Review - "Southern Army Units, 1861-1865: A Compilation - Volume 1, Alabama to Mississippi" & "Volume 2, Missouri to Virginia" by Philip Osborne

[Southern Army Units, 1861-1865: A Compilation-Volume 1, Alabama to Mississippi & Southern Army Units, 1861-1865: A Compilation-Volume 2, Missouri to Virginia by Philip J. Osborne (Author, 2025). Softcover, footnotes, bibliography, appendix section. Pages main/total: (V1) x,396/406 & (V2) x,386/396. ISBN: (V1)-9798269241180 & (V2)-9798270767471 $35 ea.]

Even though the Confederate Army was dwarfed in raw size by the Union forces that opposed it, assembling a reliable catalog of its great multitude of components remains a daunting task. The process has had a long history, from Marcus Wright and Claud Estes's rudimentary lists to far more detailed book-length compilations from Joseph Crute and Stewart Sifakis. A number of authoritative single-state volumes that contain much more unit-specific information than what is possible to fit inside general reference guides have been produced as well. Particularly fine examples of those include Jim McGhee's out of print and highly desirable Missouri guide and Art Bergeron's Louisiana volume. We also have access to well-researched army-wide orders of battle from Steven Newton and Dan Fullerton, the former focusing on the critical year of 1864 and the latter the entire conflict. Building upon all of this previous work while conducting his own intensive research is Philip Osborne, the author of a new two-volume record titled Southern Army Units, 1861-1865: A Compilation.

A focused scouring of national and state government archives is a prominent feature of Osborne's primary research. That is supplemented by additional use of manuscript materials as well as published primary and secondary sources. Newspapers from every state, together numbering in the hundreds across both volumes, were also widely utilized by the author.

Within the set's state sections (which are ordered alphabetically), basic Confederate Army units (i.e. infantry and cavalry regiments and battalions, consolidated units, and both light and heavy artillery units) are listed by ascending unit number. Where applicable, miscellaneous and specialized units such as engineers are also grouped together. Each Confederate Army entry includes primary and alternate unit designations, field grade officer lists for the regiments and battalions (and for artillery batteries their captains and lieutenants), and departmental assignments (with date ranges). Many readers will particularly appreciate the close attention paid to battery compositions and, since so many of those changed over time, date ranges. Unit notes are variable in length and content (the information conveyed by some is pretty wide-ranging) and are not intended to be comprehensive service summaries. The most consistent feature is a rough time (month/season and year) of initial organization. Campaign and battle records are not listed. As useful as the previous Crute and Sifakis reference books are, gaps in their work have long been recognized, and Osborne cross-references his own lists with the corresponding reference number from Sifakis's Compendium series (so units lacking that number were among those absent from Sifakis's books). Indicated by "(A)" in Osborne's listings are those field grade officers also found in Bruce Allardice's Confederate Colonels.

Titling these volumes "Southern Army Units" rather than "Confederate Army Units" was by design, the intention being to apply equal emphasis to state and Confederate units. The comprehensiveness of this broader approach is unprecedented. Previous guides have offered only limited state unit coverage, but Osborne's set truly takes it to another level. State and local entities of all designations, including the plethora of state militia, state army, state guard, state line, home guard, local defense, minute men, and 'old men and young boys' reserves infantry, cavalry, and artillery units, appear in Osborne's guide. Paper units never fielded and temporary formations of very short duration, Mississippi's 60-Day "Army of 10,000" being associated with the latter group, are also dutifully referenced. Post-secession state armies (before they were incorporated into the Provisional Army of the Confederate States) are added, too. All of this pushes the number of units listed in Osborne's two books into the thousands. Unlike the Confederate Army sections, the portions of both volumes that are devoted to state units are widely footnoted and occasionally arrange units within higher organization tables. The author's prodigious newspaper research proved particularly useful in finding key information about these more obscure state units.

This two-volume set is not intended to be the be all, end all reference tool of its type (Osborne himself modestly describes their content as a "starting point" for users), and anything of this scale will have errors and omissions of its own, but there are more than enough new and enhanced features in it to produce unquestioned value when measured against what else is available. Authoring even the most ambitious reference books can seem like a thankless task, and (as was the case here) even finding an outfit willing to publish it can prove to be a disheartening quest. With the added challenge of doing all this while being based in the U.K., author Philip Osborne deserves a lot of credit for the dedication of his research and for his long-term perseverance, even if it ultimately meant channeling all of that considerable labor into, in all likelihood, the audience-limiting route of self-publishing. Southern Army Units, 1861-1865: A Compilation merits a place in any Civil War reference library, and hopefully this review can help get the word out.

Review - "The Devil’s Own Purgatory: The United States Mississippi River Squadron in the Civil War" by Robert Gudmestad

[The Devil’s Own Purgatory: The United States Mississippi River Squadron in the Civil War by Robert Gudmestad (Louisiana State University Press, 2025). Hardcover, maps, photos, appendix section, endnotes, bibliography, index. Pages main/total:xiii,212/305. ISBN:978-0-8071-8491-2. $50]

The strategies, leaders, common sailors, ships, and operations associated with the Civil War period U.S. Navy's Mississippi River Squadron (the famed "Brown Water Navy") have been documented and studied in numerous book-length overviews, biographical treatments, and microhistories. Fine modern works from the likes of Gary Joiner, Barbara Tomblin, and Myron Smith have preceded this one, but what makes Robert Gudmestad's The Devil’s Own Purgatory: The United States Mississippi River Squadron in the Civil War exceptional is its development of fresh interpretive themes drawn from, among other sources, extensive use of newly created datasets as well as its unprecedented levels of quantitative integration (including GIS mapping) into the volume's textual description and analysis.

In a compact narrative remarkable for the breadth and amount of focused depth achieved in just over two-hundred pages of main text, Gudmestad explores the Mississippi River Squadron's origins as the army-controlled Western Gunboat Flotilla and documents the full range of its wartime activities, which included squadron-scale engagements, ship vs. ship and ship vs. shore encounters, escort duties, counterguerrilla operations, area control patrolling, and interdiction of both illicit trade and Confederate use of western waterways for their own supply, transport, and logistical uses. An exhaustive presentation of the squadron's Civil War record is beyond the book's scope, but strong summaries of the more significant battles and campaigns (among them Forts Henry and Donelson, early-1862 White River operations, the Battle of Arkansas Post, the 1862-63 Vicksburg Campaign, and 1864's Red River Campaign and Johnsonville debacles) are provided as are brief accounts of a myriad of smaller-scale actions. Shipboard life (including discipline and punishment) is also vividly described and the squadron's central role in military emancipation highlighted at some length.

A key component of the research behind the book is the impressive sailor database compiled from official muster rolls by the author and his team. Their combined efforts produced detailed information on 14,754 sailors. With the likelihood that another 1-2,000 individuals went unexamined, the author estimates that up to 17,000 men served in the squadron. In both text and tabular formats, a detailed demographic profile of Brown Water Navy recruits emerges from that source. Differences between Union sailors and army soldiers are noteworthy. Western sailors were far less likely than Union Army volunteers to be farmers, more likely to be immigrants, and both younger and slightly shorter than their foot soldier counterparts. While there were also demographic differences between the navy's deep water and inland waterway sailors, Gudmestad contends that both groups shared a general lack of ideological enlistment motivation. Though William Marvel has recently argued in convincing fashion that economic considerations drove early Union Army enlistment in previously underappreciated ways, most scholarship highlights saving the Union as the army volunteer's primary motivation (with some enlistees also expressing earnest desire to free the slaves). By contrast, it is the author's conclusion here (though one wishes Gudemestad had developed the argument at greater length in the book) that the evidence best supports the claim that economic reasons, including the prospects of prize money, were what generally motivated western sailors.

