Customer Reviews

Battle at Bull Run (Davis)

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This new and revised edition of the original 1977 book offers the reader a splendid narrative of the first major battle of the American Civil War. On the 21st of July 1861, 60,000 American soldiers from the North and South met along the banks of Bull Run. In the fighting that followed the Union forces lost 2,900 out of the 20,000 men engaged while the Confederates lost 2,000 out of about 17,000 engaged.

The first half of the book describes the Union and Confederate forces as they muster their men into the first armies of the Civil War. It continues with an outline of the events' leading up to the battle and gives you a feeling for, and an understanding of, the main characters involved. Future heroes and leaders of the Civil War come to the fore, such men as `Stonewall' Jackson, Jeb Stuart, A.P. Hill, Jubal Early and Joseph E. Johnston for the Confederacy and men like William T. Sherman, Ambrose Burnside and Irvin McDowell for the Union.

The final chapters describe the fighting from Blackburn's Ford to the final rout of the Union Forces on the evening of the 21st. The author's description of the intense fighting is gripping and written in such a fluent style that it holds you to the narrative. Although the casualties for this engagement were not significant when compared to those bloody battles that followed you still feel for the individual soldiers who were caught up in this terrible War.

This book is an enjoyable and easy to read story and is well presented by a number of photographs taken at the time of the battle or shortly after. The author has included 8 small, but easy to read maps that help you follow the outline of events during the battle. This book is recommended to any body who has a love for this period of history or to the general reader who likes a good story.

The Battle of Bull Run is a lucid account of the early days of the war climaxing with, of course, the first major engagement at Bull Run. Davis does a fine job balancing the larger strategic and tactical issues surrounding the campaign with the simple, horrific and sometimes downright remarkable experiences of the common soldier. I very much recommend this book.

Mr. Davis has over the years provided Civil War enthusiasts with many fine books dealing with most aspects of the war. He has written books on the politics of the era, biographies of some of the era's leading figures and is the case here, he has written battle histories. This book like the author's other offerings is clearly written and concise, easy to understand and read and most importantly, it is not dull. Many authors offer up books that are just full of good information but reading them is like reading the Biblical book of Leviticus. Heaven only knows just how many well intentioned people have attempted to read the whole Bible but have come to a dead halt upon reaching Leviticus. The same applies to history books which go into such mind numbing detail about every movement of every regiment and company that the reader finds themselves completely lost and frustrated. Davis, with his wonderfully chatty writing style avoids this problem while still giving the reader all of the pertinent details.

Davis begins his story with Fort Sumter where the reader meets General P.G.T. Beauregard, the first major player in this story. Beauregard of course becomes the "hero of Sumter" and goes north to Virginia with a high reputation and an even bigger ego. Davis is not kind to the Creole general in this book and in fact may be just a little too harsh. As the story progresses the reader is also introduced to some of the people who will be major players throughout the war. This view of men like Jackson, Ewell, Early, Sherman, Stuart and Burnside will certainly help the reader understand events shaped by these men later in the war and each of these men are destined to play a major role over the next four years. Davis does an excellent job of hinting at the future of these men and also pointing out little habits or quirks that are going to become important as these men rise in rank and stature.

As with any well-written book, Davis builds the suspense as her works his way toward the battle. Actually, more of this book deals with the preparations for the battle than with the battle itself. Beauregard, who had an excellent eye for building defenses chose his ground and fortified it well. If the Yankees had just done what he expected them to do the battle would have been over in a very short time. The much-maligned Irvin McDowell had put together an excellent battle plan and Davis offers a pretty rousing defense of McDowell in this book. Davis clearly shows that had McDowell had a little better support and a little better luck, things might have turned out much differently. Besides being completely new to this type of command, McDowell had to deal with a President who was playing politics with his army and a General in Chief who not only disliked McDowell but was also playing political games. Then there was General Daniel Tyler who almost single-handedly destroyed McDowell's plan in a bid for individual glory and also General Patterson who's sloth and caution allowed Joe Johnston to join Beauregard before Patterson even knew he was gone.

Davis does a marvelous job of setting up this battle and then does an even better job of describing the action once it all begins. He has set the whole thing up so well in fact that the narrative of the battle needed very little explanation for everything made perfect sense because of the set up. This situation allowed for the story of the battle to flow about as smoothly in this book as in any book I have ever read.

