Search

Tennessee Valley Civil War Round Table

Education and Preservation

Open Search
Category

Book Review

The Yellowhammer War: The Civil War and Reconstruction

Professor Noe is well known to the Tennessee Valley Civil War Round Table having presented various topics regarding the war as one of our most notable speakers.

Professor Noe assembled this series of essays by equally notable authors addressing various aspects of the war and Reconstruction in Alabama. The essays cover often neglected fields such as race, religion, women, the home front, and Reconstruction. And, of particular interest this month is the essays written by Sara Woolfolk Wiggins, Terry L. Seip, Michael W. Fitzgerald, Jason J. Battles, and Bertis English, all focused on various aspects of Reconstruction and the civil rights movement.

Free People of Color in Madison County, AL

Was it purgatory on earth, neither slave nor equal in the community? Nancy Rohr has documented, through the available records of Alabama and the county, and presented snippets of the life and the time Free African Americans coped in Southern society before and during the Civil War. It is not a novel but for those interested in the social environment of the Old South there are ample storylines to tingle the imagination and reflect on the impact of a deliberately segregated society on a single segment of its population. She outlines the patriotic justification that secured freedom for some slaves, freedom as the reward for loyalty to the master, and other legal methods for slaves to join a free society. The short descriptions of individuals who’s legal documents illustrate a struggle the freed slaves endured to support themselves and their families in a community that, at best, was ambivalent and, at worst, accusatory and violent. And, the primary focus is the Madison County Community.  She illustrates the civil changes that affected the lives of all citizens and presents findings in records where returning to bondage was a better alternative to freedom. It is a documentary illustrating the struggle for equality in a society where the African American is seen but seldom noticed until the fear of insurrection surfaces. Ms. Rohr’s essay is supported by the census of 1830 – 1860;  The Black Huntsville census of 1865; and material found in the Alabama State Assembly (legislature) and Madison County court records. A must for the library of anyone interested in the Old South society.

The Newsletter Editor’s interview with TVCWRT member and author Nancy Rohr.

Editor: Free People of Color is an interesting topic. Why did you choose to research and write about that particular subject?

Ms. Rohr: Curiosity leads a lot of folks astray. There were a couple of   emancipation cases in the Probate Deed books, and I couldn’t understand why. One thing leads to noticing another and then more cases just seemed to appear.

Editor: Recognizing that the topic is not one that most Civil War buffs would necessarily pick up to read, did you find any particular individual that merits additional research and could add more depth to the attitude and disposition of other residents of Madison County?

 

Ms. Rohr: Originally my work was to be an essay to tie up what I had learned about the real cases that followed at the end of the book. For me the first section was to understand the issues and their importance to real people. The last part, is the “good” stuff – who they were and how the individuals must have gotten through life as I had learned it to be in that very first part.

Of course it will not be of interest for Civil War buffs, and alas, I’m afraid few other folks will care. But how could one ignore, once connections were made to the life of Rachael A. Pauper? (Somewhere today her family must have a real surname.) There were five generations going back to Native Americans in Virginia. That family could account for ancestors’ from1770 and in the legal system of the times for us to read today.

Editor: What would you most like the readers of Free People of Color in Madison County- Alabama to take away from your book?

Ms. Rohr: My goals have always been the same for everything I’ve written – just for a reader to pause and think for one moment on one page, “Gee, I didn’t know that!”

Editor: Many writers find information that is interesting but just doesn’t fit in the outline or storyline of their book. Did something stand out that you just couldn’t include in the text?

Ms. Rohr: No, I was more concerned about all the free people of color I might not have found – yet.

Editor: What is the topic for your next effort?

 

Ms. Rohr: Next topic? Next topic? One doesn’t know what that is until it’s found!

Richmond Redeemed: The Siege at Petersburg, the Battles of Chaffin’s Bluff and Poplar Spring Church, September 29 – October 2, 1864

This was a pioneering study of an important military operation: in1980 the author’s approach to Civil War history was praised for its originality and value to serious students of the war. Richard Sommers was the first historian to write a tactically detailed narrative of a Civil War battle for the general audience. He was also the first historian to write about the Petersburg Campaign (aside from incidents such as the Battle of the Crater) since Major General Andrew Humphries, a participant in the campaign, wrote his history in 1883. Richmond Redeemed won numerous awards and is still regarded the definitive study of Grant’s Fifth Offensive against Petersburg and Richmond. Richard Sommers has inspired many other historians to write about Civil War battles from the tactical, small-unit, and personal points of view.
As already stated, this book analyzes Grant’s Fifth Offensive (September 29 – October 2, 1864), primarily the Battles of Chaffin’s Bluff (Fort Harrison) and Poplar Spring Church (Peebles’ Farm). The Union attack north of the James River at Chaffin’s Bluff broke through Richmond’s defenses and gave Federals their best opportunity to capture the Confederate capital. Fierce fighting by four United States Colored Troops brigades earned their soldiers thirteen Medals of Honor and marked Chaffin’s Bluff as the biggest, bloodiest battle for African-American units in the whole Civil War. The corresponding fighting outside Petersburg at Poplar Spring Church so threatened Southern supply lines that General Lee considered abandoning his Petersburg rail center six months before actually doing so. Hard fighting and skillful Confederate generalship saved both cities, and Richmond was ‘redeemed’ from capture for another half-year.

In the opening chapter, Sommers gives the reader a good idea of how the war was going for both sides at the time of the campaign, and what the opposing generals were trying to accomplish. He maintains the reader’s suspense by, in his own words “…never get[ting] ahead of myself by tipping off readers to the outcome. Readers step lively with the columns of march, charge with the brigades, man the ramparts with the defenders, plan with the generals, and struggle with those commanders to try to fathom the uncertainty of battle and of war.” He draws heavily on the personal accounts of commanders and private soldiers; using literally thousands of letters, reports, and memoirs drawn from over 100 archives throughout the nation.  His maps (and the explanations provided on each map) depict the actions down to regimental level, helping the reader to quickly understand the terrain and the troop movements.

