Carlton McCarthy, a former artilleryman with the Richmond Howitzers, noted after the war that historians would only write about big battles and campaigns, not how the common soldier fried his bacon and baked his biscuits. McCarthy was correct. Save for a few small references in scattered books, no one has set out to document how an army was fed, or the daily eating habits of Confederate soldiers until Michael C. Hardy’s Feeding Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia.Although seldom studied, food (or the lack thereof) and the logistics behind it played a critical role during the war, contributed mightily to the success and failure of campaigns, and impacted the overall outcome of the conflict. Understanding how soldiers fried their bacon and baked their biscuits, how they ate and, very often, went hungry, is a vital tool to understanding their individual experiences and the larger history of supply and logistics within the Confederate army.Hardy bases his unique study on more than 300 sets of letters and diaries that closely examine the importance of sustenance in the day-to-day life of the soldiers in the Army of Northern Virginia. Various chapters examine food issued by the army, food sent from home, and food carried, collected, and eaten during campaigns. These accounts dispel many misconceptions and assumptions about food during the war and provide a rich and complex picture of the arduous journey various meats, grains, and other foodstuffs underwent to reach the hungry soldiers in the field.In addition to the common soldier, Feeding Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia examines what the Confederate high command ate and also explores the relationship between hospitals and food, demonstrating the importance of proper nutrition in the recovery and care of the wounded. The vital role of camp servants is also studied, as is the critical connection between proper nutrition and morale. The voices of the men themselves provide a multi-faceted examination of this critical, but often overlooked, field of history.Battles and campaigns would not have been possible without a proper diet and a functioning logistical system to support the men at the front. Feeding Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia offers invaluable insight into this overlooked and understudied topic that made it all possible.

What actually happened during the first six weeks of new-found peace once General Lee surrendered the remnants of the Army of Northern Virginia to General Grant? What were the initial reactions of the soldiers and Virginia citizens to the devastating news of Lincoln’s assassination? How did they handle the situation of the emancipated slaves? These and many other issues are covered in depth by Chris Calkins, former chief historian at Appomattox, in The Final Bivouac: The Confederate Surrender Parade at Appomattox and the Disbanding of the Virginia Armies, April 10-May 20, 1865.The first installment in this unofficial set, “No One Wants to be the Last to Die” (formerly The Battles of Appomattox), set the stage for the final dramatic act of the Civil War in Virginia: the surrender parade at Appomattox. Calkins vividly captured the intense feelings and emotions of both Union and Confederate soldiers as the former enemies faced each other for the last time. The honor and respect shown the victorious Federal troops toward the defeated Southerners is one of the most moving episodes in American history.The Final Bivouac continues the story with accounts of homeward-bound Confederates, the Union encampment at Burkeville, the Danville Expedition, and the occupation of Southside Virginia. The narrative concludes as the last few regiments in blue cross the James River at Richmond on their way to Washington, D.C., and then, finally home.Calkins based his work on primary source material, photographs, and archaeological evidence. When primary sources differ, as they occasionally did, he presents all of the information so readers can weigh the facts for themselves. The Final Bivouac will stand the judgment of time and will be of deep interest to everyone who enjoys reading about the American Civil War.

In the spring of 1864, many in the North, including President Lincoln, were growing frustrated. Although Lincoln’s armies were achieving success on the battle¬fields, the gruesome toll was becoming increasingly unacceptable. The president needed a general who would ¬ finally put an end to the war. He found him in Ulysses S. Grant, who would close out the conflict a little more than a year after his appointment. Determined to destroy Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia, Grant bulked up the Army of the Potomac with the addition of Burnside’s IX Corps, swelling the army’s numbers to nearly 120,000. The campaigns of 1862 and 1863 had inflicted heavy losses on Lee’s army, including some of his most talented commanders, among them “Stonewall” Jackson. In the spring of 1864, Lee’s army was more scattered than Meade’s, but the Army of Northern Virginia was not only capable but also deeply familiar with the Virginia terrain.Grant planned several offensives involving attacks against Richmond, Atlanta, and the Shenandoah Valley. In the north, the Army of the Potomac would strike hard at Lee, while the Union Army of the James would head inland toward Richmond to cut supply lines and then join with Meade’s army. On May 3, 1864, the Army of the Potomac headed for the Wilderness to open the Spring Campaign. The next six weeks saw the most brutal ¬ fighting of the entire war. Repeatedly, Grant brought Lee into battle—notably at the Wilderness, Spotsylvania, North Anna, and Cold Harbor—yet each time Grant was frustrated in his efforts to destroy the Army of Northern Virginia. Finally, unable to capture Richmond, Grant reached the James River where his forces built a long bridge to facilitate its crossing to attack Petersburg. While Grant had failed to destroy Lee’s army or capture Richmond, the relentless pressure of the campaign effectively sealed the fate of the Confederacy.

