Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Book Review: Horses and Mules in the Civil War.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Book Review: Horses and Mules in the Civil War.

    Horses and Mules in the Civil War
    By Gene C Armistead
    McFarland & Co. Inc. Publishers
    Jefferson, NC and London, 2013
    ISBN: 9780786473632

    I saw a blurb on this new book recently, ordered then read it and thought I might share its virtues. Of course this book covers a topic near and dear to our hearts here on this forum and as such warrants a review.
    Just out last August, its coverage is good and includes some very interesting practical information starting in the first chapter " For the Want of a Horse (or Mule)". In it we find some really good information on the number of equines in the U.S. at the time of the war and the "relative" likely number that served in the war right down to the likely numbers in the regimental levels, cavalry, artillery, quartermaster, medical and headquarters staff, etc. Good perspective.
    The rest of the book is equally as good. It also covers how CW horses were chosen, purchased, their costs, transportation, trained, etc. etc. Some of the best writing was the chapter entitled "Lost on the Field of Battle". An obvious perspective filled with anecdotes that were great reading but I wish had been more extensive. Other chapters cover the lack of feed, bad roads, poor care and morale relative to equines. The author spends a lot of time on the names of CW horses and has an entire chapter on a roster of Civil War equine veterans.

    It covers the topic "fairly" well. I say that because it has some great points and some misfires. I really liked the info on transporting horses another on horses/mules that were "consumed" as food out of necessity was interesting. Most detailed topic areas were good (excellent for novices) though as a horseman and long time cavalry reenactor I found some of the information a bit shallow or even naive perhaps reflecting the author's inexperience with horses. Certainly, those of us that have extensive reading on the subject, long time real world experience with horses or have been in the field (long marches, camps, drill, feed/care of equines, etc.) as long time a long time reenactor see the Civil War horse a bit more accurately from the perspective of the period. For example, an entire chapter was spent on "runaways and stampedes". Really kind of minor even unique I thought. Another chapter was on "The Lightning Mule Brigade of Able Streight's Raid through Alabama in 1863. Another rather minor incident that a few paragraphs would have sufficiently covered.
    On the other hand, the abject, unnecessary, widespread and sad suffering by horses and mules was only sufficiently covered and I thought a deeper comparison to today's understanding of this aspect could have been done a bit better. The hard use of horses in the war would shock 21st century people. Even normal everyday use by many of the period would be considered abuse by many today. Massive pus running sores on horses backs were common. Poor feeding was routine. Running or working horses to exhaustion, overwork and death were more prevalent than people today realize. Sure, the times were different and the necessities of battle required it but it is these perspectives that should have been covered more extensively in this book. In this same light I also thought more coverage should be given the widespread devastation of mounts from lameness, sickness, the unnecessary neglect, starvation abuse (even in its day) and more exploration of the South's utter lack of address to these issues in a common sense manner. The north did better to an extent but an almost wholesale ignoring even denial of these problems were found among Southern leadership (to the South's demise I might add) .
    The chapter on naming horses and the roster of CW equine veterans was to me at first, a bit silly even smacked of an unnecessary "chickification" of the topic. However, after I read it I did glean some good information. It was fun reading too.
    Largely well written and accurate I found only a very few mistakes including one that notes that Forrest had "19" horses shot from under him in the war. A minor detail error but even a cursory look at almost any Forrest material (even a short search on GOOGLE) would find he had 29 horses shot from under him. But, perhaps this was a typo.
    One big negative was the book's very pricey cost. It is paperback, small format, 250 pages but the best price I could find on the web was $39 (before shipping). On Amazon it goes for $45!! Yes!! Way too high for a CW paperback of this calibre. Perhaps, this is the kind of book we should buy as a group then pass around read or, wait awhile for the price to go down and pick it up on the cheap.
    Overall, this was a very good book filling a huge void and deserving of an important place on every cavalry historian, cavalry and mounted artillery reenactor's book shelf. A fun read too and very worthy if not essential for any of us that frequent this folder. I say "get it"!!!

    Ken R Knopp
    Last edited by Ken Knopp; 01-18-2014, 01:49 PM.

  • #2
    Re: Book Review: Horses and Mules in the Civil War.

    I would like to ad a "Post-Script" to my review. I received a very kind and polite response to my review from the author. He made note that the mistake noting the number of horses that N B Forrest had shot from under him was a mistake in the caption of the photo of Forrest. In his text Mr Armistead notes correctly that the number was 29. So, it is in fact, a typo. As for the price, it appears that in this case the publisher set the price to the book not the author. Ironically, Mr Armistead agrees it is a bit pricey.
    Second and foremost, after a re-read of my review I have come to the conclusion that I was perhaps, a bit too harsh, too judgmental. Having done a little writing I know all to well about "critics". Writing is hard work and incredibly "thankless" of which I am too often reminded. It is therefore for most of us a labor of love because contrary to popular thought, it is certainly NOT a paying "gig". One is often limited by the publisher as to what is included and even omitted. Moreover, works such as this one and others in the historical context are "dated" as soon as the print dries. When new sources or information comes to light we are tagged as being "uninformed", "incomplete" or "old" leaving arm chair historians and Monday morning quarterbacks the endless right to take their shots for all time and eternity. And it seems, they do. I am embarrassed to realize I have found myself in that lot.
    After further thought on the subject, yes, I would have liked a lot more anecdotal stories and some other perspectives as I noted. But then, having read so much on the subject over the last 35 years I am probably a bit over-read and expecting more than the average person desires, requires or cares about.
    I really believe this effort a worthy one. As I noted it fills a void in CW studies and does it quite thoroughly.
    Again, I say "buy it". You will be entertained and informed and, there is a lot in it that "we" should know.

    Ken R Knopp
    Last edited by Ken Knopp; 01-18-2014, 11:46 PM.

    Comment

    Working...
    X