For this Sesquicentennial re-issue of the book Sommers adds several appendixes, including a day-by-day timeline of the offensives and the Senior Officers of the Fifth Offensive, cross-referenced by State, Grade and Command. He has not just re-issued, he has re-written his book, crediting his additions or re-interpretations to over twenty years of “…new research, new writing, and most of all new thinking.” Since 2008, he taught electives and core courses to students at the U.S. Army War College at Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania. War College students are Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps Colonels and Lieutenant Colonels as well as Navy and Coast Guard Captains and Commanders who had demonstrated potentiality to become Generals and Admirals. Sommers presented military history, including the Petersburg Campaign, in their courses. He contributed to the officers development as senior strategic leaders, and gained valuable new insights from them “…through their real-world experience in making military history….” which contributed greatly to his understanding of generalship and high command, adding greatly to the value of his final-chapter’s analysis of the generalship of Generals Robert Lee, Ulysses Grant, A. P. Hill, Gouverneur Warren and the other commanders.

This book is highly recommended to those who want to develop an understanding of “how they fought” during this campaign as well as in the latter part of the war, or who want to understand the very important mid-point of the Petersburg Campaign.

 

Review by David Lady

That Furious Struggle: Chancellorsville and the High Tide of the Confederacy, May 1-4, 1863

Chancellorsville is a classic in the study not only of the Civil War and military history in general, but also of leadership, risk-taking, and military tactics.

The First Battle of Manassas (Bull Run) on July 21, 1861, had shown that indeed there would be large-scale, open war between north and south.  The Battle of Shiloh (April 6-7, 1862) had shown that the war would be long, hard-fought, and bloody.  And as the 1863 campaign season got underway, with major battles already having been fought in all theaters, the war appeared to stretch indefinitely into the future.

Thus the armies of Robert E. Lee the Army of Northern Virginia, and Joseph “Fighting Joe” Hooker the Army of the Potomac faced each other in April-May, 1863, across the Rappahannock River in a thickly-wooded region known as “the Wilderness” west of Fredericksburg.  The Army of the Potomac was the Union’s premier maneuver force in the Eastern Theater.  Steeped in the theories of Antoine-Henri Jomini (as were all that had attended West Point before the war), Union leadership looked to the east (principally Virginia) as the critical theater of war.  Several times the Army of the Potomac had sought decisive victory in major set-piece battles.  And despite not yet having achieved victory, Major General Hooker intended to have another go at it.  As with his predecessors, he was confident of victory (and admittedly, his, was a good plan of maneuver), yet he was just as unsuccessful as they had been.  What makes this battle particularly interesting was that General Lee had absented a major portion of his force (First Corps, under Lieutenant General James B. Longstreet) south to Suffolk, Virginia and nearby parts of North Carolina to forage for food and supplies for the Army of Northern Virginia.  Thus General Lee and a reduced Army of Northern Virginia faced a reinvigorated AoP and, making great use of Lieutenant General Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson, had to execute some truly brilliant tactics to once again defeat it.

Mackowski and White capture the battle with a concise, yet reasonably detailed description of the engagements, supporting movements, and the key personalities, including an excellent description of the wounding of Jackson.  The writing is generally crisp and effective, and is supported by maps of sufficient detail to allow the reader to understand the action.  There are a large number of photos and diagrams from the time, as well as more current photos of the terrain that will facilitate touring the battlefield, although some of these are dark with resultant loss of detail.  The book includes five appendices on related topics, a detailed order of battle for both sides down to regimental and battery level, and a suggested reading list for further study.

All in all, this is a good primer on the campaign.  But it is more than that.  The book’s strength is its battlefield tour guide.  Interwoven into the text, it will facilitate the planning of personal and professional tours of all or parts of the battle area, particularly for families with elementary through high school children who want to walk and see the ground over the course of a two or three-day weekend, perhaps with evening readings as a review of the coming day’s tour.  The Chancellorsville battlefield is a beautiful piece of ground and would make for a great family outing.  Mackowski’s and White’s book would provide an ideal supplement.

 

Review by Emil Posey

Patriots and Rebels

The author, John C. Bush, has created a fictional drama around the real-life ancestors of his wife, Sara.  He used military records, the National Archives, other historical tomes, and family stories to pin down the location and dates where the ancestor, Tom Benton Files, served in the army.  Then he used his imagination to create some of the man’s adventures in his journeys across the U.S. throughout the war and afterwards.

Here’s the plot:  Tom Files is born and raised in north Alabama, but when the war between the states breaks out, he is determined to be a patriot – a defender of the United States of America, which his ancestors fought and died to establish and protect – and not a southern rebel.  The Files family owns no slaves, and neither do his neighbors.  But Tom’s reluctance to join the rebel army was the cause of some unpleasant midnight calls to frighten him into joining the southern forces.

After the family was subjected to a violent visit from the Home Guard one dark night, Tom leaves his wife and two little girls in charge of the farm while he rides off on his hard-working mule to join the First Alabama Cavalry, United States Volunteers.  The story is told by the older daughter, Mary Frances, affectionately known as Fannie, who is a “tweenager” at the beginning of the story in January of 1863.

Fannie and Mattie, her mother, manage to carry on at the farm . . . suffering the losses common to most of the residents of a war-torn area.  Their food and livestock are eventually confiscated by soldiers from both sides.  They are harassed by some of the rebel families.  But they survive with the aid of some helpful neighbors.  Another daughter is born.  The war ends.  But Tom does not return until two years after the war was over!

Tom had some explaining to do – and that is the meat of the story, Patriots and Rebels.  While Fannie tells us in her simple, if ungrammatical, prose how life begins to get back to normal with her daddy back from the war, Tom spins out the epic of his journeys around the fireside after the babies are put to bed.

The story that John C. Bush develops around his protagonist is lucid and poignant.  Tom Files is an anomaly – a southerner who fights for the Union – and is therefore trusted by neither Johnny Reb nor Billy Yank.  In fact, during his journeys he falls victim to both sides.  He explains to his family that he was afraid to return home after the war because of stories he heard about returning Union veterans in the south being tortured – sometimes killed – in front of their families.  He says he didn’t even dare to write to them for fear the Home Guard would find out and wreak havoc on the little family left behind.

Tom tells how, when his stint with the cavalry ended, he decided to travel with some army friends up to their home in the Midwest, where he felt he would be safe.  He encounters some runaway slaves when he stays at the home of a Quaker family, so the issue of slavery is discussed.  He finds the seeming disinterest of the northerners in his family background disconcerting.  He gets a job at a prosperous farm to earn money for the journey back to Alabama; and then is warned by some local “Copperheads” to leave the area, as they didn’t like the idea of a southerner turned Union soldier.

When Mr. Files starts home to north Alabama, the war is still on.  On the way back, he is imprisoned alternately by both the Confederates and the Yankees, both of whom fear he is a spy!  The beatings he receives from angry rebel prisoners leave him with permanent injuries.

