I’m excited and very pleased to announce that one of my favorites of my titles, 2006’s The Battle of Monroe’s Crossroads and the Civil War’s Final Campaign is back in print after being out of print for four or five years. The folks at Savas-Beatie have just released a softcover edition of the book just in time for the commemoration of the 150th anniversary of the battle, which was fought on March 10, 1865. For those attending the 150th commemoration of the Battle of Bentonville next weekend (March 21-22) or the 150th anniversary of Johnston’s surrender to Sherman at Bennett Place on April 18, I will have copies of both editions available for sale there. Signed copies are also available by contacting me directly.Scridb filter
On January 9, 2015, I announced that I had made a deal with Savas-Beatie to bring out a Kindle version of my Ulric Dahlgren biography very soon, and a softcover version of it later this year. I am pleased to be able to tell you that the Kindle version is now available, as are all other digital formats. The cost is $9.99, and I hope some of you will check it out!
I will let everyone know when the book is back in print later this year.
And thank you for your support.Scridb filter
Thanks to John M. Priest for the excellent review of The Devil’s to Pay: John Buford at Gettysburg. A History and Walking Tour that appeared in the December issue of The Civil War News:
“The Devil’s to Pay”: John Buford at Gettysburg: A History and Walking Tour. By Eric J. Wittenberg. Photos, maps, notes, bibliography, index, 286 pp., 2014, Savas Beatie, www.savasbeatie.com, $32.95.
Until the publication of Michael Shaara’s The Killer Angels and the public release of the movie “Gettysburg,” only students of the Civil War had known anything about Brig. Gen. John Buford and his Federal cavalry division at Gettysburg.
Eric Wittenberg in “The Devil’s to Pay” has separated the real story from the popular one and has brought to life John Buford and his stalwarts who bought precious time until the Union infantry could arrive on the battlefield.
A West Point graduate, the Kentucky-born Buford had relatives who fought for the Confederacy. Ironically, a fellow classmate, Gen. Henry Heth, would open the Confederate attack on July 1 against Buford and his troopers.
Wittenberg meticulously describes the ties within the Buford family that the war tore asunder.
From there he goes into the opening shots by the cavalry on June 30 and carries the story through the end of July 2 when Buford’s division was relieved of duty.
He finishes the narrative with an analysis of Buford’s performance on the field and a detailed walking/driving tour of the cavalry positions on the field.
This book, which I could not put down, has completely changed my perspective on the role of Buford’s cavalry on July 1 and 2.
Without giving away everything I learned from this carefully crafted work, I will share a few of the generally unknown “gems” that I mined from its pages.
A.P. Hill, commanding the Army of Northern Virginia’s Third Corps, and his division commander Heth had decided the day before the battle to engage what they believed to be local militia despite orders not to bring on a general engagement.
Buford’s men, through very effective scouting as they approached Gettysburg, had gathered enough intelligence to inform Union Gen. John Reynolds of what to expect before the infantry advanced on Gettysburg.
Brig. Gen. Thomas Devin’s cavalry brigade engaged Gen. Robert Rodes’ division of Richard Ewell’s 2nd Corps before the Union 11th Corps arrived on the right of the Army of the Potomac. There is so much more to glean from this narrative that makes it worth exploring.
Wittenberg has skillfully filled a historical void in the Gettysburg story and has defined what really happened to Buford and his cavalrymen on that fateful July 1.
While historians have portrayed Buford as a visionary cavalryman, the author has cleared away the mythology surrounding him and has preserved for future generations an honest assessment of a solid, no-nonsense professional officer and the troopers who followed him.
The numerous citations from letters, memoirs and diaries, both military and civilian, make the action come alive. The flowing narrative involves readers in the heat of battle.
After reading this book, Gettysburg visitors should be able to stand before the monuments along the cavalry line and vividly remember the men they represent.
“The Devil’s to Pay” is essential reading for everyone, Civil War enthusiasts and novices, interested in the Battle of Gettysburg or Civil War cavalry.
