“Any understanding of the nation…has to be based on
an understanding of the Civil War.” So said the writer Shelby Foote
at the beginning of Ken Burn’s PBS series, Civil War. In popular memory
the American Civil War came down to a contest between two generals, Robert
E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant. It has also come down to one important
battle, Gettysburg. Grant is seen as the hero of the Union army, taking
over from a series of incompetent generals to finally provide the leadership
needed to move the Army of the Potomac forward in defeat of Lee’s Army of
Northern Virginia. Most historians consider the Battle of Gettysburg
as the turning point of the war, the decisive battle that marked the end
of Lee’s ability to continue the fight. When taken in conjunction with
each other, Lee’s defeat at Gettysburg, and Grant’s ascension to command,
it is not surprising that the eventual outcome of the war seemed pre-determined.
There have been, at last estimate, over sixty thousand books written about
the American Civil War. That is as author C. Brian Kelly puts it, “forty-one
books for every day of the Civil War, or close to two books for every hour
of the conflict.” (C. Brian Kelly.
Best Little Ironies, Oddities and Mysteries
of the Civil War. Nashville: Cumberland House, 2000. Page xiii.)
The American Civil War was one of the defining moments in American history.
It represented the nation’s growing pains, and for better or worse, it made
the nation what it is today. The people who fought the war, who suffered
through it, who died because of it, will forever be in the mind-set of our
collective memory. Millions of Americans were involved in the war,
over 300,000 were wounded and over 600,000 lost their lives. When the
war ended in April of 1865, over two-thirds of the population was either
dead or wounded. Therefore, is it so surprising that sixty thousand
books have been written on the subject?
The history of Civil War publications seems to be as varied and interesting
as the events surrounding the war itself. They basically came in two
waves, one comprising a bulk of work written in the years immediately following
the war, the other beginning around the time of the 125th anniversary of
the war and continuing to this day. The first publications regarding the
war began to appear during the last years of the war itself, although none
of these accounts would delve into the causes of the war or the political
aspirations of the war in any detail. Most were accounts of the various
military campaigns or the personalities involved in these events. Not
until twenty years after the war ended did a serious series of books and
articles find there way onto American bookshelves. Again most of these
works focused on personal reminiscences and unit histories, although a strong
tendency by both ex-soldiers and politicians to justify their causes began
to develop at this time. One example of this is provided by Civil War
historian Gary W. Gallagher, who writes, in the forward to David J. Eicher’s
The Civil War In Books, “Jefferson Davis and Alexander H. Stephens…offered
a two-volume set of memoirs that argued the constitutional purity of the
South and played down the issue of slavery as a factor in bringing secession
and war.” (David J. Eicher.
The Civil War In Books. Chicago: University
of Illinois Press, 1997. Page xiii.) Another example can be found in
Henry Wilson’s History of the Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America.
Wilson, a radical Republican, presented a counterpoint to southern writers
like Davis and Stephens, claiming that the war was a result of sectional
tensions fostered during the 1850s.
While a number of generals published their own accounts during this time
period the most famous of these were of course, the memoirs of Ulysses S.
Grant. Written while the ex-general and President was dying of cancer,
Grant’s accounts of the war seemed to have been totally unpartisan, a response,
as some historians have pointed out, to the work by Jubal A. Early, who made
the claim that the Southern Confederacy was only defeated because of the
North’s overwhelming numbers and resources. Grant argued that manpower
and resources could not alone explain Union victory. It was these type
of arguments that seemed to exemplify most of the material written on the
war during this time period, as Gallagher puts it, “Much of the writing between
1865 and the mid-1880s reflected a common belief that former enemies could
not be trusted.” (Ibid.)
One of the earliest writers on the Civil War was John Codman Rope (1836-1899).
