The Army of the Potomac in the Overland and Petersburg Campaigns: Union Soldiers and Trench Warfare, 1864–1865 by Steven E. Sodergren (review)

With this new interpretation of the Army of the Potomac's 1864 Overland campaign and subsequent siege of Petersburg, Virginia, Steven E. Sodergren provides a nuanced account that helps historians better understand the final year of the Civil War in the eastern theater. Most campaign histories recount the brutality and carnage of the Overland campaign, epitomized by battles such as the Wilderness, Spotsylvania Courthouse, and Cold Harbor and the grinding attrition associated with expanding trench networks around Petersburg, while focusing clearly on military maneuvers and operations. Sodergren instead homes in on the regimental officers and enlisted men who experienced these campaigns, explaining how they were able to endure such horrific conditions and ultimately triumph over the Army of Northern Virginia.

The Overland campaign all but shattered the Army of the Potomac, which suffered almost 55,000 casualties in about six weeks and experienced a marked decline in morale. Desertion rates increased significantly, and disciplinary issues became a more pervasive problem throughout the army. Projecting conventional wisdom about trench warfare in World War I back on the Civil War, readers might assume that those problems would continue as the Union army began operating along the fortified line that pinned in the Army of Northern Virginia at Petersburg. Sodergren's analysis suggests otherwise, arguing that the Army of the Potomac's morale and combat effectiveness improved as a result of its time in the trenches, even as Confederate morale and combat effectiveness declined, paving the way for the successful campaign in the spring of 1865 that ended the war in the eastern theater.

Sodergren identifies multiple reasons, some interdependent, for this outcome. First, the men learned how to live in the trenches, and although they remained in mortal danger throughout the siege, they also learned how to protect themselves in a way that had not been possible during the Overland campaign. Second, their logistical situation improved dramatically, with most now having access to a steady stream of supplies. Those supplies came not only from the government but also from entities such as the United States Sanitary Commission and the Christian Commission, whose efforts served as tangible evidence of wider support. Third, a significant increase in the number of furloughs granted, coupled with consistent delivery of mail and newspapers to the front lines, connected soldiers more closely to the home front, both physically and psychologically. Those connections reaffirmed that they were fighting for a just cause and had not been forgotten. Fourth, Union victories at Mobile, at Atlanta, and in the Shenandoah Valley suggested that the Confederacy was in decline and that a final push in the East could bring the war to a close. There was fighting and dying in these Union troops' future, but not the slaughter of the Overland campaign that had seemingly lacked purpose. Though Sodergren discusses the impact on morale and motivation of the large manpower turnover in the Army of the Potomac in the summer of 1864, he might have given the topic more careful consideration. But his analysis is thoughtful, convincing, and well argued.

Sodergren's conclusions are drawn from his careful reading of an impressive number of diaries, letters, and memoirs generated by officers and enlisted men who experienced the war at the company and regimental levels. In doing so, Sodergren has convincingly captured the hopes, fears, and changing perceptions of the war in a way that one wishes were present in more traditional campaign histories. This volume intentionally avoids recounting every movement and encounter of these campaigns, but the end result is a notable contribution to our understanding of this critical period of the Civil War.