I finally finished this epic narrative history of the Civil War. This volume, though it followed a decade after the previous one, is stylistically the same. There are fewer major campaigns, with Lee and Grant at a stalemate for basically a year. Meanwhile, Sherman’s campaigns in Georgia and the Carolinas are practically unopposed. I feel like I’ve already shared my major observations, so this will be a few disparate remaining thoughts I have.

Reading a Long Book

This was the longest book I’ve ever read. While technically three volumes, it is really one magnificent epic detailing perhaps the greatest episode of the American saga. Concision is not Foote’s specialty, not that his subject matter lends itself to brevity. He seems to begrudgingly capture the facts of various battles as an excuse to get to his real passion: eloquently describing the lives of individuals, peculiar circumstances, and the wonders of the American landscape. Foote the novelist is in tension with Foote the popular historian, and I would say the novelist wins out in the end. The result is 3,000 pages of history transposed into narrative with colorful literary adornments on every other pages. This book is a tremendous introduction and overview to the Civil War, useful as either a guide to further, more detailed exploration or a check in the box of “cursory understanding of the Civil War.” Completing this was a sizeable undertaking and occupied nearly three months of my reading. When you can only read so many books in your life, can it be worth it to spend so much time on one?

I think the answer is a resounding yes. Prior to this, the longest book I had read was The Power Broker, Robert Caro’s biography of Robert Moses. I have forgotten far more than I learned about Robert Moses. I read it in a two week sprint at the beginning of the pandemic, and its contents left my memory with the same ferocity they entered. Still, the book left an indelible impact on me. It was my first real exposure to power in practice. It changed my naive understanding of how political outcomes come to be. I expect something similar will happen with The Civil War: A Narrative. At a glance, it would seem to be a waste of effort if my main takeaways are restricted to a few banal facts about the Civil War and some colorful anecdotes about its many characters. While many details are lost to time, the themes are stickier. Like with The Power Broker, I took many lessons about politics. The way political concerns pervade every aspect of life are easy to understand in theory, but I think it takes a lengthy applied example to understand it in practice. Moreover, there are numerous applications to contemporary politics that I think will enhance my understanding of current events.

There’s also a benefit to the heft insofar as there is no way to avoid immersion. While I read these books I was constantly thinking about the Civil War. I was sharing interesting facts with my uninterested friends. I was looking at Georgia and imagining what it looked like 150 years ago, when Sherman’s left wing feinted at my current home of Augusta. Shorter works can be blitzed through and discarded, but there’s no such way through 3,000 pages. Lastly, I think I gained a fundamental familiarity with the character of the Civil War. It’s impossible to truly imagine what it was like to live so long ago, especially given the breakneck technological transformations of the 21st century, but I believe I know what the soldiers, generals and politicians felt. I have some insight into the privations of the average Yankee or Butternut.

So I will continue to work through lengthy collections. There’s a short proof of their worth. More people read short books than long books. So, famous books that are long became famous with a smaller audience. Presumably the book’s artistic value must overcome this lack of audience. Additionally, things that take more time get judged more harshly. If you’re watching Lawrence of Arabia, it better be worth 3.5 hours of your time, when there are great movies at 1.5 hours. There’s an opportunity cost for free time and that is what we weigh the value of something against. For people to invest so much of their time in a book and not feel like it went on too long is a tremendous accomplishment. QED. Out of curiosity, I compiled a list of some long series I would like to read before I croak. Apparently I chose the shortest one.

Title	Author	Word Count
The Civil War: A Narrative	Shelby Foote	1.2 million
In Search of Lost Time	Marcel Proust	1.27 million
The Years of Lyndon Johnson	Robert Caro	1.9 million (and counting)
The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire	Edward Gibbon	1.6 million
A Song of Ice and Fire	George R.R. Martin	1.77 million (and counting)

Foote, the Lost Cause, and Sorry Lots

I was surprised to read that there was controversy about Foote as a Confederate sympathizer. Foote gained celebrity for appearing in Ken Burns’ documentary and people accused him of Confederate apologia. My read on it is historians are envious and criticize Foote for creating a work of quasi-history that people actually want to read! Similarly, Foote was selected for the Civil War because he could speak charismatically about the subject, rather than in the affected, pedantic manner of many historians. Foote is clearly a Southerner with some Confederate sympathies, which come across in both his writing and his documentary cameos, but I think he gives a balanced perspective on the war.

