|
Peter Cozzens, This Terrible
Sound: The Battle of Chickamauga.
Section One
Scope: This book covers the Chickamauga campaign that culminated in the battle between Union Major General William Rosecrans' Army of the Cumberland and Confederate Lieutenant General Braxton Bragg's Army of Tennessee in northwest Georgia in September, 1863. It marked the final battle in the Civil War's year of decision, and it represented the only substantial victory ever achieved by the hard luck Army of Tennessee. Bragg's failure to exploit the victory and aggressively pursue the defeated Federals created a topic for countless debates over tens of years. More importantly, however, the defeated Union army remained intact; it became a building block around which Major General U. S. Grant created the force that soundly defeated Bragg at the Battle of Missionary Ridge a few months later, the event that led to Confederate ruin in the West.
Thesis: Peter Cozzens wrote this book with the objective that it become the standard reference book for the battle. He attempts to present both sides with all their worts, their chaotic and often egocentric command relationships, and their tactical weaknesses fully exposed. He points out that each commander suffered from a variety of near fatal flaws, but that Bragg won despite his and those of his Commander-in-Chief, Jefferson Davis.
Sources: As should be expected from an author hoping to produce a standard reference for a specific event, Cozzens relies extensively on primary materials. He masterfully blends the first-person accounts of the battle into his text and presents the reader with an account that unfolds on an hour-by-hour basis. Of the secondary sources he cites, only three appear to be general accounts of the battle, and two of those were written before 1890 - one, in 1863, by an obviously Southern sympathizer. Of the other secondary sources. most are either general biographies of the participants or unit histories.
Section Two
Accuracy: This book is painstakingly researched and appears very accurate, with differences and discrepancies between the combatants as to time and place usually noted. Given the lack of precision with which 19th Century commanders kept time, any seemingly precise reference to that measure must be viewed skeptically, and Cozzens does. The same is true of geography, since naturally the topography of an area, especially a battlefield, changes as trees grow, fields become covered and streams meander. Interestingly, one of the obscure references which Cozzens cites is surely an attempt by Indiana veterans to redress inaccuracies in the accounts of the battle. 1 One can only speculate what errors those veterans were seeking to redress; no doubt, however, they included issues of both time and location.
Logic: Cozzens does a wonderful job of developing the story of the campaign and the battle, which even by Civil War standards was very complex. He weaves the personality traits (more accurately, perhaps, personality faults) of the various commanders on both sides. His account of the series of battles which together constitute the Battle of Chickamauga is developed on a time line, with very little skipping about which would confuse the reader. However, the book is woefully inadequate with respect to maps and illustrations which would assist the reader in following Cozzens' richly detailed narrative.
Balance: This Terrible Sound is very fairly balanced. The reader senses the woeful inadequacies of both commanding generals. Further, the splendid, often needless or fruitless sacrifice by the officers and men at the division and lower echelons is fully developed and credit given to both sides. Cozzens shows that most Union commands fought bravely with great determination and gallantry; faced by an enemy of equal fortitude and esprit who also benefited from major blunders by Union generals, the Confederates prevailed despite their commanders and their own errors. Cozzens also points out, however, that Confederate command blunders saved parts of the Union army before the actual battle began. But Cozzens writes that, in war, he who remains and occupies the field is usually declared the winner. The Confederate surely won the day at Chickamauga, but Bragg's subsequent inaction squandered the sacrifice made by his troops.
Section Three
Cozzens has achieved his obejctive to write the definitive reference for the Battle of Chickamauga. This is a great book that thoroughly presents all aspects of the battle. Using it as a starting point, any Civil War student has more than sufficient material to investigate, analyze and evaluate the actions and reactions of either combatant. From insightful analysis of the general officers, their eccentricities and blatant military deficiencies, their egocentric views of themselves to the brave private soldiers and junior officers on both sides, Cozzens provides a masterful account.
Even the less serious student of the battle will value this book for its broad presentation of materials. Cozzens secondary theses, that both Bragg and Rosecrans were incapable of meeting their responsibilities; that the Southern command structure, starting with Davis and down to the level of the corps' commanders was inadequate and could not expect victory; that common soldiers and junior officers were almost uniformly brave and heroic regardless of their uniforms or unit, are all well developed. But it is Cozzens treatment of the general officers on each side which makes the book. The reader learns of the personal relationships which dramatically affected the results on the battlefield. With respect to the catastrophic mistake of the battle, Union Brigadier General Thomas Wood's decision to strictly follow orders to pull his men out of the line when he knew a the Confederate attack had reached his skirmishers seems inexplicable, yet Cozzens not only reports the event but also provides the reasoning behind the general's decision. Similarly, when Longstreet showed great initiative early on the final day, only to inexplicably stop for a leisurely lunch at the height of the Confederate tide, Cozzens discusses the event in the context of the Southerner's experience with Lee and provides insights which help understand Longstreet's actions.
Cozzens does not cite Richard McMurry's book, Two Great Rebel Armies, published in 1989, three years before Cozzens'. McMurry's thesis was that the Army of Tennessee had many deficiencies when compared to the Army of Northern Virginia, including the relative strength of their commanders, but also including the military experience and training of field and junior officers as well as men in the ranks. Cozzens echoes similar themes within the context of a specific battle. McMurry's work provides additional insights about the overall composition and structure of the Army of Tennessee, consistent with Cozzens', and very complementary.
Edwin Coddington's remarkable The Gettysburg Campaign: A Study in Command provides the definite single work for that titanic event. Nearly thirty years later, Peter Cozzens has given us This Terrible Sound: The Battle of Chickamauga. If anything, Chickamauga was an even more disjointed and fragmented series of battles than Gettysburg, and Cozzen's account is every bit as good as Coddington's highly respected standard.
Endnotes
1. Peter Cozzens, This Terrible Sound. The Battle of Chickamauga. (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1992), p.645.
Bibliography:
Cozzens, Peter. This Terrible Sound. The Battle of Chickamauga. Urbana and Chicago. University of Illinois Press. 1992.
Esposito, Vincent J., ed. West Point Atlas of American Wars. 2 Vols. New York. Henry Holt and Company. 1995.
McMurry, Richard M. Two Great Rebel Armies. Chapel Hill. University of North Carolina Press. 1989.
|