The only real fault I found in this book was the maps. The maps were good but they were a little small which required me to put on my specks and there were too few of them. There are also several typos that should have all been weeded out in this revised edition and the publishers need to correct this problem in any future editions. Still, this is an eminently readable and highly enjoyable account of the first major battle of the Civil War. Well researched, well written, and highly informative, what more could anyone ask?

An absolutely brilliant book,it covers every move made by the two oppossing armies. The mistakes that led to the defeat of the volunteer Union army.And it is told like gripping novell placed in the most gallant time.

Davis has written an interesting read on the Civil War's first major battle: the narrative is interesting without being overly simplistic, the criticisms and praises are balanced for North and South, and the maps are okay (would have liked to have seen more and enlarged).

While the book's approximately 270 pages are small by Civil War standards (of course, other battles were larger and had more political developments and changes in leadership as opposed to the time of 1st Bull Run), Davis does a good job of weaving the political climate and military strategy in with the battle descriptions. I particularly enjoyed reading in the book's last chapter summarizing what happened to the battle's main participants after Bull Run.

All in all, a good and recommended read as the definitive account of the war's first major battle.

While many narratives concerning Civil War battles and campaigns become extremely lengthy, Davis does a good job of covering the major events from April 12 - July 21, 1861 in only 260 pages, while still maintaining enough personal analysis, movements and primary accounts to make the read entertaining.

The maps are few and far between until the engagment, during which the maps are plentiful and troop movements are easy enough to follow. Thus it would be helpful for those who know less about the land (or haven't read about it in books covering other battles throughout Northern Virginia) to have maps identifying areas like Centreville and the Shenandoah.

The author himself analyzes the activities and decisions of nearly every brigade commander on the field. He concludes that Paterson bears the brunt of the blame for the junction of Johnston and Beauregard's armies, while lack of experience and raw troops lead to the breakdown of McDowell's offensive against the Confederate left.

All in all it's a very good book. Other books on the battle will go into stronger detail, but this is a good first book to read about the campaign.

I would like to give this review 3.5 stars. The book is too well written for a 3, but it has some flaws that make me somewhat uncomfortable with the 4 I am giving it. Davis' book about New Market is a 5 star effort.

Davis succeeds in most areas with Battle of Bull Run. He describes the campaign well, and he gives adequate background of most of the key participating officers. The maps are adequate. The battle itself and the aftermath are competently covered. Most importantly, Davis' writing style makes for comfortable reading. His retelling appears objective and balanced for the most part, and it appears that he tries to treat the participants fairly with the information at hand all these years later. Although he does relish in retelling a few romanticized episodes (particularly in the opening), he is quick to point out the theater in these.

So where is the book lacking? Overall, it is a bit shorter and more concise than what I expected of such a momentous battle (this will be a positive for some readers, less so for the more detail oriented.) Unlike his New Market book, there is no Order of Battle, detailed listing of unit strengths, or casualties. The maps could be larger, and zoomed in to particular zones. Davis' writing in this work is not quite as clear as it was in the New Market work (or at least as I remember it.) There are several points where sentences are not adequately phrased to give the reader a full view of the subject, without paging back through the book to find the original event 40 pages earlier. Other problems are some minor but annoying factual discrepancies (usually generalities, that are too general) or things that leave one wondering what the rest of the story was.

One of the frustrating little things is the front cover Brady photo (paperback) that is also found later in the book. The text mentions this photo being used in reporting the Federal dead on Matthews Hill. The caption of the photo does not tell us that this is now known(?) to have been a staged photo of livemen playing dead, it just says that it is "often erroneously" identified.

It is a good book and I will recommend it, but it is not a truly great book, so I feel necessary to express some reservations with my recommendation.

Author William C. Davis has assembled a great amount of information on the Battle of Bull Run and put it together and a concise and easy to read format. Davis investigates the early generalship of both armies coming to grips with a divided nation and how each side will defend itself. The birth of Union and Confederate high command struggles early to define their strategies. Davis brings such issues to life as the very "green" Union and Confederate armies clash in and around Manassas. I liked how Davis built the climax of the battle together and how he wrote about the various brigades and regiments formed or that were directed as the birth of the first major battle formed. During the fighting Davis points out key areas of fighting in the short terrain near Bull Run and how brigades held together or either fall apart. It was interesting to read about how Davis downplayed the more popular events of the battle such as the myths surrounding the naming of Stonewall Jackson, or how the Washington's social elite were chased while being overwhelmed by a retreating Union army. Davis focused on the battle at hand while his references back up commentary, or soldier accounts. For anyone looking to understand the first major battle of the Civil War, they owe it to themselves to read this book!

