Review: Vanishing Footprints

Vanishing Footprints: The Twenty-Second Iowa Volunteer Infantry in the Civil War
By Samuel D. Pryce. Edited by Jeffry C. Burden

In the stacks of the State Historical Society of Iowa in Iowa City, lies Samuel D. Pryce’s manuscript, “Vanishing Footprints: The Twenty-Second Iowa Volunteer Infantry in the Civil War.” Begun in Pryce’s middle age, the manuscript was reasonably complete enough to warrant the approval of the 22nd Iowa Regimental Association in 1903, but the volume was never published. Instead, Mr. Pryce kept working at it, adding things here, pasting things there, often times adding his thoughts about topics unrelated to the 22nd Iowa Infantry or the Civil War. By the time of his death in 1923 Pryce’s manuscript had grown to a mammoth 827 densely typed pages.

Over a century has passed since the 22nd Iowa Regimental Association gave its stamp of approval to the project. Now at last thanks to the efforts of editor Jeffry C. Burden and the Press of the Camp Pope Bookshop, Pryce’s lifework has at long last been published. Mr. Burden has done an exemplary job in paring down Pryce’s massive manuscript into an easily read soft cover book of 256 pages. Mr. Burden has also managed to include 52 photographs, 11 maps, footnotes, bibliography and an index.

One hundred years after the close of the American Civil War Johnny Rivers sung the question “Where have all the soldiers gone?” The first chapter of Pryce’s regimental history of the 22nd Iowa Volunteer Infantry attempts to answer a very similar question. The appropriately titled chapter, “The 22nd Iowa: Comrades Remembered,” is a nostalgic and often tragic accounting fates of his brothers in arms both during the war, and for those who survived, after it. While reading this opening chapter I was reminded of yet another musical question from the 1960’s, “Anybody here seen my old friend John? Can you tell me where he’s gone?”

Pryce, who served as the adjutant of the 22nd Iowa for many of its 36 months in service, narrates the unit’s history in a linear fashion, beginning in the summer of 1862 and follows the regiment through to their return to Iowa and discharge in late July & early August 1865. During its term of service the 22nd saw service guarding railroads in southeast Missouri, participated in the Vicksburg Campaign, then the Overland Texas Expedition and ending up on the Texas coast. Five companies of the 22nd were detached and participated in the Red River Campaign, after which the unit was reunited and shipped out for service in the Shenandoah Valley at Winchester, Fisher’s Hill & Cedar Creek. Before returning home the 22nd finished its service as an occupational force in North Carolina and Georgia.

Throughout the book, Pryce’s easygoing and conversational literary style shines through. Indeed, it is a triumph of Mr. Burden’s editing that Mr. Pryce’s voice seems to come alive. His wit, and humorous anecdotes are laced throughout the book.

Though the soldiers about whom Johnny Rivers sang were fighting a war very much different than those of a century earlier, the answer to his musical question remains the same, “Gone to Graveyards, everyone.” One hundred forty-four years have passed since the end of the Civil War, and it has been fifty years since the deaths of its last veterans. Eighty-six years after his death the voice Samuel D. Pryce can now be heard, if not from beyond the grave, then something very akin it.

ISBN 978-1-929919-14-7, The Camp Pope Bookshop, © 2008, Softcover, 256 pages, 52 photographs, 11 maps, footnotes, bibliography, index. $18.95

Book Review: Triumph & Defeat: The Vicksburg Campaign, Vol. 2

Triumph & Defeat: The Vicksburg Campaign, Vol.2
By Terrence J. Winschel

Have you ever said to yourself, “I’ll just eat one potato chip,” and twenty minutes later you look down and to your shock and horror you discover you’ve devoured the whole bag and still craving for more? Such was my feeling when I finished reading Terrence J. Winschel’s “Triumph & Defeat: The Vicksburg Campaign.” Thankfully Mr. Winschel has provided an additional tome, “Triumph & Defeat: The Vicksburg Campaign, Vol. 2” to satiate my apatite.

Mr. Winschel, Chief Historian at the Vicksburg National Military Park, has again written a slim volume of ten stand alone essays on the Campaign for Vicksburg, its siege and the aftermath of its surrender. His essays are well researched, written in a simple and easily understood style, and seasoned with illustrations, maps and photographs. He never talks down to his audience and his essays can be read and savored by the Civil War historian and novice alike.

Using the successful recipe of his first book, each of the essays in his second tome again approach its subject from a number of different perspectives. There is something in Mr. Winschel’s book to satisfy the pallet of every connoisseur of the Vicksburg Campaign and Siege.

The first three essays cover Grant’s crossing of the Mississippi River, and his overland campaign around Vicksburg to approach the city from the east, including the battles leading up to the siege. The Fourth essay reevaluates the relationship between Ulysses S. Grant & John A. McClernand, and the reasons for the latter’s controversial dismissal. In his next essay the author explores the trials and tribulations of the “Brown Water Navy” as he relates the saga of the federal Gunboat Cincinnati. Mr. Winschel next takes us inside the besieged city of Vicksburg in “The Lords of Vicksburg” to give us a taste of civilian life during the siege. He follows up with two essays covering Joseph E. Johnston’s botched efforts to come to Vicksburg’s aid the Siege of Jackson, Mississippi. The ninth, and most significant essay of both Mr. Winschel’s volumes, outlines why Vicksburg was so important to the war efforts of both the Union and Confederate governments and their armies. And finally the last essay on the menu concerns the efforts of Stephen D. Lee and others in the formation of the Vicksburg National Military Park.

But that’s not all, Mr. Winschel, in a hat tip to Michael Shaara’s “The Killer Angels,” has also provided an epilogue, detailing what happened to the various people highlighted in his essays.

Terrence J. Winschel in the two volumes of “Triumph & Defeat: The Vicksburg Campaign,” has given his readers more than just a tantalizing appetizer of the campaign for Vicksburg, its siege and the aftermath of its surrender. He has provided an entrée as well, that satiates his reader’s hunger for knowledge of his subject, but still has left them enough room to be able to eat their desert.

ISBN 1-932714-21-9, Savas Beatie LLC, © 2006, Hardcover, 221 pages, Maps, Photographs and Illustrations, End Notes, Bibliography & Index, $29.95

Review: Triumph & Defeat: The Vicksburg Campaign

Triumph & Defeat: The Vicksburg Campaign
By Terrence J. Winschel

Are you a Civil War enthusiast who would like to learn about the Vicksburg Campaign, but lack the time to read Edwin C. Bearss’ excellent three volume study? Do you find yourself conversing with people about the Siege of Vicksburg and its surrender and suddenly find you have nothing to say? Or all you a wallflower Civil War Roundtable meetings only listening to what other’s have to say about Grant, Pemberton and Grierson? Then “Triumph and Defeat: The Vicksburg Campaign” is just the book for you.

Written by Terrence J. Winschel, Chief Historian of Vicksburg National Military Park and the author and editor of several books and dozens of articles on the Civil War, “Triumph and Defeat: The Vicksburg Campaign” offers between its covers not one, not two, but ten, yes, that’s right ten essays covering every major aspect of the Vicksburg Campaign, the Siege of Vicksburg and its surrender to Union forces led by Ulysses S. Grant.

Each essay stands alone on its own right and therefore the book lends itself well to those readers who don’t have time to spend on a detail oriented, or multivolume history of the campaign. That said however, some of the introductory material in each essay does become a bit repetitive, especially if you are reading large chunks of this book in one sitting.

It is not, and was not meant to be, a book on the full Vicksburg Campaign. Though mentioned, Chickasaw Bayou, Raymond and Jackson are not discussed in detail. Winschel focuses on Grant’s southward movement along the west bank of the Mississippi River, Grierson’s Raid, the Battles of Port Gibson and Champion Hill, and of course the siege of Vicksburg.

