That latest Camp Pope News (the infrequent, but always eagerly welcomed, newsletter published by Clark Kenyon's Camp Pope Bookshop) contains an interesting announcement that a new book about the Battle of Athens, MO is in the works:
"I'm working on a new, detailed study of this battle that took place between Union Home Guard troops and the Missouri State Guard in far northeast Missouri on August 5, 1861. It's best known as the closest actual fighting got to Iowa (Croton, Iowa, stood right across the Des Moines River from Athens). The author Jonathan Cooper-Wiele and I have been discussing the publication of this work for several years, and now we are definitely going ahead with it."
I eagerly await this book. The best single source for information on this battle remains an old article by Leslie Anders in Missouri Historical Review ("‘Farthest North:’ The Historian and the Battle of Athens," MISSOURI HISTORICAL REVIEW 69 (Jan 1975): pp 147-168). A book was also published a while back (now long out of print) written by a Mr. Dixon which I understand from trusted sources is a fairly informal, loosely organized collection of information on the battle.
As for projects farther along the pipeline, the Camp Pope series Unwritten Chapters of the Civil War West of the River has a new installment coming out soon (perhaps this summer). Duty, Honor, Country is an annotated compilation of the letters of William Black, Captain of Company K (Fremont Rifles), 37th Illinois Infantry. The series is edited by Michael Banasik.
If you would like to subscribe to the Camp Pope newsletter, click here. I highly recommend it.
Friday, April 28, 2006
Monday, April 24, 2006
"The Raiders of 1862"
Retired army officer James Brewer's The Raiders of 1862 is one of my favorite 'cavalry books'. Sure, it's treatment of its subjects is not as exhaustive as say David Evans' Sherman's Horsemen, but the level of research is adequate and author's writing style is a pleasure to read. What really hooked me was Brewer's choice of cavalry raids for study.
The book is divided into three parts. Part I covers Frank Armstrong's West Tennessee raid (Aug.24 - Sept.4, 1862). This one appealed to me the most as it had direct relevance to one of my wargame design projects. Fights at Medon Station, Middleburg, and Britton's Lane are detailed in this section. Part II is a history of Forrest's West Tennessee raid (Dec.13, 1862 - Jan.3, 1863), with its battles at Lexington, Salem Cemetary, and Parker's Crossroads. Lastly, you get a nice overview of John Hunt Morgan's Christmas Raid (Dec.22, 1862 - Jan.5, 1863) in Part III.
Raiders is a fairly high quality hardback, similar to a McFarland effort. Although grainy computer generations, the maps are numerous, detailed, and very helpful in fostering an operational and tactical understanding of each raid. I would recommend the book to anyone interested in western theater cavalry raids.
The book is divided into three parts. Part I covers Frank Armstrong's West Tennessee raid (Aug.24 - Sept.4, 1862). This one appealed to me the most as it had direct relevance to one of my wargame design projects. Fights at Medon Station, Middleburg, and Britton's Lane are detailed in this section. Part II is a history of Forrest's West Tennessee raid (Dec.13, 1862 - Jan.3, 1863), with its battles at Lexington, Salem Cemetary, and Parker's Crossroads. Lastly, you get a nice overview of John Hunt Morgan's Christmas Raid (Dec.22, 1862 - Jan.5, 1863) in Part III.Raiders is a fairly high quality hardback, similar to a McFarland effort. Although grainy computer generations, the maps are numerous, detailed, and very helpful in fostering an operational and tactical understanding of each raid. I would recommend the book to anyone interested in western theater cavalry raids.
Thursday, April 20, 2006
Primitive Baptists
In his nice overview of the Civil War in Appalachian Virginia and Kentucky, Contested Borderland, Brian McKnight made an interesting observation about the role of religious doctrine in rallying support for the Confederate cause. Specifically, he talked a bit about the Primitive Baptist sect ('primitive' as in clinging to strict interpretations of older doctrines such as Predestination). McKnight argued that the worshippers's strict interpretation of Predestination fostered a firm attachment to the new Confederate cause--after all, it was preordained. He didn't mention if he also believed it eased the transition toward defeat and Reconstruction. Mark Wetherington also wrote about the Primitive Baptists among Georgia's wiregrass population in Plain Folk's Fight, but did not explicitly make the interpretive leap that McKnight made.
