In February 1862, General Ulysses S. Grant captured forts Henry and Donelson in Tennessee and won the American Civil War.
It took almost three more years and thousands of lives, but the capture of the two earthwork structures was key to all that came later, argues British historian John Keegan in The American Civil War: A Military History.
“Possession of the Tennessee River, if it were used correctly by the North, would give access to southern Tennessee, northern Alabama, and the upper Mississippi, and lend support to operations down the Mississippi River itself,” Keegan writes. “The capture of Forts Henry and Donelson effectively marked the end of the opening stage of the Civil War in the West.”
Surprised? I was. Most histories of the subject tend to rank the capture of the two forts as marking the emergence of Grant, and not much more. For many writers, and not just those with a sneaking admiration for various Confederate commanders, the Civil War is more of a close-run thing. You almost wonder how or even if the North won at all.
Keegan, a former lecturer at the Royal Military Academy, Sandhurst, and author of such works as A History of Warfare (1993), The Mask of Command (1987) and The Face of Battle (1978), is a big-picture writer. He’s more comfortable with the movements of armies and decisions by generals than with vignettes that romanticize people and places.
The overview format favored by Keegan is distinctly old-fashioned in a day when writers spend hundreds of pages on the heroics of a single engagement. The emphasis on the personal over the strategic has obscured the story of the war, which was essentially written with the North’s successful blockade of Southern ports and the isolation of the Confederacy. The North’s eventual victory was inevitable.
What this approach lacks in suspense, it makes up for in clarity and concision. Even buffs steeped in the subject will find value in Keegan’s observations and conclusions, especially about the nature of battle.
For one thing, there were lots of them: 10,000 between 1861 and 1865. For another, they were often indecisive, chiefly because both sides lacked the cavalry and artillery that would have forced the issue. Finally, there was the question of terrain. Many of the bloodiest battles were fought in relatively confined areas marked by dense vegetation.
The reputation of General Grant has seen a revival in recent years, and Keegan is a partisan. He considers Grant “the greatest general of the war, one who would have excelled at any time in any army,” followed by his friend and colleague William T. Sherman. He calls the Confederacy’s Robert E. Lee “a gifted battle-winner” whose defects included a lack of boldness, excessive sensitivity to the feelings of his subordinates and a failure to insist upon his own judgment.
And then there’s this, presented early on without elaboration: “The armies of the Civil War were the worst tailored of any great conflict, and the effect was heightened by the almost universal abandonment of shaving.”
If The American Civil War has a defect, it is the book’s less-than-chronological, sometimes jumbled narrative style.
Before the Appomattox finale, a grab-bag of chapters covers such subjects as black soldiers in the Union army, Walt Whitman and the quality of medical care, the war at sea, life on the home fronts and the obligatory “Could the South Have Survived?” Some of these chapters are compelling, even provocative, and yet here they seem presented as afterthoughts.
The one-volume approach is refreshing and, these days, unusual. Those who are looking for more can always go find full-length treatments of the Iron Brigade, or Collis’s Zouaves.
Last week Joseph Nye, the well-known China scholar, wrote on the Australian Strategic Policy Institute’s website about how war over Taiwan might be averted. He noted that years ago he was on a team that met with then-president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), “whose previous ‘unofficial’ visit to the US had caused a crisis in which China fired missiles into the sea and the US deployed carriers off the coast of Taiwan.” Yes, that’s right, mighty Chen caused that crisis all by himself. Neither the US nor the People’s Republic of China (PRC) exercised any agency. Nye then nostalgically invoked the comical specter
Relations between Taiwan and the Czech Republic have flourished in recent years. However, not everyone is pleased about the growing friendship between the two countries. Last month, an incident involving a Chinese diplomat tailing the car of vice president-elect Hsiao Bi-khim (蕭美琴) in Prague, drew public attention to the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) operations to undermine Taiwan overseas. The trip was not Hsiao’s first visit to the Central European country. It was meant to be low-key, a chance to meet with local academics and politicians, until her police escort noticed a car was tailing her through the Czech capital. The
April 15 to April 21 Yang Kui (楊逵) was horrified as he drove past trucks, oxcarts and trolleys loaded with coffins on his way to Tuntzechiao (屯子腳), which he heard had been completely destroyed. The friend he came to check on was safe, but most residents were suffering in the town hit the hardest by the 7.1-magnitude Hsinchu-Taichung Earthquake on April 21, 1935. It remains the deadliest in Taiwan’s recorded history, claiming around 3,300 lives and injuring nearly 12,000. The disaster completely flattened roughly 18,000 houses and damaged countless more. The social activist and
Over the course of former President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) 11-day trip to China that included a meeting with Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leader Xi Jinping (習近平) a surprising number of people commented that the former president was now “irrelevant.” Upon reflection, it became apparent that these comments were coming from pro-Taiwan, pan-green supporters and they were expressing what they hoped was the case, rather than the reality. Ma’s ideology is so pro-China (read: deep blue) and controversial that many in his own Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) hope he retires quickly, or at least refrains from speaking on some subjects. Regardless