Gudmestad's manuscript research, fresh analysis of the relevant primary and secondary literature, and new quantitative measures (the last including GIS mapping of riverine irregular warfare events), together leads him to interpret the Mississippi River Squadron's war as passing through four distinct, yet partially overlapping, phases. Overall, it is a useful construct for tracking the evolution of the squadron's assigned roles and range of activities. During Phase One (July 1861-June 1862), the Western Gunboat Flotilla, primarily manned by former bluewater sailors and transfers from the army, directly confronted Confederate vessels, squadrons, and river forts both alone and in conjunction with the army. Phase Two (ending in April 1863), which further perfected army-navy combined operations and essentially marked the complete destruction of organized Confederate naval opposition, was still characterized by attacks on river forts, but the escalation of irregular attacks against Union rear area shipping during that time transformed the main duties of the squadron to supply line protection and escort duties. During Phase Three (May 1863 to April 1864), the naval counterguerrilla war deepened and intensified, with the navy going on the determined offensive against both guerrilla attackers and their presumed civilian supporters (the targeting of the latter leading to much in the way of unjustified acts of plunder and property destruction). Finally, Phase Four, which encompassed the final twelve months of the war, witnessed a steep drop in squadron efficiency and an accompanying rise in Confederate success in ambushing and destroying squadron vessels.

After the harsh reality of sailor life on a closely confined western gunboat set in, it became increasingly difficult to maintain minimum crew strength. Individualistic northern recruits chafed at naval discipline, which was much stricter than that of the army. That, combined with the many personal discomforts and extreme health hazards involved in the shipboard environment (the squadron routinely operated in the most mosquito-infested areas of the Deep South) deterred new recruits and helped produce a persistent manpower gulf. Gudmestad convincingly argues that black recruitment (willing, half-willing, and unwilling) critically addressed that widened gap that emerged during the second and third phases of the squadron's war. His research reveals that blacks and white immigrants enlisted in nearly equal numbers during the second phase, and black men comprised more than one-third of new recruits during the third phase. Military emancipation facilitated much of that Phase Three influx. The Union Army's role in military emancipation across the length and breadth of the lower Mississippi River Valley has been featured in a number of recent studies. By comparison, the western navy's part in the process has been less appreciated in the literature, and Gudmestad's coverage of the topic represents a significant effort toward addressing that imbalance.

A variety of elements involved in Phase Four make it worthy of special attention. Much has been written about the negative impact late-war recruits had on Union Army of the Potomac combat efficiency (although more recent scholarship has strongly contested many of those earlier conclusions), but far less attention has been paid to how much expiring enlistments affected naval operations over the same period. Gudmestad argues that, compared with 1864 Union Army regiments, Mississippi River Squadron vessels experienced far more critically low reenlistment rates. He attributes much of that to discipline requirements, low onboard quality of life (exemplified by the sailor quote serving as the book's title), and, as also mentioned above, lack of ideological commitment. Other contributors to plunging operational efficiency were very heavy desertion rates (perhaps the highest among all Union military formations) and high personnel turnover from disease and disability. There was also extensive turnover in top leadership, with more than a third of squadron vessels having new commanders for the war's final twelve months. In comparison to the two prior phases, the final phase witnessed a sharp plunge in black enlistment (only 8%), a change likely stemming from native-born and immigrant whites taking advantage of highly lucrative late-war enlistment bounties. The result of all of this was a very noticeable drop in overall leadership aggressiveness, far fewer shore expeditions, and a sharp rise in the incidence and success rates of anti-ship attacks from experienced and highly mobile Confederate guerrilla and raiding forces (a prime example of notable Confederate success against qualitatively declining opposition being the Johnsonville, Tennessee disaster of November 1864). However, as Gudemestad also explains, none of those drawbacks, significant as they were, prevented the squadron from carrying out its primary tasks and finishing out the war wearing the crown of victory.

A deftly composed combination of sound synthesis and groundbreaking original research, Robert Gudmestad's The Devil’s Own Purgatory: The United States Mississippi River Squadron in the Civil War presents a fresh portrait and reassessment of the Brown Water Navy's war. Elements of this study will enhance and challenge the existing knowledge and perceptions of even the best-read students of the subject matter. The extensive datasets created by Gudmestad's team will also be profoundly useful tools for future researchers. Highly recommended.

Review - "Civil War Cavalry: Waging Mounted Warfare in Nineteenth-Century America" by Earl Hess

[Civil War Cavalry: Waging Mounted Warfare in Nineteenth-Century America by Earl J. Hess (Louisiana State University Press, 2025). Hardcover, photos, illustrations, diagrams, tables. Pages main/total:ix,357/440. ISBN:978-0-8071-8444-8. $49.95]

With the publication of Civil War Cavalry: Waging Mounted Warfare in Nineteenth-Century America, military historian Earl Hess has now completed a trilogy of works that comprehensively examine the recruitment, organization, training, arming, support, and administration of all three principal combat arms of the Union and Confederate armies. With cavalry's use on the Civil War stage being the most versatile of the trio, Hess's study also broadly delves into the branch's significant impact on the strategic planning, operations, and battlefield tactics of both sides.

As was the case with Civil War Infantry Tactics (2015) and Civil War Field Artillery (2022), Hess begins Civil War Cavalry with a background summary of cavalry's place in the American military experience beginning with the Colonial period. Hess notes that, while both infantry and artillery were deployed in a manner and scale at least somewhat comparable to their European power forebears (and with accompanying doctrinal development), American cavalry, which typically operated in dribs and drabs, was the odd man out.

Hess goes on from there to summarize Civil War cavalry recruitment, organization, and training. In a fashion similar to corresponding sections of his infantry and artillery books, Civil War cavalry's tactical formations and maneuvers are illustrated through contemporary diagrams and explained through fairly detailed descriptions and numerous battlefield examples. That cavalry units and formations were typically deployed in mixed fashion, line and column, is an important part of the discussion. Lines, both mounted and dismounted, were commonly supported by columns of mounted troops to flank and rear, those columns used to quickly counter enemy thrusts, support faltering front lines, and exploit offensive opportunities. One interesting internal debate during the Civil War surrounded the deployment of cavalry lines in single or double rank. Both had their proponents, and, while the former generally won out, the conflict over rank structure was never entirely resolved.

The theme of cavalry being the most versatile of the three combat arms is represented through the myriad of tasks and operations that were assigned to it. These are all described in the book, and include providing couriers for infantry leaders, outpost duties, establishing picket lines, skirmishing, intelligence gathering, screening front and flank, direct combined arms cooperation, raiding, and covering retreats. Another major element of that versatility was the capability of maneuvering and fighting adeptly in both mounted and dismounted fashion, that being a general quality of Civil War cavalry and not a specialized unit-type focus. Of course, the unique defining feature of cavalry on the battlefield was the mounted charge, and Hess outlines the mechanics (and uniquely gruesome aspects) of that brand of face-to-face Civil War combat. Irregular mounted warfare is not given much attention in the book, if at all.

Raiding was a salient part of cavalry's contributions to Civil War military operations, providing a number of its most dramatic moments. However, Hess, though he offers case studies of both successful and unsuccessful raids, joins many critics in holding a generally dim view of the practice's overall effectiveness, explaining that the vast majority of raids had little effect beyond the "local, regional, or tactical level" (pg. 184), with not enough gains to justify often crippling losses in horseflesh that took a long time (many months) to recover. Readers can count the author among those who believe that Civil War cavalry would have, in most cases, been far more usefully deployed in close cooperation with the field armies. However, Hess also raises a good point that the American military had so little institutional experience in the sphere of direct infantry-cavalry cooperation that widespread neglect and missed opportunity in that area is understandable. In the face of that, the allure of the raid was powerful.

Hess also surveys the range of personal weaponry wielded by Civil War cavalrymen. At the risk of overgeneralization, he determines that, for a variety of reasons, Confederate cavalrymen emphasized the pistol in close combat and Union cavalrymen the saber. To some degree, procurement factors were at play (with good sabers always being in very low supply for the Confederate Army) in creating that disparity, but frequent readers of Civil War cavalry battles might also recognize a narrowing in that gap the further east one progresses. In terms of assessing the impact of support weapons, Hess does not believe that horse artillery had much impact on the course and outcome of mounted engagements, suggesting that the guns, even though they were more maneuverable than normal field artillery, could not keep pace with the swirling, up-tempo nature of the cavalry versus cavalry battlefield.