(P.S. It made me wonder if this particular sect has much influence today. With the help of Google, I browsed a few sites. Acknowledging the difficulty of estimating this group's current membership size, this site estimated that only around 8,500 adult Primitive Baptists remain as Strict Predestinarians.)
Monday, April 17, 2006
"Civil War in Cabell County, WV 1861-1865"
When a price comparison inquiry on the many used book search sites comes up empty, it seems like many booksellers simply tag a $150 price on their copy and see if anyone bites. This is indeed what I found when I first attempted to find a used copy of Joe Geiger's Civil War in Cabell County, West Virginia 1861-1865 (Pictorial Histories Publishing: Charleston, WV, softcover, 1991 OP, 2 maps, photos, rosters, notes, pp. 140). Lo and behold, I check out Morningside recently and they have a new copy (must be a slooow seller) for 10 bucks. It pays to know where to look!
It's a worthwhile purchase, but I think anyone who pays anywhere close to three figures would be ultimately disappointed. On the plus side, Mr. Geiger's book is made up of high quality materials and is very nicely presented and well-researched. The author made a solid effort to uncover and examine a range of previously unpublished source materials. Like most books from this publisher, photographs are sprinkled liberally throughout. Coverage of events (military or otherwise) in the county during the first two years of the war is adequately detailed, with nice chapters on the 1861 Battle of Barboursville and the Clarkson/Jenkins raid on Guyandotte later on that year. Additionally, capsule biographies of prominent individuals and families are included, as well as unit rosters of both Union and Confederate Cabell countians.
Unfortunately, like many county histories where the main events occurred early in the war, the amount of material rapidly dwindles as the war goes on, making the book progressively less interesting. The reading here was a bit of chore to get through after 1862. Also, the maps aren't much help for those readers unfamiliar with the area, another lamentable feature of CW county histories.
Overall, I would recommend the book to anyone interested in the early years of the Civil War in West Virginia.
It's a worthwhile purchase, but I think anyone who pays anywhere close to three figures would be ultimately disappointed. On the plus side, Mr. Geiger's book is made up of high quality materials and is very nicely presented and well-researched. The author made a solid effort to uncover and examine a range of previously unpublished source materials. Like most books from this publisher, photographs are sprinkled liberally throughout. Coverage of events (military or otherwise) in the county during the first two years of the war is adequately detailed, with nice chapters on the 1861 Battle of Barboursville and the Clarkson/Jenkins raid on Guyandotte later on that year. Additionally, capsule biographies of prominent individuals and families are included, as well as unit rosters of both Union and Confederate Cabell countians.
Unfortunately, like many county histories where the main events occurred early in the war, the amount of material rapidly dwindles as the war goes on, making the book progressively less interesting. The reading here was a bit of chore to get through after 1862. Also, the maps aren't much help for those readers unfamiliar with the area, another lamentable feature of CW county histories.
Overall, I would recommend the book to anyone interested in the early years of the Civil War in West Virginia.
Friday, April 14, 2006
Brian Downey's Antietam maps
Today's posting on Brian's blog mentions a wonderful Antietam campaign map project he's working on--daily operational maps from September 4-20. I am impressed with the detail and the beauty of the maps and have a deep appreciation for this comment of his:
As I have been plotting units, though, I’m finding there are far more of them than I’d read of previously, and the neat orders of battle with which I’m familiar are of less and less help. Local militia, orphaned cavalry detachments, signalmen, state troops; not to mention rear-area logistics, supply, and communications points.
The OBs of most campaign and battle histories (even the very good ones) include only the formations present on the "main" subject battlefield, generally ignoring those-- both large and small--that played even significant operational roles at some point in the campaign leading up to the climactic battle.
As I have been plotting units, though, I’m finding there are far more of them than I’d read of previously, and the neat orders of battle with which I’m familiar are of less and less help. Local militia, orphaned cavalry detachments, signalmen, state troops; not to mention rear-area logistics, supply, and communications points.
