What do you think?
Rate this book
Long, Obstinate, and Bloody: The Battle of Guilford Courthouse
On 15 March 1781, the armies of Nathanael Greene and Lord Charles Cornwallis fought one of the bloodiest and most intense engagements of the American Revolution at the Guilford Courthouse in piedmont North Carolina. Although victorious, Cornwallis declared the conquest of the Carolinas impossible. He made the fateful decision to march into Virginia, eventually leading his army to the Yorktown surrender and clearing the way for American independence.In the first book-length examination of the Guilford Courthouse engagement, Lawrence Babits and Joshua Howard—drawing from hundreds of previously underutilized pension documents, muster rolls, and personal accounts—piece together what really happened on the wooded plateau in what is today Greensboro, North Carolina. They painstakingly identify where individuals stood on the battlefield, when they were there, and what they could have seen, thus producing a bottom-up story of the engagement. The authors explain or discount several
320 pages, Hardcover
First published March 15, 2009
26 people are currently reading
161 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
December 20, 2014
This book provides an exhaustive analysis of the Battle of Guilford Courthouse – one of the critical engagements of the Southern Campaign of the American Revolution. For a more comprehensive examination of that campaign as a whole, see Buchanan’s “The Road to Guilford Courthouse.” (And don’t forget Babits’s previous work on Cowpens, “Devil of a Whipping”). Traditionally the southern campaign has been largely given a backseat to the events that took place in the northern states/colonies, which is unfortunate and unjustified.
Long, Obstinate, and Bloody begins with a brief overview of the weeks leading up to the engagement, then an analysis of the composition of Cornwallis and Greene’s armies. Some readers may find the level of examination at this point overwhelming, as the descriptions of the two opposing forces are extremely well-detailed. Clearly the authors spent a great deal of time determining precisely WHO was present. Though incredibly interesting in the overall, it can be information-overload at times.
The book then follows the actions of March 15, 1781 from the first skirmishing at New Garden meeting house to the opening artillery barrages and first line fighting. The reader is taken across the field basically in step with the British infantry, each chapter being in-depth analyses of the fighting along the first, second, and third lines, as well as the intense combat that took place along the southern flank of the second line. This “battle within a battle” as it is described was particularly bloody and confusing, but the book does an excellent job of explaining what happened. The accompanying maps are well done.
Particularly interesting is the analysis of the impact of the American militia volleys on the first and second lines, and the disputing of some long-held traditions concerning their efficacy. The book does an excellent job of illustrating that some of the post-battle analyses were perhaps unfair to those men on the first line, who seem to have held their ground much longer than thought.
Also intriguing is the analysis of the third-line fighting between the American Continentals and British regulars. There are some great descriptions of the intensity of the fighting, and brief melee that took place there. Perhaps most notably, the authors quite effectively dispel the long-held notion that Cornwallis ordered his artillery to fire into the melee on the third line. As with the “battle within a battle” the analysis takes what was an extremely confusing situation, with multiple troop movements going on at short range, and in a short time frame, and posits it in a way that the reader can easily understand.
The book finishes out on a chapter explaining what happened to most of the participants postwar. Though pretty dense, there are some great nuggets of information in there. Most readers will likely find it interesting that Cornwallis is buried in India, or that the father of Civil War naval officer David Farragut fought at Guilford. The chapter is somewhat of an odd inclusion, but it does round of the book nicely. The amount of work here is really impressive.
Overall, I highly recommend this book to those looking for an in-depth analysis of the battle itself. Simply put, it’s the best examination of the battle to date. The writing is excellent, and the academic quality wonderful. For the non-history-buff reader, however, it might be too-detailed. The information overload at times can drag down the reading, but nevertheless it’s a great book. The authors themselves argue that it should be seen as a baseline for future research, with which I wholeheartedly concur.
Long, Obstinate, and Bloody begins with a brief overview of the weeks leading up to the engagement, then an analysis of the composition of Cornwallis and Greene’s armies. Some readers may find the level of examination at this point overwhelming, as the descriptions of the two opposing forces are extremely well-detailed. Clearly the authors spent a great deal of time determining precisely WHO was present. Though incredibly interesting in the overall, it can be information-overload at times.
The book then follows the actions of March 15, 1781 from the first skirmishing at New Garden meeting house to the opening artillery barrages and first line fighting. The reader is taken across the field basically in step with the British infantry, each chapter being in-depth analyses of the fighting along the first, second, and third lines, as well as the intense combat that took place along the southern flank of the second line. This “battle within a battle” as it is described was particularly bloody and confusing, but the book does an excellent job of explaining what happened. The accompanying maps are well done.
