Fighting Joe Hooker

by Walter H. Hebert, James A. Rawley (Introduction)

“I have placed you at the head of the Army of the Potomac. Of course I have done this upon what appear to me to be sufficient reasons. And yet I think it best for you to know that there are some things in regard to which, I am not quite satisfied with you.”

 

With this opening sentence in a two-page letter from Abraham Lincoln, Union general Joseph Hooker (1814–79) gained a prominent place in Civil War history. Hooker assumed command of an army demoralized by defeat and diminished by desertion. Acting swiftly, the general reorganized his army, routed corruption among quartermasters, improved food and sanitation, and boosted morale by granting furloughs and amnesties. His hour of fame and the test of his military skill came in the May 1863 battle of Chancellorsville. It was one of the Union Army’s worst defeats; shortly thereafter Hooker’s resignation was accepted.

 

This definitive biography of a man who could lead so brilliantly and yet fall so ignominiously remains the only full-length treatment of Hooker’s life. His renewal as an important commander in the western theater during the Chattanooga and Atlanta campaigns is discussed, as is his life before and after his Civil War military service. In a new introduction James A. Rawley, Carl Adolph Happold Professor Emeritus of History at the University of Nebraska, reminds today’s readers of Fighting Joe’s place in history.

Genres: Civil War

366 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1944

Reviews

[Mac · Rating 4 out of 5]

Americans are still fascinated by the Civil War, yet certain figures have drawn most of the attention. President Lincoln above all, then key generals like Ulysses S. Grant, Robert E. Lee, William Tecumseh Sherman, Stonewall Jackson, and George B. McClellan have been the subjects of numerous biographies. It is surprising, then, that Joseph Hooker has received relatively little attention. He was by all accounts second to none in personal bravery, often leading his troops into battle in person (as opposed to a general like McClellan, who was usually miles to the rear). More than that, he was personally committed to his men, from lowest ranks up. In fact, he tended to antagonize his officer corps if he felt they were getting in the way of the rank and file. Hooker's good qualities were many, but in history he is best remembered for his one major failure, the Battle of Chancellorsville. He maneuvered the Army of the Potomac into a position that left the Confederate army in extreme peril, yet somehow he was unable to close the deal and defeat Robert E. Lee. Walter H. Hebert's "Fighting Joe Hooker" is (to date) the only full-length biography of this fascinating figure. Hebert writes in a very clear style, and though the book dates from 1944 it wears its age well. The author is very fair with his subject, not hesitating to pass judgment on his positive qualities as well as his failings. As might be expected, the bulk of the book covers Hooker's Civil War campaigns, with especial focus on his time in command of the Army of the Potomac. Hebert tells his tale well, going in depth without getting lost in minute details. Fighting Joe Hooker the man deserves more respect, and this book is a fine way to give it to him.

[Steven Peterson · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a fine biography of the Union General, "Fighting" Joe Hooker. The book is somewhat dated (originally published in 1944), but it holds up pretty well.

The book starts with a little about Hooker's early life. But we then move ahead quickly to his Civil War record. His first real command was as brigade commander after First Bull Run (Manassas). The story of his Civil War involvement begins then. At some point, early on, he became known as "Fighting Joe Hooker," a nickname that he despised. The book straightforwardly notes that the origin of the nickname is unclear.

One thing that set Hooker apart from many other early generals was that he, indeed, was a fighter. There were poor generals (Franz Sigel comes to mind), there were generals who found it difficult to fight hard and commit themselves totally to battle (George McClellan exemplifies this), some were good at brigade or division command and poor when promoted to corps command. Hooker was a fine general at division and corps command. The one question: Could he have been successful in independent command? His one opportunity was when he headed the Army of the Potomac at Chancellorsville. Between injury and possible loss of confidence and nerve, he threw away a winnable battle after some excellent maneuvering on Hooker's part. He remained in command briefly after that, but was gone by the time of Gettysburg.

Up to Chancellorsville, as this book points out, he was a good solid general. Afterwards, when two corps of the Army of the Potomac were transported to Chattanooga, he found himself in charge of the 11th and 12th Corps. He generally led these troops creditably until he resigned after General James McPherson's death (Hooker felt he should have had that command). The book then chronicles his career thereafter and follows him until his death.

The book portrays well his sometimes foolish attacks on others. He could be an intriguer. The author shows well why Lincoln had some reservations about making him commander of the Army of the Potomac. At the same time, he showed considerable administrative ability after taking the Army over from the hapless Ambrose Burnside.

This is a fair portrayal of a complex person, who had more good days than bad during the Civil War, but who also had questions dogging him throughout his career. A well done biography.

[Lloyd · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is unfortunate that little has been written about this intriguing Civil War general. While he was a flawed man, he did have significant impacts on the Union Army and the Civil War. General Hooker has been stigmatized and primarily remembered as the man beaten by Robert E. Lee at the Battle of Chancellorsville in 1863. That battle is often described as Lee’s greatest victory and Hooker as the general whose large boasts of expected victory failed badly. This biography provides a fuller picture of the man; however, it was first published in 1944 and at just 300 pages it doesn’t feel like the “definitive” bio of this man. But there haven’t been any follow-up biographies. This biography does capture the General’s contributions to the Army of the Potomac before Chancellorsville and then his additional services post Chancellorsville with the Western armies at Chattanooga and the Atlanta campaign. The General comes across as an able leader of soldiers in battle and one who cared for his men and their well-being. This loyalty to his men was paid in return by their respect for him. The difficulty for the General was his own doing. He curried favor with politicians, often at the expense of his fellow officers as Hooker was very critical and very vocal about his low opinions of their ability. Thus, Hooker was not well liked by his brother officers and had few friends in the army. Those characteristics have probably taken away from his appeal to historians to invest their time and effort into writing a definitive biography of General Hooker.

[Dennis Phillips · Rating 5 out of 5]

Hebert does such a fine job of writing that one feels he has come to know Joe Hooker. One in fact, really begins to like the man. On occasion I found myself rooting for him to succeed, until I remembered he was a Yankee and came to my senses. I have often said that a biography is a true success if when the subject dies the reader feels a sense of loss. I felt that when Hooker died because in the pages of Hebert's book I felt I had come to know Joe Hooker personally. In a world overrun with civil war biographies, this has to be one of the best.

[Mark Harden · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was amazed that no updated biography of Joe Hooker had been written since this one, published nearly eighty years ago, especially since Hooker is such a central and controversial figure in the war. But after reading this, it’s hard to imagine how it could be surpassed with apparently no additional first person sources having come to light. Hebert writes well, and this is no hagiography. He is much more critical of Hooker at Chancellorsville than Sears, for example. Well worth a read, especially for those unaware of the excellent service Hooker performed in the West before he was stabbed in the back by Sherman and Grant.

[Avis Black · Rating 2 out of 5]

Hooker needs a new biography. Unfortunately, this book is the only one in existence about him. It's okay, but not very good.