The OBs of most campaign and battle histories (even the very good ones) include only the formations present on the "main" subject battlefield, generally ignoring those-- both large and small--that played even significant operational roles at some point in the campaign leading up to the climactic battle.
"The Tygarts Valley Line June - July 1861"
The Tygarts Valley Line, June-July 1861
by Eva Margaret Carnes (1961--Third Printing 2003, Barbour County Historical Society, paperback, 112 pages, ISBN: 0-87012-703-9) is a useful little booklet written during the Centennial period. On one level, it's a short military history of the June 3, 1861 Battle of Philippi and the skirmishes in the Tygarts River valley during the second week of July; but, through a number of interesting vignettes, the book also paints a nice portrait of the valley's conflicted populace and of individual citizens rarely mentioned in later histories.
Carnes writes perhaps the most detailed and nuanced view I've come across of Confederate Colonel George A. Porterfield and his actions. On the Union side, she writes in admiration of Benjamin Kelley while passing harsh judgement upon George McClellan and Robert Milroy. However, Carnes is certainly no Lost Cause advocate either as she aims perhaps her most strident criticisms at Robert E. Lee for his apparent ignorance of and lack of concern for the region and its inhabitants and also for not following through on written promises of reinforcements, arms, and supplies. Her points are well taken but, given the situation the Confederates were in in May of 1861, it's difficult to imagine alternative results given the resources the Union army was pouring into their effort in western Virginia.
by Eva Margaret Carnes (1961--Third Printing 2003, Barbour County Historical Society, paperback, 112 pages, ISBN: 0-87012-703-9) is a useful little booklet written during the Centennial period. On one level, it's a short military history of the June 3, 1861 Battle of Philippi and the skirmishes in the Tygarts River valley during the second week of July; but, through a number of interesting vignettes, the book also paints a nice portrait of the valley's conflicted populace and of individual citizens rarely mentioned in later histories. Carnes writes perhaps the most detailed and nuanced view I've come across of Confederate Colonel George A. Porterfield and his actions. On the Union side, she writes in admiration of Benjamin Kelley while passing harsh judgement upon George McClellan and Robert Milroy. However, Carnes is certainly no Lost Cause advocate either as she aims perhaps her most strident criticisms at Robert E. Lee for his apparent ignorance of and lack of concern for the region and its inhabitants and also for not following through on written promises of reinforcements, arms, and supplies. Her points are well taken but, given the situation the Confederates were in in May of 1861, it's difficult to imagine alternative results given the resources the Union army was pouring into their effort in western Virginia.
Monday, April 3, 2006
Review: "A Single Grand Victory"
[A Single Grand Victory: The First Campaign and Battle of Manassas
by Ethan S. Rafuse (Wilmington, Delaware: SR Books, 2002, Pp. 232 est., Paper, $17.95, ISBN: 0-8420-2876-5)]
West Point professor Ethan Rafuse’s new book A Single Grand Victory is volume seven of the American Crisis Series edited by Steven Woodworth. Despite a few quibbles with the book’s presentation, A Single Grand Victory is a worthy addition to the series. While acknowledging the previous excellent work of William C. Davis and John Hennessy in their books Battle at Bull Run and The First Battle of Manassas, the author seeks to expand our understanding of the first major campaign of the Civil War by also discussing the social, political, economic, and gender-related factors that led to the outbreak of civil strife. Indeed, the author has mined the wealth of current research and scholarship pertaining to cultural influences and summarizes the findings well. The issues of soldier motivation and what factors led each side to expect a war that would be largely decided in one decisive battle are also examined.
The sections covering the campaign and battle are written in a lively fashion with many first-person accounts woven seamlessly into the text. Though no groundbreaking discoveries are made, the analysis throughout is sound. Unfortunately, the reader’s understanding of the Manassas campaign’s operational and tactical movements is hampered by maps that are both too few and lacking in detail. For example, in a battle often characterized by uncoordinated regimental level attacks, the maps are mostly brigade-level and lack important terrain features.
