Being a longtime student of Civil War in the Western Theater, I am always interested in learning more about the armies, soldiers, civilians and press coverage in the heartland. Having received this book prior to the Christmas, I looked forward to diving into it after the holidays. The wait was worthwhile. Clampitt has created a real gem in this book. His research is impeccable and he obviously spent a great deal of time uncovering the huge quantity of letters, diaries and newspaper accounts he references throughout the entire book. Like most scholars, the author retains the punctuation, misspellings and slang the writers used in their journals, diaries and letters. This makes the read quite enjoyable and I found myself chuckling, more than once, as I read the solders’ accounts of life in camp.

I found Chapter 6, “November-December 1864: Sunset at Franklin,” particularly interesting. This chapter covers the events in central Tennessee that culminated in the battles of Franklin and Nashville. Clampitt makes a great case for this two month period of time, and the Battle of Franklin in particular, as being the death knell of the Confederacy. More than any other battle, Franklin destroyed the Army of Tennessee and, for the most part, permanently removed the threat that army posed to U.S. generals George H. Thomas and William T. Sherman’s forces. While the morale, confidence and support of the western Confederacy remained high throughout much of the war, the Franklin-Nashville Campaign caused a deterioration in support for the war effort in the heartland.

For any of my readers interested in learning more about the final eighteen months of the war in the Western Theater, I highly recommend this book. It is a quick paced read and is very enjoyable. Congratulations to Mr. Clampitt on a wonderful book.

Details about “The Confederate Heartland: Military and Civilian Morale in the Western Confederacy”
Written by: Bradley R. Clampitt
Hardcover: 256 pages
Publisher: LSU Press
Date of First Edition: December 12, 2011
ISBN-10: 0807139955

Both of Johnson’s books are well made. Each book is packed with pictures and text on the sites that the author guides you to. One feature of both of these books which this reviewer truly appreciates is the way Johnson organizes the sites into separate tours which are geographically connected and can be completed in a reasonable amount of time. As an example, Touring Virginia’s and West Virginia’s Civil War Sites includes twenty-two separate tours including: The Harpers Ferry Tour, The Lee and Jackson Tour, The Shenandoah Valley Tour, The Peninsula Tour and The Appomattox Court House Tour. Each tour includes information and directions to the area’s battlefields, forts, memorials, graves, historically significant homes and towns which played an important role in the area during the war. I would highly recommend both of these books if you are planning summer or fall vacations to the mid-Atlantic states.

Details about “Touring Virginia’s and West Virginia’s Civil War Sites“
Written by: Clint Johnson
Paperback: 480 pages
Publisher: John F. Blair, Publisher
Date of Second Edition: May 1, 2011
ISBN-10: 0895874024

Details about “Touring the Carolinas’ Civil War Sites“
Written by: Clint Johnson
Paperback: 464 pages
Publisher: John F. Blair, Publisher
Date of Second Edition: May 1, 2011
ISBN-10: 0895874032

###

• Published after World War II (as with Eric and LaFantasie, this removes many notable narratives from my list)
• No biographies
• No narratives from participants of the battles
• No multi-volume works or series

I have modified my criteria to include multi-volume narratives and one notable book from a participant. In addition, as I am a HUGE fan of biographies, I have included a smaller list of biographies separate of the narrative list. Also, unlike Eric and Professor LaFantasie, I have limited my list to include only books that I would consider to be tactical studies of the battle or campaign. This eliminates several books that most Civil War students would add to their top 12 lists: A Stillness at Appomattox by Bruce Catton, Battle Cry of Freedom by James M. McPherson and The American Heritage Picture History of the Civil War, also by Bruce Catton.

While I found it pretty easy to pick out my top 12 battle/campaign narratives, I must say it was much more difficult to put them in rank order. Obviously this is very subjective and I’m certain this order would change slightly if I were to rank them three months from now.

12. Perryville: This Grand Havoc of Battle, by: Kenneth W. Noe – The Battle of Perryville was inevitably one of the most ill-conceived battles that CSA General Braxton Bragg fought. Instead of leading a victorious army to the Ohio River, Bragg would be forced to retreat into central Tennessee. Often the lack of water, caused by the summer and fall drought of 1862, is listed as the impetus for this battle, it probably lies more with faulty intelligence. Bragg believed he was facing a much smaller force than he actually faced. Noe is an excellent story teller and his research of this battle is impeccable. This book is well worth its cost and was recently released in paperback. I interviewed Ken Noe in July 2010 about his newest release, “Reluctant Rebels.” Portions of the interview discussed “Perryville.” To listen to my interview click HERE.

11. For Cause & For Country: A Study of the Affair at Spring Hill & the Battle of Franklin, by: Eric A. Jacobson and Richard A. Rupp – The Affair at Spring Hill and Battle of Franklin have always been two of my favorite engagements in the Western Theater. Eric does a wonderful job portraying the intense fighting at Franklin and Hood’s lost opportunities at Spring Hill. This is a must read for anyone that is interested in the Confederate Army of Tennessee or John Bell Hood.

10. Plenty of Blame to Go Around: Jeb Stuart’s Controversial Ride to Gettysburg, by: Eric J. Wittenberg and J. David Petruzzi – I have studied the Battle of Gettysburg for years. There is a plethora of studies on this battle – so many that I may publish a separate article on my favorites. One thing that has been missing over the years, however, is a study of the Confederate cavalry actions during the Gettysburg Campaign. Published in 2006, by the excellent press Savas Beatie LLC, “Plenty of Blame to Go Around” fills the void on Confederate cavalry actions during the campaign. Wittenberg, considered an expert on Civil War cavalry, partnered with J. David Petruzzi, an expert on the Gettysburg Campaign, to write this detailed analysis. This book is so well written that an experienced Wittenberg reader, such as myself, has difficulty determining which author is writing, when. As always, Savas Beatie published a great book that will last through the generations. If you are a cavalry aficionado, this book needs to be in your library.

9. The Louisiana Tigers in the Gettysburg Campaign: June – July 1863, by: Scott L. Mingus, Sr. – As a student of individual brigades and regiments of the Civil War, I always appreciate histories of individual fighting units. This book provides an operational analysis of the Louisiana Tigers (5th, 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th Louisiana infantry regiments) which was commanded by Brigadier General Harry T. Hays during the Gettysburg Campaign. Mingus’ vivid prose jumps off the pages while they quickly go by. The author is able to capture the actions of individual soldiers while tightly weaving the narrative into the larger structural analysis that encompasses the Gettysburg Campaign – a tall order indeed. This book details the fighting along Cemetery Ridge on July 2 and 3, 1863 – a brutal clash that is often skimmed over by other Gettysburg studies. If you enjoy reading about Gettysburg, your library is not complete without this great book. I interviewed Scott Mingus in March 2010 about “The Louisiana Tigers.” To listen to my interview click HERE.

8. Taken at the Flood: Robert E. Lee and Confederate Strategy in the Maryland Campaign of 1862, by: Joseph L. Harsh – Dr. Joseph L. Harsh is one of the foremost experts on the Maryland Campaign of 1862, which included the Battle of Antietam. Grab any modern narrative on this brutal campaign, and look at the notes and bibliography. Without a doubt, Harsh’s “Taken at the Flood” is one of the secondary sources cited. This is, without a doubt, one of the best battle narratives written – on any campaign. It is a must have for any serious student of the Civil War. Sadly, the Civil War community lost a legend when Dr. Harsh passed away in September 2010.

7. This Terrible Sound: The Battle of Chickamauga, by Peter Cozzens – With the exception of Gettysburg, Chickamauga National Battlefield is the battlefield that I have visited most often. It is wonderfully preserved and still has a remoteness about it that takes one back in time. The battle itself is very complex and can be difficult to interpret while tromping the battlefield. My first couple of visits were made before I read Cozzen’s narrative on the battle. Today, I never leave for Chickamauga without this book. It is, without a doubt, the best book written on this sanguinary fight and deserves to be on my top 12 list.

6. From Winchester to Cedar Creek: The Shenandoah Campaign of 1864, by: Jeffry D. Wert – Historian Jeffry Wert is well known in the Civil War community. He has written extensively for Civil War periodicals and has written no less than nine books on the war. I have always admired the gutsy leadership of US Major General Philip Sheridan during the 1864 Shenandoah Valley Campaign. After nearly reaching Washington City, during the summer of 1864, CSA Lieutenant General Jubal A. Early’s Army of the Valley posed a continuing threat to the north. Wert’s exceptional narrative takes the reader on a detailed journey through Sheridan’s pursuit of Early in the Shenandoah Valley and its near annihilation at the Battle of Cedar Creek.

5. Pea Ridge: Civil War Campaign in the West, by: William L. Shea and Earl J. Hess – Pea Ridge National Battlefield is one of two fields of battle that I consider my “home” battlefields. Situated in northwest Arkansas, Pea Ridge also is known for a wayside tavern located on the battlefield: Elkhorn Tavern. In March of 1862, US Major General Samuel R. Curtis invaded northwest Arkansas to attack the Confederate forces of Major General Earl Van Dorn. The battle was a decisive victory for the United States and would mark the high point in Curtis’ brilliant career. Shea and Hess’ “Pea Ridge” is the definitive study on this battle and is an extremely fast paced book. Their tactical narrative is second to none and their extensive research pays off in a book that is enjoyable to read and overflowing with detail.

4. Valley Thunder: The Battle of New Market and the Opening of the Shenandoah Campaign, May 1864, by: Charles R. Knight. I had limited knowledge of the Battle of New Market before reading Mr. Knight’s first book. Unfortunately it has often been overshadowed by US Major General Phil Sheridan’s decisive Shenandoah Campaign later in 1864. Most notable as the battle that pitted VMI cadets against US Major General Franz Sigel’s Federal forces, it is much more than that. Knight adroitly leads the reader through a battle that terrain played a decisive role in. The imagery the author’s prose paints allows the reader to feel they are taking part in the battle. Knight, who previously worked as a historical interpreter at New Market, uncovered significant amounts of previously unused primary source material for “Valley Thunder.” William C. Davis, author of the well respected “The Battle of New Market” (1983) wrote the foreword for Knight’s book and proclaimed, “Valley Thunder surely takes its place now among the dozen finest and most complete accounts of any Civil War action…” If you have an interest in superb tactical analyses, this narrative deserves a place in your Civil War library. I interviewed Charlie Knight in June 2010 about “Valley Thunder.” To listen to my interview click HERE.

