Charlestonians in War: The Charleston Battalion.

Charlestonians in War: The Charleston Battalion. By W. Chris Phelps. Foreword by Joseph P. Riley Jr. (Gretna, La.: Pelican Publishing Company, 2004. Pp. 299. $22.00, ISBN 1-58980-166-0.)

The Charleston Battalion evolved from the city's antebellum militia. With South Carolina's secession, the companies volunteered for service. In the spring of 1862 they became the First South Carolina Infantry Battalion, organized to defend Charleston. In 1863 it was consolidated with other companies, including from the First Battalion of Sharpshooters. The new regiment was named the Twenty-seventh South Carolina Infantry.

W. Chris Phelps offers a threefold purpose in writing his history of the Charleston Battalion: to document the role Charlestonians played; to analyze the relationship between Charleston society and the battalion; and to produce a resource for genealogists. The book is organized chronologically with an introduction, eleven chapters, four appendixes, a bibliography, and an index. The author has thoroughly researched his topic. Appendixes B and C include a battalion roster and a list of the dead, and the index will be helpful to genealogists.

Phelps successfully achieved his goals. The Charleston Battalion distinguished itself in the defense of the city. At Secessionville, June 16, 1862, the unit helped blunt a Yankee attack that could have brought about the fall of Charleston. In 1863 during the siege of the city it was equally effective at the battle of Fort Wagner, helping to thwart a Union attempt to retake Fort Sumter. The battalion's successes came at a high cost. Nearly one in four members of the battalion who saw action became casualties during the Fort Wagner campaign. In 1864 the battalion also faced deadly warfare in Virginia and North Carolina.

The unit's dedication evolved from its close connection with the city. Most members had a stake in victory. Phelps's "quasi-prosopographic examination" covers occupation, nationality, age, slaveholding, and race (p. 13). The men came from every element of Charleston's society, including the English, the Huguenots, Germans, Irish, and free blacks. Most were older than the average rebel. The rank and file included lawyers, shopkeepers, skilled artisans, and unskilled laborers. The battalion was "peppered with slaveowners" (p. 65). Some thirty-three African Americans served, mostly as cooks and musicians. One slave was described as a "private" (p. 66).

Model unit studies, such as this, will form the basis for a more complete paradigm on the life of the Confederate soldier. Moreover, the book discusses important issues, such as friendly fire, desertions, divisions, and persons in the battalion with social connections who were never "counted in the firing line."

EDMUND L. DRAGO

College of Charleston