Though not necessarily meriting great criticism, some omissions in the text are curious. For instance, the author mentions the civilian spectators only in passing and chose not to delve into the Bee/Jackson controversy, limiting the treatment of the subject to a short paragraph. In his analysis of the battle, Rafuse does not criticize McDowell’s decision to make Tyler’s diversion on the same flank where the main attack was to be made. No formal order-of-battle or discussion of weapons, tactics or training is included either.
These criticisms aside, Rafuse has written a solid overview of the First Manassas campaign that places military events in a cultural context. The general reader especially will find the book’s comprehensive coverage of the campaign and battle to be interesting and informative. On the other hand, though the discussion of the campaign’s operational elements is particularly useful to students of military history, readers interested mainly in the battle’s tactical details will still find Hennessy’s book to be the best source available.
(The following review is reprinted with the permission of North and South Magazine, originally appeared in vol. 5 #4, reviewed by Andrew Wagenhoffer)
by Ethan S. Rafuse (Wilmington, Delaware: SR Books, 2002, Pp. 232 est., Paper, $17.95, ISBN: 0-8420-2876-5)]West Point professor Ethan Rafuse’s new book A Single Grand Victory is volume seven of the American Crisis Series edited by Steven Woodworth. Despite a few quibbles with the book’s presentation, A Single Grand Victory is a worthy addition to the series. While acknowledging the previous excellent work of William C. Davis and John Hennessy in their books Battle at Bull Run and The First Battle of Manassas, the author seeks to expand our understanding of the first major campaign of the Civil War by also discussing the social, political, economic, and gender-related factors that led to the outbreak of civil strife. Indeed, the author has mined the wealth of current research and scholarship pertaining to cultural influences and summarizes the findings well. The issues of soldier motivation and what factors led each side to expect a war that would be largely decided in one decisive battle are also examined.
The sections covering the campaign and battle are written in a lively fashion with many first-person accounts woven seamlessly into the text. Though no groundbreaking discoveries are made, the analysis throughout is sound. Unfortunately, the reader’s understanding of the Manassas campaign’s operational and tactical movements is hampered by maps that are both too few and lacking in detail. For example, in a battle often characterized by uncoordinated regimental level attacks, the maps are mostly brigade-level and lack important terrain features.
Though not necessarily meriting great criticism, some omissions in the text are curious. For instance, the author mentions the civilian spectators only in passing and chose not to delve into the Bee/Jackson controversy, limiting the treatment of the subject to a short paragraph. In his analysis of the battle, Rafuse does not criticize McDowell’s decision to make Tyler’s diversion on the same flank where the main attack was to be made. No formal order-of-battle or discussion of weapons, tactics or training is included either.
These criticisms aside, Rafuse has written a solid overview of the First Manassas campaign that places military events in a cultural context. The general reader especially will find the book’s comprehensive coverage of the campaign and battle to be interesting and informative. On the other hand, though the discussion of the campaign’s operational elements is particularly useful to students of military history, readers interested mainly in the battle’s tactical details will still find Hennessy’s book to be the best source available.
(The following review is reprinted with the permission of North and South Magazine, originally appeared in vol. 5 #4, reviewed by Andrew Wagenhoffer)
Friday, March 31, 2006
What I've been reading
Finished a few review books I was happily inundated with recently... Two are excellent treatments, but, regrettably, another was perhaps one of publishing's greatest wastes of compressed wood pulp (maybe I'll save it for a 'worst book I read this year' posting). But on to what's good about Civil War publishing.
Ironclad's No Such Army Since the Days of Julius Caesar is a definitive piece of the military history of Sherman's Carolinas Campaign. I get the feeling that most authors are so spent near a project's completion that the analysis section, which is always positioned at the end, often suffers. It feels rushed, belabored by obvious points, and spare with detail as compared with previous chapters. Not so here. The authors (Mark Smith and Wade Sokolosky) are career military officers and their critical analysis of the campaign is truly impressive.
University of Kentucky Press's Contested Borderland: The Civil War in Appalachian Kentucky And Virginia
is a fine introduction to the Civil War in the Big Sandy Valley and the mountain divide between eastern Kentucky and southwestern Virginia. It's coverage is broad in scope, touching on military leaders and events (both regular and irregular) as well as analyzing how social, political, religious, and economic ties factored into determining regional loyalties and support for the war. Brian McKnight's work here is the first really comprehensive examination of the Civil War in this particular region of Appalachia. I look forward to his future work.