3. The Maryland Campaign of September 1862, Volume 1: South Mountain, by: Ezra Carman edited by: Thomas G. Clemens – Here I deviate from Professor LaFantasie and Wittenberg. Colonel Ezra Carman, of the 13th New Jersey Infantry, wrote one of the most exhaustive studies of the Maryland Campaign. Encompassing years of research and interviews with participants in the campaign, Carman’s unpublished manuscript has been used for decades by historians writing about the campaign. A quick glance through the notes and bibliography of Harsh’s landmark “Taken at the Flood,” (number 8 on this list) reveals countless references to Carman’s work. While Carman’s manuscript reveals his political leanings and potentially jaded criticism of US Major General George B. McClellan, this deficiency is more than overcome by his knowledge and research of the armies’ movements. This is all well and good, but what makes this work superb enough to be on my top 12 list? The footnoting of editor Tom Clemens. Sometimes I am guilty of not reading all of the footnotes. Not so with this book – I devoured all of them. Often Clemens’ candidness would leave me laughing. More often amazed at the depth of his research. If the reader skips the footnotes they are missing what makes this work so phenomenal - Clemens’ extensive research and knowledge of the Maryland Campaign. Kudos also have to go to Savas Beatie LLC. The work in publishing a book is significantly compounded by including all of the footnotes on the page that references them. By taking the extra time, Ted Savas made this book easier and more enjoyable to read. It is well worth the cost. I for one am looking forward to Clemens’ forthcoming analysis of Carman’s manuscript on the Battle of Antietam. I interviewed Dr. Clemens in August 2010 about “The Maryland Campaign of September 1862.” To listen to my interview click HERE.

2. Return to Bull Run: The Campaign and Battle of Second Manassas, by: John J. Hennessy – The Second Battle of Manassas was one of the most devastating defeats for the United States during 1862 – a year that witnessed the Peninsula Campaign, the Seven Days and the Battle of Fredericksburg. When Abraham Lincoln brought US Major General John Pope east, to command the recently created Army of Virginia, he envisioned two Federal armies, operating as a regional juggernaut, ultimately crushing CSA General Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia. This would require cooperation between the commanding generals of each army if victory was to be achieved. Lincoln did not anticipate the bickering and jealousies that would characterize the relationship between Pope and Major General George B. McClellan, commander of the Army of the Potomac. Historian John Hennessy’s narrative on the Second Manassas Campaign is without a doubt the defining work on the campaign.

1) The Overland Series, by: Gordon C. Rhea which includes The Battle of the Wilderness, May 5-6, 1864, The Battles for Spotsylvania Court House and the Road to Yellow Tavern, May 7-12, 1864, To the North Anna River: Grant and Lee, May 13-25, 1864 and Cold Harbor: Grant and Lee, May 26 – June 3, 1864. Again, I have charted a different course than Wittenberg and LaFantasie. They chose not to include any multi-part series which left out Gordon Rhea whose series on Ulysses S. Grant’s Overland Campaign is by far the best tactical analysis I’ve ever read. What struck me most about this author’s work is how easy they were to read, while being extremely complex in details. Each book in the series stands well by itself, but when taken cumulatively they are absolutely masterful. Comprising nearly 2,100 pages it is the definitive work on the “knock ‘em out” pile driver offensive of General Grant. Rhea provides criticism where appropriate and takes no prisoners in this epic work. I personally look forward to his next book on the final movement of the armies to Petersburg, Virginia.

While I enjoy reading battle narratives more than any other type of book, I would be remiss if I did not mention a few notable biographies that stand out amongst my Civil War titles. The best of these, in my humble opinion, offer detailed historical information on the subject plus well thought out analyses of the leadership of the individual on the battlefield. Additionally, they must be as balanced as possible. Here are my top five Civil War biographies:

5. Grant: A Biography, by: William S. McFeely – This book was the winner of the 1982 Pulitzer Prize for biographies and autobiographies. McFeely does a superb job detailing the life of Hiram Ulysses Grant – better known as Ulysses S. Grant. The book is easy to read and moves at a quick pace. McFeely is critical of many of Grant’s decisions, particularly during his presidency. While Grant’s legacy has improved over the past two decades, I’m certain this book will continue to be the superlative work on our 18th president.

4. Breckinridge: Statesman, Soldier, Symbol, by William C. Davis – Only one general on either side of the American Civil War could claim the honor of being vice president of the United States: John C. Breckinridge. Noted historian, William C. Davis brings this seminal statesman, and soldier, to life in this brilliant study on the Kentuckian. As with all of Davis’ work, it is extremely well researched and interesting to read. Recently re-released by the University Press of Kentucky, it is a massive volume spanning over 700 pages.

3. Stonewall Jackson: The Man, The Soldier, The Legend, by: James I. Robertson, Jr. – Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson is a legend. All one has to do is drive the roads of Northern Virginia to see the reverence his name holds. Roads, shopping centers and monuments dot the countryside paying homage to his name. Robertson’s work takes a pro-southern stance and while it is obvious that Robertson enjoyed writing about him, his biography is very solid. This book is inevitably on many bookshelves throughout the south, but anyone with an interest in the great “Stonewall” should read Robertson’s book.

2. Sickles at Gettysburg: The Controversial Civil War General Who Committed Murder, Abandoned Little Round Top, and Declared Himself the Hero of Gettysburg, by: James A. Hessler. For any serious student of the American Civil War the mere mention of Daniel E. Sickles will inevitably conjure up what most historians have written for years – that Sickles was a scoundrel and murderer. Jim Hessler’s book, “Sickles at Gettysburg,” may not change one’s ultimate opinion of the man, but it provides an extremely well balanced look at the controversial man. Few of his era ever questioned his bravery. Most would probably state he was a political general with no business as a high ranking officer in the U.S. Army. The first statement is true. He won promotions mostly partly due to his political connections. The second part of the statement may not be as clear cut. Did Sickles possess a tactical understanding of leading men into battle? Did he keep his cool when leading his men? Did his personal presence on the battlefield inspire his men to fight? Did he operate with alacrity when the situation called for it? Hessler’s well written biography offers the readers a true opportunity to assess Sickles strengths and weaknesses. It is certainly not a “pro-Sickles” biography. Before you answer the questions I have posed, I highly recommend you read “Sickles at Gettysburg.” This is a book I truly enjoyed reading. I interviewed Jim Hessler in July 2009 about “Sickles at Gettysburg.” To listen to my interview click HERE.

1. Major General Robert E. Rodes of the Army of Northern Virginia: A Biography, by: Darrell L. Collins – Once in a great while a biography comes along that provides a “fresh look” at a Civil War officer. Darrell Collins’ recent release, “Major General Robert E. Rodes of the Army of Northern Virginia,” is just such a book. Not only is it a “fresh look,” it is the first biography written on Rodes. Rodes, a graduate of the Virginia Military Institute (VMI), would rise in rank from colonel of the 5th Alabama Infantry to major general in command of a division in the 2d Corps of the Army of Northern Virginia. I find it incredulous that a division commander in the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia has never had a biography written about him. Collins’ book is very well written demonstrating the significant amount of time the author spent on research. While his correspondence with his wife, Hortense, is forever lost to history (she burned her personal letters from her husband) Collins was able to obtain many letters exchanged with his father, friends and professional military associates. Rodes was a capable soldier, brave to a fault, a faithful husband and a man of strong moral beliefs. I came away from reading this biography with a much better understanding of Rodes and an appreciation for the courage he demonstrated while leading his troops. If you don’t read any other biography in 2011, I recommend you purchase this fantastic book. I interviewed Darrell Collins in July 2010 about “Major General Robert E. Rodes.” To read the interview click HERE.

While this ranking is subjective, at best, it represents what I believe to be the best books I’ve read. I’m sure through the prism of time, there will be changes to my list. However, I am just as confident that all of these will stand the test time. I would enjoy hearing your thoughts on my list. Enjoy your reading and studying in 2011.

###

September 26, 1861 (Thursday)
In Kentucky, a contingent of Union cavalry (Stewart’s Cavalry) composed of 75 troopers led by Captain Stewart engages a Confederate force of fewer than 50 at Lucas Bend. The Union sustains no casualties. The Confederates suffer four wounded and five captured.

In New Mexico, Company C, U.S. 3^rd Cavalry, commanded by Captain Robert M. Morris, engages and defeats a Confederate force at Fort Thorne in a skirmish that lasts slightly more than two hours. Casualties are unavailable.(i)

September 26, 1862 (Friday)
In Missouri, the 9^th Missouri Militia Cavalry skirmishes with Confederates at Cambridge. Casualty figures are unavailable.

In Union general officer activity, Colonel William Woods Averell is promoted to brigadier general. Also, Colonel Robert Cowdin is elevated to that rank. However, his commission expires on 4 March 1863 due to the Senate’s inaction. On 30 March he is relieved from duty. Colonel Albert Sully (1^st Minnesota) is promoted to brigadier general. He participates at Fredericksburg and in the Chancellorsville campaign, but afterward he is transferred back to the frontier as commander of the Department of Dakota. Also, Colonel Gouverneur Kemble Warren (5^th New York) is promoted to brigadier general.(ii)

(i) Hannings, Bud, Every Day of the Civil War: A Chronological Encyclopedia, published by McFarland & Company, Inc. on September 27, 2010, Pg. 86.
(ii) Ibid, Pg. 238.

For this break, I chose “A Stillness at Appomattox” by famed author Bruce Catton.  This is his third and last volume in his trilogy on the Union Army of the Potomac and won the 1954 Pulitzer Prize.  Reading this book brings back memories of my past readings and the things that originally drew me to the American Civil War: quality research, stunning prose and skillful storytelling.  While “Stillness” was not written as a tactical analysis it provides enough detail to keep a serious Civil War student enthralled while being an enjoyable read for a more casual reader.  If you have time for a “break” of your own, I highly recommend reading any of Catton’s trilogy – but especially “A Stillness at Appomattox.”

Now back to reading and note taking…

Valley Thunder: The Battle of New Market -video trailer

I interviewed Charlie in May.  To listen to the interview, and read my review on “Valley Thunder,” click on the following link.

Mike’s interview with Charlie Knight

If you have not purchased this book, I highly recommend it.  It is one of the best battle narratives recently released.

In speaking with Mr. White, I learned that he wanted to write a book that focused much attention on the young Lincoln.  Lincoln, growing up on the western frontier, would not have it easy.  With little formal education he would become the epitome of a “self made” man, proving that a person can do anything he sets his mind to.  During the first three chapters, White develops Lincoln and leads the reader through his formative years which would inevitably shape him into the man he became: frontiersman, inventor, lawyer, husband, father and the President of the United States.