In addition to conveying a strong reminder of the enormous financial expense and logistical backing required to raise, equip, and maintain large mounted forces, Hess's study emphasizes the war's vast rate of horse wastage, which was far greater than that of European army contemporaries. Both sides wrestled with managing it, and Union and Confederate authorities alike are properly chastised in the book for badly overlooking specialized veterinary care. As expected, the author joins every other historian in criticizing the Confederate Army's shortsighted policy of having cavalrymen supply their own mounts and remounts. Interestingly, Hess explains that the Union Army had a similar self-supply program that extended well into the conflict, but it operated in parallel with the government supply and rehabilitation system that quickly proved superior. In his discussion of mounts and their welfare, Hess also directs exceptional attention toward the sentient lives of cavalry horses. Explorations of the emotional bonds forged being horse and rider are common enough in the literature, but the author also raises awareness of the ways in which horses both complied with and pushed back against the rigorous and dangerous demands of the service.

Hess believes that the traditional view that skilled horsemanship was more widespread among southern recruits probably has some merit, but he critically argues that the impact of individual riding skill was minimal within the conventional cavalry service's regimented system of training and battlefield deployment. In his view, the 4+ months of training obtained from competent officers and drillmasters produced troopers well able to perform the tasks that cavalry service demanded of them, individual horsemanship being only of marginal additional benefit in those circumstances. One suspects that individual horsemanship played a much more significant part in irregular mounted warfare, especially among dispersed groups of guerrilla-style fighters.

In comparing the overall effectiveness of Union and Confederate cavalry, Hess is justly hesitant when it comes to elevating any single factor over the great many that are identified and assessed in the text. Nevertheless, his study does form a persuasive argument that "management and administration were the keys" (pg. 333) when it came to explaining the divergent paths of effectiveness taken by Union and Confederate cavalry formations overall as the war progressed. One can be tempted to attribute contrasting arcs of Union ascendancy and Confederate decline primarily to resource differences that widened sharply from the war's midpoint onward, but Hess strongly maintains that leadership and management factors were just as, and arguably even more, significant.

Throughout the war, both sides grappled with how to use infantry, artillery, and cavalry together to best effect. As Hess explains, infantry and artillery developed robust combined arms capability, but fully integrating cavalry, which was far more mobile than either of those, was a constant battle. Hess reduces that struggle to a "dispersion versus concentration" debate that Union forces were much more successful at resolving as the war progressed. It was not a matter of one way being entirely better than the other but, as the author maintains, which side was capable of striking the best balance. In Hess's view, that was clearly the Union side. With its vastly inferior degree of support infrastructure, field logistics, and remount capabilities, Confederate ability to maintain and utilize large concentrations of cavalry effectively waned as the war progressed while that of their foes expanded. Hess sees generals Philip Sheridan in the eastern theater (1864-65) and James Wilson in the western theater (1865) as being the clear standout leadership forces behind the late-war apogee of Civil War cavalry effectiveness through concentration.

With U.S. Army cavalry deployment never again approaching the scale of those large forces that operated during the Civil War, the arm's North American legacy was limited. Hess finds that professional military observers from the European powers collectively condemned the excessive wastage of horses that was prevalent in the American conflict, but there was some appreciation for effective development of dismounted fighting and common interest in strategic raiding. Accompanying that superficial enamorment with deep raids, though, came a belief that such operations had little place in their own European conflicts. One wishes that Hess could have explained what was primarily behind that calculation. Perhaps it was felt that western and central Europe's conflict environment, which was far more populous, urbanized, and developed than North America's, could not offer the scale of open space that Civil War deep raiders thrived upon, especially in the western theater.

As a comprehensive portrait of Civil War cavalry, from origins to postwar legacy, Earl Hess's Civil War Cavalry: Waging Mounted Warfare in Nineteenth-Century America is an impressive study full of descriptive detail, nuance, reasoned challenges to traditional views, and interesting arguments. Highly recommended.

Review - "The Weather Gods Curse the Gettysburg Campaign" by Nese & Harding

[The Weather Gods Curse the Gettysburg Campaign by John M. Nese & Jeffrey J. Harding (Arcadia Publishing and The History Press, 2025). Softcover, maps, photos, illustrations, tables, charts, appendix. 238 Pp. ISBN:978-1-4671-5846-6. $24.99]

Every Gettysburg student is familiar with the gist of the campaign's weather story. In summary, the combatants had to endure early-summer high heat and humidity during forced marches and fighting, and the post-battle retreat and pursuit offered the survivors different miseries to deal with in the form of rain and mud. However, one might reasonably ask how much deeper we can take this broad-stroke weather assessment of the campaign. Is a daily, perhaps even more granular, description and analysis of weather's impact on men and operations before, during, and after the July 1-3 Battle of Gettysburg possible? According to John Nese and Jeffrey Harding, the answer to that question is a resounding 'yes,' and all is revealed in their fascinating book The Weather Gods Curse the Gettysburg Campaign.

Nese, an academic at Penn State's Department of Meteorology and Atmospheric Science, and Harding, a licensed GNMP battlefield guide, draw upon their respective areas of expertise (in weather science and Gettysburg military history) for a fresh examination of this underexplored topic. The book begins with a meteorological science primer that, among other things, provides background information necessary for readers to understand the practical meaning and significance of a variety of weather-related measurements that the authors utilize in their analysis, from simple thermometer and dewpoint readings to more complex heat index and wet-bulb globe temperature calculations.

Very significant to the study is its employment of a relatively new computer model developed by the NOAA that allows its users to recreate weather maps of the past, keeping in mind that its reliability is more macro than micro. This "reanalysis system" represents one among many research tools that Nese and Harding have at their disposal, the integration of which offers keen insights into the weather encountered by Union and Confederate soldiers in Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania during June and July 1863.

Underpinning Nese and Harding's research is a critical body of recorded observations from contemporary weather watchers such as the government staff of the Naval Observatory, the network of daily weather reports from military installations across the country, and dedicated civilian recorders such as those who submitted their data to the Smithsonian Meteorological Project. Many of the individuals involved are profiled in the text. This data recorded from both near and afar, combined with Nese's expert knowledge of local and regional atmospheric and weather patterns, allows the study to trace reliable meteorological readings at any point in time across the campaign's multi-state path. 

It is often said that if you want to know the weather just look out your window, and the historical equivalent of that window view is represented by the approximately 1,500 soldier and civilian journal and letter accounts of the weather that the authors have recovered and organized for their research. This collection of subjective firsthand perspectives critically augments Nese and Harding's quantitative analysis, and the most salient portions of select passages are interspersed throughout the text. In an ingenious manner, Nese and Harding combine this historical documentation with the aforementioned modern weather modeling techniques to provide us with a remarkably detailed reconstruction of weather effects during the entire run of the campaign. Additionally, findings and descriptions revealed in the narrative are supplemented by a plethora of historical and modern weather maps, charts, and tables. For easy reference, a record of daily weather data and notes for the period June 3 to July 14 is also compiled in tabular format in the appendix.

As explained in the book, the June 10-18 heatwave experienced by the armies in the field was exceptional for late spring. Unfortunately for the health of those involved, it also coincided with a period requiring hard marches that resulted in widely reported physical debility and heatstroke death (although those numbers are not quantified). Data suggests that the severity of the conditions was historically rare for June, marking that heat wave as one among several of the campaign's exceptional weather-related events. Without the ability to forecast weather, generals lacked the information needed for weather-adjusted planning (where possible). Examples cited in the book of forced marching during heat wave conditions and operational pauses during fine marching weather are signal reminders of one of many chance elements that contribute to the overall friction involved with conducting war. In an interesting side note, the authors mention that the mixed-material jean cloth of Confederate uniforms breathed better than the wool jackets issued to Union troops. That, combined with the lighter color, made the southern shell jackets more comfortable in hot summer months for those wearing them. Indeed, while today's writers often emphasize the presumed general discomfort of Civil War uniforms, the soldiers themselves complained vastly more about their feet and footwear problems during long, hot marches.

