Writing Tempest: One More Book on Spotsy?
“Why do we need another book about Gettysburg,” I’ve heard no Civil War buff ask ever.
While the appetite for Gettysburg books seems insatiable, I’ve already had a couple folks ask, “Why do we need another book about Spotsylvania Court House?”
After all, there are already four of them out there: William Matter’s If It Takes All Summer (1988), Gordon Rhea’s The Battles for Spotsylvania Court House (1997), Jeffry Wert’s The Heart of Hell (2012), and A Season of Slaughter (2013), which I co-wrote with Kris White. Beyond that, Blue & Gray magazine published a pair of issues written by Greg Mertz and another pair co-written by me and Kris.
Aside from that, Spotsy is covered in some single-volume overviews of the Overland Campaign, and that’s pretty much it.
So why my new A Tempest of Iron and Lead: Spotsylvania Court House, May 8–21, 1864?
“I already have Gordon Rhea’s book,” one person said to me.
“Me, too!” I replied. Gordon’s five-part series of the Overland Campaign will always remain the definitive account, and it’s a set of books I value and adore deeply. It’s why I asked him to write the foreword for my own book, which he was kind to do.
Based on the logic of “I already have Rhea’s book,” though, we could’ve all stopped buying Gettysburg books after Edwin Coddington’s The Gettysburg Campaign: A Study in Command (1997). Who needs, for instance, all three volumes of Harry Pfanz’s outstanding history of the first two days of the battle (1987, 1993, 2001)? Or Stephen Sears’s smooth-reading Gettysburg (2004)? Why did Allen Guelzo even bother trying with Gettysburg: The Last Invasion (2013)? And those are just the big studies, let alone the multitude of smaller actions that have gotten focused attention.
If you’re one of the “one book per battle is enough for me” sorts of readers, then it might indeed seem that Gordon’s book is enough. (And I will recommend it to people 10 days out of 10.) BUT, Gordon takes a book and a half to cover Spotsy, so if you’re really just looking for a book, then I hope my single-volume treatment of the battle will serve the purpose for you. Otherwise, you need to get Gordon’s To the North Anna River to get the story of the second half of the battle. (a book I consider my favorite microtactical Civil War study, period, and one I’ll again recommend 10 days out of 10.)
One of my main objectives with Tempest was to cover Spotsy in a single book that would be both readable and manageable. Readability is always of utmost concern to me. I want people to read my stuff and find the experience pleasurable. I don’t want them to have to fight—or slog—their way through one of my books. That focus on engaging prose is something, I hope, that sets my prose apart from other single-volume treatments of Spotsy. Bill Matter’s book, for instance, is jam-packed full of great content, but its dense prose is something that requires effort to get through.
Jeff Wert’s single-volume treatment of Spotsy is highly readable—one of many things I really like about it. My book is different from his, however, in that he hones in on the May 12 fighting at the Bloody Angle. I take a more comprehensive approach, from May 8–May 21, 1864. A lot of compelling action takes place in that span, and Tempest covers it all.
I would also argue that I have a degree of familiarity with the ground that makes me uniquely qualified to write about the battle. I live in the immediate area, I’m on the battlefield all the time, and my wife’s family even owns a big chunk of it. That’s a degree of access that other authors just haven’t had. I tried to infuse the manuscript with what I’ve learned from being on the ground.
Tempest is the first full treatment of the battle in more than 25 years. New information has come to light, unavailable to Gordon or Bill, that I’ve been able to take advantage of. Some of my interpretations are a little different in spots.
So, it’s a fair question to ask, “What makes your book different than other Spotsy books,” and hopefully that’s a fair answer. But as to whether we “need another book on Spotsy”. . . .? I’d suggest that true students of the war would want to read a bunch of different sources, test them against each other, and then walk the ground themselves. That’s how we can best engage history and get the most out of it.
Started it yesterday and am thoroughly enjoying it.
Thanks! I hope you continue to enjoy it.
My question would not be “Why do we need another book on X Battle”, it would be “Why do we need another book by a biased yankee who has little regard for the combatants?”
I think you’ll find I have plenty of regard for the combatants. If you’re suggesting I’m a biased Yankee, I’m actually a carpetbagging Yankee. There’s a difference!
I have it and I’m looking forward to reading it. I have read all the others you have mentioned.
I hope you enjoy it, Terry!
Looking forward to reading it!
Thanks, John. I hope you enjoy it!
Spotsylvania is the battle, more than Cold Harbor, that must have finally given Lee doubt. For all the butchery he inflicted, especially on May 18, Grant remained indomitable. I will sneak this volume in under my wife’s frugal radar!?
If your frugal wife’s book radar is anything like my frugal wife’s book radar, I wish you the best of luck with the special black ops that you’re about to undertake.
Hey Chris, is there somewhere I can order a copy of the book, signed by the author? I looked on the S-B site, but didn’t see anything. Direct from you, or ECW?
Hi, Stan. I think SB is all sold out of signed copies. Email me at cmackows@sbu.edu and I can hook you up.
Really good book! nd I agree on Chris’ assessment of Gordon Rhea’
s North Anna book.
Thanks, Doug!
We can have 100 books on a single topic if they bring new insight, new information, etc. (But please, no more books on Abraham Lincoln. There are something like 1,100 out there, and the last 999 have brought us nothing new, so writers have turned him into a fantasy figure, ennobled to embody and carry forward all the wonderful aspects of the Civil Rights movement that began 90 years after his passing…with angels cooing in the background.) That’s why the last 10 books on Gettysburg have frankly been ho-hum; they’ve brought us nothing new, and not one of them debunks the Myth of Longstreet’s Genius that was started by…Longstreet himself with the fantastical claims in his memoirs, and the historians who desperately want to believe them. Nor do we need current historians attacking past historians, especially those that are superior to them. Gordon Rhea’s Overland Campaign series is good if dry reading, but the cheap shot he takes at Shelby Foote in one of the five books was not just uncalled for, but inaccurate. Poor Old Shelby – attacked, after his death so he cannot defend himself, for not being a revisionist in the cause to erase American History. Damn – he must have been a Southerner! In the end, we’ll be all right. All societies go through different phases in their self-examination, and right now we’re in a Maoist Revisionism period. This too shall pass.
Just ordered my copy
Give’em Hell, Eric. Chris, don’t take this personally, but your 6 (and counting) blogs on your book borders on hype.
Will do, Mike – thanks! Now, I don’t mind if Chris’ blogs are hype…’cause his book is really good!
Chris,
Well said. That’s a fine argument for Tempest. Thank you.
Different perspectives on historical events is crucial. There can’t be too many books. That said, readers need to make choices on what matters most to them. I just finished reading “A Tempest of Iron and Lead”. I enjoyed it and learned a lot. It is lucidly and engagingly written as befits Chris Mackowski’s background both in history and in English. His writing students are fortunate to have him as a teacher.
Good points. As such, we could use a new Gettysburg book debunking the myth of Longstreet the strategic expert, which began when people started believing his self-aggrandizing memoir. It has gone on too long and made too deep an impression on people. It’s time to set the record straight. The book I’m currently writing largely centers on the Seven Days Battle, which brings us another Longstreet myth – that Micah Jenkins opened the Battle of Glendale prematurely upon overreaching on an order from Longstreet to conduct a small, not a large action. Longstreet claimed this in his memoir, almost certainly to cover for his mishandling of his central role in the battle; as per form, the person onto which he shifted blame was dead and unable to defend himself. No such event occurred, and extensive research as well as newly uncovered physical evidence that I will present in my book will rewrite the accepted history of what occurred at Glendale.