Among the many informative essays in this book are:

• “Unvexed to the Sea,” in which Mr. Winschel explains Grant’s options for capturing the fortress city on the bluffs of the Mississippi River, and why his previous attempts failed.
  
  
• “Playing Smash with the Railroads” is an essay dealing with Union Colonel Benjamin Grierson's raid from La Grange, Mississippi to Baton Rouge, Louisiana, after which Grierson was appointed Brigadier General. If your only knowledge of Grierson’s Raid comes from watching “The Horse Soldiers,” directed by John Ford and staring John Wayne & William Holden, then this essay is for you.
  
  
• “Spades are Trump” is a look at the siege operations around Vicksburg which foreshadows the fate to befall the Confederate Army at Petersburg, Virginia a year later.

And also…

• “Shut Up as in a Trap,” a view of life inside the besieged city.

Well researched and simply written, Mr. Winschel’s slim volume on the Vicksburg Campaign with illustrations, photographs and maps throughout is easy to read and understand. This book is equally useful to the Civil War expert and novice alike. Get yours today!

ISBN 978-1882810314, Savas Publishing, © 1999, Hardcover, 220 pages, Maps, Photographs and Illustrations, End Notes, Bibliography & Index

Review: Bedlam South - A Novel

Bedlam South: A Novel
by Mark Grisham & David Donaldson

The struggle to stay sane during the insanity of war is often a staple metaphor of the “war novel” genre. In their novel, “Bedlam South,” Mark Gresham and David Donaldson have transformed that metaphor into the reality of an insane asylum in the heart of the Confederacy.

With in the pages of their novel, Gresham and Donaldson weave the threads of several plotlines into a cohesive tapestry portrait of the disintegration of the Confederacy. Central to the story are two characters, young Dr. Joseph Bryarly, who has returned from England to oversee Wingate Asylum outside of Richmond, and the sadistic Captain Samuel Percy, who runs it. The tension between these two characters forms the warp and weave of the story.

Another thread in the novel involves seventeen year old Zeke Gibson who enlists in the Confederate army who joins his older brother, Billy, a corporal, outside Fredericksburg, Virginia. They are separated during the cataclysmic battle at Gettysburg and both fear mortal harm as come to the other.

The Dougall family became acquainted with Dr. Bryarly on their journey to America and their story forms yet another thread in the story, as does Mary Beth Greene, a mulato prostitute, and Stephen Billings, a 22 year old attorney from the North.

The authors, Mark Gresham and David Donaldson, have been friends since childhood. Mr. Gresham, the brother of legal novelist, John Gresham, has a deep interest in Civil War history and Mr. Donaldson has an interest in mental health. The novel they have written takes full use and advantage of both their interest to tell a story never before told. Mr. Gresham writing the military characters and Mr. Donaldson the characters of the asylum.

From a writing perspective “Bedlam South” gets off to a rocky start with the over use of clichés, proverbs and dialogue that boarders on the cornpone: “Don’t put the cart before the horse,” “it ain’t the size of the man in the fight,” “a one legged man in a butt kicking contest,” are just a few of the tried and true phrases that appear between the covers of this book.

At a few points the dialogue does not have the ring of truth to it: A lawyer exclaiming “Oh my heavens!” In a few instances the authors seem to hold themselves back trying not to offend the sensitivities of their readers: “son of a buck” is used a couple of times, and when Zeke’s friend Nate is killed all he can say is “lousy stinking blue bellies!” In one instance only is the word “damn” used. Their linguistic obfuscation borders on the politically correct as there are several references to slaves and blacks but not one use of the word “nigger,” an omission which is totally unrealistic considering their novel is set in the Civil War South.

That being said, about half way through the book, the novel gains its momentum that carries it through to its conclusion. As the novel progresses the characters begin to interact with each other, the separate threads are woven together to form the whole cloth. As each character gets closer in physical proximity to one another, the weaving of their storylines grows tighter. At one point near the end of the novel, I’m not ashamed to admit, I was actually moved to tears.

For their first collaborative effort Mr. Gresham and Mr. Donaldson have written a pretty damn good novel, and others are promised to follow. “Bedlam South” isn’t a work of great literature, nor I think was it meant to be. I enjoyed reading it and at the end of the day, at least as far as reading a novel is concerned, that’s all that really matters.

ISBN 9780681497566, Borders Press, © 2007, Hardcover, 308 pages, $24.95

Book Review: Tried By War by James M. McPherson

Tried By War: Abraham Lincoln As Commander In Chief
By James M. McPherson

February 12, 2009 marks the 200th anniversary of the birth of Abraham Lincoln, the 16th President of the United States. Consequently, over the next year and a half, the average bookstore browser will be buried underneath an avalanche of new books on the most written about figure in all of American history.

“Tried By War: Abraham Lincoln As Commander In Chief,” by James M. McPherson, noted Civil War historian & the George Henry Davis '86 Professor Emeritus of United States History at Princeton University, is among the newest in the crop of the Lincoln Bicentennial titles.

In “Tried By War” Dr. McPherson highlights how Abraham Lincoln came to understand and define the largely undefined role of commander in chief. He takes us through each phase of Lincoln’s development into the role: from first deferring to General Winfield Scott, then to prodding George B. McClellan into action. After studying military tactics, Lincoln felt confident enough and wondered if he might borrow the army when McClellan fell ill with typhoid fever. In the end McClellan was a disappointment to Lincoln, as were Henry Halleck, Don Carlos Buell, John Pope, Ambrose Burnside, Joseph Hooker, William Rosecrans and George Meade. Through each successive general Lincoln learned and grew into the role of commander in chief, not largely because he wanted to, but because he had to. Finally, with Ulysses S. Grant, William T. Sherman & Philip Sheridan, Lincoln found generals who understood the defeat of the Confederate armies and not the surrender of Richmond, the Confederate capital, would bring the rebellion to an end.

Sadly there is little, if anything, new in fact or interpretation in this book. Dr. McPherson seems to have relied on the tried and true. Most of the content between the covers of “Tried By War” can be found in a number of other books on Lincoln.

The Lincoln-McClellan relationship is complicated, and one worthy of a book of its own. Dr. McPherson seems to have “cherry picked” every negative word and action of McClellan’s for inclusion in his book. To be fair, McClellan has served up these quotes and snubs toward Lincoln (not to mention his overestimates of Confederate troop strength, his constant pleas for more men and his apparent lack of will to send the Army of the Potomac into battle) on a silver platter for historians. But I think Dr. McPherson’s diagnosis of McClellan’s “messiah complex” goes a bit too far.

If anything, at 270 pages of text, the book is too short. It is a great survey of Lincoln as commander in chief, but an in depth review of the facts and analysis of them it is not. On its merits, the book it well researched, and well written. Dr. McPherson’s narrative flows effortlessly from topic to topic and is easily read. Though “Tried By War” may not be the book for the well read student of the Civil War it would serve as a great introduction for some one just developing their interest in the subject.

ISBN 978-1-59420-191-2, The Penguin Press, © 2008 - Hardcover - 329 Pages - $35 Photographs, Notes, Index

Review: Storming the Heights by Matt Spruill

Storming the Heights: A Guide to the Battle of Chattanooga
By Matt Spruill, Maps by Lowell Forbes

Visiting Civil War battlefields to try to gain a sense of what happened there can often be tricky. Reading the signage and monument inscriptions only gives you the most basic information. Or as in the case of Chattanooga only a small part (or parts) of the battlefield have been preserved and the rest is obfuscated by urban sprawl. A good guide book can make the difference when visiting a Civil War battlefield. Matt Spruill has written just such a book, “Storming the Heights: A Guide to the Battle of Chattanooga.”

