Customer Reviews

No Better Place to Die: THE BATTLE OF STONES RIVER (Civil War Trilogy)

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Few major battles of the Civil War have been more neglected than Stones River. It was among the bloodiest battles of the war, and started a ripple effect that would end with the defeat of the South, yet there are less than half a dozen books on it, and only the most devoted students of the war know much of anything about it. Peter Cozzens' book, `No Better Place to Die', is perhaps the best single book detailing and explaining the significance of this nearly forgotten battle.
December of 1862 had been a very bad month for the Union. General Burnsides and the Army of the Potomac had been horribly defeated at the Battle of Fredericksburg, and Grant and Sherman had been stopped cold in their attempt to take Vicksburg. The Union badly needed a victory, and another defeat could have been disastrous. Stones River was fought between the Union's Army of the Cumberland and the Confederate's Army of Tennessee over three days; from New Years Eve 1862 till January 2, 1863. Though the battle was considered by many to be a tactical draw, and both sides claimed victory, General Bragg and his Army of Tennessee retreated, conceding middle Tennessee to The Army of the Cumberland and the Union, and setting the stage for opening up the back door to the heart of the Confederacy. Though many today have forgotten the significance of this battle, its importance was not lost on President Lincoln, who after the battle wrote to General Rosecrans, commander of the Union forces at Stones River, "I can never forget whilst I remember anything, that... you gave us a hard-earned victory, which had there been a defeat instead, the Nation could scarcely have lived over."
Cozzens is no great wordsmith, but his research is meticulous and his detail is exacting. `No Better Place to Die' is not so dry as the previous book of his that I have read, perhaps because though detailed, it is still a short book (just over 200 pages), and because he uses many interesting quotes from participants in the battle that add the color that his own words lack. It is, in my opinion, the best, clearest, and most detailed book on this important battle, and anyone who wants to seriously study the Civil War and understand how it was won in the western theater can ill afford to miss it.

Theo Logos

This is a very complete, very detailed account of the Battle of Stones River but it lacks the intensity of other works by Peter Cozzens. As a result, I was disappointed with the narrative. However, it is a good work, deserving of your time.

Fought by two mediocre generals, Braxton Bragg and William S. Rosecrans, this engagement was intense and ugly. As the 24,000 casualties indicate, once begun, there was little strategy involved. The opposing armies simply mauled each other.

As mention in my review of Stones River by James Lee McDonough, this was the first major battle in the Union's plan to seize the Nashville-Chattanooga-Atlanta corridor. Claimed by many to be a tactical draw, it was a Southern defeat of the worst sort. The South lost control of an invaluable asset, middle Tennessee's railroads. It is from this spring board that Union armies once again sliced the Confederacy in two.

If you are a Peter Cozzens fan as I am, know ahead of time that this is not Peter Cozzens at his best.

Cozzens' first book about the Civil War's western theatre admittedly is easily the least compelling, but still a good read. Calling this book "bad" as another reviewer did, is just bizarre. If you're not interested in the Civil War, don't read books about it. This is, for the most part, a well-written, fine account of the Battle of Murfreesboro, or Stones River. The main problem is a sometimes-confusing rundown of troop movements, not helped by even more perplexing maps. I had a great deal of trouble figuring out just where everybody was on the battlefield. Cozzens' next two books in this "trilogy" remedy most of the problems and are big steps forward.

If you prefer fast food over meal which requires you
to sit down and relax, then you probably won't care for
this book. If you love detail, then this is the book for
you. The book is about a significant civil war battle that never got the attention it deserved. By the way, I just came from Stones River Battlefield, and if you should ever find yourself in Nashville, TN, I highly recommend visitiing this historic battlefield. It's managed by the U.S. Park Service, and they do a superb job with the visitors. It's located about 45 minutes south of Nashville by car. A visit there will give you a very good
feel for this key battle of the U.S. Civil War.

Peter Cozzens has done a masterful job of telling the story of Stones River. His narrative of troop movements, supplemented by sketches of unit locations throughout the two days' fighting, make it easy for the reader to follow the flow of action. Cozzens tells the story of Stones River through the eyes and words of the participants, drawing extensively on soldiers'memoirs. To set the stage, he describes how the Kentucky campaign and Bragg's defeat at Perryville affected the preparation and strategy at Stones River. Generals Bragg and Rosecrans are profiled, and how their personalities and relations with their subordinate commanders affected the outcome of the battle. Cozzens wraps things up by analyzing how the results of Stones River affected public opinion in both North and South. An excellent treatment of a long-neglected battle.

Cozzens wrote three superb, and related, books on the decisive Battles in the West. Of these three, the most important is "No Better Place to Die".. not because it is the best of the three, for it is not, but rather because it is a very detailed analysis of an otherwise ignored battle.

Cozzens does not write in the most accessible style, but considering the complexity of the battle and the serious nature of the work, it is appropriate, and after a few pages, clear and understandable. One wishes that better and more detailed maps had been provided, along with some photographs of key players, but those "deficiences" are more than made up by the quality of the research.

The battle of Murfreesboro (Stones River) is one of the most important neglected battles of the American Civil War - or one of the most neglected important battles, if you like. The battlefield is also a good illustration of the challenges of battlefield preservation, since large parts of it are preserved while other parts are buried underneath urban and suburban sprawl. A good history and a good battlefield guide would be welcome.

