Customer Reviews

Not War But Murder: Cold Harbor 1864

5 star:		(16)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Ernest B. Furgurson has proven that Walt Whitman was wrong. The "good gray poet" once said the real Civil War would never get into the books. "Not War But Murder: Cold Harbor 1864" is about as close to the reality and horror of that struggle as we are likely to get. I absolutely defy anyone to read the opening paragraph of the Prologue without reading the book to its end. I recommend it not only to everyone interested in the Civil War but to everyone who admires brilliant writing. This book is not only military history at its best, but it is far more than than military history because of the complex moral, philosophical and pyschological questions that it raises and with which it deals. With "Not War But Murder," Furgurson, who has already written two fine Civil War books, joins the ranks of our most distinguished historians of that perilous time.

This book was a wonderful read. The author presented the information in a clear manner. There were plenty of maps to make clear the events on the battlefield. He also had a good number of quotes, some very entertaining, from participants.

However, I did not give the book five stars because of a shortcoming I felt while reading it. Cold Harbor is, without doubt, the worst mistake of Grant's carreer (OK, after running for President, but I meant his military carreer). The author goes into why this occurred quite ably. His conclusion, unfortunately, falls back on the old saw, "Robert E. Lee was great. Grant stunk." The funny thing is, he shows both generals in the book in ways opposite to his conclusion. Lee was very lucky in a number of the events the way they occurred. That had nothing to do with his abilities. Grant quite nimbly picked his way out of traps Lee set and out-manouvered Lee on a couple of occasions. All this is presented in the book.

So, for all those that worship at the Temple Lee, you will agree with this author. For those looking for good history, you'll agree with this author.

To my knowledge, three armies surrendered during the Civil War. Grant received two of them personally. That hardly sounds like a loser and a bad general.

Cold Harbor is a name familiar to everyone interested in the American Civil War. It has come to symbolize the terrible nature of warfare that had began with dreams of glory and had been transformed into the horrible futility of attacks against entrenchments. Strangely, however, the Cold Harbor itself has attracted little study in comparison with such early battles as Antietam, Chancellorsville, and Gettysburg. To my knowledge Ernest Furguson's "Not War but Murder: Cold Harbor 1864" is only the second book-length narrative of the battle ever to have been published. Furguson carefully examines the events from all viewpoints: Union and Confederate, commanding generals and foot soldiers. He has crafted an absorbing story which, although focusing on the grand, doomed assault of June 3, does full justice to the events before and after while the Army of the Potomac and the Army of Northern Virginia confronted one another near the Confederate capitol of Richmond.

Furguson lays the blame for the lop-sided defeat, accurately I believe, at the feet of US Grant, overall commander of the Union troops, and of George Meade, his principal subordinate in actual command of the Army of the Potomac. Grant failed badly in his understanding of the state of morale and combat strength not only of his foes, but also of his own depleted army. And Meade, it seems, allowed the battle to proceed without control or coordination due to a fit of pique engendered by his treatment in the press. Grant also deservedly receives strong criticism for the way he handled truce negotiations which would have allowed rescue of wounded soldiers trapped between lines after the failed attack, although here Lee too wins no marks for compassion.

I have only one real criticism of Furguson's account of Cold Harbor (and it is a fairly small criticism): I believe that Furguson overstates the significance of what happened at Cold Harbor, particularly the famous disastrous assault of June 3 which resulted in perhaps 7000 Union casualties against probably fewer than 1500 Confederates. He blames the subsequent failure of the Union army to capture Petersburg upon a "Cold Harbor syndrome" reluctance to attack fortifications and depicts the June 3 attack as destroying the battlefield power and morale of his army. In fact, Cold Harbor and the doomed attack was really only the culminating act in the devastating Overland Campaign which had already taken the Army of the Potomac (and the Army of Northern Virginia) through the Wilderness and Spotsylvania battles. The Union losses during the June 3 assault were only a small fraction of the total casualties during the campaign and the Army of the Potomac by the time of Cold Harbor was already exhibiting fatigue and loss of morale and by then had learned caution in attacking entrenchments. Whether or not the June 3 attack was made, it seems that the speedy capture of Petersburg may have already been beyond Grant's grasp.

This small criticism aside, I would strongly recommend "Not War but Murder" to anyone interested in the grim realities of combat during the closing year of the American Civil War. It is a vivid study of a battle more famous than understood.

The text's opens stating "From June 3, 1864 to this day, those who know anything about the American Civil War, the name Cold Harbor has been a synonym for mindless slaughter." The Prologue continues "Never did generals so blatantly place concern for their own reputation above mercy for their soldiers dying in the sun."

The author, Ernest Furgurson, first reviews Grant's 1864 spring campaign from the Battle of the Wilderness to Cold Harbor. Throughout the campaign Grant continued to insist that he would beat Lee if only the Confederates would come out and fight an open battle where his numerical superiority would prevail. The Confederates refused to cooperate and developed entrenched positions leading Union General Meade to remark "In every instance we have attacked the enemy in an entrenched position we have failed."