Particularly interesting is the analysis of the impact of the American militia volleys on the first and second lines, and the disputing of some long-held traditions concerning their efficacy. The book does an excellent job of illustrating that some of the post-battle analyses were perhaps unfair to those men on the first line, who seem to have held their ground much longer than thought.
Also intriguing is the analysis of the third-line fighting between the American Continentals and British regulars. There are some great descriptions of the intensity of the fighting, and brief melee that took place there. Perhaps most notably, the authors quite effectively dispel the long-held notion that Cornwallis ordered his artillery to fire into the melee on the third line. As with the “battle within a battle” the analysis takes what was an extremely confusing situation, with multiple troop movements going on at short range, and in a short time frame, and posits it in a way that the reader can easily understand.
The book finishes out on a chapter explaining what happened to most of the participants postwar. Though pretty dense, there are some great nuggets of information in there. Most readers will likely find it interesting that Cornwallis is buried in India, or that the father of Civil War naval officer David Farragut fought at Guilford. The chapter is somewhat of an odd inclusion, but it does round of the book nicely. The amount of work here is really impressive.
Overall, I highly recommend this book to those looking for an in-depth analysis of the battle itself. Simply put, it’s the best examination of the battle to date. The writing is excellent, and the academic quality wonderful. For the non-history-buff reader, however, it might be too-detailed. The information overload at times can drag down the reading, but nevertheless it’s a great book. The authors themselves argue that it should be seen as a baseline for future research, with which I wholeheartedly concur.
March 11, 2009
The Battle of Guilford Courthouse (GC), like pretty much all of the southern campaign, has typically gotten short shrift when discussing the history of the American Revolution (AR). The recent spike in interest in the AR has led to a better appreciation of what happened in the south and long-ignored chapters are finally being told.
That it took so long for GC to receive a full-length treatment is frankly shocking, as it is one of the most important battles of the AR -- important enough to have been butchered in The Patriot (starring Academy Award winner Heath Ledger). But what's past is past, and we finally have a book (not to slight Another Such Victory, but it was more pamphlet than book). So how did Babits and Howard do?
The Good:
--Details, details, details! As best as can be ascertained by the authors, we know where everybody was in the battlefield, and often know where they moved as the battle progressed. This results in a few surprises (see The Interesting below), but more importantly makes sure the reader always has a sense of order through the chaos of battle.
--Academic rigor. Bibliography, notes, and maps are solid. Index is actually useful.
--Readability. You can easily follow the action, and the authors' style doesn't detract from the book (as frequently happens in history books).
--Did I mention that GC deserved this treatment a long time ago?
The Bad:
--The details may bog the reader down, especially when the authors go through the order of battle. Since the maps do a good job of listing troop positions, I would recommend that during the chapters on the troop makeup, pay more attention to the who of the companies rather than the where.
--For a book that's only about 220 pages in narrative, there's a substantial amount of padding, including about 23 pages of what happened afterwards to pretty much everybody that survived the battle. I'm guessing the authors had little choice, but it's a little disheartening. That said, it was an interesting chapter so I don't begrudge its inclusion.
The Interesting:
--If the militia performed better than Greene later relates, does that mean George Washington's postwar analysis is way off?
--I'm curious if we'll ever find out exactly why "Light Horse" Harry Lee disengaged from the side battle.
--Mythbusting! I was shocked to discover that the oft-retold story that Cornwallis fired into the 2nd Guards-1st Maryland melee may be wrong. I wonder if the National Park is going to need to re-edit its films. It's also interesting because that action was included in the aforementioned Patriot, thus accomplishing what I thought was impossible: making that movie even more historically inaccurate.
The Conclusion:
Glad to have this book on my shelf, as there had been a gap there for far too long. Like the authors I believe that this book should be the start of even more research on this important battle. I highly recommend it to anyone with an interest in the American Revolution, and heck I even recommend it for those who don't have an interest ... yet.
That it took so long for GC to receive a full-length treatment is frankly shocking, as it is one of the most important battles of the AR -- important enough to have been butchered in The Patriot (starring Academy Award winner Heath Ledger). But what's past is past, and we finally have a book (not to slight Another Such Victory, but it was more pamphlet than book). So how did Babits and Howard do?
The Good:
--Details, details, details! As best as can be ascertained by the authors, we know where everybody was in the battlefield, and often know where they moved as the battle progressed. This results in a few surprises (see The Interesting below), but more importantly makes sure the reader always has a sense of order through the chaos of battle.
