BLOG
Finds and Interests
No one likes to think of their friends and family going off to war and possibly not coming back, but for most of history, every war has taken thousands of young lives. One of the many items I collect and sell are photos from the Civil War. They provide a history of the war and often a personal record of those who served.
Photographs from the mid-19th century are hard to come by since the materials used break down over the years. Collectors like myself will always seek out examples of historical photos, not just to have or display but to preserve. Today, we have modern digital photos, but the evolution of photos spans hundreds of years, which is a long time. In terms of how far the technology has come, it’s amazing to see how much has developed (see what I did there?).
The three main types of photos from the Civil War era are daguerreotypes, ambrotypes, and tintypes. The dates when photographers used them overlap but run roughly from about 1839 to the early 1930s. While they each use different chemicals and processes, their common element is that they are direct images. The format for creating them does not include a separate negative. A photographer would have a plate inside a camera coated with chemicals. The subject and any light in the room would react with the substances to create an image.
If a photo of any of these types is lost or destroyed, the information and documentation die with it. Naturally, as collectibles, this makes them very desirable, and as historical records, they are priceless.
I have been fortunate enough to collect examples of these early photos. Beyond the issue of monetary value, they offer a glimpse into what they show us about history, daily life, and societal norms. In the area of militaria, which is a big part of what I like to collect, photographs of soldiers on both sides of the Civil War usually include some documentation.
Some were in hinged cases, covered with glass, and within the case would be a note, sometimes with a name, date, and location. Examples that include regimental information help historians fill in data about the war.
However, one of my current listings is a favorite of mine, not only for its quality and the inclusion of a name, date, and location but for what it says about how childhood was defined. It’s a daguerreotype of a Private Wilbur Hudler, taken in 1862. The muster records of his unit, The Tenth Legion of the 56th New York Infantry, show that Wilbur said he was 18 when he joined in 1861, but he was only about 15/16 years old.
It was common for young men to lie about their age so they could join the war and do their part. It wasn’t uncommon for boys as young as 14 to enlist. The photo was taken in Washington, DC, in 1862. He was at least 16 but hardly a fully grown adult.
Subsequent wars would continue to attract young men, shortening their childhoods and aging them as nothing else could. In both World War I and World War II, young men often joined at 16. Almost every family has stories of relatives who left home in their early teens. It happened in Vietnam as well, where the “official” average age of a soldier killed in action was 23.1 years old. However, five 16-year-old American soldiers were killed in Vietnam, and one service member killed was a 15-year-old.
Today, life’s “childhood” phase has been extended, sometimes even past the teen years. Photos from the past have preserved the sacrifices made by these young people, some of whom barely got out of grammar school. It’s a part of military history that isn’t always documented, but we should never forget them.