The text then provides an excellent account of the Cold Harbor campaign emphasizing the climatic battle on June 3, 1864 when the Union forces attacked the well-entrenched Confederate lines. The climatic battle lasted less than an hour (extra time is disputed) with the Union suffering sever losses to comparatively light Confederate casualties. Confederate General Evander Law later wrote "It was not war; it was murder."The lines stabilized, then sniper and mortar action continued for several days while the dead, dying and wounded lay unattended between the lines in no man's land. Finally, four-one-half days later, Lee and Grant arranged a truce when the dead and wounded were attended to.

Unlike the June 3rd attack, in a brilliantly planned and executed move, Grant's army left Cold Harbor during the night of June 12 with Grant's entourage arriving at the James River on June 14. Some say Lee was fooled by Grant's move across the James, but the author notes " . . . messages prove, Lee was not fooled by what Grant did. But beyond doubt, he was surprised by the secrecy, speed and efficiency with which Grant did it."

There were few light moments at Cold Harbor; however, the texts tells of two opposing soldiers trapped between the lines "in the same hole who played cards until dark, when the Confederate claimed the Yankee loser as his prisoner." Also, the book records that on Thursday, June 9 "The Rebs and our men got tired shooting and stopped without any arrangements between them . . . Men left their guns in the pits and met as friends . . . and were laying down on the works"-until the Union officer of the day ordered both sides back to their lines. "When they were back in their holes, they hollered to one another, `Watch out, Yanks I'm going to shoot,' and `Take care there, Johnnie, your head's in the way of my bullet."

Regarding Grant's defeat at Cold Harbor, the text states "Grant badly misunderstood the enemy, from Robert E. Lee down to the leanest Alabama rifleman." When Grant reported, "A battle with [the Rebels] outside of intrenchments cannot be had,' he considered that apparent fact to be proof of dwindling Southern morale. He had not learned the lessons of May as well as the privates in his own front ranks. " In addition the author writes "To attack such a formidable defense `all long the line,' without detailed reconnaissance, without specific objectives, and without a follow-up plan, was an act of colossal misjudgment. By the time Grant called off the attack, that was clear to every general and every private. They understood what had happened, and after belatedly inspecting the field, the generals understood now."

The author discusses command problems. Regarding the strained Meade/Grant relationship he writes, "With two generals in command, no one properly managed the assault at Cold Harbor. There Grant suffered his worst defeat and Lee won his last great victory, and what happened there determined what happened across the James." The Army of the Potomac lost about seven thousand men in the ill-fated June 3 attack with Lee losing less than fifteen hundred. Union army morale slumped even lower after Cold Harbor and The Army of the Potomac developed a reluctance to charge enemy breastworks. After the Union army first crossed the James River, they held back when they could have easily overrun the puny Confederate Petersburg force.

Finally, the book gives some colorful insights to the role of the press during the spring campaign. One Union officer wrote "The reporters who make public opinion are the scum of creation and there is not one of them who any gentlemen would associate with."

While Grant, perhaps recklessly, lost heavily at Cold Harbor, the author notes that Charles Dana (Union War Department Observer) correctly wrote "The outlook warranted the effort." Breaking Lee's lines would have meant "his destruction and the collapse of the rebellion." And if Grant had won, who would have thought of the losses?"

For the Confederates after Cold Harbor, Capt. Charles Blackford's previous observation was still tragically true when he had noted "We are being conquered by the splendor of our own victories, and Grants accepts defeat with that consolation . . ."

Most histories of the Grant's 1864 spring campaign devote only a page or two to Cold Harbor. This excellent and well-written book provides details of interest to any serious student of the Civil War.

Ernest Fergurson is one of the most readable writers of Civil War history. If you begin reading Grant's campaign's from the Battle in the Wilderness written by Gordon Rhea, then read Rhea's book on the Battle for Spotsylvania Court House and his To The Anna River, you will be ready for Not War But Murder.

This book is a page turner. I read the first 100 pages in two nights. Staying awake until 5 AM, I just couldn't put the book down. As a Civil War buff for over 60 years, I never had books available that could detail this part of the Civil War.

Even after reading Grant's own biography of the war, the explicit details of all four of these books is mind altering. Following each battle one more deadly then the next. You are transported in time to 137 years ago, when tens of thousands of men died weekly as Grant moves The Union Army to his eventual victory. But the opportunities to defeat Lee were there on almost every given day as these two armies fought from the Wilderness to Richmond.

Not War But Murder illuminates the Battle at Cold Harbor, just outside the Richmond fortifications. Here Grant came with a force twice the size of Lee's. Lee's army was ill fed, ill clothed and ill armed. But the Confederates were fighting to save the south in their backyard. Lee was sick, tired and without his greatest generals, Longstreet, Jackson and Stuart. Yet Grant and Meade made blunder after blunder allowing Lee the opportunity to slaughter Union soldiers. In the end Lee was forced to the seige of Petersburg and Richmond, but at what a price in dead, wounded and captured soldiers.