--Academic rigor. Bibliography, notes, and maps are solid. Index is actually useful.
--Readability. You can easily follow the action, and the authors' style doesn't detract from the book (as frequently happens in history books).
--Did I mention that GC deserved this treatment a long time ago?
The Bad:
--The details may bog the reader down, especially when the authors go through the order of battle. Since the maps do a good job of listing troop positions, I would recommend that during the chapters on the troop makeup, pay more attention to the who of the companies rather than the where.
--For a book that's only about 220 pages in narrative, there's a substantial amount of padding, including about 23 pages of what happened afterwards to pretty much everybody that survived the battle. I'm guessing the authors had little choice, but it's a little disheartening. That said, it was an interesting chapter so I don't begrudge its inclusion.
The Interesting:
--If the militia performed better than Greene later relates, does that mean George Washington's postwar analysis is way off?
--I'm curious if we'll ever find out exactly why "Light Horse" Harry Lee disengaged from the side battle.
--Mythbusting! I was shocked to discover that the oft-retold story that Cornwallis fired into the 2nd Guards-1st Maryland melee may be wrong. I wonder if the National Park is going to need to re-edit its films. It's also interesting because that action was included in the aforementioned Patriot, thus accomplishing what I thought was impossible: making that movie even more historically inaccurate.
The Conclusion:
Glad to have this book on my shelf, as there had been a gap there for far too long. Like the authors I believe that this book should be the start of even more research on this important battle. I highly recommend it to anyone with an interest in the American Revolution, and heck I even recommend it for those who don't have an interest ... yet.
May 3, 2019
Detailed examination of the Revolutionary War battle of Guilford Courthouse. Detailed examination of the men, units, and hardware in the battle. In the first part of the book--the lead up to the battle and the early part of the battle, better maps could have been used instead of the extant contemporary maps. There was also a detailed account of what happened to most of the participants. the authors used primary records, examined them for likelihood, and cross-checked them using among other things, pension records. Well researched. Recommended.
February 11, 2022
If you’re looking for a book on a Revolutionary War battle, this is the one for you. The authors are extremely open about their sources and how they piece together information. How they break down the battle is well done, each movement is well described and the dynamics of the battle are well illustrated. Overall a well written book and deserving of a read.
December 10, 2024
The authors have done a truly impressive job detailing the battle of Guilford Courthouse. The nature of the battlefield, broken up by terrain and forest, made the progress of the battle somewhat confusing even to the participants. The authors used numerous first hand accounts to sort it out, and also turned to a primary source that might be overlooked, the pension claim applications turned in years later by veterans in which they described their service. The result is a relatively clear narrative of what happened. In addition, they have a good narrative of the events leading up to the battle and its aftermath to the siege and surrender at Yorktown, which itself was an ultimate result of the battle, the losses Cornwallis having sustained in North Carolina convincing him to shift his operations to Virginia.
Both commanding general, Lord Cornwallis for the British and Nathaniel Green for the Americans, come out looking good. Cornwallis was a competent professional soldier who handled his troops well, and had two horses shot out from under him while leading them. General Green, after five years of war, had developed into one of the best American generals. He grasped the essential dynamic of the war in the Southern Colonies, that as long as he kept his army intact he could wear down the British. Preserving the core of his army was more important than winning a battle. He also had developed an understanding of how best to use his troops, which varied widely in quality, particularly the militia. If handled well and in favorable circumstances, the militia could perform adequately, but they couldn't stand up to a British bayonet charge. Green's Continental troops also varied considerably. The best could go toe to toe with the British. A lack of experienced officers affected both, particularly the militia. For Guilford Courthouse Green, after being pursued in the "race to the Dan" river by Cornwallis, arranged his troops in three lines, with the militia in the first two and his Continentals in the third. He knew the militia would break and fall back, but they served the purpose of slowing down and disorganizing the British, and inflicting casualties, before they reach his best troops. Green was forced to retire from the field, but he inflicted significant casualties on Cornwallis's troops, which was largely the point.
An excellent read, though perhaps a little too detailed for casual readin.