For the three-day battle itself, thermometer temperatures weren't considered extreme on the first day, with much of the discomfort coming from the humidity. July 2 was much hotter, and the book effectively uses the very lengthy approaches to the battlefield of Law's Brigade on the Confederate side and the Union Sixth Corps as case studies of the day's weather effects on marching and fighting. Even though the recorded shade temperature still may not have been extreme, the heat index likely pushed 90 degrees and the effects of direct sunlight made the forced marching even less bearable. In contrast to Sixth Corps, whose march was marked by periodic rest and hydration breaks, Law's Brigade had little of either. The weather, lack of recovery time, and rugged terrain at Little Round Top all hindered the brigade's chances for sustained success as it spearheaded the attack during one of the three-day battle's key moments. The enervated condition of Law's men upon arrival at the front likely contributed mightily to the large prisoner haul that the formation lost during the celebrated Union counterattack involving the 20th Maine. The data and NOAA modeling employed by Nese and Harding confirms contemporary observations that July 3 was the worst of the three in terms of physical discomfort. With the heat index almost certainly over 100 degrees (with some likelihood of even reaching 105), and keeping in mind that the index relies on shade measurements, such brutal body-stressing conditions undoubtedly impaired fighting endurance and performance during Pickett's Charge, especially for the attacking troops.

As detailed in the literature, from July 4 onward the principal weather challenge switched over from head and humidity to rain, with thick mud and rising streams hampering both Confederate retreat and Union pursuit. The volume's data gathering and analysis adds a great deal in the way of finer detail when it comes to the likely timing and quantification of the rainfall episodes. Nese's applied expertise shines through the entire book, but one of the finest examples of it is shown in the attempt to understand the deluge that preceded the Potomac River recrossing of Lee's army back to Virginia. Gaps in the instrument readings and lack of expected results from the NOAA reanalysis model hinder explanation of the massive river rise, but Nese is able to provide a solid meteorological basis for the event through a more complex interpretation of regional weather patterns utilizing contemporary data gathered from afar. On a final note, findings confirm that the steep rise of the Potomac behind Lee's army at Williamsport was a truly extraordinary weather event for any July in recorded history. Lee's army could count itself fortunate to have escaped.

John Nese and Jeffrey Harding's The Weather Gods Curse the Gettysburg Campaign is a truly remarkable, highly useful, and completely original contribution to the ongoing study of the Gettysburg campaign and battle. As the authors maintain, weather and its extremes affected how the campaign unfolded at every stage of its development, and it was a testament to the human endurance and ingenuity displayed by the armies that weather-induced disaster was avoided. Accessible to general reader and specialist alike, this masterfully conceived and executed study is an essential addition to the Gettysburg library, a key reference for every future chronicler of the campaign.

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.

Review - "Holding Charleston by the Bridle: Castle Pinckney and the Civil War" by Roberts & Locke

[Holding Charleston by the Bridle: Castle Pinckney and the Civil War by W. Clifford Roberts, Jr. & Matthew A.M. Locke (Savas Beatie, 2024). Hardcover, maps, photos, illustrations, footnotes, appendix section, bibliography, index. Pages main/total:xxviii,206/287. ISBN:978-1-61121-714-8. $32.95]

It certainly wasn't for want of trying, but every Union effort to carry Charleston harbor by direct land and naval assault and finally seize the Cradle of Secession failed. Instead, Charleston's fate would ultimately be determined by outside forces. In February 1865, the city and its surrounding forts, outflanked and isolated by General William T. Sherman's inexorable inland advance up through the Carolinas, were evacuated by their defenders.

So how did Charleston hold out for so long when so many other Confederate fortresses and cities were unable to cope with the Union's vast superiority in combined operations technology and strength? One major factor was the harbor's extensive defense in depth, which consisted of mutually supporting forts and batteries, torpedoes, and fixed obstructions, all backed by a small but powerful ironclad flotilla. That combination proved so effective that even the perimeter, which consisted principally of forts Sumter, Moultrie, and Johnson, successfully resisted both heavy enemy land forces and the Union Navy's greatest concentration of ironclad warships. That maintenance of the harbor's outermost cordon of defense meant that interior posts were left relatively untested throughout the conflict and their own stories largely neglected in the military history literature. As just one example, the wartime history of Castle Pinckney, a Second System fort situated on Shute's Folly Island that oversaw both the mouth of the Cooper River and the city of Charleston's commercial waterfront, has been completely overshadowed by those of the outer forts (Sumter in particular). Ably bringing that topic to the forefront is W. Clifford Roberts, Jr. and Matthew A.M. Locke's Holding Charleston by the Bridle: Castle Pinckney and the Civil War.

Roberts and Locke's study touches upon the entire length of Castle Pinckney's existence, even addressing its Colonial-era antecedents. During the Early Republic period, much of the nation's military spending went into coastal defense, and the need for more modern fortifications on Shute's Island was well recognized by local, state, and national planners. That recognition resulted in Castle Pinckney being built over the remains of the old Fort Pinckney. With its guns capable of hitting Charleston itself, the Second System fort figured prominently during the Nullification Crisis, and the harbor post also served as a holding facility for Second Seminole War prisoners (which would not be the last time the fort doubled as a prison). Throughout the book the authors do a fine job of selecting which aspects of the fort's long history to emphasize, and both of those events are discussed. However, as time went on the Shute's Folly fort's utility as a first-line military position was overtaken by the nation's new Third System of coastal defense, which addressed major advances in engineering and technology (in particular, more powerful and longer range artillery).

Appropriately, perhaps half the book covers the Civil War-era, with Pinckney gaining early distinction as the first fort in the harbor seized by hastily organized southern militia. Throughout its history, Pinckney's security and relative isolation made it useful as a multi-purpose facility, and during the Civil War it also housed prisoners (the first batch being those captured at Manassas in 1861). In addition to detailing that part of its story, Roberts and Locke also recount at length the continual defensive improvements made to the fort, which included massive sand revetment, armament upgrades, wall reinforcement to hold up the increased weight, and new enclosed field works to address the vulnerability of the fort's open rear. Their text also offers numerous insights into the personalities and daily lives of the fort's rotating series of defending units and leaders. While increasingly massive Union rifled siege artillery gradually pounded Sumter into rubble from 1863 onward, the more distant Pinckney did not escape occasional shelling. Nevertheless, that threat was never far from the minds of its defenders and much of the text serves as a highly informative case study of the many ways in which the Confederates responded to the enemy's steadily growing edge in heavy artillery capabilities with effective military engineering countermeasures of their own.

The volume is filled with historical maps, engineering drawings, and both period and modern photographs. Those complementing the narrative's exploration of Pinckney's Civil War history are especially helpful in making more intelligible the many physical alterations made to the fort as the war progressed. Enhancing the reference value of the book is its extensive appendix section, which is filled with a series of prisoner list and defending unit rosters along with a bevy of additional historical documents.

After the Civil War, federal Reconstruction governments used Castle Pinckney as a place to confine prisoners convicted by martial law's military commissions. These were their own soldiers as well as southern civilians held there for various crimes. Existing island infrastructure as well as enough area for new construction also made Pinckney suitable as a lighthouse system supply depot, and that peacetime role is also detailed in the text.

For the next hundred years, as recounted in the book, governmental entities at all levels (local, state, and federal) struggled to determine how or if to preserve Castle Pinckney. During that time responsibility for the fort passed through a series of historical associations and government departments, with some of the latter doubting its historical value as being worthy of expensive, long-term restoration and maintenance. Aptly describing Castle Pinckney as a "hot potato" alternately maintained and neglected by various responsible parties, the authors, also citing the fort's archaeological treasures unearthed during recent excavations, make a strong case for Pinckney being still worthy of both study and preservation. Regular harbor channel work, which has resulted in Shute Island's near complete erosion into the sea, continues to threaten the fort's delicate existence, but the Castle Pinckney Historical Preservation Society remains determined to both save it and keep its historical memory alive for future generations. This fine book can certainly aid in that worthy mission.