The ponderings of young Fannie help the reader consider the plight of the character who stands up for what he feels is right – against the popular tide.  The story gives the reader a feel for home life in the war-ravaged Tennessee Valley, as Fannie describes their work in the garden, their visits to town for church.  And Tom himself describes the amazing journey across the lines and his return to hearth and home.

At times, the framing of this “story within a story” is clumsy and therefore distracting.   And the narrator’s name is variously written as Mary Francis or Mary Frances.  Sometimes the author’s educated vocabulary creeps into the farmer Tom’s mouth (vacillate, for instance).  Nevertheless, the simple, no-nonsense yarn of Tom Files comes through.

John C. Bush tells a great story.  His author’s notes at the end of the book relate how he blended the facts and events he researched with fictional and historic people and events.  I myself know very little about the lives and service of my civil war ancestors; how I would love to have someone flesh out a story like this around them!  It’s not a dull recital of the exploits of a military unit – it’s the story as it might have happened to the real people in the real Tennessee Valley, just as they might have told it.  It’s a good read.

 

Review by Kathi Paul

Bloody Autumn: The Shenandoah Valley Campaign of 1864

The Shenandoah Valley played an important supporting role in the Civil War.  With the apt nickname “The Breadbasket of the Confederacy”, it supplied Confederate forces in the eastern theater, particularly the Army of Northern Virginia, with grains, produce and livestock necessary to their survival.  That part that was in “friendly hands” protected the flank of operations, Union as well as Confederate, in eastern Virginia; the part that wasn’t in “friendly hands” posed a significant flanking threat.  In 1862 it was the theater in which Maj. Gen. Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson rose to lasting fame by demonstrating his tactical and operational skills holding three Union armies at bay and thus likely saving the Army of Northern Virginia from encirclement and destruction.  It then became the Army of Northern Virginia’s axis of advance into Maryland (1862) and Pennsylvania (1863) and its main supply route (or MSR) during both of these campaigns.  In July 1864 it was the axis of advance for yet another Confederate offensive into Maryland, this time under the command of Lt. Gen. Jubal Early who, with his Army of the Valley District, menaced the defensive lines of Washington, DC and even brought President Abraham Lincoln under fire on July 12 at Ft. Stevens (albeit this was occasioned more by President Lincoln’s curiosity than by Early’s offensive posture at that point).

 

Early could not sustain the pressure on Washington, however, and withdrew back into the Shenandoah Valley.  Union Lt. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant, commander of all Union forces (since March 1864), decided it was time to neutralize the Valley as a threat.  He centralized command lines of authority in the region and placed Maj. Gen. Philip H. Sheridan in command of the Army of the Shenandoah.

 

It was Sheridan’s job to shut the Valley down.  Starting out on August 9 from his conference with Grant at Monocacy Station, Maryland, Sheridan (who latest position had been Maj. Gen. Meade’s, i.e., the Army of the Potomac’s, chief of cavalry) rode to Harpers Ferry and commenced to do just that.  Over the next two months fighting raged up and down the valley: at Guard Hill, Summit Point, Berryville, Winchester, Fisher’s Hill, Tom’s Brook, and Cedar Creek – battles dim in the knowledge of many, but engagements in a campaign of significance.

 

Davis and Greenwalt capture the campaign with a concise, yet reasonably detailed description of the engagements, supporting movements, and key personalities, particularly their ongoing discussions of Early and Sheridan.  The writing is generally crisp and effective, although occasionally it does get a bit tedious.  There are numerous maps, but of only mediocre detail.  There is a large number of photos, but several of the landscape shots are dark, with resultant loss of detail.  The book includes four appendices on related topics, and a detailed order of battle for both sides down to regimental and battery level.

 

All in all, this is a good primer on the campaign.  But it is more than that.  The book’s strength is its four driving tour guides – Third Winchester, Fisher’s Hill and Tom’s Brook, Cedar Creek, and “Two Fallen Officers: Alexander Pendleton and John Rodgers Meigs”.  These will facilitate the planning of personal and professional tours of all or parts of this August-October 1864 campaign area, particularly for families with elementary through high school children who want to walk and see the ground over the course of a two or three-day weekend, perhaps with evening readings as a review of the coming day’s tour.  The Shenandoah Valley is a beautiful piece of ground and would make for a great family outing.  Davis’s and Greenwalt’s book would provide an ideal supplement.

 

Review by Emil Posey

“The Devil’s to Pay”: John Buford at Gettysburg. a History and Walking Tour

There were thousands of battles in the Civil War, dozens of them categorized as major by any standard – number of combatants engaged, number of casualties, military or political significance, and so forth.  Of these, many consider the Battle of Gettysburg to be the capstone.  It certainly is the most studied of Civil War engagements.  It pitted against each other the best and the worst of leaders, leadership, tactics, and logistics.  At the tactical level, Brigadier General John Buford is emblematic of the best on either side.  His performance in command of the United States First Cavalry Division in the campaign leading into, during, and in the immediate aftermath of the battle provides classic examples of leadership, determination, and tactics that are studied by military professionals to this day.

Eric Wittenberg has captured this well.  Not only is his book superbly researched, documented, and written, it is a grand book – not in size, at a modest 245 pages, but certainly in subject, scope and sweep.  With an engaging style, it is fast-paced, easy to ready and comprehend, and covers not only the operational and tactical levels, but individual officers and soldiers involved – on both sides.

Now, I already knew about Buford and his gaining time to the west and north of Gettysburg as the Army of the Potomac closed in.  So, in addition to being a good read, what did I get out of the book?  What did I learn?

For one, Buford’s background, family and personal, and a detailed insight into his character.  A Kentuckian by birth, he was destined to be a soldier.  Coming from a family history of military service stretching back to the Revolution, he naturally vectored in that direction.  He developed superior horsemanship skills as a youth, which pushed him towards the cavalry.  Graduating from West Point in 1848 (16th out of a class of 42), he showed strong leadership qualities from the beginning of his career.  Eric discusses his various unit assignments from graduation through the beginning of the war.  He was in uniform the entire period.  Buford’s family split in their loyalties, with an older half-brother taking the Union side, briefly commanding a division under Ulysses S. Grant, and a first cousin that went South commanding a division of cavalry under Nathan Bedford Forrest.  Buford struggled with his loyalty to Kentucky, but despite a personal plea from the South-leaning governor, his loyalty to the US Army and the US government it served won out.  He served primarily in staff positions in the first two years of the war, although he commanded a reserve cavalry brigade with distinction in the Second Battle of Bull Run (getting wounded in the process).  He got back into field command in February 1863, serving as a cavalry brigade commander under Major General George Stoneman before being selected for command of the First Cavalry Division in May 1863.  From there, the war led him to Gettysburg.

