Review - "Green and Blue: Irish Americans in the Union Military, 1861–1865" by Damian Shiels

[Green and Blue: Irish Americans in the Union Military, 1861–1865 by Damian Shiels (Louisiana State University Press, 2025). Hardcover, illustrations, graphs, tables, biography appendix, endnotes, bibliography, index. Pages main/total:xiii,176/314. ISBN:978-0-8071-8370-0. $50]

Typically, scholarly studies of Irish American contributions to the Union armed forces during the Civil War possess a very selective geographical (ex. the urban Irish of New York, Philadelphia, and Boston) and unit focus (most prominently the famed Irish Brigade). Thus, it is high time for revisiting the big picture with a proper investigation of Irish volunteer demographics, motivations, beliefs, and attitudes that are more representative of the whole. A powerhouse study housed in a compact and highly accessible package, Damian Shiels's Green and Blue: Irish Americans in the Union Military, 1861–1865 succeeds in doing just that.

In researching this project, Shiels consulted an abundance of primary sources while also thoughtfully engaging with the secondary literature (including influential recent works from Catherine Bateson, Ryan Keating, Christian Samito, and Susannah Ural), but the gamechanger was his access to the recently digitized widow's pension files housed at the National Archives. The author's extensive review of those records (first used in creating his 2016 book The Forgotten Irish) unearthed a treasure trove of letters written by or for Irish soldiers during the Civil War, all being supporting documentation to bolster widow or dependent claims. Kept by the government in the files were 1,135 letters (singly or in bunches) from or for 395 soldiers along with almost three hundred additional supporting letters from other sources. That body of wartime letters provides invaluable information on 568 Irish American soldiers, an unprecedented gathering for investigation of this sort. Additionally, in bringing together individuals from 260 units raised from 22 states and districts, this large sample represents by far the widest breadth of Irish volunteer service yet studied. An appendix also compiles brief biographical profiles of those individuals featured in the main text. 

The volume begins with an informative summary of eighteenth-century immigration and settlement patterns from Ireland to the United States, noteworthy for the concentration of Irish immigrants into northern urban centers east and west. There is also some brief background on pre-Civil War Irish contributions to the armed forces, which included disproportionate enlistment in the antebellum Regular Army and a heavy presence in the U.S. Navy.

Early-war enlistment dominates the pension records, with almost three-fourths of the correspondents volunteering before the end of 1862. The overwhelming majority were drawn from the working class (92% were either farm laborers, unemployed, or worked in blue-collar occupations). As expected, the eastern states dominate, with just over 40% of the sample coming from New York alone. Just over a third were born outside the Emerald Isle to Irish parents in the U.S., Canada, or the U.K, and the average age of the Irish American enlistee was over a year and half younger than the average age of the Union volunteer overall. As the author explains, his finding that nearly two-thirds of these volunteers were single was expected given that Irish men tended to marry later than other ethnic groups.

In terms of what Irish American soldiers wrote about their soldier experience, Shiels finds that they expressed themselves in the straightforward, non-sentimental descriptive manner that was much the same across the lower classes of all white ethnic groups. Their written reactions to combat, marching, and camp life also closely matched others. One noteworthy difference among Irish volunteers was a higher than average desertion rate, which the author primarily attributes to the exceptionally precarious financial position of Irish families (a distinction from other ethnicities that's well explained in the book).

The commonly accepted total of Irish who served in the Union Army is, in round numbers, 150,000 men, but Shiels reveals why that figure should be considered much too low. The traditional number excludes certain geographical regions as well as the U.S. Navy and Regular Army. Including those numbers raises the total to over 180,000, and, if you add the children of Irish immigrants to the total, the author believes the best conservative estimate to be at least 250,000. Shiels feels that the implications of this are critically important, as, in addition to simply being more accurate, the amended total upends the long-held conclusion that ethnic Irish were underrepresented (which Shiels questions even when using the old numbers) in the Union volunteer forces. Instead, the revised numbers suggest that the Irish were truly overrepresented. The impact of this on assessing Irish loyalty and duty toward their new country, both of which were sullied by the Irish's heavy role in opposing conscription (especially during the infamous New York City Draft Riot of July 1863), is important to consider.

The great many acts of deadly violence perpetrated during the aforementioned civil unrest in New York City, in which a predominantly Irish mob specifically targeted black residents, has been commonly used as a reference point to gauge Irish American attitudes toward blacks in general. In addition to reminding readers that only a small proportion of New York's Irish participated in the bloody riots, Shiels's research into how Irish soldiers described their interactions with free and enslaved blacks encountered during their service reveals a complicated range of attitudes. Nevertheless, it remains the case that the vast majority of Irish soldiers deeply opposed the Emancipation Proclamation and the war's new direction, their attitude grounded in both racism and economic fears. Interestingly, Shiels's research directly challenges the viewpoint of those contemporary abolitionists (among them Frederick Douglass) who maintained that it was immersion into American society that produced Irish beliefs in black racial inferiority. Instead, Shiels's work strongly suggests that most Irish already held such opinions before they arrived on American soil.

In the arena of Irish American political identity, it is noteworthy that not a single letter in Shiels's sample expressed support for the Republican party. As the author explains, this is understandable given that party's evolution from nativist and anti-Catholic roots, and the Irish's position as the white ethnic group most vulnerable to the economic implications of emancipation and possible mass migration of freedpeople into heavily Irish urban centers. Also pointed out by the author is the Irish's generally conservative interpretation of the Constitution. Shiels does not dismiss the likelihood that many soldiers, in particular the early volunteers most personally invested in finishing the war, voted Republican in 1864 or declined to vote at all in protest of the Peace Party wing of the Democratic Party, but in his opinion it remains highly likely that the Irish cast the largest block of Democratic votes in the Union Army. Given that opposition to emancipation and Democratic affiliation in general both came to be widely viewed as evidence of disloyalty during the mid to late-war period, Shiels acknowledges that the ethnic group's voting patterns contributed mightily, and unfairly, to broad anti-Irish feeling.

Interwoven with nativist doubts about Irish loyalty were issues and perceptions related to chosen identity. From the letters Shiels examined emerged a dual Irish American identity that few among them were uncomfortable with by the 1860s, it being clear that these men were proud of their ethnic heritage but also strongly identified with being an American. Of course, those 1830s and 1840s immigrants and their children were more tightly bound to their American identity than those who arrived during the 1850s wave of new immigration. It is noteworthy that the soldier correspondents of Shiels's sample routinely elevated the Fourth of July holiday above St. Patrick's Day. Additionally, most of these soldiers did not pine for the old country in their letters home but rather expressed deep attachment to their local communities. They also more often than not preferred to get their news from non-ethnic newspapers.