When people think of Civil War battles they tend to think in terms of one army attacking another army in one geographic place and the battle is usually over in one day. That indeed is true for some Civil War battles, but not all, especially not for Chattanooga. There isn’t one engagement that I could pinpoint and say “That is the Battle of Chattanooga.” In reality, however, there were several battles that took place around Chattanooga which culminated in the Union Army’s ability to break the Confederate siege lines around the city and the to Confederate Army’s retreat from those lines.

Beginning with the opening of a Federal supply line at Brown’s Ferry & Wauhatchi, then to the Battle for Lookout Mountain and ending with the Battle for Missionary Ridge Mr. Spruill guides us through these engagements. He has also included side trips to the Lookout Valley, the site of Fort Wood, Orchard Knob, Rossville Gap and Chattanooga National Cemetery.

Mr. Spruil takes us to the site of these engagements with turn by turn directions. There are several tour stops for each engagement. At each stop Mr. Spruill has included topographical maps overlaid with the Union and Confederate troop positions. He lets the participants relay what happened there by relying heavily on official reports. Both Union and Confederate sides are covered for each engagement.

In my opinion Mr. Spruill has leaned too heavily on the official reports for the story telling. I would have liked to read quotes from letters, journals and diaries of the common soldier alongside the official reports of the Union and Confederate officers.

The maps included in the book, drawn by Lowell Forbes, are also a bit problematical. Certainly I wish there were more of them (one can never have too many maps when studying a Civil War battle). I also would have liked to have seen at least a few of them include modern roads, which would be especially helpful when trying to follow Mr. Spruill’s turn by turn directions. Also the maps aren’t generally oriented so that north is at the top of the page, and Mr. Forbes did not include a directional indicator on any of the maps in the book.

That being said, “Storming the Heights” is an indispensable book for one studying the engagements during the Battles for Chattanooga, and touring its battlefield sites.

ISBN 1-57233-237-9, University of Tennessee Press, © 2006 - Softcover - 341 Pages - $21 Photographs and Maps, Appendices, Index

Review: Army of the Potomac: McClellan Takes Command

Army of the Potomac, Volume II:
McClellan Takes Command, September 1861-February 1862
By Russel H. Beatie

George B. McClellan is easily one of the most misunderstood and maligned people in history. Though not a McClellan apologist, Russel H. Beatie, in his second of three so far published volumes (of what is sure to be a massive multivolume work) on the history of The Army Of The Potomac, demonstrates what many people have come to believe about McClellan isn’t a true and accurate portrait of the man that was. A lawyer by profession and an historian by avocation, Mr. Beatie slowly builds his case against misconceptions of the perceived historical McClellan. As if pealing an onion, he removes layer after layer of historical half truths and misinformation, he shows the reader the mechanizations of politicians intent on pointing their fingers, placing the blame and passing the buck, and he explains the “why” of McClellan’s actions in regards to Winfield Scott, Edwin Stanton, the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the war and, most of all, President Abraham Lincoln.

Picking up were volume one left off, Winfield Scott’s resignation has been accepted by Lincoln and McClellan appointed the General-In-Chief of all the Union forces. Though not a battle book, a considerable portion of the book does involve The Battle of Ball’s Bluff, where Senator, General and close friend of Abraham Lincoln, Edward Baker is killed in action. Though paled in comparison to later battles of the war to follow, Ball’s Bluff is not important tactically to the story, but politically, having given Congress (and more notably the Radical Republicans) an excuse to form The Joint Committee On The Conduct Of The War.

In another large portion of the book, Mr. Beatie discusses in depth the various pools of men from which the Federal Army drew its generals: The Bull Run Officer Pool, The West Point and Regular Army Pools, Foreigner and Politician Pools and the Gubernatorial Pool, pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of the various men who came out of those pools, but most notably he notes the bias against officers from the West Point Pool, being viewed as largely sympathetic to the Confederacy.

The last major portion of this book covers the McClellan-Lincoln relationship. Mr. Beatie shows us that McClellan did not trust the President or members of his cabinet and therefore kept his plans largely to himself. When McClellan was struck down by the effects of typhoid fever, Lincoln was confronted with politicians who were demanding military action. With the General-In-Chief confined to his bed and refusing to share his plans, Lincoln had no other option than to borrow the army for a while and begin to make plans of his own. McClellan, alerted by friends of the President’s actions, rose from his sick bed before Lincoln had the chance to put his plans into action. The book finishes with McClellan in the planning stages for what will become known as The Peninsula Campaign.

Mr. Beatie’s research is exemplary. He has unearthed many first hand accounts that until now have never been published anywhere. Though his narrative is at times dry and sometimes strays a bit from the path, much of the material between the covers of Russel H. Beatie’s Army of the Potomac, Volume II: McClellan Takes Command, September 1861-February 1862 has not previously been covered, nor found in any other published works on the topic, and Mr. Beatie provides a fresh look and new interpretations on many of the historical controversies surrounding George B. McClellan and the army he commanded.

Bravo!

Click HERE for my review of the first volume in this series.

Book Review: "The Disagreement"

The Disagreement: A Novel
By Nick Taylor

It was a time of metamorphosis, when civilians became soldiers, boys changed into men, and the enslaved set free. A nation torn asunder, North from South, peacetime transformed into a time of war, the innocence of youth, in its fiery crucible, burned away, and what remained was the hardened knowledge of adulthood.

It is this cataclysmic time of change which Nick Taylor has used as the setting for his debut novel, “The Disagreement.” Written as a memoir, Taylor’s book is less a novel of the Civil War, and more a coming-of-age story of its narrator, John Alan Muro, who has announced to his family his intention to become a doctor, a profession on which his father, now the owner of a local woolery, turned his back years before.

John Alan’s hopes to attend medical school in Philadelphia were dashed on his sixteenth birthday when his home state, Virginia, voted to secede from the United States. Not wanting to send their only son off to war, Mr. & Mrs. Muro decide to honor their son’s wishes and send him to medical school at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville.

At the University of Virginia John Alan meets the people who will populate the rest of his life, his roommate, Braxton Beaucom III (B.B.); mentor, Dr. Cabell (rhymes with rabble) and his niece, Lorrie Wigfall; and patient, Lt. Stone (formerly Dr. Stone). It is where John Alan grows from a boy to a man, from a student to a doctor, where he learns about love and heartache, and the hardships of war, and making due without.

Mr. Taylor’s narrative takes us behind the scenes of a Confederate General Hospital and shows us its inner workings; where supplies of drugs are low or nonexistent and medical science must turn to home remedies for its medical cures. As the war goes badly for the Confederate cause, Mr. Taylor shows us the wreckage of war, through the hospital’s over-crowded wards where the wounded, out of necessity, get the only the slightest of the doctors attentions and death is everywhere.

“The Disagreement” is a wonderful debut novel, and a joy to read. Mr. Taylor has skillfully written a novel whose characters and the world in which they inhabit emerge from the chrysalis of the Civil War and have been truly transformed by the experience of it.

ISBN 978-1416550655, Simon & Schuster, © 2008, 360 Pages - Hardcover (7×10) - $24.95

A House Divided: A Review of "Two Brothers"

Two Brothers: One North, One South
By David H. Jones

With the coming of the American Civil War many families found themselves torn apart by conflicting ideologies and loyalties. Fathers and sons, uncles and nephews, brothers and cousins sometimes faced each other on opposite sides across a field of battle. Often times, and certainly with more frequency the families most severely divided came from the border states of Missouri, Kentucky and Maryland. The Crittenden and the Todd families are but two examples on a lengthy list one might compile of families that were split apart by the war. The Prentiss family of Baltimore, Maryland is a family that could also be enumerated on just such a list.

