"A Matter of Sensational Interest": The Century "Battles and Leaders" Series

"A MATTER OF SENSATIONAL INTEREST": THE CENTURY "BATTLES AND LEADERS" SERIES Stephen Davis The editors had "chosen the psychological moment; the generals were ready to write and the public to read." Thus Roy F. Nichols explains the success of Battles and Leaders, a collection of Civil War articles written in the 1880s by prominent participants and published over a three-year period by Century Magazine. The series was then expanded for publication as a book, which in turn appeared in four later editions. Enjoying an immediate and immense popularity, the work was also recognized at the time for its historical value. Since then, Battles and Leaders has become one of the most important sources in Civil War historiography.1 The series came into being not so much as a result of conscientious scholarship as of determined entrepreneurship. In the early 1880s, American illustrated magazines were becoming increasingly popular, and the front-running titles vied for a larger share of the market. Harper's Monthly had achieved enormous success through its printing of popular fiction and plentiful illustrations. Scribner's Monthly, begun in 1870, made use of the same format and quickly rose as principal challenger. The two magazines competed sharply for sales, especially after 1881 when Scribner's became Century.2 Generally speaking, the Civil War had not emerged as a substantial area for articles in these monthlies. A survey of Scribner's in its first decade shows not a single contribution on the subject before 1876. Thereafter, only a baker's dozen of pieces appear, three of which pertain to Lincoln. The most notable articles were reminiscences by former Confederate soldier Allen C. Redwood, whom the editors knew primarily as an illustrator. But the neglect of the war is best shown by the contribution in 1880 of an article by George B. McClellan, ex-com1 Roy F. Nichols, "Introduction to New Edition," in Robert Underwood Johnson and Clarence Clough Buel, eds., Battles and Leaders of the Civil War (1888; reprint ed., New York, 1956), l:iv. 2 Frank Luther Mott, American Journalism (New York, 1962), pp. 321, 394. Civil War History, Vol. XXVII, No. 4 Copyright© 1981 by The Kent State University Press 0009-8078/81/2704-0003 $01.00/0 BATTLES AND LEADERS339 mander of the Union Army of the Potomac: McClellan wrote not of his campaigns, but of his recent European sight-seeing tour.3 In July 1883, the editors of Century first recognized the commercial appeal of war recollections presented in the context of dialogue by former enemies. The issue for that month carried an article by Alexander R. Boteler, "Recollections of the John Brown Raid by a Virginian who Witnessed the Fight," to which was appended F. B. Sanborn's "Comment by a Radical Abolitionist" (which had previously been printed in Athntic Monthly). The two pieces apparently stirred such a readers' response that assistant editor Clarence Clough Buel—whose idea it had been to juxtapose the two clashingviewpoints—suggested a series on the Civil War employing the same format.4 (Actually, Buel's idea was not without precedent; years before, the Philadelphia Times had run a similarly organized series of war articles, then had published it in 1879 as a book. To it such luminaries as Generals Longstreet, W. B. Franklin, Beauregard, Pleasonton and Johnston had contributed accounts of important engagements.5) Buel presented his plan to associate editor Robert Underwood Johnson, who readily agreed to it, as did editor-inchief Richard Watson Gilder. However, Roswell Smith, Century Company president, was skeptical that any such series could increase magazine sales. Gilder, however, was confident, as he later expressed in a letter to Smith: "This war-series is a flank movement on all our rivals. It is a great scheme. . . ."e As originally planned, the series was to include onlyeight or ten pieces on the major battles. But the project soon expanded. In the words of Johnson, to whom Gilder gave chief responsibility for the series, "The plan was, first of all, so far as possible, to give an account of the campaign or battle from the commander of each side, or, if he were not living, from the person most entitled to speak for him...