Review - "North Carolina Troops, 1861-1865: A Roster, Volume XXII - Confederate States Navy, Confederate States Marine Corps, and Charlotte Naval Yard" by Hatton & Meekins

[North Carolina Troops, 1861-1865: A Roster, Volume XXII - Confederate States Navy, Confederate States Marine Corps, and Charlotte Naval Yard edited by Katelynn A. Hatton & Alex Christopher Meekins (North Carolina Office of Archives and History, 2024). Cloth, maps, photos, illustrations, roster, appendix section, index. Pages:xi,468. ISBN:978-0-86526-504-2. $55]

Currently under the auspices of the North Carolina Office of Archives and History, the origins of the North Carolina Troops, 1861-1865: A Roster series stretch all the way back to 1961. As explained on the jacket flap, the project's mission is "to publish a service record for every man who served in a unit raised in North Carolina during the Civil War, and to publish a history of each of these units." With previous entries focused on army and militia units and leaders, the final Confederate volume^*, North Carolina Troops, 1861-1865: A Roster, Volume XXII - Confederate States Navy, Confederate States Marine Corps, and Charlotte Naval Yard, awards the nautical service's sailors, marines, and naval station support personnel their just due. The book compiles roster information on roughly 2,450 individuals.

To call the volume's text a supporting narrative to the roster feature does not do justice to its depth and quality. Many aspects of the naval war fought on North Carolina rivers and sounds have been well addressed among numerous specialized manuscripts, scholarly articles, and chapters within broader studies, but editors Katelynn Hatton and Christopher Meekins employ both synthesis and their own primary research to create for this series a remarkably fresh and comprehensive overview of the subject. In fact, no other single-volume study of the Confederate Navy in North Carolina waters approaches the inclusiveness of this one. In it, Hatton and Meekins provide important big picture views and interpretations of events and strategy, but they also explore on a more tactical level an extensive array of squadron-level operations and single-ship actions along with a host of land and seaborne raids of both well known and highly obscure natures.

The text offers in-depth explanations of the many military, economic, and political challenges involved with creating a Confederate naval presence in North Carolina from scratch. The most defining setback to that process was the great success of the Burnside Expedition in seizing strategic points located along the North Carolina coastline. Similar to how the fall of New Orleans in April 1862 dramatically decreased Confederate capacity for building a navy to serve on the western waters, the quick loss of eastern North Carolina, according to the authors, set Confederate naval construction in the area back by at least a year. That was critical lost time that could not be made up. Additionally, outside of Wilmington's preserved facilities, enemy seizure of the rest of the North Carolina coast's shipyards and ports forced new warships to be constructed at ad hoc facilities located some distance upriver, an inescapable liability that limited design possibilities (ex. displacement and draft considerations). So equipment saved from Gosport in Virginia went to the new naval yard at Charlotte, North Carolina and to additional yard facilities for ironclad construction established at places such as Tarboro on the Tar River and Whitehall on the Neuse. In carrying out the region's ironclad program, well-defended Wilmington had it better when it came to industrial potential, but the authorities there labored under similar manpower and resource restrictions.

Indeed, the leadership, strategy, organization, interservice relations, and resource allocation associated with the ironclad construction program in the state is a major focus of attention. In addition to limited availabilities of everything needed (especially skilled labor, powerful steam engines, and iron for armor plating), the naval yards in North Carolina also had to compete with the supply and logistical needs of the army in Virginia for use of the region's overworked rail system. The various naval construction yards also had to compete with each other for pieces of the human and material resource pie, and the dispersal of effort involved in all that greatly extended the project finishing times for every ironclad and exposed the safety of many to ever increasing Union land and naval encroachment. The careers of the CSS North Carolina, Albemarle, Neuse, and Raleigh (along with the particular challenges and problems associated with each of those ironclads) are discussed at some length, as are the fates of others either burned on the stocks to escape capture or destroyed by enemy raiders.

The Confederacy's overall return on investment when it came to its ironclad programs is a hotly debated topic. Some have argued that coordinated defense systems of torpedoes, obstructions, and fortified heavy batteries could have fulfilled the same defensive purposes as ironclad squadrons and at a fraction of the cost. On the other hand, ironclads, even deployed singly, held significant "fleet in being" value, and adoption of purely defensive measures also meant that strategic locations once lost had almost no possibility of being regained without the punching power provided by ironclads. As editors Hatton and Meekins note, aside from the Albemarle's signal contribution to the recapture of Plymouth in 1864, the overall benefits the Confederate war effort gained from use of its North Carolina ironclads (most of which were destroyed or dismantled by their own crews after experiencing relatively little action over the course of their existence) were not in favorable proportion to the sheer amount of scarce financial and material investment poured into their construction. With active ironclad operations being primarily a middle-late war phenomenon in North Carolina, one also really sees the impact of the lost year referenced earlier.

Analysis of the merits and strategic impact of commerce raiding missions based out of North Carolina, specifically those of the Tallahassee and the Chickamauga, is another strong element of the study. The popularly celebrated exploits of those vessels are recounted at some length, but perhaps the most interesting issues raised by the writers surround the animosity that developed between the commerce raiders (and their mission supporters in Richmond) on one side and both local army authorities and blockade runners on the other. At Wilmington, General W.H.C. Whiting believed that the raiders only served to bring more unwanted enemy attention to the port, making his job much more difficult that it already was by 1864-65, and the runners decried being forced to allocate precious anthracite coal from their own limited stocks to the raiding ship bunkers. Accurately or not, complaining blockade runner captains also tied the successes of the cruisers against northern merchant shipping to a tightening of the North Carolina blockade and its heightened dangers to their own ships.

In addition to the differences in strategy espoused by state leaders and the Confederate authorities in Richmond, the book also reveals the interservice divisions that greatly hampered efficiency. Far different from the cooperative spirit so often demonstrated between Union generals and naval officers on the western waterways, so many incidents of serious tensions between the Confederate Army and Navy are cited in the book that it is suggestive of far more than traditional service rivalry and more of a pervasive conflict over authority, objectives, and resources that proved harmful to the general war effort in North Carolina. For example, army-navy relations were so bad for so long at the Wilmington station that an armed standoff developed between the respective commands of General Whiting and Commodore William F. Lynch, the situation only defused after both leaders were ordered to Richmond to explain themselves. Things were better elsewhere, the best example being the triumph at Plymouth, but such occasions of brotherly interservice cooperation tended to be few and far between in North Carolina.

The significant sailor and marine contributions to the land defenses of Fort Fisher and surrounding batteries during both major Union efforts to take them are well outlined in the book; however, as Hatton and Meekins explain, much of the heroics of the rank and file were hampered by the less than stellar Confederate leadership at the top from generals Braxton Bragg and Chase Whiting. As Union land and naval forces gradually overwhelmed the defenses in North Carolina and remaining naval vessels were scuttled, officers and crews were incorporated into land units that served as infantry up in Virginia during the eastern war's final campaign.

As is the case with many reference book projects, visual aids and frills are relatively few here, with just a handful of maps, photographs, and drawings scattered about the volume. There is no bibliography, but the source material is fully documented in the footnotes. In terms of strength and quality of construction, the physical package is built to withstand decades of heavy use. The jacket is lightweight, but gray cloth binding and paper are both of high standards.