In his novel, “Two Brothers: One North, One South,” David H. Jones tells the story of the Prentiss family. Clifton, the older brother, fought for the Union cause and rose to the rank of major in the 6th Maryland Infantry, while his younger brother, William served in the Confederate Army with 2nd Maryland Battalion. Both were mortally wounded minutes and yards apart at Petersburg, Virginia in the closing days of the Civil War.

After the battle the brothers were taken to Armory Square Hospital in Washington, D.C. where they are cared for in separate wards. One of the volunteers in the hospital was Walt Whitman who frequently visited William, and upon William’s passing located Clifton to inform him of his brother’s death. Two other Prentiss brothers, John & Melville, arrive soon after, and Whitman tells the three siblings what he has learned about William’s service with the Confederate Army.

Unfortunately Mr. Jones’ novel has a few serious flaws. The title of the book, “Two Brothers,” is somewhat misleading, as Clifton’s storyline is often overshadowed by that of his younger brother. The story is told from the opposing viewpoints of Clifton and William; however William’s story is filtered through Walt Whitman, which brings me to the narration.

There is not a central narrator in Jones' novel. Clifton Prentiss tells his part of the story and Whitman is left to relate William’s. There are several times throughout the book, especially at the beginning of chapters where it is not all together clear as to who exactly is narrating, Clifton, Whitman, or a literary 3rd person narrator. Whitman’s narration is particularly flawed as he relates details that he did not have first person knowledge of and most certainly could not remember with such clarity. This is problem when the novel wanders off with the secondary characters of sisters Hetty and Jenny Cary and their cousin Constance Cary, in which Whitman is giving third hand information to the surviving Prentiss brothers. Whitman was not present for any of the events related, and for some of them neither was William. How did Whitman come to know of such things? Many of the episodes involving the Cary’s are tangential in reference to William’s story and should have been judiciously pruned from the novel.

There is far too much exposition in the book. There is a writer’s axiom that states: “Show, don’t tell.” Jones spends too much time telling the story, and instead of showing it through the eyes and actions of his characters. I got the impression that Mr. Jones, knows a lot about the Civil War, and just couldn’t help inserting his knowledge into the story… for one example, the book is set in June of 1865, at one point the author makes a reference to Lew Wallace and notes that he would later gain fame as the author of “Ben Hur” which would not be published for another fifteen years.

The dialogue does not ring true, especially when it is weighted down, as it often is, with exposition relating details to the reader that would have been common knowledge to anyone during the war.

The characters are two dimensional, there is no character development. The war years were years of turmoil and angst for any and all who lived through them. There is plenty of room for Mr. Jones to have taken literary license and given motive to his characters actions, or gone into their heads, to see the story through their eyes, to show us what their motivations and how they felt about things. It was an opportunity missed, and therefore the reader is left not caring about the characters. As for John and Melville Prentiss, they serve absolutely no function in the book at all. The character of Walt Whitman is used solely as a literary device to tell the story, and is also never fully fleshed out as a character.

There is much to like about Jones’ novel, negating its structural and narrative problems, it is a great story, and I enjoyed reading about the Prentiss brothers and the Cary Sisters. But unfortunately even the most beautiful house cannot remain standing when it is placed upon a weak foundation.

The Battle of Stones River: A Driving Tour

Winter Lightning: A Guide to the Battle of Stones River
Matt Spruill & Lee Spruill

In the library of Civil War literature the Battle of Stones River, December 31, 1862 to January 2, 1863, is one of the most under represented large scale battles of the war. One can easily count the number of volumes dedicated solely to the battle on the fingers of one hand.

Having moved to Murfreesboro nearly five years ago I am a regular visitor to Stones River National Battlefield, but I have never been able to make much sense of the battle by my battlefield visits, even when using the park brochure’s guided tour. I suppose my confusion about the battle stems from the fact that the park’s current 600 acres represents only about 15% of the total area where fighting took place.

Matt & Lee Spruill have come to my rescue with their book, Winter Lightning: A Guide to the Battle of Stones River. With twenty-one tour stops (as opposed to the National Park’s six) the Spruill’s lead you on a driving tour over the ground, both outside and inside of the park, where the three day battle between the Confederate Army of the Tennessee with General Braxton Bragg at its head, and the Federal Army of the Cumberland under General William S. Rosecrans.

The evening of December 30, 1862 found both armies facing each other northwest of Murfreesboro, Tennessee in opposing lines of battle, stretching diagonally from the town’s west to its north, and each preparing to attack the other’s right. Which ever side to launch their attack first would have the advantage. At sunrise, Bragg and his Confederate Army was the first to strike.

The Spruill’s follow the battle chronologically as it progressed, following the action as the Confederate troops rolled up the Federal right and sending Union regiments, one after another, fleeing to the rear, to the Federal’s stand at The Round Forrest, and finally to the fighting at McFadden’s Ford on January 2nd. At each stop we are provided narration by the authors, giving the reader an overview of what happened, and then we are presented with a balanced view of the action from both sides with first hand accounts from the soldiers who were there, usually from official reports, but some times from diaries or letters.

The book contains 41 maps, which vary widely in scale from theater maps down to maps on the regimental level, depending on the situation or topic being covered. One only reading the book may find the maps a little cumbersome as north is not always oriented to the top of the page. This book was intended to be a tour guide, and the maps are presented to the reader at each of the stops as the reader would see the landscape that is in front of him. Therefore if you are directed to look to the southeast, southeast would be oriented to the top of the page. Not only do the historic roads appear in the maps but also the roads of the present and are clearly marked, for example: “Medical Center Pkwy (today).”

Not only have Matt & Lee Spruill added a book to the small library shelf dedicated to the battle, they have also given me a greater understanding of it. I can now point to a spot of land just south of the present day Medical Center Parkway and say with confidence that is where my great great grandfather, Walter E. Partridge (Company F, 36th Illinois Infantry) was during the battle.

A New Volume in the Gettysburg Library

One Continuous Fight: The Retreat from Gettysburg
and the Pursuit of Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia
July 4-14, 1863

By Eric J. Wittenberg, J. David Petruzzi and Michael F. Nugent

Gettysburg. Say it and one is immediately reminded of the cataclysmic three day battle between the Army of the Potomac, commanded by George Meade, and the Army of Northern Virginia, commanded by Robert E. Lee. Three days, July 1-3, 1863, that changed American History forever. Thousands of books and articles have been written about the battle which took place in the tiny hamlet of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. I dare say you could fill an entire room in a library with nothing about books devoted to this one battle alone.

But what happened after the battle? Lee’s retreat from Gettysburg, and Meade’s failure to destroy the Army of Northern Virginia before it crossed the Potomac River to the safety of Virginia is sometimes given the briefest of mentions, but more often is treated as a single chapter, or epilogue in a work covering the battle or the whole of the Gettysburg Campaign. Books devoted entirely to the retreat itself can easily be counted on the fingers of one hand.

Eric J. Wittenberg, J. David Petruzzi and Michael F. Nugent have successfully corrected this omission from the historical library with their book, “One Continuous Fight: The Retreat from Gettysburg and the Pursuit of Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia, July 4-14, 1863.” Drawing on a wealth of first hand accounts: letters & diaries, many of which until now have remained unpublished for 145 years, as well as contemporary newspaper articles and previously published primary and secondary sources, the trio of authors have written a dynamic and engaging volume, that is easily read and hard to put down.

During its retreat the Army of Northern Virginia clashed in nearly two dozen skirmishes & major engagements with the Army of the Potomac, including fighting at Granite Hill, Monterey Pass, Hagerstown, Williamsport, Funkstown, Boonsboro and Falling Waters. There was so much fighting going on between the opposing forces that Privet L. T. Dickinson of the 2nd Virginia Cavalry to described the ten day retreat as “one continuous fight.”