Both commanding general, Lord Cornwallis for the British and Nathaniel Green for the Americans, come out looking good. Cornwallis was a competent professional soldier who handled his troops well, and had two horses shot out from under him while leading them. General Green, after five years of war, had developed into one of the best American generals. He grasped the essential dynamic of the war in the Southern Colonies, that as long as he kept his army intact he could wear down the British. Preserving the core of his army was more important than winning a battle. He also had developed an understanding of how best to use his troops, which varied widely in quality, particularly the militia. If handled well and in favorable circumstances, the militia could perform adequately, but they couldn't stand up to a British bayonet charge. Green's Continental troops also varied considerably. The best could go toe to toe with the British. A lack of experienced officers affected both, particularly the militia. For Guilford Courthouse Green, after being pursued in the "race to the Dan" river by Cornwallis, arranged his troops in three lines, with the militia in the first two and his Continentals in the third. He knew the militia would break and fall back, but they served the purpose of slowing down and disorganizing the British, and inflicting casualties, before they reach his best troops. Green was forced to retire from the field, but he inflicted significant casualties on Cornwallis's troops, which was largely the point.
An excellent read, though perhaps a little too detailed for casual readin.
January 31, 2023
This book explains the events that preceeded the Battle of Guilford Courthouse and then gives an excellent battle report. General Greene led General Lord Cornwallis on a "race to the Dan" but ultimately chose to meet the British army on ground that he chose. His setup was similar to that used by Daniel Morgan at Cowpens.
The author is very detailed. Key details are explained and where there may be questions, the author explains how he arrived at his conclusion. Many first-hand accounts were used: diaries, pension statements, letters, etc.
For the reader interested in the American Revolution, the Southern theater played a huge role and The Battle of Guilford Courthouse is essentially the crescendo that arguably lead to the British surrender at Yorktown and the ultimate goal of Independance.
The author is very detailed. Key details are explained and where there may be questions, the author explains how he arrived at his conclusion. Many first-hand accounts were used: diaries, pension statements, letters, etc.
For the reader interested in the American Revolution, the Southern theater played a huge role and The Battle of Guilford Courthouse is essentially the crescendo that arguably lead to the British surrender at Yorktown and the ultimate goal of Independance.
February 17, 2025
The Battle of Guilford Courthouse was fought in March, 1781, two months after the Battle of Cowpens. At Guilford Courthouse, British forces under General Cornwallis faced off against Continental forces under Nathaniel Greene.
In the battle, Greene arrayed his forces in three successive lines. These lines broke up the cohesive British lines. By the time that the British reached the third line, they attacked piecemeal and were initially repulsed. However, as more units came up, the British fought fiercely and eventually took control of the battlefield.
In this book, the authors investigate primary records, including Continental Army pension applications, to piece together details of the action, including the actions on the flanks, which hadn’t been well documented previously.
5 stars.
In the battle, Greene arrayed his forces in three successive lines. These lines broke up the cohesive British lines. By the time that the British reached the third line, they attacked piecemeal and were initially repulsed. However, as more units came up, the British fought fiercely and eventually took control of the battlefield.
In this book, the authors investigate primary records, including Continental Army pension applications, to piece together details of the action, including the actions on the flanks, which hadn’t been well documented previously.
5 stars.
May 25, 2021
The authors' thorough and careful analysis of all the evidence in the historical record yields a book whose detail will be invaluable to many buffs and researchers but unnecessary and potentially tedious to those with a more casual interest in the subject. As I am among the former, this book will be an essential reference for me.
The authors' challenges to prevailing and long-held beliefs about the battle are interesting and are a strength of the book. But while I found all of their conclusions and opinions intriguing, I found some of them unpersuasive. I would urge readers to treat the authors' conclusions with the same caution they have used when challenging the work of their predecessors.
The authors' challenges to prevailing and long-held beliefs about the battle are interesting and are a strength of the book. But while I found all of their conclusions and opinions intriguing, I found some of them unpersuasive. I would urge readers to treat the authors' conclusions with the same caution they have used when challenging the work of their predecessors.
October 10, 2023
This is an excellent books for students of the Battle of Guilford Courthouse. Babits does an excellent job pulling in sources that hadn't previously been used, and evaluating them in a systematic and even statistical way to get to draw out new insights about the fighting. He makes some controversial arguments that I don't know if I agree with, but they are based his interpretation of data and facts, not speculation.
Where the book falls short is in telling the story of the battle. The narrative often fails to convey the drama of the events that took place. A book like Another Such Victory, while much shorter and out of date in certain ways, does a far better job on this count.
Where the book falls short is in telling the story of the battle. The narrative often fails to convey the drama of the events that took place. A book like Another Such Victory, while much shorter and out of date in certain ways, does a far better job on this count.