The summer of 1863 started off disastrously for the Army of the Potomac in the Eastern Theater. In early May, Confederate General Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia defeated and humiliated Major General Joseph Hooker’s army at the Battle of Chancellorsville. While both armies reorganized in the wake of Chancellorsville’s massive losses, Lee then maintained the initiative and launched an invasion of Pennsylvania. Throughout June, Lee’s army advanced deeper into Pennsylvania and Northern efforts to stop his progress were ineffective until Major General George Meade replaced Hooker as commander of the Army of the Potomac. On July 1, 1863, Meade and Lee’s large armies collided outside of the crossroads town of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. The stakes were never higher for either army as the newly promoted Meade defended Northern soil, while General Lee risked everything by taking the war into enemy territory.The first day of the Battle of Gettysburg is often overshadowed by fighting on the following days, but July 1 was one of the bloodiest single engagements of the entire Civil War. Many of the decisions leading to and through Gettysburg’s first day remain steeped in controversy. Did Meade intend to fight on the Pipe Creek line in Maryland until subordinates such as Major General John Reynolds forced the engagement at Gettysburg? Did the absence of J. E. B. Stuart’s cavalry really leave Lee “blind” to his opponent’s movements? Was Lee’s desire to avoid a general engagement ignored by his own officers? With neither commanding general on the battlefield for much of the day, crucial decisions remained in the hands of subordinates such as John Buford, John Reynolds, A. P. Hill, Richard Ewell, and Oliver Howard.This Casemate Illustrated volume sets the stage for the Civil War’s greatest battle and covers the heroism, decisions, and mistakes made on the first day at Gettysburg.

Following their defeat at Saratoga in upstate New York in 1777, the British decided to implement a Southern Strategy against the American insurgents, a plan to “roll up” the rebellious colonies from Georgia through the Carolinas to Virginia. Instead, they triggered a savage partisan war of raids, ambushes, assassinations, and large pitched battles that rivaled any fought in the northern colonies.Untrained Patriot militiamen—occasionally stiffened by contingents of the Continental Line—were pitted against Britain’s Cherokee and Creek allies, and Loyalist militia and British regulars led by General Cornwallis and his two ablest subordinates, Patrick Ferguson and the ruthless Banastre “Bloody Ban” Tarleton. In October 1780 the Loyalist militia was virtually destroyed at King’s Mountain, the battle that Lord Clinton, the British commander in Chief, said was “the first link in a chain of events that followed each other in regular succession until they at last ended in the total loss of America.” Other defeats at Blackstock’s Farm and Cowpens, and a Pyhrric victory at Guilford Courthouse, gutted the British Southern Army and drove Cornwallis north to encirclement and surrender at Yorktown.This study uses battlefield terrain analysis and the words of the officers and common soldiers, from pension records and littleknown interviews, to bring to life the crucial role of one militia regiment—the Second Spartans of South Carolinathat fought in virtually every action of the vicious backcountry war that decided the fate of America. Or as one private in the Second Spartans said, expressing admiration for his colonel: “. . . a few Brave Men stood true for the cause of liberty.”

