confederate fellow travelers” (nor anyone else) has shared anything from that page that with me.
The page shows up on my stat counter every few hours. 🙂 I clicked on it once and learned that I am under the “anti-Southern” category. If remember correctly, Brooks, Connie writes about men who have been falsely accused of sexual harassment in the workplace. Connie seems obsessed with making accusations. I guess it’s true that we tend to write about what we know from experience.
“The page shows up on my stat counter every few hours.”
Really? ‘Cause I never get that many. 😦 Then again, she never has had a thing for me like she has for you.
I’m sure Connie will deny all while “fixing” the problem. Just like she denied admitting stalking me on her blog after admitting it.
Which is just about what she did, although she did reveal that it was Corey Meyer who alerted her to this situation (applause to Corey). Wonder when she’ll apologize directly for her insinuations ….
BTW, it appears that she was careless in sending her own information about. Now it appears that the url in question had extremely important and sensitive information on it (other than confirming that Connie was making plenty of visits here, I didn’t examine to contents of the webpage). Clearly someone Connie pursues has it in for her. However, she needs to cast her suspicions elsewhere.
Bravo to Corey Meyer, who did the decent thing.
Anybody who does swear fealty to the CBF and the Lost Cause Mythology is labeled anti-Southern while they actually mean anti-Confederate as they fail to understand there is a difference.
How am I categorized? (Or am I still under her radar?)
You’ll have to ask her.
I’m not sure if Shelby was in fact speaking entirely tongue in cheek. He gave a long interview about 15 years ago to the Atlantic Monthly (if I recall correctly) which contained a few disconcerting comments about the War. People tend to forget that Foote was primarily a writer of fiction who grew up in a heavily segregated South.
I doubt that Mr. Lyons has read Kenneth Noe’s book on “Reluctant Rebels,” (or many historical books for that matter), but it would be interesting to hear him speculate on whether white Confederates had their heads beaten against barrels or were whipped to death, as sometimes occurred to those “loyal Blacks” in army camps whom he insists on calling Confederates.