**If you're interested, my reviews of these two books will probably appear in the next issue or two of North and South magazine and will be republished later on here as well.
Ironclad's No Such Army Since the Days of Julius Caesar is a definitive piece of the military history of Sherman's Carolinas Campaign. I get the feeling that most authors are so spent near a project's completion that the analysis section, which is always positioned at the end, often suffers. It feels rushed, belabored by obvious points, and spare with detail as compared with previous chapters. Not so here. The authors (Mark Smith and Wade Sokolosky) are career military officers and their critical analysis of the campaign is truly impressive.
University of Kentucky Press's Contested Borderland: The Civil War in Appalachian Kentucky And Virginia
is a fine introduction to the Civil War in the Big Sandy Valley and the mountain divide between eastern Kentucky and southwestern Virginia. It's coverage is broad in scope, touching on military leaders and events (both regular and irregular) as well as analyzing how social, political, religious, and economic ties factored into determining regional loyalties and support for the war. Brian McKnight's work here is the first really comprehensive examination of the Civil War in this particular region of Appalachia. I look forward to his future work.**If you're interested, my reviews of these two books will probably appear in the next issue or two of North and South magazine and will be republished later on here as well.
Monday, March 27, 2006
"The Yankee Invasion of Texas"
I recently obtained a copy of The Yankee Invasion of Texas by Stephen Townsend. After posting about a couple books I admire dealing with the Overland Expedition to Texas in the Fall of 1863 (here and here), I was pleasantly surprised to find a title coming out that deals with the interrelated coastal invasion, the "Rio Grande Expedition", of the same period. I haven't had a chance to read it yet, but, at first glance, it looks like another good Texas A&M press title. When the time comes, I'll post my thoughts about it here.
Friday, March 24, 2006
Donald Frazier
As I mentioned before in my list of 20 great Trans-Mississippi Civil War titles posted back in January, I am a fan of Donald Frazier's Blood & Treasure: Confederate Empire in the Southwest
. I like to see talented scholars that concentrate their work on the Trans-Mississippi theater. Last week, while I pondered what Frazier was working on at the moment, a helpful soul on a messageboard directed me to the author's CV, posted on his university's website. Looks like some good stuff coming up:
Although I shouldn't prejudge from title alone, I'm not quite sure we need another book like the last one on the list, but the first two definitely have my deep interest. The press Texas A&M is affiliated with has had a nice run of recent Civil War titles. I hope they keep it up.
. I like to see talented scholars that concentrate their work on the Trans-Mississippi theater. Last week, while I pondered what Frazier was working on at the moment, a helpful soul on a messageboard directed me to the author's CV, posted on his university's website. Looks like some good stuff coming up:- Donald S. Frazier. "Tom Green’s Texans: The Civil War in Southwest Louisiana". College Station: Texas A&M University Press, forthcoming.
- Donald S. Frazier, ed. "Texas: The Western Flank of the Confederacy". Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Press, forthcoming;
- Donald S. Frazier. "Americans at War, 1861-1865: The Struggle for Southern Independence". London: University College London, forthcoming.
Although I shouldn't prejudge from title alone, I'm not quite sure we need another book like the last one on the list, but the first two definitely have my deep interest. The press Texas A&M is affiliated with has had a nice run of recent Civil War titles. I hope they keep it up.
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
Michael Burlingame: "The Inner World of Abraham Lincoln"
While viewing a CSPAN2 Booktv program last year(I wish I could remember which one), a historian mentioned that Michael Burlingame was working on a multivolume biography of Lincoln. Unfortunately, since that time I haven't seen any further mention of such a project.
Michael Burlingame's The Inner World of Abraham Lincoln (University of Illinois Press, 1994) is my favorite 'Lincoln book'. It's been called a psycho-biography. This is unfortunate in some ways because the book isn't a biography in the classic sense and so many previous authors, perhaps in an attempt to make their mark in a crowded field, have vastly overreached when constructing their conclusions from the available evidence. Right or wrong, the psycho- prefix has reflexively become a bit of a pejorative term in the minds of many readers. In my opinion, Michael Burlingame's work in this regard is among the best out there. His measured approach takes neither criticism nor praise too far and he generally avoids the overreaching conclusions mentioned above that harm the credibility of so many writers (at least that's my memory of it).