Shiels challenges enduring negatives stereotypes of Irish soldiers as uninhibited rowdies and street toughs who were just as hard drinking as they were hard fighting. There were certainly large numbers of individuals in the Union Army (Irish or otherwise) who were just like that, but Shiels counters that his research reveals that the majority of Irish American soldiers, like their comrades of other ethnicities, valued duty and restraint within a generally more moderate form of what recent scholars term "martial manhood." On the matter of alcohol, the author acknowledges the significance of Irish drinking culture, but notes that all societal classes and ethnicities in the Union service struggled with alcohol abuse, and the nativist stereotyping of the Irish as exceptional offenders often led to harsher punishments than might otherwise have been imposed by officers.

Of course, any investigation into the religious identity of Irish Americans is readily confronted with the cultural dominance of the Catholic Church and its sacramental teachings. However, Shiels's research path also meaningfully encounters the much smaller Protestant Irish identity and outlook that many prior investigators tended to ignore as materially insignificant to the Irish American experience. Perhaps remarkable is that the letters he examined evinced very little in the way of sectarian division between the two groups when they served together.

In examining the crossover between identity and ideology when it comes to enlistment motivation, Shiels finds no evidence to support the popular contention that many Irish joined the Union Army primarily to gain military experience needed to free Ireland from British rule. Among the soldier correspondents, there was widespread sympathy for the Fenian Movement (the individual expression of which Shiels describes as often being "performative" in nature), but the primary focus of their attention was on the practical matter of doing their part to achieve Union victory and secure their own future in their adopted homeland. Rather than dream of returning to the "Old Sod" to free it from British imperial oppression (an aspiration that some individuals certainly did articulate), the far more common cross-Atlantic intention expressed by the sample correspondents was a determination to entice more family members and friends to join them in a reunited post-Civil War America full of promise and opportunity.

If Fenianism wasn't a major enlistment motivator, economic considerations and patriotism certainly were. The role economics played in early-war volunteerism in general has been examined at greater depth in recent years (William Marvel's detailed work being among the most pointed in tone and analysis), and it is clear from Shiels's sample group that the prospect of regular pay and other financial incentives were important considerations for the working-class individuals who formed the vast majority of Irish American volunteers. They, especially the urban workers, were especially vulnerable during the national economy's sharp late-antebellum and secession-period downturn. Whether expressed overtly or with more subtlety, patriotism was also widely expressed in the Irish soldier letters, especially from those who had spent their youth into adulthood years in the United States. Their words and sentiments related to duty and commitment to the preservation of the Union were similar to those of Union volunteers in general, and that evidence collectively reinforces the author's views in regard to the preeminence of local and national American identity over ethnic insularity.

In addition to being the first of its kind in terms of providing a comprehensive profile and analysis of Irish volunteers, Damian Shiels's deeply impressive Green and Blue ranks as one of the most important of all Civil War ethnic soldier studies. One might hope it could be used as a model for studying other large groups of ethnic volunteers such as German American soldiers, both for intrinsic value and for comparative purposes. This book is very highly recommended.

Booknotes: Hero of Fort Sumter

New Arrival:

• Hero of Fort Sumter: The Extraordinary Life of Robert Anderson by Wesley Moody (OU Press, 2025).

Kentuckian Robert Anderson's Civil War arc is well known to readers. Handling the situation in Charleston Harbor during the secession crisis as well as anyone could have expected under the circumstances, Anderson's conduct during the bombardment and surrender of Fort Sumter transformed the relatively obscure U.S. Army major into the Union's first war hero. He was rewarded with a major command in the western heartland, which poor health forced him to relinquish after only a short period in charge. He returned to Charleston in 1865 in an emotional flag raising ceremony at Fort Sumter, his Civil War career ending at the very place it began. Now readers will get the full story of Anderson's life and military service in Wesley Moody's Hero of Fort Sumter: The Extraordinary Life of Robert Anderson.

From the description: Moody "charts Robert Anderson’s path from an upbringing on the Kentucky frontier to a West Point education and a military career that saw him fighting in nearly every American conflict from the Black Hawk War to the Civil War—catching malaria fighting the Seminoles, taking several bullets while serving in Mexico, writing the textbook for field artillery used by both Union and Confederate forces, mentoring William Tecumseh Sherman."

Anderson had family and personal connections to a number of figures central to American history. More: "(His) family, harking back to the nation’s founding, included William Clark (of Lewis and Clark fame) and Chief Justice John Marshall. His father crossed the Delaware with George Washington. And among his acquaintances were presidents ranging from the aged John Adams to seven-year-old Theodore Roosevelt."

As fully expected, the centerpiece of Moody's biography is its coverage of the leadership Anderson displayed in Charleston Harbor between South Carolina's secession and the surrender of Fort Sumter. More from the description: "Central to Anderson’s story was his deft and decisive handling of the Fort Sumter crisis. Had Major Anderson been the aggressor, as many of his command urged, President Abraham Lincoln would have been unable to rally the Northern states to war. Had Anderson handed his command over to the Confederate troops, a demoralized North would have offered little resistance to secession." I don't know about that last point, but in upholding national honor Anderson surely did have to walk a fine line between provocation and showing strength.

If you are wondering about how much of the study addresses the remaining balance of Anderson's Civil War experience, around fifteen pages are devoted to his return to duty, promotion to brigadier general, his brief departmental command in 1861, and triumphal 1865 return to Fort Sumter. It will be interesting to get Moody's take on which factor, deteriorating personal health or lost favor with the Lincoln administration, was the principal driving force behind Anderson's replacement by William T. Sherman as Department of Kentucky commander. A handful of pages cover the final years of Anderson's life, from the end of the war to his death in 1871.

Another dormant series revived: Great Campaigns of the Civil War

Last month, I posted [here] some news regarding the impending return of the This Hallowed Ground and Civil War Campaigns in the West series from University of Nebraska Press and SIU Press, respectively. Now there's even more good news. Ten years after the publication of Perry Jamieson's Spring 1865: The Closing Campaigns of the Civil War (2015) comes word that the long-awaited next installment of the Great Campaigns of the Civil War series will be released in July of 2026. I've long known that an 1862 Peninsula Campaign addition to the series was in the works and was pleased to learn that it will finally be coming to fruition next year. Like the new This Hallowed Ground guidebook title from the same publisher, Forward to Richmond: The Virginia Campaign of 1862 is authored by Brian Burton. I don't know anything more about it than what's found at the link provided, but having Burton, best known for his Seven Days work, behind it is a plus in my book.

Review - "Fred Grant at Vicksburg: A Boy’s Memoir at His Father’s Side During the American Civil War" by Albert Nofi, ed.