This book relates less than two weeks of battle but they are told from the viewpoint of North and South, Officer and enlisted man. Fergurson has done his research and is a master storyteller. No Civil War buff should miss all four of these great books.

In "Chancellorsville 1863: The Souls of the Brave" and "Ashes of Glory," Ernest B. Furgurson showed a mastery of the anecdotal style of historical writing, weaving personal accounts together to tell a story from ground level. In "Not War But Murder," he combines this ability with thorough archival research and an ability to write good operational military history. The result is a joy to read, a book that will appeal to the scholar and the general reader, the Civil War neophyte and the serious buff. The book is also attractively presented, with George Skoch's matchless maps- he's the best in the business as far as I'm concerned.

This book is also a winner because Furgurson creates a concise but comprehensive thesis, and argues it very persuasively. Whether he is "right" about everything, or has the final word on Lee and Grant is hardly the point. His arguments are coherent and believable, and he presents them in an entertaining format. I applaud him especially for picking a side on the Lee vs. Grant cease fire controversy. Grant apologists should realize that the author is not condemning U.S. as a bad general.

I heartily recommend this book to anyone with an interest in the Civil War's eastern theater. It is certainly difficult to provide fresh material on Lee and Grant, but Furgurson carries it off with style.

Ernest Furgurson's Not War But Murder is recommended for avid followers of Civil War history: it focuses on Cold Harbor events, recounting the bloody campaign there and providing the first book-length analysis of the battle. 1864 history and military events come alive in a survey which includes underlying influences.

I have toured many of the battlefields, both major and minor, and believe that Cold Harbor is the most interesting, not only because of what took place there in June, 1864, but also how eerily somber the site is today. It is one of the few that have not grown completely over, and you can walk across the field toward the Confederate earthworks and imagine minie balls and artillery striking the ground or comrades close by. Furgurson's account gave me the same chilling feeling.

The 1864 battle at Cold Harbor has enjoyed somewhat of a rejuvination lately with a recent work from Gordon Rhea as well as this fine volume from noted Civil War historian Ernest Furgurson. Naturally, a comparison is warranted (whether fairly or unfairly) so I'll indulge myself.

Rhea's coverage of the battle is framed in a military/campaign format with specific movements and tactics spelled out in sometimes extreme detail...a great many readers, I'll wager will not be able to "see the forest for the trees". For Civil War buffs however, this work is paradise.

By comparison, Furgurson's account takes a more general approach to the struggle with emphasis on the everyday soldier and military life. The result is a sparkling and refreshing view of this awful battle with an added bonus of a brilliant description of the subsequent extrication of U.S. Grant's Army of the Potomac from Cold Harbor and the beginning of the siege of Petersburg.

Furgurson tells just enough of the details of both armies movements from the end of the battle at the North Anna river up to and including the climactic struggles on June 1st and 3rd to keep the military historians engaged, but also in a way that drags the general reader in and holds him. As in his previous work covering the 1863 battle of Chancellorsville, Furgurson keeps a remarkable balance between the detailed battle tactics and social issues of the day, all the while allowing the story to flow at a pleasurable pace...without sacrificing any details.

Furgurson goes on to discuss the mood of both armies as they settle in for the Petersburg siege...the almost criminal loss of opportunity of the Union forces to destroy the Confederates as Grant steals a march on R.E. Lee. Grant's deteriorating relationship with Gordon Meade is a principal factor at this point in the war for the Union's poor coordination and Furgurson does not hesitate to criticize both. Finally, a brilliant Epilouge that discusses the battlefield post Cold Harbor and the Cold Harbor cemetery eloquently close out the book.

As in any battle history, the mark of a standout story is the author's ability to depict the battle and all the details while not suffering "atmosphere" and Ernest Furgurson succeeds magnificently with "Not War But Murder". I recommend this book highly.

Cold Harbor is one of the least written about but yet one of the most significant battles of the Civil war. It was the last Confederate victory in the eastern theatre.It was less a Confederate victory than a Union defeat or perhaps disaster is a better word. The disasters on Marye's Heights at Fredericksburg and Pickett's charge at Gettysburg should have convinced Generals on both sides of the fallacy of sending massed formations up against an entrenched line. But that is exactly what U.S. Grant did at Cold Harbor, not once but twice.The author says that Cold Harbor is the greatest blot on Grant's reputation and that had any other Union General committed a similar blunder He would have been sacked in short order.Yet other distinguished civil war Historians such as T. Harry Williams and Russell Weighley dismiss Cold Harbor as just another part of Grant's campaign of attrition against the Army of Northern Virginia which ended ultimately in victory for the Army of the Potomac.Yet it is instructive that Grant called Cold Harbor one of only two mistakes He made in the war. Ernest Furgurson is clearly anti-Grant but He is an excellent writer. He shows us clearly that the Cold Harbor disaster was rooted in the strained relationship between Grant and the commander of the Army of the Potomac George G. Meade. This is an outstanding book that well deserves a place of honor of the library of every serious Civil War student.