Paid Advertisement
Historynet/feed historynet feedback facebook link Weider History Group RSS feed Weider Subscriptions Historynet Home page

Donnybrook: The Battle of Bull Run, 1861 (Book Review)

Originally published on HistoryNet.com. Published Online: June 12, 2006 
Print Friendly
4 comments FONT +  FONT -

Reviewed by Dan Monroe
By David Detzer
Harcourt

In Donnybrook: The Battle of Bull Run, 1861, retired history professor David Detzer returns to the battle that made plain the bloody intensity that was to characterize the Civil War in the Eastern theater. Caught up in a surging tide of Northern public opinion favoring aggressive action, typified by The New York Tribune's masthead slogan "Forward to Richmond," Abraham Lincoln ordered Brig. Gen. Irvin McDowell to take the offensive. Although inexperienced at handling large troop formations and worried by his men's lack of training, McDowell complied. The result was a pitched battle near the rail junction at Manassas, Va., a bloodletting that Detzer reminds us cost more killed in action than the U.S. Army suffered landing at Omaha Beach in 1944.

Detzer challenges accepted interpretations of the battle and the events preceding it. For example, Maj. Gen. Robert Patterson, commander of Union forces in the Shenandoah Valley facing a Confederate army under General Joseph E. Johnston, is typically criticized for failing to prevent the transfer of Johnston and crucial reinforcements to Confederate forces at Manassas under General P.G.T. Beauregard. Other historians have characterized Patterson as superannuated, an elderly has-been incapable of offensive action. To the contrary, argues Detzer, Patterson was an offensive-minded officer and a vigorous, healthy man. The problem lay in confusing and contradictory orders that General-in-Chief Winfield Scott, the real superannuated warrior, sent to Patterson. Scott's equivocal commands, cautioning Patterson against forward movement unless success was assured, curbed Patterson's natural aggressiveness and allowed Johnston to slip to the east.

Detzer also dismisses the widespread belief that Washington politicians and dandies came to witness the battle and what they believed would be the certain defeat of the Southern army, feasting on picnic lunches and sipping champagne amid the carnage. Detzer argues that while it is true that a small number of congressmen and other civilians witnessed the battle, they did so because regiments composed of their constituents were on the march.

Amid Detzer's narrative of the battle's progress are pithy essays on the experience of soldiers in the war. He describes the awkward transformation of civilians into warriors, including their reaction to camp and army life. We learn the steps needed to load and fire a musket, and the horrors a wounded soldier might experience in a field hospital. Detzer offers plenty of battlefield excitement and gore while skillfully drawing on manuscript sources to create word portraits of officers and men.

He has an excellent command of the topography surrounding the stream called Bull Run, and conveys the confusion that enveloped the Virginia countryside as inexperienced troops on both sides grappled with each other. Similarities in the uniforms and flags of the opposing armies added to the chaos.

It is clear that much of the fault for the Union defeat must lie with McDowell, who experienced physical symptoms that suggest he buckled under pressure. Sleep-deprived and suffering from vomiting and diarrhea, probably brought on by stress, McDowell bungled his handling of the army, most notably in ordering a disastrous night retreat that turned a setback into a chaotic rout. President Abraham Lincoln also comes in for a measure of criticism from Detzer for yielding to howls from the press for a prompt drive on Richmond and for ordering McDowell forward with a still-green army.

Detzer's indictment of Scott is convincing, but his defense of Patterson is less so. As Maj. Gen. George B. McClellan would do later, Patterson greatly overestimated the size of Johnston's army. He misinterpreted the signs of Johnston's moving his army east to assist Beauregard as reinforcements arriving to Johnston. If he was truly an aggressive commander, he ought to have kept Johnston pinned in the valley, orders or not.

Strangely, in a book that faults Lincoln, Detzer relies on aged biographies — Hay, Sandburg and Oates — rather than David Donald's more recent Lincoln biography or Phillip Paludan's history of the Lincoln presidency. Those quibbles aside, Detzer has written a fine book that engages the historiographer while giving the reader a heart-pounding account of the battle.


4 Responses to “Donnybrook: The Battle of Bull Run, 1861 (Book Review)”


  1. 1
    Ernesto SmileyFace says:

    please make an easier website!!
    thank you.

  2. 2
    seefa says:

    to much words

  3. 3
    Senora says:

    Please make this more understandable and use less words!!!!
    Thanks,
    Senora

  4. 4

    [...] Detzer, Donnybrook: The Battle of Bull Run, 1861  states that Judith Carter Henry, an 85-year-old widow and invalid, who was unable to leave her [...]



Leave a Reply

Human Verification: In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Related Articles

Donnybrook: The Battle of Bull Run, 1861 (Book Review)

Originally published on HistoryNet.com. Published Online: June 12, 2006 
Print Friendly
0 comments FONT +  FONT -

Reviewed by John Hennessy
By David Detzer
New York: Harcourt, Inc., 2004

Whether you refer to it as Manassas or Bull Run, you'll want this book on the war's first major battle.

The First Battle of Bull Run, or Manassas, holds an odd place in the nation's historical mind. It grabs our attention because it was the first major battle of the Civil War, but we shun it for precisely the same reason. Full of the mayhem, confusion, illogic and public fascination that characterizes a generation's first foray into battle, Bull Run was a curious spectacle that defies the geometric, clinical analysis that so many students of the Civil War adore. Subsequent events rendered the military significance of the battle minimal; without military significance, generations of historians and students of the war have concluded it had little significance at all (the Civil War is one era in which, in the popular mind, military significance is often the only benchmark of an event's worthiness for study). But in Donnybrook: The Battle of Bull Run, 1861 (New York: Harcourt, Inc., 2004, $28), author David Detzer elegantly embraces First Bull Run for what it was: a chaotic drama and a labo-ratory for war with immense social and political trappings. This is a good book.