[Fred Grant at Vicksburg: A Boy’s Memoir at His Father’s Side During the American Civil War edited and annotated by Albert A. Nofi (Savas Beatie, 2025). Softcover, 2 maps, photos, illustrations, footnotes, appendix section, bibliography, index. Pages:x,146. ISBN:978-1-61121-741-4. $16.95]

Perhaps hearkening back to the melancholy he experienced during his Old Army postings on the frontier (those feelings contributing to his decision to resign his commission in 1854), U.S. Grant arranged for the headquarters presence of close family members on numerous occasions during his celebrated Civil War service. Son Frederick Dent Grant was the frequent beneficiary of this chance of a lifetime opportunity for being present at the making of history, and, with the fulsome consent of mother Julia Dent Grant, the boy spent extensive periods of time with his father in the field. Perhaps the most event-filled of those interludes was when young Fred (12 years old at the time) joined the Grant headquarters family for the most active and decisive months of the 1863 Vicksburg Campaign. His most lengthy and detailed remembrance of that adventurous time is reproduced in editor Albert Nofi's Fred Grant at Vicksburg: A Boy’s Memoir at His Father’s Side During the American Civil War.

According to Nofi, more than a dozen versions of Fred Grant's speeches and interviews pertaining to his time in Mississippi can be viewed in print. The most comprehensive version of his wartime remembrance, and the one that forms the basis of this book, is the 18,000-word memoir account serialized by the National Tribune in 1887. In addition to organizing and transcribing that Tribune account in full, Nofi annotates the material. His footnotes identify or clarify persons, places, and events mentioned in Fred's memoir while dutifully pointing out errors in the account as well as noteworthy differences with, or omissions from, other versions. A selection of important people and places mentioned in the text are addressed at greater length in a pair of appendices as well.

It's easy to see why Fred Grant was a prize get for the Gilded Age speaking circuit. Beyond the obvious appeal of being the son of the Union Army's greatest war hero, Fred, a West Point graduate himself (Class of 1871) who eventually reached the rank of major general, was well informed on military matters in his own right. His Tribune account is a mixture of serious observation balanced by more lighthearted remembrances of boyish antics and adventures near the enemy (sometimes too close for comfort). Though obviously pro-Union in sentiment, the memoir treats friend (even comrades with whom his father sharply conflicted, such as John C. McClernand) and foe alike with an even keel.

Fred's Vicksburg account was developed well after the war ended and apparently without the fact-checking benefit of any additional source material or personal notes. As Nofi mentions, that led to a lot of mistakes in identifying persons, places, and especially dates. Events were also occasionally conflated or mistaken altogether. So what value is there to be had? The memoir definitely provides Civil War readers with a unique perspective in terms of its author being the son of the commanding general, a position that afforded him ready access and opportunity for observing and interacting with the army's high command in the middle of a critically important campaign. The boyish adventures that young Grant engaged in on multiple occasions might also interest many readers. Some anecdotes are uniquely Fred's. For instance, his account of General Grant and Admiral David Porter personally involving themselves with a shipboard test firing of a coffee mill gun, the unfortunate result of which was a fairly severe (by Fred's estimate) accidental injury to the general's hand that took some time to heal. According to Nofi, that incident, though very specific and vividly described by Fred, is mentioned nowhere in Grant's own writings nor could the editor find the incident described in any other books about Grant.

By his own account (which spans the period, with some interruption, from the end of March 1863 to just after the fall of Vicksburg), Fred seemed to have had the ability to freely attach himself to any of Grant's subordinate generals, and he apparently shared company with all the army's corps and division commanders at one time or another, witnessing most in action. He claims to have been adopted as a special "pet" by some of the Grant's officers (ex. James McPherson) and befriended an orderly that joined him on many escapades.

Fred's high command access allowed him to gain the measure of Grant's lieutenants, at least in retrospect, and he freely shares his perceptions of them in the memoir. His impressions of the personalities and abilities of important generals such as Sherman, McClernand, and McPherson closely align with the most common descriptions of those qualities passed down through history all the way to today. Of the division commanders in the Army of the Tennessee, John Logan inspired exceptional curiosity and admiration from Fred. It's interesting that he repeatedly refers to the general as "Fighting Jack," with no mention of the "Black Jack" nickname that today's students are much more familiar with in their own reading.

The absence of extensive discussion related to the Vicksburg operation's siege phase is explained by the fact that the writer was sent away during that time to recover from a festering flesh wound received earlier in the campaign. Given that camp diseases and stray bullets had no regard for rank or youth (ask Sherman about the deadly risks involved in exposing one's own child to that), it is somewhat startling to learn just how enthusiastic Julia was about continually sending Fred to be with her husband at the front, even after the boy was shot and also caught a life-threatening case of dysentery. She even amusingly justifies Grant having Fred around on campaign as being akin to Philip of Macedon mentoring a young Alexander.

This is a fine memoir of the Vicksburg Campaign written from a wholly distinctive perspective, made even more valuable through the prodigious enhancements and supplements provided by the editor.

Booknotes: From Ironclads to Admiral

New Arrival:

• From Ironclads to Admiral: John Lorimer Worden and Naval Leadership by John V. Quarstein & Robert L. Worden (Naval Inst Press, 2025).

Most Civil War readers remember John L. Worden as the first commander of the U.S.S. Monitor, which he led during the most famous naval duel of the Civil War—the ironclad clash between his ship and C.S.S. Virginia at Hampton Roads in March 1862. During that engagement, Worden was badly wounded, and he largely fades from more general treatments of the naval conflict. However, it was the case that Worden had many more contributions to make, and his entire life and career are examined in John Quarstein and collateral descendant Robert Worden's From Ironclads to Admiral: John Lorimer Worden and Naval Leadership. According to Craig Symonds's jacket blurb, this the first full biography of Worden.

From the description: "Throughout his 52-year career, Rear Adm. John Lorimer Worden was always the right officer for the job. The epitome of an innovative commander who helped move the U.S. Navy out of the age of sail and into the era of ironclad technology, Worden’s contributions extended beyond the Battle of Hampton Roads and shaped the future of the Navy. He demonstrated exceptional leadership in both combat and peacetime."

In April 1861, Worden, employed as a secret messenger for the government, was arrested on his way back to Washington and held captive by Confederate authorities for more than half a year. Upon release, Worden's antebellum sea experiences and scientific background [he led "a successful rescue mission" and captured "a prize ship during the Mexican-American War," and later served "(t)hree tours at the U.S. Naval Observatory"] placed him in good stead when a commander was sought for the U.S. Navy's Monitor, a new and untried technological wonder.

Upon recovery from his Hampton Roads battle wounds, Worden played a major role in the U.S. Navy's further refinements in ironclad design, use, and technology. More from the description: Worden "returned to command the USS Montauk, where his unparalleled expertise in ironclad design and combat tactics continued to set him apart. From testing ships in battle to overseeing the innovative production of ironclads at the Brooklyn Navy Yard, he consistently refined his craft. Confronted with multiple ship design failures, he relentlessly drove improvements, pushing the boundaries of naval technology and securing lasting progress in the development of modern warships."

When the Civil War ended, Worden's professional career was far from over. He "became superintendent of the U.S. Naval Academy, where he trained the next generation of naval officers and co-founded the U.S. Naval Institute." He "capped his career by ably serving as commander-in-chief of the European Squadron during a time of upheaval on that continent. Displaying courage, commitment, and diplomacy, Worden skillfully led U.S. European naval forces from 1875 to 1877."