Inner World is a collection of excellent essays dealing in turn with AL's ambition, anger, and depression; along with his attitude toward marriage, women, parenting and slavery. My personal favorite is the very first chapter, which traces Lincoln's development from party hack to statesman. Burlingame marks the transformation in the context of a midlife crisis of sorts. I was immediately hooked as this aspect of Lincoln's political development was something I had never seen in any other scholarship--although admittedly I don't read the majority of the new Lincoln stuff that spews forth every year. On the other hand, in Inner World, some important issues were left out. One notable omission was a self-contained essay on Lincoln and religion/spirituality.
Frequent scans through the upcoming and new release CW books on Amazon seems to reveal a marked uptick in Abe Lincoln 'issue books' over the past year or so. I hope readers don't confuse The Inner World of Abraham Lincoln with Tripp's The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln.
Michael Burlingame's The Inner World of Abraham Lincoln (University of Illinois Press, 1994) is my favorite 'Lincoln book'. It's been called a psycho-biography. This is unfortunate in some ways because the book isn't a biography in the classic sense and so many previous authors, perhaps in an attempt to make their mark in a crowded field, have vastly overreached when constructing their conclusions from the available evidence. Right or wrong, the psycho- prefix has reflexively become a bit of a pejorative term in the minds of many readers. In my opinion, Michael Burlingame's work in this regard is among the best out there. His measured approach takes neither criticism nor praise too far and he generally avoids the overreaching conclusions mentioned above that harm the credibility of so many writers (at least that's my memory of it).
Inner World is a collection of excellent essays dealing in turn with AL's ambition, anger, and depression; along with his attitude toward marriage, women, parenting and slavery. My personal favorite is the very first chapter, which traces Lincoln's development from party hack to statesman. Burlingame marks the transformation in the context of a midlife crisis of sorts. I was immediately hooked as this aspect of Lincoln's political development was something I had never seen in any other scholarship--although admittedly I don't read the majority of the new Lincoln stuff that spews forth every year. On the other hand, in Inner World, some important issues were left out. One notable omission was a self-contained essay on Lincoln and religion/spirituality.
Frequent scans through the upcoming and new release CW books on Amazon seems to reveal a marked uptick in Abe Lincoln 'issue books' over the past year or so. I hope readers don't confuse The Inner World of Abraham Lincoln with Tripp's The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln.
Saturday, March 18, 2006
Siege of Corinth
Next month will see Corinth's turn to be introduced by the Civil War Campaigns and Commanders series with Campaign for Corinth: Blood in Mississippi. Although the almost two month long campaign commonly called the 'Siege of Corinth' is introduced, the book's focus appears to be on the later events in the area during September and October of the same year--the battles of Iuka, Corinth, and Davis Bridge. Unfortunately, at least as far as I know, no book length study of the Siege of Corinth exists. This is a significant gap in the military historiography of the war. To me, the campaign is worthy of study on several levels:
- The operation was massive in scale (up to 120,000 Federals and 75,000 Confederates); and who knows if these numbers are even accurate, and, additionally, I've never seen a detailed order-of-battle anywhere.
- We have the interesting and unique opportunity to study Halleck as field commander; and, furthermore, all the 'big men' from the U.S. side--Pope, Grant, Buell, Thomas, Sherman--were in the field together for the only time during the war.
- The Union advance was in short stages with the completion of fortified lines at each halt. This use of fortifications on the offensive was novel for the period and deserves a detailed examination. (We need Earl Hess here!)
- The political, social, and military consequences of the war's first mass bloodletting at Shiloh (including the handling of Grant) could be studied to good effect at this moment.
- It was perhaps during this campaign more than any other that disease had the greatest influence on the condition of the opposing armies. The swampy terrain's insect denizens and lack of potable water put men in the hospital by the tens of thousands. A medical study of this campaign could probably fill a book of its own.