Join Garner, Dodge, and the rest of RT Iowa as they venture “across the fence” to help stem the flow of the North Vietnamese on the Ho Chi Minh Trail. Tense hours of moving in areas “denied” to the U.S. military are interspersed with fierce firefights; back at Kontum, the Green Berets unwind with wild abandon, while the recon first sergeant makes repeated, often doomed attempts to ensure the teams’ success—and survival.First published in 1990, this classic account of Military Assistance Command Vietnam, Studies and Observation Group, was written as a novel by a veteran of Recon Team Iowa to bring his experiences and those of fellow MACV-SOG soldiers to a wider audience at a time when their dedication and sacrifice was little known. The small tight recon teams—each comprising three U.

After taking Forts Henry and Donelson, the Union army prepared to try and take the vital rail hub of Corinth, Mississippi. To facilitate this, Major General H. Halleck planned to combine Grant’s Army of West Tennessee with Buell’s Army of the Ohio. Meanwhile the newly formed Confederate Army of the Mississippi was placed under the command of General A. S. Johnston. Johnston planned to attack Grant’s encampment before Grant and Buell could combine their commands.The Confederate army left Corinth and marched north into Tennessee. On the morning of April 6, 1862, Johnston attacked at Shiloh, taking Grant’s forces by surprise. Grant’s troops put up a tenacious defense with their backs against the Tennessee River. Unfortunately for the Confederates, Johnston was killed early that afternoon. Buell’s army arrived that night and next morning launched a counterattack along with Grant’s semi-organized survivors. The Union forces were too large to be stopped, and after a stout defensive effort Beauregard ordered a withdrawal. The first great bloodbath of the Civil War was over, resulting in up to 30,000 killed, wounded, and captured. Its ramifications would be felt for the rest of the war.Illustrated with photographs, paintings and maps, this is a full account of the first large set-piece battle of the war, the only time a large Union army was taken by surprise.

The 14-month campaign to regain the control of Mississippi River by capturing Vicksburg, Mississippi, stands as the prime example of how the Civil War would be fought and won. The Federal government’s policy of blockading the southern ports and controlling the inland waterways would only be successful with total control of the country’s largest river. Technological advances created by the war itself and used by progressive-thinking Federal and Confederate commanders ensured that this vital Southern supply and logistics base would be the focal point of the war on the western waters. Ulysses S. Grant, who had risen to fame as one of the North’s prominent heroes early in the war, boldly concluded that Vicksburg would be the next nut to crack in the Federal policy for control of the Mississippi River. Understanding that only a strong relationship with US Navy could ensure the success of Vicksburg’s surrender, Grant found a man as bold and daring as himself in David Dixon Porter and his Mississippi Squadron of ironclad gunboats and fleet of vessels. These two commanders and their trusted subordinates would frustrate John C. Pemberton’s attempts to defend Mississippi and eastern Louisiana for the Confederacy. A lack of experience in commanding such an important assignment, limited resources, poor staffing, and a Confederate government consumed with the war in the east ensured Pemberton’s position would be insurmountable as the Confederacy’s tenuous hold on the Mississippi River began to fall apart.

By the end of March 1863, Major General Ulysses S. Grant was at a crossroads in his military career. His bold attempts in the late fall 1862 and winter of 1862/63 had all come up fall short of his objective: get his army on high ground north and east of Vicksburg and capture the last major obstacle on the Mississippi River. Grant had been stymied by the difficult region’s swampy bayous as well as Confederate resistance at key locations that thwarted his advances and prolonged his army’s miserable dispositions in the sickly camps of Louisiana bottomland. Confederate Lieutenant General John C. Pemberton had performed well using his interior rail lines and intelligence networks to place blocking forces or obstructions that delayed or derailed Grant’s movements.Realizing his career was on the line, Grant chose the riskiest operation he could have concocted. In a joint military operation, Grant marched two of his army corps down the roads and along the bayous of Louisiana, repairing them as they progressed, while Acting Rear Admiral David Dixon Porter led his ironclad gunboats with transports past the Confederate heavy artillery defending Vicksburg’s riverfront. It was Grant’s hope to get enough boats below the city to enable a crossing of the Mississippi River, a forced march into the state, and arriving at Vicksburg’s doorsteps from the east–west approach. In doing this, Grant would sever his main line of logistics and supply, something his subordinate officers thought was a disastrous mistake. Grant would take the risk in a zero-sum game: he would capture Vicksburg or destroy himself and his army doing so.Realizing his career was on the line, Grant chose the riskiest operation he could have concocted. In a joint military operation, Grant marched two of his army corps down the roads and along the bayous of Louisiana, repairing them as they progressed, while Acting Rear Admiral David Dixon Porter led his ironclad gunboats with transports past the Confederate heavy artillery defending Vicksburg’s riverfront. Grant hoped to get enough boats below the city to enable a crossing of the Mississippi River. Then, he would force a march into the state and arrive at Vicksburg’s back door from the east. In doing this, Grant would sever his main line of logistics and supply, something his subordinate officers thought was a disastrous mistake. Grant would take the risk in a zero-sum game: he would capture Vicksburg or destroy himself and his army doing so.