Rope, the son of a leading Bostonian merchant, was born in St. Petersburg
on April 28th, 1836 while his family was in Russia on business. At
age fourteen his family returned to Massachusetts, attending Harvard in 1853,
and graduating in 1857 with a law degree. His interest in military
history began with the outbreak of the Civil War, where a spinal deformity
kept him from serving. He did however, provide services to the 10th
Massachusetts Regiment in which his brother, Henry, served until his death
at Gettysburg. (John Codman Rope ‘s biographical information from the
JRank
Online Encyclopedia.) It was thus after the war that he began his
interest in chronicling the events of that great conflict. In his 1881
book,
The Army Under Pope, Rope centered his attention on the eastern
theater of operation following the Peninsular Campaign, Cedar Mountain, Thomas
“Stonewall” Jackson’s valley campaign, and Second Manassas. In the
book Rope is overly critical of Major-General John Pope’s command at Second
Manassas, but clearly places the blame for the Union failure on Major-General
Henry W. Halleck for not supporting Pope with Major-General George B. McCellan’s
army.
The first major work that addressed the events of the Battle of Second Manassas
is
The Army of Northern Virginia in 1861 – 1862, written by William
Allan and published in 1892. In the book Allan bases his account on
eyewitness testimony, describing in detail the movements and activities of
the Southern army during the first year of the war, and looks at the Peninsular
Campaign, Second Manassas, Sharpsburg and Fredericksburg.
The later part of the nineteenth and early part of the twentieth centuries
saw Southern writers weave into their writings the notion of the “Lost Cause.”
Authors began to argue that the eleven southern states that formed the Confederacy
did not do so to protect slavery, but to protect the notion of states rights.
This outlook, of the south fighting a second American revolution, coincided
with the move to present monographs that began to romanticize the bravery
and high-moral motives of the soldiers on both sides of the conflict.
The early part of the twentieth century also saw the beginning of scholarly
work that supplemented the more personally orientated materials.
Jones Williams’
Life and Letters of Robert Edward Lee, Soldier and Man,
published by the Neale Publishing Co. in 1906 is an example of this type
of work. Serving in the 13th Virginia Infantry, Williams had personal
access to Robert E. Lee both during and after the war, and served on the
staff of Lt. General A. P. Hill, later holding the position of secretary
of the Southern Historical Society. The author provides an overview
of Lee’s life, looking at his Mexican War activities and army life through
the Civil War. The majority of the book relies on letters and official
reports as its source.
The lull between the First and Second World Wars saw a number of publications
which advanced the field in a more scholarly direction. “Civil war
publishing,” writes Gallagher, “developed along two quite distinct paths.
Most academic scholars have focused on nonmilitary topics, while…a great
many others have contributed titles on battles, campaigns and military biography.”
(David J. Eicher.
The Civil War In Books. Chicago: University of Illinois
Press, 1997. Page xv.) W. E. B. DuBois produced one of the first examinations
of Black Americans during the war, while Bell I. Wiley focused his attention
to the field of soldier studies.
It was during this stage that the next major work to address the war was
begun by Kenneth P. Williams in 1948. Born in Urbana, Ohio on August
25, 1887, Williams taught mathematics at Indiana University receiving his
degree from that university in 1908 and assuming the Chair of the Mathematics
Department in 1938. He was the founder and first commander of the Student
Army Training Corps, later to be known as The Reserve Officers Training Corps
(ROTC) at Indiana University, but is best remembered for his work,
Lincoln
Finds A General: A Military Study of the Civil War. (Kenneth P. Williams’
biographical information from
Indiana University website.) Originally
intended as a seven volume set, the first volume saw publication in 1949
with subsequent volumes following. In the set the author looks at the
Union response to secession, its search for a strategy to win the war, and
a general to implement that strategy. Based on official reports published
by the U.S. government, Williams’ volumes assess the troubles the Union faced,
especially in the early years of the war. Unfortunately the untimely
death of the author on September 25th, 1958 ended all hopes of the series
continuing, and only five volumes were published.
