For the purposes of something I’m writing, I need to understand what the experience of a black man would have been in Sharpsburg, MD, immediately after the battle of Antietam in the American Civil War.
The man travels into the nearby town of Sharpsburg after the Union forces win the battle and hold the surrounding area. Maryland was a slave state on the border between north and south, but after the Union victory would this man be able to walk freely and unimpeded? Would the Union victory mean he would be treated the same as free black men in a northern state?
I realize he’s still a black man in 1862 and all the limitations that entails, but how would his experience in Sharpsburg at this time compare to, say, his experience walking the streets in Atlanta at the same time?
If the black man had been a slave of a Maryland resident, then he’s still a slave at this point. Slavery remained legal in Union border states until very late in the war, well after the Emancipation Proclamation (issued just after the Battle of Antietam, came into effect 1 Jan 1863) , because that proclamation did not apply to Union slave states. Maryland’s 1864 Constitution (ratified October of that year) finally banned slavery within the state.
Based on the information you’ve given, that man is still a slave.
A comparable black man on the streets of Atlanta at the end of September 1962 is still de facto a slave, because although the Emancipation Proclamation was effective in Georgia, laws don’t enforce themselves and the Union Army wouldn’t get to Georgia until 1864, and Atlanta itself didn’t fall to the Union until September.
Was this man a slave or a free man before the battle of Antietam?
Slaves weren’t automatically freed just because the Union took control of that area. Slaves in that part of the U.S. were officially freed in 1864, when Maryland changed its constitution. If that man was a slave before the battle of Antietam, then he was still a slave, and probably would be for the next two years.
In that part of Maryland, black slaves had originally outnumbered free blacks in the early 1800s, but as the 1800s progressed, the ratio changed. By the 1850s, there were more free blacks in that region than there were black slaves. A free black man walking around in that area in 1862 wouldn’t have been all that out of the ordinary. There were quite a few free black men in that area at that time.
As you note though, this was 1862, with all that the racial attitudes of that time entailed.
Thank you for the responses so far. This is helpful. This man is a slave traveling from the South. I understand that legally he is still a slave, and he thinks of himself that way. But he is on his own in Sharpsburg.
So do I understand correctly that a black man walking in Sharpsburg after the battle of Antietam would not stand out as unusual or draw undue attention? Because there were plenty of free black men and women in the area before and after the battle? That is the crux of what I’m trying to get right in my depiction.
That’s an awesome typo! Civil rights leaders would have nodded.
Regarding Antietam, a slave in Sharpsburg would be likely to be pressed into service burying bodies on the battlefield – a gigantic and disagreeable task.
Also remember that persons of Unionist sympathy called the battle Antietam, while those of secesh stripe called it Sharpsburg.
Keep in mind that this part of Maryland was commonly used by escaped slaves to get from Virginia and Maryland to Pennsylvania (often heading to Chambersburg, PA).
As a result of this, there were a lot of slave catchers prowling around in this part of Maryland. A free black man walking around town would not be out of the ordinary, but a stranger in town who happened to be a black man would probably arouse a lot of suspicion. Your escaped slave might initially think he’s relatively safe when he sees free black men walking around, only to find himself chased and hunted by a slave catcher shortly thereafter.
I know that slave catchers operated in that area, but I don’t know how common they were.