Customer Reviews

To the Gates of Richmond

5 star:		(21)
4 star:		(10)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Sears (as usual) does a great job of covering all the logistics and numbers surrounding the lengthy Peninsula campaign, and it's necessary since the campaign's principal source, George Brinton McClellan, was deluding himself throughout 1862.

Each battle is covered in very good detail and the maps are easy enough to follow. Sears does a good job covering every folly, from Johnston's mixeded up plan for Seven Pines to McClellan's disgraceful disappearance act on the Galena.

As always, plenty of primary source information from the common soldier gives a good idea what the marches and other hardships were like. And every reader will put down the book completely disgusted with George McClellan.

The Civil War Virginia Peninsula Campaign of 1862 set the tone for the Union implementation of the war for the subsequent 2 years and Stephen Sears chronicles this series of battles magnificently in "To the Gates of Richmond". The overwhelming thrust of this book descrbes in great detail how inept a battle general George McClellan was and how his poliicies led to the ultimate withdrawal of the "Army of the Potomac" from the Richmond front. The reader gets a true feeling of frustration at McClellan right from the beginning as the campaign starts with the siege at Yorktown. The Federals far outnumber the Confederates in this initial phase, but McClellan opts to entrench his army in the face of a much weaker and somewhat exhausted "Army of Northern Virginia" just completing it's march down to the Peninsula from Manassas. Sears does a good job of documenting McClellan's lack of ability to obtain military intelligence but does a better job showing McClellan's lack of "the will to fight". And this isn't more evident than in the following battles at Williamsburg and Seven Pines/Fair Oaks...the Federals really had victory in their grasp, but because of the "defensive minded" leadership, the campaign continued on. An interesting debate on how long this faceoff at Richmond would have lasted can be had if Joe Johnston hadn't gotten wounded at Seven Pines and R.E. Lee hadn't taken over. Johnston was fairly "defensive-minded" himself and I'm sure that the campaign would not have followed the course that it ultimately did. Lee then, of course, initiated an offensive that started with Jeb Stuart's cavalry ride around the Federal entrenchments, proceeded on to the battles at Mechanicsville, Gaines Mill, Savage's Station and Glendale before ending with the blood-bath at Malvern Hill and subsequent Union withdrawal to Harrison's Landing on the James River. Sears descibes each battle with just the right amount of military tactics and "real-person" accounts from the many journal/diary entries enclosed to give the reader a real feel for the action. His discussions of Longstreet's subversion of the plan at Seven Pines, the mysterious actions of Stonewall Jackson throughout the campaign, the bloody fighting and ultimate breakthrough by the Confederates at Gaines Mill and the standoffs at Savage's Station and Glendale adroitly precede the brilliant climax of the book at the "Guns of Malvern Hill" chapter and the amazing decision (by McClellan) to retreat to Harrison's Landing following the Malvern Hill victory. Sears continues his brilliant writing as he closes the book with the entrenchment at Harrison's Landing and subsequent withdrawal (ordered by Halleck and protested by McClellan) back up the Potomac. Sears proves himself to be one of the pre-eminent Civil War historians around today with this book and he should be considered an "essential" author in any reading of the conflict...I definitely look forward to reading his other books and would recommend this book very highly.

In To The Gates of Richmond : The Peninsula Campaign, Stephen W. Sears once again proves that he is the preeminent author of Civil War histories. Like his histories of the The Battle of Antietam in Landscape Turned Red or of the Battle of Chancellorsville, Sears has an enviable way of setting forth both the feel of the battles and the raw history that one needs to fully understand the battles and campaigns of the Civil War. In To The Gates of Richmond, Sears does a masterful job of describing the thought process of McClellan and Lee as well as the line soldiers on both sides. If one wants to get a true feel of what it was like to be on the Peninsula in 1862, then this is the book for you.

The theme of the book is lost opportunities for both the Union and the Confederacy. The Peninsula Campaign is probably the only time in the history of the Civil War where each side had an ability to end the conflict on terms that were advantageous. For the Union, a victory and the capture of Richmond, probably would also have resulted in the destruction of the main Southern Army. For the Confederacy, if Lee had been able to cut off and destroy the Union Army, as Lee wanted to do, the Union would have been left with no effective force to stop an advance on Washington. However, errors on both sides led to three more years of death and destruction.

For Lee it was the problem of a new command, with subordinates not of his own choosing and with many of those subordinates failing to live up to expectations. For Stonewall Jackson, the Peninsula Campaign was far from his finest hour. From failing to communicate with Lee, to not having his troops arrive on time, to not pushing forward where there was a clear advantage, Jacksons failures assisted the Union Army in escaping the traps that were being set by Lee. However, the blame is not placed solely on Jackson and his fellow Generals. Sears properly criticizes Lee for his overly complicated battle plans, especially given his unfamiliarity with the command.

Sears greatest criticisms are rightfully saved for McClellan. Like in the Battle of Antietam, McClellan great caution turned a real numerical superiority into an imaginary disadvantage. Where McClellan should have been driving forward and bringing Lee to battle, his incorrect belief that he was outnumbered two to one forced him to take the defensive and almost led to the destruction of the Army that he truly loved. The plain fact is that McClellan may have been the right General to have formed the Army of the Potomac, but as a battlefield leader he was a disaster. From his ordering retreats when they were not necessary, to his failure to establish a clear chain of command during battles, to his penchant for not being in the field when battles were taking place, and for his failures to take advantage of opportunities presented him, Sears systematically outlines the deficiencies of the General that was once known as the Young Napoleon.