From my reading, Foote is not a Lost-Causer. He is clear about the role of slavery in the war. He repeatedly points out that Confederate racism and the related reluctance to arm slaves was a direct contributor to the Union victory. He also makes this clear during the road to war. Just because he legitimizes “states’ rights” as part of the reason for secession doesn’t mean he believes the Confederate motivations were just. Of course, he is a southerner and has more sympathy for the Confederacy than most can tolerate, but I think Foote’s real issue is he belongs to a different generation where people’s professional and private lives were examined separately.

Foote is a man who admires greatness in all its forms. Likely motivated by his own grand ambitions and insecurity related to the lack of recognition for his accomplishments, he focuses on the exceptional people in the war. He adores Lincoln for his shrewd political sense, but more for his literary elegance. He also appreciates the martial virtues. There are generals on both sides that he takes a liking to: Lee, Sherman, Grant, and Forrest. Forrest is where most people draw the line. Foote draws flack for his favorable interpretation of the Fort Pillow massacre. General Forrest’s troops murdered a bunch of captured Union troops, applying disproportionate deadly force on the black Soldiers. Foote acknowledges this atrocity happened, but he writes that Forrest does all he can to stop it. While Forrest’s later leadership role in the KKK is not within the scope of the book, Foote later defends his involvement and downplays the harm of the First Klan. I am ignorant of his comments on Forrest beyond a brief Wikipedia section, but his comments seem misguided to say the least. Maybe Foote finds it hard to believe Forrest’s military prowess is consistent with his KKK involvement, and needs to downplay the latter to rationalize it all?

Foote is an interesting character to say the least! Tablet Magazine published an interesting article about him that reveals his complicated nature. One particular passage is worth noting. Foote is reflecting on his legacy as a failed novelist. While he became somewhat famous for The Civil War, he never achieved the critical acclaim he thought he deserved:

In a 1985 letter to Walker Percy, Foote lamented, “it’s no small sport to have written something as great” as the Civil War trilogy, “and to watch it go unrecognized for what it truly is.” The great increase to his fame in the following decade left unchanged the problem for his literary reputation, which he accurately defined: “Historians won’t read it because it lacks footnotes, and liberal arts professors won’t read it because it’s history; I fall between two stools and mainly find my following composed of ‘buffs,’ a sorry lot who know little or nothing of either history or literature.”

How tragic it is to be ashamed of your only audience! But I think he’s right, as I too “know little… of either history or literature.” But Shelby, you’ve got to “love the one you’re with.”

Reconstruction

Foote alludes to the failures of Reconstruction in a few sentences at the end of the third volume, but I am eager to learn more about what went so wrong. As I was approaching the end of the war, it seemed obvious that the recovery would be painful. Everything seemed so hopeless. You have a country that just fought a costly Civil War. The side with all of the black people sacrificed its young men, most of its major cities, and four years of collective life to maintain slavery! They never realized the wrongness of their ways. They gave up because they were so thoroughly beaten down. How was it ever going to work out that they would see the freed slaves as equals? What was going to happen to the ruling class and the 100,000 veterans who largely returned to the helm of Southern society? Government decrees can’t change how people feel. So, yea reconstruction went horribly. But compared to what?

Offense and Defense

One theme of the end of the war is the difference between offense and defense. Each side has its commanders by now. There seem to be only a few commanders who do both well. Thomas, the “Rock of Chickaumauga,” is one of the war’s heroes, but he is eventually relieved after Nashville. While he was a hero in the defense, he was too slow going to win offensive battles. His Confederate counterpart is Joe Johnston, who is risk-averse and trades space for time on the withdrawal to Atlanta, all but guaranteeing Sherman’s successful seizure of the city.

Similarly, offensive minded generals tend to lack prudence. There was General John Bell Hood, who wasted a quarter of his army for no reason at the Battle of Franklin. At a time of desperation where unnecessary losses were especially to be avoided, he marched his Soldiers two miles through open terrain to assault an entrenched Union line. He lost 6,000 men in a few minutes. He continued to defy the odds and, headstrong as always, opposed Thomas’ army at 1:3 odds. He was routed, and with it the last of the Confederate hopes. On the Union side, General Sheridan played this role. Aggressive, always referring to “smashing the enemy,” he eventually found great success and was the proximate cause for Lee’s surrender at Appomattox. He suffered heavy losses, but history is written by the victors, I suppose. It helps that he struck finishing blows to Early and later Lee.