John Michael Priest
I am humbled by Mike’s kind words and appreciate them a great deal. Please be sure to check out Mike’s latest, Stand to It and Give Them Hell: Gettysburg as the Soldiers Experienced it from Cemetery Ridge to Little Round Top, July 2, 1863, which is quite a good book in its own right.Scridb filter
Here’s a quick update on the status of my new book, The Devil’s to Pay: John Buford at Gettysburg. A History and Walking Tour. As I write this, it’s ranked 4,221 out of the many millions of books sold on Amazon, and is sitting at number 1 on the list of Gettysburg books. That’s the highest ranking any of my books has ever had on Amazon. The first printing was sold out before it ever went to the bindery. Not even a month later, the second printing is nearly sold out too, and a third printing is going to be ordered very shortly. Since it’s selling like crazy, if you want a copy, be sure to order one from me or from my publisher, Savas-Beatie, LLC. Thanks to Ted Savas and to his marketing staff for doing such a great job with this book.Scridb filter
Last month, I was honored to be the keynote speaker at the first annual symposium put on by my friends at Emerging Civil War. A camera crew from C-SPAN was there to record the entire program. I’ve just learned that my talk, which was on the Battle of Trevilian Station, will air twice on C-SPAN 3 twice this upcoming Saturday, September 13, 2014 at 6:00 PM and 10:00 PM as part of C-SPAN’s American History TV series. Please check it out!Scridb filter
I have long been an enthusiastic supporter of the gang at Emerging Civil War. Chris Mackowski and Kris White founded Emerging Civil War to create a place for the next generation of Civil War historians to try out their voices. And they have formed a very talented team that includes Chris Kolakowski (whom I’ve known for about 10 years now), Dan Davis, Phil Greenwalt, Rob Orrison, Meg Thompson, and others. As I travel around the country, I see far, far more gray hair in the groups that attend the events where I speak and too few young people. Consequently, I constantly worry about the future of Civil War scholarship.
I’m pleased to tell you that after attending an event put on by ECW this weekend, I am far more comfortable with the future of the study of the Civil War. If this is what the next generation has to offer, then we’re in very good hands.
For one thing, there’s the Emerging Civil War Series of books. These are meant to be gateway books into specific topics, filled with lots of photos, maps and battlefield tours. They are intended to provide introductions to different battles that will lead others to study those battles in a far more in-depth fashion. This series is the brainchild of Chris Mackowski and Kris White, and it’s quite good indeed. Our mutual publisher, Savas-Beatie, publishes these books.
This weekend was ECW’s first annual Civil War Symposium. The event was held at the absolutely gorgeous Stevenson Ridge inn (the house where we stayed is the image at the beginning of this blog post), which happens to be owned by Chris Mackowski’s in-laws, and which is located on a portion of the Spotsylvania battlefield. Friday night featured a very interesting panel discussion, and Saturday included a full slate of speakers. ECW gave me the honor of being the keynote speaker at the event, which was on the war in 1864. Four of the talks (including mine) were filmed by C-SPAN and will be broadcast at a later date (I will let you know when I know the date). All of the talks were excellent and it was an honor to be included. Today was a full day battlefield tour. Attendees could choose between an in-depth tour of Spotsylvania, or an overview tour of both the Wilderness and Spotsylvania.
I want to focus on one speaker in particular. Lee White, who is a ranger at Chickamauga, was supposed to speak on the Atlanta Campaign, but a family issue prevented him from attending. A young man named Ryan Quint, who is still an undergraduate college student at Mary Washington University, filled in, and did so quite ably indeed. He gave a terrific talk. If this 20-year-old college student represents the caliber of talent in the next generation of Civil War historians, then our avocation is in very good hands indeed.
It was a real pleasure getting to spend time with the likes of old friend Dave Powell, Chris Kolakowski, Chris Mackowski, Kris White, Dan Davis, Phil Greenwalt, Michael Hardy, John Michael Priest, and lots of familiar faces among the attendees. Thanks to the ECW crew for an outstanding event.