This is a very good book, especially for those who are interested in the personalities of those that led the armies into battle. It is very readable and draws a fine balance between presenting the facts that one needs to be aware of as well as the personalties of the leasers and common soldiers that fought the battles.

I've come to expect great things from Mr. Sears since his triumphant "Landscape Turned Red". Here he continues to excite and interest readers with the "Prequel" if you will of the Antietam Capaign for the Army of the Potomac; The Peninsular Campaign. Sears give us a sweeping narrative made up of both the generals, officers and the enlisted ranks. He combines primary sources with eloquent narrative prose to give an excellent account of the campaign.

Carnage and confusion, much like Shiloh and Manassas, reign in this campaign. Some of the rare instances where the confederates created situations where they outnumbered the union troups yet still resorted to the napoleonic charges through ravine and up hill.
Sears is a no frills writer and that is good. The story is told in a clear and interesting fashion. He is a writer not apparently in the McPherson, Robertson, Davis high level exposure group, yet I look forward to reading his Landscape Turned Red, Chancellorsville, and Gettysburg books for I feel he mostly trumps those mentioned.

Sears brings facts and a clean writing style that provides an informative and flowing read on the battles of the Seven Days. Each description of the battles and the leaders are written in not too much minutia so that they are easy to follow while providing the major personnel conflicts and battle movements, strategy and tactics. Each battle is accompanied by straight forward maps that make easy reference to Sears' accurate descriptions of the battle. Sears' long study of McCllelan provides insight that many historians may not have been aware such as his personal abandonment of the battlefields of Glendale and Malvertn Hill. Sears also has some scoops such as finding that their were two bridges at issue for Jackson in his approach to Savage Station not just the Grapevine Bridge. The detail is so well done that one can envision Stonewall falling asleep with a biscuit in his mouth while the pivitol battle of Gelndale is coming to a close just a mile or so to the south. I took this book with me while taking a wonderful Richmond National Park service guided bus tour and although the maps were not as detailed as the historians, I always had a quick reference to the lay of the battlefield. The famous artilery officer for Longstreet, General Porter Alexander has said that the confederates "knew as much about the battle terrian as they did about Africa"; however, Sears' book gives you a far greater advantage.

Sears does his standard job with Civil War history. McClellan's Penninsula Campaign is explored in detail with those details woven into a compelling story. Meticulous but not swallowed up in minutia. Well told, but not over dramatized. Sears delivers the fights, strategy, personalities and conclusions in masterly style.

"To the Gates of Richmond" should be on any Civil War (or American History) enthusiast's bookcase. It is a true page turner and I read it in under a week (which for me is an oddity). My only complaint about this book is the lack of quality maps. There are maps, but not very good ones. This does not detract from the quality of the text however.

I have yet to find any books on this particular campaign in the Civil War, and now I don't think I will have to look any farther than this.

Sears' abililty to weave strategy, politics, and personalities against the backdrop of a major Civil War campaign will keep the reader's interest from beginning to end.

Sears spares no criticism of the mistakes made on both sides:

1. The South (Jackson's secretiveness and unwillingness to communicate, Lee's difficulty in coordinating attacks as the new general of the newly-named Army of Northern Virginia, Gustavus Smith's indadequacy as Joseph Johnston's replacement after the latter's wounding, Joseph Johnston's negative and critical tendencies).

2. The North (McClellan's overcautious attitude despite numerical superiority, Washington politicians' tendency to meddle too much into military affairs, incompetencies of several corps and division commanders).

The battle narratives are interesting and lack the dry content or overly bloody descriptions of other Civil War titles by other authors.

The only reason I did not give the book was the maps. While adequate, they lacked the detail (often went down only to the brigade level while other books have gone down to the regimental level) and were not enough. Unfortunately, an insufficient lack of maps seems to be a consistent theme in Civil War campaign studies. In my humble opinion, sufficient maps (in detail and number) often help to clarify troop movements during battles and give the reader an overview of the importance of terrain during battle.

Complaint aside, I highly recommend "To the Gates of Richmond" as the definitive study of the war's first (and could have been the only one had McClellan been more aggressive) major campaign.

Read and enjoy!

The Civil War should have ended in 1862 with the Peninsula Campaign. McClellan had far superior numbers (despite his opposite claim) and shouldnt have had a problem destroying the Army of Northern Virginia. But one has to remember that we're dealing with McClellan here. McClellan could have had an army of half a million and he still would have said he was outnumbered. He was, without a doubt, one of the worst generals in U.S. history.

This was my second book by Sears (the first one was Landscape Turned Red: The Battle of Antietam) and he is the best Civil War historian that I have discovered thus far. The Seven Days battles have always confused me a bit, but he made them as clear as day. He did a wonderful job with describing the mood of the soldiers as well, instead of only focusing on the battles or the generals. Sometimes the actual people who fought in the war are ignored.

I recommend this book.