Coming Soon (July '25 Edition)

Scheduled for JULY 2025¹:
• Gettysburg Surgeons: Facing a Common Enemy in the Civil War’s Deadliest Battle by Barbara Franco.
• Encyclopedia of Union Generals: The Definitive Guide to the 588 Leaders of the North's War Effort by Samuel Mitcham.
• The Lower Battlefield of Antietam: The Forgotten Front of America's Bloodiest Day by Robert Dunkerly.
• Conflict and Controversy in the Confederate High Command: Davis, Johnston, Hood and the Atlanta Campaign of 1864 by Dennis Conklin.
• Landscapes of Freedom: Restoring the History of Emancipation and Citizenship in Yorktown, Virginia, 1861–1940 by Rebecca Toy.
• David Davis: Abraham Lincoln's Favorite Judge by Raymond McKoskie.
• Midnight on the Potomac: The Last Year of the Civil War, the Lincoln Assassination, and the Rebirth of America by Scott Ellsworth.
• The Invincible Twelfth: The 12th South Carolina Infantry of the Gregg-McGowan Brigade, Army of Northern Virginia by Benjamin Cwayna.

¹ - These monthly release lists are not meant to be exhaustive compilations of non-fiction releases. They do not include reprints that are not significantly revised/expanded, special editions not distributed to reviewers, children's books, and digital-only titles. Works that only tangentially address the war years are also generally excluded. Inevitably, one or more titles on this list will get a rescheduled release (and they do not get repeated later), so revisiting the past few "Coming Soon" posts is the best way to pick up stragglers.

Booknotes: The National Tribune Remembers the Atlanta Campaign

New Arrival:

• The National Tribune Remembers the Atlanta Campaign: Battles, Skirmishes, Marches, and Camp Life as Recalled by the Union Veterans Themselves edited by Stephen Davis (Savas Beatie, 2025).

During its decades-long run, the National Tribune periodical evolved into one of the most significant archives of Civil War veteran writings. From the description: "From 1877 to 1943, the National Tribune served as a compendium for Union veteran reminiscences, war yarns, and postbellum reflections. The firsthand treasure-trove began as an eight-page monthly newspaper in 1881 and within a few years it became a weekly. The Washington-based paper was founded by George E. Lemon, a veteran of the 125th New York. Initially an advocate for Union veteran pensions, the National Tribune hit its stride when it began publishing articles about the war penned by the Northern soldiers themselves." The man primarily behind the Tribune hitting that stride was John McElroy.

More from the description:"Within three years, John McElroy, a Union veteran with editing experience and the author of a dramatic memoir about his confinement at Andersonville (1879), assumed the reins as managing editor. His keen eye for detail and deep connections elevated the quality and quantity of the content and resulted in the publication of thousands of exclusive firsthand accounts. The National Tribune’s final issue was on December 30, 1943. By that date, the Union veterans who had fought the war were nearly all gone."

Given its stature as one of the Civil War's largest and most significant campaigns, it's no surprise that the 1864 Atlanta Campaign was a popular topic of discussion among veteran writers. Indeed, "(m)ore than 1,000 items were published on the Atlanta Campaign alone: articles, memoirs, and letters on every topic imaginable sent in by Union soldiers who had followed General Sherman into Georgia in 1864. The first appeared in June 1879 on the battle of Kennesaw Mountain." A selection of these, seventy in number, are compiled by Atlanta Campaign historian Stephen Davis in The National Tribune Remembers the Atlanta Campaign: Battles, Skirmishes, Marches, and Camp Life as Recalled by the Union Veterans Themselves. 

Davis's introduction briefly summarizes the Tribune's history and explains the rationale behind how the volume was created (including the article selection process). Outside of the introduction, the text is not annotated in the traditional manner of numbered footnotes or endnotes. Instead, the editorial material is presented in a more informal style, a contextual conversation of sorts (set apart by italics) placed at either or both ends of each piece. In many cases, bracketed comments are also inserted within the transcribed passages. The notes provide additional background information and critically engage the veteran text through commentary of various types and author error discussion (all referenced).

Review- "A Campaign of Giants - The Battle for Petersburg, Volume 2: From the Crater's Aftermath to the Battle of Burgess Mill" by A. Wilson Greene

[A Campaign of Giants - The Battle for Petersburg, Volume 2: From the Crater's Aftermath to the Battle of Burgess Mill by A. Wilson Greene (University of North Carolina Press, 2025). Hardcover, 34 maps, endnotes, bibliography, index. Pages main/total:xiii,495/706. ISBN:978-1-4696-8481-9. $45]

Generations of avid followers of the Civil War campaigns fought in the eastern theater between the Union Army of the Potomac and Confederate Army of Northern Virginia have been enthralled by streams of books detailing the sweeping maneuvers, crushing flank attacks, and grand assaults that generated signature moments of enduring distinction among so many of the great field contests of 1862-63. However, when considering the campaigns fought in the theater from the spring of 1864 onward, a different popular impression of the style of warfare fought between those mighty foes emerged. For a long time, reader perception of the 1864 Overland Campaign was primarily that of a continuous series of brutal frontal slugging matches remarkable mostly for the unprecedented attritional bloodletting they produced amid extensive tactical reliance on fieldworks, and the 1864-65 Richmond-Petersburg Campaign was widely seen as a static "siege" operation. Over recent decades, though, those simplistic characterizations have been significantly overthrown by way of fresh scholarship and reassessment. Starting with Gordon Rhea's classic series of books, the Overland Campaign has come to be seen and appreciated with far more operational and tactical nuance than ever before. For the 1864-65 Richmond-Petersburg Campaign, a flood of new books has revealed that that long campaign, far from being anything truly siege-like, rather consisted of a series of mobile offensives that produced numerous battles with a great many features of interest to inquisitive military history students. A major contributor to that profound altering of perception is A. Wilson Greene, his latest project being a monumental three-volume history that began in 2018 with the release of A Campaign of Giants - The Battle for Petersburg, Volume 1: From the Crossing of the James to the Crater. Published earlier this year, the middle tome, A Campaign of Giants - The Battle for Petersburg, Volume 2: From the Crater's Aftermath to the Battle of Burgess Mill, is the subject of this review. It comprehensively addresses events on the Richmond and Petersburg fronts from the beginning of August 1864 through the end of October, months that encompassed the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth of the campaign's nine distinct offensives.

The Fourth Offensive (August 12-25) marked further development of Union Army general in chief U.S. Grant's overall theater strategy of launching coordinated offensive movements against either end of the Richmond-Petersburg line. With the Confederates not knowing which of the two was the main effort, the hope was that good timing and local superiority in numbers would combine to score a major breakthrough. If outright capture of those cities could not be achieved, at the very least gains would be made in isolating them further. While the Battle of Second Deep Bottom, on the face of it, was poorly conducted and failed to either threaten Richmond or cut the Virginia Central Railroad, it did practically ensure that the Confederates couldn't provide further aid to Jubal Early's Shenandoah Valley operation. Regardless of how much that affected Lee's real plans, the resources that went into stopping the Union attack north of the James weakened Confederate forces south of the river and eased Union Fifth Corps' task of seizing the Weldon Railroad (a major lifeline into Petersburg). During the fighting on August 18-19, G.K. Warren's Fifth Corps successfully cut across the railroad, but the gap between its advance and the rest of the army was negligently spanned (the blame for which could be spread around). That hole in the front was exploited in devastating fashion by William Mahone's Confederate division, which launched a breakthrough attack that hauled in a massive load of prisoners before being halted by arriving Union Ninth Corps elements. The Confederates didn't have the numbers to fully exploit their initial breakthrough and were rather easily turned back with heavy losses of their own during the subsequent August 21 fighting against Fifth Corps's firmly entrenched position across the railroad. In the author's view, Mahone, as he had earlier in the campaign, "played the starring role" in the Fourth Offensive. Warren's grade, on the other hand, was decidedly mixed. The controversial Fifth Corps commander displayed little in the way of offensive-minded drive and initiative, and he shared responsibility for the open space in the front line that Mahone exploited. On a more positive note, Warren partially redeemed himself on the 21st (although, as Greene maintains, achieving that defensive victory did not require any great display of generalship, and Warren made no effort to take advantage of the enemy's newly vulnerable condition). The action did not end there, though, as Grant and Meade sought to expand their gains. By any measure, the resulting Battle of Second Reams Station (August 25) was poorly fought affair on the Union side. As Greene outlines, Second Corps lines were badly placed, cavalry reconnaissance completely missed the Confederate build-up nearby, and Meade inadequately supported Hancock. In addition to severely damaging Second Corps, adding 2,000 prisoners to the larger haul accumulated only days earlier, Lee's men halted further destruction of the Weldon Railroad, which kept at a manageable distance the logistical bypass that Warren's continued presence astride the railroad still forced upon them.

Upon concluding his meticulous description and analysis of the Fourth Offensive, Greene detours into an informative look into the ongoing development of federal siegecraft, especially in the context of how it was applied to consolidating the gains produced by the latest offensive. The author also explores side topics such as fraternization between the armies and the reactions of both sides to the fall of Atlanta. During this operational pause, Union forces also grasped the opportunity to reorganize their order of battle. The main military event of the period bridging the Fourth and Fifth offensives was the "Beefsteak Raid." While Greene's fine account of that celebrated Confederate cavalry operation concludes that success was primarily due to neglect and complacency among the Union leadership, it also offers strong accolades for the man who conceived and conducted it, Wade Hampton. Throughout Greene's narrative it is revealed that Hampton was a more than capable replacement for the late Jeb Stuart, the tactical skill displayed during his command's close cooperation with the infantry on multiple occasions playing an important part in limiting Union gains below Petersburg. Indeed, while the story of the final breakthrough at Petersburg and complete success of the Appomattox Campaign in 1865 is commonly attributed to the advanced development of Union combined arms deployment of infantry and cavalry, a strong argument could be made that the Confederates held the upper hand in that regard (though theirs was more defensive in nature) on the Petersburg front in 1864. A major theme developed early on and throughout the rest of the book is the profound effects Shenandoah Valley-related events and strategic considerations had on operational planning for both sides on the Richmond and Petersburg fronts. Involved with all of that was a mixture of opportunity and fear of enemy intentions (real and imagined).

In his assessment of Grant's Fifth Offensive (September 29-October 2), Greene gives Army of the James commander Benjamin Butler mixed marks. Though Butler's command seized New Market Heights and captured Fort Harrison, further attacks ultimately fell short against the Intermediate Line of Richmond's three-ringed system of defensive fortifications. The initial plan of operations was well-received and Grant approved it without revision, but the author feels that Butler accorded more weight than was needed against the thinly held heights, not leaving enough strength to push beyond Fort Harrison, breach the Intermediate Line, and push into Richmond. Greene is certainly persuasive in arguing that leadership failures (and inopportune high command casualties), played a major part in stalling what was, even by early morning, a very promising offensive. On the Confederate side, Lee balanced his forces on both sides of the James in judicious fashion yet again, and the Richmond front's collection of front-line, second-line, and reserve troops held on better than could reasonably be expected against long odds and did not widely panic after initial disaster. Forced to wait until the next day to respond, Lee, determined to recover the lost ground, launched a counterattack against Fort Harrison that failed in the face of poor coordination from his subordinates and a consolidated defense. Meanwhile, on the other end of the line below Petersburg, four divisions of Warren's Fifth and John Parke's Ninth Corps set out west to test the sector held by A.P. Hill's Confederates and make sure no more enemy reinforcements left for the Richmond or Shenandoah fronts. Their limited action was authorized to shift over into a major offensive if circumstances permitted. While Warren and Parke seized the lightly held Squirrel Level Line on September 30, only cautious advances followed, and Hill seized the initiative, smashing the federal advance at Pegram's Farm (taking in another large haul of prisoners). The following day, the Confederates, eager to reprise their devastating counterattack of August 19, instead bungled the assault against a better prepared enemy, leading to hundreds of ill-afforded casualties. Resumption of offensive action was urged by Grant and Meade, but Warren and Parke only inched forward with their innate caution, and the Fifth Offensive ended up petering out on both sides of the James after some ineffectual probing attacks.

As Greene convincingly demonstrates, both sides had reason to be alternatively pleased and disappointed with aspects of the Fifth Offensive. The Confederates lost Fort Harrison on the Richmond front and their Squirrel Level Line buffer southwest of Petersburg, but they inflicted better than two to one losses on their foes and maintained every critical point, sealing off the breakthrough at Fort Harrison and maintaining possession of the primary positions covering the Boydton Plank Road and South Side Railroad. Union forces, by seizing the Squirrel Level Line were able to use that new position to anchor yet another westward push across Petersburg's southern front. Butler's command captured Fort Harrison (though the long-term significance of that achievement proved minimal), and his USCT forces were able to earn valuable combat prestige and experience at New Market Heights. Throughout Greene's Fifth Offensive coverage, one gains an appreciation for how adeptly the Confederate defenders employed interior lines and tactical flexibility to counter Meade and Butler's more plodding subordinates and superior numbers.

The significance of the Confederate attack down Darbytown Road on October 7, which brushed aside Butler's right flank cavalry before being stopped cold by the refused line of fortifications held by David Birney's Tenth Corps, is recognized as marking the final attempt by Lee to eliminate the Union threat to Richmond north of the James (or at least limit it to a small bridgehead at Deep Bottom). Greene also conjectures that the failure led Lee to finally accept that his army could no longer risk heavy casualties through large-scale counterattacks. But that realization did not mean the end of activity on the Richmond front. The period between the end of the Fifth Offensive and the beginning of the Sixth Offensive witnessed both a major extension of Confederate entrenchments east of Richmond (the "Alexander Line") and a major testing of those new positions by Butler's command, which was repulsed with significant loss in the Second Battle of Darbytown Road. On the other end of the line, near Squirrel Level Road, more clashes erupted across no man's land.