I can’t say enough good things about what this group of historians is doing. The second annual symposium will be on turning points in the Civil War and will be held at Stevenson Ridge next July 30. Next year’s battlefield tour will be of Chancellorsville, one of my very favorite battlefields. Do yourselves a favor and plan on attending. You won’t be disappointed. I will be there.Scridb filter
J. D. Petruzzi filmed a joint interview with Tom Carhart as part of the PCN coverage of the 150th anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg this past July 3. J.D. and Carhart debated the merits of Carhart’s nonsensical theory about the fighting on East Cavalry Field – prior to the interview, J.D. and Carhart agreed that the conversation would remain civil, which it did. Each time that J.D. raised the issue that the evidence did not support his theory, Carhart’s response was to the effect of “I’m a trained soldier, and I know that this is how it was.” At one point, Carhart got so frustrated by J.D.’s insistence that the evidence does not support his theory, he held up his book Lost Triumph to the camera and stated that he was just there to promote his book. After the end of the interview, Carhart took J.D. aside and told him (quoting Carhart according to J.D.) “The reason guys like you and Wittenberg don’t know what you’re talking about is because you never served in the military.”
Ummm….no. While I may not have the formal military training, like Carhart does, I have a license to practice law, and I know and understand evidence, weighing that evidence, and evaluating its credibility. And I know an intellectual fraud when I see one.
I give J.D. a great deal of credit for being civil to this poseur and for not doing a “Jane, you ignorant slut” with him like the old Saturday Night Live bit. I’m not at all persuaded that I would have been able to show the same level of restraint. I would have found it all but impossible not to describe his book as the festering pile of turds that it is. And I would have found it all but impossible not to tell him to his face that he and his book are nothing but an intellectual fraud. Kudos go to J.D. for not doing so. In fact, after viewing that interview, many mutual friends later told J.D. that Carhart looked pathetic, frustrated, nonsensical, and that J.D. must have had infinite patience in dealing with Carhart’s silliness. The interviewer was also obviously increasingly frustrated with Carhart and kept signaling J.D. to move the discussion along as Carhart kept trying to dominate the conversation.
I had a chance to discuss all of this with J.D. at the Williamsport event last weekend, and yesterday, while driving, I had a sudden realization.
The gist of Carhart’s theory is that Stuart’s presence on East Cavalry Field was a coordinated thrust with Pickett’s Charge (one “prong” in a supposed “two “prong” attack), and that it represented a major component of Robert E. Lee’s plan for the third day of the Battle of Gettysburg. I’ve already dealt with the bulk of this stupidity in Appendix C to the new edition of Protecting the Flank. But last night, I had an epiphany about it.
Let’s assume, just for the sake of discussion, that Carhart’s theory is correct (we need to first, of course, throw out all of the definitive evidence that refutes Carhart’s theory). If that’s the case, wouldn’t Stuart have committed all of his troopers to an all-out attack on East Cavalry Field? And would he have just called it a day after the repulse of one large-scale attack, as he did that day, if his orders were to make a coordinated attack with Pickett’s Charge? If he truly was to take the offensive, after that charge was repulsed, wouldn’t he have committed his entire command and tried again? The uncontroverted fact is that he did not do so. Instead, Stuart called it a day after the repulse of the charge of Hampton’s and Fitz Lee’s brigades at the climax of the fighting on East Cavalry Field.
The evidence shows that when he was on the offensive, Stuart was quite aggressive and quite persistent. A study of Stuart’s taking the offensive to the Union cavalry during the retreat from Gettysburg and keeping it tied up for days at a time by constantly attacking it demonstrates this beyond a doubt. Just take a good look at the battle of Boonsboro (July 8, 1863) and the battle of Funkstown (July 10, 1863) for examples of what I mean here. By taking the fight to the Union cavalry and being unrelenting about it, Stuart kept two full divisions of cavalry tied up and away from the defensive position being built by the Army of Northern Virginia. In short, Stuart’s aggressiveness bought Lee the time he needed to forge a largely impregnable defensive position along the banks of the Potomac River at Williamsport. Stuart committed his entire force on each occasion, and launched attack after attack in the process.
By contrast, on East Cavalry Field, Stuart tried once, and then with only a portion of his command. The charge by the brigades of Lee and Hampton that was the climax of the fighting on East Cavalry was only by a portion of his command. Stuart watched and saw his command was repulsed by a vastly outnumbered force scraped together from the brigades of McIntosh and Custer and he called it a day after that. If Stuart’s orders were to reach the Union rear at all costs, would he really have just quit after committing only a portion of his force? And wouldn’t Stuart have known the repercussions of withdrawing from further attempts, if his “offensive” action were indeed a vitally important prong of a “two prong” attack coordinated with the infantry assault? If, as Carhart and others have posited, Stuart was so embarrassed by his performance during the week of June 25 – July 2, and was chastised by Robert E. Lee for it, why would he run the risk of further chastisement and disappointment by Lee by not making an all-out attempt to fulfill his “coordinated mission”?
