The Fourth Battle of Winchester: Toward a New Civil War Paradigm [Paperback]

Richard M. McMurry (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: March 1, 2002

"Counterfactual questions, if kept within the parameters of what was possible at the time and place, can often help us better understand events of the past. In so doing, they can sometimes bring about a `paradigm shift'--a new way of thinking about history and hence of grasping its meaning... While the events described in the opening sections are fanciful, the underlying points, I believe are valid. The counterfactual events, I hope, can help us see the points with greater clarity."--From the Preface

Product Details

• Paperback: 150 pages
• Publisher: Kent State Univ Pr (March 1, 2002)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 087338721X
• ISBN-13: 978-0873387217
• Product Dimensions: 8.7 x 6.6 x 0.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 10.1 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.2 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (4 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,863,035 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

10 of 10 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Fun to read, May 20, 2002

By A Customer

This review is from: The Fourth Battle of Winchester: Toward a New Civil War Paradigm (Paperback)

This is a book on Civil War grand strategy during the last year of the war. It assumes the reader is familiar with the campaigns and battles mentioned, and so is not for a Civil War novice. The book begins with a counterfactual depiction of Early's raid, and the resulting consequences. It then segues to the author's previously published arguments that the West was the decisive theatre, and that Grant should have stayed there or at least put Thomas in command. ... The book then concludes with a short defense of Lee's grand strategic thinking. I found the book so interesting, readable, and short, that I finished it in one four hour sitting. At times the arguments seemed a little overwrought, and I'm sure those who feel the East was the decisive theatre will have their counter arguments, but none of this prevented my enjoying the book.

4 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Convincingly Argued, August 31, 2005

By 

John Hamill (Roanoke, VA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Fourth Battle of Winchester: Toward a New Civil War Paradigm (Paperback)

In this relatively short book, beginning with a counter-factual, the author argues that it is impossible to understand the Civil War without studying the western campaigns. Kentucky's neutrality gave the Confederacy time to prepare its defenses in the west, and hopefully to woo the vital state with its easily defensible northern border to its side. Instead, the bishop General Polk violated its neutrality, forcing it to the Union side. The Mississippi, Cumberland and Tennessee Rivers gave the Union navy and army clear paths deep into the Confederacy, making most of the important state of Tennessee untenable. Although Robert E. Lee is frequently criticized for lacking a good overall vision of the war, McMurry argues that his actions were best for the Confederacy, that only by great success in Virginia could the losses in the west be negated and Southern independence won.

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Quirky, clever discussion of grand strategy in the civil war, February 18, 2007

By 

A. McDonald (New York) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: The Fourth Battle of Winchester: Toward a New Civil War Paradigm (Paperback)

McMurry's title is ironic -- there was no Fourth Battle of Winchester. He begins the book with a "what-if" counterfactual story of the Confederates decisively winning the 1864 battle of Cedar Creek, which would therefore have been known as the Fourth Battle of Winchester for the town through which the retreating Yankees would have fled. McMurry goes on to describe a series of plausible Confederate victories in the Virginia theater following this one, resulting in more glory for Robert E Lee, more defeats for the Army of the Potomac, yet... despite all of this: the inevitable defeat of the Confederacy.

This is all a clever way of arguing that the Western (Trans-Appalachian) theater of the Civil War was the decisive Union victory, and that defeat here inevitably sealed the Confederate's fate. Regardless of the Virginia theater. McMurry is extreme about this argument, to the occassional point of ridiculous claims: "Gettysburg has had far greater impact on the tourist business of Adams County Pennsylvania than it ever had on the military outcome of the Civil War." But no matter -- these are somewhat tongue and cheek statements made for effect.

In fact McMurry's chatty, quirky tone and sense of humor aid considerably in making his argument sympathetic. The book is a short essay, and the author jumps nimbly from topic to topic on why the Confederacy really lost the war through battles like Fort Donelson, Shiloh, and Vicksburg. The book is a unique and thought-provoking addition to the literature on Civil War grand strategy