Friendly Fire in the Civil War: More than 100 True Stories of Comrade Killing Comrade (review)

66CIVIL WAR HISTORY Friendly Fire in the Civil War: More than ioo True Stories ofComrade Killing Comrade. By Webb Garrison. (Nashville, Term.: Rutledge Hill Press, 1999. Pp. viii, 229. $19.95.) Webb Garrison wrote that it was a "tragedy without a name" before American troops in Vietnam coined it "friendly fire." He took this topic, men being mistakenly shot by their own men, and applied it to the Civil War, staking a claim that his is the "first work to look at this aspect of the war between the North and South" (vii-viii). From minie balls to mortar shells, the author found 1 50 instances offriendly fire taking place in the conflict. He attributed its deadly presence to a variety of factors, including visual impairments on the field, mistaken identity, and even deliberate shootings into crowds of soldiers, since commanders felt it was better to risk the lives of their men if victory might result. Garrison's first case offriendly fire was in June 1861 , at Fairfax Court House, Virginia. At night, retreating Confederate cavalrymen were mistaken for the enemy and shot by their infantry. Armbands and watchwords were implemented as an attempt to better identify friend from foe, but such measures proved ineffective , as exemplified in the war's first major battle. At First Bull Run, both Union and Confederate troops, confused over similar uniforms, fired on their own comrades. Curiously, Garrison failed to add the similarity in national flags as complicating matters worse. Two lessons were learned from Manassas. For the Union, it was bringing uniformity to their military dress with blue attire; as for the Confederacy, which deserved some mention by the author, was the design of a new national flag that did not resemble the "Stars and Stripes." In addition to covering the common soldier, Garrison delves into the more prominent figures involved in friendly fire. He does not dispute an argument first made by Wiley Sword and more recently supported by William C. Davis, that Gen. Albert Sidney Johnson was killed by friendly fire at Shiloh. Admitting that the circumstances of Johnson's death are still open to conjecture, Garrison was more definite regarding the case of Union general Jesse L. Reno, hit by his own men at South Mountain in 1862—"The first general officerpositively known to have died as a result of friendly fire" (92). A few days later, at Antietam, the author found eleven recorded cases of friendly fire. Perhaps the Civil War's most notable example of friendly fire took place the next year, involving Gen. Thomas J. Jackson at Chancellorsville. Garrison, however, was unable to resolve the question of which North Carolina regiment actually shot Jackson, the 1 8th or the 33rd. The inability to add new information or give exact figures became problematic throughout Friendly Fire, a warning to the serious student, but perhaps still valuable to the general reader interested in the topic. Although there are more than a few instances of comments such as "No one has the faintest idea of how many men were shot at, killed, or wounded there by their comrades" (26)—the BOOK REVIEWS67 author does determine in his conclusion on average, an occurrence of friendly fire took place nearly every ten days of the war. Michael P. Gray New Egypt, N.J. A Yankee atArms: The Diary ofLieutenantAugustus D. Ayling, 2çth Massachusetts Volunteers. Edited by Charles F. Herberger. (Knoxville: University ofTennessee Press, 1999. Pp. xiv, 301. $36.00.) TheAmerican Civil War generated a huge diary literature among soldiers, many of whom previously had rarely set pen or pencil to paper to remark on their own lives and experiences. Along with the abundant correspondence left by soldiers writing home, such diaries allow us to plumb the "mind" of the soldier in matters as diverse as devotion to Victorian codes of honor and courage, concepts of freedom, thinking on the nature of the state and nationalism, adjustment to the regimentation of military life, attitudes toward race, and a host of other concerns . Of late, such sources have generated their own vast literature on why soldiers fought and how the war made soldiers into "new men," at least for a time. With so...