Knowing Stuart’s tenacity and aggressiveness as well as I do, the fact that Stuart did not press the issue indicates the following to me:
1. He knew his command was in wretched shape from its ordeal on the way to Gettysburg and that his mounts probably could not stand more hard fighting.
2. His orders truly were to guard the flank against what he knew was the presence of two full divisions of cavalry—four of the Army of the Potomac’s eight brigades of cavalry—from the attacks of July 2, and were not to execute some grand, coordinated assault as part of the Pickett’s Charge scenario. This protection of the ANV left flank is, of course, all that Robert E. Lee claimed himself as Stuart’s mission on July 3 in his own official report of the campaign. Nothing more, nothing less.
3. The single mounted charge represented Stuart at his opportunistic best—given the opportunity to break through and make some mischief in the Union rear, he would have done so. He was probing to see whether he could get through, and the repulse persuaded him that he should simply be content with guarding the flank effectually, as he did, and as he was ordered to do.
These observations are the only ones that make any sense. Any other interpretation of these events is neither logical nor supported by the evidence.
But, then again, Carhart’s comments to J.D. demonstrate quite plainly that this man is not one to allow the facts to get in the way of a good story.Scridb filter
I’ve agreed to participate in what promises to be a really fun event. More than a dozen Savas-Beatie authors are going to assemble in Gettysburg from July 28-30 for what Ted Savas is calling the “author conclave.” The idea is that we authors will assemble there for an opportunity to interact with–and lead tours for–our readers. It will be a chance for many of us to get together for the first time as a group. Ted will be there, as well the Savas-Beatie marketing director, Sarah Keeney.
Here is the schedule:
Sunday, July 28: Gettysburg
Morning (time TBD): Lance Herdegen Tour – Gettysburg: July 1, 1863: The failure of Archer’s Attack on McPherson’s Ridge
1:30 – 3:00 pm: Lance Herdegen Tour – Gettysburg: In the Bloody Railroad Cut: The Charge of the 6th Wisconsin
3:30 – 5:00 pm: George Newton Tour – Gettysburg: Confederate cannonade and Union artillery on July 3, 1863
7:00 pm: Informal gathering at Reliance Mine Saloon
Monday, July 29: Gettysburg
8:30 – 10:00 am: J. David Petruzzi Tour – Gettysburg: Buford on Day 1
10:30 am – 12:00 pm: Eric Wittenberg Tour – Gettysburg: Farnsworth’s Charge, July 3, 1863
1:30 – 3:00 pm: David Shultz Tour – Gettysburg: Attack and Defense of the Union Center July Second – Pitzer Woods’ Cause and Effect: The “Little Fight” that Changed it All
3:30 – 5:00 pm: Eric Wittenberg and J. David Petruzzi Tour – Gettysburg: East Cavalry Field
Tuesday, July 30: South Mountain, Antietam, and Ball’s Bluff
8:30 – 11:00 am: Tom Clemens Tour – South Mountain: Fox’s Gap, the Struggle for Key Terrain on South Mountain
12:00 – 2:00 pm: Tom Clemens Tour – Antietam: West Woods, Crisis on the Confederate Left
3:30 – 5:00 pm: Jim Morgan Tour – Loudoun County, VA: The Battle of Ball’s Bluff
And the best part of all: IT’S FREE!!!
I will be there Sunday night and on Monday. I won’t be there for the Tuesday tours, as I must get back to work. However, having toured Ball’s Bluff with Jim Morgan and all of the 1862 Maryland Campaign sites with Tom Clemens, I can tell you that you cannot possibly do better than to have either of them lead you on a tour of their respective favorite battlefields. Among the authors expected to be there are J. D. Petruzzi, Dave Shultz, Tom Clemens, Jim Morgan, Lance Herdegen, George Newton, Dave Powell, and others. It’s a great opportunity to meet some of my favorite Civil War authors, to get your books signed, and to hang out with us.