While interest in the war once again gained momentum during the Civil War
Centennial of 1961-1965, it quickly died back down during the early seventies,
especially as the American public’s appetite for war history had been soured
by Vietnam. Most of the material of this time period however, centered
on the military side of the conflict. This tended to elicit from both
the general public as well as the academic community a feeling that most
of this work had already been done. It would not be until the later
part of the twentieth century that an almost unprecedented amount of material
would be produced. Fostered by the tremendous success of James M. McPherson’s
Battle Cry of Freedom, and the Ken Burns’ PBS series
The Civil
War, Civil War studies took on a new light, and the 1993 big screen release
of Ted Turner’s
Gettysburg, and History Channel series’
Civil War
Combat, only helped to promote the study of the war to a television generation.
In addition, several very public appeals to save threatened Civil War battlefields
also brought the war to the forefront of the American mindset. It would
also be during this stage that revisionists would begin to produce some of
the more controversial ideas.
Arguments about the importance of Lees’ campaigns can be found in Richard
McMurry’s 1989 book,
Two Great Rebel Armies: An Essay in Confederate Military
History. McMurry, a native of Georgia, received his B.A. in history
from the Virginia Military Institute. After serving two years active
duty in the United States Army, he entered graduate school at Emory University
in September 1963, receiving his M.A. in June of 1964 and his Ph.D. in June
of 1967. From 1967 until 1981 he taught history at Georgia State College
and then moved to the position of adjunct professor of history at North Carolina
State University until 1988. (Richard M. McMurry’s biographical information
taken from
The Louisville Civil War Round Table website.) McMurry’s
book presents a comparison of the Army of Northern Virginia and the Army
of Tennessee, examining the Confederate policies that saw Jefferson Davis
and the Confederate high command support Lee’s army over Joseph Johnson’s
command. McMurry points out that the weakly supported Army of Tennessee
fought the battles that supported the Confederate war effort, and that the
eastern battles fought by Lee were strategically less important.
In 1993, author John Hennessy provided the first in-depth look at the Battle
of Second Manassas in more than one hundred years (see
The Army of Northern
Virginia in 1861 – 1862, written by William Allan above). In his
work,
Return to Bull Run: The Campaign and Battle of Second Manassas,
Hennessy provides a detailed account of the battle, following the maneuvering
of both the Union and Confederate forces, providing a full analysis of the
battle on the division, brigade and regimental levels. “The victory
at Second Manassas,” the author writes, “brought the Confederacy to the crest
of a northward-rushing wave of success.” (John Hennessy.
Return to Bull
Run: The Campaign and Battle of Second Manassas. New York: Simon and
Schuster, 1993. Page vii.) Hennessy also points out that the battle
has been overshadowed by Lee’s victory over McClellan months before, and
the bloodbath that would be Antietam in September 1862. The author also paints
a picture of Union commander Irvin McDowell as incompetent and part of the
reason the Union lines collapsed on August 30th. However the author
also suggests that Halleck, McCellan and Pope all contributed to the Union
failure. John Hennessy is the Chief Historian of the Fredericksburg
and Spotsylvania National Military Park.
1996 and 1999 saw the publications of two never before published war memoirs,
Sylvanus Cadwallader’s
Three Years With Grant: As Recalled by War Correspondent
Sylvanus Cadwallader, published by the University of Nebraska Press,
and Horace Poter’s
Campaigning With Grant, published by William S.
Konecky & Associates. Cadwallader is able to provide a first-hand
account of the battles of Vicksburg, Chattanooga, The Wilderness, and Appomattox,
because of his unique situation at Grant’s Headquarters (where he was accepted
as one of the staff). Porter, who served as lieutenant colonel from
April 1864 until the end of the war, was also attached to Grant’s staff,
where he accompanied the general into battle in the Wilderness, Cold Harbor
and Petersburg, as well as being present at Appomattox. His portrait of his
two years with Grant provides a first-hand account of the General in action.