I also gained a deeper appreciation for the fighting quality of his division at all levels and, in particular, his brigade commanders.  His subordinate commands and commanders at Gettysburg are discussed in detail.  Eric makes extensive use of contemporary accounts (newspaper articles, official reports, journals and diaries, and personal letters).  He includes period photos and thumbnail bios of every commander of significance on both sides of the battle.

Most of all, I came away with a better understanding of the truly pivotal role Buford and his division played on July 1.  The skill and determination displayed not only by Buford but his brigade commanders*, Colonels William Gamble (First Brigade) and Thomas C. Devin (Second Brigade), along with several of the division’s subordinate leaders, such as Lt. John H. Calef, commanding Battery A, 2nd US Artillery, was exemplary.  What Buford and his division accomplished that day was amazing, and Eric captures it in detail from start to finish.  (* Colonel Wesley Merritt commanded the Reserve Brigade, which had been assigned to security duties in the army’s rear and was not present on battlefield on July 1.)

The book also includes several helpful appendices.  A detailed order of battle of course, plus discussions about the Spencer rifle, and analyses of crucial events on the battlefield.  These contribute to the insights Eric brings to the battle.

Oh, and then there is the walking and driving tour guidance.  Eric points you towards specific sites associated with Buford and the US First Cavalry Division’s actions.  The photos, period and current, particularly those looking west on Chambersburg Pike and Mummasburg Road, will help calibrate one’s view today.  The GPS coordinates will be of particular use finding some of the spots.  All in all, this is a good, comprehensive guide.

There were several notable episodes of superior leadership and skill on the Gettysburg battlefield over its three days, and Eric has described one of the most important.  Buford’s delaying action on Herr Ridge and Seminary Ridge on July 1 enabled the Union Army of the Potomac to secure good defensive ground.  Had he and the US First Cavalry Division not performed as they did, the Battle of Gettysburg may well have been a one-day affair, with the decisive battle being fought later at some other locale (the Pipe Creek Line in Maryland, for example), possibly with a different outcome.  As it was, he delayed the Army of Northern Virginia and thereby set up what would be one of the decisive battles of the war.

This book is a great read!  I recommend it highly.  Eric Wittenberg is an accomplished Civil War cavalry historian and author, and I look forward to reading as many of his other books as I can manage.

 

Review by Emil Posey

Broken Valley: A Wartime Story of the Hopes and Fears of Those Left Behind in a Remote East Tennessee Valley

Set in Tennessee’s Sequatchie Valley, Broken Valley relates the experiences endured by the families of the valley during and after our Civil War. This work focuses on the Barker family (William, Cornelia, and their children Will and Lillie) from the summer of 1861 to early 1872.

The Barker’s are a typical valley family, locally-focused and hard-working, apolitical and with no deep allegiance to either Union or Confederacy. Yet mountain trails connecting Murfreesboro and Chattanooga run through their part of the valley, and the war directly affected their lives by the autumn of 1863.

Federal and Confederate armies, stragglers, renegades, foragers and smugglers all cross paths with the Barkers and other valley citizens. Among them are Marc Thierry, a mysterious Southern gunrunner who is part Native American and part Cajun Frenchman. True Chance, a wounded Confederate soldier, is hidden from the Union troops and has an impact on William and Cornelia’s relationship. Col. Abram DuMont is the Union commander trying to maintain a law and order, control his troops and prevent espionage and gun-running.

Judge Isaac Easterly represents the pre-war legal values in rural Tennessee, yet also maintains shadowy connections to smugglers and possibly spies. Sheriff Mark Dry understands the valley’s people and tries to maintain peace amid the horrors of the war.

William Barker is the main protagonist of the story, who tries to remain neutral, raise his crop, and protect his family. His relationship to his wife and son and his experiences as sheriff in place of the murdered Mark Dry provide the most interesting character studies and most riveting action of the novel.

Interspersed throughout the story are valley inter-family tensions, youthful romances, family members’ and soldiers’ deaths. As the war and the story come to an end Scott Sims, an Ohio newspaperman who arrives to chronicle the war’s effects on a personal level, is introduced to illustrate how generations will be required to mend the cracks in the ante-bellum order of the Sequatchie Valley.

This book is plainly written, but makes a very enjoyable read. Mr. Greg Wade has given the public a first-rate historical fiction.  He identifies the factual incidents on which the novel has been loosely based in his author’s notes.

Wayne L. Wolf is Professor Emeritus at South Suburban College. He is the author of numerous Civil War books and articles including The Last Civil War Scout.

 

Review by David Lady

Jefferson Davis, American

What drove the South to secede?  Why would they rise up in arms to combat a nation they professed so passionately to love?  A deep question with an answer perhaps easy to verbalize, but certainly difficult to understand.  It is also an answer enormous in its scope if you grapple with it in the context of the whole of the South – many people, opinions, and motives – but we can begin to understand if we focus on the mindset of one individual:  Jefferson Finis Davis.  If anyone personified the Confederate cause, he did.

 

“I worked night and day for twelve years to prevent the war, but I could not.  The North was blind, would not let us govern ourselves, and so the war came.”

Jefferson Davis

 

I had only a superficial knowledge of Davis, and essentially viewed him as a traitor to the nation.  Then I occasioned upon his great-great grandson, Bertram Hayes-Davis.  He speaks and writes often about Davis, and his tag line is that he is misunderstood.  I decided to plow into this book to find out.

Davis’ motives often don’t get much in-depth analysis in conventional histories of the war.  Summarizations are easier.  Even those pieces that discuss the Southern perspective may do so with little penetration into issues and positions.  William J. Cooper’s book drives right to heart of that question.  A professor of history at Louisiana State University, he doesn’t promote Davis’ agenda, but neither does he demonize it.

No matter how you approach the topic, one cannot escape the issue of slavery in all its perspectives – its morality, its importance to the South’s economy, its persistence in the South, how it was an integral part of the South’s identify, and so forth.*  Nor can it be ignored that the South waged a war of rebellion against the duly constituted government of this nation in what is still it bloodiest conflict.  Trying to understand the South’s motivations is an amazing exercise in cause-and-effect contradictions.  Campbell expertly weaves this backdrop into the story.

* It is true that the war was not started to end or even to maintain slavery, but slavery was the backdrop of all national politics in the US from the Missouri Compromise of 1820 through the end of the war in 1865.  It then echoed in national politics down to the present day.