This is the oldest book I have read on the campaign and battle of First Manassas/Bull Run but in no way did I find it to be outdated, or not relevant, for an understanding of what happened in July, 1861 in Northern Virginia.

In my humble opinion, William C. Davis is a fine author with a lively style that I had no trouble reading or understanding. I will be looking for more books written by the author.

The reader is given a good description of the situation in 1861 for both sides in the Virginia Theater of the Civil War, introduced to the principal characters for both sides (Lincoln, Scott, McDowell, and Patterson for the Union, Davis, Lee, Beauregard, and Johnston for the Confederacy), and made to understand why the battle took place where it happened. The author goes on to describe the campaign/battle and its aftermath in an entertaining narrative style. All the lesser characters in the story and the parts they played in the events described are layed out in a way that for me, gave them personalities. This made reading the book more enjoyable.

Unfortunately, the book has no Theater of Operations, or Campaign map to help the reader undersand what was going on in the Shenandoah Valley, or how the armies got to the banks of Bull Run for the climactic battle on 21 July, 1861. No map is provided for the skirmish at Blackburn's Ford 18 July, 1861, so the reader has to learn about it through a combination of reading the description and looking at other maps that do show the area. The map showing the position of forces at dawn on 21 July is not bad, but like all the battle maps does not show the outlines of all the principal terrain features (Matthews Hill, Henry Hill, Chinn Ridge, etc.) that influenced the battle. Six maps show the unfolding situation at various times throughout the day. The maps only show infantry brigades for the most part, some regiments are shown, and Stuarts cavalry also, but no artillery batteries are Shown! (Not so good for following the action in a battle that in its most desperate stage centered around the back and forth capture and loss of two Union batteries on Henry Hill!) One map shows the Union rout and retreat from the battle. The quality and small number of maps are one of the two negatives I found in this book. (For more in depth descriptions of the combat I recommend "The First Battle of Manassas" by John Hennessy, and for better and more abundant maps "The Maps of First Bull Run" by Bradley M. Gottfried)

The book did not have an Order of Battle for the armies and I always find this a negative for a Civil War Campaign/Battle history book, but for most readers it shouldnt be a problem. The book also has a good Bibliography for when it was released (1977). A big plus for this book is the 46 illustrations and photos of participants, combat units, and locations that readers learn about while reading the book. It always helps to have a face to go with a name when reading history, at least for me.

The book goes into depth somewhat trying to figure out just what was said by Confederate General Bee about Thomas J. Jackson and his command on Henry Hill and the words meaning? (Compliment? Insult?) Interesting to see that there has always been some controversy surrounding Jackson's nickname since that day on Henry Hill among the participants, and in all the modern studies of the battle. Davis follows the traditional view that the biggest share of the blame for the Northern defeat can be laid at the feet of Union General Patterson and his failure in letting Joe Johnston and his Confederate Army of the Shenandoah give him the slip and unite with Beauregard's troops at Manassas. (Always found it interesting that Beauregard's army was the first one called the Army of the Potomac!)

Loved the writing, found it to be a good description of the battle and campaign. The maps, not so good. But still a good read and source for information on the battle of First Manassas/Bull Run.

In July 1861, half-trained Union and Confederate armies met in a corps-sized battle in northern Virginia near a not especially significant stream called Bull Run. On the Confederate side of the stream were the Manassas Gap Railroad, the Manassas-Sudely Road and Manassas Junction. The Yankees, who often thought in terms of rivers, called the battle "Bull Run" (and later First Bull Run, because, alas, there would be a Second Bull Run) and the Rebs called it "First Manassas."

The battle, by whatever name, was unique in the Civil War in that no general on either side had ever exercised high command in combat. July 21, 1861 would amply demonstrate that careers devoted to theoretical studies of warfare and peacetime soldiering provided poor indicators of success in real combat.

