Confederate Generals in the Western Theater, Vol. 3: Essays on America’s Civil War (The Western Theater in the Civil War)

The Western Theater in the Civil War

by Lawrence Lee Hewitt (Editor), Arthur W. Bergeron Jr.

@font-face { "Times New Roman";}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { 0in 0in 0.0001pt; 200%; 12pt; Times; }table.MsoNormalTable { 10pt; "Times New Roman"; }div.Section1 { Section1; } The American Civil War was won and lost on its western battlefields, but accounts of triumphant Union generals such as Grant and Sherman leave half of the story untold. In the third volume of Confederate Generals in the Western Theater, editors Lawrence Hewitt and Arthur Bergeron bring together ten more never-before-published essays filled with new, penetrating insights into the key question of why the Rebel high command in the West could not match the performance of Robert E. Lee in the East.             Showcasing the work of such gifted historians as Wiley Sword, Timothy B. Smith, Rory T. Cornish, and M. Jane Johansson, this book is a compelling addition to an ongoing, collective portrait of generals who occasionally displayed brilliance but were more often handicapped by both geography and their own shortcomings. While the vast, varied terrain of the Western Theater slowed communications and troop transfers and led to the creation of too many military departments that hampered cooperation among commands, even more damaging were the personal qualities of many of the generals. All too frequently, incompetence, egotism, and insubordination were the rule rather than the exception. Some of these men were undone by alcoholism and womanizing, others by politics and nepotism. A few outlived their usefulness; others were killed before they could demonstrate their potential. Together, they destroyed what chance the Confederacy had of winning its independence.              Whether adding fresh fuel to the debate over the respective roles of Albert Sidney Johnston and P. G. T. Beauregard at Shiloh or bringing to light such lesser known figures as Joseph Finegan and Hiram Bronson Granbury, this volume, like the ones preceding it, is an exemplary contribution to Civil War scholarship. Lawrence Lee Hewitt is professor of history emeritus at Southeastern Louisiana University. A recipient of SLU’s President’s Award for Excellence in Research and the Charles L. Dufour Award for “outstanding achievements in preserving the heritage of the American Civil War,” he is a former managing editor of North & South. His publications include Port Confederate Bastion on the Mississippi. The late Arthur W. Bergeron Jr. was a reference historian with the United States Army Military History Institute and a past president of the Louisiana Historical Association. Among his earlier books were Confederate Mobile and A Thrilling The Memoir of a Southern Unionist.

440 pages, Hardcover

First published April 1, 2011

Reviews

[Avis Black · Rating 2 out of 5]

When Gary Gallagher edited his series of essays by various Civil War scholars, it's notable that the volumes were centered around campaigns. But Hewitt's series concentrates on generals, which is not surprising to anyone who knows the history of the western campaigns. The infighting among the southern generals was notorious. Although there is a lot of potential here, this volume in the series is a very mixed bag of essays.

Hewitt makes the point in the second preface that when many of the Union generals were transferred west, they fought better. This was not because they had suddenly improved in skill, but that they were fighting weaker and more poorly supplied and trained opponents.

The better essays in the collection are about Polk, Buckner, Johnston, and Stephen Dill Lee. Bruce Allardice makes the point that S.D. Lee had a pretty good war record until the Battle of Ezra Church, when he screwed up in a way disastrous to the Confederate cause. Robert Girardi argues convincingly that Polk did not actually violate Kentucky's neutrality, because most of the state was already in Union hands at that point, and Union troops had just occupied territory opposite Polk's location, which meant Polk with no choice but to advance troops if he was to hold onto any part of Kentucky at all. Instead, Girardi blames Polk for not seizing more territory, for Polk left Grant with too much of an advantage.

However, I take issue with Wiley Sword's essay about Beauregard at Shiloh. Sword criticizes Beauregard for not having the area around the battle properly mapped, and for not sending out scouts to provide adequate intelligence before and during the battle. Though Sword makes the point that Beauregard had been very sick for some weeks and was still sick practically all the way up to Shiloh, (a fact well known to Albert Sidney Johnston) he still holds Beauregard responsible for the Confederate defeat.

However, there's one big problem with this analysis. Beauregard was not the commanding general. Albert Sidney Johnston was. Making sure that mapping and proper intelligence gathering is being carried out is the commanding general's job. The more I know about A.S. Johnston, the more he comes across like a nobler version of John Bell Hood. A good man in a fight, but uninterested in administration or planning. I've admired Sword's writing in the past, but he does not make a convincing case here.

[Stephen Graham · Rating 3 out of 5]

As with most essay collections, there are hits and misses. While they were decent essays, I'm not sure I needed yet another pair of essays on Johnston and Beauregard at Shiloh. The best to me were the essays on Preston and Granbury. The essay on SD Lee at Ezra Church didn't really seem to tell me much about him as a commander.