 

First and foremost, Campbell paints for us a portrait about Davis.  If his isn’t the definitive biography of the man, it should be a contender for that moniker.  It is full of period anecdotes, observations by peers, newspaper columns, and extracts from letters to, from, and about him.  It’s also a portrait of the antebellum South through Davis’ experiences, the sectional and national politics of the times, and the Civil War and its immediate aftermath.  As for the war itself, the book deals at the national level — grand strategy, not details of battles and campaigns.

It is a thorough portrait that Campbell builds.  Davis was born to politics; it was his life’s work.  He had a successful plantation (Brierfield) in a bend in the Mississippi River in Warren County, Mississippi, with a full complement of slaves* and the other resource, crops, and related activities of a typical Southern plantation.  Beginning in 1840, he often left it to his brother, Joseph, to manage (along with Joseph’s own neighboring plantation, Hurricane), while he spent much of his time engaged in politics.  He had a family that he adored, but, again, politics usually came first.  He long-suffered of ill health, afflicted by a chronic eye infection as well as a condition known as trigeminal neuralgia.  While somewhat episodic and disabling (the neuralgia was extremely painful), they didn’t slow him down much.

* Throughout his early army career, after graduating West Point, Davis was accompanied by James Pemberton, his slave.  When Davis got Brierfield up and running, he made Pemberton the plantation overseer.  This is telling of Davis’ character, not to mention his confidence in Pemberton, since the overwhelming majority of plantation owners employed whites in this role.  Pemberton held it until his death in 1850.  Campbell acknowledges that Davis was “a reasonably humane slave master”, but that he was totally committed to the superiority of the white race and to the institution of slavery (pp. 230-239).

Davis was a workaholic, often to the point of exhaustion.  He would work long hours and travel regularly despite his recurrent health problems.  He paid great attention to detail and had difficulty delegating responsibility, the combination of which caused him to be a micromanager.*  These traits were manifest in his political life as well as in his government service.  During the Civil War he tended to neglect civil matters in favor of military issues, favored old friends in appointments of cabinet officers and military commands (see pg. 355, for example), and put up with poor performance and relationships among some of his senior officers – his tolerance of Generals Joseph E. Johnson and P.G.T. Beauregard, and his reliance on General Braxton Bragg, for example.  (Contrast this with the mutual respect, confidence, and trust between Davis and General Robert E. Lee.  Theirs was a relationship solidly grounded.)  These and other shortcomings and failures during the war were legion, and are discussed in detail by Campbell.

* Davis’ tendency to micromanage was apparent when he was US Secretary of War.  It was manifest during the Civil War as well.  Take, for example, when General Leonidas Polk violated Kentucky’s neutrality on September 3, 1861, by occupying Columbus, Kentucky.  Local politicos were aghast at the implications for the Southern cause in Kentucky and beseeched Davis to order the general’s immediate withdrawal.  Davis instructed Secretary of War Leroy Pope Walker “to retire from Kentucky and to explain his actions.  Before he received Secretary Walker’s instructions, General Pope wired Davis that “military necessity make taking Columbus essential”.  Davis accepted this and sent General Pope a countermanding order.  (Pp. 356-357.)  In fairness, it must be pointed out that Secretary of War Walker was not up to the task, which lends credence to Davis bypassing him when communicating with field commanders, but, “From the earliest days in Montgomery, Davis basically acted as his own secretary of war.  Considering no matter too trivial for his attention, he did not assign Secretary Walker primary responsibility for any activity.  Much correspondence and many directives went out over Walker’s signature, but all the major decisions, and many minor ones, were Davis’s.”  Pg. 354.)  This kind of direct involvement was in large part why he went through three Secretaries of War between February 1861 and November 1862.

There was a lot to the man.  He was an ardent supporter of progress, championing the likes of Manifest Destiny and the establishment of the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, DC.  I would have liked more about his time as the US Secretary of War under President Pierce, 1853-1857, but Campbell devotes only one chapter, about 35 pages, to this episode in Davis’ life, and even then only briefly touches on the many innovations Davis applied.  On the other hand, Campbell provides much detail in his description of state-level politics in the South, particularly Davis’ rise in his home state of Mississippi.

Throughout his career, Davis was passionate about states’ rights, and therein is the core of what drove him to the Confederacy.  In his first major congressional speech in the US House of Representatives, on February 6, 1846, he said, “To all which has been said of the inherent powers of the Government, I answer, it is the creature of the States; as such it could have no inherent powers, all it preserves was delegated by the States, and it is therefore that our Constitution is not an instrument of limitations, but of grants…[W]hatever was then deemed necessary was specifically conveyed; beyond the power so granted, nothing can now be claimed except those incidents which are indispensable to its existence; not merely convenient or conducive, but subordinate and necessary to the exercise of the grants.”  He was quite the orator.

With his chronological approach, Campbell provides a thorough, comprehensive journey through Davis’ life and times.  As to the question of who Davis really was, the title provides the book’s main theme.  As Campbell puts it in his preface, “By 1860, he stood as one of America’s most accomplished political leaders.  A superb politician, he dominated his state of Mississippi.  As a hero of the Mexican War, as a notable cabinet officer, and as a prominent member of the United States Senate, Jefferson Davis commanded respect across the nation.  He was spoken of as a man who could legitimately aspire to his country’s highest office.  And he did become president, but not of the United States.” (Pg. xiv.)  He believed in the Constitution, and served his country long and well until the Civil War, yet his dedication to states’ rights, first manifested during the Nullification Crisis between South Carolina and the United States government in 1832-33, prevailed.  An exercise in contradictions, indeed.  Yet, was there a contradiction in these seemingly divided loyalties?  Many in the South, including Davis, felt not – they felt clear in their beliefs.  Campbell discusses Davis’ views comprehensively and at length, relying in large part on his speeches in public, at party conventions, and in the House and the Senate.  Davis always strove to be clear, but he struggled to reconcile all of his points to reality.  Contradictions remained.  The struggle many, north and south, had in answering that to themselves shows they, too, struggled with the contradictions.

Campbell is an accomplished author of Civil War history with several books already to his credit.  These include We Have the War upon Us: The Onset of the Civil War, November 1860-April 1861, Liberty and Slavery: Southern Politics to 1860, and The South and the Politics of Slavery, 1828-1856, to name a few.  Each of these compliments Jefferson Davis, American quite well.