To sign up, click here.Scridb filter
Ted Savas has a gift for getting his company’s books placed with the History Book Club, the Military Book Club, and Book of the Month Club 2. He has a terrific record of success with doing so; of my works, The Battle of Monroe’s Crossroads and the Civil War’s Final Campaign, and the second edition of Gettysburg’s Forgotten Cavalry Actions: Farnsworth’s Charge, South Cavalry Field, and the Battle of Fairfield, July 3, 1863 were both featured selections.
Ted just informed me that the new edition of Protecting the Flank at Gettysburg: The Battles for Brinkerhoff’s Ridge and East Cavalry Field, July 2 – 3, 1863 has also been chosen by the book clubs. Ted informs me that it will be a featured alternate in the July 2013 catalog offering, which mails on June 2, 2013. I am, of course, very flattered to learn this, and am excited to be featured by the book clubs once more. For those of you who are members of any of the three book clubs, please keep an eye out for it.
Thanks again to Ted for making this happen.Scridb filter
I have spent a lifetime building a library. I have more than 1500 Civil War books. I have probably another close to 1000 books of other categories, most of which are history books. Many of them are first editions, quite a number of them are signed, there are a fair number of antique books, and a number of unique ones. My library is my prized possession, and is something that I am quite proud of. Some photos of the Civil War portion of my library can be found here. I have added some new books since those were taken last August. The collection grows constantly; I purchased three more over the weekend.
I also have no children, so there is no prodigal son to inherit it. I have no brothers and sisters. None of my nieces or nephews share my interest in military history. In short, there is nobody within the family for me to bequeath my library to when the time comes for me to shuffle off this mortal coil.
That raises an important question. And it’s one that I have discussed with some others who are in the same position, including J. D. Petruzzi, who faces the same issues that I face. We all end up in the same place: we don’t know what to do with our libraries.
I can tell you what I DON’T want to happen to my library: I don’t want to donate it to a larger library where it will be broken up and only some of the volumes would be put on the shelves while others are disposed of. That is the very last thing that I want to happen to the library that I have so lovingly constructed over the course of my lifetime. Whatever happens to it, I want it kept together. I don’t want it pieced and parceled out. That’s completely unacceptable to me and is not an option under any circumstances.
I thought I had come up with the perfect solution. My alma mater, Dickinson College, is the beneficiary of the largesse of the Pohanka family, which endowed the Brian C. Pohanka Chair of Civil War History in Brian’s honor. Knowing that, and in keeping with Brian’s legacy, I thought it would be a perfect solution for me to bequeath my library to the history department at my alma mater, to be used in conjunction with the Civil War classes being taught there. It would be the perfect solution: I could honor Brian, my beloved Dickinson College could directly benefit, and my collection would be kept together as a cohesive unit. I even discussed this possibility with Bud Hall, who faces the same dilemma, and who was interested in paying tribute to Brian also. Perfect solution, right? Wrong. The College has no physical space in the building where the history department is located to house my library, meaning that it could not promise me that it would not end up being parceled and pieced out into the main college library, which, as pointed out above, is not an acceptable solution.
The other idea that I entertained for years was to leave it to the Brandy Station Foundation, but that was before the BSF stopped being a battlefield preservation organization and became the Joe McKinney appeasement society. And, after what the BSF did to Bud Hall, I would rather burn my books than see them end up there. There is less than a zero percent chance now that I would ever donate anything to that organization.
Finally, I could, of course, consign the whole thing to a book vendor and sell it. However, I doubt very much that I would recoup anything close to what I have invested in building it over the course of a lifetime, and it also means that it would be broken up and sold, like so many others. I have a book in my collection that was owned by Prof. Edwin B. Coddington, who wrote the “bible” on the Gettysburg Campaign. Obviously, his library was broken up and sold off piecemeal, and I don’t want to see that happen to mine.
This brings me back full circle: I have no idea what to do with this library of mine when the time comes. And so, I throw it open to you for suggestions. You know what my parameters are from the discussion above. No, I’m not going to donate it to one of you as an individual, so please don’t even suggest it. That will annoy me, and I don’t want to be annoyed. At the same time, I welcome legitimate, good faith suggestions, and promise to seriously consider all of them.
What are the rest of you with large collections of Civil War books planning to do with your libraries when that inevitable time comes?Scridb filter