Unfortunately, "No Better Place to Die" is not that book. In fact, I'd say that it's really more of an example of how *not* to write military history. Almost all of the book is a descriptive, blow by blow account of the battle, often at the regimental and brigade level. This means that Cozzens does not provide a sufficiently frequent birds-eye view of the battle to supplement the action on the ground and to explain the choices people were making. His prose style is also pretty dry, though quotations from diaries help liven it up considerably.

The book also does not have enough maps. Especially in a blow-by-blow book, an abundance of well-designed maps showing the action are essential and would really help tell the story.

Despite its weaknesses, I managed to read the book to the end, largely because I was in Murfreesboro at the time. If you are physically there, the first chapter is good for setting the stage. In fact, Cozzens would have done better to write the other chapters more like the first. Moreover, if you are in town, you can get a sense of the battlefield without maps (and you'll have the park service maps after all). The book is also helpful because you will meet some characters whose monuments you might see around town.

I haven't read any of the other books available on the battle, so it may be true (as some other reviewers claim) that this one is the best available. But you'll probably note that most of the reviewers talk about the battle, not the book. It's a disappointment.

a. Until now, only three book-length studies have been done on the bloody Tennessee battle near Stones River. Peter Cozzens has used No Better Place to Die: The Battle of Stones River to recount the late 1862 campaign and battle in detail. Cozzens describes the battle in great detail, emphasizing the tactical fine points and their effect on the overall campaign. His viewpoints on the eccentric personalities of Bragg and Rosecrans at their higher level of commands and his accounts of the individual soldier on the ground allow Cozzens describe the battle to the reader in a personal and first hand account. It allows the reader to see the battlefield though the soldier's eyes, bringing to life the responsibilities of commanders and the effects of their decisions on the lives of their soldiers and the ultimate purpose of their mission.

c. The thesis of Cozzens' book deals mainly with the personalities of Rosecrans and Bragg and how their impulsive and sometimes brash decisions affected the outcome at Stones River. He writes, "No one had more stinging criticism for Bragg than two who would soon become his lieutenants, Lieutenant Generals Hardee and Polk, who had urged President Davis to recognize that only a change of commanders could save the army and salvage Confederate fortunes in the West. But Davis gave his friend Bragg a chance and took no action. His inaction, however, rendered Bragg's lieutenants insubordinate; the President fostered failure at Murfreesboro." As for Rosecrans, Cozzens writes, "All the Federals needed was to fight a war of attrition. Applying constant, direct pressure to the Confederates, they would guarantee that though they might lose a few battles, they would still, in time, win the War. Although he had provided the Bluecoats with the first evidence of how they could conduct the War and win, Rosecrans was no the man to lead them to that victory. His courage was a gift in battle, but his impulsiveness was a curse. Rosecrans would become too impulsive and fashion a foolhardy plan which would allow the Rebels to beat the Federals before they had won their war of attrition."

In my humble opinion, Cozzens has produced a fine account of one of the war's bloodiest and most vicious battles. While close to 30,000 soldiers were casualties, the battle has often been overlooked in favor of Gettysburg, Antietam, Vicksburg, and other battles.

The account of troop movements and battle descriptions is detailed without being overly tedious. The author also includes several brief biographical notes of generals and other officers while also including anecdotes about several of the common soldiers in the battle. Cozzens is also able to maintain a good balance of the Union and Confederate side.

The major complaint I have is the maps - while the ones in the book are excellent and finely detailed, there's just not enough of them. Having at least 5 more battle maps would have immensely clarified troop movements and the flow of battle. For example, the narrative of Confederate Generals Cleburne and McCown's attacks on the morning of December 31, 1862 are reinforced by excellent maps while maps do not exist or are too few for other parts of the battle. Unfortunately, I find this to be a common theme in many Civil War battle text - a good or excellent battle narrative diminshed by too few maps.

Complaint aside, I recommend this book as the defintive text on one of the war's bloodiest battles.

Read and enjoy!

Peter Cozzens was just getting started with 'No Better Place to Die'. It is not quite as good as his books on Chickamauga, Chattanooga, and the Corinth campaigns but it is a very good start. Stones River was a very bloody but has been a very underwritten battle of the Civil War and Cozzens finally gives it some due. Cozzens does a good job in depicting the buildup to the battle. The usual tough times for a Western Confederate army is sketched. The aftermath of Perryville had soured many people on Braxton Bragg but not yet Jefferson Davis. The very irascible Confederate general is depicted with many interesting anecdotes as are his subordinate officers like William Hardee and Leonidas Polk.

The Union Army of the Cumberland was brought back to fighting trim by the human dynamo William Rosecrans. Cozzens does a good job of describing how Rosecrans brought back his forces back and how his subordinate George Thomas was such a key component of the army. There were also in the Union army the much less competent Alexander McCook and Thomas Crittenden as corps commanders. I really like Cozzens dissection of the two armies high commands and their attitudes plus the anecdotes of the men in the ranks.

The battle scenes ,as usual, for Cozzens are portrayed through many interesting anecdotes. This was a confusing battle. Not quite as confusing as Chickamauga but still pretty bad. I think Cozzens does the best he can and the bloody nature of the battle comes through. The attacks and counterattacks come through in Cozzens account. I think he does a good job of showing how close the Army of the Cumberland came to losing the battle. As usual, the Army of Tennessee fought with great tenacity but it wasn't quite enough. The attack of the Orphan Brigade makes a stirring finale and one will be reminded a bit of Pickett's Charge which would take place six months later.

These two armies would meet again in the North Georgia woods and the result would be truly horrific. But to understand the roads that led to the Battle of Chickamauga you have to read Cozzens work here on Stones River.

Highly recommended!