1999 also saw publication of Steven E. Woodworth’s
Civil War Generals
in Defeat. In it, Woodworth, an assistant professor of history
at Texas Christian University and author of Davis and Lee at War, brings
together essays from several Civil War historians who examine the nature
of defeat and how generals on both sides of the conflict bore the stigma
of defeat. The work addresses some of the “long-accepted simple explanations
for battlefield failures,” (Steven E. Woodworth.
Civil War Generals in
Defeat. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1999. Page 7.) while
it providing an in-depth look at Civil War commanders. July of 2000
saw White Mane Publishing Company issue
Rocks and War: Geology and the
Civil War Campaign of Second Manassas by E-an Zen and Alta Walker.
In the book, Zen and Walker look at the role topographic mapping and geologic
provinces played in the battle. By applying the notion of military geology
to the campaign, the authors showed how landforms were used by both sides
in their tactics both to their advantage, and to their disadvantage.
In 2002 Osprey Publishing presented a series of short essays devoted to military
history under the series title Campaign. In
Campaign #95: Second
Manassas 1862, Robert E. Lee’s Greatest Victory, author John Langellier
dissects the battle by providing a day-by-day account of the battle, a look
at each sides battle strategies, and profiles of the commanders in the field.
Langellier, who received his Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees from the University
of San Diego, presents a straightforward look at Second Manassas, allowing
the reader to make up his own mind on the importance of the battle.
Recently Gary Gallagher and Stephen Engle presented another overview of the
conflict in,
The American Civil War, a collection of essays and articles
originally published under the Essential Histories series of Osprey Publishing.
Gallagher, who received his B.A. from Adams State College in 1972 and his
Ph.D from University of Texas at Austin in 1982, is the John L. Nau III Professor
in the History of the American Civil War at the University of Virginia.
Steve Engle is professor and chair of the history department at Florida Atlantic
University. His area of interest includes the ethnic, military, and,
political considerations of the Civil War. Published in 2003, the book
explores the political, historical, strategic and cultural significance of
the American Civil War, examining its impact on the civilians and military
personal caught up in it.
2003 also saw the release of
Hallowed Ground by James M. McPherson.
McPherson, considered the premier Civil War historian, is professor of history
at Princeton University. In
Hallowed Ground McPherson takes
the reader on a “tour” of the Gettysburg battlefield, explaining the events
that comprised the battle, looking into the military strategies of its participating
generals, and describing the changes in the physical features of the battlefield
since 1863. In addition McPherson attempts to explain the draw of the
battlefield on both American and foreign visitors alike. “During the
bicentennial in 1976, a delegation of historians from the Soviet Union visited
the United States as a goodwill gesture,” McPherson writes. “When they
arrived [they were] asked which historic sites they wanted to visit first…Independence
Hall…Yorktown…Lexington and Concord. They wanted to go first to Gettysburg.”
(James M. McPherson.
Hollowed Ground. New York: Crown Publishers,
2003. Page 16.)
Civil War history, like history itself, is not static. As noted Civil
War historian William C. Davis writes, “Oddly, history changes...history
is a fluid process in which little remains certain for long.” (General Edward
J. Stackpole.
Chancellorsville: Lee's Greatest Battle. Harrisburg:
Stackpole Books, 1988. Page ii.) The material of today builds upon
and supplements the material of yesterday. It is not that the early
history of the Civil War has become useless, but has been redefined as new
information has been brought to light. It is therefore possible, using
the vast wealth of material that’s been published since the end of the war,
to re-examine the events of each battle, look at the personalities of each
general, and re-evaluate their individual battle plans. One may then
begin to see a very different picture from the general view that has been
presented over the years. It may be that if one examines the history
close enough, one may find that Grant was not the great general history has
made him out to be, that Lee himself was the architect of his own destruction,
and that the seeds of the Confederate defeat can find its roots back in August
of 1862, nine months before the Battle of Gettysburg, on a little focused
upon battlefield known as Second Manassas.
Essay © 2005 John Rocco
Roberto.