Joseph E. Johnston and the Defense of Richmond (review)

book reviews361 Despite these misgivings, DeMontravel's biography is superior to other efforts in two important ways. A Hero to his Fighting Men offers an especially good description of Miles's Puerto Rico campaign, a model of efficiency often overlooked amidst the army's blunders in Cuba. Further, DeMontravel has done impressive work in mining late-nineteenth-century newspapers, revealing important new contemporary perspectives about his elusive subject. Those interested in General Miles's long career will certainly need to consult this new biography. Robert Wooster Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi Joseph E. Johnston and the Defense of Richmond. By Steven H. Newton. (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1998. Pp. xiv, 278. $29.95.) Published in the Modern War Studies series from the University Press of Kansas , this volume covers Gen. Joseph E. Johnston's operations in Virginia, from approximately September 1861 to the general's wounding at Seven Pines on May 31,1862. Newton hopes to throw fresh light both on Johnston's career and on Confederate command decisions and strategies during this crucial but possibly underrated period. The author is indeed qualified for the work, having published The Battle ofSeven Pines in 1 991. Within his chronological framework, Newton concentrates on mid-February to late May 1862. During this time, the Confederate army held officer elections that could have destroyed the machine ofwar, had not Johnston and his generals worked to maintain morale and unit cohesion. Johnston also resisted meddling civilians who sought to manipulate army positions for political reasons. Also during this period, an overall strategy for the eastern theater was achieved. Johnston, probably correctly, favored a concentration of force to oppose the main enemy, Gen. George B. McClellan's Army of the Potomac. Robert E. Lee, "commanding general" of all forces under President Jefferson Davis, favored a stubborn defense of all territory from Savannah, Georgia, to Yorktown, Virginia . Newton adds to current criticism of Lee, noting that he overstated rebel capabilities and was disingenuous in going directly to Johnson's subordinates without his knowledge. Newton feels that the tension between the two generals blinded them to a better strategy, that is, using a minimum of troops to fight Lee's stubborn holding action on the Peninsula, while concentrating the major forces in front of Richmond according to Johnston's vision. As it was, Johnston conducted a masterly retreat fromYorktown and chose the right moment to attack McClelland, with his army divided by the Chickahominy River. The author concludes that Johnston was a successful commander overall, creating the positive situation that Lee then used to save Richmond. Newton's judgments are judicious, and he does not shrink from criticizing Johnston for some poor administrative work and failure to supervise his chief 362CIVIL WAR HISTORY subordinates in battle. Perhaps his most original point is that we should not think backwards, letting Johnston's dubious 1864 performance color our view of earlier operations. Instead, he sees the general's wounds at Seven Pines as producing a later timidity. At the same time, Newton overstates the neglect of Johnston. In 1956, Gilbert E. Goven and James W. Livingood produced the still-valuable A Different Valor: The Story of General Joseph E. Johnston, C.S.A., and in 1992 Craig L. Symonds published his excellent Joseph E. Johnston: A Civil War Biography. Newton tends to sight earlier defenders of Johnston while belaboring older critics of the general, such as Douglas Southall Freeman and Clifford Dowdey, many of whose judgments are now passé. Newton justifies another Johnston book by saying that the general is still underrated. But perhaps Johnston's poor standing remains partially justified. The impressions lingers that he dithered and that, had he faced a more determined general than McClelland, Richmond could well have fallen before Lee got a chance to try his hand at field command. Michael C. C. Adams Northern Kentucky University General Alexander P. Stewart and the Civil War in the West. By Sam Davis Elliott. (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1999. Pp. xviii, 339. $34-95·) Alexander Peter Stewart was Tennessee's highest-ranking Confederate military officer. A graduate of the U.S. Military Academy, Stewart left the army in 1845 and spent sixteen years teaching...