The book covers in detail the movements of the armies; however the first chapter is devoted entirely to Imboden’s “Wagon Train of the Wounded,” which I found compelling to read.

Mead has often been accused of letting Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia slip from his grasp at the moment when he had the ability to crush them in the palm of his hand. After the titanic three day struggle on the fields of Gettysburg, was Meade derelict in not following up on his victory? Did he move too slowly or too cautiously? Could Meade have done more? Or was the blue-clad Army of the Potomac as used up as their brothers clad in butternut and gray? From the title of their book alone, the authors dispel nearly 145 years of finger pointing, and accusations and in their conclusion they give a fair and balanced view of exactly who, if any one, was at fault.

Included at the end of the book are two driving tours: The Retreat from Gettysburg and The Wagon Train of the Wounded, both contain GPS coordinates and detailed driving directions so the reader can follow in the footsteps of history. Of course, if you want the full experience, I’d encourage you to don a wool uniform, strap on a backpack, pick up your rifle and walk the routes in the ninety degree heat of July. If you chose to do so I’ll wave at you from the comfort of my air conditioned car as I drive by.

Are there too many books about the Gettysburg Campaign? In a word, yes. Is there still anything left unwritten about the campaign & battle? Absolutely, and this book is but one example. It is a must have for any student of the Civil War, and especially for a student of the Gettysburg Campaign.

DVD Review: The Battle of Stones River

The Battle of Stones River: The Fight For Murfreesboro
Wide Awake Films, © 2006

After its defeat at Perryville, Kentucky on October 8, 1862 the Confederate Army of the Tennessee led by General Braxton Bragg retreated to Murfreesboro, Tennessee to reorganize, while William Rosecrans’ Army of the Cumberland followed their Confederate counterparts as far as Nashville. In the last week of December 1862 Roscrans’ 44,000 man army left Nashville to battle Bragg’s 37,000 rebel soldiers at Murfreesboro. The resulting three day fight along the banks of the Stones River, December 31, 1862 to January 2, 1863, resulted in a tactical stalemate and nearly 19,000 men killed and wounded. Since the Confederate Army retreated from the field, The Battle of Stones River is viewed historically as a Union Victory.

Among Civil War battles, Stones River has a low profile, and is often overshadowed by other battles such as Shiloh, Antietam, or Gettysburg. It is also generally overlooked by historians, usually getting the briefest of mentions in the overall history of the war. Wide Awake Film’s 2006 documentary release, “The Battle of Stones River: The Fight for Murfreesboro,” places the battle in its rightful place along side her sister battles.

Using narration over a background of film footage of “one of the largest reenactments ever held in Tennessee,” period photographs of the participants and a few maps, the film attempts to create an impression of the battle. Sadly the impression it creates, and not a good one.

The 50 minute documentary is narrated entirely by Eben Fowler. Mr. Fowler’s narration seems distantly removed from the action on the screen. Though not monotone, his narration is reminiscent of films shown in your high school history classes of the 1950’s through the 80’s. Even when quoting from letters and diaries, Mr. Fowler’s narration lacks verve and vigor. Different voices, especially when quoting from period texts would have added layers of depth to this aspect of the film. There are several large gaps in the narration itself, in some cases lasting well over a couple of minutes, when nothing is heard but the cacophonous sound of battle. These gaps would have been better used by adding additional narration to tell the viewer more about the battle.

The footage of the reenactment seems often times at odds with the narration. Nothing is recognizable, and I found the use of a Hollywood-like set-piece of the shell of a burned out house (without a roof or windows and 2x4 braces visibly holding up the walls) laughable. With over 5,000 reenacters the screen was filled with soldiers, both blue and gray, but none of them were ever identifiable as Bragg, Hardy, Rosecrans, Thomas, Sheridan, etc.

Taken for what it is, this DVD, with its narration over a generic battle reenactment, is an acceptable introduction the battle and its participants. The disk also contains a two bonus features; footage of the 1992 reenactment (a video scrapbook for its participants, but of no redeeming use for anyone who wasn’t there), as well as a “Battlefield Park Tour” with noted Civil War Historian Ed Bearss, which isn’t a battlefield tour at all, but merely one stop on the tour: The Round Forest.

An Atlas Of A Battle

The Maps of Gettysburg:
An Atlas Of The Gettysburg Campaign,

June 3 - July 13, 1863
By Bradley Gottfried

I can’t begin to tell you how many descriptions of Civil War troop movements I’ve been frustrated by: this brigade moved here or that regiment moved there. I am a visual person, I learn best when I can visualize things… therefore I, by my nature, am a map person. Most books on Civil War battles contain only enough maps to cover the most basic aspects of troop movements in a particular battle. There are never enough maps for me.

Bradley Gottfried understands me and others like me and has authored nothing less than an atlas of the Gettysburg campaign. Like an oasis in the middle of the desert, The Maps of Gettysburg: An Atlas Of The Gettysburg Campaign, June 3 - July 13, 1863, has quenched my thirst for maps.

Mr. Gottfried’s book contains 29 maps map sets, each containing between 2 & 21 maps, covering the advance to Gettysburg, the battle and the Confederate retreat. In all the 136 maps give nearly an hour by hour account of the three day battle that changed the course of American History. At last I am able to see and understand the fighting back and forth across the unfinished railroad cut on July 1st, the bloody, awful fighting in the Wheatfield and Peach Orchard on the 2nd and the breathtaking and awe inspiring lines of the Picket-Pettigrew-Trimble charge as they moved across the Emmitsburg Road on July 3rd.

Each map is accompanied on its left facing page by a descriptive text detailing the specificities of troop movements at the corps, division, brigade, regimental and some times even down to the company level.

My one and only criticism of Mr. Gottfried’s book is there is almost no reference to time. A date/time stamp on each map would have been helpful, when moving from one map set to another in identifying events that were taking place on different areas the battlefield at approximately the same time. That is but a small flaw in an otherwise nearly perfect book.

The Maps of Gettysburg is without a doubt, an indispensable work on the Gettysburg Campaign. No library, Civil War historian or student of the war should be without a copy.

Enough Fault For Everyone

Plenty Of Blame To Go Around
Eric J. Wittenberg and J. David Petruzzi

As the last of George Pickett’s men limped off the battlefield on the evening of July 3rd, 1863 it was clear the Confederate Army, after three days of fighting, had been defeated. General Lee, as the commander of the Army of Northern Virginia, accepted all responsibility for the loss, but many, after the battle, blamed General J.E.B. Stuart instead. It has been 145 years since the Confederate defeat at Gettysburg, and the controversy over who is to blame for the loss has never abated.

Eric J. Wittenberg and J. David Petruzzi have brought the case to trial in their book, “Plenty Of Blame To Go Around: Jeb Stuart’s Controversial Ride to Gettysburg.” The first half of the book is an inquiry into the facts of the case, as the authors present General Lee’s orders to Stuart as exhibits. Their careful and diligent research has turned up many witnesses, both Union and Confederate, who add their testimony, and together, they form a narrative of the events following Stuart’s departure with his cavalry, their ride around the Federal Army and their arrival on the battlefield of Gettysburg on July 2nd.

The second half of the book enters the historiography of Stuart’s ride into evidence, and breaks it down into three phases. In the first phase, immediately after the battle and war, those immediately involved in the Confederate high command, and those involved in the ride, begin the finger pointing and placing of blame. In the second, the controversy continues, and heats up, during the post war years, as the participants continue quarreling with one another. Finally, after the passing of the participants, the debate continued into the 20th & 21st centuries, when the historians took up the argument. In all three phases, JEB Stuart had his supporters and detractors. The authors have done a fine job, presenting the evidence and arguments on both sides of this complicated issue.

Was the infallible Robert E. Lee at fault for issuing vague orders to Stuart? Did Stuart disobey, either willfully or unintentionally, Lee’s orders? The authors, in their conclusion, deliver their verdict and find there is no one single person entirely to blame for the Confederate loss at Gettysburg. There is enough fault for every one. Or, in other words, there’s “plenty of blame to go around.”

“Plenty Of Blame To Go Around” is the definitive history of Jeb Stuart’s ride to Gettysburg. Eric J. Wittenberg and J. David Petruzzi’s outstanding research has produced a book that is truly a joy to read.

A Portrait of Love and War

Shades of Gray:

A Novel of the Civil War in Virginia
By Jessica James

“You think I think that an artist’s job is to tell the truth,” says U.S. Poet Laureate, Tabitha Fortis, in an episode of The West Wing. “An artist’s job,” she continues, “is to captivate you for however long we’ve asked for your attention. If we stumble into the truth we got lucky.”

One may think that’s a pretty bold quote to start of a book review, and it may be, but this reviewer was certainly captivated by Jessica James’ Shades of Gray: A Novel of the Civil War in Virginia.

With her use of two diametrically opposed perspective points, Ms. James has successfully drawn the historical fiction and romance genres together and created a multi-dimensional picture. She begins with broad strokes of her pencil and sketches the outlines of two characters. The first, Andrea Evans, clothed as a boy known as Andrew Sinclair, is a scout and spy for the Union Army. The second, Captain Alex Hunter, the dashing and noble Confederate Cavalry officer who would like nothing more than to capture and kill his nemesis, Sinclair.

A novelist must ask his or her readers to suspend their disbelief and accept the world as the author has presented it to them. In the first few chapters of “Shades of Gray” I found it hard to suspend my disbelief; the plot twists and machinations which draw Ms. James’ two characters together seem a bit contrived and forced. But, once Andrea finds herself confined to Captain Hunter’s home the artist’s rapid strokes of her pencil revealed to me all that came before was mere background to a much more intimate picture she was trying to draw.

Next Ms. James slowly begins the delicate job of drawing sharper lines and defining her characters through their conflict. Both believe strongly in the cause for which each is fighting, both have very strong opinions about the opposing sides and often the two characters seem to be at war with one another.

With an artist’s touch she begins to smudge and gently soften the harsher outlines of her subjects. As affection grows between the Union spy and her dashing Confederate cavalryman, Jessica James’ transforms her characters with small strokes of her pencil, intricately drawing in detail, shading darker here and or lighter there.

The reality of the outside world cannot be held back in a country torn apart by civil war, and the divided loyalties of Ms. James’ carefully crafted subjects threatens to tear them apart. With an artist’s gift she draws her audience into making assumptions about her subjects, and demands them to look closer at the picture. With a guiding hand, Ms. James allows her readers to discover that the picture they thought they were seeing isn’t really the picture she has drawn at all.

In Shades of Gray, Jessica James’ skills as an artist are unquestioned. She as drawn a picture filled with conflict and love, loyalty and betrayal, history and romance, and a passion of lives lived in the moment. And along the way I think she may have also stumbled into truth.

Editing Can't Win A War But It Might Improve This Movie

Gods And Generals
Directed by Ronald F. Maxwell

In the film "Gettysburg" Colonel Joshua Chamberlain (Jeff Daniels) utters "there's nothing so much like a god on earth as a general on a battlefield." Based on Jeff Shaara's novel of the same title "Gods and Generals" is the prequel to "Gettysburg," which itself was based on the Pulitzer Prize winning novel, "The Killer Angels," written by Shaara's father, Michael.

Directed and adapted for the screen by Ron Maxwell (as was its predecessor) "Gods and Generals" presents the first two years of the American Civil War as the Army of the Potomac and the Army of Northern Virginia struggle against each other in the battles of First Bull Run, Fredricksburg and Chancelorsville.

Much has been made of the film's historical accuracy but, little of the gore and carnage of war can been seen in its sanitized battle scenes filled with smoke, explosions, and men falling to the ground. Though the battle scenes themselves are expertly choreographed, hardly any thought seems to have gone into the cinematography of these scenes as they lack imagination in their framing and execution. Yet, I found the battle scenes alone worth the price of admission.

I cannot say the same for Maxwell's bloated screenplay which is filled with flowery dialogue, long-winded speeches, and droning soliloquies. Yes, citizens of the nineteenth century spoke differently than we do today, but the dialogue is so jarring to the modern ear that it is nearly impossible for an audience to maintain a willingness to suspend its disbelief.

The narrative in Mr. Shaara's novel is nearly equally split between four major characters: Colonel Joshua Chamberlain and General Winfield Scott Hancock on the side of the Union and Generals Robert E. Lee and Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson on the Confederate side, while Mr. Maxwell's adaptation can nearly be considered as a Stonewall Jackson bio-pic with the other characters merely as supporting players. Shaara's book maintains a balance of viewpoints of both North and South but, Maxwell's film tilts the majority of screen time to the Confederate side.

Stephen Lang does an admirable job as the highly religious Stonewall Jackson. Indeed, the film's shining glory is that Maxwell's screenplay and Lang's performance come closest to capturing the man that Jonathan Jackson was in reality as anything yet set forth on film. Though it is hard to separate Lang from his earlier portrayal of General George Picket in "Gettysburg." Jeff Daniels competently reprises his role as Chamberlain, though he lacks screen time and is saddled with reciting Lucanus' "The Crossing of the Rubicon" as he watches elements the Union Army crossing the Rappahanock River into Fredericksburg, Virginia. The films greatest disappointment was Robert Duvall in his lackluster performance as General Robert E. Lee.

Randy Edelman's sentimental score is adequate to the task at hand, and though pleasurable to listen to it does not rise to meet the challenge of the material presented. Mary Fahl's contribution, "Going Home," played over the opening credits of windblown battle flags, in a movie which the director well knows is going to come in at 3 ½ hours, should have fallen to the cutting room floor, though I love every note of it. And Bob Dylan is as raspy as ever in his "Cross the Green Mountain" played over the end credits.

Is "Gods and Generals" the greatest movie ever made about the American Civil War? No. Is it the most accurate movie about the Civil War? Quite possibly. But accuracy could not save this movie. Editing could. Edit the screenplay. Edit the dialogue and speeches. Edit the opening credits. Edit. Edit. Edit.

Review: Army of the Potomac: Birth of Command

Army of the Potomac:

Birth of Command

November 1860 – September 1862

By Russel Beatie

July 2, 2002. – The Eastern Theater of The American Civil War – The curtain rose from the stage at the premier of Da Cappo Press’ newest production, to reveal “Army of the Potomac: Birth of Command November 1860 – September 1862.” Authored by Russel H. Beatie, it is the first of a series covering the history of the Army of the Potomac.

Mr. Beatie has been kind enough to present us with a Dramatis Personae, a playbill, if you will, providing us with the briefest of possible biographical sketches of the players about to grace the stage. Receiving top billing, of course, is Winfield Scott, the hero of the Mexican War. He is supported by a cast of subordinates: Charles P. Stone, Robert Patterson, Fitz-John Porter, Benjamin F. Butler, Elmer Ellsworth, J. K. F. Mansfield, Irvin McDowell, Samuel P. Heintzelman, David Hunter, George B. McClellan and Nathaniel Prentis Banks.

The stage has been carefully set. On November 6th, 1860 Abraham Lincoln was elected President of the United States without a single electoral vote from any of the Southern states. Shortly thereafter, on December 20th, South Carolina was the first state to secede from the union. It is January 1861 and Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia & Louisiana have now also left the Union. Texas will join her sister Southern states on February 1st.

Lincoln, having been confronted with the problem of resuplying or reinforcing Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor, immediately upon his inauguration, chose the less confrontational route: to resuply it, thus, maneuvering the South into firing the first shot of the war on April 12th, 1861 and providing the inciting incident of our national drama, and the beginning of the Civil War. Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee soon after seceded and joined the Confederate States of America.

Mr. Beatie illuminates the central question in the first act of his drama, “How does one create an army?” by shining his spotlight on New York, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Ohio, where from nebular clouds regiments of soldiers begin to emerge.

Maryland provides our first plot point. Heavily secessionist in sentiment, Maryland surrounds Washington D.C. on three sides. With Virginia having already seceded, if Maryland were to cast its lot with her sister slave states, Washington would be cut off. Now that there is an army, fractured though it is, how does one move it through hostile territory to Washington where it is needed?

Here the author shifts his focus from upstage to stage center, narrating Abraham Lincoln’s steps to ensure that Maryland stayed in the Union by suspending the writ of habeas corpus and arresting the state legislators who sided with the South. All the while, Patterson, Porter, Butler, Keyes, Lefferts & Stone began to secure routes both through and around Baltimore, a city seemingly seething with anti-unionist sentiment, to Washington, D.C.

The first Battle of Bull Run is the center piece of Mr. Beatie’s second act, as the action moves down stage to Virginia. Mr. Beatie deftly weaves together the fate of Harper’s Ferry and Patterson’s attempts to keep Joseph E. Johnston’s southern soldiers bottled up in the Shenandoah Valley and preventing them from joining the rest of the Confederate Army under P.G.T. Beauregard at Manassas. Patterson’s ultimate failure allowed the two Southern armies to join in battle against the Federal Army, led by Irvin McDowell at Bull Run Creek.

The battle is the midpoint in Mr. Beatie's drama. As the two armies collide on the field of battle, the point of view is strictly from the vantage of the men and commanders of the Federal army. Mr. Beatie presents the facts and events throughout his narrative as they happen, this technique can some times be confusing to the audience, and the one critique this reviewer has is the wish for more maps in this section to allow the audiance to better follow the action as it proceeds. The fog of war envelopes the Union forces, facts are misinterpreted, mistakes are made, and ultimately the failure of the command structure results in a Confederate victory, and the curtain falls on a defeated demoralized Federal army as they gradually make their way back to Washington.

George B. McClellan enters from stage right at the beginning of the final act. Having been called from the West after several small but impressive victories to assume command of what will soon come to be known as the Army of the Potomac. Mr. Beatie concentrates on the bickering between Scott, the General-In-Chief and his subordinate officer, McClellan, and as the light shines brighter on McClellan, Scott’s time in the light begins to fade. Scott's letter of resignation sent to Lincoln serves as the last plot point and the final curtain falls to the stage floor with George B. McClellan soon to be commissioned as General-In-Chief.

Mr. Beatie’s “Army of the Potomac: Birth of Command November 1860 – September 1862,” has been well received and hailed as a critical success. Not since Douglas Shouthall Freeman’s, “Lee’s Lieutenants,” has a work of such magnitude and scope as Mr. Beatie's graced the literary stage of the American Civil War.

An appendix, “Officers and Battlefield Maneuvers,” as well as a fully annotated bibliography citing the strengths of weaknesses of the source materials used, serve as Mr. Beatie’s curtain calls. And on a production note, the book is fully noted with footnotes at the bottom of every page.

This, Mr. Beatie’s first production in the series, has already spawned two sequels, and if they are its equal, I’m sure they will be followed by others.

I give it a standing ovation!

Click HERE for my review of the second volume in this series.

A Short Story Wrapped in Novel Wrapping Paper

Savannah, or a Gift for Mr. Lincoln
By John Jakes

When writing reviews I usually try to put them at a length of about 500 words, give or take a few. However, upon contemplating this review of John Jakes' latest work of historical fiction, "Savannah, or a Gift for Mr. Lincoln," I think I would find it difficult to find 250 words to say about it much less 500. I anxiously await the release of any new John Jakes novel. I was slightly disappointed by "Charleston" as not meeting previous John Jakes standards, such as "The Kent Family Chronicles" or his masterwork, the "North and South" trilogy. So imagine my surprise when my slight disappointment with "Charleston" turned into extreme disappointment with "Savannah."

I can really say nothing about the plot of "Savannah" as after having read it, I remember precious little of anything that happened between its covers. I dare any John Jakes reader to say that about any of his other books. But what I do remember of the story centers around 12 year-old Hattie Lester's attempts to save her family's plantation, "Silvergrass," from the soldiers of Union General William T. Sherman, who have arrived just outside of Savannah from their march through Georgia in December of 1864.

Only half of my disappointment in "Savannah" lies at the foot of John Jakes himself. It is too simplistically written. His characters are underdeveloped and there is next to no plot. At best "Savannah" should be called a short story. It does not by any means or stretch of the imagination live up to the John Jakes works of the past, in which the writing is good, the characters fully developed, and the plotlines, though somewhat resemble modern day soap operas, are often interconnected. Indeed, "Savannah" seems to have been written for the young reader of between 10 or 12 years old, and if that is the case then Mr. Jakes can and should be forgiven.

I reserve the other half of my disappointment in "Savannah" to the publisher, Dutton. As sited above, "Savannah" is in reality a short story, and the editors of Dutton have done their best to lengthen it into a full-fledged novel, or at least something that resembles a novel.

First I'll tackle the size of this book. All of my other hard cover John Jakes books measure 9.5" x 6.5" while "Savannah comes in at a wimpy 8.5" x 6" and when placed on a shelf next to her sister John Jakes novels, she appears to be slightly out of place.

Secondly, Dutton has succeeded in lengthening "Savannah" to a novel of 288 pages, not only by the reduced size of this book as already stated, but by using a substantial font size and line spacing to give the book lots of "white space," and they also threw in a couple of illustrations for good measure as well.

Thirdly, if my theory of John Jakes writing this novel for a much younger audience is correct, I then fault the marketing department at Dutton for not marketing it as such. Even if this was marketed as a children's book many John Jakes fans, such as myself, would have purchased the book because it was a John Jakes book with the full knowledge that it was written for children and would not have been disappointed at all by it.

And lastly, Dutton further aggravated my disappointment in this book by its inflated cover price of $23.95. I refused to buy it at that price, even though it was a John Jakes book, and waited until it was 50% off to buy it at my local book store, and even then I felt like I had been robbed.

But the question is can I recommend this book. Well that's a tricky question to answer and my recommendation would depend on who was asking me. If you are a die-hard John Jakes fan who froths at the mouth at the mere mention of a new John Jakes book hitting the shelf, then yes, I would recommend it, with the reservation that the book is geared to a younger audience, and as such the characters and plots are much simpler than regular John Jakes fare. If you are 10 to 12 years old with an interest in the Civil War, I would recommend this book for you, as it seems to have been written with younger readers in mind. But if your are an avid reader of historical fiction where fully developed characters struggle to over come adversities of their time, and revel in the detail of such, no I would not recommend this book. And to the casual reader, I offer, "read it. You might like it, but don't blame me if you don't."

Okay so I did have more than 250 words to say about "Savannah." This review came in at 805 words.

Note: This is a review of the hardcover edition of this book.

"I'll take the Civil War for $600, Alex"

Armchair Reader Civil War: Untold Tales of the Blue and Gray

I have often been told I know a lot about the Civil War. I do not. Granted, I know more Civil War history than the average American walking down the street. What I do know is a lot of Civil War trivia. If I were to write a book about the Civil War, it would likely be a book of Civil War trivia… but wait, that’s already been done: Armchair Reader Civil War: Untold Tales of the Blue and Gray.