This is a fine resource for those of casual interest about Jefferson Davis and the Civil War as well as those of a more scholarly bent.  It is a long book – 658 pages of text, plus extensive end notes – but it is well written, flows smoothly, and is easily read.  I highly recommend it.

 

Review by Emil Posey

No Turning Back: A Guide to the 1864 Overland Campaign, from the Wilderness to Cold Harbor, May 4 – June 13, 1864

This book is an example of the title absolutely reflecting the contents.  The core of the book is a series of directions, buttressed by maps, numerous black and white photographs (Civil War era and modern), and GPS coordinates.  The text first gives directions to a stopping point, then explains its significance to the battle or campaign in several paragraphs.  These directions allow the reader to visit not only the famous battlefields that are preserved, but also to follow the routes taken by the armies and to visit the remaining ante bellum buildings that were used as headquarters and hospitals.

After a brief overview of the strategic situation in the Eastern Theater as of early May, 1864, the narrative outlines the campaign’s opening moves, with detailed directions to Germanna Ford on the Rapidan River where Wilson’s cavalry dispersed Confederate pickets.  There are fourteen stops for the Battle of the Wilderness alone and at many of them there are footpaths leading to various points of interest.  This is nothing, however.  There are thirty-one stops covering the Battle of Spotsylvania Court House and subsequent maneuvers down to the North Anna River.  The books covers the thirty-one stops in fifty-two pages—a nice balance between explanation, illustration, and directions.  Once the North Anna is reached, another twenty-one stops cover the North Anna and Totopotomoy Creek engagements before moving on to Cold Harbor and finally the James River in another fifteen stops.  The book ends as Grant tries to outmaneuver Lee by crossing the James and moving on Petersburg.

The authors (one of whom, Donald Pfanz, is the son of the author of the famous two-volume set on the second day of Gettysburg) recommend taking two or three days just to follow the directions given.  I would say it may take even longer if you desire to walk any of the trails.

The book itself is a long-needed supplement to the very detailed War College Battlefield guides for these same battles.  Written for a layman with good general knowledge of the Civil War, the book provides an up-to-date route (current roads) guide and a more friendly description of the various actions as compared to the War College books.  I highly recommend it to those who want to take such a tour, even if only parts of the various battlefields.  The GPS coordinates even allow one to tour vicariously via Google Earth!

 

Reviewed by John Scales

General Gordon Granger: The Savior of Chickamauga and the Man Behind “Juneteenth”

Gordon Granger was a hard-bitten professional officer – as described by Robert Conner in this survey of his professional career, he comes across as something between John Wayne’s US Army Colonel John Marlowe (in The Horse Soldiers) and US Marshall Rooster Cogburn (in True Grit as well as in the movie by that name).  He didn’t mince words, was often cynical, didn’t suffer fools, could be irrascible, and was not all that impressed by the rank of officers above and below him.  On the other hand, he was most competent, aggressive in the field, duty-driven, and got the job done.  As described in his obituary in the New York Times in 1876, “He was in every respect a great and distinguished officer.  The story of his life is one of constant service and strict attention to duty.”

 

This is a detailed yet succinct biography of a New York-born career officer of the United States Army.  Mr. Conner spends only a few pages on his early life in the beginning chapter, and similarly a few pages in the last chapter concerning the closing days of his life and career.  (He was still serving when he died.)  In between the reader is treated to a detailed chronology of his service, including his formative experiences at West Point, in the War with Mexico (assigned to General Winfield Scott’s army during the Mexico City campaign), and during subsequent service on the western frontier, along with various relationships he formed along the way with contemporaries he would later encounter on both sides in the American Civil War.  Mr. Conner’s style is thorough and concise throughout; not flamboyant – a smooth, easy, and interesting read.

 

Mr. Connor brings out several aspects of General Granger’s Civil War service that I found striking –

  • His style – Displaying a lack of respect and deference towards others, including senior officers, he often was argumentative to the point of being disrespectful. Obviously this did not serve him well, but he overcame it (at least in the first years of the war) by his competence, natural instincts, and success in the field.  Conner provides a variety of examples throughout the book that illustrate this trait.  In the process, he also compares and critiques past accounts, and puts General Granger’s decision-making under full scrutiny.
  • His health – General Granger had several bouts of ill-health throughout his career that took him away from his duties. This probably was not atypical of the times, but it comes out dramatically in the narrative.
  • His service – He served in many theaters and venues (political, rear area, and frontline). He fought all through the war and was consistently successful on the battlefield.  He got around.  The war’s beginning found him in command of the St. Louis Arsenal in Missouri.  He participated in the Battle of Wilson’s Creek, the Battle of New Madrid, and then the Battle of Corinth.  He went on to cavalry operations in Kentucky, from which he was elevated to command the Reserve Corps of the Army of the Cumberland.  This led him on to his high points in the battles of Chickamauga, Chattanooga and Knoxville, on to Mobile Bay in Alabama, and finally to command of US troops in Texas after war’s end.  It was there that he issued a proclamation on June 19, 1865 declaring enslaved blacks free, and asserting that they should have property rights equal to whites. This proclamation became the basis of the holiday “Juneteenth”, which is still celebrated in Texas as a holiday.
  • His career apogee – His performance at Chattanooga (in command of the newly-formed IV Corps, a regular infantry corps in the Army of the Cumberland) coming on top of his performance at Chickamauga (where he had been in command of the Reserve Corps) was outstanding in many respects, yet he failed to go on to more critical Union Army command positions. At Chickamauga he had prevented the Confederates from having a truly decisive victory. At Chattanooga he was instrumental in the Union victory.  However, General Grant was in overall command of Union forces at Chattanooga.  In the thick of the battle General Granger’s proclivity for personally directing cannon fire didn’t favorably impress either Grant or Sherman.  General Granger continued to command the IV Corps during the successful Knoxville campaign, but his reputation took a further beating during this campaign, and he was relieved of command of IV Corps.  Conner devotes a full chapter to each of these major engagements (Chickamauga, Chattanooga, and East Tennessee).   General Granger did not go on to participate in General Sherman’s campaign for Atlanta and the subsequent March to the Sea.  Instead, he wound up being shunted to Mobile Bay in southern Alabama to lead land forces (the XIII Corps) under the overall command of Admiral Farragut in the campaign that closed the last Confederate port of any significance.  After Knoxville, his were not unimportant commands, but he did not participate in the decisive campaigns of the remainder of the war.
  • The role of a Reserve Corps – Mr. Conner’s narrative provides interesting insight into the role and importance of a Reserve Corps, and the scope of responsibilities and requirements upon a Reserve Corps commander. These ranged from protection of rear areas (particularly from enemy cavalry raids), intelligence gathering, protection and efficient operations of lines of communications, and myriad other duties, all of importance to the front line commander.

