The photo at the left is of Brig. Gen. John Buford, whom I freely acknowledge is my single favorite figure of the Civil War. I’ve long harbored a fascination with Old Steadfast, as his men called him, and have had four articles on his role in the Gettysburg Campaign published in Gettysburg Magazine. Three of my books also touch on Buford’s career heavily. But I’ve never done a monograph on Buford at Gettysburg, which is the topic that got me started on him in the first place.
About three weeks ago, I realized that I have published something book-length on every major cavalry action that took place north of the Mason-Dixon Line during the Gettysburg Campaign but one: John Buford’s actions at Gettysburg. I am now in the process of correcting that oversight. I am doing a monograph on Buford’s role at Gettysburg, June 30-July 2, 1863. It will include 16 of Phil Laino’s excellent maps, a lot of photographs (including some rare, seldom-seen images), and a walking/driving tour with GPS coordinates. There will be three appendices: one addressing the myth of the Spencers, another discussing whether Buford’s defense was a defense in depth or something else, and one addressing the question of whether Lane’s Brigade formed square to defend against a feinted mounted charge by Buford’s two brigades at the end of the first day’s fighting at Gettysburg. J.D. Petruzzi will do an introduction for the project for me. I don’t expect it to be a terribly long book, but it will be jam-packed with useful information.
I have been researching this for more than 20 years, and I am confident that this is going to be a quality project. In many ways, it’s like visiting with an old friend, and I’m enjoying coming back to what has always been my first love with respect to the Battle of Gettysburg. Sit tight–I will update as to progress.
And, in a few days, I will have an announcement about another fun project that has nothing whatsoever to do with the Civil War. Stay tuned…..
Scridb filterComments
Comments are closed.
Sponsors
Back to top
Blogs I like 
- Andrew Duppstadt
- Andy Etman
- Blue Gray Daily
- Bob O'Neill
- Bottle Rocket Science
- Brooks Simpson
- Bruce Long
- Charlie Knight
- Civil Warriors
- Corey Meyer
- Craig Swain
- Damien Shiels
- Dave Powell
- David Woodbury
- Dimitri Rotov
- Drew Wagenhoffer
- Emerging Civil War Historians
- Harry Smeltzer
- J. D. Petruzzi
- Jack Dempsey
- Jim Miller
- Jim Rosebrock
- Jim Schmidt
- John Hoptak
- Kevin Levin
- Kraig McNutt
- Lee Hutch
- Mannie Gentile
- Mark Grimsley
- Matt Lively
- Michael Aubrecht
- Michael C. Hardy
- Michael Lynch
- Mike Block
- Mike Noirot
- Mysteries and Conundrums
- Rea Andrew Redd
- Richard J. Bell
- Richard McCormick
- Robert H. Moore, II
- Robert Redd
- Scott Mingus
- Scott Patchan
- Sean Heuvel
- Steve Light
- Susan Wittenberg
- Ted Savas
- TOCWOC
- Tom Clemens
- You Stink! blog
- Civil War Sites
- Central Ohio Civil War Roundtable
- Civil War Trust
- CWDG Online
- Dennis Morris
- J. David Petruzzi
- Ohio Civil War 150
- Ohio in the Civil War
- One Continuous Fight: The Retreat from Gettysburg and the Pursuit of Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia, July 4-14, 1863
- Pennsylvania in the Civil War
- Plenty of Blame to Go Around: Jeb Stuart’s Controversial Ride to Gettysburg
- Randy Drais
- Rush’s Lancers, also known as the Sixth Pennsylvania Cavalry
- The Books of Eric J. Wittenberg
- Wade Sokolosky
- West Virginia in the Civil War
- Woodbury Historical Tours
- Compilation Blogs
- Other Sites
- Our sponsors
- Publishers of Civil War History
- Popular Pages
- Archives
Like you, John Buford is my favorite Union Cavalry Commander as Nathan B. Forrest is in the Confederacy. Looking forward to the release date.
Can’t wait to read it…..
Can’t wait to read it!!
So, another effort to wring more money out of me! Hurry up already!
Best regards,
Dennis
Your other books have been excellent. I look forward to reading this one on Buford!
WHY NOT DO THE BIOGRAPHY ON GENERAL BUFORD THAT YOU HAD MENTIONED YEARS AGO? EITHER WAY I LOOK FORWARD TO ALL OF YOUR BOOKS. THANKS AGAIN, JAMES
Excellent news. And for us fans of the “long arm”, can you make sure Calef’s boys get their due? They tend to get lost in the historiography.
Looking forward to it Eric.
While the truth may never be known, the Jerome version, with its extensive detail, leaves the least room for doubt. Despite its conflict with Gibbon’s account of Buford’s physical condition, Jerome’s account seems too detailed for it to have been entirely false. Moreover, Jerome was consistent in his recounting of the story. The other accounts are ambiguous in that it is unclear whether they refer to Buford’s force or to the general himself. The first meeting between the two Union commanders most likely took place at the Seminary, as related by Jerome.
Great news! In most accounts, Buford’s cavalry fades into the distance once the First and Eleventh Corps arrive. I have seen some wild speculation on Devin’s position and role. Particularly irksome is the theory put forth by some Barlow apologists that Devin’s brigade remained in force to the east of Blocher’s Knoll justifying Barlow’s advance. Alternatively, I have seen the Barlow apologists blame Devin and Buford for abandoning Barlow’s flank. Your clear and concise examination of the evidence will be greatly appreciated.
Eric,
This is excellent news. I have always wanted to learn more about Buford’s actions at Gettysburg. Looking forward to reading this.
Regards,
Scott
Buford was one I was interested in, even tho’ I was not pro-Union. My side was grey. I however, was fascinated with Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, for some reason. Looking forward to it my friend.
Excellent news! No better man for the job. Can’t wait to read it.
Mike
Counselor, I once heard you say that you held Gen’l Buford’s Henry in your hands – a high honor richly deserved in light of your excellent past work on Old Steadfast. For this news, Huzzah! and I second the excellent suggestion from John Foskett that Calef’s boys receive their due.
While the truth may never be known, the Jerome version, with its extensive detail, leaves the least room for doubt. Despite its conflict with Gibbon’s account of Buford’s physical condition, Jerome’s account seems too detailed for it to have been entirely false. Moreover, Jerome was consistent in his recounting of the story. The other accounts are ambiguous in that it is unclear whether they refer to Buford’s force or to the general himself. The first meeting between the two Union commanders most likely took place at the Seminary, as related by Jerome.
Also, in reference to Eric’s remark on Jerome’s version of the story and his “hidden agenda”, if we were to use that as a tool for the belief of many accounts, we would have a difficult time deciding who to believe about many things. In fact, in every single person’s account of anything, there is always a hidden agenda – whether conscious or not. If we believe the OR or choose to go beyond to something written later or by someone else, we are either accepting the participant’s account or we are accepting the refuter’s account and in so doing are accepting one or the other’s hidden agenda. I think that may partially be the reason it is so easy to be a revisionist where history is concerned. No offense intended to you, Eric, and I am not saying I think you are wrong about anything — just something to think about.