Later, in chapters four through nine, White details Lincoln’s entrance into politics, his election to the Illinois State Legislature and his single term as a United States Representative.  Additionally, the author provides a great deal of insight into Lincoln’s rise as a rural attorney.  It is fascinating to read about Lincoln’s travels of the huge Eighth Judicial Circuit where he would argue cases in front of judges, juries and attorneys, many of which would have a prominent role in his future successes.

Any analysis of Lincoln’s life would not be complete without a thorough understanding of Lincoln’s time in Springfield, Illinois.  The author provides a thorough analysis of this period of time in chapters ten and eleven.  While he was no longer serving as an elected legislator, Lincoln would continue to campaign for the Republican Party, make speeches on various issues and grow his law practice.  While in Springfield, Lincoln would meet Mary Todd.  Todd, from a wealthy slave owning family in Kentucky, was very different from Lincoln, the self educated “rail-splitter.”  The two would present quite a dichotomy but would ultimately marry after a short lived breakup.  White explores their relationship and the impact Mary had on Lincoln in both private and public life.

Lincoln would once again enter the national scene after two events shook the Republican Party: the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the March 1857 Supreme Court ruling in the Dred Scott case.  In chapters eleven to thirteen White highlights Lincoln’s return to the national stage and his two failed attempts to win a Senate seat.  White provides a portrait of Lincoln attempting to understand the changing national events and how they impacted the freedom provided by the Constitution and Declaration of Independence.  Running for the Senate in 1856, Lincoln passionately spoke to the people about the ramifications of the Kansas-Nebraska Act and how it nullified the Missouri Compromise - essentially making slavery legal in any state that voters decided to allow it.  While not an abolitionist, Lincoln was in favor of restricting the expansion of slavery into any of the western territories seeking statehood, a position he believed would lead to its ultimate extinction.  The author provides an adroit analysis of the Lincoln–Douglas debates of 1858 and how they increased his stature in national politics.

Chapters fourteen through sixteen cover Lincoln’s decision to run for President, his able handling of his network of supporters, winning the Republican nomination and managing the campaign for his election.  While Lincoln followed the long held tradition of not campaigning for himself, he expertly pulled the levers behind the scenes.  He would be elected President on November 6, 1860, in a hotly contested four way race.  White details Lincoln’s inauguration, including his First Inaugural Address, in chapter seventeen.  His story telling is superb as he walks the reader through the tough times Lincoln encountered as he prepared to be inaugurated.  Continuing his tradition of “dissecting” Lincoln’s words, established in “The Eloquent President,” the author provides the reader with an enlightened understanding of the process Lincoln used when writing speeches.  I found this to be extremely interesting as I continue to increase my understanding of Lincoln.

White writes of Lincoln as Commander-In-Chief in chapter eighteen.  As you follow the author, you learn how Lincoln became more engaged in managing the Federal forces and how he handled his generals.  He continues to tell the story of Lincoln managing the Civil War in chapters nineteen and twenty detailing how Lincoln handled the terrible losses his Federal forces would sustain – especially in the Eastern Theater.  With fortunes turning against the fight for “Union,” Lincoln prepared what he called a “war measure” – the Emancipation Proclamation.  White details Lincoln’s struggles with this single act in chapter nineteen.

Chapters twenty to twenty-three continue to analyze Lincoln’s managing of the war effort and his enemies in the “front and rear.”  White provides a significant amount of detail in discussing the political climate that existed during Lincoln’s first term – a climate that would provide the “enemies in his rear” – the Radical Republicans and the Copperhead Democrats – plenty of ammunition.  By issuing the Emancipation Proclamation he upset the Radical Republicans, as the measure did not go far enough, and gave the Copperheads additional reasons to criticize him as his war aim had changed from saving the Union to freeing the slaves.

In the concluding chapters, twenty-four to twenty-six, White covers the Gettysburg Address, Lincoln’s reelection, the Second Inaugural Address and Lincoln’s assassination.  White is at his best when he analyzes Lincoln’s speeches.  Here he analyzes his Gettysburg Address and his Second Inaugural.  As the author suggests, both of these speeches demonstrate Lincoln’s changing position on God and the Almighty’s control over events in the United States – especially His will that the war continue.  The Second Inaugural is perhaps Lincoln’s best speech.  With the Civil War winding down he uses it as a platform to speak to the people about healing and reuniting as one country.  The author considers this Lincoln’s best speech and he makes a wonderful case for that in dissecting Lincoln’s words.  White finishes his book with a stirring narrative on Lincoln’s assassination and how it martyred him, grieved the people and negatively impacted Reconstruction.

I recommend “A. Lincoln: A Biography” to all of my readers and listeners.  It is well researched, meticulously written and enjoyable to read.  Whether you are a Lincoln expert, or casual reader, I’m sure you will enjoy this book as much as I did.

I had the opportunity to interview Mr. White on August 11, 2010.  The following interview provides a revealing glimpse into the author’s research methodology and a historian’s understanding of his favorite subject: Abraham Lincoln.  The interview is separated into smaller parts so you can listen to it at your leisure.  Enjoy!

Details about “A. Lincoln: A Biography”
Written by: Ronald C. White, Jr.
Paperback: 816 pages
Publisher: Random House
Date of First Edition: May 4, 2010
ISBN-10: 0812975707

Ronald C. White, Jr. Interview – 14 Parts
“A. Lincoln: A Biography”
Interview Date: August 11, 2010
Total Time: 1 hour 29 minutes 55 seconds

Part 1: Ronald C White Interview Part 1
Time: 6:33
Contents: Welcome and introductions | About Ron and his interest in Abraham Lincoln | Why write about Abraham Lincoln? | Ron’s focus on the “young” Abraham Lincoln | New material used in “A. Lincoln: A Biography”

Part 2: Ronald C White Interview Part 2
Time: 5:17
Contents: Ron’s research methodology and the difficulties encountered when researching “A. Lincoln” | The Lincoln collection at the Huntington Library | Traveling Indiana and Illinois to “walk in Lincoln’s footsteps”

Part 3: Ronald C White Interview Part 3
Time: 6:23
Contents: A discussion on Lincoln’s early life in Kentucky and Indiana | Lincoln’s formative years and the losses of the women in his life | Lincoln’s life in New Salem, Illinois | Coming of age and Lincoln’s election to the Illinois legislature

Part 4: Ronald C White Interview Part 4
Time: 5:20
Contents: A discussion on Lincoln’s lack of formal education | Lincoln as a self made man | Lincoln hones his speaking skills | Learning through memorization | A discussion on teaching history in the 21^st century

Part 5: Ronald C White Interview Part 5
Time: 5:51
Contents: Lincoln’s accomplishments in the Illinois legislature and as a lawyer | Lincoln’s capacity to put himself in the “shoes of other people” | Lincoln’s relationship with Mary Todd

Part 6: Ronald C White Interview Part 6
Time: 7:48
Contents: A discussion on Lincoln’s single term in the U.S. House of Representatives and his “Spot Resolutions” | Lincoln returns to Springfield believing he is finished with elected office | Lincoln returns to his law firm but continues to follow politics | The Kansas-Nebraska Act and Lincoln’s opposition to it | Lincoln’s evolving thoughts on the Declaration of Independence

Part 7: Ronald C White Interview Part 7
Time: 6:15
Contents: Lincoln takes on Douglas over the Kansas-Nebraska Act | A “tool” to rid the nation of its greatest evil | Lincoln’s 1854 Senate candidacy | The Dred Scott decision and Lincoln’s run for Stephen Douglas’ Senate seat | The Lincoln-Douglas debates and Lincoln’s rise in national stature

Part 8: Ronald C White Interview Part 8
Time: 4:39
Contents: A discussion on Lincoln’s Cooper Union speech | Lincoln as a leader in the new Republican Party | Lincoln uses research to craft his speeches

Part 9: Ronald C White Interview Part 9
Time: 8:02
Contents: Lincoln elected the sixteenth President of the United States | A discussion on Lincoln during the great Secession Winter | Lincoln remains removed from Washington City but continues to closely follow the events of the secession crisis | A discussion on Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address

Part 10: Ronald C White Interview Part 10
Time: 8:02
Contents: Lincoln faces his first crisis with the need to resupply Fort Sumter | Lincoln takes charge of the situation | The fall of Fort Sumter | Did Lincoln believe his actions to resupply Fort Sumter would cause the Confederate government to attack first? | Lincoln’s hands-on approach to managing military matters | Lincoln takes responsibility for the defeat at First Bull Run and starts his search for a general that can win

Part 11: Ronald C White Interview Part 11
Time: 8:03
Contents: Lincoln challenges McClellan’s Urbanna Plan | Lincoln sustains his generals after defeats | A discussion on Lincoln’s executive management style dealing with his military commanders | Lincoln’s enemy in the rear: Radical Republicans and Copperhead Democrats | Lincoln’s necessary war measure: The Emancipation Proclamation

Part 12: Ronald C White Interview Part 12
Time: 7:56
Contents: Federal victories at Gettysburg and Vicksburg and the changing fortunes of the Federal war efforts | A discussion on the Gettysburg Address | Lincoln’s changing views on God | Bloodshed during the summer of 1864 jeopardizes Lincoln’s reelection bid | A discussion on Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address – perhaps his best speech ever? | The role of God in the war and America’s sin: slavery

Part 13: Ronald C White Interview Part 13
Time: 6:02
Contents: The close of the Civil War and Lincoln’s desire to “let them down easy” | Lincoln’s assassination and his legacy | How did Lincoln’s death impact one of his primary second term priorities: reconstruction

Part 14: Ronald C White Interview Part 14
Time: 3:44
Contents: Future projects and books that Ron is working on | Wrap up and closing

Colonel Ezra Carman was commissioned as lieutenant colonel in the 7th New Jersey Volunteer Infantry on September 9, 1861.  He would be wounded at the Battle of Williamsburg on May 5, 1862.  Upon returning to duty, he would be promoted to colonel and would actively recruit the 13th New Jersey Volunteer Infantry.  He would lead his regiment during the Maryland Campaign, Chancellorsville and Gettysburg.  Carman would temporarily lead a brigade to extinguish the New York Draft Riots.  He would be transferred to the Western Theater, with the XII Corps, and would participate in the Battle of Chattanooga and the Atlanta Campaign.  He would receive brevet promotion to brigadier general on March 13, 1865.  After the war, Carman would become chief clerk of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and would be a historical expert on the Maryland Campaign.  He was the superintendent at the Chickamauga-Chattanooga National Battlefield.  His first love, however, was as a historian.  His manuscript on the Maryland Campaign would occupy much of his time after the Civil War.  He would use firsthand accounts from commanders and soldiers to write his manuscript in addition to regimental histories and newspaper articles.  As Clemens told me, in our interview, the Carman manuscript would be used by other historians to write their narratives on the Maryland Campaign.  While the manuscript does contain some biases, it is still the definitive work on the subject.