For his Sixth Offensive (October 27-28), Grant continued to hit upon his promising strategy of employing simultaneous attacks on both ends of the long Richmond-Petersburg line. North of the James, Butler's two corps (Tenth and Eighteenth) sought to outflank the newly extended Confederate front before Richmond but instead engaged the Confederate defenders, who used lateral flexibility to meet them head on, through a series of poorly conducted attacks that produced no results noteworthy enough to justify the casualties incurred. Meanwhile, strong elements of Second, Fifth, and Ninth corps plus Gregg's cavalry swung around the far Confederate right below Petersburg and attempted to seize the grail objectives of Boydton Plank Road and the South Side Railroad. Neither of those lofty goals would be met, as Parke and Warren became immediately bogged down, leaving Hancock to fight off a fierce counterattack at Burgess Mill. Their rebuff left the Confederate spearheads, especially Mahone's men, isolated and vulnerable, and it was with great difficulty that they were able to disengage and withdraw without disaster. In the end, both sides suffered roughly equal casualties overall and Second Corps fell back rather than risk staying in an isolated position. With that fizzle went any hope of achieving a signal success on the Richmond and Petersburg fronts that might have helped clinch Lincoln's prospects for reelection. For the eastern theater at least, that honor would go to Philip Sheridan's series of victories in the Shenandoah Valley.

In conveying to readers an understanding as to why this series of Union offensives, like those that preceded them, failed to achieve greater results, Greene focuses mostly closely on controllable factors. At a number of places in the narrative, Grant's frustration is felt deeply, as his innate aggressiveness could not be fully transmitted to the tip of the spear on either side of the James. If Grant was a jolt of electricity from the top, and Meade duly carried out his superior's wishes while also offering sage advisement, the charge steadily diminished as it moved down the Union order of battle, which acted like a poorly insulated conducting wire. Even the usually reliable cavalry division commander David Gregg significantly underperformed during this period. In ways that attempted to cover up their own shortcomings, Union leaders frequently blamed their own men for defeats. At numerous points in the book, the author reveals damning quotes, originating from high-ranking Union generals and lesser lights alike, that routinely blamed the new men in the army for the most lopsided mishaps suffered at the hands of Lee's veterans. Directly confronting those claims might be beyond the scope of Greene's investigation, but one hopes that the third volume can reserve some space for addressing the most recent scholarship on the topic. Completed around the same time as Greene's Volume 2 are major works from Edwin Rutan and Alexandre Caillot that strongly challenge the most persistently hidebound negative assessments of the fighting capabilities of the Army of the Potomac's late-war enlistees and regiments.

As revealed in the book, the Confederates were not without their own accumulation of operational misjudgments and tactical mistakes. Lee is reasonably second-guessed on occasion, one example being his determination to go forward with a delayed counterattack to try to recover Fort Harrison, but the record remains clear that the Confederate leadership overall performed commendably in limiting federal gains to manageable losses in the near term. Of Lee's subordinates, hard-hitting William Mahone emerges as his commander's chief fireman on many battlefields described in both volumes, and Greene's narrative also offers renewed appreciation for Henry Heth, who is typically regarded as a fairly middling major general. With the ailing A.P. Hill leaving a bit of a higher leadership void along his overstretched and highly vulnerable Third Corps front, Heth stepped up effectively in some key moments.

Though Greene prominently pays homage to those who have covered this material before, singling out for special recognition Hampton Newsome, John Horn, and the late Richard Sommers, and refers his readers to the relevant works from that trio to find even more micro-level detail, his own narrative offers impressive levels of tactical depth and sage analysis. Indeed, Greene ranks high in his ability to transform a vast amount of primary and secondary source research into a complex yet readily comprehensible campaign and battlefield narrative. Supplementing Green's text is a set of very fine operational and tactical-scale maps (34 in total) from Edward Alexander that cover the action without leaving any notable gaps.

Judging from the content and tone of this review, one might correctly surmise that this volume receives the site's highest possible recommendation. If V3 meets the same standards set by V1-2, and there is no reason to suppose otherwise, then the finished trilogy will unquestionably become a lasting standard on the same order as other top-flight book series such as David Powell's Chickamauga, Timothy Smith's Vicksburg, and Gordon Rhea's aforementioned Overland Campaign work.

Booknotes: Lee Besieged

New Arrival:

• Lee Besieged: Grant’s Second Petersburg Offensive, June 18–July 1, 1864 by John Horn (Savas Beatie, 2025).

It's easy to see why John Horn is one of the authors that A. Wilson Greene singles out for special acknowledgment in his epic multi-volume history of the 1864-65 Richmond-Petersburg Campaign. After all, Horn was putting out Petersburg titles long before the topic's recent upsurge in interest and coverage. His volume addressing the events of August 1864 ranks among the better entries in H.E. Howard's classic Virginia Civil War Battles and Leaders series, and his Petersburg Campaign contribution to Combined Books's Great Campaigns series of overviews was a staple of used bookstores way back when. A big part of Horn's more recent return to prominence is his partnership with Savas Beatie, which reissued in 2015 a newly revised and expanded version of Horn's Howard series book on Grant's Fourth Offensive and published Horn's regimental history of the 12th Virginia (the "Petersburg Regiment") in 2019. Their latest collaboration is Lee Besieged: Grant’s Second Petersburg Offensive, June 18–July 1, 1864, another impressive-looking effort.

Grant's Second Offensive, which came on the heels of the mid-June attacks that failed to achieve their goal of capturing Petersburg and forcing the evacuation of Richmond, was arguably "one of the most dramatic operations of the entire war." From the description: "To pave the way for success, Grant brought the city’s bridges under the fire of his siege guns to slow the transfer of enemy trips in and out of Petersburg. He also seized a bridgehead at Deep Bottom on James River’s north bank to draw Confederate forces out of Petersburg by menacing Richmond. Next, he took more ambitious measures by sending infantry to hem in Petersburg from the Appomattox River below the city to the Appomattox above. The move was designed to cut the critical Weldon and South Side railroads and force the Rebels to abandon Petersburg and Richmond. As his infantry went to work, his cavalry set out to sever the Confederate railroads below Petersburg to cut off supplies and reinforcements from the south and west."

By seizing the bridgehead on the north bank of the James River while also sweeping below Petersburg, this offensive marked the initiation of what would develop into a months-long series of concurrent large-scale attacks against the defenses and lines of communication into and between both Richmond and Petersburg, the object being to stretch Confederate lines to the breaking point and force a decisive breakthrough on either end of the line. While progress would be made, the ultimate prize eluded the federals until the following spring.

