I think that what you say probably has some validity.

Let me put this a different way.

The author chose to self-publish the book. From what I can tell, it had no editor, its scholarship is lacking, and because there was no peer review process involved in its publication, it enabled a book that is not up to snuff from an academic standpoint to be published.

Perhaps “lazy” was a strong word. However, I struggled finding a better one for the following reason. The commander of the 2nd Ohio Cavalry, which fought at Buffington Island, was Col. August V. Kautz, who later became a major general. Kautz was a pretty prolific guy–his diary is in the manuscripts collection of the Library of Congress, and his unpublished memoirs are part of the collection at USAMHI in Carlisle. The author evidently never consulted either of these sources, because they’re not cited anywhere in the book. My point is that neither the Library of Congress nor USAMHI are exactly considered obscure sources, and you would think that these would be significant sources to mine for anyone doing serious research on the raid. I’m at a bit of a loss to understand why these sources, and others like them, were not consulted.

Your points about photos and maps are well-taken, and I concede the point.

I’m pleased to hear that you’re a fan of this particular episode. I hope, therefore, that when the time comes, you will find some merit to what I’m doing.

Eric

Eric,

I was also disappointed with Horwitz’s book on Morgan’s Indiana/Ohio Raid, since that’s long been a favorite topic of mine, ever since visiting my wife’s hometown and seeing the Morgan’s Raid marker in the town square. I’ve traced most of the route as far as Buffington Island. As a “present” on my 30th birthday, my wife agreed to a long road trip to walk through the weeds and mosquitos in the Ohio River bottoms there.

But Horwitz’s book is not without merit, and one can critique it without disparaging him personally as “lazy,” or whatnot. Clearly he’s not a professional historian, and for all the book’s shortcomings, it’s also clear that he worked his ass off on it. No bibliography, as you mention, but he made respectable use of letters, newspaper accounts, and the O.R.

It’s not the definitive work, and it’s not up to the standards of the best Civil War scholarship, but it is, in fact, the most comprehensive account to-date. It also has lots of useful photos, and good maps. Additionally, he did some unique work that others had not done before, like taking period maps from certain counties and pinpointing state claims of residents who lost property along Morgan’s route.

All of this is to say that, while we still need definitive scholarship on the Raid, there’s no reason to be so completely dismissive of the work of amateurs who, in their passion for the subject, brought some new and worthwhile material to light.

Dave Woodbury

I hear you–I understand exactly what you mean about staffs that are not helpful. I definitely can’t say that about OHS, even with the horrific budget cutting that’s gone on there.

A friend of mine has been working on a project that takes her to a place culled Tudor Place, in Washington, DC. The archivist there–as if they really need one–acts as if my friend is imposing on her every time she’s there, and she abuses my friend verbally often. Talk about someone impressed with her own self-importance.

Eric

I appreciate the suggestion. However, I intend to take a laptop next time. End of problem.

Eric

Definitely contact Eric about the prospect of publishing your bibliography. We researchers find those to be wonderful sources – for instance, Sauers’ Gettysburg Bibliography (recently revised and could still be twice as large IMO) is a useful starting point for anyone working the topic. It saves researchers and authors a lot of time. Such things don’t typically “sell” like hotcakes, but they’re indispensible to a niche of us folks. There are many topics (individuals, units, battles, campaigns, etc) I’d love to have exhaustive bibs of, considering my future writings projects.

Eric is correct about mining the secondary sources – that’s where we all start, basically. You have to absorb every secondary source that exists on your particular subject, if nothing else than to familiarize yourself with what’s been used and what’s out there – plus WHERE those sources are. Then you begin gathering every primary source you can find, especially those never used.

And it amazes me time after time how many wonderful primary sources, held in public institutions – easily accessible for the most part – are begging to be used but haven’t been touched. As I mentioned to Eric a couple weeks ago, 150 years later some of the best stuff is continually turning up, never used by anyone. 150 years from now, God willing, it’ll still be turning up. The thought of that is what keeps us going, keeps us researching – if there wasn’t a chance of discovering something “new,” we wouldn’t constantly be looking for it – and all that there’d be left to do is re-word what another has already done.

J.D. Petruzzi

As for your bibliography, you might consider finding a publisher for that. You’d be doing the community of researchers and readers a real service if you did. I have some ideas for you if you’re interested. If you are, please drop me a line by private e-mail, and I will be happy to discuss them with you.

Eric