 

Mr. Conner developed this book in 2011-12 when he as site interpreter at Grant Cottage in upstate New York.  In studying General Grant, he became interested in General Granger and the friction that developed between the two.  While he could understand General Grant’s point of view (as well as that of General Sherman), he wasn’t convinced that General Grant’s low opinion of General Granger was fully deserved.  In the course of this biography, he lays out the facts while liberally sprinkling the narrative with snippets of opinions of contemporaries of General Granger.  He maintains a neutral tone throughout, yet I wound up agreeing that either General Grant had been unreasonably harsh in his opinion of General Granger, or he had reasons that have not yet surfaced.  That said, it’s also easy to see how General Granger could be hard to like.

 

The definitive biography of Gordon Granger has yet to be written.  In the meantime, Mr. Conner’s is an excellent survey of him and his career.  This book is engaging, informative, and an important resource for students of the American Civil War as well as for anyone interested in command relationships during wartime.

 

Reviewed by Emil Posey

My Love, My Enemy

Mr. Hewitt has attempted an historical novel set in the American Civil War period; the main characters, Fairfax and Cassandra Cole, reside in Huntsville, Alabama.

Fairfax Cole, a wealthy young graduate of West Point, has married a young belle from Virginia and brought her to Huntsville to start their lives together.  Cassandra has abolitionist tendencies; when her father-in-law presents the newly married couple with a wedding gift of two slaves, Cassandra insists that her new husband free the slaves and employ them as hired servants.  The couple lives about ten years in our fair city of Huntsville.  When the war begins, Fairfax becomes a major in the Confederate Army.

Early in the war, Fairfax is ordered by General P. T. Beauregard to assume the identity of a recently captured US Army officer, Major Wiley, whose orders were to report to the war offices in Washington, D.C.  Amazingly, Fairfax apparently resembles Wiley enough to be his twin.  Reluctantly, after some grueling indoctrination and surgery on his earlobe to more closely resemble the captive, whose ear was clipped by a minié ball, Fairfax infiltrates the war offices without too much trouble.

I don’t buy it.  It seems incredible to me that a young man, born and bred in the Deep South, could ever pass as a Pennsylvania man.   Hewitt goes to a lot of trouble to spin a yarn about the protagonist getting tutored on the violin, an instrument at which Wiley was proficient.  But he never even broached the subject of the difference in regional accents, which seems an obvious flaw.

Later in the story, commanding officers, subordinates, and even Wiley’s wife are convinced that Fairfax is Wiley.  Sorry.  I just don’t buy it.  The southern man’s accent would have instantly betrayed him.

While her husband is off serving the rebel army, Cassandra meets with the local Huntsville abolitionist group and is afforded the opportunity to become a spy for the United States government.  She has some outrageous experiences in her service, most absolutely unbelievable.  She is riddled with guilt because she is working against her husband’s Cause.  And Fairfax, acting as Major Wiley, starts investigating abolitionist agents in his hometown of Huntsville–including his wife, who is identified only by her code name, Lavender.

Sad to say, Mr. Hewitt’s story is clumsily told.  Awkward punctuation distracts from the dialogs.  A competent editor should have caught the most blatant spelling and grammatical errors — for example, the term “minié ball” is misspelled (minè) throughout.    The writer mentions “Handle’s Messiah,” which certainly would upset the composer, Mr. Handel.  On page 151, “chocked up” should be “choked up.”  A gentleman speaks with a “tilt” in his voice.  Huh?  “Least the trackers catch them” should read, “lest the trackers catch them.”   The family enjoys a “desert” of pecan pie instead of a dessert.  Modern colloquialisms “in his face” and “mentally retarded” don’t fit with the time period. Flashbacks are poorly related, ruining the continuity.

I am no expert on the customs of the civil war, but I’ve learned a bit from my reading and studies.  Cassandra, a middle aged woman of some wealth, travels in a stagecoach.  One supposes she was dressed in the hoopskirts of the day, which makes it rather unlikely she could perform the gymnastics Mr. Hewitt pens for her:  She jumps onto a saddled horse, gallops it to the coach, and then grabs the bridle of the lead horse in the stage coach and gets the 6 hitched horses stampeding so she can accomplish her getaway!  Another time she travels alone to the train depot to meet an agent of the US government . . . kills numerous soldiers single-handedly and is never discovered . . . makes a stupid mistake during one of her impersonations, mentioning her husband . . . slays soldiers in her own home and drags 4 bodies in a cart to the outskirts of town, including that of her butler — but no one ever shows up at her home to investigate.  How did she hide all that blood?  How did no one recognize her butler?  Where did this genteel woman learn to shoot all the different firearms she wielded?

Mr. Hewitt’s treatment of a love scene between the two is gross and explicit.  At one point when Fairfax’s identity is in question, the wife of the Yankee officer claim examines the rebel’s private parts, supposedly to make a determination of his identity.  Ewww!

There were a couple more things that didn’t ring true in the story, such as a freedman’s village south of Huntsville and a female secretary in the US army offices.  Just more instances of things that raised my eyebrows.

Another oddity in the style of the writing:  the author writes that a female servant uses “a subservient falsetto” when she is under stress, and Mrs. Cole reprimands her for this mannerism.  This brings to mind a scene from the movie, Gone with the Wind; that type of stereotype does not bear repeating.

The author includes some war-time trivia which, though interesting, is of questionable taste — like graphic description of hogs feeding on the corpses after the battle of Gettysburg.

Life goes on at the Huntsville home after the war ends.  And though Fairfax has no apparent employment, the Coles are living in their home with their original furniture intact and lots of meat and delicacies, with paid servants — even though General Ormsby had headquartered in that home.  These facts just don’t jive with my impressions of life in Huntsville as recorded in contemporary diaries from Huntsville.

So . . . my recommendation would be to skip this one if you are looking for a good civil war story with Huntsville as a backdrop.

 

Reviewed by Kathi Paul

Ruin Nation: Destruction and the American Civil War

According to the Civil War Trust, the ACW cost 625,000 lives (some estimates are significantly higher) – nearly as many American soldiers as died in all the other wars in which this country has fought combined – and was the largest and most destructive conflict in the Western world between the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815 and the onset of World War I in 1914.  Ms. Nelson goes into detail.