Among a number of factors, fierce Confederate opposition played a major part in keeping the federals out of both cities. Lee's army, though heavily depleted over the course of the Overland Campaign, remained a highly potent opponent. More from the description: During the Second Offensive detailed in Horn's study, "Lee and his infantry division commander William Mahone marched to meet the enemy, and in a stunning turn of events, routed Grant’s foot soldiers at Jerusalem Plank Road. Together, Confederate cavalry under Wade Hampton and Mahone’s infantry smashed Grant’s troopers at the battles of Sappony Church and First Reams Station. Thousands of Federal prisoners flooded into Confederate camps." The grind would go on.

The Second Offensive was covered very well in the first volume of Greene's A Campaign of Giants trilogy (which just completed its second part), but, as far as I know, this book is the first major standalone treatment of those events. In support of Horn's detailed narrative is a whopping set of forty maps. Contained in the appendix section are strength and casualty tables along with orders of battle.

Booknotes: Gettysburg Surgeons

New Arrival:

• Gettysburg Surgeons: Facing a Common Enemy in the Civil War’s Deadliest Battle by Barbara Franco (Stackpole Bks, 2025).

The plight of the Gettysburg Campaign's wounded has been examined, to some degree or another, in innumerable books and articles. Barbara Franco's Gettysburg Surgeons: Facing a Common Enemy in the Civil War’s Deadliest Battle contributes to that expansive literature by focusing most closely on the physicians from both sides who were charged with the care of a veritable flood of torn bodies. From the description: "In the bloodiest battle of the Civil War, a thousand surgeons faced an unprecedented medical catastrophe: 25,000 wounded soldiers needing immediate care with only primitive tools and their own determination to save lives."

In field hospitals established all around the Gettysburg landscape, these surgeons struggled to keep up with the sheer volume of wounded. From dealing with all that human tragedy (at Gettysburg and elsewhere during the Civil War years), however, emerged invaluable experience and knowledge that facilitated a leap forward in developing improved treatments for physical trauma and in post-operative care. More: "At Gettysburg's makeshift hospitals—set up in barns, churches, and blood-soaked fields—military and civilian surgeons from both North and South worked around the clock performing life-saving operations under fire. Drawing from a decade of meticulous research, historian Barbara Franco reveals how these courageous medical professionals revolutionized battlefield medicine and established principles still saving lives today."

Expressed "(t)hrough vivid accounts and previously untold stories," major themes in Franco's study address: "(h)ow surgeons improvised new techniques that became standard trauma procedures," "(t)he harrowing reality of Civil War field hospitals during the three days of battle," "(h)ow lessons learned at Gettysburg transformed American military medicine," and "(t)he lasting impact on modern emergency and disaster response."

Franco's study is delivered in three parts. Part I delves at some length into background matters associated with Civil War surgeons, including their education, army recruitment, defined duties, and experiences in the field. The heart of the book is found in Part II's discussion of the many duties and responsibilities involved with caring for the wounded both during and after the three-day battle. Finally, Part III focuses on one of the least investigated aspects of a Civil War surgeon's career arc—the strain involved with returning to the civilian world after the war ended—those challenges relating to both finding success in professional practice postwar and maintaining personal health that was in many cases chronically impaired by their hospital service. Some abandoned medicine altogether, redirecting their primary energies toward business or political pursuits. For added reference value, a number of Union and Confederate surgeons are individually profiled in the appendix section.

Two of my favorite university press book series to awaken from their slumber next year

1. Among our choices of battlefield touring books, Nebraska's This Hallowed Ground: Guides to Civil War Battlefields series has always been a CWBA favorite. According to the home page, there was an six-year gap between the two most recent volumes, and, more significantly, nothing has been released since 2014. That extended hibernation has long had me concerned that the series was discontinued. Happily, I just found out that that will not be the case, and we'll get another installment next June—Brian Burton's Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville: A Battlefield Guide (2026). It will be Burton's second contribution to the series, the first being 2007's The Peninsula and Seven Days: A Battlefield Guide.

2. Also next June we'll get The Forts Henry and Donelson Campaign: February 6-16, 1862 (2026), edited by Woodworth and Grear, from SIU Press's Civil War Campaigns in the West essay anthology series. The most recent title was 2020's Vicksburg Besieged, so in this case the gap between then and now is more like getting back up from a long nap than a deep slumber. At any rate, it's great to get confirmation that the editorial team is still plugging away at their ambitious schedule (by my count, this upcoming title will be the eighth of seventeen originally planned volumes). Unless they can start to shrink that interval between releases again, though, only a modern Methuselah will be able to collect them all.

Booknotes: Loving Lincoln

New Arrival:

• Loving Lincoln: A Personal History of the Women Who Shaped Lincoln's Life and Legacy by Stacy Lynn (SIU Press, 2025).

Stacy Lynn's Loving Lincoln "features thirty historical and personal essays, and within them, the stories of more than ninety women, each with their own mini biographies in an appendix. Among them are Lincoln’s friends, clients, and extended family, as well as writers, artists, and—blurring the lines between history and memoir—author Stacy Lynn herself."

Lynn believes that too many Lincoln scholars and historians have "overlooked Lincoln’s love for and friendship with women." By contrast, her own study "lifts up their interactions with Lincoln." Loving Lincoln centers on the great many women who helped mold Lincoln's "moral character" throughout his life. More from the description: "Lincoln understood the importance of the women in his life, and he put women’s wellbeing at the center of his personal, professional, and political ethos. He was loved by two strong pioneer mothers as well as sisters, friends, nieces, friends’ daughters, and his wife. He served women clients during his long legal career. As president, he met with women, dedicating time to hear their concerns despite the burdens of office. He replied to letters women wrote him. He believed in their capabilities and revolutionized the role of women in the workforce."

After Lincoln's 1865 assassination, women also played a role in shaping his remembrance in the long term. More: "Mary Lincoln ensured his burial among friends, artist Vinnie Ream sculpted his statue in the US Capitol, and biographer Ida Tarbell provided a nuanced portrayal of his life. Harriet Monroe and Ruth Painter Randall further cemented his place in literature and history."

In sum, "Lynn’s unique blending of history, biography, and her own story reveals the ways in which an emotional connection to the historical figures one studies opens the door to richer human and historical understanding."

Review - "North Carolina's Confederate Hospitals 1864-1865, Volume II" by Wade Sokolosky

[North Carolina's Confederate Hospitals 1864-1865, Volume II by Wade Sokolosky (Fox Run Publishing, 2025), Hardcover, 7 maps, photos, tables, footnotes, bibliography, index. Pages main/total:viii,216/263. ISBN:978-1-945602-30-6. $32.95]

By now the vast majority of significant Civil War campaigns, raids, and battles fought in the state of North Carolina, beginning with the Union captures of Forts Hatteras and Clark in August 1861 and concluding with the Confederate surrender at Bennett Place in April 1865, have received noteworthy treatment in the military history literature. However, the Confederate medical service's tall task of dealing with the human cost of those conflicts, from serious illness and disease acquired in camp or on the march to wounds received on the battlefield, has not been followed in like depth and fashion. Making enormous inroads into bridging that gap is Wade Sokolosky, who has not only contributed immensely to the documentation of the late-war campaigns in North Carolina but is now in the middle of producing a multi-volume history of the military hospital system in North Carolina. The newest installment in that project, North Carolina's Confederate Hospitals 1864-1865, Volume II, represents the middle volume of a planned trilogy.

