View single post by PvtClewell
 Posted: Mon Apr 28th, 2008 04:33 pm
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 
PvtClewell
Member


Joined: Wed Jun 13th, 2007
Location: North Carolina USA
Posts: 420
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Renee,

I also have to agree with Joe and Widow that the odds are long that it's a picture of Jackson.

First off, there are only two known photographs of Jackson taken during the war years, and both of them are portraits. One of them was a front view taken in Winchester in 1862, and the other was a famous three-quarter profile taken two weeks before he was killed at Chancellorsville.

My volumn of the 'Photopgraphic History of the Civil War,' under the last picture of Jackson taken, states "Only once had a war photograph of Jackson been taken up to April, 1863, when, just before the movement toward Chancellorsville, he was persuaded (by his wife) to enter a photographer's tent at Hamilton's Crossing, some three miles below Fredericksburg, and to sit for his last portrait."

I have seen the picture above previously that Joe has provided, and for the life of me, I can't find it in any of my books. Although the man on the left bears a passing resemblance to Stonewall, there are some things that don't 'feel' right about it. Most apparent is the jacket he's wearing — most officers wore jackets with a double row of buttons (as seen in the two wartime photos of Jackson), and this man has a single row. Also, there is no indication of rank, although I think Jackson wore an unadorned uniform.

Another thought is that there just weren't that many photos taken of Confederates by Confederate photojournalists, especially in the field, mostly because there weren't that many Confederate photojournalists. A photo like that would be intrinsically rare. Case in point: How many pictures of Confederate officers can you think of that are not portraits or CDVs? A few do exist, like the picture of Lee on Traveller in Petersburg in 1864, but apparently not many.

I would also hazard to guess that if this were a picture of Jackson, it would have been identified as such years ago, and most surely by the photographer who took it.

This is not to say it's not a picture of Jackson, but I'd say the odds are long against it. But I'll keep looking.

 Close Window