Civil War Generals in Defeat (review)

book reviews359 Civil War Generals in Defeat. Edited by Steven E. Woodworth. (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1999. Pp. 240. $29.95.) Everyone likes a winner, and Civil War buffs and historians are no different. Most tend to focus on those generals who succeeded in combat and won battles. The losers get attention too, but often it is to heap blame on them as individuals and bemoan their failings. Civil War Generals in Defeat examines why commanders failed in combat. Editor Steven E. Woodworth criticizes the tendency of historians to equate failure in battle with overall incompetence. Many Civil War generals were bright, courageous men with solid prewar reputations, but, as Woodworth writes, somehow they still "fell short" (3). Woodworth opens the collection with an essay on Albert Sidney Johnston's failed 1862 campaign in the West. At the start of the war, Johnston seemed poised to be one of the Confederacy's heroes. Instead, he suffered humiliating defeats, withstood angry public censure and, ultimately, tragic death at Shiloh. Woodworth concludes that timing had a lot to do with Johnston's shortcomings. He had no chance to learn from his mistakes and adjust to the new kind of volunteer army and fighting the Civil War brought. Alan Downs next looks at Joseph E. Johnston and his troubled wartime story. Johnston's problem, Downs argues, was not so much his famed sensitivity to rank or even his alleged preference for defense over offense. His father was a soldier, as was his great uncle Patrick Henry. Downs finds it significant that Johnston always carried a Revolutionary War sword with him that was given to him by his father. Johnston's failures, Downs contends, "was in his inability to divorce himself from the past and look to the present and future" (69). Ethan S. Rafuse and Stephen Engle look at two generals who also could not change with this changing war. Rafuse traces McClellan's conservative "rational " view on war to his father's strong Whig sentiments, and Stephen Engle shows that Don Carlos Buell never deviated from his belief that war should be fought by professional officers and never impinge on the rights and lives of citizens. Neither commander had any respect for politicians and both found themselves without command by the end of 1862. Stephen Sears defends Joe Hooker at Chancellorsville and maintains that except for Chancellorsville, where a blow to the head severely affected his ability to lead, "Fighting Joe" was a solid commander. Michael Ballard wonders how John C. Pemberton was put in such a crucial position at Vicksburg, when he showed repeatedly that he was not fit for field command. Finally, Brooks Simpson offers a fresh look at the command relationships at Gettysburg and concludes that Lee and his generals were bested by a more cooperative, more determined team of Union commanders. In the end, the secret to success was a variety offactors, but one ofthe essential ones was adaptability. The men who were able to adjust to this hard, destructive, highly politicized war excelled; those who did not faltered and failed. Timing and luck mattered too, and the quality of one's opponent also played a crucial role. 36oCIVIL WAR HISTORY This collection is refreshing and well written. Readers will not entirely agree with each ofthe authors' conclusions (McClelland, rational?), but they will find it an insightful and worthwhile study of the losing side of war. Lesley J. Gordon University of Akron A Hero to His Fighting Men: Nelson A. Miles, 1839-1925. By Peter R. DeMontravel (Kent, Ohio: Kent State University Press, 1998. Pp. x, 463, $45.00.) Nelson A. Miles ranked among the most important military figures of late-nineteenth -century America. One of the best of the North's "boy generals" of the Civil War, Miles fought in virtually every major battle on the eastern front. He went on to further fame in the wars against the Indians, playing an important role in the defeat of the Comanches, Cheyennes, Lakotas, Nez Percés, and Apaches. Miles also played a controversial role in 1894 Pullman Strike. And as the last commanding general ofthe army, he led the United States occupation of Puerto Rico during the...