Clemens did a masterful job of editing Carman’s manuscript.  His publisher, Savas Beatie, LLC, worked with him to ensure that the footnoting appears on the same page as Carman’s text.  This makes reading the book, and digesting the editor’s footnotes, a much easier experience.  I find myself often skipping footnotes, in other books, when I have to go to the end of the chapter or the notes section.  In “The Maryland Campaign of September 1862,” I read all of the footnotes in their entirety and it made Carman’s manuscript much more enjoyable to read.  I would often find myself chuckling while reading them as Clemens injected sarcasm and humor into his notes.  You will inevitably have an appreciation for Carman’s work, and Clemens’ research, when you read the book.  These footnotes alone make this book a great value.  Clemens also supports his editing of the manuscript with wonderfully unique maps.  The maps are in the front of the book and were created by cartographer Gene Thorp.  They are easy to understand and support the book well.

“The Maryland Campaign of September 1862” is intelligently organized.  The “Forward” was written by Ted Alexander, historian at Antietam National Battlefield.  Clemens’ well written “Introduction” is followed by the important section “Note on the Carman Manuscript” which provides detailed information on the manuscript and the challenges it presented Clemens during the editing process.  The chapter breakdown follows.

1. Maryland
2. The Confederate Invasion of Maryland
3. The Confederate Army Crosses the Potomac
4. General McClellan and the Army of the Potomac
5. Advance of the Army of the Potomac from Washington to Frederick and South Mountain
6. Harper’s Ferry
7. South Mountain (Crampton’s Gap), September 14, 1862
8. South Mountain (Fox’s Gap), September 14, 1862
9. South Mountain (Turner’s Gap), September 14, 1862
10. From South Mountain to Antietam
11. McLaws and Franklin in Pleasant Valley

The chapters are followed by an Appendix 1: Organization of the Armies followed by the Bibliography that makes it readily apparent how difficult Clemens editing project was.

I would highly recommend “The Maryland Campaign of September 1862, Vol. 1: South Mountain” to any serious Civil War student or enthusiast.  I’m certain you will find the book extremely interesting and enjoyable to read.

I was able to interview Tom on August 2, 2010.  As always, I have broken the 90 minute interview into multiple parts to make it easier to enjoy; you can listen to the parts at your leisure and come back to the next part when your time allows.

Details about “The Maryland Campaign of September 1862, Vol. 1: South Mountain”
Written by: Colonel Ezra Carman
Edited by: Thomas G. Clemens
Hardcover: 576 pages
Publisher: Savas Beatie, LLC
Date of First Edition: May 19, 2010
ISBN-10: 1932714812

Click HERE to order this and other excellent Civil War titles from Savas Beatie, LLC

Tom Clemens Interview – 15 Parts
“The Maryland Campaign of September 1862, Vol. 1: South Mountain”
Interview Date: August 2, 2010
Total Time: 1 hour 29 minutes 49 seconds

Part 1: Tom Clemens Interview Part 1
Time: 6:08
Contents: Welcome and introductions | About Tom Clemens | Why use Ezra Carman’s manuscript? | About Carman and his famous manuscript

Part 2: Tom Clemens Interview Part 2
Time: 5:59
Contents: Maryland during the Secession Crisis | Why did it take so long for Carman’s manuscript to be published in its entirety? | Tom’s research methodology and the difficulties he encountered | The Confederate Army of Northern Virginia pushes for an invasion of Maryland as early as 1861

Part 3: Tom Clemens Interview Part 3
Time: 6:42
Contents: Why did Jefferson Davis finally approve the invasion of Maryland in September 1862? | Did Lee believe a victory on northern soil would lead to Confederate recognition in Europe? | Why the Confederate authorities believed they could control the Mississippi and receive support from the northwest states

Part 4: Tom Clemens Interview Part 4
Time: 7:20
Contents: A discussion on Robert E. Lee’s decision to divide his Army of Northern Virginia | Carman’s belief that Harper’s Ferry was lost with the abandonment of Maryland Heights | Did the deliberate movements of US Major General William Franklin’s VI Corps make the surrender of Harper’s Ferry inevitable?

Part 5: Tom Clemens Interview Part 5
Time: 8:24
Contents: A discussion on Carman’s disdain for Halleck and the eventual capitulation of Harper’s Ferry | The tactical situation in Pleasant Valley and Harper’s Ferry prior to the surrender of Harper’s Ferry | The censure of Dixon Miles and the special commission’s decision with regards to the surrender of Harper’s Ferry

Part 6: Tom Clemens Interview Part 6
Time: 6:52
Contents: A discussion on Carman’s assertion that Lee could have been beaten piecemeal had Franklin’s VI Corps moved rapidly into Pleasant Valley in conjunction with a rapid movement by McClellan towards Boonsboro | How Frederick affected the movements of the Army of the Potomac

Part 7: Tom Clemens Interview Part 7
Time: 4:51
Contents: Franklin’s VI Corps attacks Thomas Munford at Crampton’s Gap | Carman’s criticism of CSA Brigadier General Howell Cobb

Part 8: Tom Clemens Interview Part 8
Time: 5:40
Contents: The fight for Turner’s Gap and Fox’s Gap | Tom’s description of the terrain at South Mountain and how it affected troop deployments and movements | Walking a battlefield is important to understanding the battle

Part 9: Tom Clemens Interview Part 9
Time: 5:28
Contents: The death of US Major General Jesse Reno and the fight for Fox’s Gap | Carman’s criticism of CSA Brigadier General Roswell Ripley

Part 10: Tom Clemens Interview Part 10
Time: 7:16
Contents: The fight at Turner’s Gap and the performance of US Brigadier General John Gibbon’s Iron Brigade | The performance of US Major General Ambrose Burnside | The other Iron Brigade from New York

Part 11: Tom Clemens Interview Part 11
Time: 3:30
Contents: The other Iron Brigades (continued)

Part 12: Tom Clemens Interview Part 12
Time: 7:51
Contents: Robert E. Lee orders his troops from South Mountain and Harper’s Ferry | A discussion of Carman’s criticism of McClellan’s slow movements from South Mountain

Part 13: Tom Clemens Interview Part 13
Time: 5:40
Contents: A discussion about McClellan’s lost opportunities of September 15, 1862 | The arrival of the Army of Potomac at Antietam | The tactical situation on September 16 at Antietam | An assessment of McClellan’s actions in the Maryland Campaign | Tom’s opinion on Ezra Carman’s manuscripts and their balance

Part 14: Tom Clemens Interview Part 14
Time: 4:28
Contents: Further discussion on the Carman manuscripts and the difficulty in researching them | Tom’s extensive database on Carman’s manuscripts

Part 15: Tom Clemens Interview Part 15
Time: 3:40
Contents: The status of The Maryland Campaign of September 1862, Vol. 2: The Battle of Antietam | A discussion on the footnoting of Tom’s book | Wrap up and closing

Collins’ biography of Rodes covers his early life, growing up near Lynchburg, Virginia through his divisional leadership in the Army of Northern Virginia.  Not lacking any detail, the book is over 500 pages.  Collins’ prose brings Rodes to life with the general jumping off the pages with excellent literary imagery.  Born on March 29, 1829, Robert Emmett Rodes was the son of David Rodes – a general in the Virginia Militia.  The younger Rodes would attend the Virginia Military Institute (VMI), graduating in 1848.  While Robert wanted to study engineering at the University of Virginia, his father had other plans for him.  Ultimately, Rodes would become a math teacher at VMI.

The author provides much detail of Rodes’ professional life, a journey that would take him through much of the south as an engineer, working for a canal operation and several railroads.  Collins makes a strong case for these years, working in the private sector, molding Rodes into the individual that would bravely lead his regiment, brigade and division into battles during the Civil War.  Rodes, a strict disciplinarian, would ultimately meet his wife, Hortense Woodruff, while an engineer for the Northeast and Southwest Alabama Railroad.

Never losing his interest in VMI, or teaching, he would accept a professorship at VMI in 1861.  Unfortunately, he was never able to start his new career as the Civil War would interrupt his plans.  Collins again provides a wonderful glimpse into Rodes’ life, detailing his time as captain of the Alabama “Warrior Guards” and his appointment to colonel of the 5th Alabama Infantry regiment.  Collins writing is very balanced, not glossing over the anger Rodes experienced when his regiment did not participate in the First Battle of Manassas, or the overly hard drilling he put his regiment through after the battle.

Collins’ knowledge of the Civil War, and expertise of battlefield tactics, is on display in the detailed descriptions of Rodes battlefield exploits while in the Army of Northern Virginia.  The author becomes a virtual battlefield guide for major battles that Rodes led his troops in: Seven Pines, Gaines’ Mill, Antietam, Chancellorsville, Gettysburg, the Wilderness, Spotsylvania Court House and Opequon.  Rodes led from the front and would be wounded several times before he would finally be killed at Winchester.  The author’s free-flowing style makes “Robert E. Rodes of the Army of Northern Virginia” an enjoyable journey through the major battles of the Eastern Theater.   I recommend this book for anyone that is a serious student of the Civil War.

I was very fortunate to have the opportunity to interview Mr. Collins recently.  The text based interview follows.  Enjoy!

Details about “Major General Robert E. Rodes of the Army of Northern Virginia”
Written by: Darrell L. Collins
Paperback: 524 pages
Publisher: Savas Beatie, LLC
Date of First Edition: July 7, 2008
ISBN-10: 193271409X

*************************************************************************

Interview with Darrell L. Collins, author of “Major General Robert E. Rodes”

This Mighty Scourge (TMS): Darrell, can you tell my listeners a little about yourself and how you became interested in the Civil War?  Were there any mentors that influenced your interest in history?

Darrell Collins (DC): I cannot remember a time when I was not interested in the Civil War.  This is due in large measure to the fact that I was fortunate enough to grow up in a family that appreciated history.  I remember my parents and grandparents telling me stories about the Civil War that they had heard from their grandparents.  I grew up in Michigan, but my family heritage goes back many generations to the Virginia-West Virginia area.  Perhaps the most fascinating story I recall concerned my Confederate great-grandfather facing his own Union brother at the small battle of Droop Mountain in West Virginia, not far from their common home.  Such great stories set me on a life-long quest to learn more about this war of brother against brother.

TMS: I recently finished reading “Major General Robert E. Rodes of the Army of Northern Virginia.”  I must say that I really enjoyed the book and believe it provides a fresh look at one of the most successful commanders in Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia.  Why did you choose Rodes for a full length biography?

DC: Thank you for the compliment and I am glad you enjoyed the book.  In 1997, I attended a Civil War conference in Frederick, Md.  The keynote speaker was James Robertson, who had just published what I consider to be the definitive biography of Stonewall Jackson.  At the time, I had written a few books on the Civil War, but not a biography.  Robertson’s fascinating talk about his quest to know Jackson inspired me to set out on a similar adventure.  I, too, wanted to do a general in Lee’s army, one who had participated in nearly all its major campaigns.  I soon discovered that no major work had been done on Rodes.  We seemed a perfect match.

TMS: Rodes was raised in Lynchburg, Virginia.  His family sent him to private schools during his youth.  As a young man he attended the Virginia Military Institute – known as VMI.  Upon graduating from VMI, his father, David Rodes tried to get his son appointed as an officer in the Regular Army.  Unfortunately, with the Mexican War having recently ended, the U.S. Army had been downsized and there was no position available for Robert.  He would end up taking a teaching position, at VMI, with a rank of lieutenant.  Can you tell me how this teaching assignment impacted him?

DC: There is no doubt in my mind that Rodes loved and admired his father, a Virginia Militia general, court clerk, and speculator in land and slaves.  Though loving and kind, David Rodes was strict and controlling, making the major decisions regarding his son’s future.  After VMI, young Robert wanted to continue in education in engineering by attending the University of Virginia, but his father, though fairly well-off, refused to pay for it.  Instead, he came up with such schemes as getting Robert a commission in the army, becoming a court clerk in Richmond, or sending him out to Missouri to be a “preacher.”  When all these failed to materialize, Robert, almost by default, accepted a position at VMI teaching basic math courses to freshmen.  This, however, Robert truly loved doing.  From then on he wanted nothing more than a career in teaching, his ultimate goal being a full professorship at his beloved VMI.

TMS: VMI was a growing institution.  With its growth, a professorship position opened which Rodes applied for.  He would not end up getting the position –  a position that would be filled by none other than Thomas J. Jackson – the future “Stonewall.”  Rodes enjoyed teaching immensely, but financial considerations required him to take an engineering position with the North River Canal and later with the South Side Railroad where he was in charge of surveying the line from Farmville towards Lynchburg.  Can you describe this period in Rodes’ life and the toils of being an engineer for the South Side Railroad?

DC: The new chair that went to Jackson, Rodes did not get for two reasons: he had little training in the subjects to be taught (chemistry, geology, and mineralogy), and VMI Superintendent Francis Smith though a great admirer of Rodes, wished to follow the example of the West Point Academy by not making full professors of its graduates until VMI had been open at least twenty years (VMI opened in 1839).  Unable to survive on the meager pay of an assistant professor, Rodes reluctantly left his beloved VMI and began a career as an engineer in the field.  This proved to be a very tough life, working long hours outside in all kinds of weather, living in tents or hovels for weeks at a time, with little or no social life.  It was an existence Rodes learned to both love and hate.

TMS: One of the most enjoyable aspects of your book was the glimpses into Rodes’ character and moral beliefs.  One such example was during the period of time he was working on the South Side Railroad.  With his father losing his banking job, Rodes would bring his younger sister to live with him.  While it was rough living along the unfinished railroad, Robert would take care of his sister, providing for her needs.  This action and many others throughout his short life, would show the compassionate side of the future military commander.  What say you?

DC: In 1850, Virginia adopted a new state constitution, which stipulated, among other things, that a number of positions in state government filled by appointment now had to be filled by popular election.  Despite having held the position of district court clerk for more than twenty years, David Rodes was voted out of office in 1852.  Erroneously concluding that his father now was financially strapped, Robert offered to take in his teenage sister Sally.  Sally, however, refused to live in a one-room hovel with her brother, preferring instead to live in much more comfortable surroundings with friends in Charlottesville.  This offer by Rodes, as you say, was but one of many examples of his compassion.  Another example was his attempt to help a financially destitute friend by buying his watch for $75, an entire month’s wage for Rodes at the time.  There was, however, another side of Rodes that showed a definite lack of compassion, a prime example being his wish at the start of the war to settle his debts by selling the young children of his house-slave Hannah.

TMS: Rodes was extremely ambitious.  Over the coming years he would lose several assistant engineer positions, with different railroads.  This was fairly common as the road would either run out of money or would reach a point in its construction where fewer engineers were needed.  He would end up working twice for the NE & SW Alabama Railroad.  The first time the railroad ran out of money and the second time he came back as chief engineer.  It was during his first tenure, in Alabama, that he would meet Hortense Woodruff – his future wife.  Can you elaborate on what Rodes was experiencing during this difficult time and what gave him the financial security to marry Hortense?

DC: In addition for working for the Southside Railroad in Virginia, and the Northeast and Southwest Alabama Railroad in Alabama, Rodes worked a short time with different railroads in Texas, Missouri, and North Carolina.  Though he loved engineering, he hated the ephemeral nature of his work.  His return to Alabama in 1856 and appointment as chief engineer two years later gave him four things that finally secured his happiness: 1) a permanent job, with little or no threat of layoff, 2) a headquarters office—no more living in the field, 3) excellent pay–$3,000 a year, more than 15 times that of a common laborer, and 4) his chance to once again pursue and finally marry Hortense.

TMS: While no longer teaching, Rodes remained very interested in the educational system.  After he left VMI, he continued to remain in regular contact with Francis H. Smith, the head of VMI.  These letters provided much insight into the maturing Rodes – a man you described as being a strict disciplinarian.  How did this help mold him into the commander he would become later in life?

DC: Living under the guidance of his strict militia-general father, Rodes grew up in an environment of discipline.  Added to the discipline imposed by the military setting at VMI, was the self discipline Rodes developed as an engineer working under extremely harsh conditions for long periods of time.  In 1859, the University of Alabama was considering converting into a military institute similar to VMI.  The Board of Directors consulted Rodes.  He strongly recommended that the only way to “control the pupils” was to build a tall brick wall around the entire campus.  I think this is quite revealing.

TMS: Robert E. Rodes would finally get an opportunity to pursue his dream – teaching a VMI.  The board of VMI appointed Rodes Professor of Civil Engineering and Applied Mechanics.  He was to start on September 1, 1861.  Unfortunately the gathering war clouds of 1860 and early 1861 would intervene.  Rodes was well prepared for command.  After John Brown’s failed raid at Harpers Ferry, Tuscaloosa County funded the “Warrior Guards.”  Rodes would be elected their captain.  While he drilled his men hard, and kept strict discipline throughout the company, his men would grow to respect Rodes.  He was knowledgeable and turned the raw men into soldiers quickly.  With the formation of the 5th Alabama, Rodes would be appointed their colonel.  Many of the Warrior Guards would follow Rodes into Confederate service – another sign of the respect they felt for him.  Can you describe this period of time?

DC: As chief engineer of the NE & SW Alabama, Rodes worked in the company headquarters town of Eutaw, the seat of Greene County, some thirty miles southwest of Tuscaloosa.  Because of Hortense’s frequent illnesses (described only as “neuralgia”), the couple moved in with her parents in Tuscaloosa.  This fortuitous circumstance made Robert eligible in 1859 to be elected captain of the Warrior Guards.  By November of the following year, Rodes had so thoroughly trained the Guards that at the fair of West Alabama they won the banner as best drilled company.  When the Guards went to Montgomery, the following May, to be sworn into Confederate service, they became Company H of the 5th Alabama Infantry, and Rodes, his reputation for command now firmly established, was elected colonel.

TMS: After spending a period of time in Florida, the 5th Alabama was sent to Virginia.  They arrived at Manassas Junction on June 19, 1861 and were assigned to Brigadier General Richard S. Ewell’s Brigade.  The 6th Alabama, 6th Louisiana (later to be part of the Louisiana Tigers) and the Washington (LA) Artillery were also in the brigade – along with four companies of cavalry.  To protect the gathering Confederate army, Rodes was sent east towards Centreville and posted at Farr’s Crossroads.  It was there, on July 17, that Rodes would first meet the enemy.  Unfortunately, supporting forces had withdrawn leaving Rodes isolated, and in front of the rest of the army.  His 5th Alabama fought bravely, in what would best be described as a small skirmish, but once he realized he was surrounded he ordered his regiment to “recede” – a term he would use instead of “retreat.”  Can you describe the early war preparations, his arrival in Virginia and his first action at Farr’s Crossroads?

DC: Immediately after forming in May 1861, the 5th Alabama was sent down to Pensacola, Florida to be part of General Braxton Bragg’s force besieging Fort Pickens.  By the time the regiment reached Virginia in mid-June, Rodes had molded it into a highly efficient and well-trained unit.  He was sent up the Braddock Road to serve as an advance picket at Farr’s Crossroads.  Here Rodes’ engineering skills, more than his military training, served him well, his keen eye for terrain selecting an excellent defensive position for his men.  Eventually approached and nearly surrounded by about 2,000 men of Samuel Heintzelman’s division, Rodes refused to “recede” until he received specific orders to do so from General Ewell down at Union Mills Ford.  It was, as I have written, a splendid little affair for Rodes and the 5th Alabama.

TMS: On July 21, 1861 the first large scale battle was fought in the Civil War.  The First Battle of Bull Run would be a terrific victory for the Confederate army – however, without the arrival of Brigadier General Joseph E. Johnston’s command, from the Shenandoah Valley, it could have easily been a terrible Confederate defeat.  Rodes would see little action during the battle as he was posted away from the action.  This caused a growing resentment that you described as “petty and even illogical.”  Additionally, he would start a strict drill program that was so hard that the men suffered terribly.  Finally a surgeon told him he was going to kill all of his men – with the result being less drill during the heat of the day.  Can you describe Rodes during this period of time – the resentment he felt for not being part of the Confederate victory at Bull Run and his increasing use of hard drill?

DC: For four brief days after Farr’s Crossroads, Rodes basked in an atmosphere of back-slapping congratulations.  He appears to have thoroughly enjoyed the accolades, which all to soon were reduced to insignificance by the momentous battle of the 21st.  Already possessing a reputation for having a well-trained, efficient regiment, he seemed determined after Bull Run to further build on that reputation as additional proof that he was indeed, battlefield glory or no, a capable officer.  Rodes, however, may also have had the welfare of his men in mind when he put them on his harsh training regimen.  Though he did not participate in the great battle of the 21st, he witnessed its horrible aftermath, with its acres of dead and wounded men.  Only the severest discipline and training might spare his own men this awful fate in the next great contest.

TMS: One of the challenges you faced when writing this book was cited in the introduction.  While much of Rodes’ correspondence with his father, friends and military associates was saved, Hortense burned all of her correspondence with her husband after his death – letters that would have provided a glimpse into the heart of Rodes.  How did you work around this lack of primary source material and what other difficulties did you encounter when researching this book?

DC: Lacking this essential primary source material, I decided to approach my subject not only from his own perspectives, as revealed in his extant letters, reports, etc., but also from the perspectives of those people on whose lives he had a significant impact.  Simply put, a biography is an attempt to understand an individual.  A full understanding thus requires an investigation into not only what the main subject thought, believed, felt, and did, but also the effect of all these on the people with whom he interacted.  I therefore relied heavily on the letters, diaries, and memoirs of the people who knew Rodes, who worked with him, who befriended him, and who entrusted their lives to him.

TMS: Rodes’ hard work paid off.  On October 25, 1861, Rodes was promoted brigadier general in the Confederate Army.  His brigade included the 5th, 6th and 12th Alabama regiments and the 12th Mississippi.  Interestingly enough, Alabama law required that the new commander for Rodes’ 5th Alabama would be elected by a vote of the regiment.  This created quite a controversy.  Can you elaborate for my readers?

DC: Back in May, Rodes had been chosen colonel of the 5th Alabama by a vote of the men in the regiment.  He considered that method appropriate for new, raw units in the process of formation.  He strongly protested, however, against that method for veteran regiments, arguing, reasonably enough, that it ran too great a risk of not putting in place the best man for the job.  Respecting the principle of state’s rights, on which the new nation had been founded, Confederate authorities and General Beauregard refused to intervene in the matter, whereby Alabama’s Governor Shorter stood firm in his insistence that the new colonel be elected.  Ironically, the men chose Lieutenant Colonel Allen Jones, the man Rodes preferred for the job.

TMS: During US Major General George McClellan’s Peninsula Campaign Rodes’ brigade would not see action at Yorktown or Williamsburg.  They would, however, receive their “baptism of fire” at Seven Pines.  During the Confederate charge, which Rodes’ brigade led, his brigade would suffer a 50% casualty rate.  Additionally, Rodes received a significant wound to his arm.  Can you describe his performance at Fair Oaks?

DC: Before Seven Pines, Rodes possessed a well-deserved reputation for having molded his brigade, as he had done with the 5th Alabama, into an efficient, well-trained unit.  He remained, however, an untested, unproven, and unknown quantity as a combat officer, his little affair at Farr’s Crossroads notwithstanding.  Rodes emerged from the battle with soaring praise as immanently worthy of the high position he held.  D.H. Hill, his division commander, had launched the attack before Rodes was fully deployed.  Rodes’ intense training now paid off as he sent his men into the fight en echelon.  Once they smashed through the first Federal position, Rodes expertly straightened his line and pressed on, always inspiring and leading his men from the front.  Rodes truly impressed me, as he did his contemporaries, with both his ability and courage.

TMS: Darrell, your book includes wonderful maps.  These were made by Timothy Reese.  I am unfamiliar with Mr. Reese.  Can you tell my readers a little bit about him and how your partnership was formed?

DC: For my previous books I drew and developed my own maps.  They were adequate, but for Rodes I wanted the services of a professional cartographer.  My publisher, Ted Savas, recommended Timothy Reese, a prominent Civil War mapmaker used by Savas on several other projects.  I would send Tim sketches of the battles I wanted to use, indicating where I wished to place special emphasis regarding Rodes, and he turned them into the beautiful maps you see in the book.  I was very glad and grateful to have his services.

TMS: While still suffering a fever, and significant pain from his wounded arm, Rodes was again leading his brigade during the Battle of Gaines’ Mill.  His beloved 5th Alabama would perform very well during the attack against the Federal position but would eventually be forced to retire.  Unfortunately, Rodes would open the wound on his arm and would leave the field.  Taking his place was Colonel John B. Gordon.  Can you provide an analysis of Rodes’ Brigade’s actions at Gaines’ Mill?

DC: Rodes returned to duty too soon, a mere three weeks after receiving his wound at Seven Pines.  Convinced, however, that a major, if not war-winning campaign was about to begin, he resumed command of his brigade on June 20, five days before the beginning of the Seven Days’ Battles.  At Gaines’ Mill, Rodes’ Brigade held the left-center of Jackson’s line, poised to strike Porter’s Yankees across a dense, almost swampy thicket, and then 400 yards of open ground.  At 7 p.m., the men rushed forward, Rodes’ troops emerging from the thicket widely scattered and spread out.  Rodes was reorganizing his line when he wisely and nobly concluded he no longer was fit to go on.  The Confederates, including Rodes’ Brigade, ultimately went on to achieve a stunning victory.

TMS: While convalescing at a hospital in Richmond, Gordon would continue to command Rodes’ Brigade.  At the battle of Malvern Hill, the brigade would again suffer staggering losses – 450 men from all causes.  While severely depleted after the Peninsula Campaign, and the Seven Days, Rodes’ Brigade had earned a reputation for hard fighting and bravery.  What say you?

DC: Up to the very morning of the battle of Seven Pines, many of Rodes’ men despaired that they were being left out of the war, having stood in reserve at Williamsburg, seen no real action at Yorktown, and heard the guns but fired none of their own at Manassas.  After Malvern, many had had more than enough of this war, 1,650 of their number having been placed on the casualty lists.  Rodes’ Brigade had indeed earned it reputation as one of the best combat units in Lee’s army.

TMS: Rodes would return to his brigade after the Battle of Second Bull Run.  Part of Daniel Harvey Hill’s Division, it would engage the Federal forces at Turner’s Gap.  The fighting would be brutal during the battle of South Mountain as the Army of Northern Virginia attempted to keep the Federals from pushing through the gaps.  Can you describe the fighting Rodes’ men experienced at Turner’s Gap?

DC: I believe that at South Mountain Rodes performed one of his greatest services for the Confederacy.  If McClellan had pushed through the gaps, and thus interposed between Longstreet at Frederick and Jackson at Harper’s Ferry, untold disaster might have befallen Lee’s army.  Rodes’ Brigade played a crucial role in preventing that from happening.  The ground on South Mountain was rough and broken, but Rodes, with his keen engineering eye for terrain, placed his men to such advantage that they held off an entire division (Meade’s) for several hours without help.  To avoid being overwhelmed, Rodes then pulled back his men into an excellent L-shaped line that held off the enemy until darkness mercifully ended the fight.  The brigade, however, again lost heavily, this time about 400 men.

TMS: After the fighting at Turner’s Gap, the strength of the brigade had been reduced to around 1,200 effectives – not much larger than the original strength of Rodes’ 5th Alabama when it mustered into Confederate service.  Arriving at Antietam, D.H. Hill’s division, including Rodes’ Brigade, would be assigned a position south of the Sunken Road.  Described after the battle as Bloody Lane, Rodes would face US Major General William French’s Federal Division.  Needless to say, while eventually being pushed to the high ground beyond the road, Rodes’ Brigade would suffer during the fight in this sector.  Can you elaborate?

DC: Having once been convinced that they were being left out of the war, Rodes’ men now consistently found themselves placed at the crucial spot in nearly every great battle of Lee’s army, the Bloody Lane being yet another example.  I have walked the length of this narrow road, marveling at the courage of Rodes as he did the same under much more dangerous circumstances, encouraging his men as they, along with George Anderson’s brigade on their right, threw back charge after charge.  I walked back 100 yards or so to the barn where Rodes and an aide had ridden to bring up reinforcements, and saw the approximate spots where the aide took a bullet in the face and Rodes a piece of shrapnel in the thigh.  Faced with overwhelming numbers, Rodes’ and Anderson’s men eventually broke, but many were rallied by Hill, Longstreet, and a thigh-bandaged Rodes, and once again, Lee’s army was saved.

TMS: After the Maryland Campaign, Rodes would be assigned temporary command of Hill’s Division while in the Shenandoah Valley.  During this period of time, Rodes would command one of his future brigadier generals, Bryan Grimes.  An interesting exchange would take place between these two warriors during this time – an exchange that would cause future issues when Rodes was later made a division commander.  Can you provide some details on what took place?

DC: As senior brigadier, Rodes in late November 1862 assumed temporary command of Hill’s division while that officer was away on business.  Soon afterwards, Lee ordered the 2nd Corps to proceed from the Valley to Fredericksburg, Rodes putting the division in motion on November 21.  Unaware that Rodes was in command of the division, Grimes, in temporary command of Ramseur’s Brigade, complained to him about the order that forbade the men to remove their shoes and pants to cross the cold, waist-deep Shenandoah River.  Grimes was quite taken aback by the sharp rebuke he received from Rodes, only to be further angered by him later that same day for being chastised at not ordering his men to stack arms during a halt, and still later for not hurrying along sufficiently to a nearby town.  These unpleasant exchanges soured relations between the two men for nearly a year and a half, finally being mitigated by what Grimes called Rodes’ “gentlemanly gesture,” probably the division commander’s strong endorsement of Grimes’ promotion to brigadier.

TMS: During the spring of 1863, D.H. Hill was sent to North Carolina.  There was much anticipation about who would take his place in command of the division.  While Rodes was the senior brigadier general, Edward “Allegheny” Johnson would receive the promotion.  How did this affect Rodes?

DC: Though he desperately wanted the promotion, Rodes, unlike many of his colleagues, refused to campaign for it by soliciting endorsements from fellow officers and prominent politicians.  He felt highly gratified, however, when unsolicited references poured in for him.  Nonetheless, Rodes did not let his hopes get too high, reasoning that since he was not a ”West Point man” he had little chance of becoming a major general.  He thus took Johnson’s promotion in stride, especially since that officer was still recovering from a wound and probably would not take command for some time.  In the meantime, Chancellorsville took place.

TMS: I would like to comment on your writing style.  One thing I appreciated was how fluidly you could move from a narrative of battle action to providing interesting information on the background of Rodes or another soldier.  This made the book very enjoyable to read.  Is this style something that came naturally for you or did you consciously try to intersperse the narrative with enlightening stories of the soldiers?

DC: Thank you, Mike.  I certainly appreciate those kind words.  I did not want this biography to be a mere chronological recitation of what Rodes did.  Just as I relied on the diaries, letter, and memoirs of those who knew Rodes in order to provide a fuller understanding of him, I wanted to present their experiences to further illustrate what Rodes may have been going through at the same time.  A good example of this is the horror and terror described by Private Nick Weeks of the 3rd Alabama at Chancellorsville on May 3.  Rodes at the time is known to have been with the 3rd Alabama, perhaps only a few yards from Private Weeks.  What did Rodes confide to his own wife about that terrible day?  We will never know.  But Nick Weeks gave us some idea of what he, and Rodes, experienced.

TMS: In May 1863, Rodes would lead one of Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson’s Divisions at Chancellorsville.  It was during Jackson’s flank march, and subsequent engagement with US Major General O.O. Howard’s XI Corps, that Rodes provided his most valuable action during the war.   Leading the assault, on the center of the line, Rodes would receive much credit for rolling the Union right flank up, and pushing it to the main Federal line near the Chancellor Tavern.  Rodes was continually seen in the thick “of the action,” leading his men from the front.  Can you describe this portion of the battle and give an overall analysis of Rodes’ performance?

DC: It was customary practice, if possible, for units on the march to rotate from day to day which should be in the lead and which should bring up the rear.  On the morning of May 2, however, there was no time for such rotation.  Rodes’ division, being nearest the designated jump-off point on the Furnace Road, automatically drew the honor of leading the march, which meant that ultimately Rodes and his men also would lead the attack.  After a grueling march of some twelve miles, which consumed seven hours, Rodes deployed his 8,500 men fairly quickly into a one-and-a-half mile line straddling the Old Turnpike.  At the signal, Rodes sent his men forward, crushing the right of the XI Corps, and maintaining the momentum of the attack as long as possible until darkness, confusion, exhaustion and a lack of ammunition finally brought it to a halt.  Undoubtedly, it was Rodes’ finest hour.  “He seems after Jackson,” wrote Ewell in a private letter, “to be the hero of the fight.”

TMS: On May 10, Rodes was officially promoted major general.  Dated May 10, Rodes would take the unusual action of sending it back, requesting that it be made effective May 2.  The senate confirmed it with the requested date, effectively making Rodes the official division commander during the fight at Chancellorsville.  While most of his soldiers were pleased with his promotion, there was some dissension in the ranks, the soldiers believing that they earned the laurels at Chancellorsville.  Can you elaborate?

DC: I found this incident to be somewhat amusing.  As the only medium at the time, newspapers were devoured by the soldiers, who scanned every page looking for (favorable) references to their units.  When after Chancellorsville the papers heaped praise on Rodes, with little or no mention of his brigades or regiments, some soldiers in the division had had enough.  They protested, by way of anonymous letters to various papers, that although Rodes was an excellent officer who did his job, it was the men in the ranks who won the fight.  Rodes, by the way, had no delusions about this.  On several occasions he is known to have personally visited different regiments and thanked the men for their efforts in the latest battle.

TMS: After a long grueling march to Pennsylvania, in June 1863, Robert Rodes would lead his division to the sounds of fighting, at Gettysburg, on July 1.  Upon arriving north of Oak Hill, he would dress his lines and move to attack the Federal XI Corps at Oak Hill.  The fighting would be intense, but they would end up pushing the XI and I Corps through the town of Gettysburg and on to Cemetery and Culp’s hills.  Can you describe the action during the first day’s fight at Gettysburg?

DC: At Chancellorsville, Jackson and Rodes had achieved the unthinkable dream of assembling a large attack force on the flank of an unsuspecting enemy.  At Gettysburg Rodes did it again, this time by chance, when he came up on the right flank of the same XI Corps.  Now, however, Rodes took too long to deploy, waiting for his entire division to come up before attacking (What if he had sent even two brigades against the right of the XI Corps?).  By the time his troops were up, the I Corps had deployed in front of him.  Rodes finally launched his attacks, but they were uncoordinated.  The fighting became desperate, and for a time it looked as though the hero of Chancellorsville was facing defeat and humiliation.  The timely arrival of Early’s Division on his right changed all that, turned the tide, and pushed the Federals through Gettysburg.  Rodes appeared to have agreed with corps commander Ewell that Cemetery Hill could not be taken that day.

TMS: On the afternoon of July 2, Early’s 2d Corps Division attacked the Federals on East Cemetery Hill.  The vaunted Louisiana Tigers pushed through the Federal rifle pits and reached the reserve artillery.  Rodes’ Division was supposed to support the attack from the northwest.  His division did not make it into the fight and Early was forced to give up the ground his bloodied division fought so hard to take.  Your book is fair and balanced, and you do not give Rodes a pass for his poor performance at Gettysburg.  What happened that prevented Rodes from supporting Early on the afternoon of day two at Gettysburg?

DC: July 2 at Gettysburg undoubtedly was one of Rodes’ worst days as a commander.  He failed to appreciate the difficulty he faced in getting his division into position for an attack for which he had all day to prepare.  And once in position, it was his brigadiers who reported back to him the strength of the enemy line and the impossibility of the attack, which indicated that Rodes had not ordered any fact-finding reconnaissances.  These omissions were very uncharacteristic of Rodes, and on the surface they seem inexplicable.  In the course of my research, however, I discovered a possible explanation.  Observers claimed they saw Rodes that day frequently lying in an ambulance, apparently quite ill, and obviously incapable of command.  If so, Rodes deserves severe criticism for not turning over his division to a more-fit officer.  I assume pride prevented him from doing so.  When in thirty years his grandson would ask, “What did you do grandfather at the great battle of Gettysburg, the day we won the war?” there is no way Rodes is going to answer, “Nothing, I was sick.”

TMS: During the fall and winter, of 1863, Rodes worked diligently to put the right commanders in charge of his brigades.  Alfred Iverson would be shuttled out of the Army of Northern Virginia while Edward O’Neal, who Rodes had no confidence in, was left in command.  Eventually O’Neal would be replaced, but the struggles Rodes endured clearly highlighted the political realities of high command.  Can you tell my listeners about Rodes’ actions to firm up his command structure?

DC: At Gettysburg on July 1, Iverson sent his men into a deadly crossfire that nearly destroyed the brigade, while he remained in the rear, having ordered no reconnaissance and sent out no pickets.  Afterwards, his men openly refused to serve under him.  Clearly, he had to go.  Lee tactfully removed Iverson by making him a provost marshal.  Even before Gettysburg, Rodes harbored doubts about O’Neal, apparently concerning disciplinary issues related to Rodes’ old brigade.  The relationship between the two men turned bitterly sour, O’Neal going so far as to accuse Rodes of “drunken debaucheries,” an accusation unsubstantiated by any sources I have discovered.  The final straw for Rodes came at Gettysburg on July 1, when O’Neal, like Iverson, did not advance with his brigade.  Determined to be rid of the colonel, Rodes resisted the efforts of both Lee and Alabama politicians to have O’Neal made a brigadier.  At some cost to his popularity back home, Rodes eventually won out, and Cullen Battle became the new commander of the brigade.

TMS: In the spring of 1864, the Federals had a new commander – Lieutenant General Ulysses S. Grant.  He wasted little time setting his army in motion.  Rodes would arrive near the old Chancellorsville battlefield in early May and would take part in the campaign’s opening battle – The Wilderness.  With his division posted along the Orange Turnpike, Rodes would attack the Federal V Corps and Ambrose Burnside’s IX Corps.  How would you grade Rodes’ performance at The Wilderness?

DC: The fighting in the Wilderness was bloody and desperate, with several moments when victory or defeat hung in the balance.  Rodes was involved in two of those moments, the first when John Jones’ Brigade of Johnson’s Division collapsed in front of him under the weight of fierce V Corps attacks, and Rodes moved up his division in time to steady the line and hold the position.  The second occurred the next day, May 6, when Rodes sent Stephen Ramseur’s Brigade to the right just in time to fill a gap in the line and stop Burnsides’ IX Corps from breaking through.  Unlike at Gettysburg, Rodes throughout the Overland Campaign would be in top form.

TMS: At the Battle of Spotsylvania Court House, Rodes’ Division was posted at the Mule Shoe Salient.  It would receive the brunt of Emory Upton’s attack on May 9.  On May 12, Rodes was again at the epicenter of a Federal attack against the salient – this time from the entire Federal II Corps.  Rodes, and his brigadier, Stephen Ramseur, were able to repulse the Federal onslaught, saving the day for Lee.  Can you describe Rodes’ contributions to the battle of Spotsylvania Court House?

DC: Part of what drew me to Rodes as his biographer was the fact that so often he found himself, quite by chance, to be in the hottest spots and most crucial situations, from the Bloody Lane to the Bloody Angle, in many of the great battles fought by the Army of Northern Virginia.  At the Mule Shoe I believe Rodes performed magnificently, both as a masterful tactician, moving Ramseur, for example, like a knight on a chessboard—over two spaces and up one, and as a brave leader of his men, many claiming afterwards that they consistently saw him “within rods of the firing.”  After Spotsylvania, I think no one could deny that Rodes was Lee’s toughest and most capable defensive commander.

TMS: Grant would move around Lee’s right flank, and again meet Lee – this time at the North Anna River.  Wisely choosing not to enter a pitched battle there, Grant pushed further south where he fought Lee at Cold Harbor.  Early’s 2d Corps, including Rodes’ Division, were used offensively, while Grant attacked other portions of the line.  Can you provide an analysis of Rodes’ performance at Cold Harbor?

DC: In perhaps the grandest assault of the war, involving three times the number of men who made “Pickett’s Charge,” Grant on the morning of June 3 sent 40,000 to smash the center of the Confederate line.  Lee’s men required little more than thirty minutes to shoot down 7,000 of these men and stop the attack cold.  At the same time, Grant had sent Burnsides’ IX Corps around to hit Lee’s left north of the Old Church Road.  Early and Rodes easily stopped him.  The whole bloody affair was perhaps Grant’s greatest mistake during the war.

TMS: In June 1864, Jubal Early’s 2d Corps was sent to the Shenandoah Valley to repulse US Major General David Hunter’s forces operating there.  Rodes’ entire division was depleted to 3,000 soldiers of all arms.  Early’s Army of the Valley quickly pushed all Federal forces from the upper Shenandoah Valley.  In an effort to draw forces from Grant’s position at Petersburg, Early moved into Maryland and defeated US Major General Lew Wallace’s small force at Monocacy.  However, with his sights set on Washington, Early’s plans were somewhat thwarted as Wallace held him at Monocacy long enough for reinforcements to arrive from Petersburg.  While the Army of the Valley did reach the outskirts of Washington, they were not able to break the defenses before they were forced to pull back.  Can you elaborate on Rodes contributions during the offensive actions of the 1864 Valley Campaign?

DC: With no more than twelve or thirteen thousand men at any one time, Early adopted the policy of being constantly on the move, whereby he hoped to magnify his numbers by way of creating numerous threats.  Thus while their comrades in the 1st and 3rd Corps were suffering in the trenches before Petersburg, Early and Rodes’ men were dashing up and down the Shenandoah Valley and venturing into Maryland to the very borders of the District of Columbia.  These tactics proved largely successful, clearing the entire Valley of all Federal forces, threatening Washington, and relieving Lee by drawing off thousands of enemy troops from around Petersburg.  During this time, Rodes’ men often were hungry and barefoot, but their morale remained remarkably high.  Rodes never let them forget that they were soldiers.