The bloody two-week siege of Spanish Fort, Alabama (March 26-April 8, 1865) was one of the final battles of the Civil War. Despite its importance and fascinating history, surprisingly little has been written about it. The fall of the fort was considered by many the key to the surrender of the important seaport of Mobile, which fell to Maj. Gen. Edward R. S. Canby on April 12, 1865. Paul Brueske’s Digging all Night and Fighting All Day: The Civil War Siege of Spanish Fort and the Mobile Campaign, 1865 is the first full-length study of this subject.General U. S. Grant had long had his eyes set on capturing Mobile. Its fall would eliminate the vital logistical center and put one of the final nails in the coffin of the Confederacy. On January 18, 1865, Grant ordered General Canby to move against Mobile, Montgomery, and Selma, and destroy anything useful to the enemy’s war effort. The reduction of Spanish Fort, along with Fort Blakeley—the primary obstacles to taking Mobile—was a prerequisite to capturing the city.After the devastating battles of Franklin and Nashville in Tennessee in late 1864, many Federals believed Mobile’s garrison—which included a few battered brigades and most of the artillery units from the Army of Tennessee—did not have much fight left and would evacuate the city rather than fight. They did not. Despite being outnumbered about 10 to 1, 33-year-old Brig. Gen. Randall Lee Gibson mounted a skillful and spirited defense that “considerably astonished” his Union opponents. The siege and battle that unfolded on the rough and uneven bluffs of Mobile Bay’s eastern shore, fought mainly by veterans of the principal battles of the Western Theater, witnessed every offensive and defensive art known to war.Paul Brueske, a graduate student of History at the University of South Alabama, marshaled scores of primary source materials, including letters, diaries, reports, and newspaper accounts, to produce an outstanding study of a little-known but astonishingly important event rife with acts of heroism that rivaled any battle of the war.

Gettysburg for Kids and Grown-ups, Too! is a book like no other. It is a family-friendly story of the Battle of Gettysburg for everyone, no matter their age. Powerful modern images enhance an easy-to-read narrative. Fascinating sidebars create an engaging volume that is informative and entertaining but also sympathetic and reverent. Our familiar guides, Liam and Jaden, now joined by their teen brother Jesse, lead young readers and their families on a journey through the Gettysburg story that is immediate and alive.