Its intuitive that the offense and defense would favor different dispositions. Most importantly, the offense is often harder and requires a perseverance that more cautious leaders could not stomach. A bolder McClellan may have ended the war in the beginning. There are many such examples. While Grant ultimately prevailed, it was not without the useless spilling of blood on multiple occasions, most notable Cold Harbor. But even after losing 10,000 troops in 30 minutes, Grant never gave up the chase. This immunity to the sunk cost fallacy and the total loss of spirit seems essential in an offensive. But this trait hardly seems like a universal good.

On Renaming Military Bases Named After Confederate Generals

Over the last few years, the US has renamed a number of Army bases in former Confederate states that were named after Confederate generals. This was an annoying culture war topic for a few years and it never interested me much. I don’t think the people who care actually care. No one notices the names of the base or knows a damn about history. I know the defenders don’t know history because some of the bases are named after terrible generals. The two biggest bases in the Army (one by size, the other by reputation) were named after John B. Hood and Alvin Bragg. Hood was an overaggressive brute who led his Army to the slaughter at the most inopportune time. Bragg was widely viewed as incompetent and had a knack for retreating after his victories. Foote suggests that were someone better in charge, the war might have gone very differently. While I think we shouldn’t name military bases after secessionists for obvious reasons, we especially shouldn’t name them after incompetent secessionists if only because we should revere winners at the very least.

Wait, Secession isn’t Treason?

I was surprised to learn of Jefferson Davis’ life after the war. Though he was confined and arguably tortured for a few years after his capture, he was eventually released. The U.S. didn’t think they could convict him for treason! The logic goes one must be a citizen of the country to commit treason. The Southern states seceded, which was believed to be permissible because they had voluntarily entered the Union. So the U.S. had a weak case against Davis, and while they could have convicted him in a kangaroo court, this would only exacerbate the unrest that started when northern mistreatment of Davis turned him into a Southern martyr, the only living man to pay for the sins of secession. Davis lived to the age of 82 and lived like an aristocrat. He made speeches and never admitted regret or apologized. He felt through the end that he had done what was right. While the Confederacy had failed, he did not think it was a mistake to try. Towards the end of the Civil War, the momentum suggests the North will colonize the South. And yet, many of their leaders, to include the commander in chief, go back to the ways of the Southern gentleman.

Not that it matters in any practical way but it is interesting that, according to the law, it was not treason to fight for the Confederacy. What about the Northerners who fled their states to fight for the Confederacy? Surely that is treason.

Fun Anecdotes

Grant is in Washington to get an official picture taken and he is almost killed by an act of God:

Brady sent an assistant up on the roof to draw back the shade from the skylight directly overhead. To his horror, the fellow stumbled, both feet crashing through the glass to let fall a shower of jagged shards around the general below. “It was a miracle that some of the pieces didn’t strike him,” the photographer later said. “And if one had, it would have been the end of Grant; for that glass was two inches thick.” Still more surprising, in its way, was the general’s reaction. He glanced up casually, with “a barely perceptible quiver of the nostril,” then as casually back down, and that was all. This seemed to Brady “the most remarkable display of nerve I ever witnessed.

It was otherwise with Stanton, who appeared unstrung: not only for Grant’s sake, as it turned out, but also for his own, though none of the splinters had landed anywhere near him. Grasping the photographer by the arm, he pulled him aside and sputtered excitely, “Not. a word about this Brady, not a word! You must never breathe a word of what happened here today… It would be impossible to convince the people that this was not an attempt at assassination!” 9

Meade was a team player:

“the work before us was of such vast importance to the whole nation that the feeling or wishes of on one person should stand in the way of selecting the right men for all positions. For himself, he would serve to the best of his ability wherever placed.” 10-11

Grant didn’t like Washington. Well, I guess he learned to like it eventually:

And really, Mr Lincoln,” he added frankly, “ I have had enough of this show business.” 12

Soldiers and their timeless cynicism:

Angry because some four hundred of their wounded comrades had been left behind to be nursed and imprisoned by the rebels, they began the march in a mutinous frame of mind, muttering imprecations. But presently the company clowns took over. After the manner of all soldiers everywhere, in all ages, they began to ridicule their plight and mock at the man who had caused it, inventing new words for o ld songs which they chanted as they slogged. 52

Lieutenant Colonel Bailey achieved one of the most impressive engineering feats of the war. To get naval ships out of the dried up Red River, he improvised a set of locks to raise the water and get the ships to safety. He was given a bunch of gifts and Porter said:

Words are inadequate to express the admiration I feel for the abilities of LTC Bailey. This is without doubt the best engineering feat ever performed. Under the best circumstances a private company would not have completed this work under one year, and to an ordinary mind the whole thing would have appeared an utter impossibility. 84

Sedgwick meeting his demise was so tragicomic:

“What? Men dodging this way for single bullets? … “What will you do when they open fire along the whole line? I am ashamed of you. They couldn’t hit an elephant at this distance.”…. “Next time the glass-sighted Whitworth cracked, a couple of minutes later, Sedgwick’s chief of staff was startled to see the fifty-year-old general stiffen, as if in profound surprise, and slowly turn his head to show blood spurting from a half-inch whole just under his left eye… He smiled strangely, as if to acknowledge the dark humor of what had turned out to be his last remark, and did not speak again. Within a few minutes he was dead.” 203

Grant’s pride at trying to get a truce to collect his wounded at Cold Harbor was scandalous.

this sacrifice of brave men for not apparent purpose except to salve his rankled pride. Worst of all, they saw in the agony of their comrades, left to die amid the corpses on a field already lost, a preview of much agony to come, when they themselves would be left to whimper through days of pain while their leader composed notes in defense of conduct which, so far as they could see, had been indefensible from the start. 296-297

Meade like Sherman had no love for journalists.

Enraged by the repetition of this “base and wicked lie,” Meade placed the offender in arrest and had his adjutant draw up a general order directing that he “be put wihtout the lines of the army and not permitted to return.” … Wearing on his breast and back large placards lettered LIBELER OF THE PRESS, Crapsey was mounted face-rearward on a mule and paraded through the camps tot he accompaniment of the “Rogeu’s March,” after which he wass less ceremoniously expelled. 298

Davis was annoyed by Johnston’s lack of aggressiveness against Sherman.

“Yes,” he said icily, “I know Mr Davis thinks he can do a great many things other men would hesitate to attempt. For instance, he tried to do what God failed to do. He tried to make a soldier of Braxton Bragg, and you know the result. It couldn’t be done.” 414

When Johnston was relieved, Hood was put in an impossible position. He didn’t know anything about the plans and had to defend Atlanta in a last ditch effort.

With all the earnestness of which man is capable,” Hood later wrote, “I besought him, if he would under no circumstance retain command and fight the battle for Atlanta, to at least remain with me and give me the benefit of his counsel whilst I determined the issue.” Touched at last, and “with tears of emotion gathering in his eyes,” Johnston assured his young successor that, after a necessary ride into Atlanta, he would return that evening and help all he could. So he said. According to Hood, however, “he not only failed ot comply with his promise, but, without a word of explanation or apology, left that evening for Macon, Georgia.” 422

Threatening to move to Canada is a tradition as old as the US itself:

the reaction to this latest call for volunteers, which was seen as a velvet glove encasing the iron hand of a new draft. “Only half a million more! Oh that is nothing,” one angry Wisconsin editor fumed, and followed through by saying: “Continue this Administration in power and we can all go to war, Canada, or to hell before 1868.” 470

Politics once again at odds with the war:

With help from Sherman, who at Lincoln’s urging not only granted furloughs wholesale to members of the twenty-nine Hoosier regiments in his army down in Georgia, but also sent John A. Logan and Frank Blair with them on electioneering duty, all three states registered gains for the Union ticket, both at Congress and at home.” 562

Fun:

Enraged to find the dawn attack deferred to await his arrival from Independence, Pleasonton had begun his day with on-the-spot dismissals of two brigade commanders — “You’re an ambulance soldier and belong in the rear,” he told one of the brigadiers, shaking a cowhide whip in his face quite as if he meant to use it” 582

Taking a high value prisoner was lucrative:

Hit in the arm and thrown from his horse, Marmaduke was taken single-handedly by James Dunlavy, an Iowa private, who marched his muddy, dejected captive directly to army headquarters. “How much longer have you to serve?” the department commander asked. Told, “Eight months, sir,” Curtis turnedto his adjutant: “Give Private Dunlavy a furlough for eight months.” The Iowa soldier left for home next day, taking with him the long-haired rebel general’s saber for a souvenir of the war that was now behind him.” 584