It appears that no stone was left unturned in the quest for obtaining roster information. Sources used include "ship muster rolls, newspapers (casualty lists, officer appointments, etc.), Confederate paymaster receipts, North Carolina Governor's Office records, diaries, and personal letters." "Confederate pension records, the dicennial federal censuses (1860-1930), cemetery records, published reminiscences," and previous roster series titles were also consulted (pg. 243). Entries are organized alphabetically, and the most detailed ones offer personal and service-related information such as rank, birth and death dates and locations, burial site identification, enlistment/commission dates, list of appointments/commands (dates, stations, ships, etc.), promotions, transfers, wounding(s)/POW/KIA dates and info (if applicable), and sickness records. Impressed black sailors and naval yard laborers are also included. The C.S. Marine Corps and Charlotte Naval Station rosters are presented separately, as are lists of ships stationed in North Carolina, blockade runners that passed in and out of Wilmington, and other vessels upon which North Carolinians served.

In this first exposure to the North Carolina Civil War roster series, this reviewer has come away roundly impressed by the depth of research and effort that went into both the history and roster features of Volume XXII. The narrative portion alone ranks as one of the best naval histories in the Civil War literature. If the other series installments display the same degree of thorough and authoritative excellence, one is surely left with a truly monumental reference tool for future generations of scholars, genealogists, and topic enthusiasts.

Additional Note:
* - As mentioned in the earlier CWBA Booknotes entry, in fulfillment of the ongoing mission the editors are now working on the Union series, which will "include service records of North Carolinians who served in the U.S. Army, Navy, and Marine Corps." However, that doesn't automatically mean that the Confederate series is finished for good with the release of Volume XXII, as new information is always being solicited from the public and an addendum is cited as a distinct possibility. If you feel you have any information that might help, follow the series link provided in the review above and you'll find submission requirements and suggestions.

Review - "Union "Tales of the War" in the Trans-Mississippi - Part One: 1861" ed. by Michael Banasik

[Union "Tales of the War" in the Trans-Mississippi - Part One: 1861 edited by Michael E. Banasik (Camp Pope Publishing, 2024). Softcover, 4 maps, photos, footnotes, appendix section, bibliography, index. Pages:xii,276. ISBN:978-1-929919-95-6. $17.95]

If this is your first exposure to Camp Pope Publishing's "Tales of the War" in the Trans-Mississippi series, which is itself a sub-series of the press's Unwritten Chapters of the Civil War West of the River series, its constituent volumes are edited compilations of newspaper articles written by Civil War veterans of all ranks. Those reminiscences were printed by The Missouri Republican (St. Louis) in the paper's Saturday editions between 1885 and 1887. Comprising the writings of ex-Confederates, "Tales of the War" Volume VII was published in five parts [follow this link to read site reviews of those titles] and is still in print. This new release, Union "Tales of the War" in the Trans-Mississippi - Part One: 1861, marks the beginning of Volume VIII, which follows the previous format but from the Union perspective. All installments of the Unwritten Chapters series are chiefly, and most often solely, edited by Michael Banasik.

Given where the center of the action was in 1861, it is not too surprising that Part One is predominantly a Missouri affair. The book's opening chapter collects a series of reminiscences of Missouri political and military episodes from the first six months of the year. Prominent events from the period that are recalled include the struggle over the St. Louis arsenal, the ascendancy of General Nathaniel Lyon, the "Camp Jackson Affair" (and its aftermath), Union recruiting in the state, and some early small-scale operations. The next chapter is comprised of six articles covering various aspects of the battles of Carthage and Wilson's Creek, and Banasik himself contributes an informative piece about the Union army's retreat to Rolla. The third and final chapter contains two articles, one revisits the use of hemp bales as mobile breastworks at Lexington (the most widely known incident of the siege) and the other the fight at Belmont.

The material is heavily annotated, with expansive explanatory footnotes nearly filling an entire page on occasion. Based on manuscript materials, newspaper articles, government records, books, and articles, the notes fulfill the traditional role of providing background and context for persons, places, and events mentioned in the main text. Capsule biographies of noteworthy individuals, both well-known and obscure, are also common footnote features. Banasik's notes frequently, and often at some length, weigh the merits of conflicting interpretations found in the secondary literature, and those discussions are additionally supplemented with his own research and conclusions. In terms of presentation, the only major complaint is with the rampant missing words and typographical errors found in both main text and footnotes, which are very uncharacteristic of both series and publisher.

With multiple pieces featured in the first two chapters, the most frequent contributor to the volume is Otto C. Lademann, a former Third Missouri captain. In this reviewer's opinion, his group of articles are the clear highlight of Part One. In addition to being highly observant firsthand accounts of the marching and battlefield experiences of German soldiers during the Missouri campaigns of 1861, Lademann's writings also frequently go against the grain without seeming agenda-driven. German troops are often stereotyped as ethnocentric "I fights mit Sigel" idolizers of that controversial general's presence and military ability, but Lademann's accounts of Carthage and Wilson's Creek are very evenhanded, and in places highly critical of Sigel's battlefield behavior and decision-making.

The wealth of additional editorial commentary and reference information found in the appendix section is a key feature of every "Tales of the War" title. This volume's Appendix A assembles a collection of relevant official communications in the form of letters, resolutions, proclamations, and political addresses. Expanded biographical treatments of a select group of military officers and political figures are included in the second appendix. The editor's "extended comments" on a variety of topics, mostly battle-related, comprise most of Appendix C. Meticulous order of battle, unit strength, and casualty reviews for both sides at Carthage, Wilson's Creek, and Belmont are compiled in the last appendix. Attached to the revised OB tables are extensive additional editorial commentary and secondary source engagement similar to those found in both main text and footnotes.

Those who appreciate (as anyone with an extensive interest in the Civil War west of the Mississippi should) the five-part Confederate "Tales of the War" writings of Volume VII will be very happy to know that they can expect more of the same in Part One's strong start to Union-focused Volume VIII.

Review - "The Confederate Navy Medical Corps: Organization, Personnel and Actions" by Guy Hasegawa

[The Confederate Navy Medical Corps: Organization, Personnel and Actions by Guy R. Hasegawa (McFarland, 2024). Softcover, photos, illustrations, roster, notes, bibliography, index. Pages main/total:v,188/244. ISBN:978-1-4766-9451-1. $39.95]

Pharmacist Guy Hasegawa is the author of a number of notable studies related to Civil War science and medicine, and he's also delved deeply into bureaucratic histories. His Matchless Organization: The Confederate Army Medical Department was released in 2021, and his research into that department's smaller naval counterpart, the Confederate States Navy's Office of Medicine and Surgery (OMS), has resulted in the publication of The Confederate Navy Medical Corps: Organization, Personnel and Actions. The CSN grew steadily throughout the war, peaking at just over 5,000 officers and men along with around 500 additional personnel in the CS Marine Corps. All of those men needed medical care, and it was the task of Surgeon William A.W. Spotswood and his OMS to provide it on land, river, and sea.

During the chaos and destruction of Richmond's evacuation in 1865, much of the Confederate Navy's records were lost. Making Hasegawa's task even more difficult, CSN surgeon diary, journal, and letter resources are few in number. Recognizing that many gaps can probably never be adequately filled, the author nevertheless dove into newly searchable archives and was able, with the help of other key sources, to piece together a more than respectable volume tracing the history, staffing, organization, duties, and actions of the naval medical corps. As expected, the CSN adopted (or adapted) a great many legacy aspects from the USN, and Hasegawa, with due care, explores the strong possibility that missing information about the CSN medical department's organization and practices can be addressed at least to some degree by extrapolating from how the USN was run.

Recruitment and evaluation of top personnel is a major part of Hasegawa's study. While Confederate authorities hoped and expected that resigned USN medical officers would form the core around which an effective medical service might be built, the level of need rapidly outstripped supply. Meeting that need meant that other sources, such as state navies, civilian doctors (who would be accorded standing as acting assistant surgeons), and even the Confederate Army, had to be tapped. In the end, roughly a third of the 106 appointees as surgeons in the CSN previously served in the USN. Assisting the surgeons directly were surgeons' stewards and hospital stewards (another carryover from the USN). The author recounts the duties of each and notes that, even though they were very different by USN tradition (surgeons' stewards were appointed from the enlisted ranks and were tasked with medical care as well as record-keeping while hospital stewards were civilians who supervised staff and performed administrative duties but were not involved in direct patient care), sometimes the distinction between the two was not so clear in the CSN.