July 1863 was a momentous month in the Civil War. News of Gettysburg and Vicksburg electrified the North and devastated the South. Sandwiched geographically between those victories and lost in the heady tumult of events was news that William S. Rosecrans’s Army of the Cumberland had driven Braxton Bragg’s Army of Tennessee entirely out of Middle Tennessee. The brilliant campaign nearly cleared the state of Rebels and changed the calculus of the Civil War in the Western Theater. Despite its decisive significance, few readers even today know of these events. The publication of Tullahoma: The Forgotten Campaign that Changed the Course of Civil War, June 23 - July 4, 1863 by award-winning authors David A. Powell and Eric J. Wittenberg, forever rectifies that oversight. On June 23, 1863, Rosecrans, with some 60,000 men, initiated a classic campaign of maneuver against Bragg’s 40,000. Confronted with rugged terrain and a heavily entrenched foe, Rosecrans intended to defeat Bragg through strategy rather than bloodshed by outflanking him and seizing control of Bragg’s supply line, the Nashville& Chattanooga Railroad, at Tullahoma and thus force him to fight a battle outside of his extensive earthworks. It almost worked. The complex and fascinating campaign included deceit, hard marching, fighting, and incredible luck - both good and bad. Rosecrans executed a pair of feints against Guy’s Gap and Liberty Gap to deceive the Rebels into thinking the main blow would fall somewhere other than where it was designed to strike. An ineffective Confederate response exposed one of Bragg’s flanks - and his entire army - to complete disaster. Torrential rains and consequential decisions in the field wreaked havoc on the best-laid plans. Still Bragg hesitated, teetering on the brink of losing the second most important field army in the Confederacy. The hour was late and time was short, and his limited withdrawal left the armies poised for a climactic engagement that may have decided the fate of Middle Tennessee, and perhaps the war. Finally fully alert to the mortal threat facing him, Bragg pulled back from the iron jaws of defeat about to engulf him and retreated - this time all the way to Chattanooga, the gateway to the rest of the Southern Confederacy. Powell and Wittenberg mined hundreds of archival and firsthand accounts to craft a splendid study of this overlooked campaign that set the stage for the Battles of Chickamauga and Chattanooga, the removal of Rosecrans and Bragg from the chessboard of war, the elevation of U.S. Grant to command all Union armies, and the early stages of William T. Sherman’s Atlanta Campaign. Tullahoma - one of the most brilliantly executed major campaigns of the war—was pivotal to Union success in 1863 and beyond. And now readers everywhere will know precisely why.

Almost everyone is familiar with the name of at least one Revolutionary War battle. Some, like Lexington and Concord, Bunker Hill, and Yorktown are nearly household names. Others are less well known but readily recognized when mentioned. An engagement in a New England colony during the war’s sixth year, commanded by one of history’s most famous military names, is not among them. Matthew E. Reardon has set out to rectify that oversight with the publication of The Traitor’s Homecoming: Benedict Arnold’s Raid on New London, Connecticut, September 4-13, 1781.By 1781, Britian was at risk of losing the colonies. The combined Franco-American armies of Gens. George Washington and Jean-Baptiste comte de Rochambeau spent much of that August deceiving British General Sir Henry Clinton into believing they were moving on him to lay siege against to New York City. In fact, they were moving south toward Yorktown, Virginia, in a bid to trap Lord Cornwallis’ army against the sea. Clinton, meanwhile, dispatched former American general Benedict Arnold across Long Island Sound to attack New London, hoping the move would derail reinforcements and supplies headed toward the city.Situated in southeastern Connecticut, New London was the center of the state’s naval activities. State and continental vessels were constructed within its harbor, which doubled as a haven for American privateers. Arnold landed on September 6 and, in a textbook operation, defeated local militia, took possession of the town, harbor, and forts, and set New London’s waterfront ablaze. But that is not how it is remembered. The state government’s vicious propaganda campaign against the British and Arnold, who was already infamous for his treachery, created a narrative of partial truths, myths and legends that persist to this day. The true story, however, is much more than the bloody fighting and “massacre” at Fort Griswold.The Traitor’s Homecoming utilizes dozens of newly discovered British and American primary sources to weave together a balanced military study of an often forgotten and misunderstood campaign. Indeed, Reardon achieves a major reinterpretation of the battle while dismantling its myths. Thirteen original maps and numerous illustrations and modern photographs flesh out this groundbreaking study.