The Cushing family was pretty impressive. Alonzo Cushing earned the Medal of Honor with an epicly gallant stand that involved directing a defense while holding his exposed intestines with his hand. His brother, William, made a commando assault to destroy a Confederate ironclad. But he had some issues later:

He died at the age of thirty-two in a government asylum for the insane, thereby provoking much discussion as to whether heroism and madness, like genius and tuberculosis, were relatedy — and, if so, had insanity been at the root of his exploits? or had the strain of performing them, or even of having performed them, been more than a sane man could bear? 595

Lee’s Army endured such privations. There was no food or shoes even. We take for granted how much more durable modern shoes are!

the quality of such food as they received was even lower than its quantity; which was low indeed. The meal was unbolted, generally with much of the cob ground in, and alive with weeviles. But the bacon remained longest in their memories and nightmares. Nassua bacon, it was called, though one memorialist was to testify that “Nausea with a capital would have been better. It came through the blockade, and we believed it was made from the hog of the tropics and cured in the brine of the ocean. More likely it was discarded ship’s pork, or ‘salt junk’… It was a peculiarly scaly color, spotted like a half-well case of smallpox, full of rancid odor, and utterly devoid of grease. When hung up it would double its length. It could not be eaten raw, and imparted a stinking smell when boiled. It had one redeeming quality: elasticity. You could put a piece in your mouth and chew it for a long time, and the longer you chewed it the bigger it got. Then, by a desparate effort, you would gulp it down. Out of sight, out of mind.” 629

General Schofield sent a telegram to Grant tattling on General Thomas and his slowness:

“Steedman, can it be possible that Schofield would send such a telegram?” Steedman, who share in the glory of CHickamauga had been second only to his chief’s, replied that he must surely be familiar with his own general’s handwriting. Thomas put on his glasses and examined the message carefully. “Yes, it is General Schofield’s handwriting,” he admitted, and asked, puzzled: “Why does he send such telegrams?” Steedman smiled at the Virginian’s guileless nature, uncorrupted by twenty-four years of exposure to army politics. “General Thomas,” he presently asked, “who is next in command to you in case of removal?” Thomas hung fire for a moment. “Oh, i see,” he said at last, and shook his head at what he saw.” 693

Oh Pickett! Not again!

All seemed well; he had no doubt that he could maintain his position against Sheridan’s horsemen, even if they ventured to attack, and there had been no word of a farther advance by the blue infantry whose reported presence west of Gravelly Run had provoked his withdrawal this morning. Consequently, when an invitation came from Rosser to join in an alfresco meal of shad caught in the Nottoway River on his way from Stony Creek, Pickett gladly accepted, as did Fitzhugh Lee, who turned his division over to Colonel T. T. Munford around 1 o’clock, then set out for the rear with his ringleted superior for a share in their fellow Virginian’s feast. Neither told any subordinate where he was going or why, perhaps to keep from dividing the succulent fish too many ways; with the result that when the attack exploded — damped from their hearing, as it was, by a heavy stand of pines along Hatcher’s Run — no one knew where to find them. Pickett only made it back to his division after half its members had been shot or captured, a sad last act for a man who gave his name to the most famous charge in a war whose end was hastened by his three-hour absence at a shad bake. 870

Coincidences are so common throughout the Civil War:

The house Sheridan pointed out belonged to a man named Wilmer McLean, who had agreed to let it be used when Marshall rode in ahead of Lee in search of a place for the meeting with Grant. By the oddest of chances, McLean had owned a farm near Manassas Junction, stretching along the banks of Bull Run, at the time of the first of the two battles fought there. In fact, a shell had come crashing through one of his windows during the opening skirmish, and after that grim experience he had resolved to find a new home for his family, preferably back in the rural southside hill country, “where the sound of battle would never reach them.” He found what he wanted at Appomattox Courthouse — a remote hamlet, better than two miles from the railroad and clearly of no military value to either side — only to discover, soon after midday on this fateful Palm Sunday, that the war he had fled was about to end on his doorstep; indeed in his very parlor, where Lee and Marshall waited a long half hour until Babcock, atching beside a window for his chief’s arrival, saw him and his staff turn in at the gate then crossed the room and opened the door into the hall. 946

The damages of the Civil War are hard to comprehend, and over a million dead and wounded combined does not really register. One quote did:

Some notion of the drain this represented, as well as of the poverty the surrendered men came home to, was shown by the fact that during the first year of peace the state of Mississippi allotted a solid fifth of its revenues for the purchase of artificial arms and legs for its returning veterans. 1041