As one might have expected, it was a struggle for Confederate authorities to locally source enough medical supplies to meet the needs of the service. It was hoped that the balance, particularly in prepared medicines that Confederate labs were unable to replicate en masse, could be obtained through the blockade. Even though much of that critical supply entered the country through widely dispersed port cities, Richmond still insisted upon a central depot for their dispersal. Hasegawa keenly observes that the government's failure to create satellite medical supply depots closer to the major blockade-running ports represented a significant and needless inefficiency in the purveying department's distribution operations. The author also found discrepancies between official department reports prepared at the top and those submitted downstream. For example, while the head of purveying in late 1864 confidently reported that all vessels in the CSN were adequately stocked with medical supplies, the author's deeper digging into the sources reveals that not to have been the case.

Hasegawa comprehensively lists and describes the many different types of assignments that were required of CSN surgeons. These ranged from shipboard postings to naval stations, navy yards, shore batteries, and even army assignments. Another duty, the organized but not exactly standardized process of examining recruits, is also discussed in some detail. While the CSN did not possess far-flung oceanic squadrons, surgeons did serve aboard commerce raiders and blockade runners. It is noted that most surgeons, especially the younger ones, were posted to a number of these different assignments during their Civil War service. With surgeons even accompanying small-boat raids, the personal danger could be considerable and more than a few naval surgeons were captured during the war.

Of course, the staffing and administering of naval hospitals, based either on shore or on a small number of hospital ships, was another major responsibility of the OMS. In the book, Hasegawa briefly recounts the history of naval hospitals established at Richmond and at major cities all along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. Individuals who served at those places as medical officers are also identified in the text. The range of diseases commonly treated in the hospitals as well as their treatment regimens are documented, and it is noted that malaria was the most challenging disease faced given the commonality of contact with mosquito-infested habitats in the waterborne service.

As an added reference tool, an annotated list of all known medical officers commissioned in the CSN is included as an appendix. Surmounting in many ways the challenges and limitations the author was confronted with during this research project, a coherent portrait of the Confederate States Navy's medical officer corps, their duties, experiences, and wartime accomplishments emerges from the text. As Hasegawa laments, the information does not exist to offer a comprehensive comparison between the medical corps of the Union and Confederate navies, but there is enough raw data scattered about and reliably admiring testimonials from the other services available to enable the author to conclude that the CSN medical department's performance was "quite creditable" (pg. 187) under the circumstances.

Review - " Artillery of Antietam: The Union and Confederate Batteries at the Battle of Antietam " by James Rosebrock

[Artillery of Antietam: The Union and Confederate Batteries at the Battle of Antietam by James A. Rosebrock (Press of the Antietam Institute, 2023). Hardcover, 28 maps, chapter notes, appendix section, bibliography, index. 442 Pages. ISBN:979-8-218-18099-7. $44.95]

Perhaps more than any other major Civil War battlefield of comparable size, Antietam was made for artillery. With expansive sight lines across vast swaths of the battlefield, rifled artillery (especially the heavier Union guns deployed on the heights across Antietam Creek) had ample opportunity to enfilade defenders, smash counterattacks, and significantly disrupt both lateral enemy redeployments and reinforcements rushing forward. Countless Confederate accounts spoke of their inability to escape the reach of federal guns. The power of the long arm at Antietam was so pronounced that Curt Johnson and Richard Anderson, taking their cue from Confederate artillery battalion colonel S.D. Lee's famous description of the battle, titled their classic study of the subject Artillery Hell. But the terrifying effects of flying solid shot and shell at Antietam weren't all one sided. As detailed most recently, and arguably more vividly than anywhere else in the literature, inside Scott Hartwig's monumental history of the battle, I Dread the Thought of the Place, there were several desperate moments at Antietam when (in the absence of available infantry reserves) scratch concentrations of Confederate artillery were indispensable to holding the line.

Though it has stood as the standard reference work on the subject for decades, it is nevertheless true that Johnson and Anderson's Artillery Hell is quite limited in scope. You certainly can't say that about NPS certified battlefield guide James Rosebrock's Artillery of Antietam: The Union and Confederate Batteries at the Battle of Antietam, which provides military historians and artillery enthusiasts with all the information they could possibly want. Released by the Antietam Institute's publishing arm, this is the artillery companion to 2021's Brigades of Antietam.

According to the foreword, Rosebrock's book examines 135 batteries in total (72 Confederate and 63 Union). However, the volume does not have defined sections for each battery. This might appear odd at first to readers but, upon reflection, is appropriate to the org progression precedent set by its aforementioned infantry and cavalry companion volume edited by Bradley Gottfried. Being the book structure's lowest-level order of battle scale presented in standalone fashion, narrative and data sections are created for Union divisional and corps (unattached and reserve) artillery and, for the Confederates, artillery battalions and army reserve formations. For those seeking information about a single battery of interest, it takes little enough effort to tease that out of the higher order section of the book in which it belongs. The index helps in that regard as well.

Artillery of Antietam is a thick, 8.5" x 11" hardcover with double-column text. In overview fashion, Union corps and Confederate Wing sections summarize artillery organization, engagement, and casualties on the various battlefields (in addition to Antietam and Shepherdstown, the artillery fighting at Harpers Ferry and the South Mountain passes are covered). More intensive examination begins at the divisional artillery, reserve, and battalion levels. In those parts of the book, component batteries are introduced (with battery composition, strength, and loss data provided at the top) and followed throughout the 1862 Maryland Campaign. With information drawn from a large and diverse research body of primary and secondary source materials (all documented in the chapter notes), descriptive text in regard to battlefield positioning and fighting experiences is impressively thorough and vividly enhanced through seamless integration of abundant participant quotes and perspectives. Suitable attention is paid to the battlefield context of each battery's contributions, and the highlights are well summed up in each section's concluding recap.

Grouped together near the front of the book are 28 maps created specifically for this volume. According to the cartographer's note, these are the product of cross-referencing map data from historical maps with modern aerial photography and surface scans. Utilizing that process to both pinpoint period features and assist in brushing out postwar changes, the end result is an 1862 Antietam landscape, presented at a self-described "high level of precision," upon which to place the batteries. The maps are time stamped and also include nearby infantry units for additional context.

Enhancing the main text's already tremendous reference value is a substantial appendix section. It houses full artillery orders of battle for both sides, strength and casualty tables for each battery, armament tables for each battery, and a reproduction of Army of the Potomac artillery chief Henry Hunt's Sept. 12, 1862 order instructing his subordinates how to better manage their commands.

James Rosebrock's Artillery of Antietam is a perfect example of the type of grand-scale reference tome that readers and researchers dream about, but rarely get, for their favorite topics. This is a must-have new addition to every serious Maryland Campaign bookshelf.

Review - "Revisiting The Battle of Red Fork: A Two-Part Review and Analysis of the History and Controversy of the First Civil War Battle Fought in Indian Territory in What is Now Oklahoma" by Dale Chlouber

[Revisiting The Battle of Red Fork: A Two-Part Review and Analysis of the History and Controversy of the First Civil War Battle Fought in Indian Territory in What is Now Oklahoma by Dale Chlouber (New Forums Press, 2023). Softcover, maps, photos, notes, appendix section. Pages:vi,164. ISBN:978-1-58107-378-2. $26.95]

In a rare diplomatic victory over its Union foe, the Confederate government in 1861 successfully negotiated alliance treaties with the major tribal nations residing within Indian Territory. However, even after principal chief John Ross finally succumbed to the pressure and aligned the powerful Cherokee with Richmond, there were many among the Creeks and other groups who believed their best interests still lay in honoring the old agreements with the U.S. government. Numbering in the thousands, they rallied around the highly respected Muscogee Creek former chief Opothleyahola. On the other side, the now Confederate Indians and their new Texas and Arkansas allies were determined to deny the possibility of armed opposition blossoming under their noses. That rising threat of open warfare caused Opothleyahola and his followers to flee north, a winter trek that some have called the "Trail of Blood on Ice." Pursuit led to a running series of engagements, the most significant of which were the "battles" of Round Mountain (November 19, 1861), Chusto Talasah (December 9), and Chustenahlah (December 26). The last was a rout of Opothleyahola's remaining warriors, but the harried Indian loyalists ultimately reached asylum in Kansas. There they huddled in refugee camps under less than ideal conditions, their sufferings endured amid the hope and promise of eventual return to their former homes under the protection of U.S. forces.