The Federal forces were commanded by Irvin McDowell, a 42 year-old Ohioan who was a brigadier general in the regular army. He had once been an instructor in tactics at West Point. (Among his students had been a certain lackluster cadet named Grant, who had excelled only in drawing and horsemanship.)

Opposing McDowell were two generals who had combined their two armies just before the battle, even as McDowell advanced. Joseph E. Johnston was a full general in the Confederate service and (in his own strongly expressed opinion) the highest ranking officer to leave the US Army in order to join the Confederacy. The Confederate man-on-the-spot who actually chose the battlefield was Pierre Gustave Toutant Beauregard, then still a brigadier general. He would later become one of the eight men to hold the rank of full general in Confederate States Army. Beauregard had been appointed as Commandant of West Point in January 1861. He held the job for a total of five days before Louisiana, his native state, seceded.

McDowell was the loser in this first major battle of the war and he has received a great deal of bad press ever since because of that. Author Davis, however, holds that he performed quite well on the run-up to the battle and on the day itself. I think he makes a pretty convincing case for McDowell, especially when one considers the subsequent spectacular collapses of such Union generals as Pope, Burnside, Hooker and Rosecrans, each of whom had vastly more combat experience than the untried McDowell.

In fact, McDowell came within an ace of winning the day, despite slothful and wooly-headed subordinates and undisciplined citizen-soldiers. He got across the river barrier in short order and assailed the Confederates so strongly that they were forced to improvise on their battle plan and tactics throughout the day. In the end, it was the virtually fortuitous arrival of E. Kirby Smith's fresh Confederate brigade at exactly the right time and place on the unprotected right flank of the Union army, just as it was exhausted and pausing for a final breath before sending Johnston's and Beauregard's hard-pressed men reeling into defeat. The attack by a fresh Rebel force on the Union flank stopped the Federal offensive cold, leading to an orderly retreat that swiftly degenerated into a panicked rout.

"Battle at Bull Run" is, as Civil War books go, a relatively short and concise account of the battle and its antecedents. Author Davis defends the reputation of McDowell and is probably justified in doing so. He launches an all-out assault on Beauregard that is, I think, rather less justified. He joins with the judgment of history in dismissing the Federal general in the Shenandoah Valley charged with the task of keeping Johnston from joining Beauregard, as an over- timid, military dunce. Davis' account of the battle itself is straightforward and seems to me to be perfectly lucid.

Overall, this is a good book about First Bull Run. Its main strength is in setting out the complex battle narrative. The analyses of people and politics that precede the battle are workmanlike but not much more. There is an indefinable but pervasive air about the book that proclaims it to be lightweight in nature. Oh, it's sound enough and well enough written, but somewhere there is a better, weightier book to be found or perhaps to be written.

To my mind, the weakest part of the book deals with the aftermath. It focuses almost entirely on the Union side. General Sherman, who was a colonel in command of a brigade at First Bull Run, wrote about that first battle after the war was concluded. Davis quotes him in a sort of general summing up: "Bull Run Battle was lost by us not from want of combination, strategy or tactics, but because our army was green as grass. Though a source of great disgrace it was no misfortune, for we then realized that organization & discipline were necessary."

This is good enough as far as it goes, but it ignores the Confederates and particularly a strategic and tactical decision they faced immediately after the battle. In 1954, the Australian army published a brief and wholly admirable analysis of Stonewall Jackson's Shenandoah Campaign of 1861-62 which starts off with an account of First Bull Run. Military analyses often have a noticeably different texture than those of the pure historians. It's after the battle that the soldiers take their different tack. Here's what the Aussies had to say:

"Johnston and Beauregard were trained and experienced soldiers. They must have known that the untrained and thoroughly beaten Federal army would take some time to recover any semblance of cohesion, even if left unmolested. They must have known that an improvised brigade or so, filled with the intoxication of victory, could have chased it into Washington, or at the very least have occupied the heights commanding the Federal capital. But they saw too many difficulties, the disorganization of the army, the inexperience of the troops, the problem of supplies. But, while they took counsel of their fears, Jackson reorganized his brigade, packed three days' rations into it haversacks and impatiently awaited the order to advance--an order which never came."

Imagine it! Mighty Stonewall roaring like a lion before the gates of Washington while the Federal government and army quivered in terror before him. What strange new courses might history have followed after that?