- The railroad junction at Corinth was one of the 'great points' of the Confederacy and a detailed reevaluation of the periods immediately before, during, and after the siege may provide some rich ground for a fresh strategic analysis.
Monday, March 13, 2006
Review: "Donnybrook"
[Donnybrook: The Battle of Bull Run, 1861
by David Detzer. (Harcourt, Inc, 2004. Pp. 512, $28.00, Hardback, photos, notes. ISBN 0-15-100889-2)
The Battle of Bull Run is so full of drama, controversy, and interesting personages that there always seems to be room for a fresh interpretation. Professor David Detzer, whose previous Civil War book Allegiance was well received, has entered the mix with a new history of the battle that challenges many of the conclusions of prior authors. The jacket boldly proclaims that Donnybrook is the “first major history of Bull Run to detail the battle from its origins through its aftermath”. Questionable premise aside, the result is a bit of mixed bag.
Donnybrook is not a classic battle study, but rather a vibrant narrative history that will appeal to a wide range of readers. Detzer’s style is informal and a bit eccentric but very effective and unfailingly entertaining. How many academic historians would describe Stonewall Jackson as a “twit” or quote boxer Mike Tyson in a chapter head? Another passage, related to Israel Richardson’s new marriage, amusingly stated that “though his loins may have been more relaxed, his fighting instinct remained”. Granted, the style isn’t for everybody, but the substance cannot be discounted. Although there is no bibliography to compare with previous works, detailed endnotes are included that make it abundantly clear that the author did his homework. Detzer uncovered a vast number of primary accounts and skillfully weaved them into the text.
Even the most jaded Bull Run specialist will enjoy reading this book. In my opinion, the most interesting aspect of Donnybrook is the author’s unabashed challenging of the battle’s many myths and interpretations. There are far too many to list here but they include perhaps history’s least condemning review of Robert Patterson’s generalship (ed. 3/12/06 - Russel Beatie is similarly corrective in volume one of his Army of the Potomac series). The author’s assessment of the campaign’s heroes and villains is certainly unconventional. Detzer additionally holds the actions of Jackson and his Virginians to be unexceptional and he is never afraid to confront previous historians’s conclusions about specific events that took place during the fighting on Henry House Hill.
However, the book is not without flaws, some serious. The absence of even a single map is really unacceptable. Considering how inviting most of the book is to the novice reader, how that person will begin to understand the confused fighting without maps is beyond me. Though the depiction of events up to and including the action on Matthew’s Hill is excellent, the previously smoothly flowing narrative breaks down on Henry House Hill. Mythbusting tangents and conflicting sources notwithstanding, the author fails to construct a likely sequence of events from the sources available that is comprehensive enough to give the reader a reasonable impression of what happened there. The previous works of Hennessy, Davis, and most recently Rafuse were much more successful in this regard. Finally, the ending was rushed. Though organized into three books, the action on Matthew’s Hill does not begin in earnest until Book Three and the battle’s aftermath takes up only a dozen pages or so in a book containing over 400 pages of text. This wasn’t enough space to convincingly lay out the author’s thesis minimizing the negative consequences of the Union defeat.
Nevertheless, everyone interested in the Battle of Bull Run should read this book. Detzer’s narrative style is extremely entertaining, accessible, and can draw the general reader in in the vein of a Foote or a McPherson and the multitude of new interpretations of persons and events should spark a lively debate among the specialists.
(P.S.--3/12/06-- I should say that, although maps were absent in the review galley proof, a single rather poorly presented period map was included in the published edition. I also got a kick out of the magazine advertisement the publisher created for the book, which cherry-picked choice phrases from my N&S review, connecting them with "...", making it appear as if I had given it a rave review.)
(Reprinted with Permission from North & South Magazine. Originally published in Vol. 7 #7, pg. 90, reviewed by Andrew Wagenhoffer)
by David Detzer. (Harcourt, Inc, 2004. Pp. 512, $28.00, Hardback, photos, notes. ISBN 0-15-100889-2)The Battle of Bull Run is so full of drama, controversy, and interesting personages that there always seems to be room for a fresh interpretation. Professor David Detzer, whose previous Civil War book Allegiance was well received, has entered the mix with a new history of the battle that challenges many of the conclusions of prior authors. The jacket boldly proclaims that Donnybrook is the “first major history of Bull Run to detail the battle from its origins through its aftermath”. Questionable premise aside, the result is a bit of mixed bag.