Perhaps the most notable historiographical controversy of the entire campaign revolves around the disputed location of the Battle of Round Mountain (less commonly known as the Battle of Red Fork or Round Mountains). Strong oral history and local tradition built up around the Twin Mounds site west of Yale, Oklahoma, but the controversy really started with the public dissemination of the findings of avocational historian John Melton and the 1949 Chronicles of Oklahoma article authored by professional historian Angie Debo. Their arguments in support of the Twin Mounds site convinced many, and the issue seemed resolved. However, Debo's scholarship was soon challenged by Chronicles of Oklahoma editor Muriel Wright, who initially seemed satisfied by Debo's analysis before rejecting it wholesale in favor of promoting a location (or locations) near the confluence of the Cimarron and Arkansas Rivers, the so-called "Keystone Site" or sites. That was followed by decades of back and forth arguments and competing claims among historians, interested individuals, historical societies, and local communities. The conflict, which frequently reached unseemly depths, resulted in competing monuments and enduring questions. This contentious and nearly three quarters of a century-long debate is the subject of Dale Chlouber's Revisiting The Battle of Red Fork: A Two-Part Review and Analysis of the History and Controversy of the First Civil War Battle Fought in Indian Territory in What is Now Oklahoma.

Chlouber's book is divided into two parts of roughly equal length: (1) "Background on the Controversy of the Battle of Red Fork" and (2) "Revisiting the Battle of Red Fork." "Background" re-explores the source of the controversy in depth, one of its most useful reference features being its creation of an extensive and well-documented timeline of events spanning 1949-1996. After professional historians lost interest in the debate, sometimes due to the career problems involved with it, amateurs stepped forward, and Chlouber also critiques the merits of the battle location advanced by Robert DeMoss (called, appropriately enough, the "DeMoss Site"). In strong fashion, the author explains why he is unconvinced by DeMoss's arguments and unsupported conspiracy charges, finding instead that the best features of DeMoss's analysis not only do not reject the Twin Mounds/Yale site but buttress it.

In point by point fashion, the "Revisiting" section reevaluates the merits of the best sets of evidence put forth by proponents of both main locations: the collective Keystone area site(s) and the Twin Mounds/Yale site. Chlouber judiciously weighs the strengths and weaknesses of each piece of evidence, and persuasively concludes that the preponderance of best sources (including maps, participant accounts written closest to the time of actual events, and oral history) strongly supports the Twin Mounds/Yale location over any other suggested site. In determining this, Chlouber is not a lone wolf. By his estimation, knowledgeable persons today support the Twin Mounds/Yale site with near unanimity.

In text and photos (including the results of his own amateur relic hunting), Chlouber also advances the notion that available artifact discoveries tend to support Twin Mounds as being the true battle site. What's really needed, as Chlouber admits, is a more systematic survey of the location candidates using the most current technology and professional practices of battlefield archaeology. Douglas Scott and others have used such tools to great effect on other Civil War battlegrounds. Chlouber reminds us, however, that man-made Keystone Lake has placed some potential survey sites underwater.

In terms of suggestions for improvement, typos were pretty heavy, especially in the first section. Inclusion of an updated, article-length narrative summary of the battle itself would have helped many readers more fully comprehend the events themselves along with their historiographical dimensions. The volume seems to assume that most, if not all, prospective readers possess at least a rudimentary prior understanding of the battle, but the topic along with its sources and critical geography will undoubtedly be alien to a number of interested readers (as they mostly were to this one!). Additionally, key sources excerpted in the main text are limited enough in number to be fully reproduced in the appendix section. For a future edition, the book's overall organizational structure might also be gainfully reconsidered. There is some needless repetition between sections, and, at least from this reader's perspective, there's a great deal of information presented in the second part of the book that provides useful context for sounder comprehension of key matters explored in the first. In some ways, I wish I had read the second part first. Those concerns might have been resolved through employment of a more integrative approach.

In highlighting the negative consequences of institutionalized personal animosity, incomplete and selective research, misuse of sources and context, flawed assumptions, and community rivalry, Chlouber's Round Mountain examination draws sober lessons from the controversy that can be more broadly applied to the practice of history. In what seems appropriate, the author broadly faults Wright's leadership of the publication arm of the state historical society, The Chronicles of Oklahoma, as doing a disservice to history. By "neutralizing and subduing critiques," (pg. 71) Wright's editorship promoted deeply flawed history and engendered a fear of reprisal (i.e. through refusal to publish other professional articles in The Chronicles) that suppressed healthy scholarly dissent.

Out of an abundance of caution, one might still deem the matter of the Round Mountain battle location to be lacking an unassailable resolution. Nevertheless, this volume thoroughly and effectively compiles and analyzes the available evidence in ways that significantly reinforce those assessments favoring the Twin Mounds site. In doing so, author Dale Chlouber strongly rebuffs the claims of those who still argue that good evidence, or not enough of it, in support of one site over the others does not exist. Revisiting the Battle of Red Fork is a very useful tool for guiding readers through a long, complicated, and lesson-filled historiographical dispute.

Review - " The Antietam Battlefield Atlas " by Brad Butkovich

[The Antietam Battlefield Atlas by Brad Butkovich (Historic Imagination, 2023). Paperback, 124 color maps, orders of battle, endnotes, bibliography. 172 pages. ISBN:978-1-7325976-5-5. $49.95]

Brad Butkovich is the author of the creatively conceived Visual Antietam series, a three-volume reissue of the battle sections of the seminal Ezra Carman manuscript. What made Butkovich's edition of Carman's work stand out were his enhancements: excellent original maps that were in turn supplemented by modern battlefield photographs taken at the approximate time of the action depicted. Newly spawned from that earlier work, and significantly boosted through the use of color, is Butkovich's The Antietam Battlefield Atlas.

This Antietam atlas study, designed to be handy for both armchair reading and battlefield tramping, is divided into eight main battle sections. The first chapter covers initial contact on September 16 and the rest move on from there to comprehensively address the main fighting on the 17th from beginning to end. Each chapter begins with a brief narrative summary of events that is followed by maps tracing the fighting at frequent time intervals. Other sources were consulted, but the volume's research is most extensively based on the O.R. and 1862 Maryland Campaign authority Tom Clemens's exhaustively edited edition of the Carman manuscript (a multi-volume project that was completed in 2017).

Each map is presented in full color and fills most of the generous space provided by the book's 8.5" x 11" page dimensions. Terrain detail is impressive, with salient battlefield features such as buildings, woods, orchards, rock outcroppings, haystacks, and fields circumscribed by roads and multiple fence types. Contour lines drawn at 10' intervals offer a strong sense of the battlefield's elevation nuances without over cluttering the maps. At the bottom of each map is an approximate time (or time range) stamp followed by numbered event stamps describing the action depicted in the drawing. There's good portability, and these bullet point-style text descriptors are great for those having only a few hours for in-person battlefield exploration. As is standard for books of this kind, regiments and batteries are the base scale. An overall winning combination, the cartography is deeply informative, easy to follow, technically strong, and aesthetically pleasing.

Unit placements and timing of events are always open to differences in interpretation both large and small, even with the war's most extensively documented battles (like this one). It's true that we already have a benchmark Antietam atlas published a decade ago that's solidly grounded in current research (see Bradley Gottfried's The Maps of Antietam); however, there's every reason for scholars and enthusiasts alike to pick up a copy of Butkovich's The Antietam Battlefield Atlas both on its own merits and for side-by-side comparison.