With this work, Detzer establishes himself as the premier historian of the war's first months, as Donnybrook follows his thoughtful and much acclaimed Allegiance: Fort Sumter, Charleston, and the Beginning of the Civil War. Detzer's extensive knowledge of the early war period helps him illuminate the conflict's first major battle in a way never before matched.

What makes this book work is not its battle narrative — though that narrative is thorough and by a wide margin the most thoughtful done on First Bull Run. Rather, Detzer seamlessly moves between the general and the specific, presenting details not for their own sake, but always to illustrate a larger point. He assiduously avoids the often pointless recounting of detail endemic to so many battle studies. In Donnybrook, context brings details into relief, details that illuminate the larger points Detzer seeks to make.

Detzer breaks new ground by daring to defend perennial whipping boy Union Maj. Gen. Robert Patterson, whom historians have universally held responsible for allowing Confederate Brig. Gen. Joseph E. Johnston to move his 11,000-man army to P.G.T. Beauregard's aid at Manassas. In historians' circles, dissing Patterson is akin to praising "Stonewall" Jackson — virtually inevitable. That's largely because historians have uncritically accepted the conventional wisdom on Patterson. Detzer does not. The result is a provocative (though not unarguable) rehabilitation of the maligned Robert Patterson.

Detzer also sheds new light on overlooked aspects of the First Bull Run adventure. He offers a scathing assessment of the work of the Union army's chief engineer, John G. Barnard, who bungled the effort to find a secure route for the Union flank march on July 21, 1861. Likewise, he provides an excellent critical analysis of the use of spies and intelligence on both sides, citing the almost comical lack of security and discretion. He concludes, rightly and contrary to popular belief, that Confederate authorities did not rely much on "pie peddlers or Rose Greenhow," who according to legend passed critical information to the Confederates by bundling messages in her hair bun. Instead, Detzer offers, clever devices like embedded hair buns were far less useful than the mundane act of reading Northern newspapers.

If nothing else, First Bull Run was the stuff of legends: civilian observers, Stonewall Jackson, the charge of J.E.B. Stuart's cavalry on Henry Hill. Detzer takes on virtually every legend associated with the battle — not with mindless attempts at myth-busting, but with careful parsing of source material (in itself interesting) and measured description that once and for all sets the record straight on many fronts. Civilians did not swarm the battlefield, intermixing with warriors; Jackson earned his nickname later in the day and under much different circumstances than is usually presumed; Stuart's charge had "little or no effect" on the flow of battle. Detzer makes no pretense of resolving every controversy, myth or mystery (the ebb and flow of fighting on Henry Hill remains something of a muddle, even after Detzer's work), but skillfully presents what the source material suggests after careful consideration.

A few things elevate this book above others of its genre. Detzer's characterizations of major players in the battle is outstanding. He presents the experience at Bull Run not just in the context of the war, but also in the context of key participants' lives and personalities. Irvin McDowell, Patterson, Barnard Bee, Beauregard, Jackson, Johnston and a dozen others emerge as real and flawed people struggling with an event beyond their ability to control.

Just as the event was a generation's introduction to war, Detzer uses the battle to give us a primer on war and soldiering. Useful and interesting interludes vividly describe the fundamentals of being a soldier: training, food, recruiting, organization, medicine and the noise, confusion and heartache of being in battle. As the soldiers learned, so too do readers — even those who fancy themselves already informed.

This thoughtful, innovative and accessible approach to history is supported by excellent research (much new or rarely used material appears in the footnotes), thoughtful and provocative analysis, and — most pleasing — outstanding prose. Uncommon is the book that succeeds on all three levels, and this one does. Unlike most writers of this genre, Detzer pays much attention to the rhythm of words and the use of language. The result: an elegantly written book that engages from first word to last.

The final word on First Bull Run may yet be written or, more likely, may never be, but in the interim David Detzer's Donnybrook is first-rate history presented with great literary merit.



Leave a Reply

Human Verification: In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Related Articles


History Net Images Spacer
Paid Advertisement
Paid Advertisement
History Net Daily Activities
History net Spacer
History net Spacer
Historynet Spacer
HISTORYNET READERS' POLL

Which of these wars resulted in the most surprising underdog upset?

View Results | See previous polls

Loading ... Loading ...
History net Spacer
STAY CONNECTED WITH US
RSS Feed Daily Email Update
History net Spacer
Paid Advertisement History net Spacer
Paid Advertisement

Paid Advertisement
What is HistoryNet?

The HistoryNet.com is brought to you by Weider History, the world's largest publisher of history magazines. HistoryNet.com contains daily features, photo galleries and over 5,000 articles originally published in our various magazines.

If you are interested in a specific history subject, try searching our archives, you are bound to find something to pique your interest.

From Our Magazines
Weider History

Weider History Network:  HistoryNet | Armchair General | Achtung Panzer! | StreamHistory.com
Today in History | Ask Mr. History | Picture of the Day | Daily History Quiz | Contact Us

Copyright © 2014 Weider History. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Advertise With Us | Subscription Help | Privacy Policy