On the eve of the Civil War, the London Times informed its readers that Castle Pinckney has “been kept garrisoned, not to protect Charleston from naval attack from the ocean, but to serve as a bridle upon the city.” Located on a marshy island in the center of Charleston’s magnificent harbor, the large cannons on the ramparts of this horseshoe-shaped masonry fort had the ability to command downtown Charleston and the busy wharves along East Bay Street. This inescapable fact made Castle Pinckney an important chess piece in the secession turmoil of 1832 and 1850, and in the months leading up to the 1861 bombardment of Fort Sumter. Holding Charleston by the Bridle: The History of Castle Pinckney from 1811 Through the Civil War to the Present Day by Cliff Roberts and Matthew Locke is the first book on the subject, from the fort’s innovative design as part of America’s “Second System” of coastal fortifications to the modern challenges of preserving its weathered brick walls against rising sea levels. The impressive bastion was constructed as a state-of-the-art seacoast fortress on the eve of the War of 1812. President James Monroe and Gens. Winfield Scott, Robert E. Lee, and P. G. T. Beauregard inspected its casemates and barracks. The history of Pinckney is as impressive as its list of visiting VIPs.Defending the fort was one of Winfield Scott’s major concerns during the Nullification Crisis of 1832. Seminole Indians and Africans from the illegal slave ship Echo were held there. In 1860, Maj. Robert Anderson knew the fort was the key to protecting his small Federal garrison at Fort Moultrie, but his requests to Washington for troops to hold the Castle went unheeded. That December, three companies of Charleston militia scaled and seized the fort in a daring act that pushed the nation to the edge of civil war. After First Manassas (Bull Run), 156 captured Yankee officers and enlisted men were sent to the island, and in 1863, members of the famed 54th Massachusetts were held there as POWs. The fort’s guns helped defend the city during the war’s longest siege. By 1865, the old fortress had been transformed into an earthen barbette battery with a rifled Brooke gun and three giant 10” Columbiads. During Reconstruction, the Castle became an “American Bastille” for Southerners accused of crimes against the government.Roberts and Locke rely on extensive primary research and archaeological evidence to tell the full story of the Castle for the first time. Given its importance to America’s history, it is a history long overdue.

The first shot of the American Civil War was not fired on April 12, 1861, in Charleston, South Carolina, but instead came on October 16, 1859, in Harpers Ferry, Virginia - or so claimed former slave turned abolitionist Frederick Douglass. The shot came like a meteor in the dark. John Brown, the infamous fighter on the Kansas plains and detester of slavery, led a band of nineteen men on a desperate nighttime raid that targeted the Federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry. There, they planned to begin a war to end slavery in the United States. But after 36 tumultuous hours, John Brown's Raid failed, and Brown himself became a prisoner of the state of Virginia. Brown's subsequent trial further divided north and south on the issue of slavery as Brown justified his violent actions to a national audience forced to choose sides. Ultimately, Southerners cheered Brown's death at the gallows while Northerners observed it with reverence. The nation's dividing line had been drawn. Herman Melville and Walt Whitman extolled Brown as a "meteor" of the war. Roughly one year after Brown and his men attacked slavery in Virginia, the nation split apart, fueled by Brown's fiery actions. John Brown's Raid tells the story of the first shots that led to disunion. Richly filled with maps and images, it includes a driving and walking tour of sites related to Brown's Raid so visitors today can walk in the footsteps of America's meteor.

In the spring of 1862, George McClellan and his massive army were slowly making their way up the Virginia Peninsula. Their goal: capture the Confederate capital and end the rebellion. “To Hell or Richmond” one Federal artillery unit vowed, sewing the words onto their flag. The outnumbered and outgunned Confederates under generals “Prince John” Magruder and Joseph E. Johnston kept pulling back, drawing McClellan away from his base at Fort Monroe and further up the peninsula—exactly the direction McClellan wanted to go. But if they could draw him just far enough, and out of position, maybe they could attack and defeat him.As McClellan approached the very gates of Richmond, a great battle was brewing. Could the Confederates save their capital and, with it, their young nation? Could the Federals win the war with a single fatal blow?In To Hell or Richmond: The 1862 Peninsula Campaign, Doug Crenshaw and Drew Gruber follow the armies on their trek up the peninsula. The stakes grew enormous, surprises awaited, and the soldiers themselves had only two possible destinations in mind.