April 19, 2018
This book concentrates on the details of the fighting, using analysis of pension applications to resolve long-standing controversies about the battle; this leads to many detailed descriptions of wounds, which may or may not be appreciated by the reader. The reader who would like a strategic view of the battle should look elsewhere.
September 19, 2023
Historically accurate and detailed, but gets lost in the weeds on more than one occasion. It took longer to read than the battle took to fight, and I’m on the fence about whether that’s a good thing or not.
Regardless, strong historical work and research on behalf of the authors.
Regardless, strong historical work and research on behalf of the authors.
May 8, 2023
My wife surprised me! We were at Greensboro to see, oddly enough, a King and Country concert. The next day she took me here and we walked the park and read the plackets. I am the guy who buys the history book at places I get to visit. I know more about Guilford Courthouse battle, it is very detailed.
I recommend both the book and the park.
I recommend both the book and the park.
September 28, 2012
Long, Obstinate, and Bloody by Lawrence Babits and Joshua Howard is a detailed military account of the Battle of Guilford Courthouse that occurred in 1781 during the American War of Independence. This is a well-researched and very detailed military analysis of this pivotal clash that attempts to put to rest many controversies and lingering questions about this battle. As such it may not suit the general reader.
Overall it was a decent account with some lovely B&W images of uniforms worn by the various British and Continental units however it would have been so much better if they were presented as colour plates within the book. The maps were sufficient to follow the action and the authors provided details of what happened to the many characters involved in this battle.
Parts of the story, once we got into the fighting at Guilford Courthouse, were excellent such as this vivid description of the British Guard's fight with the Continentals from Maryland in the third line at the battle of Guilford Courthouse in 1781:
As the Guards officers gathered their men into a new line facing west and northwest and got them firing back, the Marylanders came on in a rush. The Guards responded largely without specific commands, being pushed by swords and muskets into an approximation of a battle line facing the oncoming Continentals, who fired several platoon volleys as they came. At a range of less than twelve yards, both lines fired again, so close that muzzle flashes overlapped into a wide sheet of flame and the heat from the volley could be felt in the cold, damp air.
Those hit by musket balls went down immediately. At this close range, the heavy lead balls used in the Charlesville and Brown Bess muskets smashed through bone, shattering it, and often passing through the body to exit on the other side. Those receiving the most serious head wounds were hit with catastrophic force that tore open large entrance wounds in the skull and destroyed the brain in a spray of bone, flesh, brain matter, and fluid. A soldier hit directly in the head at this range went down immediately, killed instantly.
This book would suit any keen reader of the Revolutionary War or any avid military reader or amateur historian.
Overall it was a decent account with some lovely B&W images of uniforms worn by the various British and Continental units however it would have been so much better if they were presented as colour plates within the book. The maps were sufficient to follow the action and the authors provided details of what happened to the many characters involved in this battle.
Parts of the story, once we got into the fighting at Guilford Courthouse, were excellent such as this vivid description of the British Guard's fight with the Continentals from Maryland in the third line at the battle of Guilford Courthouse in 1781:
As the Guards officers gathered their men into a new line facing west and northwest and got them firing back, the Marylanders came on in a rush. The Guards responded largely without specific commands, being pushed by swords and muskets into an approximation of a battle line facing the oncoming Continentals, who fired several platoon volleys as they came. At a range of less than twelve yards, both lines fired again, so close that muzzle flashes overlapped into a wide sheet of flame and the heat from the volley could be felt in the cold, damp air.
Those hit by musket balls went down immediately. At this close range, the heavy lead balls used in the Charlesville and Brown Bess muskets smashed through bone, shattering it, and often passing through the body to exit on the other side. Those receiving the most serious head wounds were hit with catastrophic force that tore open large entrance wounds in the skull and destroyed the brain in a spray of bone, flesh, brain matter, and fluid. A soldier hit directly in the head at this range went down immediately, killed instantly.
This book would suit any keen reader of the Revolutionary War or any avid military reader or amateur historian.
March 7, 2015
A very concise history of a central (if not the central)battle that lead to our nation's independence.Babits combines extensive research and an unbelievable passion to explain this battle as it should be.Each of the 3 lines of battle are intricately explained and the author does justice to to the honor and courage of the British and Hessian troops,as well as to the American,or continental troops.He also makes the reader see the battle as it unfolds.This book is not for the casual reader who only knows that in general the British paid a heavy price for this"victory",but rather for the history aficionado who wants to know all the details.I was thoroughly impresses with this account of important United States history.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews