The (Sloppy) Pen Is Mightier Than the Sword

John C. Oeffinger, ed.. A Soldier's General: The Civil War Letters of Major General Lafayette McLaws. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2002. xx + 299 pp. $34.95, cloth, ISBN 978-0-8078-2690-4. Reviewed by Bradford Wineman Published on H-CivWar (July, 2003) The (Sloppy) Pen Is Mightier than the Sword twenty-four years he served in the Mexican War John Oeffinger's A Soldier's General: The Civil and remote western frontier outposts. McLaws es‐ War Letters of Major General Lafayette McLaws caped the boredom, illness, and monotony of provides a long overdue examination of one of army life, thanks in a large part to the loving com‐ the Confederacy's most capable yet often over‐ panionship of his wife, Emily (the niece of Presi‐ looked commanders. The reason for McLaws's dent Zachary Taylor), with whom he had seven historical neglect rests not in the lack of accessible children. primary material concerning his military exploits, When his native Georgia seceded in 1861, for the Southern Historical Collection at the Uni‐ McLaws resigned his commission and offered his versity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has held services to the Confederacy. He quickly rose over four hundred of his letters for nearly three- through the ranks and achieved command of his quarters of a century. Researchers have shied own division in the Army of Northern Virginia by away from this collection because of McLaws's spring 1862. He distinguished himself during the nearly illegible handwriting. Fortunately, Oeffin‐ major campaigns of that year and earned a repu‐ ger has painstakingly transcribed each document tation for his competence in battle and his atten‐ and compiled over one hundred letters and jour‐ tion to administrative detail. Unfortunately, his nal entries treating the general's Civil War experi‐ talents for cautious battlefield discretion led him ence. to failure at the Battle of Chancellorsville, where Born in Augusta, Georgia, in 1821, McLaws his overly prudent nature prevented him from experienced a comfortable childhood and attend‐ making a key assault and nearly prevented a Con‐ ed the best private schools, all provided for by his federate victory. McLaws's division then bore the politician/businessman father. In spite of his fne brunt of Lieutenant General James Longstreet's schooling, McLaws graduated from West Point unsuccessful attempts to turn the Union left fank near the bottom of his class in 1837. Over the next on the second day at Gettysburg, the planning and H-Net Reviews execution of which led to bitter resentment be‐ on numerous topics including life in the Confeder‐ tween the once childhood friends. ate army, Civil War-era politics, and the Southern The growing animosity between the two gen‐ press. The general opines on Jefferson Davis, Rich‐ erals climaxed in November 1863 when mond newspapers, the "loyalty" of Virginia civil‐ Longstreet relieved McLaws from command and ians, and the Northern Democratic party; howev‐ charged him with neglect of duty after his failed er, this rarely extends beyond a sentence or two assault at Fort Sanders during the Knoxville cam‐ or passing reference. With the exception of major paign. Believing the charges to be malicious and diatribes against Generals Longstreet and John B. unfounded, McLaws demanded a court-martial Hood, McLaws has little to say about other major and, after a trial, was eventually exonerated. He commanders, such as Robert E. Lee, Thomas J. spent the remainder of the war in the Department Jackson, or other celebrated contemporaries. He of South Carolina and Georgia, charged with the also leaves scant description, if any, of the numer‐ defense of Savannah and hampering Sherman's ous engagements on which he had built his battle‐ march through the Carolinas. After the war, field reputation, such as the Seven Days, Second McLaws served in local political offices and dedi‐ Manassas, Antietam, and Fredericksburg. Finally, cated much of his time to restoring his tarnished the impetus behind the moniker "a soldier's gen‐ reputation and repairing relations with his critics. eral" does not stand out in the text of his letters. While he does make one reference to poor medi‐ Oeffinger demonstrates his excellence as an cal care in the summer of 1861, he never other‐ editor not only for deciphering McLaws's hand‐ wise mentions the welfare of his troops in battle, writing but also for his copious and well-docu‐ in camp, or on the march. Oeffinger's attempt in mented notations throughout the letters. His six‐ the introduction to substantiate McLaws's com‐ ty-page introduction outlining McLaws's life and passion for his troops relies on thin evidence, career provides a more than ample foundation such as a passage from an unidentified newspa‐ for the subsequent correspondence. The letters per article and the engraving on McLaws's own themselves offer several interesting contributions, tombstone. including the voluminous correspondence during his court-martial and his harsh criticism of On the whole, this collection of correspon‐ Longstreet immediately after the Battle of Gettys‐ dence delves more into McLaws's personal life burg. There are also a handful of less noticeable than his analysis of military or political affairs. treasures in this collection. McLaws describes in While he may have held the great responsibilities detail the defense of the York-James Peninsula of command, most of the letters McLaws sent to during the winter of 1861-62 and the campaign to his family demonstrate human emotions similar slow William T. Sherman's advance through the to any enlisted man enduring the hardships of Carolinas after the fall of Savannah, both of which war: justifying the cause he fghts for, pining (of‐ receive comparatively little attention in Civil War ten incessantly) for letters from home, wrestling historiography. The four antebellum letters, situ‐ with the challenges of being an absentee father, ated before the actual war correspondence, offer and mulling the uncertainty of life after the war. an extraordinary wealth of information on the If readers come away with any understanding of U.S. Army's 1859-60 Navajo Indian Campaign in this man, it will be a realization of his overwhelm‐ Utah territory. ing desire to have control over any situation or challenge that he confronted. His meticulous at‐ The book's major faw is in its bold contention tention to administrative detail, demand for disci‐ that the McLaws letters "contain a wealth of opin‐ pline in his troops, fear of taking dangerous risks ion and information" (from the book's dust jacket) on the battlefield, criticism of ineffective com‐ 2 H-Net Reviews manders, continual concern over his reputation and micromanagement of his children's upbring‐ ing are all behaviors that reflect his fear of being placed in a situation where he could not personal‐ ly control the outcome. This attitude probably provides a better characterization of the general than either "cautious" or "defensive-minded." A Soldier's General is a valuable contribution to the study of the Army of Northern Virginia and Confederate leadership and will be of interest to those examining battlefield-homefront connec‐ tions during the war. While it sometimes falls short of what it promises, it is still a worthwhile read and an exemplary model of primary docu‐ ment editing. If there is additional discussion of this review, you may access it through the network, at https://networks.h-net.org/h-civwar Citation: Bradford Wineman. Review of Oeffinger, John C., ed. A Soldier's General: The Civil War Letters of Major General Lafayette McLaws. H-CivWar, H-Net Reviews. July, 2003. URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=7935 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. 3.

Load more