TMS: Having returned to the Shenandoah Valley, Early’s Army of the Valley had a new Federal commander to contend with – US Major General Philip Sheridan.  Placed in charge of the Middle Department, Sheridan proved up to the task.  He would attack a widely strung out Confederate army on October 19, at Third Winchester.  Facing the bulk of the attack was Stephen Ramseur’s Division.  Significantly outnumbered, Ramseur’s position was difficult.  Rodes’ Division would quickly move to reinforce Ramseur with John B. Gordon’s division also participating.  Upon arriving Rodes quickly assessed the situation and determined that drastic action was needed – an attack against the numerically superior Federal army.  During the attack, leading as always from the front, Rodes would be killed by either a piece of shrapnel, or minie ball, to the head.  Early would suffer a terrible defeat at Third Winchester and would forever lose the services of one of the preeminent Confederate division commanders with Rodes’ untimely death.  Can you tell my listeners about this pivotal battle and the death of Rodes?

DC: A price Early unwittingly paid for his remarkable success in the Shenandoah Valley during the summer of 1864, was overconfidence in himself coupled with a corresponding contempt for any Federal commander sent against him.  Rodes seemed to be aware of the growing problem.  He cautioned Early against ultimately taking one chance too many, whereby he feared Sheridan would pounce on his scattered forces and defeat them piecemeal.  Early refused to listen.  Thus on the morning of September 19, Early’s forces, as one of his soldiers later complained, were “scattered from Dan to Bersheba.”  Ramseur was two miles west of Winchester, with Rodes six miles beyond that at Stephenson’s Depot, and Gordon eight miles beyond that at Bunker Hill.  With remarkable speed, Rodes and Gordon arrived on the field and deployed to help Ramseur, who was under tremendous pressure form Sheridan.  Regardless, with 40,000 against 12,000 the battle was hopeless.  Rodes was sending Battle’s Brigade into the fight when his luck finally ran out and he was struck down.  The loss devastated his men, many later unreasonably concluding that had Rodes not been killed they would have won the battle of Third Winchester.  Throughout the Confederacy many considered the severity of the loss to be second only to that of “the great Jackson.”

TMS: Darrell, are you working on any new projects?

DC: I have a few projects in mind, but I have settled on nothing yet.  Mike, let me add that I thoroughly enjoyed this interview and I feel honored to have it placed on your excellent Blog.

“Reluctant Rebels” starts with an eighteen page introduction that references previous analyses on the motivations of the Rebel soldier.  Noe provides a great deal of background information on predecessors to his book including Chandra Manning’s “What This Cruel War Is Over,” Stephanie McCurry’s “Masters of Small Worlds,” James McPherson’s “For Cause and Comrades” and Bell Wiley’s “The Life of Johnny Reb” and “The Life of Billy Yank.”  The author then provides a detailed overview of the research methodology he employed to analyze the 320 Confederate soldiers that comprised his sample.  This sample included soldiers from all Confederate states with ranks from private to colonel.  It should be noted that Noe specifically chose men who enlisted so the commissioned officers won promotion to their ranks through their performance as soldiers.  I believe it is essential for the reader to thoroughly acquaint themselves with the introduction before reading the book.  The author spends much time detailing the differences between his sample and previous studies, placing the book on a solid footing.

In the first two chapters, Noe provides an analysis of many previous assumptions that the Rebel soldier enlisted for ideological reasons.  While many of the soldiers that enlisted during the first months of the war were motivated by patriotism, nationalism and states’ rights, the author adroitly builds a case for the later enlisters not being motivated by politics or ideology but rather by their home, families and way of life.  I found this particularly fascinating as most previous works are at odds with this premise.  Noe emphasized that many of his hypothesises differ from the previous works due to the difference in his sample group – specifically first enlisters versus those who enlisted after 1861.

The next three chapters focus on things much closer to home: the motivating role of women, personal property (home and slaves) and financial considerations.  Based on Noe’s research of personal letters, he puts forth a much different role women played in a soldier’s motivation for joining the army.  Many previous scholars built a case for women encouraging their men to enlist.  This was not necessarily the case for the late enlisters, many of which had spouses that delayed their enlistment due to needing them at home.  The author makes a strong case for the men of his sample fighting for their home.  This was very personal and was often influenced by the occupation of their homelands by invading armies and the threat to their personal property.  With the war dragging on, many of the soldiers in Noe’s sample would enlist for financial reasons.  Some of the soldiers did not list an occupation in the census rolls and inevitably were enduring very hard times on the homefront.  The same financial difficulties would often lead men, with the financial means, to hire substitutes.  This practice is investigated by the author and his research is very interesting.

The last four chapters deal with familiar themes: comrades, religion, weariness and courage under fire.  While these topics have been put forth in most earlier works, Noe again uncovers many differences between the earlier enlistees and those who enlisted later in the war.  Comrades were a tangible source of motivation for soldiers on both sides of the conflict.  The author’s research shows that the soldiers who enlisted after 1861 had more difficulty fitting in and making friends.  Many of them would be mustered into veteran regiments where they did not know other soldiers.  While they were present during two periods which witnessed Christian revivals, they typically entered the service with a firm religious footing and would often scorn those who recently adopted Christianity, often viewing them as hypocritical.  Noe would be surprised with the lack of support the late enlisters had for desertion.  During the final two years of the conflict, weariness had set in for the soldier - and those he had left at home.  While the author states letters can be misleading, he could only confirm two soldiers in his sample that deserted –  both of which returned to their units and would become casualties.  Did these soldiers desert less?  Based on Noe’s solid research it would indicate they did.  Finally, the author discusses battlefield performance.  The sample clearly indicates that the late enlisters were brave and did not run from the enemy any more frequently than those who enlisted during the first year of the war.  What gave these men the intestinal fortitude to face their enemy?  Noe asserts that it was not the fear of Yankee rule, or the threat to slavery, but the desire to demonstrate their bravery and fight for their home that kept them in line during battle.  This was very enlightening to read and was supported by solid research.

“Reluctant Rebels” is a fresh look at what motivated Confederate soldiers who enlisted after 1861.  The book is well written and is sure to survive the passage of time.  I would highly recommend this book for an student of the Civil War that is interested in learning more about the private soldier.

I had the opportunity to speak with Ken on June 30, 2010.  It as a very interesting discussion and the author’s expertise is clearly evident.  I am sure you will enjoy the interview as much as I enjoyed participating in it.

Details about “Reluctant Rebels”
Written by: Kenneth W. Noe
Hardcover: 320 pages
Publisher: The University of North Carolina Press
Date of First Edition: April 15, 2010
ISBN-10: 0807833770

Kenneth Noe Interview – 13 Parts
“Reluctant Rebels: The Confederates Who Joined the Army After 1861”
Interview Date: June 30, 2010
Total Time: 1 hour 12 minutes 34 seconds

Part 1:  Kenneth Noe Interview Part 1
Time: 5:47
Contents: Welcome and introductions | About Ken Noe | How Ken became interested in the Civil War and American history | Why write “Reluctant Rebels?” | How does this book differ from other studies on Confederate soldiers?

Part 2:  Kenneth Noe Interview Part 2
Time: 3:53
Contents: “Reluctant Rebels” vs. previous studies on Confederate soldiers | Background on “Reluctant Rebels”

Part 3:  Kenneth Noe Interview Part 3
Time: 6:51
Contents: Noe’s research methodology and challenges in researching | About the research sample size | Sources used for research | Demographics and rank of soldiers in sample

Part 4:  Kenneth Noe Interview Part 4
Time: 6:31
Contents: Why the “late enlisters” joined the war effort | Results of Noe’s analysis vs. previous studies | The American Revolution as a motivating factor for late enlisters | Lack of references to ideology being a motivating factor for the late enlisters

Part 5:  Kenneth Noe Interview Part 5
Time: 5:07
Contents: The Lost Cause and states’ rights as a motivating factor for the late enlister | How did honor and duty motivate the late Confederate enlister? | Ken’s surprise with regards to honor and duty motivating the late enlister

Part 6:  Kenneth Noe Interview Part 6
Time: 6:44
Contents: Social, geographic and occupational backgrounds and their impact on slavery being a motivating factor for the late enlister | Correlation between Noe’s sample and overall slave holding population of the Confederate states | Slave holding as a wider matrix of those fighting for “home” | Southern women and sexual intimidation being a motivating factor for the late southern enlister | Spouses often kept the late enlister from joining the Confederate army

Part 7:  Kenneth Noe Interview Part 7
Time: 5:17
Contents: “Masters of their immediate universe:” the late enlister’s involvement in decisions made at home | The impact that loneliness had on the southern soldier | What letters home revealed about the Confederate soldier

Part 8:  Kenneth Noe Interview Part 8
Time: 6:22
Contents: Hatred and its impact on the Rebel soldiers’ psyche | The impact of an occupying Federal force in the mindset of the southern soldier | Substitutes and the impact of the draft on the substitute soldier | Lawsuits against the Confederate government with regards to substitutes

Part 9:  Kenneth Noe Interview Part 9
Time: 5:27
Contents: Christian revivals, faith and religion and their impact on the late enlisters | Were late enlisters more pious than the soldier who enlisted in 1861? | Heavy campaigning and its impact on the late enlisters faith | Reuniting with loved ones in heaven and the reach of the Confederate soldier on his family’s religious activities at home

Part 10:  Kenneth Noe Interview Part 10
Time: 4:56
Contents: How comrades, messmates and relatives impacted the late enlisters fighting motivation | Late enlisters and their difficulties bonding with other soldiers | The Confederate soldier community and its insularity

Part 11:  Kenneth Noe Interview Part 11
Time: 4:51
Contents: The impact of weariness and fatigue on the late enlisters motivation | Statistics on desertion in Noe’s sample and the surprising lack of support for desertion | Letters from 1865 revealed that Rebel soldiers were still optimistic about Confederate war fortunes

Part 12:  Kenneth Noe Interview Part 12
Time: 4:54
Contents: “Facing the elephant” and the fighting élan of the late enlister | Fighting for home motivated the late enlister to face the enemy with courage | Later enlisters were often not up to the physical demands of campaigning | The exhilaration of fighting

Part 13:  Kenneth Noe Interview Part 13
Time: 5:54
Contents: Future projects which Noe is working on | Using technology to enhance Civil War enthusiasts’ experiences | Noe’s research on weather impacting his previous narrative on the Battle of Perryville | Wrap up and closing