As one might expect, Volume II closely follows the structure and style of presentation first established by the author in North Carolina's Confederate Hospitals 1861-1863, Volume I. At this late stage of the war, the bureaucratic conflicts between the Richmond government and state and local authorities that were covered so well in Volume I were largely resolved. Many other important topics and themes, however, are common to both books. Volume II continues to feature detailed profiles of every general hospital and wayside hospital in operation during the covered period, the wayside hospital being responsible for the feeding and temporary care (ex. examination and redressing of bandages) of wounded and sick soldiers in transit. Hospital location, its physical description, bed capacity, and personnel matters related to it are major features of each facility profile. Firsthand accounts gleaned from Sokolosky's deep primary source research also provide readers with keen insights into hospital operations from both staff and patient perspectives. Specific administrative issues, both internally and within the system at large, are also frequently discussed.

The tireless and highly competent leadership of Medical Director Peter Hines is commended throughout. In addition to the doctor's adept display of large-scale hospital system management skills, Hines always did his duty with an eye toward enhancing the quality of patient care. Examples cited by the author include Hines's decision, during mid-war hospital expansion, to adopt the pavilion-style designs that both sides came to favor and his establishment of specialized care destinations within the system (ex. the Greensboro location having particular expertise in treating wounds to the face). The leadership and accomplishments of many other military surgeons are also recognized, as are the contributions of lower staff and civilian nurses. While the well-known writings of, for example, volunteer nurse Kate Sperry ensure that her own viewpoints and activities are never forgotten, the author points out in both volumes that that was not the case for the many black nurses and hospital attendants for whom sources documenting their service do not exist.

A prominent theme in both books is the profound effects military campaigns, both inside and outside the state, had on hospital locations and operations. In Volume I it was primarily mounting casualties on the Virginia fighting front that drove hospital expansion, while Union raids launched from the occupied tidewater region of the state periodically threatened locations where major hospitals were situated. By 1864, expansion of the military hospital system centered around the three new pavilion-style hospitals referenced earlier, which were not entirely completed before being overtaken by events. As Sokolosky documents, the hospital system as a whole became threatened from all sides by large-scale military actions as 1864 progressed into 1865. In addition to renewed coastal incursions, the state was invaded from the south by General Sherman's unstoppable host and from the west through the mountains by increasingly daring cavalry raids (Stoneman's Raid in 1865 being the most prominent). To the north, the incessant stream of casualties from battles fought during the 1864 Overland and 1864-65 Richmond-Petersburg campaigns imposed unprecedented capacity stresses on North Carolina's hospitals. Those stresses, combined with mounting supply and material scarcities, threatened to overwhelm the entire system.

As first explained in Volume I, general hospital location, in addition to striking a delicate balance between proximity to the front and safety from enemy attack, was also driven by logistical considerations. That limiting factor made their establishment near cities and along major rail lines a practical necessity. In Volume II, Sokolosky recounts the constant struggles involved in maintaining hospital operations in the face of competing military demands for rail transport, the general breakdown in the Confederate economy, and the gradual shutting off of foreign supply sources through the blockade. Of course, the logistical hubs in and around which those hospitals were located were also prime military targets for the enemy, and Sokolosky carefully documents the constant relocation of hospitals and patients into the interior as the state's major cities rapidly fell to approaching Union forces in 1865. While reading those sections of the book, one cannot help but appreciate the administrative marvel that kept North Carolina's hospital system in some semblance of existence and order until the guns finally fell silent.

The trilogy's first two volumes are both heavily illustrated. In addition to pinpointing the shifting locations of North Carolina's general and wayside hospitals through a series of excellent maps, other visual supplements found in Volume II include images of persons and locations, useful data tables, and photographic reproductions of staff and admission-related documents from the archives.

So, with Volume II taking readers through the end of the war, what's left to cover in the final installment? As the author explains, Volume III will house a collection of additional topics, the prior integration of which would have proved too disruptive to the chronological flow maintained throughout the first two books. Being witness to the quality level thus far displayed, one looks forward to the final volume with relish as well as with a strong sense of appreciation for Wade Sokolosky's dedication in producing a definitive-scale history and reference guide to North Carolina's Civil War military hospitals.

Booknotes: Reckless in their Statements

New Arrival:

• Reckless in their Statements: Challenging History's Harshest Criticisms of Albert Sidney Johnston in the Civil War by Leigh S. Goggin (Fontaine Pr, 2025).

Opinions surrounding Albert Sidney Johnston's tenure as the top Confederate commander in the West vary widely. Some, citing Johnston being tasked with protecting the borders of his vast Department No. 2 with nowhere near the resources necessary to successfully operate within President Davis's initial cordon defense strategy, argue that the general was placed in an impossible situation. Others believe that it was Johnston's own deeply flawed decision-making that was principally responsible for producing much of the catastrophic military disaster that characterized the final months of his rather brief (less than eight months in total) time in command.

Of course, generations of American scholars, most recently Timothy Smith in his 2023 study The Iron Dice of Battle: Albert Sidney Johnston and the Civil War in the West, have weighed in on Johnston's strengths and weaknesses. It has often been said that well-worn Civil War topics can benefit from foreign eyes infusing fresh perspectives from the outside looking in, and we might be getting just that from Australian author Leigh Goggin in his book Reckless in their Statements: Challenging History's Harshest Criticisms of Albert Sidney Johnston in the Civil War.

From the description: "Through a meticulous analysis of military records, contemporary accounts, and secondary sources, this book challenges history's harshest criticisms of Johnston's generalship and provides explanations for his most controversial decisions, such as the reinforcement of Fort Donelson and the stacked column of corps formation used in the battle of Shiloh. Here, for the first time, Johnston's actions are interpreted in a new light - challenging long-held assumptions and inviting readers to reconsider the legacy of an important Civil War commander."

The general format employed by Goggin in his analysis is the Q&A. Each of those styled chapters (23 in total) begins with a pointed question related to Johnston's decision-making [ex. "Why did Johnston assume command of the Central Kentucky Army?"], conduct [ex. "Was Johnston responsible for the blunders at Fort Donelson?"], or awareness [ex. "Was Johnston aware of events in eastern Kentucky?"]. Arrival at an answer to the question is processed through a series of contextual angles (indicated by nested subheadings) before a final conclusion is offered. Addressed throughout each chapter are the views of key historians as they relate to the issues at hand, their major works along with the O.R. being the two most commonly cited source types in the endnotes.

Having a great deal of interest in Johnston myself, I'm looking forward to delving into this.