  Megan Kate Nelson is a lecturer in history and literature at Harvard University.  She is the author of Trembling Earth: A Cultural History of the Okefenokee Swamp.  What she presents here is a panoramic view of the extent of the Civil War’s ruination and its effect on us as a people.

The ACW was not just a political upheaval.  It was a social, environmental, and social upheaval of the first order, as well.  Its violent nature not only took hundreds of thousands of lives – almost 2% of the total 1860 resident population of some 31,443,000 (US Census Bureau) – and many, many more wounded (many grievously and long lastingly), its devastation extended to cities and villages, industrial and transportation infrastructure, farms and livestock, fields and forests and waterways, and, most importantly, peoples’ sense of themselves – their realities, relationships, aspirations, and futures.

The war, particularly in the South, touched everyone.  It was a shared experience, yet “Americans read the ruins in different ways depending on who they were, where they lived, the type of object destroyed, the moment in time, and who had done the destroying.”  Ms. Nelson elaborates: “Nevertheless, northerners and southerners reacted in similar or even identical ways to wartime ruination.  Therein lies one of the ironies of the war’s ruin narrative…its participants found common ground in their consideration of the costs.”  And it is these narratives and descriptions that she captures and shares with us.

The book is divided into four broad chapters, each dealing with separate but entwined categories of ruin: cities, houses, trees, and people.  War unmakes and remakes the landscape and society, and so these categories describe ephemeral ruin.  As she puts it: “Within a generation of their production, most of them had disappeared from the American landscape.  City buildings and homes were rebuilt or their materials were repurposed as southerners got on with the work of literal reconstruction.  The acres of stumps and tree shards that soldiers created on the march, in camp, and in battle grew over with successive species.  The men who fought lived the longest; veteran amputees survived into the twentieth century, but then they, too, were gone.  What are left are merely traces, not ruins: stone foundations, a lone chimney here or there, grassy mounds marking former earthworks, fragments of bone in a medical cabinet.”

The book doesn’t have the fast-paced flow of a battle narrative, but it is quite readable.  Relying heavily on period letters, literature, news media, drawings, and cartoons, it is a solid work that opens the door for many of us to a different way of looking at the ACW.  It is a valuable read for anyone, seasoned or novice, interested in the Civil War and its cultural significance.  I highly recommend it.

 

Reviewed by Emil Posey

To the Bitter End: Appomattox, Bennett Place, and the Surrenders of the Confederacy

This volume covers the surrenders of all the major Confederate military and naval forces, including the forces of Native American tribes allied with the Confederacy. The surrender of the Army of Northern Virginia on April 9, 1865 was only the first of the Confederate Army surrenders in 1865. Large Confederate organizations still remained in North Carolina and the southeastern states, in Alabama and Mississippi, and across the Mississippi River in Texas, Arkansas and the Indian Territory. With the Confederate capitol occupied by the United States Army, and with President Davis and his government on the run, the surrender of this most famous Confederate army only indirectly led to the suspension of hostilities throughout the former Confederacy.

Robert Dunkerly is a National Park Service Ranger and historian who has worked at Appomattox Court House, and who currently works at the Richmond National Battlefield Park, and is president of the Richmond, VA Civil War Round Table. He is a regular contributor to the Emerging Civil War blog and has co-authored this book as part of the Savas Beatie Emerging Civil War Series. Among his other books is No Turning Back: A Guide to the 1864 Overland Campaign.

Dunkerly has written a very interesting and informative account covering the series of Confederate surrenders that took place over an almost-three month period. He startled me by pointing out that Appomattox was an anomaly among the surrenders: The Federal and Confederate armies were in very close proximity to each other; the surrender terms were decided upon and signed at one meeting; a formal ceremony took place at which weapons, munitions and army property were surrendered; paroles were issued to all Confederates that surrendered. Nowhere else in the South was surrendering a major organization so quick and formal.

In contrast to the surrender at Appomattox Court House, the surrender of the other major Confederate organizations were sloppy affairs, requiring two or more meetings to develop acceptable surrender terms. These surrenders encompassed larger Confederate forces over very large ‘departmental’ areas, and the Federal and Confederate combatants were not in close proximity of each other. Paroles were issued to the surrendering forces at various places over a period of weeks and months; many Confederates never receiving their paroles. More weapons were simply abandoned in place than ceremoniously turned-over to the U. S. government.

There was much unrest and some disobedience among the remaining Confederate forces and many soldiers simply went home, causing some organizations to dissolve.  One Confederate department commander, General Edmund K. Smith, surrendered the Trans-Mississippi area because his Texan and Louisianan troops became mutinous and forced the decision on him and his subordinate commanders. The last Confederate organization to surrender was the First Indian Cavalry Brigade on 23 June, 1865. This unit was commanded by Brigadier General Stand Watie of the Cherokee Nation and composed of Cherokee, Creek, Seminole, and Osage soldiers.

Although the terms of the Appomattox Surrender applied only to the Army of Northern Virginia and a few attached organizations, this event was invested with symbolic importance by both sides. The surrender involved both commanding generals, Lieutenant General Grant of the U. S. Army and General Lee (Confederate commanding general since January, 1865). These men were the greatest and most respected generals of their respective sides, and the terms offered by Grant and accepted by Lee represented President Lincoln’s ‘let ‘em up easy’ philosophy. These terms were approved by Lincoln, reiterated by the U. S. War Department, and were used by the other Federal and Confederate army commanders to guide their negotiations.

With news of General Lee’s surrender, the attitudes of most soldiers on both sides changed after 9 April, 1865. Most accepted that the war was nearly over, and many Federal and Confederate leaders discouraged further combat. Federal commanders adopted a largely peace making and civil support role; Confederate commanders negotiated to define and secure the legal status their soldiers and themselves within the United States. The soldiers of both sides longed (and sometimes simply left) to get home as quickly as possible. Evidence that most Confederate commanders advised their soldiers to resume law-abiding civilian lives is represented by quotations from the farewell messages of Generals Lee and Forrest to their soldiers.

Mr. Dunkerly also writes of how the Confederate surrender has been remembered in history and literature and of how the respectful and generous terms and ceremonies of Appomattox came to represent the reconciliation between the white citizens of the North and the South.  The various and sometimes unexpected fates of the various surrender sites are explained. Finally, Dunkerly provides visitors’ information for those interested in the sites, monuments, and museums devoted to surrender ceremonies.

I recommend this book as a good read and a road-trip guide.

 

Reviewed by David Lady

Powered by WordPress.com.

Up ↑