Burnside

Civil War America

by William Marvel

Ambrose Burnside, the Union general, was a major player on the Civil War stage from the first clash at Bull Run until the final summer of the war. He led a corps or army during most of this time and played important roles in various theaters of the war. But until now, he has been remembered mostly for his distinctive side-whiskers that gave us the term "sideburns" and as an incompetent leader who threw away thousands of lives in the bloody battle of Fredericksburg.

In a biography focusing on the Civil War years, William Marvel reveals a more capable Burnside who managed to acquit himself creditably as a man and a soldier. Along the Carolina coast in 1862, Burnside won victories that catapulted him to fame. In that same year, he commanded a corps at Antietam and the Army of the Potomac at Fredericksburg. In East Tennessee in the summer and fall of 1863, he captured Knoxville, thereby fulfilling one of Lincoln's fondest dreams. Back in Virginia during the spring and summer of 1864, he once again led a corps at the battles of the Wilderness, Spotsylvania, Cold Harbor, and Petersburg. But after the fiasco of the Crater he was denied another assignment, and he resigned from the army the day that Lincoln was assassinated.

Marvel challenges the traditional evaluation of Burnside as a nice man who failed badly as a general. Marvel's extensive research indicates that Burnside was often the scapegoat of his superiors and his junior officers and that William B. Franklin deserves a large share of the blame for the Federal defeat at Fredericksburg. He suggests that Burnside's Tennessee campaign of 1863 contained much praiseworthy effort and shows during the Overland campaign from the Wilderness to Petersburg, and at the battle of the Crater, Burnside consistently suffered slights from junior officers who were confident that they could get away with almost any slur against "Old Burn." Although Burnside's performance included an occasional lapse, Marvel argues that he deserved far better treatment than he has received from his peers and subsequently from historians.

Genres: Civil War, Biography, Military History, American Civil War, Nonfiction, History

552 pages, Hardcover

First published November 1, 1991

About the author

William Marvel grew up on Davis Hill in South Conway, New Hampshire where he still lives. He has been writing about nineteenth-century American history for more than three decades.

Reviews

['Aussie Rick' · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ambrose Burnside may not be many people's favourite Civil War Commander but in this 1991 biography, the author, William Marvel, presents Burnside in a light previously not seen before. The Federal general comes across as a man who cared deeply for his men and was honest in his dealings with other commanders and his subordinates. The author presents his case that Burnside's reputation was tarnished by other Federal commanders who wished to pass on the blame of their failures to this man who would not publicly air his dissent. Examples given are General McClellan at Antietam, General William Franklin at Fredericksburg and Meade at the Wilderness and Petersburg.

The author presents his case well and you start to feel that maybe Burnside was given the short end of the stick in a lot of cases. Burnside appears to be a patriotic soldier who was prepared to give everything to the cause regardless of the cost to himself and his reputation. Marvel offers references & notes to support his theory and although he tends to offer Burnside the benefit of the doubt most of the time I still came away feeling that Burnside probarly did not deserve all the negative media he has received in history.

Overall this is a well researched and presented biography and although you may not agree with the author it's still a very well told story and a treat to read.

[Chris · Rating 4 out of 5]

This work seeks to set the actual performance of Ambrose Burnside as an officer against the criticisms of those who saw only his short comings in real time. Scant wonder that Burnside would emerge as someone who deserved more credit for successes and deserve less admonition for failures.
Burnside, if Marvel is accurate, has a singular failing of trusting that truth will triumph over lies and that the good nature of people will always rise.
One thing is sure - he failed to understand those he needed most to comprehend. It is hard to conceive of a more jealous and calculating lot of friends and colleagues than the command structure of the Union army. If a bad system defeats a good man every time little wonder that Burnside would be engulfed by the US army command.
The biography offers a sympathetic view of the man while noting his short comings. Remarkably, against the long shout of history, Marvel does not endorse a litany of martial shortcomings in Burnside. Patiently explaining the various causes of delays, Marvel all but exonerates Burnside of the particular cry of being late to everything.
Detailed and comprehensive (if not exhaustive) this work gives a solid account of the battle complexities with which Burnsides was presented and seeks to convince the reader old Burns did better than heretofore believed.
On the whole Marvel is successful. And the read enjoyable.

[Christopher Saunders · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sympathetic biography of the much-maligned Civil War General comes off as an egregious case of special pleading. Marvel shows convincingly that Burnside was a nice guy who was often manipulated by ambitious colleagues. His descriptions of Burnside's victories in the Outer Banks and Knoxville make good reading, even if (especially with the latter) he's inclined to overrate their importance. When it comes to Burnside's more famous blunders though he really reaches. Like any defender of incompetent generals Marvel blames everyone but his subject: meddling politicians, idiot superiors, blundering subordinates. Sure, at Fredericksburg William Franklin botched his attack on the Confederate right. But whose fault was it that Burnside threw 14 consecutive attacks against the stonewall on Marye's Heights? Marvel's silent. The whole book is like that. Marvel's contention that Burnside was a good general with bad press won't convince anyone who's read more than a few books on the Civil War.

[Craig Pearson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Most historians have relegated Ambrose Burnside to the scrap heap of failed Civil War generals. That label could not be further from the truth. His method of leadership was more apt to be considered modern than those surrounding him were capable of understanding. He led by example and was inclined to let his subordinates make tactical decisions without looking over their shoulders. He also expected his superiors and peers to be equally capable of carrying out whatever was needed for the current situation.

This biography clears up the many misconceptions of Ambrose Burnside. He was successful in war and in politics.

[William F. Daly · Rating 5 out of 5]

An Excellent Book

I have been interested in the Civil War since the 1950s. General Burnside was one of the most prominent figures in the war, and I thought I knew quite a bit about him. This book was quite revealing. My knowledge of Burnside w was based on his two tours with the Army of the Potomac. I was only vaguely familiar with his operations in North Carolina and in Kentucky and Tennessee. Although the author has taken a position of advocacy for General Burnside, I believe his treatment of Burnside and others is fair. I have revised my opinion of General Burnside after reading this book. I reached the conclusion that he received a raw deal from history.

[E · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book provides valuable insight into the character of Ambrose Burnside, and the type of individual that he was. However the work comes off as very biased and offers little to no criticism of the man, rather blames others at nearly every negative event that Burnside is involved in. Franklin takes blame at Fredericksburg, McClellan's staff takes blame at Antietam, Burnside was late at the Wilderness only because his troops were tired, he promoted Ledlie because he did not realize he was drunk and a complete failure at the North Anna, and on and on. While I do not believe Burnside deserves quite the level of criticism that he often receives, he still deserves his share when appropriate for someone that served as an Army commander as well as a long-time Corps commander.

[Frank · Rating 2 out of 5]

It was fine, but it comes off as an apology for Burnside, rather than an actual biography. I realize that a biographer often has to present an argument about his subject, especially when his conclusions run counter to the general verdict that other historians have landed on, but there's a fine line between argument and pure advocacy. The whole story seems to boil down to: "Burnside was a capable general, and a good man. Everything bad that happened to him was the result of misunderstandings or the incompetency of others." Perhaps that's true, but the argument often seems forced. Also sometimes Marvel's excuses for Burnside don't really seem to exonerate Burnside... which shows how strenuously he's trying to tie his tale together.