Donnybrook is not a classic battle study, but rather a vibrant narrative history that will appeal to a wide range of readers. Detzer’s style is informal and a bit eccentric but very effective and unfailingly entertaining. How many academic historians would describe Stonewall Jackson as a “twit” or quote boxer Mike Tyson in a chapter head? Another passage, related to Israel Richardson’s new marriage, amusingly stated that “though his loins may have been more relaxed, his fighting instinct remained”. Granted, the style isn’t for everybody, but the substance cannot be discounted. Although there is no bibliography to compare with previous works, detailed endnotes are included that make it abundantly clear that the author did his homework. Detzer uncovered a vast number of primary accounts and skillfully weaved them into the text.
Even the most jaded Bull Run specialist will enjoy reading this book. In my opinion, the most interesting aspect of Donnybrook is the author’s unabashed challenging of the battle’s many myths and interpretations. There are far too many to list here but they include perhaps history’s least condemning review of Robert Patterson’s generalship (ed. 3/12/06 - Russel Beatie is similarly corrective in volume one of his Army of the Potomac series). The author’s assessment of the campaign’s heroes and villains is certainly unconventional. Detzer additionally holds the actions of Jackson and his Virginians to be unexceptional and he is never afraid to confront previous historians’s conclusions about specific events that took place during the fighting on Henry House Hill.
However, the book is not without flaws, some serious. The absence of even a single map is really unacceptable. Considering how inviting most of the book is to the novice reader, how that person will begin to understand the confused fighting without maps is beyond me. Though the depiction of events up to and including the action on Matthew’s Hill is excellent, the previously smoothly flowing narrative breaks down on Henry House Hill. Mythbusting tangents and conflicting sources notwithstanding, the author fails to construct a likely sequence of events from the sources available that is comprehensive enough to give the reader a reasonable impression of what happened there. The previous works of Hennessy, Davis, and most recently Rafuse were much more successful in this regard. Finally, the ending was rushed. Though organized into three books, the action on Matthew’s Hill does not begin in earnest until Book Three and the battle’s aftermath takes up only a dozen pages or so in a book containing over 400 pages of text. This wasn’t enough space to convincingly lay out the author’s thesis minimizing the negative consequences of the Union defeat.
Nevertheless, everyone interested in the Battle of Bull Run should read this book. Detzer’s narrative style is extremely entertaining, accessible, and can draw the general reader in in the vein of a Foote or a McPherson and the multitude of new interpretations of persons and events should spark a lively debate among the specialists.
(P.S.--3/12/06-- I should say that, although maps were absent in the review galley proof, a single rather poorly presented period map was included in the published edition. I also got a kick out of the magazine advertisement the publisher created for the book, which cherry-picked choice phrases from my N&S review, connecting them with "...", making it appear as if I had given it a rave review.)
(Reprinted with Permission from North & South Magazine. Originally published in Vol. 7 #7, pg. 90, reviewed by Andrew Wagenhoffer)
Tuesday, March 7, 2006
David Detzer's Dissonance
I was wondering when the third volume (well, actually the second, as the author did them out of chronological order) of David Detzer's trilogy detailing the first three months of the Civil War was going to be released. Looks like Dissonance : The Turbulent Days Between Fort Sumter and Bull Run
will be out in May of this year. I think I take the minority view of the overall quality and level of importance of Detzer's earlier volumes, Donnybrook
and Allegiance, but they are certainly worth reading. Aside from a lack of alliterative consistency with the other two titles, I found Detzer's Allegiance to be a decidedly inferior 'Fort Sumter book' to Maury Klein's excellent Days of Defiance. If nothing else, Detzer has a free swinging style and an entertaining take on the leading personalities of the period. Nevertheless, I am looking forward to reading Dissonance. At least the ground covered here is a little less trampled.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)