For those who love trivia or those who know little about the American Civil War this book is for you. You say you don’t like to read but would like to learn about the Civil War? Well then you are also in luck. This book offers short articles about battles and generals, political & historical figures, as well as the common soldier both North and south which are easily read if you have five minutes or five hours and its articles cover the entire spectrum of the Civil War experience.

However, this book does have its problems. First is its structure; there isn’t one. The articles are somewhat scattershot, there is no organization to them at all, they are not grouped together by any means, not by topic or timeline, but rather this book seems to have been put together in the order in which the articles came in.

Second, there is no documentation. Footnotes would have been preferable, but I would have taken endnotes and been completely satisfied. This book has neither, and there in lies the problem of credibility. For example:

In an article entitled “The Slow Side of General Rosecrans” it is stated that Union General, William S. Rosecrans, was the great grandson of Stephen Hopkins, signer of The Declaration of Independence. I could find no evidence to positively support this statement as fact, there are numerous websites that report the same fact, but the problem is that almost none of them site their sources and when they do, it often times is another website that didn’t site its source. I’ve spent many hours trying to walk back this statement of fact, websites, as I’ve already stated are not of that much use, and the on-line genealogical databases that I have searched do not support this fact. Even moving to printed sources didn’t help as William A. Lamers & Larry J. Daniel’s book about Rosecrans, “The Edge of Glory,” states that his maternal grandfather, Timothy Hopkins, served in the Connecticut line and was a “relative” of Governor Stephen Hopkins of Rhode Island and signer of The Declaration of Independence. Another printed source, “Annals of the Army of the Cumberland,” by John Fitch, states that Rosecrans’ mother was the “daughter of Stephen and Mary Hopkins of Wyoming, Luzerne county, Pennsylvania,” but doesn’t go any farther, and a third printed source, Allen Rosenkrans’, “The Rosenkrans Family in Europe and America,” states that Crandall Rosecrans, the general’s father, married Jemima Hopkins, the daughter of Timothy Hopkins and Phebe Nesbitt, and again doesn’t go any farther than the general’s grandparents. So the fact that General William S. Rosecrans is the great-grandson of Stephen Hopkins the Signer of the Declaration of Independence is in contention… so why include it in the book at all… unless the author of the article and the editor of the book did not bother to check. More research is needed to verify exact the relationship, if any at all, between General William S. Rosecrans and Governor Stephen Hopkins (and for those of you who are wondering “Why in the world would he bother to look that up?” I am a descendant of Mayflower passenger, Stephen Hopkins, and I was curious to find a connection… there isn’t).

In another error, The Gettysburg Address is misquoted, not once, but twice. The first in an article entitled “Lincoln’s Battlefield Visits,” in which Abraham Lincoln is quoted as saying “The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have hallowed it far above our poor power to add or detract,” which completely butchers the rhythm and cadence of Lincoln’s writing. The true and accurate quote should have read: “But in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate – we cannot consecrate – we cannot hallow – this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it far above our poor power to add or detract.” In a second article, “Just A Few Remarks,” the text of Lincoln’s most famous speech is quoted in full… well almost: “We have come to dedicate a portion of that field as a final resting place for those who gave their lives that that nation might live,” having omitted the word “here” from the phrase “for those who here gave their lives.” I consulted two other published texts of the speech and both include the word “here.” You may also find digital copies of the Address and its drafts at The Papers of Abraham Lincoln website. For a text as famous (arguably one of the most famous speeches in all of recorded history) and so readily available, to misquote it is nearly an unforgivable sin. Again in both instances this is something that should have been caught but the project’s editor, but was not.

Third, the biographical article on J.E.B. Stuart, “Jeb Stuart Rides,” neglects to mention the single, most controversial aspect of the famed cavalry leader’s career: his late arrival during the Battle of Gettysburg. Historians have for years debated the effects of Stuart’s tardiness at Gettysburg. In fact the Battle of Gettysburg is not even mentioned in the article, a stunning omission.

Lastly is the book’s subtitle: “Untold Tales of the Blue and Gray.” Quite frankly, there is nothing in this book that hasn’t been published elsewhere. With “untold” in the title one would expect to read articles about subjects that have never before been written about, or new material on a subject, or at the very least a fresh look at a person, place, or event from another previously unpublished perspective. Between the covers of “Armchair Reader Civil War: Untold Tales of the Blue and Gray,” you will find nothing that cannot be found in at least half a dozen previously published texts about the Civil War… the convenience here being that the information is in one book and not in five, ten or twenty volumes.

In the end, this book is nothing more or less than what it is: a book of Civil War trivia. Will you read and enjoy it? Likely. Will you learn something from it? Possibly. Should you believe everything written within its covers? As with any book, absolutely not. This book isn’t for the Civil War buff. This book is for a person with a passing interest in the Civil War who has never studied the war, its battles or the people who lived through it. Would I recommend it? Sure. Buy it, read it and if something within its covers interests you the by all means pick up another book and continue reading about said topic… this book is a great springboard to use for people who don’t know much about the American Civil War and want to learn more… I just wish it had footnotes and a bibliography.

EDIT: Brett Schulte at TOCWOC has recently posted his review of this book and draws many of the same conclusions as I. May 6, 2008

Enemy Women

Enemy Women
By Paulette Giles

In the cannon of Civil War fiction Missouri's place in history has often been passed over for the more famous and larger conflicts in the east and south. Though Paulette Jiles' debut novel, "Enemy Women," attempts to bridge that chasm, sadly it serves as little more than filler rubble at the bottom of the canyon.

The novel's unfocussed beginning, impedes the identification of Adair Colley as the story's protagonist, instead we are left to wander among the members of the Colley family. Slowly as the family is separated by the misfortunes of war, the story settles on Adair, a young woman who, in an era where nearly every one has chosen sides, Union or Confederate, seemingly has no particular loyalty to either side. Her brother, John Lee, has fled into the hills to evade capture by the Federal soldiers who also have beaten and arrested her father, looted their farm, and stole their horses. Adair and her two sisters head north on foot in an effort to win their father's freedom and she soon finds herself in a St. Louis prison accused of aiding the Rebel bushwhackers.

During her confinement Adair is interrogated by Major William Neumann, a man who longs to be out fighting in the field instead of commanding a prison filled with women and children. Of course Major Neumann is destined to fall in love with Adair and when his transfer to a field command in Alabama is granted he helps her escape from prison and vows to find her after the war is over. And once again Adair finds herself afoot, this time heading south back to the family farm, where she hopes when the war is over her family will one day be reunited.

Jiles uses historical excerpts from letters, diaries, official accounts, and whole paragraphs from nonfiction works to preface each chapter, but they interrupt her narrative and stop the story cold in its tracks. She obviously used these materials, all previously published (there is absolutely no new material here), as research for her novel and if it appeared anywhere in the book it should have been referenced in author's notes at the end.

Jiles' knowledge of southeastern Missouri's geography and her descriptions of it are nothing less than extraordinary, so much so that the landscape itself is almost transformed into a character. Sadly the same cannot be said for the rest of Jiles' characterizations, which are two dimensional and as thin as the paper they are written on. We learn little about the lives of Major Neumann, Adair or her family prior to 1864, and know next to nothing about their thoughts and desires past their immediate needs, which drive the thin veil of her contrived plot.

"Enemy Women" is clearly a case where the characters serve as pawns on the chessboard of plot. Had Jiles let the characters think, act and speak for themselves this could have been a great book in the pantheon of Civil War fiction rather than the disappointing, mediocre work of historical fiction that it turned out to be.